Tag Archives: George Will

George Will Makes The Comparisons Between Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan Complete

By Gary P Jackson

The comparison’s between Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan are quite natural. Sarah herself is a great student of Reagan, quotes him often, and has the same common sense approach to governing. Like Reagan she’s a no-nonsense leader who gets things done. It’s her adherence to solid conservative principles that has earned her the admiration of supporters from coast to coast.

Of course, while it’s gratifying to look at all of the valid comparisons of the two great leaders, one must also look at how both were portrayed by the corrupt media, the democrats, and establishment Republicans. Here is where you find the comparisons absolutely stunning.

Both Ronald Reagan and Sarah Palin started out as sportscasters. Reagan did radio, Sarah did TV. In fact, she wanted to work for ESPN. The elites trashed Reagan as a “B-movie” actor who once co-starred with a chimp. Never mind Reagan also played one of Hollywood’s most iconic and enduring characters, “ George Gipp” in the 1940 classic “Knute Rockne All American.” No matter, being an actor, was a sure sign Reagan wasn’t fit to be President. Might as well forget his decades of political activism on behalf of Conservatism, or his time as Governor of California. Doesn’t matter, he was an actor thus “unserious

The elites have used the same tact against Governor Palin, a woman with 20 years of public service that includes city councilwoman, Mayor, Chairman of Alaska’s oil and gas regulatory commission, and Governor. All of this is negated because she starred in, and was executive producer of, a nature-travel-adventure series on The Learning Channel [TLC] and her oldest daughter was a contestant on ABC’s Dancing With The Stars, at least according to the left, the media [but I repeat myself] and the GOP elite.

Sarah Palin, like Ronald Reagan, isn’t “serious” because she, like Ronnie, is talented and good on camera. OK. Such is the logic of the “smart” people.

Clark Clifford, former Secretary of Defense for LBJ called Reagan an “amiable dunce.” In the 21st century, such civility is dead, so our “betters” just call Sarah Palin “stupid“! Even among the hoity-toity, the level of discourse has fallen greatly. At least in the old days, someone would insult you with a little style and flair!

The media along with the Republican elites all cringed and made fun of Ronald Reagan when he referred to the Soviet Union as an “Evil Empire” and even his own staffers lost their minds when he said these world changing words:”Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” Former Carter and Mondale staffer [and faux conservative] Charles Krauthammer said Sarah Palin should “leave the room” after she coined the term “death panels” to describe government health care rationing, and the board of unelected government drones who would determine who should live and die.

Sarah Palin used the term “death panels” in a lengthy policy piece, where she called out Obama’s health care adviser Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, who has written extensively about the need to ration care, giving priority to those who were deemed “productive to society.” She has been proven 100% correct on the facts. My personal guess is Krauthammer was just miffed because he wrote thousands of pretty words trying to make a similar point, and no one noticed.

The way he continually attacks her and proclaims she isn’t “smart,” makes me think Krauthammer, the former Carter adviser and Mondale speech writer, is miffed that a housewife from Wasilla is better at turning a phrase than he is. Of course, Chuck is a genius, he chose to work on the losing team against Reagan …. TWICE.

The media also laughed at Sarah when she inadvertently created the new word “refudiate.” They had a cow when she playfully tweeted that Shakespeare created new words too. Funny thing happened though. British MEP Daniel Hannan, a political superstar in his own right, and a self proclaimed “Shakespearean obsessive” wrote at the time:

Sarah Palin, never misunderestimate Shakespeare

I am thoroughly taken with Sarah Palin’s neologism. People often incorrectly use the word “refute” to mean something like “deny” or “reject“, only stronger. We could do with a new word to fill this gap and, since both “refute” and “repudiate” are already occupied with their actual meanings, neither can be pressed into service. “Refudiate” occupies the space perfectly, and deserves to become part of every politician’s vocabulary.

The handsome Alaskan politician is quite right to say that Shakespeare came up with countless new-fangled words – including “countless” and “new-fangled“. Among his coinages, as far as we can tell, are accommodation, assassinate, denote, dislocate, equivocal, eventful, hobnob, inauspicious, lacklustre, laughable, perplex, raw-boned, submerge, time-honoured, unmitigated and zany.

