Birds of a statist feather will stick together.
What, you didn’t know Nazism, the philosophy of National Socialists, was a product of the Left, too? Time to do some reading.
They’ve given us so much!
(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)
Politico looks at yesterday’s races and notes one theme out of many: the power of Sarah Palin’s endorsements as 75% of the candidates she backed in the June 8th primaries won:
Some of Sarah Palin’s riskiest endorsements scored major victories Tuesday for the former Alaska governor, showing off her power in Republican primaries.
Palin had four primary endorsements in play – Carly Fiorina, Nikki Haley, Terry Branstad and Cecile Bledsoe – and three won or moved on to a runoff.
Palin served different roles for each candidate – sometimes spotlighting conservatives not well known to the national scene while at others validating conservative credentials to an unsure grassroots and even stepping in to deflect nasty attacks.
The former governor’s influence was significant-to-decisive in California, South Carolina, and Iowa. Interestingly, the last two are important early contests in the Republican presidential primaries. Hmmm…
In Arkansas, she wasn’t able to put Bledsoe over the top, but she did help make it very close. Altogether, this should tell anyone thinking of dismissing her as a lightweight, especially her potential Republican rivals, that Sarah Palin is a force to be reckoned with. Assuming these people (and others she’s backed) win, and assuming she runs for president in 2012, there will be quite a few people who owe her, big-time.
One question for anyone out there (cue crickets): Why didn’t Sarah Palin issue endorsements in the Nevada primaries, when any Republican nominee stands a good chance of defeating the Senate majority leader in November? Scalping a senator of Reid’s power should seem awfully tempting for someone with presidential aspirations. Now, she can of course campaign for the winner, Sharron Angle, but it won’t have quite the same effect as it would have had she played kingmaker queenmaker before the election.
Was there something about all three (Angle, Lowden, & Tarkanian) that would put her off, or am I grossly overestimating her popularity in Nevada?
UPDATE: Time Magazine asked Palin how she picks her endorsements. Her answer is interesting.
Oh, my. Judging by the results in last night’s elections, my record as a kiss-of-death endorser from 2008 continues. Of five races in California and one in Nevada, I’m a perfect… 0-6.
Forget bellweather states; this is a “for whom the bell tolls” blog.
Wait, I’ve got it! The Obama administration should offer me a federal job in return for not endorsing any Democrat in November! I think US Consul in Bermuda would do just fine – for starters.
Oh, well. Commiserations to the losers and congratulations to the winners. It’s on to November. Remember:
Oh God! What have I done??
California congressman Tom McClintock, a powerful figure on the Right in this state, has cut a video carrying his endorsement of Assemblyman Chuck DeVore in his race for the Republican nomination for the US Senate. While lacking Governor Palin’s cachet, one hopes that McClintock’s blessing, coming from someone who knows California politics very well, will carry a lot of weight with Republican voters:
Tom McClintock represents one of my great political regrets of recent years, having cast my vote in the 2003 gubernatorial recall election instead for Arnold Schwarzenegger. There are few do-overs in politics, but this time I plan to make up for it by voting conviction over star-power.
Like many on the Right, I was taken by surprise by former Governor Sarah Palin’s endorsement of Carly Fiorina for the Republican nomination for Senator from California. As a supporter of both Palin and Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, who’s also running for the nomination and who shares many of the Governor’s beliefs, I had expected her to endorse him, should she choose to get involved at all. Not surprisingly, her announcement set off a minor storm on the Right, both in California and nationally. This post, then, is about two things: the endorsement itself and how the Right should take it.
Governor Palin issued her endorsement on Thursday; you can read it on her Facebook page, including the update she added after receiving a lot of criticism.
Why’d she do it?
Not being a party to the inner workings of either the Palin, Fiorina, or DeVore camps, I’m not going to speculate about “real” motives. (Then why are you blogging, dude? I thought that was the whole point! -Tito I’m trying to be reasonable for a change?) All I have to work with are the Governor’s own words, so, out of courtesy to her and lacking contrary evidence, I’ll take them mostly at face value.
Yeah, there are a couple of things that bother me. Well, three actually. In no particular order:
First, Governor Palin lists several reasons for supporting Carly Fiorina in the pre-update portion of her post, all meant to show Fiorina’s a genuine conservative whom the conservative-libertarian Right can support. Okay, but almost all those also apply to Assemblyman DeVore, who also seems to have been more consistent in his beliefs than Ms. Fiorina. So, what’s the difference that tells me I should give my vote to Carly? Sarah doesn’t say, largely ignoring Mr. DeVore in her post.
Second, Palin refers to Carly’s growing up “…in a modest home with a school teacher dad…” Huh? Pardon me, Governor, but Carly Fiorina is the daughter of Joseph Sneed III, who was an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Texas since graduating from UT in 1947. Subsequently, he taught at Cornell and Stanford law schools, was the Dean of Duke’s law school, and served from 1973 until his death in 2008 on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Fiorina was born in 1954, when Judge Sneed was made a full professor at UT, and three when he took up his position at Cornell. I would not call this a “modest upbringing” in the way most people understand it, certainly not like Governor Palin’s own youth. Not wanting to believe the Governor was being deliberately misleading in that statement, I can only assume she took biographical information from the Fiorina campaign and ran with it. This speaks of sloppy, superficial research at best, and calls the rest of her endorsement into question.
Third, when Palin referred to Fiorina in her endorsement as a “commonsense conservative,” I had to ask how it was conservative for Carly Fiorina to endorse legislative apportionment on the basis of gender, rather than individual merit. That’s corporatist, not conservative. And it’s something I find antithetical to everything American politics should be.
I’ve yet to receive a good answer to any of these.
