printBRAVO. Is this divorce? I hope so.
Politico: “Palin is declining an invitation to address the Conservative Political Action Conference next month because, a source said, she does not want to be affiliated with the longtime organizer of the traditional movement confab.”
This is Palin’s first significant act of political separation from the “GOP RIP”—and from “politics as usual,” that hackneyed term she and “McMussolini” kept using on the campaign trail. Palin embodied unusual politics on a local level.
Stay tuned. There’s more, and it involves Sarah and Farah, WND’s CEO and chief. Developing.
Update: Palin will be headlining the First National Tea Party Convention, scheduled for February 4-6, 2010 at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel in Nashville, TN. The formidable Michele Bachmann will join her. And, as David Shyster of MSNBC advertised (negatively), WND’s founder will speak too. (WND announced it as well.) As you all know, I write for WND.COM; have done so going on a decade.
The mainstream swamp of a media is framing Palin’s decision, as is their wont, as one that is based on some womanly whim—the fungus press is feminist only when it comes to ladies of the left. I hope, for Sarah’s sake, that this “break” with the GOP corpse is philosophical. In light of the fact that late last year Palin endorsed the Conservative Party’s Doug Hoffman for the 23rd Congressional District of New York, I do believe she is breaking with the GOP.
(I’ll have surprisingly good things to say about her book, which I grabbed at an airport, and have almost finished.)
Losers are those who’re pointing toward the need to revive the rotting, rigor-ridden corpse that is the GOP. Not possible. Not desirable.
A third party is the solution. However, for this to happen in earnest, the (Ron) Paul and Palin factions must commence serious ideological cross fertilization (my diplomatic way of urging Palin to heed Paul), gather the best people around and launch.
To be frank, as someone who considers herself a Paulite—and who has been called “the most persuasive Paul booster” by one of the most perceptive paleos—I see the libertarian Campaign for Liberty falling into the methodology of the GOP. By this I mean the penchant to close ranks and invite into the inner sanctum only strict and obedient adherents, as well as non-entity groupies with zero gravitas (often blond).
How like the GOP.
Good people need to elevate themselves above tribal and ego-bound instincts and gather around the best and the brightest, lots of us—not only five bright sparks, 50 mediocrities, and 500 sparkly, dim bimbos.
I was asked by the Paul Campaign to endorse Ron Paul. He’s my president of choice, so I did. Here is the blurb that was used during the campaign. I was asked to pen a position editorial for said campaign explaining why Ron Paul was VERY GOOD for Israel. I did that too.
Still, when the Campaign roles into town—my town—I am not even invited to the occasion.
I am no seeker of publicity or inclusivity. I’m independent. What matters to me is the integrity and longevity of my writing. Nevertheless, I do believe that by ignoring people with gravitas (just becasue they are independent-minded, but not always like-minded); choosing instead to embrace groupies, lightweights and other anon riffraff—good people with a good cause contribute to the dumbing down of the liberty movement.
Let’s hope Palin can avert this echo-chamber instinct and gather around her a coalition of Buchananites, Bachmannites, Paulites, Beckians, etc.
Update II: Also to be mindful of is the danger of gentrifying a grassroots movement. What you have in the tea party swell is an inchoate, energetic thing with great promise. Politicos, always eager to turn a protest into a constituency, could seize the movement, as a stepping stone to power, and corrupt it. The movement has to be given solid philosophical contours, but how do you keep the Republicans away. Especially when they’re packaged as appealingly as Sean Duffy is. Duffy’s a Hamiltonian (not a good thing) GOPier.
Update III (Jan. 9): The Democratic and the Republican Parties are one and the same thing. Each is a necessary counterweight in a partnership designed to keep the pendulum of power swinging forever from one putrid entity to the other.
The balance is kept by bamboozling (successfully, as it would appear from posts on this blog) respective supporters. The mesmerizing momentum will endure forever; will keep the colluding quislings in power in perpetuity, and continue to sell books for their respective fascistic philosophers.
The philosophical foot soldiers for the duopoly have their own game going. Whether they are shouting “liberal this; liberals that” all the way to the bank, or suddenly discovering the Constitution when the rival faction is in power—they help maintain status quo.
