Skip to comments.DO NOT LET THE RINO VICHY GOP TRAITORS BLAME SARAH PALIN
Posted on 11/04/2008 7:52:44 PM PST by mick
click here to read article
I posted that thread in a moment of pique, sort of on the fly I came up with “Vichy Republicans”, it turns out that the phrase first appeared in an old Hotline Blog post in 2005, and then subsequentially in:
“Oppose the Vichy Republicans
Do the right thing, and sign NZ Bear and Hugh Hewitt’s NRSC Pledge, and commit to withhold support for any GOP Senator who votes for any resolution criticizing President Bush’s commitment to winning in Iraq.
If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution.
In the past, such feckless actions would earn said GOP members the label “RINO”, as in “Republican in Name Only”. However, given the current wartime circumstances, I think that they would be better referred to as “Vichy Republicans”
Majorchazz has an apt forsightedness, Vichy will come to betray the Soldiers on the ground, Obamao has promised it, the Vichy will write columns about “Ending Bush’s War” and our Fighting Men and Women will be left twisting in the wind unthanked and unrecognized for the work they have done Defending America in Iraq and all over the world.
Funny how a spur of the moment description can be proven true?
Good thread, thanks for posting it. Palin/Hunter 2012.
I think I’ll change my tagline now.
I love that sound and please let that baby keep on crying. ~Sarah Palin
I saw that at the polls today. Very disappointing, though not surprising. Good points you make. I hope obama's presidency is a lesson to many people who are flirting with socialism, and opens the eyes of many Americans once and for all.
I was for Fred Thompson in the beginning but who would he have chose for his running mate? I saw McCain as another Bob Dole, and when he was chosen the writing was on the wall. Both Dole and Mc Cain were no IKE. When he picked Palin it was like being pumped with adrenalin, but she came into the picture too late to be appreciated. Over all I feel like the whole election was orchestrated by the MSM and everyone danced to their music. The Dems won the Series, and we have 4 years to train for the next one. We can do it if the RNC finds their balls.
She is the only reason I paid any attention at all. Peggy Noonan can lick me where I stink. That traitor skank will be all over CNN tomorrow crowing. Similarly, FU Colon (sic) Powell; “blood” is thicker than Truth, eh Bro?
You're aware that Obama's New Government Media (formerly The Main Stream Media) contributed the equivalent of tens of millions of dollars in "journalist" salaries, TeeVee air time, and column inches making suicide runs on Palin's reputation over a politically miniscule period of two months?
I've been a media archivist at Free Republic for more than ten years, and I've never seen anything like it. Normally, an operation like STOMPSARAHPALININTOTHEDIRT takes many, many months, to avoid exposing the "journalists" for what they really are. There are a significant number of these jerkoffs twisting slowly in the wind, now. I've nicknamed the Associated Press "The Ossociated Press" due to the sheer number of AP staffers who immolated their journalistic reputations to "get" Palin.
These people mass-market for a living. Small wonder your acquaintances feel the way they do about Palin - they've been had by master ad pitchmen.
"These aren't the drones we're looking for." ;-)
A serious Republican candidate for President would have come out and said: "yes, we are down to $2.50/gallon right now, but we're going to go back up -- based on OPEC's strategy -- probably soon.. 0bama is owned by an environmental lobby that thinks our energy future comes from pixie dust." McCain couldn't, because that is also what McCain believes.
A serious Republican candidate for President would have come out and said: "You are being sold a bill of goods on this Bailout. The market is in need of a major correction, and if we need to guarantee liquidity through the credit crisis, the Federal Reserve has ways to do that which do not involve taxpayers bailing out or buying into Wall Street." Instead, our candidate proposed adding another $300 billion on top of the $1.4 trillion already paid to stabilize the market, in order to allow over-leveraged mortgage buyers to welsh on their obligations even longer.