Read more here.

Oh, and the New Oxford American Dictionary named “refudiate” it’s “word of the year” saying:

From a strictly lexical interpretation of the different contexts in which Palin has used ‘refudiate,’ we have concluded that neither ‘refute‘ nor ‘repudiate‘ seems consistently precise, and that ‘refudiate‘ more or less stands on its own, suggesting a general sense of ‘reject.’ “

I wonder how many words our “betters” in the media and the GOP establishment can say they’ve created a new word, let alone say it was recognized as word of the year in a major dictionary?

This brings us to George Will, a sincerely pompous ass, who once wrote an entire column in the Washington Post called “Demon Denim” bemoaning the fact Americans love to wear blue jeans and how it has destroyed the world, …. or something.

This “ man of the people” is a real piece of work. The typical Beltway elitist hack. Will passes himself off as a “conservative” but nothing could be further from the truth.

Mark Levin recently said this of George Will and Charles Krauthammer:

George Will missed the Reagan Revolution not only in 1976 but as late as 1980. In the 1979 Republican Presidential Primary, his first choice was Howard Baker, his second choice was George H. W. Bush, and his third choice was Reagan.

Not until days before the 1980 general election did he write on November 3, 1980 that Reagan deserved election.

For all his wonderful columns, the Republican electorate better understood the needs of the nation and the excellence of a potential Reagan presidency than Will. It is hard to believe he was so wrong about a matter of such great import, despite Reagan’s presence on the national scene for many years.

Charles Krauthammer was not only wrong about Reagan, as late as 1980 he was a speech-writer for Vice President Walter Mondale. Krauthammer, like Will, not only missed the significance of the Reagan candidacy, but was putting words in the mouth of a terribly flawed politician from a philosophical perspective.

So much for either’s ability to pick winners or know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to politics.

On Memorial Sunday Will, perched in all of his pomposity over at ABC, went on yet another crying jag and upped the ante by proclaiming we should be very worried about a President Sarah Palin, because, you know, she’ll have the nuclear codes and might just blow us all up! Whitney Pitcher talks about the jackass and his nutty statement here.

This is nothing new for fear mongers among America’s Ruling Class. In 1964 LBJ’s team ran the now infamous “Daisy” ad with the young girl picking a daisy apart as a sinister voice counted down to a nuclear launch. The ad proclaimed Barry Goldwater would destroy the world with nukes. America was so outraged, the ad only ran once.

Now I can’t find examples of George Will saying it, but plenty of GOP hacks were saying that not only would it be a disaster to let Ronald Reagan have the nuclear codes, the more insane were claiming Reagan would have us in a nuclear war with the Soviet Union within days of taking office!

Folks, this is called desperation. They threw everything they had at Reagan and couldn’t stop him. They are throwing everything they have at Sarah Palin, and not only can they not stop her, hell, she’s getting stronger!

We’ve talked about A.B. Culvahouse here before. Long time readers will remember Culvahouse was a Reagan adviser and chairs one of Washington’s most prestigious law firms. We first talked about Culvahouse after everyone was falsely claiming the McCain campaign never vetted Sarah. Just picked her and went with it. Such is the pathetic laziness of the media, and those who read and believe that sort of nonsense.

Of course the facts were quite different. She was highly vetted by Culvahouse and his team. Culvahouse and Sarah have a history too, His firm represented Exxon-Mobil, and Palin had been on the opposing side. He knew first hand how tough she was.

In April of 2009 Culvahouse spoke at the National Press Club. Mark Silva wrote at the time: [emphasis mine]

Arthur “A.B.” Culvahouse, a prominent Washington attorney who served as White House counsel to President Ronald Reagan during the president’s final two years and led Sen. John McCain’s search for a running mate – a search that included a “long list” of 26 candidates – told the tale today of picking Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

After the vetting of all the candidates, and paring them to a short list, McCain asked Culvahouse for the “bottom line” on Palin.

“”I said, ‘John, high risk, high reward,”’ Culvahouse said today. “His response – ‘You shouldn’t have told me that. I’ve been a risk-taker all of my life.”’