I think it was my WND colleague Vox Day who pointed out how the Republican reptiles move to the left when in power, and the Democratic dogs shuffle to the right when they get their turn.
Ultimately the creeps converge.
If what I am saying is true—and it is—then the assertion that the Republican Party can be reformed is a lie, a pie-in-the-sky; not pragmatism but falsehood. People who help elevate the characters involved in this cruel farce; who promulgate The Lie are, thus, either stupid or venal.
There is a scene in “Dangerous Liaisons” where the protagonist, a lying schemer, is “booed and disgraced by the audience at the opera,” and retreats to her boudoir never to emerge again.
This is the appropriate metaphor for the characters involved in American politics.
If our society had an ounce of moral fiber, this would be the fate of the Ann Couters, Rush Limbaughs, Levines—the blood-lusting vampires of the Republican War Machine, whose bitch-hot talk helped send gullible young men to their death.
This would be the fate of the grand designers behind the Democratic welfare apparatus.
A Third Party option is not for the quick-fix quacks among us. It will be slow and laborious. But it is the only way.
The Third-Party road involves a planned strategy whereby support is withdrawn from all candidates running for the duopoly. It involves the meeting of the smartest minds, with the most integrity. That the “Campaign for Liberty” has not called on myself, Vox, and other marginalized voices with sizable (WND) platforms, despite our tireless work for liberty, demonstrates that its movers and shakers are moving and shaking like a cult; not like a force of nature.
What I like about Palin is that she is a force of nature. And she has lived the quintessential American life. She is everything that is good in America. Can she bury the Republican corpse and do what I suggest? I honestly don’t know.
About her book at a later date.
We all know the republicans are a miserable bunch of losers. But third parties are no solution. If I thought they were I would try to resurrect the Confederacy. Our only chance to try to right the ship that the democrats, and their republican accomplices, have capsized is to make something happen with the republican party. I like Sarah and only hope that she does well in the early going of the primaries so as to attract heavy weight support. her message is neither new nor radical. It is the tried and true message of common sense Americanism that would be sweet to the ears of regular folks. It seems to have escaped the notice of the Washington elite that there a lot more “regular folks” than there are Yale/Princeton grads.
[Quit writing “republicans” when you should be writing “Republicans.” The GOP is not “republican” in any way.]
I agree, with regret, that a third party will only assure a second Obama administration. We have to choose between what we want (and lose) and what we can get.
I am no fan of either major party. They may be 6 of one or a half-dozen of the other. But I would maintain that the Reps don’t hate America, and at core – as monosyllabic as they are – believe in more freedom rather than less.
I know – they are incompetent and drag their knuckles when they walk, but there is hope there. There is no hope with the Dems.
If the Tea Parties form a third party, the Dems will win. If Palin goes third-party rogue, the Dems will win. This is not what I want, but what will happen.
It is an easier battle to remake the Reps than to build a third party. [We disagree completely.] Maybe one day, but we don’t have much time left before the Dems destroy what is a great nation. We need a major and rapid turnaround.
Not that he was perfect, but we need another Reagan. As flawed as he was, he understood national defense (for the most part) [in that case, a Goldwater is far superior] and had the right instincts (even though he grew government).
Haym, please name one Republican Administration in the past 100 years that has reduced the size of government and restored any semblance of liberty to the people of the USA.
Both major parties have been driving this nation to hell for a long time. Occasionally one just drives a bit slower.
IM- Great analysis of the political scene we have before us
Glad Sarah thumbed her nose at CPAC. LOL
I don’t care if it is the Rep., Dem., 3rd party, or the Greens for that matter, as long as we can get a majority of politicos from locals to POTUS, who govern with the principles of the Constitution/Liberty as their core beliefs
Will not surprise me if you have good things to say about Sarah’s book
Jack, I don’t disagree. But philosophical purity – for now – loses to practical realities.
Haym, quit worrying whether the Dems or Repubs win due to a 3rd party. They are the SAME THING. If either of them win, the country loses.
The only way to change things is to go 3rd party, and we have to start somewhere. I have cast my last vote for the old ways.
I agree that politics, a corrupting force, will corrupt the Tea Party movement (like D. B. Norton did to the “John Doe movement” in the movie “Meet John Doe”).