A serious candidate for President could have said, "contrary to claims made by the US Chamber of Commerce and the Op-Ed page of the Wall Street Journal, serious studies have actually shown that illegal immigration is a net drain on our economy. It is senseless for us to import additional weakness during a contraction." Instead, our guy mumbled some lame nonsense about "securing the borders first." Karmic justice: Hispanics are a major cause of McCain's loss.
A serious candidate would have hit 0bama and Biden early and hard about coal: both of them made idiotic statements about coal, and both favor Cap and Trade. So does McCain. What he should have said was "Regardless of how you feel about Anthropogenic Global Warming, it doesn't make any sense for us to maim ourselves in the face of increasing carbon emission from the emerging economies in China and India. While we're capping and trading, China is going to be eating our lunch." But McCain could not have said that.
Let me know when you want me to stop.
The standard bearer for an ideologically conservative party must articulate conservative principles. The point of my post is that either the Republican Party must descend into the kind of Me-too-ism that it "enjoyed" in the 50 years before the Roosevelt Era, or it must decide to be a conservative party, and that means its presidential candidate must be eloquent and firm for conservatism.
That is why GWB has had his problems, and that is why McCain could not differentiate himself from his 0pponent.
Palin is why I voted McCain. Screw the RINOs.
Sarah gas been abused by elite political McCain types ... she will be our gal in 2012
He had his faults, but I have no doubt that he loves his country.
I agree. All I’m saying is when we have a Republican and Conservative President who has been outr leader and face of our party for 8 years and who is at 70-75% disapproval a -50 net compared to a +5 or so four years ago, when you’re being outspent and outadvertised by an unprecedented amount in all the key states, when the media is 1000% behind your opponent(way more than I’ve ever seen for any dem, and I’ve seen a lot), when the economy is in the worst shape its been in 75 years and everyone blames your President, when THE 2 ISSUES that won W his reelection terrorism and moral values have completely disappeared from the agenda in four years, when the economy has gone from 20% to 60% as an issue, when all the polls for the past 6 weeks said you were behind by 10 to 15 pts and that’s all that was trumpeted for weeks on end, when your party is in shambles as evidenced by the GOP Senators and Congressmen who continue to get tossed out, when you’ve seen your party go from even strength with the opposition to -10(a net -14 in OH, a -10 in VA for example) to the point where close to 25% of those who were Republicans four years ago are either democrats or independents today, when you have all that and more against you, it’s a very tough mission.
And I’m just saying that if you want to blame someone, and frnakly no one person is really responsible, but if someone has to be at the top of the list, Bush is way more deserving than McCain. McCain was dealt a rotten hand and all things considered, I think he ended up doing about as well as any Republican would have done this year, probably a bit better. Without the economic/financial collapse in September I think tonight’s results tell me he would have won. But it did happen.
There’ll be plenty of time to apportion blame, and hopefully we’ll be able to use the next four years to recover from Bush and develop a coherent opposition to Obama and the dems, who will now be responsible for everything and not simply able to blame Bush for everything.
A bunch of folks were pretty down in 1976 when Carter won and four years later we were on cloud nine. Things can change awfully quickly in politics as we’ve seen the past four years.
I also hope that Gov Palin isn’t singled out as the sacrifical lamb as to blame her for this beyond rediculous.
Command Economies don't work and will eventually self destruct. Our Mixed Economy has been going on now for almost 80 yrs. I see boyBO as an American Gorbachev who will try to save the mixed economy like the original Gorby tried to save communism. With the same result. Which is why I say we must not allow the Vichy Republicans to blame Palin. She is a true small government,free market conservative and must be protected and nurtured for the future battle when the economy really tanks
But... GWB is not a conservative. He has some conservative impulses, but anybody who qualifies his conservatism by calling it "compassionate conservatism" doesn't understand conservatism. My Dad was a social worker for 40 years. After leaving the Army in 1946, he decided his lifelong ambition to be a journalist was frivolous, and he needed to help people. Over the years, he took a great deal of grief from his peers and from politicians (he was high up in the PA Department of Welfare), but he said -- long before GWB misunderstood conservatism: "I am a conservative because I'm compassionate. The 'compassion' of liberals is invariably a false compassion." That GWB didn't understand that, and that his father played Jerry Mahoney to the execrable Peggy Noonan's Paul Winchell with "A Kinder, Gentler Nation." is the reason the Republican Party has been laboring in the wilderness since 1988.
