Posted on 1/23/2010, 4:23:14 PM by DB9
There has been some criticism over Governor Palin’s decision to campaign for her former running mate, John McCain. Mel talked about how silly this criticism is in a post on Thursday. Several others, including Texas4Palin, have also discussed this issue. There is one aspect of the criticism that I have found particularly curious. On one hand, the critics charge that her decision to campaign for McCain is a betrayal of the Grassroots/Tea Party movement. Yet many of the same critics make the point that Scott Brown’s phenomenal victory in the Massachusetts special election the other night is a triumph for the Grassroots and that he, Scott Brown, is a grass roots hero.
Steve Flesher’s piece in today’s American Thinker is one example:
"Sarah Palin's decision to campaign for John McCain's reelection bid is dismaying some of her staunchest allies and defenders on the web.
This serves as a much-uninvited buzz-kill to conservatives, who finally had the beam of hope shone on them Tuesday night. Grassroots conservatism made a historic comeback with Scott Brown, who defeated Martha Coakley for Edward Kennedy's Senate seat in the very liberal state of Massachusetts."
First, let me state for the record that Scott Brown is a hero of the Grassroots movement. His stunning victory over Martha Coakley was a game-changing moment in the Grassroots effort to stop Obama from transforming America into an unrecognizable country. However, the inconsistency here is breathtaking. Have these critics not been paying attention to the news? Am I the only one who is aware of the fact that Scott Brown is also supporting and campaigning for John McCain? The first person Brown visited Thursday when he arrived in Washington was John McCain. Ben Smith at the Politico reports that Scott Brown has already recorded robocalls for John McCain’s campaign:
"Well that didn't take long: John McCain's re-election campaign is blasting out a robocall from none other than "newly elected Senator Scott Brown," as the caller introduces himself.
Brown, according to semi-intelligible audio from robocall monitor Shaun Dakin, describes himself as "honored at the role your senator, John McCain, played in my election," and calls on listeners to support McCain."
Let me reiterate that this is not a criticism any way, shape, or form of Scott Brown. But if those who are criticizing Governor Palin’s support for her former running mate while ignoring Scott Brown’s support could explain the inconsistency, I’d be most appreciative.
Let's keep things in perspective. McCain is not my ideal candidate either. Far from it. But we have to give him credit for making that bold choice in 2008. If he had picked, say Pawlenty or Romney, where would we be now? Governor Palin galvanized the opposition to ObamaCare and cap and trade last summer. Before she took control, opposition to Obama was rudderless and weak. If McCain had not picked her, my guess is that both of those disastrous bills would be the law of the land today, and we'd be looking at Senator Coakley instead of Senator Brown. Governor Palin and the rest of us owe John McCain a lot. Don’t forget that.
I agree...this is silly. Besides, when JD wins the primary she will be relieved of her duty to her former running mate...
Actually it’s a very consistent standard to support the incumbant of your party.
I have no use for John McCain but I’m not going to beat Sarah Palin up for refusing to behave like Al Gore.
LLS
I hope that happens. I support Sarah big time. Hopefully JD will be really hungry and bust his butt to win the primary and be elected. He can’t just sit back and expect things to fall in place. That’s what Coakley did in MA. He has to earn it.
Right, it is silly.....its not like we didn’t know she was going to support McVain, she said it last year, and if McCain loses in the primary its was up to the voters of Arizona, and Sarah is free of him
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."
I think, and I hope that the new paradigm is largely based on ideas and coherent, logical thought rather than on specific personalities. When people get caught up in personalities things often go awry. It is much better to defend ideas because they are not subject to character assassination or predictible human folly. When we get caught up in personalities we end up having to convolute reality to force fit folly and make excuses for people. No more of that for me.
Sarah... I support YOU... but Hayworth will receive my $$$$$$$$!
____________________________________________________________
Now that is the right way to look at things.....these concern trolls that say Sarah won’t get their vote because of this is dumb...I support Hayworth too, althought i do have some concerns about him...
“Let’s keep things in perspective. McCain is not my ideal candidate either. Far from it. But we have to give him credit for making that bold choice in 2008.”
What bold choice? McCain wanted Lieberman to the bitter end, not Palin. Look it up. He was pulled out of that because even his advisers knew it would be his death knell.
Now, the worst of the worst political hacks, who was McCain’s #1 man, is also hers. And the guy endorses Romney...talk about contradictions.
The guy who claims to have pulled McCain out of the jaws of defeat in 2008 is FRED MALEK. Fred, according to some on FR, is now leading Palin on her path. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2434882/posts?page=22#22
This guy is NOTHING for conservatives to be proud of.
OP kingmaker leans toward Mitt Romney
5/19/09
Fred Malek, a heavyweight Republican fundraiser and kingmaker, has singled out former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney as the GOP’s leading contender in the early stages of the 2012 Republican presidential derby.
In a largely unnoticed post to his blog late last week, Malek, a wealthy businessman who served as national finance co-chair of John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign, ranked Romney No. 1 on a list of influential Republicans “who might both lead our party back and who might be our nominee in 2012.”
