Skip to comments.Sarah Palin: Fatal Cancer? (FreeRepublic.com linked with pissant's thread)
Posted on 10/12/2008 8:04:47 PM PDT by neverdem
David Brooks is taking some heat from doctrine-enforcement agents of the left and right for stating, in an interview with me at that famed redoubt of populism Le Cirque that Sarah Palin represents a "fatal cancer" for the Republican Party...
(Excerpt) Read more at jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com ...
Palin is no the cancer, she is the cure!
I’m not sure I disagree with him. McCain had me at hello, but to be frank, I’m sick of the cult of Palin. I just don’t get the attraction. I’m voting for McCain here in a few weeks, but I don’t ever see myself directly casting a vote for Palin, for anything.
David Brooks and the putrid RINOs are the fatal cancer..... unless a huge dose of Palinotherapy can kill off all the malignant cells before they propagate more widely.....
Am I supposed to recognize the name David Brooks? I don’t. . . . Googled him. Oh, he writes for the New York Times, and does commentary on PBS. So why would you quote him on this website? How is it you’re even reading his stuff? He asked suspiciously.
Thanks for the link.
“Offending stupid people since 1963”
But how long have you been offending smart people?
brooks didn’t write it, he said it. That’s why you can’t find the article...
Yes it could lead to the same results as the Cult of Reagan.
I recognize the name but barely,,,,and couldn’t care about his opinion.
She sure ain't benign either.
Now if we can get McCain to start wearing a moose hat, I would be even happier.
> Im voting for McCain here in a few weeks, but I dont ever see myself directly casting a vote for Palin, for anything.
Fair enough. Why?
Obama has followers.
Palin has supporters.
There is a big difference between the two.
Original Article Here:
Sorry I disagree. I don’t get McCain, and McCain is lucky to be this close thanks to Palin.
Unless you’re a plant (it’s been known to happen ;) the only reason you are sick of the Cult of Palin is because you’re riding the wave - rather than researching why you should like her.
I’ve been following her career since she took on the corrupt establishment in Alaska three years ago. If McCain didn’t pick someone with her abilities, and credientials (basically her or Bobby Jindal or maybe Rick Santorum) there was NO WAY I was going to waste my vote on him.
Damn straight! Why would you ever read anything that isn’t vetted by the ostrich brigage on FR.
After clicking on your name I have to agree with you Motto,.., nothing to see in you, so move along............................
No wonder you are sick of the cult of Palin, what with the great press and kind words of MSM. s/
Fundamentally, Brooks does not understand conservatism nor conservatives. Oh yes, he declares himself to be a “conservative”, but that’s a conservative who doesn’t associate with the help.
I don’t consider myself to be a “pure” democrat. I am glad that we live in some semblance of a constitutional republic. But Brooks tends towards more of a, well, royalist, or perhaps a class based kind of conservatism, in which the commons may benefit, but most definitely are not seen and not heard, save for the trips by presidential candidates to the rustic parts of our country for a trip down nostalgia lane.
This is why Sarah Palin offends him so. He is absolutely opposed to the notion of the citizen-politician. Politics is too important to be left to the masses. Their betters are the ones who should be entrusted with governmental power. Nevermind that Lincoln was essentially a self-educated hick from the boondocks. Truman was another commoner who through a series of unfortunate occurrences ended up in the Oval Office. Men like Roosevelt (either), Kennedy, and Bush41 are the type of men Brooks believes should be the executive in our federal government. Patrician, wealthy, Ivy League educated, and ‘wise.’ Men like, well, him.
Last time I checked, we referred to this condition as Tourette's.
You're going to love this design that I made a while back on my shop at ISupportSarah.com
Who is 'teethodore'? How is it you don't know who David Brooks is, or more importantly, how is it you would think to question a long time, quality Freeper like 'neverdem'??
Oh wait! You signed up 3 days ago? Are you a troll, he asked suspiciously??
“David Brooks and the putrid RINOs are the fatal cancer”
Never heard of David Brooks until I just looked him up. Since he writes for the New York Times, I feel safe to assume he’s not even a RINO.
But now, as to the term RINO. I happen to favor Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt. That’s why I chose the screen name Teethodore, in honor of “the hurricane who walked on two legs,” and was one of our all-time most popular Presidents, of any party. Does that make me a RINO?
Or are the Republicans In Name Only the Libertarian/Anarchists who have been hijacking the party and wrecked the Bush administration? You know, the ones who want to make America work the same way Somalia does.
Actually, McCain and the rest of the carreer politicians ( both R & D ) are the cancer of the nation. Palin fought back in Alaska and that is why many Republicans want her brought down. However, I am also "voting for McCain here in a few weeks."
McCain is camel fecum without Palin.
He is the problem with the republican party.Sarah is the cure.Conservatives versus rinos.Pure and simple.
I will be the first to admit that Palin is not everybody’s cup of tea. But she sure as heck works for me.
No candidate is going to be right for everybody. The Republican Party will always be an uneasy conglomeration of different people. But no Republican should be calling any other Republican a “Cancer”. This just demonstrates that the person who does so want to be in control, and doesn’t have the best interests of the party at heart.
If Palin is a Cancer, sign me up for Cancer!
Actually, I wish Palin was running for President and McCain as VP.
Palin represents a young vigorous conservatism that hasn’t been seen or felt since Ronald Reagan. And no she isn’t Reagan...but none of the candidates for the Republicans were either.
Her beliefs, as far as we know, are as close to Reagan conservatism as I’ve seen since 1980 in a Republican candidate.
My PREFERENCE would have been for her to stay a governor for a few more years before being brought onto the national stage, but she came up early. She and Bobby Jindal (and Michael Steele) have the POTENTIAL to thoroughly change the “white male” stereotype of the Republican party...while keeping its core conservative values—and that just must irritate the hell out of the Blue Blood East Coast R’s.
I am glad Palin is around.
Should McCain have chosen someone such as Lowell Weicker, Chuck Hagel, Michael Bloomberg, or Lincoln Chafee to be his running mate?
He's the token conservative at the NY Times and PBS' The News Hour.
So why would you quote him on this website? How is it youre even reading his stuff? He asked suspiciously.
Suspect what you please. If you want firsthand sources, most of the time it's from the left.
I posted it here. Searching the archive couldn't retrieve it.
That should read “Stupid person offending since 1963”.
One can only hope.
Did you ever think maybe you’re the stupid one, and it’s smart people you’re offending?
Or worse...Lindsey Graham.
How am I tied into all of this?
No, even worse...George Voinovich.
We can see from the dizzy talking and talking that the only discourse in politics is libertine, prattling discourse with no exceptions. The concerns of the talkers (including writers) about personalities and appearances are far removed from our national and foreign relations realities.
Foghorn Leghorn for President!