Conservatives Ponder The Sarah Palin Problem

Some on the right are beginning to realize that Sarah Palin's popularity may cause a serious problem for the GOP in 2012.

As I’ve noted over the past week (here and here), Sarah Palin remains an incredibly polarizing figure outside the Republican Party and trails Barack Obama in head-to-head polls. Inside the GOP, she remains incredibly popular to the point where her winning the nomination is so conceivable that it’s hard to be sure just who might be able to stop her. For one thing, as Nate Silver notes Sarah Palin is simply a far more popular draw than anyone else in the running in the GOP:

Ms. Palin’s search traffic, since the start of 2010, is roughly 16 times that of Mitt Romney, 14 times that of Newt Gingrich, 38 times that of Mike Huckabee, and 87 times that of Mr. Pawlenty. (It is about six times greater than these other four candidates combined.)

Ms. Palin, in fact, draws almost as much search traffic worldwide as the man she would face if she wins the Republican nomination: Barack Obama. And her name is searched for about 30 percent more often than the President’s among Google users in the United States.

Some members of Ms. Palin’s family also draw as much attention has the other Presidential contenders. Todd Palin, her husband, gets about as much search traffic as Mr. Pawlenty. Bristol Palin, her daughter (and a finalist on “Dancing With the Stars”), gets several times more than any of them (as does her former boyfriend, Levi Johnston).

Mentions of the candidates in media outlets tracked by Google News have been nearly as asymmetrical. Sarah Palin’s name has been mentioned in about 20,300 articles since the start of the year, according to Google News, versus 3,640 for Mr. Romney, 3,280 for Mr. Gingrich, 2,980 for Mr. Pawlenty, and 1,870 for Mr. Huckabee. The ratio of candidate mentions in The Times since the beginning of 2010 has largely followed the same pattern: Ms. Palin’s name has been mentioned in 870 stories, against 540 for the other four candidates combined.

All of this poses a dilemma for the other potential Republican contenders. If and when Ms. Palin declares her candidacy for the White House, it could consume much of the media oxygen literally for months. For that matter, if Ms. Palin declines to run for office, it could also be a huge story. And, of course, until her mind is made up, there will be plenty of articles that attempt to anticipate Ms. Palin’s decision.

Indeed, there is hardly a day that goes by that there isn’t some story about one of the Palin’s somewhere in the press. Much of it is irrelevant nonsense, such as the reports about Bristol Palin’s appearance on Dancing With The Stars or the contents of Willow Palin’s Facebook page. Even the irrelevant nonsense, though, is a reflection of the fact news about the Palins drives traffic and spikes readership and viewer ratings. There’s a reason that nobody hears from the sons of Mike Huckabee or the daughters of Tim Palwenty. Heck, there isn’t as much press coverage of Malia and Sasha Obama as there is of the two eldest daughters of Sarah and Todd Palin. There’s a reason for it, and it has nothing to do with media bias, it’s because the Palins have turned into some kind of weird media celebrity, and that seems to be raising concern in many Republican circles that if she did run for President Sarah Palin would have an unstoppable path to the Republican National Convention.

I’ve already made note since the elections of reports of growing concern about Palin inside the GOP, as well as comments by the likes of Karl Rove that Palin is acting in an “unpresidential” manner. Now, the Palin backlash seems to be going viral with Townhall’s Mona Charen being the latest to argue that Sarah Palin should not run for President:

After the 2008 campaign revealed her weaknesses on substance, Palin was advised by those who admire her natural gifts to bone up on policy and devote herself to governing Alaska successfully. Instead, she quit her job as governor after two and a half years, published a book (another is due next week), and seemed to chase money and empty celebrity. Now, rather than being able to highlight the accomplishments of Sarah Palin’s Alaska, we get “Sarah Palin’s Alaska,” another cheesy entrant in the reality show genre. She’d so much rather be out dog sledding than in some “dull political office,” she tells the audience. File that.

She is wildly popular with a swath of the Republican electorate, it’s true. And, as a conservative woman politician told me, the consultants (who get paid the big bucks win or lose) will doubtless descend upon her with game plans showing how she can win in Iowa and then cruise to the nomination. Maybe. But the general election would be a problem, since 53 percent of independent voters view Palin unfavorably, according to a recent Gallup poll, along with 81 percent of Democrats.