Culvahouse was addressing the Republican National Lawyers Association today at the National Press Club, and C-SPAN was running a camera.

There were three rules,” Culvahouse said of himself and McCain. “He was the decider. There was no one between him and me…. There was no one who was going to say, ‘This one is on the list, this one is off the list’… Third… he could not pick anyone that I had not vetted.

[ …. ]

They considered many.

We had 26 people on the long list. It was a blind basis… They did not know they were on the list,” said Culvahouse, who had a staff of 30 lawyers helping him who wrote 50-page reports on the candidates.

Gov. Palin told us everything – everything except the pregnancy (of) her daughter was on the written questionnaire,” he said of Palin, who discussed teenage daughter Bristol’s pregnancy privately. “She told me there was one issue she wanted to talk about. We knew everything going in.

Palin “has lots of presence. She fills up a room,” said Culvahouse, noting that some of his most cynical colleagues also were impressed with her.

Culvahouse, commenting on the later, damaging interviews that Palin gave to CBS News anchor Katie Couric, suggested that the wrong impression had come from those sessions – such as the idea that Palin was not familiar with Supreme Court rulings.

She clearly did… My law firm represents Exxon in the Valdez matters,” he noted. “Until she became governor, Gov. Palin was a plaintiff in that case...”

They asked her why she wanted to be vice president — “the question Judge Bork was not prepared to answer — why he wanted to be on the Supreme Court,” said Culvahouse, who also handled Bork on the Hill.

They asked her if she is prepared to use nuclear weapons in the defense of the American homeland, he said, and they asked her if, say Osama bin Laden should be spotted, but taking him out would result in many other casualties, would she take the shot?

She knocked those three questions out of the park,” he said.

“She would have been a great vice president… She wouldn’t have been ready on Jan. 20,” he allowed, but then most people wouldn’t, save for Dick Cheney when he joined George W. Bush’s ticket in 2000.

“Qualifications in this town meant someone with a great resume,” Culvahouse said today. “As John… directed me, it was someone who had the capacity to be president.”


Here’s video of Culvahouse at the National Press Club:

So you guys tell me. Who’s opinion would you trust: A guy who missed Reagan’s brilliance not once, but twice, or someone who professionally vets candidates for Vice President of the United States, and handles Supreme Court Appointees?

I will give Georgie some credit though. With the fear mongering over nuclear weapons, the comparisons between Ronald Reagan and Sarah Palin are pretty much complete!

I bet Ronnie and Maggie would agree [that George Will is the “amiable dunce“]!

Video courtesy: C4P


Filed under Uncategorized

George Will Plays Political Genetics and Endocrinology Professor on ABC’s “This Week”

by Whitney Pitcher

Today on ABC’s “This Week”, George Will, as is common for him, chose to provide unsubstantiated and disparaging remarks on Governor Palin’s potential presidential run. When asked if she is going to run for President, Will first replied:

Two things are infinite. One is the expanding universe, and the other is media attention to Sarah Palin, who’s a genius at manipulating it. She has several political problems, the first of which is there’s no undecided vote in this country anymore about Sarah Palin, surely.

Governor Palin manipulates the media attention? Really? To be sure, the media is fixated on every move Governor Palin makes, but to assert that Governor Palin manipulates media coverage is a false. Unlike with other potential candidates, the media has become fixed on the minutiae of Governor Palin’s life and their own created “nontroversies”, not the substance of her policies stances or her record. When Governor Palin made a humanitarian trip to Haiti, the media made the trip about the fact that she had a “hair stylist” (aka Bristol Palin)when she was there.When Governor Palin chose to attend today’s Rolling Thunder rally in Washington D.C. at the request of a retired Rolling Thunder board member, the media asserted that she had not been invited. When she laid out a serious 5 point “Palin Doctrine” about the proper use of military force, the media focused on her reference to President Obama as “our president”, rather than calling using his last name in her reference. Governor Palin does not manipulate the media; the media misrepresents her.

