You really have to laugh at these
Republican establishment types. These “good old boy” characters couldn’t
be more pathetic if they tried.

As you know, Michael Steele has once
again opened mouth and inserted foot. Full disclosure, I like Michael Steele. I
don’t have bad feelings for the guy. But he’s proven that being the Chairman of
the RNC isn’t the best use of his talents. This latest flap is way overblown,
however. He’s said worse.

Anyhow, this isn’t about bashing
Michael Steele. Nope, this is all about exposing the pathetic milquetoast moderates
and their silly notions.

With all of the calls for Steele to
step down, the establishment seems to think they have an idea: Replace Steele
with Sarah Palin. No, I’m serious here. Kevin D. Williams writing for National
Review Online came up with this:

Re: Steele and the RNC: Allow me to
chime in with my usual observation on this subject: This is a job for Sarah
Palin. Palin would be a much better RNC chairman than presidential candidate or
freelance kingmaker. She’d raise tons of money and help recruit good
candidates, i.e., she’d excel at doing the things Steele should have been doing
instead of appointing himself Republican pundit-at-large.

A Chairman Palin would help set the
right tone for the Republican party without having to get herself entangled in
the minutiae of policy-development, which has not been her forte. Sure, she’d
be polarizing, but so is Barack Obama, and these are polarized times. And it’s
one thing to have a polarizing party chairman, another to have a polarizing
candidate.

Anybody disagree?

Kevin, I think if you take time to
look around, you’ll see that pretty much EVERYONE disagrees with you pal. And
not just with your idea of making Sarah Palin RNC chair, but your entire
condescending, factually incorrect, backhanded complement filled drivel.

To take the anniversary of day that
Sarah Palin literally changed history forever to insult our
intelligence, and Sarah Palin, is simply breathtaking.

First of all, could you BE more
obvious with your intentions here?

We all know what this little “suggestion”
is all about. You beltway, establishment Republicans are looking for any way
possible to get Sarah Palin out of the running for 2012, so as to pave the way
for one of your show ponies, who have zero chance if (when) Sarah runs for
President. Gotta keep the Big Government Republicans in power, even if it means
running a show pony who can’t win against Obama.

All of you cats know exactly what
Sarah Palin is capable of. You know good and well what she did to the corrupt
establishment Republicans in Alaska, and you know what she would do once she
was in the White House. Business as usual would come to a loud, grinding halt.

Now you are right about one thing,
Sarah Palin can raise money like no one out there. That will come in handy for
her in 2012, now won’t it? And you can bet there wouldn’t be any of your
establishment type buddies out there on her watch, if she was RNC chair. She’s
not perfect, but she’s got a rock solid record of picking winners, good solid
Common Sense Conservatives, who actually believe in the Constitution and the
Rule of Law. An unknown concept in D.C.

The thing is, neither she, nor the
candidates she chooses to endorse, need the RNC as bad as the RNC needs them.
The RNC has become so undependable, so establishment driven, and so timid, they
are becoming an afterthought. Conservatives, the people that make up the bulk
of the Republican base, now research candidates on their own, and send them
money directly. Far less likely to see their money wasted on loser show ponies,
or after hours parties.

Now you say that:

A Chairman Palin would help set the
right tone for the Republican party without having to get herself entangled in
the minutiae of policy-development, which has not been her forte

Could you make a bigger clown out of
yourself?

I guess you’ve been too busy
dreaming of mediocrity to go over to Facebook, Twitter, or check
out her appearances on Fox News and Fox Business News, or listen
to her speeches, most of which are readily available online at either Palin TV
or The Right
Scoop.

Maybe you should start with her
latest red meat offering from her appearance in Norfolk, Virginia. This was a
serious policy speech on national security and foreign policy. In it, Sarah
lays out an aggressive agenda for not only national security and foreign
policy, but Liberty, Freedom, and the American way. It’s not her first.

<object width=”640″
height=”385″><param name=”movie”
value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/TWc49eKypsI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1″></param><param
name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”></param><param
name=”allowScriptAccess”
value=”always”></param><embed
src=”http://www.youtube.com/v/TWc49eKypsI&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xd0d0d0&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1″
type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” allowfullscreen=”true”
allowScriptAccess=”always” width=”640″
height=”385″></embed></object>

You can read the transcript and
commentary here.

Next you embarrass yourself further:

Sure, she’d be polarizing, but so is
Barack Obama, and these are polarized times. And it’s one thing to have a
polarizing party chairman, another to have a polarizing candidate.