(…)

Palin has many strengths. I admire her fortitude and her commitment to principle. Her capacity to connect with a crowd is something most politicians can only dream of. I will always remember her 2008 convention speech as a rollicking star turn. She would be terrific as a talk-show host — the new Oprah.

But as a presidential candidate? Someone to convince critical independent voters that Republicans can govern successfully? Absolutely not.

Of course, there are those, such as MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, who think that this entire Palin-For-President dance that we’re seeing is part of a cynical dance that the former Governor is playing that has nothing to do with any plans to ever run for higher office:

As Silver notes, though, even if Scarborough is right and Palin never runs for President she still poses a problem for the prospective 2012 field just because of the amount of media attention that she continues to get. There’s no reason to think that is going to change anytime soon, regardless of what she decides to do.

FILED UNDER: Politicians, Sarah Palin, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Tano says:

    “… if she did run for President Sarah Palin would have…”

    Shouldn’t there be a comma in the middle there – you almost made me lose my breakfast…

  2. tom p says:

    “And her name is searched for about 30 percent more often than the President’s among Google users in the United States.

    Some members of Ms. Palin’s family also draw as much attention has the other Presidential contenders. Todd Palin, her husband, gets about as much search traffic as Mr. Pawlenty. Bristol Palin, her daughter (and a finalist on “Dancing With the Stars”), gets several times more than any of them (as does her former boyfriend, Levi Johnston).”

    Can we just go ahead and change the name of the Republican Party to the “National Enquirer Party”?

  3. Janis Gore says:

    Hard to do that, Tom P., with John Edwards so recently in the background.

  4. MarkedMan says:

    Wait, Doug, do you really mean that some in the media are just reporting on the Palin’s just to drive up traffic on their sites? Shocking! What kind of person does that?

  5. anjin-san says:

    > John Edwards so recently in the background.

    How is Edwards affair any different then that of say, Newt? Palin is a relentless publicity hound, both for herself and her family. Her mission is to build the Palin brand – a task she found far more important than carrying out her sworn duty tot he State of Alaska and its citizens.

    Edwards certainly has his faults, but your comparison is a bit of a joke.

  6. Janis Gore says:

    I brought him up simply because his story was pursued by the National Enquirer. He IS the National Enquirer candidate.

  7. anjin-san says:

    Nice try Janis, thanks for playing.

    The difference between Palin and Edwards is that he got exposed doing something he was trying to hide. Palin actually wants this sort of attention.

  8. Janis Gore says:

    I wasn’t making any comparison between candidates, Anjin. They’re nothing alike. But if someone is going to bring the National Enquirer into the conversation, John Edwards is the go-to guy during the last few years.

    Don’t be so touchy.

  9. anjin-san says:

    > Don’t be so touchy.

    I don’t think pointing out that your position is totally bogus is touchy, but by all means, stick with the bait and switch tactic. It can be a useful tool in the absence of a valid argument.

    > He IS the National Enquirer candidate.

    When did Edwards announce he was testing the waters? I must have missed the announcement. Edwards is a washed up hack no one cares about, and deservedly so. That you resort to bringing him into the discussion is revealing in of itself.

  10. Smooth Jazz says:

    Hey Doug,

    Repeat after me: “Palin is Divisive”, “Obama is Divisive”, “Palin is Polarizing”, “Obama is Polarizing”, “Palin is Divisive”, “Obama is Divisive”, blah blah blah. You are so obsessed with Palin, you cannot come to grips with the fact that Obambi is arguably more divisive and/or polarizing that Gov Palin is.

    And that is why I want her to win more than anything else: So that elitist snobs like you can eat some crow for trying to tell us, we the people, who should be our leaders. Oh Man, Oh Man, that would be a dream come true – So left wing hacks like you and RINOs like all the DC & New York elitists can stuff it.

  11. Janis Gore says:

    What, that I don’t think the National Enquirer Party is the proper jibe at a party that supports Sarah Palin? I don’t. I think the TV Guide party would be better.

  12. anjin-san says:

    > And that is why I want her to win more than anything else: So that elitist snobs like you can eat some crow

    > So left wing hacks like you and RINOs like all the DC & New York elitists can stuff it.

