Is Obama a real post-partisan?
posted at 11:00 am on January 14, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Barack Obama made a lot of noise about post-partisanship during the presidential campaign, but few of us thought it meant more than just campaign noise and centrist credibility-building. However, last night’s confab at George Will’s house with David Brooks and Bill Kristol just before Obama’s inauguration might indicate that, as George Bush attempted, Obama might try to calm the tone in Washington:
This could ruin their reputation: President-elect Barack Obama Tuesday evening attending a dinner party at the home of conservative columnist George Will, attended by fellow conservatives William Kristol and David Brooks.
The press pool following the president-elect reported that he left his temporary home at Washington’s Hay-Adams hotel Tuesday evening and arrived a short time later at Will’s home in the Maryland suburbs. A press pool photographer shot a photo of Kristol, an editor of the Weekly Standard, and Brooks, a columnist at the New York Times.
I like David Brooks, and he’s about as conservative as anyone with a regular column in the New York Times could be, but I’d classify him as center-right at best. George Will and Bill Kristol are certainly conservative, but Will doesn’t dig into the partisan warfare, preferring to remain on policy more than politics. Kristol, though, is a man for the trenches, a stalwart on both policy and politics.
Kristol’s presence impresses me the most. Had Obama just wanted a conservative “beard”, he could have stuck with Brooks and invited Doug Kmiec. The entire meeting is somewhat of a surprise, but Kristol’s presence indicates that Obama wanted it to be taken seriously.
Will it change Obama’s direction? Of course not. Obama will do what Obama wants to do. I’d guess that he’s hoping at best to take some of the nastiness out of the punditry to come over the next few months. It’s not as easy to rip your friends as it is your opponents, and Obama wants a base of goodwill for his first 100 days to give him some breathing space. It makes some sense, but knowing Kristol as I do (slightly personally, but I’ve read him for years), I don’t think it will work if Obama runs to the left on economics and foreign policy — nor should it.
Allahpundit asked a good question last night in his post on the subject: Whither the blogosphere in a post-partisan age? Post-partisan puts too much into it. The partisan divide will continue to exist because people have vastly different ideas about the role of government in a free society — and a free society should welcome that debate. Taking the nastiness out of the policy debate will only improve the process, as it will clarify the actual policy choices and the people who support what, without the distorting factor of party affiliation getting in the way — which to some extent it has with the bailouts and on immigration, to name two examples.
The blogosphere will fare quite nicely under those conditions, assuming they ever exist. One dinner does not Xanadu make, after all, and not all of the arrows have come from conservatives — which I suspect Obama will discover when some of his putative allies on the Left begin commenting on this meeting.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
BHO is a post-capitalist foreign exchange student.
DeweyWins on January 14, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Charles Krauthammer wasn’t there?
YYZ on January 14, 2009 at 11:06 AM
I’m sure Obama will get to work on that right away, Captain Ed, after he rips into the MSM for Bush bashing.
andycanuck on January 14, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Elitist meets elitists for dinner. Film at 11.
hillbillyjim on January 14, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Kristol, Will and Brooks are in no way conservatives, unless you’re comparing them to Osama Obama.
Ed, you’re slipping.
MrScribbler on January 14, 2009 at 11:09 AM
They are more conservative than Allahpundit, though…
The Dean on January 14, 2009 at 11:10 AM
YYZ
Now that is a good question. I must disagree that Kristol, Brooks and Will are all that much Conservative… at least for my liking. but then, I’m so darn close to joining the the Constitution Party ( not quite yet), it may affect my value system.
MNDavenotPC on January 14, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Bill Kristol is a real conservative. So is Will, at least on his better days.
Ed Morrissey on January 14, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Is this why Rush went to Washington yesterday?
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 11:12 AM
It’s nice of the One to offer a reach around. Too bad these ‘conservatives’ will fall in love due to the favor.
Darksean on January 14, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Symbolic only. I also don’t share Ed’s faith that the conservative writers won’t be affected. To think otherwise demands a belief that they are dedicated to the point of disregarding the benefits of personal access. Conservatives are not immune to ambition and the delights of the limelight.
a capella on January 14, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Apparently Larry Kudlow was there too.
singlemalt_18 on January 14, 2009 at 11:12 AM
So instead of reining in his own mad dogs Obama’s hoping to neuter those who might speak out against his march to Hope & Change. Obama is just trying to work the few in the media who haven’t totally felt the Chris Matthews tingle.