Will also asserts that Governor Palin has “several political problems”, but he only chooses to list one–a rather weak one at that. Will asserts that too many people have already made their mind up about Governor Palin, and there is no changing it. Well, that settles that! Governor Palin and all other candidates and potential candidates can fly home.There’s no need to waste time over the next year to visit states, meet voters, and give speeches! George Will has spoken. No debates are needed for candidates juxtapose their positions and records against one another. People will not change their mind about Tina Fey Governor Palin. That’s just it. That is what campaigns are for to help the undecideds make up their minds and to hopefully change the minds of those in disagreement.

With Governor Palin, so many people have made their decision based upon a media caricature of her. So few know that she cut spending in Alaska by more than 9% and that Alaska has a $12 billiion surplus now due in large part to her policies, but people think that she can see Russia from her house. Correcting the misconceptions, setting the record straight, and controlling the message on one’s own terms is what a political campaign is all about. In Iowa next month and throughout the country in the coming months, a film depicting the truth about Governor Palin’s record and resignation will premiere, providing her with a opportunity to address the caricature, lies, and misrepresentations.

Should she chose to make an official campaign, she will control her own message, something she could not do as part of the McCain campaign, and will be able to juxtapose her record and stances against that of the other candidates. Will conveniently leaves out the fact that Governor Palin is within the margin of error as the front runner for the GOP nomination for President, and more than one in five GOP voters do not have an opinion yet on who should be the nominee for President. That kind of blows a hole in Will’s assertion, does it not?

Will’s most egregious claim comes in his next statement:

Second, the threshold question. It’s not usually asked, but it’s in everyone’s mind in a presidential election. Should we give this person nuclear weapons? And the answer is — answers itself there. That doesn’t mean she can’t be without political consequence.

George Will’s hollow argument becomes that Governor Palin–that capricious, empty headed woman– is simply incapable of handling military power responsibly.  By his assertion, that question is so obvious that it answers itself. As usual, there is nothing to back it up. Why does Will think Governor Palin is incapable? Because her highest office was at the state level as governor? Surely not, as that would render Governors Romney, Pawlenty, Johnson, and Roemer incapable too. It must be noted that in addition to serving as the commander-in-chief of the Alaska National Guard, Governor Palin also served as the official commander of the Alaska State Defense Force (also known as the 49th Readiness Brigade).This is a group of volunteers, often retired military personnel, who supplement the National Guard’s work, which sometimes involves assisting in homeland security and FBI activities. Only 24 states have such defense forces, and Minnesota, New Mexico and Mississippi are among those who do not, meaning someone like Governor Pawlenty has less “experience” than Governor Palin. It also means that someone like Bill Clinton also had less “experience” along those lines than Governor Palin had.

Will’s assertion likely lies in something more along the lines of Governor Palin’s genetic makeup, rather than her political experience. That’s right. People who have a pair of X chromosomes, instead of a X and a Y chromosome can simply not be trusted with such information, in his mind. That extra X chromosome, or estrogen, must give female politicians some uncontrollable urge to press the proverbial red button without consultation or hesitation, according to professor of political genetics and endocrinology, George Will. This has been a common assertion American politics.When Geraldine Ferraro ran for Vice President in 1984, it was asserted that there might be a time when she may have to push the proverbial button to fire missiles, but she might not be able to if she’s just done her nails. Of course, in 2008 as well, sexism was used as a political weapon against both then candidate Hillary Clinton and Governor Palin especially when it came to foreign policy. George Will gives no reasoning as to why he feels that Governor Palin is not to be trusted with the responsibility of the America’s nuclear arsenal. There is no reason whatsoever to think that Governor Palin would make a flippant decision about America’s nuclear arms–whether in deploying them, converting them, or destroying them.Meanwhile, we have a president who signed a treaty with Russia that allows them to move nuclear weapons closer to America’s NATO allies and does not allow America to convert nuclear systems to conventional systems and who seems to not be serious about addressing Iran’s nuclear program. Those are both issues of great concern that Governor Palin has addressed. Governor Palin would not handle America’s nuclear weaponry with carelessness, but she would address the potential of enemies’ nuclear arsenal with seriousness, unlike President Obama.