You know who else was polarizing?
Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Reagan was incredibly polarizing,
especially to the country club, Rockefeller, establishment wing of the party.
In fact, it’s quite telling that you guys are now using the same tired old play
book you used on Reagan, to no avail, on Sarah Palin.

“Oh we like Reagan, but he’s
kinda dumb, an ‘amiable dunce.’ He didn’t go to the right schools, you know.”
~ Country Club Republicans circa 1976-1988

It’s awfully big of you to note that
Barack Obama is polarizing as well. This gives us a chance to point out that
there are two kinds of polarizing. Barack Obama is the negative kind. He
polarizes people against him and his Marxist agenda. In less than two short
years, he’s managed to turn most of the Republic against him and his out of
control Congress.

Barack Obama has polarized the
nation in a way few could. He has Americans picking up the history books, and
reading the Constitution again. He has people engaged in the political process
like no time in recent history. The Republic is polarized against him, and
working to defeat him and his radical agenda.

Ronald Reagan and Sarah Palin are
cut from the same cloth. For the lack of a better term, they are “Field of
Dreams” kind of leaders. They know if you stand for something, believe in
something, and are a person of good character and virtue, people will beat a
path to your door.

Like Reagan before her, Sarah knows
you don’t moderate your message, or “move to the middle” in search of
mythical “moderates” that don’t really exist. Instead, you build a solid
agenda based on time honored principles. You build it, and the people will
come.

When Ronald Reagan ran for President
in 1980, he ran as an unabashed Conservative. He had strong positions on
everything, and was thought of as incredibly polarizing. The thing is, people
aren’t looking for someone who will tell them what they want to hear. They want
a leader. They want someone that not only matches their values, but someone who
will take a stand for those values, and never, ever backdown.

This really isn’t polarizing, in the
end, it’s galvanizing.

This is something you squishy
country clubbers aren’t capable of grasping.

Reagan won back to back landslide
victories running as an unabashed Conservative, with a proven record. He was
able to galvanize the people, and turn the nation around by sticking to these
principles,and leading with conviction.

Currently Sarah Palin is leading as
an unapologetic Conservative. She’s a real fighter who never backs down, never
gives any quarter. Never compromises on her principles just to curry favor from
some here today, gone tomorrow faction.She too is galvanizing the nation, in
her effort to save it.

Sarah Palin, like Regan, has a
proven record of not just talking the talk, but walking the walk. Her record is
unmatched by anyone currently on the scene.

At the end of the day, after reading
your incredibly insulting piece, I have to ask you this. You seem to think
Sarah Palin isn’t smart enough to develop national policy, though for some
reason you think she could develop a political strategy to win elections and
raise money. (This is where you gave away your real intent BTW)

If Sarah is so bad, why haven’t you
called for … oh, I don’t know …. Mitt Romney …. to come in and save the
RNC?

I mean he’s supposed to be the big
businessman, isn’t he? He actually did turn around the Salt Lake City Olympics,
saving them from disaster.

Why NOT Mitt Romney?.

As Romney is currently disengaged
from the fight against tyranny and oppression, and unlike Sarah Palin, who is
LEADING the battle, finds himself totally unencumbered by the responsibilities
of saving our Republic, you’d think the guy would be the perfect choice.

Oh, I know he wasn’t all that impressive as Governor, and his endorsements aren’t worth much, especially
when he waits until after they win their primary, and
well, maybe we shouldn’t mention RomneyCare at all, but hey, the guy can raise
money!

Much better to pick someone like
Romney, and make him a clerk, than take the Commander-in-Chief off the
battlefield and give Her the job, eh?

You know what? I have a much better
idea. How about we just call up Ken Blackwell and ask him to take
over? He’s the one who should have had the job all along.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading …

About Gary P.

Gary P is editor and publisher of A Time For Choosing as well as a
contributor to Red State, Digital Journal, The Sarah Palin Web Brigade,
The Sarah Palin Information Blog, and other conservative sites. A Time For Choosing is a website based on solid Ronald Reagan/Sarah
Palin conservatism. We give no apologies, and accept no substitutes.This website is named after Ronald Reagan’s iconic 1964 speech at
the Republican National Convention of the same name. Although, A Time
For Choosing is the speech’s official title, it is so iconic, so well
known, and so highly quoted, it is simply known as “The Speech.”It’s time for all Americans to choose the nation they wish to live
in. do they want to continue to live in a free nation and retain their
God given liberties, or do they want to allow someone to take it all
away?Do Americans want a nation where they can live their lives as they
see fit, or do they want a totalitarian, oppressive government?It is a time for choosing.

• Mail

|

• Web

|

• More Posts (519)