I might have had some respect for Obama if he worried about Democratic politicians – you know – the ones who SHOULD be part of the decision making process, rather than the ones he wants to sell it to us knuckle-draggers.
katiejane on January 14, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Sitting down with the enemy is ALWAYS a bad thing, unless it’s to accept thier surrender. This is nothing more than a MSM ploy used by the Messiah. It means nothing, it solves nothing. BHO is ENEMY #1 of the USA, he’s going to destroy our ability to defend ourselves, he’s going to make us all captives to political correctness and slaves to the all knowing, all powerful welfare state. I have NOTHING but disdain for ALL those that attended. Sitting with evil is not biblical, evil should be defeated, not listened too.
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 11:12 AM
The blogosphere as a whole, yes. Sites like Hot Air and Daily Kos, not so much. Partisanship helps fuel sites like these, and the end of fierce partisan loyalty will make blogs like Politico more thriving.
MadisonConservative on January 14, 2009 at 11:14 AM
How about you Birchers get a room?
MadisonConservative on January 14, 2009 at 11:15 AM
This like a meeting with the new Godfather (his favorite movie). He’s telling these guys the rules and that they will ply by them or else. We shall see when the columns from these guys come out how they received it.
thomasaur on January 14, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Seems to me that it was not 0bama’s privilege to invite or not invite anyone since this was at George Will’s home. Oh nevermind, he’s the 1 I forgot he can tell Mr. Will whom he can or can’t invite?
Brat on January 14, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Rush went to Washington for the Medal of Honor Awards. He did not have dinner with Barry. There’s a headline from Radio Equalizer about it on the HotAir Home Page. If the columns from the “Conservatives” that ate with Barry start kissing up to him, you’ll know Barry Hussein Obama did his “Svengali” act and it worked.
kingsjester on January 14, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Kristol is a big government republican.
lorien1973 on January 14, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Don’t kid yourself, this guy is slicker than a greased eel . . . he’d charm and co-op the devil if he thought it would further his Marxist agendas. Relax at your own peril.
rplat on January 14, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Yeah, the far left Commies are really interested in putting aside fierce partisam loyalties… Wow, just when I had agreed with you on several of your latest posts, you pull this moronic one out of your… Politico is SO FAR left and a tool of the Libs just as id MMA and DK. All organs of the MSM and it’s anti-American push. And they are winning, so now is NOT the time for consession or retreat, it’s time for sites like HA and ManlyRash’s… Fight or Die, it’s comming soon to a street corner in your town. Evil is at the door, people like MadisonConservative would rather us open it and ask it to sit down for supper, then fight it.
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 11:19 AM
kingsjester on January 14, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Aha, thanks. Here endeth the speculation.
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 11:20 AM
He just wants to know how to talk to conservatives…not do anything for them. learn this.
He wants to use it against republicans. I guess you have to meet with him, but don’t get all willy nilly over it. Geez.
tomas on January 14, 2009 at 11:20 AM
CINOs? Do we really need a new acronym here?
The Dean on January 14, 2009 at 11:20 AM
This is nothing but an attempt by a poseur to pose as a centrist, and distract us from the fact that he is appointing Socialists like Carol Browner and Hilda Solis to his administration.
Buy Danish on January 14, 2009 at 11:21 AM
kingsjester on January 14, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Yeah, the real conservative met with Bush and was there for the awards. The “media approved conservatives” of course met with Barry. We know who are allies are. Brooks is certainly not a liberal, as is Kristol, which is weird he would go. As for Will and Krauthammer, both are conservative for liberal MD. But neither are socially conservative and only Kraut was somewhat sympathetic to Mac. At least on this week, it does seem that Will has become much more liberal and much more willing to agree with all the other liberals. 5-10 years ago, with Roberts and Donaldson headed the show, he was more of a conservative.
