en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/1073888 Comments by societyis2blame http://biggovernment.com/jhoft/2010/07/08/defeat-socialism-save-america-from-the-obama-pelosi-regimedraft-sarah-palin-for-rnc-chair/#IDComment85600671 I've been saying this for almost a year now. Nice to see BigGov, NRO and others are picking up the flag on this idea. Palin's a perfect choice for NRC chair. Genuine mainstream "flyover state" Conservatives who represent the vast majority of potential GOP voters haven't had a voice inside the GOP leadership and she'd fit that bill admirably. To the misguided partisans who're calling this some kind of insider Republican plot to kill a 2012 Palin presidential campaign - stop looking for enemies in your own camp and appreciate how this could benefit not only her party but Palin herself in preparing for a campaign on down the road (say 2016 or 2020). She's not ready to run in 2012 (polling shows 61% think she's not qualified) but she could be later. Stop pushing the kool-aid on everyone and let them see her in action on a national stage for a few years and that number will hopefully improve. Thu, 8 Jul 2010 21:06:16 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jhoft/2010/07/08/defeat-socialism-save-america-from-the-obama-pelosi-regimedraft-sarah-palin-for-rnc-chair/#IDComment85600671 http://biggovernment.com/prahe/2010/06/27/walter-lippmann-on-progressivism/#IDComment82636947 Criticizing some of the things Beck does, says or believes in (some, not all, BTW) does not make you "Daily Joe." Frum and Brooks are wholly different animals from Continetti, who makes some valid points. The "if you disagree with me you are Keith Olbermann" routine isn't winning us any votes in November. If you want to support the cause, stop fragging guys like Continetti who are a) on our side and b) probably agree with you on 70% of Beck's agenda. Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:34:18 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/prahe/2010/06/27/walter-lippmann-on-progressivism/#IDComment82636947 http://biggovernment.com/prahe/2010/06/27/walter-lippmann-on-progressivism/#IDComment82635716 Unfair to Beck. There's no way to deal with 9/11 that doesn't "exploit it" for "political gain" under this definition. Whatever your comment on 9/11 is, whatever you want to do, or avoid doing, you're making a statement intended to influence how people think. How are his arguments anything like 7 degrees ? I'm not a fanboy for Beck but saying "I hate Glenn Beck" takes you beyond criticism into simple character assassination. Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:22:19 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/prahe/2010/06/27/walter-lippmann-on-progressivism/#IDComment82635716 http://biggovernment.com/prahe/2010/06/27/walter-lippmann-on-progressivism/#IDComment82635253 He does a good job - I just can't get with the conspiracy theorizing - although I'll leave it to Beck to comment more unequivocally on what he genuinely believes on that score before I'll credit Continetti on that score - the article doesn't have a "smoking gun" as to Beck believing everything Skousen said, but I'd say the burden's on Glenn at this point. Regardless, his show's worth watching, but I'd take what he said with a bigger grain of salt if he really buys into the "secret society" thinking. Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:17:12 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/prahe/2010/06/27/walter-lippmann-on-progressivism/#IDComment82635253 http://biggovernment.com/prahe/2010/06/27/walter-lippmann-on-progressivism/#IDComment82634635 You're proving Continetti's point, Missy. "If you don't like everything Glenn Beck does, you're Hitler !" sounds like something we'd see from the moonbats at DKos. The more I see ridiculously hyperbolic statements like this, the more I'm inclined to agree with Continetti. Some of us were here before you discovered your "calling" to "save Liberty" and "Re-found America." And we'll still be here to say "we told you so" when voters in the next two elections demonstrate that they're no more ready for full-throated "Atlas Shrugged" radical capitalism than they were for Obama's hard-Left socialism. Slow and steady incremental change is what will win this country back - not radicalism. You should check with the American people before you presume to speak for them, or radically restructure their lives, even if it is in the name of "Liberty" (ala the French Revolution). Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:10:55 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/prahe/2010/06/27/walter-lippmann-on-progressivism/#IDComment82634635 http://biggovernment.com/jadkins/2010/06/22/grassroots-lobbying-laws-shut-out-ordinary-citizens-from-politics/#IDComment81483270 A perfect example of how any cure in the form of "campaign finance reform" is worse than the disease. The First Amendment was enacted first and foremost to protect political expression, and these laws should be greeted with even more zealous indignation than our Supreme Court has previously reserved for alleged "establishment of religion" infringements. Any attempt to control who can say what, who can spend what, or how they must do so, beyond barring outright bribery or fraud, will create its own set of problems that will be just as bad or worse than the ills it seeks to prevent. Every layer of alleged disclosure, oversight and approval provides an opportunity to job the system and favor one's cronies (e.g. Soros' "Secretary of State" project targeting Secs of State in order to get his hands on the levers of electoral accountability). Short of bribery or fraud, let the marketplace of ideas set the price and judge the content of political speech. It's the worst way of doing things except for all the other ones. Tue, 22 Jun 2010 21:45:20 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jadkins/2010/06/22/grassroots-lobbying-laws-shut-out-ordinary-citizens-from-politics/#IDComment81483270 http://biggovernment.com/mcrowley/2010/06/22/mcchrystal-goes-rogue-again/#IDComment81480768 If McChrystal is being truthful (or truthfully quoted) re: his voting for Obama, I'd certainly question his judgment on that score. To anyone as politically informed as a high-ranking