    Ah, so. Would not want to bring something trivial like what’s best for the country into a Presidential election. Go tea party!

  13. Smooth Jazz says:

    So what would you consider “best” for the country: The unmitigated disaster named Obama. Two years ago we listened to left wing blogs like OTB and people like you hive up this community organizer who basically spent 2 years in the Senate, and what did that get us – A narcissist who is in way over his head.

    At least Gov Palin has had some governing and business experience; The clown currently masquarding as President can only point to his role in putting together the Harvard Law Review examples of his leadership experience.

  14. Davebo says:

    Keep in mind that in these days an “elitist snob” is anyone who graduated from 6th grade.

    And OTB is now a left wing blog? Seriously?

    Congratulations James. Now you and Doug (and anyone to the left of Attilla the Hun) is a librul!

    Good luck with the party building.

  15. anjin-san says:

    > The unmitigated disaster named Obama

    Tell us the details of this “disaster”. Keep in mind that Obama took office with the country teetering on the verge of an honest-to-goodness depression, and then take a look at corporate profits and the performance of the stock market during Obama’s time in office. Also that there is a cause and effect calculation that has to be considered when discussing unemployment.

    You are going to have to do better than mouth lame slogans. Personally, I think that’s all you have, but I am willing to give you a shot at producing an actual substantive argument.

    > At least Gov Palin has had some governing and business experience

    Uh huh. In Alaska, where they know her, she is running fourth among potential GOP Presidential hopefuls for 2012. The people of Alaska have experience too. They have experienced her BS…

  16. Davebo says:

    “At least Gov Palin has had some governing and business experience”

    In the only state that literally pays it’s citizens to live there and gets over 70% of it’s government revenues from the Feds.

    Yeah, rugged individualists those guys. Where’s my check?

  17. Of course, there are those, such as MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, who think that this entire Palin-For-President dance that we’re seeing is part of a cynical dance that the former Governor is playing that has nothing to do with any plans to ever run for higher office

    I sort of agree here. Palin doesn’t want to actually be president. The problem for the GOP is that even if she doesn’t really want to win, she may still run in order to maintain her current meal ticket.

  18. Smooth Jazz says:

    Doug and OTB’s obsession with everything Palin is no doubt traffic related – even if he has to repeat the same talking points (She is divisive, She is Polarizing, etc) hundreds of times. I suspect he feeds off the traffic she generates like everybody else, even if he has to sound like a broken record. I gather if you searched “divisive” or “polarizing” on this site, you liekly hit scores or hundreds of hits and posts with Palin as the subject – even though the community organizer in the White House is perhaps WAY more polarizing than Palin.

    My problem with Doug and elitists snobs like him is that want to deny Gov Palin a chance – Just like JournOlist hacks like Katie Couric who tried to cut her off at the knees in 2008. Doug and OTB would have us believe that Obama is good for us, without allowing Gov Palin the opportunity to see what she can do on the stump or in debates. I do not understand why they want her just to just go away. If she doesn’t measure up in 2011 and 2012, then the people will decide and she will go back to Alaska or Fox News or wherever. She shouldn’t have to fold up and go home because elitists on the coasts and DC say so.

  19. And that is why I want her to win more than anything else: So that elitist snobs like you can eat some crow for trying to tell us, we the people, who should be our leaders. Oh Man, Oh Man, that would be a dream come true – So left wing hacks like you and RINOs like all the DC & New York elitists can stuff it.

    Doing something to piss off the elites is just as bad as doing something just because the elites tell you to do it. In either case, you’re allowing the elites to control your actions. When you’re deciding who to vote for, you should want them to win because they’d be the best president and stop wasting your time worrying about whether elites like you or not.

  20. Smooth Jazz says:

    Good lord Dude. If you pass on the Obama as messiah KoolAid, you will see the following:

    1. His party was obliterated in the 2010 midterms
    2. OBAMACARE – which most Americans hate
    3. Trillion dollar deficits
    4. EXploding debt – $14Trillion and counting
    5. Etc
    6. Etc
    7 Etc

    Admit it: Your guys has been a dismal failure and trying to blame everything on Bush when the community organizer has been Preident isn’t going to fly just like it didn’t in the midterms.