The Global Empire now costs 90% in real dollars as we spent in 1945 when we had more capable enemies than shoe/underpants bombers. See:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11113
Many of these tea-partiers want more F-35’s, troops in Yemen, and interceptors in Poland – e.g. more Empire.
Will Palin, Bachmann, and these Republicans really stand up to the Global Security state and neoconservative interventionism? Will they really propose domestic budget cuts or just give the usual blather about “cutting waste” and finding some $ 3 million earmark of a Pelosi that constitutes 0.0001 % of the budget?
How many believe in the Constitution vs. those who are happy to just post the Ten Commandments where illegal aliens come for free health care? How many want to promote Leave No Child Behind or “save” Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security? How many believe it is the government’s role to provide people with “jobs”?
Jack – Warren Harding reduced the size of government (which is why the leftist historians hate him).
I rarely, if ever, read a book by a politician or Religion theologian. Neither seems to know their subject; maybe because both fields are based on faith. Although the ladies listed above have supported unconstitutional wars, I’ve also heard them make a couple of good economic comments in line with Ron Paul. I would be interested in hearing Ilana’s review of Ms. Palin’s book. In regard to the third party argument, at present we have a choice of losing big or small, but lose we will no matter which way we go. If we wait and try to clean up the party, the Republicans will conjure the dissatisfied back into the fold, mostly because there was not a real voice articulating truth. True a third party will not hurt the Democrats, and will hurt the Republicans, but we can’t clean up the Republicans, the Senator from S. Carolina, has made that clear. If we build a large enough third party to be noticed, future generations will be able to read history; develop new political theory on the base we leave. Who knows, we might even get lucky and become the David.
In the last election, I supported RP in the primary, but was going to vote for myself for president…anything but support the weak candidate I think the mainstream media picked for us. I hate politicians, and McCain is a prime example of a cynical, creepy, exploitive reach-across-the-aisle second-hander. But, he picked Sarah and I changed my mind. She is much less of a crooked Washington beltway insider than any other viable candidate I can think of, so I support her. You can tell how scared of her the left is by their rabid, scurilous, relentless personal attacks. They know they can’t beat her, so they are determined to destroy her.
I understand the argument that a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for the liberal (Ross Perot, anyone?). My vote is available, but I’m sick to death of compromising my principles to vote for the least odious candidate.
My vote is available, GOP, but you gotta earn it.
It’s too bad that you, in particular, Ilana, were treated as you have been by the Campaign for Liberty. You donated your intellectual property to the Paul campaign in the form of endorsements and position paper(s) and now, are not even asked to attend a local event (seems to me that you should have been asked to speak at the event.)
Philosophical positions aside, one often makes a decision to stay in or leave an organization based on the quality of interaction one has with other members or those in leadership. In your case, the leaders had a great chance to involve you, and blew it.
I use lower case on republicans, democrats, muslims etc. to show lack of respect. However in respect for your superior linguistic ability I will try to use proper spelling in the future.
[it’s not about spelling. “republican” is an honorific. A high compliment.]
Having watched the 38 year failure known as the Libertarian Party, I am skeptical of 3rd parties. They become a magnet for marginal kooks, single issue people, and petty squabbles. A national campaign takes $ 1 billion – even one on the cheap with some TV ads basically starts at $ 100 million – not with unemployed college dropouts running for President (like Bednarik).
Single charismatic person 3rd parties like Wallace, Perot, Nader, and possibly Palin live and die with that person – warts and all.
As for “conservatives” and Republicans, they are an ideological muddle. For example, Sean Duffy: ” We MUST ensure the solvency of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. “. These clowns endorse the Drug War and the Liberate Islam Crusade (for all the “real” Religion-of-Peace Moslems who will welcome us as “liberators”). “Conservatives” want to cut taxes but endorse a government with a $ 4 Trillion budget. Even if 20 million illegal aliens, consuming 25,000 of tax money each, were transported to Mars, the budget would be $ 3.5 Trillion!!! – hence you need a Death Tax, high income taxes, etc. to finance the Leviathan. “Conservatives” are part of the PROBLEM rather than the solution.
I don’t know what an honorific is. But I certainly don’t want to give the Republicans any compliments, high or otherwise. My ongoing education at your hands continues.
MyRon Pauli for Prez 2012, book it !