Of the aftereffects of the endorsement itself, there’s no doubt that it was good for Fiorina and a body-blow to DeVore, who actively sought Governor Palin’s blessing. And there’s no doubt that it sent shock waves through the conservative populist (“Tea Party”) movement here in the Golden State and nationwide. And this leads to the next section.
To paint with a bit of a broad brush, there have been three general reactions to Palin’s announcement:
Puzzled, but willing to give the governor a break: “Now why would she do that? It doesn’t make sense, but I’ve admired her to this point, so I’ll have to think about this for a bit.” I fall into this group, along with quite a few Righty bloggers.
Hurt, betrayed, and ticked off: “OMG?? WTF?? Sarah Palin endorsed that RINO McCain toady? Then she’s not a Tea-Party, grassroots conservative! She’s just a… a… she’s just a Republican politician!” Followed by wailing, gnashing of teeth, and the tossing of souvenir caribou jerky into the garbage. Seen mostly on Twitter. (Including from some DeVore aides. Joshua Trevino, you need to walk back that “sheepdog” comment. It’s insulting both to Governor Palin and conservatives in California, and you make Mr. DeVore look bad by reflection.)
Ticked off at those who criticize Sarah Palin: “How dare you? The Governor is perfect! She’s one of us! She shakes things up! YOU’RE THE REAL RINO!!” Seen mostly at dedicated pro-Palin blogs, such as Conservatives for Palin. And before anyone comes after me with a 10-gauge, C4P does a great job defending the governor from the lies and slanders that have been thrown at her by the Left, the mainstream media (but I repeat myself), and the establishment Right. However, they have a bad habit of reacting to even legitimate criticism or questioning of Sarah Palin like a bunch of coked-up wolverines. (Adrienne Ross, your implication that DeVore is using state-paid staff to subsidize his campaign is definitely tendentious, as anyone can see who reads the article you linked.)
Here’s my take: an endorsement should be taken merely as a guide or a suggestion to be considered, not as holy writ to be obeyed blindly. And I don’t think Sarah Palin wants Stepford Wives for followers. We in the Center and the Right, who believe that progressives such as Barbara Boxer are backhanding the Constitution, spitting on the Founders, and running this country off a cliff, have to remember that our real political foes are on the progressive-statist Left, not each other. There is room to reasonably disagree. Or, as the great philosopher Rodney King once put it:
“Can’t we all get along?”
I support Sarah Palin. I like her record; I like what she stands for. And, 95% of the time, I like her judgment. I plan to vote for her and campaign for her should she run for President. But, as a conservative, I recognize that no person is perfect – not even Sarah Palin. I think she made a mistake with this endorsement, picking the second-best candidate. But I see this neither as a betrayal of “true conservatism” nor as a divine revelation. It is the recommendation of one very smart, very savvy politician whom I admire greatly – and with whom I disagree in this particular case. I can take her opinion into account, look at the web sites of all three candidates, and still make my own choice.
Which is to vote for Chuck DeVore.
If Carly wins, or (God forbid) Tom Campbell, I can vote for them, too, with a clear conscience. Any of the three is better than Barbara Boxer.
Any of them.
So let’s put down the long knives, remember what unites us, and aim for the gold ring in November, not the brass one in June.
Well, this should sell our new statist health system to the masses of bitter-clingers like nothing else could: kind words and congratulations from the United Nations and communist Cuba! Hope and Change are here at last!
First, a pat on the head from Turtle Bay by way of Geneva:
“The people in this country and their leaders are courageous. That (healthcare reform) is an unprecedented achievement,” WHO Director General Margaret Chan said.
She was speaking to reporters after a lecture in which she argued that unrestricted market forces were limited as a means of redressing imbalances in global health care.
Chan has made clear her view that governments and global organizations such as WHO should make a case for market regulation to deliver more equitable health benefits.
“Market forces, all by themselves, will not solve social problems. That is why public health needs to be concerned,” said Chan in a lecture at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“The hardest thing … is persuading world leaders or ministers … that health concerns can, in some instances, be more important than economic interests. Economic growth is not, after all, the be-all, end-all, cure-all,” said Chan, whose organization is based in Geneva.
The World Health Organization is the same organization that helped spread panic during the bird-flu outbreak of 2005-06 and the recent swine flu non-epidemic. Given this lack of sober judgment and the fact that they are part of the massively corrupt UN –the home of Oil-for-Food, Cash for Kim, and peacekeeper rape, among other badges of honor– it’s not surprising that one of their avid statists would endorse a massive expansion of statism. As Nile Gardiner put it:
It is hard to think of a more embarrassing endorsement of President Obama’s health care reform bill than that offered this week by the United Nations. The UN, probably the most corrupt and ineffective multilateral body on the face of the earth, which devotes much of its time trying to undermine American global power, has officially given its blessing to Barack Obama’s hugely controversial and unpopular legislation. The United Nations is increasingly disliked in the eyes of the American public, and continues to empower some of the most odious anti- American tyrannies across the world.
But wait, Nile! It does get more embarrassing! The Washington Post reports that last Sunday’s passage of the health-care reform act received a big thumbs-up from no less than Fidel Castro, himself:
It perhaps was not the endorsement President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress were looking for.
Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro on Thursday declared passage of American health care reform “a miracle” and a major victory for Obama’s presidency, but couldn’t help chide the United States for taking so long to enact what communist Cuba achieved decades ago.
“We consider health reform to have been an important battle and a success of his (Obama’s) government,” Castro wrote in an essay published in state media, adding that it would strengthen the president’s hand against lobbyists and “mercenaries.”
Before anyone takes Castro at his word (Hint: He’s a murdering creep), perhaps they should look at the reality behind Cuba’s health care and then breathe a sigh of relief that it’s taken us this long to start down that same path.
I bet you won’t be seeing these testimonials anywhere on the White House web site, anytime soon.