  21. anjin-san says:

    > even if he has to repeat the same talking points

    Coming from someone who has no vocabulary beyond “empty suit” and “community organizer” this is pretty laughable.

    > JournOlist hacks like Katie Couric

    If Couric is a hack, why was Palin unable to deal with her effectively? Ronald Reagan ate journalists for breakfast when it suited him. Palin got rattled by a softball artist, and came off like a gibbering idiot. Not impressive.

  22. anjin-san says:

    > Good lord Dude. If you pass on the Obama as messiah KoolAid

    I’m sorry Jazz, you are simply too stupid to burn any more daylight on. Google “substantive argument”. Sorry, I should have realized words of more than two syllables would confuse you.

    I keep waiting for and intelligent and articulate person who supports the tea party movement to come along to have a decent argument with. Waiting…. and waiting…

  23. Eric Florack says:

    The only people who are having problems with it are the ones who find real conservatism problematic.

  24. wr says:

    I love Smooth Jazz’s exhaustive list of reasons why Obama is so bad. Basically he’s got three — the Dems lost seats in the mid-terms (although you might ask Senate Majority Leader McConnell about that “obliteration”), the idea that “most Americans” hate “Obamacare,” although poll after poll shows a vast majority in favor of just about every element of the program, despite health insurance companies secretly funnelling $85 million to the Chamber of Commerce to spread lies about it; and two ways of saying that the country is running a deficit, a problem that never bothered him as long as a Republican was in the White House. And then he runs out. Apparently he didn’t pay his cable bill so he hasn’t been able to pick up new calumnies from Fox.

    So to recap: We’re supposed to admit that Obama is a failure because “etcetera.” That’s some keen political arguing there. No wonder Smoothy loves him some Palin.

  25. “real” conservatism being the leftist style identity politics Bush introduced to the party rather than the any adherence to actual conservative principles. Palin doesn’t actually have to do anything conservative, just keep mouthing all the codewords and wait for tribal loyalty to kick in.

  26. anjin-san says:

    wr… smooth is rocking out to a Kenny G imprint album. It is affecting his higher brain functions in a negative way, and those synapses are not exactly turbocharged on the best of days.

  27. Smooth Jazz says:

    Here is the problem with this statement OTB: Charen is a known supporter of Mitch Daniels. If I were you, I wouldn’t quote a Repub speaking out against Gov Palin and trying to suggest it is a “backlash” without full disclosure – ie Does that Repub have a favored candidate in the race. If you don’t alert your readers to this pertinent fact, you are just using another Palin hit piece to reinforce your internal bias. Just something your readers should consider.

  28. Hey, why do you have to hate on Kenny G?

  29. anjin-san says:

    I wonder what actual conservatives like Barry Goldwater and William F. Buckley would have to say about our Sarah?

  30. anjin-san says:

    > Hey, why do you have to hate on Kenny G?

    Because I have a Coleman Hawkins record on to remind me what sax is all about…

  31. Yes but there’s a big space between “not the greatest saxophonist ever” and “turns you into a crazy internet troll”

  32. ponce says:

    “if you pass on the Obama as messiah KoolAid, you will see the following:”

    I see far more evidence that Sarah Palin is the Anitchrist.

  33. sam says:

    @Smooth

    “And that is why I want her to win more than anything else: So that elitist snobs like you can eat some crow for trying to tell us, we the people, who should be our leaders.”

    And once again the hard little turd of resentment at the center of the being of a Palinista is revealed. Smooth evidences an interesting syndrome of traits: Arrogance — “we the people” (what gives him the right to speak for the rest of us?) coupled with a profound sense of being victimized by those, whom in his heart of hearts he truly believes, I think, are his betters. That’s a dangerous mixture. The police power of the state in the hands of losers like that should give us all pause.

  34. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***In the only state that literally pays it’s citizens to live there and gets over 70% of it’s government revenues from the Feds.**** lol, sure it is……

  35. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***I see far more evidence that Sarah Palin is the Anitchrist.****lol, sure you do……

  36. Herb says:

    “You are so obsessed with Palin”

    Drink

    “Doug and OTB’s obsession with everything Palin ”

    Drink

  37. Pug says:

    G.A., the phony rugged individualists of Alaska get far more money per capita from the Federal government than any other state.