general should be, Obama's eagerness to cut and run and his appeasement first, blame-America foreign policy should have been readily apparent (as it was to most of us). While I'm on board with many of McChrystal's criticisms of Obama, they ring a bit hollow when I hear that, like Colin Powell, he actually voted for the man. Tue, 22 Jun 2010 21:29:42 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/mcrowley/2010/06/22/mcchrystal-goes-rogue-again/#IDComment81480768 http://bigjournalism.com/fross/2010/06/19/defending-obama-wapo-offers-ad-hominem-arguments-in-place-of-political-discourse/#IDComment81186571 Fine. Let's agree that no one who has had a divorce or an illegitimate child is fit to hold office, vote or even engage in political discourse. That sucking sound you just heard was 95% of the Democratic Party vanishing. Careful what you wish for, Mr. King. Where the hell are the editors and owners of the paper on this sort of piece ? The only thing I could have even ostensibly "learned" from this piece was that King hates Limbaugh, Gingrich and Newton and really wishes they'd leave his poor O-Brittney alone. Every one of its readers could have told you a week ago without wasting valuable ad space for this drivel. What's up for tomorrow's scoop ? Maureen Dowd still thinks Dick Cheney sucks ? If we have to slog through this agitprop at least try sprinkling it with useful facts, or even a sense of humor for a change. Mon, 21 Jun 2010 07:13:51 +0000 http://bigjournalism.com/fross/2010/06/19/defending-obama-wapo-offers-ad-hominem-arguments-in-place-of-political-discourse/#IDComment81186571 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/06/19/palin-its-perfectly-fine-if-you-want-to-smoke-marijuana/#IDComment81181376 For everyone getting exercised about pot legalization, "same old arguments" and brain damage... Government has limited resources. All of us agree that those resources should be reduced, not increased. As such, government's mission is due for some rollback, and all Palin is saying is that aggressive policing of small-time drug offenses is not high on her list of priorities. Yes, nearly all laws have a moral dimension, but the argument that one shouldn't/cannot legislate morality is only co-equally absurd with the argument that one should and could legislate all morality. It's not possible and choices have to made as to what morals are a) more important to society and b) which moral codes are most effectively promoted or enforced by the coercive police powers of the government vs. the "soft" promotion and enforcement of parental guidance, social stigma and simple common sense. Alcoholism is legal. Smoking 5 packs of cigarettes a day is legal. Hell, adultery is legal. Does that mean anyone endorses these actions or would recommend them to their kids ? Does it mean that we need to have alcoholism, smoking and adultery patrols ? Mon, 21 Jun 2010 05:55:58 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/06/19/palin-its-perfectly-fine-if-you-want-to-smoke-marijuana/#IDComment81181376 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/06/20/george-wills-lack-of-will-is-a-problem-in-afghanistan/#IDComment81180338 If the examples used by the anonymous NCO Will cites aren't exceptions but rather the rule, I'd say the rules of engagement have become unreasonably stringent. That's a tactical, not strategic argument, and sadly, Will's solution to this tactical problem is still strategic - a total withdrawal - which would simply hand the country back to the Taliban and other warlords, leaving us tactically in the same boat we were in circa December 2001 and strategically discredited with both friends and enemies. Does Mr. Will think that any Muslim who doesn't support jihad will ever support us if we leave the field in Afghanistan, leaving those who stood with us to the mercies of the jihadis in a brutally unnecessary reprisal of post-war Vietnam (which prior experience leaves us with no excuses for not anticipating that brutal outcome) ? We must remain because we can't afford another Somali-style withdrawal which would allow the Osamas and Gadahns of the world to wave another bloody shirt of U.S. fecklessness in the face of their own alleged fanatical resolve. Mon, 21 Jun 2010 05:38:58 +0000 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/06/20/george-wills-lack-of-will-is-a-problem-in-afghanistan/#IDComment81180338 http://biggovernment.com/mholt/2010/05/12/cato-scholar-to-tea-party-beware-of-gop-avoid-social-issues/#IDComment75174008 Excellent post - particularly the part about Libertarian foreign policy's small government problem when it comes to defense. YouTube had a piece with John Stoessel interviewing 3 libertarian leaders regarding their foreign policy views and I wouldn't let even the most hawkish of them near elected office. What's the secular atheist equivalent of bringing your Bible to a poker game ? I'd say bringing Atlas Shrugged to a poker game but Rand had no problem with national defense. Libertarians' philosophical distaste for making hard, ruthless decisions abroad is an odd marriage of Pat Buchannan isolationism and Israel-bashing with a dash of Ron Paulian black-helicopter anti-"globalism" for good measure. My personal profile fits the Libertarians more than classic Conservatives (atheist, Objectivist) but I'm foursquare with John Bolton on national defense. Thu, 13 May 2010 02:19:42 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/mholt/2010/05/12/cato-scholar-to-tea-party-beware-of-gop-avoid-social-issues/#IDComment75174008 http://biggovernment.com/gopelka/2010/05/10/obama-to-grads-a-little-ipod-is-a-dangerous-thing/#IDComment74732113 Liars hate information they can't manipulate or control. Keep talking Barry. We know you're lying by when your lips move. He and his Alinksyite cohorts obviously want (and need) more muscle over the message. I suspect Obama's anticipating some victories on the FCC front because that kind of activity is not what normally hits the radar screen on what he sees as the "intellectually ignorant" Tea Party Right. I'd like to see him unpleasantly surprised on that score. Tue, 11 May 2010 02:59:57 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/gopelka/2010/05/10/obama-to-grads-a-little-ipod-is-a-dangerous-thing/#IDComment74732113