George Will was, however, magnanimous enough to say that Governor Palin still is of political consequence. How generous! Perhaps she can become a Republican cheerleader when it comes to nuclear and national defense. It would give whole new meaning to the “D-E-F-E-N-S-E” cheer often shouted at sporting events, would it not? However, as Nicole and myself have written, Governor Palin is a point guard, and you do not ask a point guard to become a cheerleader. Governor Palin has often noted that such criticisms and underestimations only give fuel to the fire in her belly. Governor Palin will choose her political path; it will not be chosen for her by the ostrich-like pundocracy. Needless to say, it is the “We the People’s” Will not George Will that will ultimately determine the results of the upcoming primary and general elections.

H/T to multiple C4P contributors

Update: Josh Painter has a good post up on George Will, “the Republagogue”, here.


Filed under Uncategorized

Mark Levin On Sarah Palin, Ronald Reagan, and “Intellectual” Elites

By Gary P Jackson

Mark Levin was on fire Monday morning, releasing a scathing refudiation of Republican “intellectuals” and their complete inability to recognize and understand Conservatism and it’s principles. Levin rightly points out that George Will, an elitist if there ever was one, never got what Reagan was about. I’m sure it had something to do with the fact Reagan often wore blue jeans, a no-no in Georgie’s world.

Krauthammer has long been a disappointment. He’s intelligent, for sure, but often quite wrong when it comes to basic issues. Oh, Charles can be brilliant at times, especially on complicated issues. But when it comes to the every day meat and potatoes issues, Charles just doesn’t get it. Of course, what does one expect from someone who not only worked for President Jimmy Carter but Walter Mondale, as well, when he ran against Ronald Reagan!

Calling Charles Krauthammer a “Conservative” is like calling David Frum, David Brooks, Kathleen Parker, and Peggy Noonan “Conservatives.”

The American people are well past allowing our “betters” to continually tell us how we should think, and who we should vote for.

The hate for Sarah Palin

The corporate hate for Sarah Palin at Politico is obvious. The latest is here

But if you google Politico and Palin, the evidence of a Politico agenda is overwhelming. And the manner in which Politico’s editors pursue their hate-Palin agenda is to cherry-pick the individuals they quote to make the point they want made.

A couple of quick things:

1. As I demonstrated last week, remarkably George Will missed the Reagan Revolution not only in 1976 but as late as 1980. In the 1979 Republican Presidential Primary, his first choice was Howard Baker, his second choice was George H. W. Bush, and his third choice was Reagan. Not until days before the 1980 general election did he write on November 3, 1980 that Reagan deserved election. For all his wonderful columns, the Republican electorate better understood the needs of the nation and the excellence of a potential Reagan presidency than Will.

It is hard to believe he was so wrong about a matter of such great import, despite Reagan’s presence on the national scene for many years.

2. Charles Krauthammer was not only wrong about Reagan, as late as 1980 he was a speech-writer for Vice President Walter Mondale. Krauthammer, like Will, not only missed the significance of the Reagan candidacy, but was putting words in the mouth of a terribly flawed politician from a philosophical perspective. I certainly do not begrudge, but in fact encourage, liberals becoming conservatives or Democrats becoming Republicans.

Reagan was a Democrat who famously changed parties. But I do not believe that individuals touted by a left-wing “news” site as two of the leading conservative intellectuals, who stunningly opposed Reagan’s candidacy while both were of mature age and mind, are necessarily reliable barometers in this regard. The “non-intellectual” voters knew better.

3. It is apparent that several of President George W. Bush’s former senior staffers are hostile to Sarah Palin, including Karl Rove, David Frum, and Pete Wehner, to name only three. Pete is a good friend and a very smart guy. That said, Bush’s record, at best, is marginally conservative, and depending on the issue, worse. In fact, the Tea Party movement is, in part, a negative reaction to Bush’s profligate spending (including his expansion of a bankrupt Medicare program to include prescription drugs). And while Bush’s spending comes nowhere near Barack Obama’s, that is not the standard.