  38. sam says:

    Prototypical GA Phillips “argument”

    Assertion.

    GA’s counter: lol {null}

    (where { } represents his ears and ‘null’, well, you get the picture.)

  39. anjin-san says:

    In many ways, Alaska is the tea party dream embodied. You get lots of government schwag, but you also get to tell yourself you are a REAL AMERICAN. Free, self-sufficient, beholden to no one. Kind of a modern day Jeremiah Johnson. It is only fitting that reality TV maven Sarah Palin should embody this hallucination.

  40. Pug says:

    Hey Doug, don’t get upset because some know-nothing loser calls you and elitist. I’m an elitist, too, and I worked like hell to get to be one.

    I’m pretty proud of it.

  41. tom p says:

    “Hard to do that, Tom P., with John Edwards so recently in the background.”

    Janis: my only surprise is that nobody here mentioned the “Obama/ Oprah/ Michelle love triangle” that was all over the grocery check outs just a couple months ago (and if I recall correctly, was resurrected in the past few weeks.

    Talk about low hanging fruit… You guys are so LAME….

  42. Janis Gore says:

    Yikes. I am lame. My only defense is that I rarely shop for groceries. The spouse does that in this household.

    Oprah now? I thought it was Vera or something, down in the islands.

  43. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***G.A., the phony rugged individualists of Alaska get far more money per capita from the Federal government than any other state.*** So what state do the people in the UAW live in LOL…………..

    Sam, lol………………

  44. wr says:

    Right, because building cars for a living is exactly the same as getting a government check for sitting on your ass in Alaska.

    I suppose you’d rather they be like Zels, and just collect an unemployment check while complaining about other people taking government money.

  45. narciso says:

    Rest asured, Doug actually believes what Couric was selling, despite she didn’t notice the actual historical malapropism of our actual vice president, you know the part about” President
    FDR giving a fireside chat on TV in 1929″ or that part about the US ‘kicking Hezbollah out of Lebanon’ (actually Syrian intelligence) or flubbing the Pipeline vote in 1973, coming up with FISA,
    or VAWA that the Supreme Court slapped down

  46. sam says:

    ” flubbing the Pipeline vote in 1973,”

    Fair point. Too bad Palin didn’t hit him over the head with in during the debate…assuming she knew about it. Do you know if she did? I mean, she’s from Alaska and all and one would think she would’ve known about that. And I would have loved to have seen her round on him for the Violence Against Women Act. That would’ve made for a great piece of political theater. And as far as FISA goes, I would have been equally entertained to hear her position on the Act…presuming she knew, at the time, what it is. (Hell, at the current time).

  47. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***Right, because building cars for a living is exactly the same as getting a government check for sitting on your ass in Alaska.***

    lol.. ….hmmmm…lol…..

  48. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***I suppose you’d rather they be like Zealand just collect an unemployment check while complaining about other people taking government money.***

    IT’S TAX MONEY, oh wait, the government does just print it now, don’t they………lol……

    And no, I take it and complain people like you and the way you think, and, the way you force other people to think.

  49. Pug says:

    <,i…. and, the way you force other people to think.

    Force other people to think? Not even sure what that is supposed to mean.

  50. Haven’t you heard? George Soros backed a research program on Kenyan muslims to give liberals seceret mind control powers.

    *concentrates real hard* Pug…. bring me a sandwhich……

  51. Davebo says:

    http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu/Publications/webnote/Federal_Spending2008.pdf

    About a third of all jobs in Alaska can be traced to federal spending here—and over the past
    decade the rapid increase in federal spending drove much of the economic growth. Federal
    spending in Alaska more than doubled between 1995 and 2005, and in 2006 it was $9.25 billion

  52. Eric Florack says:

    The problem here is not so much that conservatives consider Sarah Pailin a problem, so much as the establishment Republicans, (who are at best centrists.more properly labeled RINOs) do.
    The left considers anything to the right of Castro to be conservative, (witness, for example, the labeling of Bush, himself an unabashed centrist,  as Hitler and you begin to see my point) and so, too, therefore, does the press by the natural extension. Their worst fear, would appear to be the rise of real conservatism.
     
