Posted on 07/21/2010 3:47:17 PM PDT by neverdem
Sarah Palin got some push-back Wednesday, but not from one of her liberal critics in the "mainstream" media. No, it was a conservative -- and influential -- New Hampshire newspaper that tartly dismissed the former Alaska governor's recent endorsement of U.S. Senate candidate Kelly Ayotte.
In a front-page editorial, New Hampshire Union Leader Publisher Joseph W. McQuaid wrote that Palin's endorsement should "neither surprise nor upset the other campaigns" since voters in the state are "rarely impressed by what outsiders have to say."
Better pay attention: in a state that traditionally hosts the first presidential primary -- and will again in 2012 -- the Manchester newspaper wields considerable clout, particularly among Republican voters.
Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate, "isn't making these endorsements because, as she claims, she had spent time in New Hampshire and thus knows that the people here are a lot like Alaskans. She spent a few hours here one day during the 2008 presidential election. That's still more time than she spent getting to know Ayotte, but it takes quite a lot longer to know New Hampshire," McQuaid said in the editorial. The publisher called Ayotte a formidable, legitimate contender in a four-person race for the GOP Senate nomination. But he advised other candidates: "Don't fret over what a 'Mama Grizzly' from Alaska does. Right now, Granite Staters have more to worry about in keeping bears away from bird feeders."
In a Facebook posting, Palin praised Ayotte as a "Mama Grizzly" and said she was the "strongest common-sense conservative who can win in the fall."
Ayotte, the former New Hampshire attorney general, is well financed and the front-runner in polls heading into the Sept. 14 Republican Senate primary. Rep. Paul Hodes (D-N.H.) is the likely Democratic nominee in a contest to succeed Sen. Judd Gregg, (R-N.H.), who chose not to seek a fourth term.
So who is your Pres. pick Frantzie? Who do you like and why and who do you dislike and why?
Considering your opinionated nature, these questions should be pretty easy for you to answer...........
Lets go dude, let's hear your picks!
“Yep, you are right ... My Wife worked there a long time ago. But when Loeb died ... poof and look there was a RINO.”
Ironic...the Massholes moved to NH ...most of them because they hated the high taxes and crap in MA...and changed it so much...no one told them “no matter where you go, there you are.”
Or, I guess, they are just too stupid to realize it. Now they bitch about NH. I wish CWll would start and we could just get on with it. Wonder who will take Third Manassas?
BS. I guess compassionate conservatism told people that we were actually very feeling.
Fiscal conservative makes complete sense to me. It suggests someone that is otherwise socially moderate. Probably the majority of the country.
Exactly, I agree. It is hard to disagree with much of what she says, it is her sloganeering that grates me.
Why say it twice, then?
Saying “common-sense conservative” implies that conservatism may not be sensible.
It’s a dumb generic phrase. I wish Palin would drop it.
well said.
Yep, Massholes is right ...
You have to wonder what happens when the US economy collapses around them. I heard today the bond rating companies would rate munis anymore, because of the horrendous liabilities for them in the Finance Bill.
I wonder when the whole pile will be declared unconstitutional
BS. I guess compassionate conservatism told people that we were actually very feeling.
No not BS, PDS.
Palin never used the term "compassionate conservatism". Don't blame her for GWB's use of the term.
She saying that conservatism is common sense.
I love that.
From now on I will also tell people that I am an “everyday conservative.”
It doesn’t. At least not this one. They haven’t had that wine there since 2000...
She is describing what conservatism is to people who think conservatism is bad.
She is saying that conservtism IS common sense to these people.
Remember, though, that sloganeering is critical to getting elected given the dumbed down voting populace. After all - and sadly - “Hope and Change” WORKED.
The vast majority of the electorate is nowhere near as informed as most freepers. We should recognize slogans and ignore them, realizing they are (1) necessary and (2) NOT aimed at us.
It doesn’t need to be repeated over and over. It makes it seem like we have to say we are for common sense because the other kinds of conservatism aren’t for common sense.
Conservatives are not Republicans.
Wake me when the dems add on common sense democrats....or maybe fiscally reponsible democrats.
“It’s a shame that the word “conservative” has to be qualified with “common-sense”.”
No. It is not. Words mean something. You can have a person who refuses to budge an inch. Reagan wanted a 30% tax cut in 1980. He campaigned on it. But he compromised in 1981 and got 25%. A doctrinaire, inflexible “conservative” could have taken the position that it was 30% or nothing.
Most genuine conservatives would, I think, favor a flat tax over the current system. A doctrinaire conservative would reject any tax reductions unless he got his way. And a flat tax is undeniably superior to a general rate cut because it defangs the IRS and is much more efficient and cheap for business and individuals. A common sense conservative would accept another form of tax reduction, if that was the best that could be done.
In 1976, Reagan selected Liberal Pennsylvania Senator Richard Schweiker as his running mate, infuriating doctrinaire conservatives. Although it was not altogether defensible as conservative (It wasn’t that bad in retrospect. Schweiker became more Conservative after 1976), it was a common sense move to preserve his chances at the nomination.
Jesse Helms, a great Senator was a doctrinaire conservative. Ronald Reagan was a common sense conservative. The actual differences were slight, and Reagan as President was more effective than Helms would have been, although Helms was the more unbending conservative.
Sometimes the difference between common sense and intellectual conservatives is no more than how they explain conservatism. In this sense Reagan was the quintessential common sense conservative and Bill Buckley would be the quintessential intellectual conservative. They both agreed on nearly everything, but they would explain it in different ways. Reagan would use stories, jokes, humor and pithy sayings, as does Palin. Some intellectuals never liked this about him. But most of them either got over it. Or they got run over by it.
A list of Reagan’s commonsense conservative wisdom is linked below:
http://www.reagansense.com/common-sense/
New Hampshire Union Leader Publisher Joseph W. McQuaidI hated him in "Total Recall". Thanks neverdem.
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.