Moreover, Bush was not exactly among our most articulate presidents, let alone conservative voices. I raise this not to compare Bush to Palin, but to point out only a few of the situational aspects of the criticism from the Bush community corner. (If necessary, and if challenged, I will take the time to lay out the case in all its particulars, as well as other non-conservative Bush policies and statements. No Republican president is perfect, of course, but certainly some are more perfect that others, if you will.)

This is not to say the folks cherry-picked by Politico are without accomplishment and merit. They clearly are accomplished. But that’s not the point. Most were not involved in either the Reagan Revolution or the Tea Party movement, and were not, to the best of my knowledge, early outspoken supporters of either.

What is necessary is a fulsome debate on each candidate’s substance and policy positions. Most of these Politico stories are little more than excuses to attack Palin, intended to damage her early on in case she should decide to run. This has been going on for some time now. If she is as weak as some think, why the obsession? Why the contempt? Moreover, Palin has used social media and other outlets to comment substantively on a wide range of issues and policies. In fact, she has spoken on a wider array of issues than Youtube governor Chris Christie, popular among most of these folks, and her positions have, for the most part, been solidly conservative.

(Christie’s positions on numerous issues important to conservatives are all but ignored by some of those complaining about Palin; indeed, the same could be said of potential presidential contenders Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, and Mitch Daniels, among others.)

My purpose in mentioning Christie here is to juxtapose the demands by “the intellectuals” on one politician versus another. Their inquisitiveness seems influenced by their political bias. That’s not unusual, but it requires underscoring lest their opinions be viewed or promoted as objective.

As a Reaganite pre-dating Reagan’s 1976 candidacy, the contempt for Palin does, in fact, remind me of the contempt some had for Reagan, especially from the media and Republican establishment, although no comparison is exact. I’ve not settled on a favorite would-be presidential candidate, but I also know media hit-jobs when I see them. I am hopeful more conservatives will begin to speak out about this or, before we know it, we will wonder why we are holding our noses and voting for another Republican endorsed by “the intellectuals” but opposed by a majority of the people.

Ronald Reagan was vilified by the Republican elites. It was very much like the attacks and petty sniping we are witnessing now against Sarah Palin. As is always the case, the Republicans fought harder against the Conservative, Reagan, than they did Carter!

What they are doing to Palin is nothing new. The fact is, the GOP country club set has always held true Conservatives in great contempt. Those who reflect the feelings and aspirations of the Republican Party base of voters, those true Conservatives are always attacked, ridiculed, and otherwise slandered by the cucumber and mayo sandwich crowd.

The problem with the Republican Party, the elites, is they would rather lose elections than lose power. The Republican Party, pre-President Reagan, was totally content to sit back and be the minority party, allowing the democrat party to run roughshod over the entire nation. They were happy to just sit at the table and have some power. Settling for what ever table scraps they were allowed by the democrats was fine with them.

It wasn’t until 1994 that Conservative Republicans prevailed, and ended 40 years of Democrat control of Congress. This was a natural extension of the Reagan Revolution. Sadly, once in office, many of those Republicans became just as entrenched and out of touch as the democrats they replaced. More worried about staying in office than running an efficient government.

Now the elites have carved out their little zones of power, and are not about to give them up. Not about to change the way they do business.

The Tea Party as a whole, and Sarah Palin in particular, is a direct threat to these entrenched little elites. That’s why these elites fight so hard. Things must change. Government is broken. It’s a disaster. The nation itself is staring into the abyss. We have a debt we may never be able to pay. We have an energy crisis, an economic crisis, and a national security crisis. “More of the same” is not going to cut it. Things must be shaken up, and a new path chosen.

The problem with choosing new paths though, is many of those on the old path are left behind. And these little elites don’t want to go along with the new path, especially if they lose their influence and power.

Sarah Palin represents a real threat to the Ruling Class, in both parties. She is not a “business as usual” type of leader. She’s well known as someone who “shakes things up.” Her lengthy record of leadership as a Mayor, energy regulator, and Governor shows that she doesn’t waste time doing things as they’ve always been done, just “because” and she doesn’t suffer fools well. This is bad news for the elites, because they are a foolish bunch.


Filed under In The News, Politics, Ronald Reagan, sarah palin