Malek, who did not return an email requesting comment from POLITICO, blogged that Romney has “the established organization, fundraising network, time, and talent to get the nomination this time” and predicted he could “be in the best position when the serious campaigning begins in early 2011.”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22736.html
Mr. Malek writes:
Whether you loved or hated John’s position in the Immigration debate, his actions that June exhibited the quintessential get-in-the-middle, role up your sleeves, bi-partisan leadership that has marked his service to our country. Unfortunately, at the time, much of the Republican base did not see this leadership as a positive attribute. As a result, the fundraising well dried up, and it could not have come at a worse time.
http://race42008.com/category/2008-misc/
________
Similar questions may have been raised after a recent column [”Fred Malek, Then and Now,” Feb. 4] that recounted Malek’s abuse of the public trust and public servants during the Nixon years and his role in carrying out Richard Nixon’s disgusting hunt for Jews in the Bureau of Labor Statistics. He was only in his thirties at the time, his friends say in his defense.
Is there a continuum of behavior whose parts cannot be separated from the whole Malek?
There was the dog killing in Peoria in the ‘50s, the Senate Watergate Committee in the ‘70s, the doomed nomination to be a governor of the U.S. Postal Service in the ‘80s, and now the Securities and Exchange Commission action in 2004.
Yes, Malek vs. the federal government two years ago.
Fred Malek and his company, for their failure to disclose to the pension fund (and pensioners) the side deal to retain and pay DiBella nearly $375,000 — and without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings — consented to the issuance of a cease-and-desist order censuring him and his company. Malek’s company was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $150,000, and he was personally made to pay a civil penalty of $100,000.
That wasn’t ancient history or a youthful indiscretion. The year: 2004. Malek was 67 years old. [snip]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/10/AR2006031001843_2.html
Sarah Palin probably made the commitment to campaign for McCain before Brown’s win in MA and before the Supreme Court knocked out McCain-Feingold. I’m sorry to see both Palin and Brown so closely allied to a man whose signature piece of legislation is now all but moot. I hope McCain gets some advice from his friends to drop Amnesty and Cap and Trade. What is going on with Mrs McCain and that ad she did for the CA prop 8 antis? Mavericks are hard to understand.
Baloney. Scott Brown is a moderate conservative just like McCain so it makes sense he would back him.
Palin has achieved notoriety because she calls herself a “rogue”, someone who isn’t “politics as usual” and has consistently asked for donations to her PAC so she can advance “common sense conservatism” and support “true conservatives” in their campaigns.
Then the first action out of the gate she backs the biggest RINO in the Senate.
This article is just another band aid full of excuses from a Palin worshipper and even goes farhter by trying to shift the focus from her actions to that of Brown.
Browns endorsement of McCain makes sense, Palin’s is shiv in the back of all her supporters and a direct contradiction to everything she has said up to this point.
And Scott Brown's election was almost a miracle. Still, he is a RINO lite and it's no puzzle that he might find common cause with the party's most damaging RINO. Arizona is not Massachusetts. Don't see much impact from his siding with McCain. And who knows what he will reveal about himself over the next seven months, and who knows if he will still be viewed so positively once we move from Obamacare to other issues. - Still, he's light years better than Teddy and what Coakley would have been.
“Actually it’s a very consistent standard to support the incumbant of your party.”
So all that talk about “Going Rogue” was BS? Did going rogue actually mean “politics as usual”?
Go lay down bobby, nobody here cares what you think.
Don’t forget Willie, he’s here too.
The concern trolls are out for Sarah’s blood.
16 days ago Bob J said that he would applaud Sarah if she endorsed McCain.
Roll Tape...
All observe Bob J and his "objective" criticisms of Sarah,
LOL!
As long as ardent supporters keep putting her on a pedestal out of reach of criticism there will be people who will continue to knock her back down to earth where all politicians should be.
“Today, Bob J is critical of Sarah for endorsing Sarah.
Bob J | Jan. 23: Palin has achieved notoriety because she calls herself a “rogue”, someone who isn’t “politics as usual” and has consistently asked for donations to her PAC so she can advance “common sense conservatism” and support “true conservatives” in their campaigns. Then the first action out of the gate she backs the biggest RINO in the Senate. This article is just another band aid full of excuses from a Palin worshipper and even goes farhter by trying to shift the focus from her actions to that of Brown
16 days ago Bob J said that he would applaud Sarah if she endorsed McCain.
Roll Tape...
Bob J | Jan. 8: If she comes out for him I will applaud her standing by the man who catapulted her into the national limelight.
All observe Bob J and his “objective” criticisms of Sarah “
Thanks for the weekend laugh of the day.
But that doesn’t preclude her from criticism that supporting McCain also goes against everything she has said and told us she stands for. She has been riding high on the carpet of being a “rogue”, going against the grain, standing up for what is right and what this country needs, not “playing the game” and standing gy and supporting “true conservatives”.
Palin is trying to have it both ways, riding a wave of anti-RINO, anti incumbancy and anti eltist DC politics while behind the scenes doing what is necessary to maintain her own political viability for her own personal gain.
Hypocrisy is not a campaign theme that will get you many votes but Palin believes her “karma” is so strong and her supporters so blind to reality that she can get away with supporting McCain while maintaining her veneer of “going rogue”.
She can’t have her cake and eat it too. Either she consistently SHOWS she is the rogue messiah riding in on her white horse to clean up the system and establish a new way of doing business based on ethics and doing what is right or she should just admit she is another politician playing the game to get ahead.
How much difference is there between Scozzafava and McCain? The difference for Palin is Scozzfava was a bit player that she could exploit to further her image as a “supporter of true conservatives” while McCain is too big for her to up against.
And that isn’t going rogue, it’s cynically playing the game...just like everyone else.
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.