Conservatives have carried GWB's water for eight years for the same reason we carried Nixon's (also not a conservative): On the ONE major issue of his time Bush (and Nixon) were right, and they were willing to fight that fight and the "loyal opposition" was willing to run and hide.
We have some new faces now. It's time to get them onto the national stage, and while doing it, we need to ditch the Democrat wannabees. I think people like the Bush Family and the McCain Mavericks have a role to play in our Party. But they should not be the source of our ideas, and they cannot be the leaders any longer. John McCain has had his day, and I hope on reflection he realizes that many of the people he counted on were never his friends: The Press. The Moderates. The Latino voters. The people who stuck with John McCain were the people into whose eyes he so sedulously stuck his fingers time-and-again since his first bid failed. I hope as a result of our support John McCain returns to the conservative fold he loyally occupied until he lost to Bush in South Carolina in 2000. If nothing else good could come of this election, to welcome a genuine American Hero back to his conservative roots would not be inconsequential. I've always wanted to like John McCain. I hope he sees who his true friends are, now.
I completely agree. This is an eye opener.
What bothers me is that Republicans do not understand that an awfully large part of the electorate are children, and if you have kids or have recently stopped being one, you know that children are all about blame when things go wrong. When the unfunded liability of Social Security makes the current (and it's not over by a long shot) economic correction seem like a ripple, we need to position ourselves so that the people responsible -- Democrats all -- are the ones holding the bag.
As for Palin, I don't know what her future is, but I do know this: whoever our conservatism's next leader is, he will be vilified and humiliated, and throwing Sarah Palin to the wolves isn't going to save anyone. The wolves are insatiable.
McCain lost because he supported that @*#&@ bailout, and had his little “dog and pony show” during the crisis, suspended his campaign to fly back to DC to do absolutely nothing.
Bush may not be a conservative, but unfortunately for the past 10 years or so starting with when we all knew he was gonna run back in 1998, he has been the THE face of the conservative movemnt and of the Repubican Party.
Given that his disapproval is at 75% or so, taht’s not a good place for us to be. The sooner he’s gone and we can rebuild, the better.
The exit polls tell us that we got a big beating, but we did not completely collapse. This was not like Goldwater in 64, McGovern in 72, Carter in 80, Mondale in 84, even Dukakis in 88. I’d compare it more to Ford in 76. McCain faced an uphill struggle, made a valiant effort that saw undecideds breaking towards him late in many key states, but in the end the unpopularity of Bush, the economic/financial collapse, the implosion in pary ID and Obama’s massive spending/ad advantage were too much to overcome.
But if you look at the key states like OH, FL, VA, NC, IN and others, the margins are all 3 pts or less, in many cases 1 pt or less. IN, OH, NC are all 1 pt or less. FL is 2 pts. McCain got 49% in all 4 of them. He was right there and given how bad things were for the party this year, I have confidence that they will be even more competitive next time around. You would have thought McCain could havce rode Mitch Dnaiels coattails better in IN, Daniels got 58% of the vote and that should have carried McCain. VA does look like the demographic changes are starting to take effect. They’ve had dem govs for a while and now 2 dem Senators. I do think Warner’s rout of Gilmore helped Obama big time. If John Warner had ran for reelection tonight and won which he would have, McCain probably would have oulled it out. Oh well. We are still in a decent position going forward to reclaim those.
Now, states like CA, NY, IL, MI, PA, MA, WA, OR, MD etc... are long gone and we’re seeing how difficult it is to win when you write off 200 EVs to start with.
But at least we can finally start to rebuild after Bush. He did a lot of good, but he also has left us in awful shape.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.