     

  53. […] Mataconis over at OTB, is commenting on the Anti-Palin backlash going on, and seems to me quite willing to be part of […]

  54. wr says:

    “Bush, an unabashed centrist.”
    Bush was the conservative messiah — until he became a political liability. Now he’s a centrist.

  55. anjin-san says:

    WR… Funny how guys like bit have bailed on Bush.  Do you remember the kid in high who spent three years kissing the quarterback’s ass? Then in your senior year the QB blew the homecoming game and the same guy spent the rest of the year telling everyone he always knew the quarterback sucked?
    That kid was bithead.
     

  56. sam says:

    Their worst fear, would appear to be the rise of real conservatism.
    Sarah Palin is to real conservatism as Wonder Bread is to real bread.

  57. Eric Florack says:

    Perhaps you don’t recall, Anjin… I said a couple years back…

    I don’t support Bush because of Bush. I support Bush because he and the remainder of the Republicans are the best weapon we have available to defeat what I see as the largest evil we face; Leftist Democrats.

    I’ve been quite consistent in that position, and have been saying since the Elder Bush held the post of POTUS, that neither was a real conservative, being at best a centrist.
    Another example of such, was my comments at Q&O back in 08:

    CR, you call it what you will. But if we regard government as a nessesary evil, and I think we should, then election have always come down to which of the chocies is the least evil.Such was the driver, for example of my choice to support W for POTUS. He’s at best a centrist, as I have been saying forever… but his is a far less evil choice than Kerry or Gore.

     
    Consider, for an example of where my loyalties lie, my comments in my Pajamas Media Column:
     

    While conservatives and libertarians make up the majority of the GOP, they don’t make up even half of the leadership. The rank and file are interested in principles of conservatism and libertarianism. They want to see those principles applied to governing. The GOP leadership has no interest anymore in such matters, being more enamored with attaining and remaining in power. Those principles are just standing in their way.

    It’s with a bit of humor that I notice the name of Biuckley got invoked, here by you as a backing for your position. Let’s dispel such fantasy of yours,, shall we?
    What follows is the mission statement originally written by William F. Buckley Jr. at the then fledgling National Review on November 19, 1955. This was the founding document of the magazine and needs to be viewed through that filter. That said, I dare to suggest to you that the Republican Party has found itself in trouble precisely because it has parted with these principles.

    It is the job of centralized government (in peacetime) to protect its citizens’ lives, liberty and property. All other activities of government tend to diminish freedom and hamper progress. The growth of government (the dominant social feature of this century) must be fought relentlessly. In this great social conflict of the era, we are, without reservations, on the libertarian side.
    The profound crisis of our era is, in essence, the conflict between the Social Engineers, who seek to adjust mankind to conform with scientific utopias, and the disciples of Truth, who defend the organic moral order. We believe that truth is neither arrived at nor illuminated by monitoring election results, binding though these are for other purposes, but by other means, including a study of human experience. On this point we are, without reservations, on the conservative side.
    The century’s most blatant force of satanic utopianism is communism. We consider “coexistence” with communism neither desirable nor possible, nor honorable; we find ourselves irrevocably at war with communism and shall oppose any substitute for victory.
    The largest cultural menace in America is the conformity of the intellectual cliques which, in education as well as the arts, are out to impose upon the nation their modish fads and fallacies, and have nearly succeeded in doing so. In this cultural issue, we are, without reservations, on the side of excellence (rather than “newness”) and of honest intellectual combat (rather than conformity).
    The most alarming single danger to the American political system lies in the fact that an identifiable team of Fabian operators is bent on controlling both our major political parties (under the sanction of such fatuous and unreasoned slogans as “national unity,” “middle-of-the-road,” “progressivism,” and “bipartisanship.”)  Clever intriguers are reshaping both parties in the image of Babbitt, gone Social-Democrat. When and where this political issue arises, we are, without reservations, on the side of the traditional two-party system that fights its feuds in public and honestly; and we shall advocate the restoration of the two-party system at all costs.
    The competitive price system is indispensable to liberty and material progress. It is threatened not only by the growth of Big Brother government, but by the pressure of monopolies(including union monopolies. What is more, some labor unions have clearly identified themselves with doctrinaire socialist objectives. The characteristic problems of harassed business have gone unreported for years, with the result that the public has been taught to assume (almost instinctively) that conflicts between labor and management are generally traceable to greed and intransigence on the part of management. Sometimes they are; often they are not. NATIONAL REVIEW will explore and oppose the inroads upon the market economy caused by monopolies in general, and politically oriented unionism in particular; and it will tell the violated businessman’s side of the story.
    No superstition has more effectively bewitched America’s Liberal elite than the fashionable concepts of world government, the United Nations, internationalism, international atomic pools, etc. Perhaps the most important and readily demonstrable lesson of history is that freedom goes hand in hand with a state of political decentralization, that remote government is irresponsible government. It would make greater sense to grant independence to each of our 50 states than to surrender U.S. sovereignty to a world organization.

    Point number five here is particularly potent. We were told we needed a fresh approach and to get along with the other side. Well, we might try “compassionate conservatism,” except it’s already been done and all it did was grow government and allow us to abandon our principles. It also nominated John McCain and ultimately helped  lose the general election. McCain was defeated because conservatives and libertarians — who would usually be supportive of real conservatives — sat on their hands in November, having identified McCain not as a conservative but as part of the problem.
    Any questions, class?

  58. sam says:

    I have a question. Can you please explain to us why you think Sarah Palin will usher in the New Conservative Jerusalem?
     
    Thank you.

  59. tom p says:

    Yikes. I am lame. My only defense is that I rarely shop for groceries. The spouse does that in this household.

    It’s ok, I am unemployed in our household so I do all the shopping as well…

    Oprah now? I thought it was Vera or something, down in the islands.

    Vera? let me in on all the juicy details….
     

  60. wr says:

    Is that the great Saint Buckley who opposed the civil rights bill because of the inherent inferiority of African-Americans? Just goes to show, once you dig below the surface, there’s nothing to conservatism other than “my people are better than those people.”

  61. anjin-san says:

    > what I see as the largest evil we face; Leftist Democrats.
    Of course. Those nasty Democrats are much worse than say, terrorists.
     
    > Any questions, class?
     
    Are you really as much of a pompous dipwad as you seem to be? Or is it all an act so you can have groupies like David L?

  62. anjin-san says:

    > He’s at best a centrist, as I have been saying forever
     
    There is a fundamental flaw with (all of) your commentary bit. You think of yourself as a perceptive person, and well… your not. This tends to invalidate pretty much everything you say…

  63. anjin-san says:

    >  largest evil we face; Leftist Democrats
    Hmmm. Millions of hard working Americans who are busting their butts to raise their families are “Evil”…
    Ladies and gentlemen, the far right has spoken.
    Tell me bit, the men and women of our armed forces who are “leftist Democrats” that are fighting and dying to protect your freedom… are they evil?
    How about the cop who you will expect to risk his life to protect your family if need be – or the fireman who will go into a burning building to save your sorry ass… are they “evil” if they are Democrats? You need to get on record here, but I doubt you have the stones to do so.

  64. sam says:

    See, the thing about BitEric is that he has this belief–obsession, really–that if only the Republican Party would truly embrace and evince the principles of True Conservatism, the scales would drop from the eyes of the American people, and all across the land the chorus would be heard, “Lawdy, Lawdy, Lawdy, salvation is upon us.” It’s touching in its way.  Or, more accurately, tetched.
    In the counterfactual universe in which BitEric spends his time, the principles of True Conservatism have the nature of analytic truth: To deny them is to  mark oneself as forever outside the pale of logical coherence. Alas, what is lacking, as indeed it must needs be lacking, given BitEric’s meager talents, is any proof of the core proposition.  Indeed, if you’ve read enough of his comments, you cannot escape the image of one of those airdancers you sometimes see in front of used car lots, filling up, up, up with air, at the finale, the arms waving furiously.
    It is said that when St. Paul preached to the pagans on the Areopagus, only one pagan left to follow him. BitEric, not possessing Paul’s persuasiveness, and reduced to appearing here at the modest Aeropagus we know as OTB wearing a sandwich board can’t count on anybody leaving with him.