IR-MN on January 14, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Actually caught myself wondering about this very question, especially with news of the dinner coming out yesterday. Every politician makes the speech about not caring who gets credit, and on some level I’m sure most of them actually mean it (as long as they get enough credit to retain their office). Most of the time, it’s mere telling us what we want to hear.
But is it possible, however unlikely, that BarryO may just try a little harder? He’s in a very awkward position now, and must play things perfect, espcially through the second half, if he wants another term. But circumstances are stacked against him.
I firmly doubt that anything Washington does for the economy will do anything but hurt it, unless they drastically cut spending and lower taxes, and we all know that won’t happen. Right or wrong, most people vote with their wallets, and right or wrong, the sitting president gets the blame when that wallet is empty.
His only hope is that they don’t do too much damage, and the economy recovers on its own. He may be trying to spread expectations around, so he isn’t the only one voters blame.
JamesLee on January 14, 2009 at 11:22 AM
Krauthammer has some conservative cred; not the rest.
The Dean on January 14, 2009 at 11:24 AM
Heh. Thread winnar.
Ars Moriendi on January 14, 2009 at 11:25 AM
I don’t really give a damn what you think of my posts, since you apparently are far too dense to realize that plenty of non-fringe left-wingers visit that site every day, and are in fact what keeps it going, the same as with Hot Air being frequented by those not obsessed with bolding their entire posts as part of some fantasy crusade. Chanting “Fight or Die” on a comments section of a blog is hilarious, by the way.
MadisonConservative on January 14, 2009 at 11:25 AM
If Obama had wanted to improve the tone of Washington, he could have started during his campaign by not calling Republicans stupid, evil, selfish, and racist.
JohnJ on January 14, 2009 at 11:27 AM
Get a clue, Ed. Calling David Brooks right of center is akln to calling Ann Coulter obese.
Percy_Peabody on January 14, 2009 at 11:28 AM
Hear hear.
It seems some “conservatives” are sucking down the kool-aid…
Skywise on January 14, 2009 at 11:30 AM
Seriously, Barack should go to Rush. Have a cigar (a nice way to dance with that on and off cigarette habit of his), a nice glass of brandy, and discuss stuff. It would be good for Barack to stop hearing socialist bs from the yes men around him.
Mr. Joe on January 14, 2009 at 11:30 AM
Ed and Allah along with some of the HA regulars must be getting all moist with The Messiah’s wonderfullness and willingness to meet with “Conservatives”… What a bunch of poop! These are, to use the new acronym above, CINO’s at best. Let Rush and Mark Levin sit and “chat” with The One, then we can talk about his “centerist” leanings or his reaching out for all points of view. Until then, this was a PR stunt with morons willing to give him another photo op. Our side is DEAD in the water, all our voices are growing dim, sites like this getting the warm fuzzies for His Uberness, The One, The Leader, The Messiah.
Meanwhile back in America…
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 11:30 AM
Agreed. Here’s what Brooks said a few months ago on Obama. Please. Obama is not “crossing the aisle” to meet with these people. Link here.
Obama has the great intellect. I was interviewing Obama a couple years ago, and I’m getting nowhere with the interview, it’s late in the night, he’s on the phone, walking off the Senate floor, he’s cranky. Out of the blue I say, ‘Ever read a guy named Reinhold Niebuhr?’ And he says, ‘Yeah.’ So i say, ‘What did Niebuhr mean to you?’ For the next 20 minutes, he gave me a perfect description of Reinhold Niebuhr’s thought, which is a very subtle thought process based on the idea that you have to use power while it corrupts you. And I was dazzled, I felt the tingle up my knee as Chris Matthews would say.
Pasalubong on January 14, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Really? As I recall, Bill Kristol wanted Joe Lieberman to be John RINO McCain’s running mate.
Buy Danish on January 14, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Are you insane? Obama can do whatever he wants and will be loudly proclaimed as the most awesome, wonderful, centrist person to have ever lived. He’s called Republicans evil, stupid, racist, and selfish, and people think his campaign was moderately toned. He can get away with anything. And he will. The rules are different now that a Democrat sits in the White House. Now all of a sudden people are “tired” of criticisms of the President. That was only good when Republicans were in charge.
JohnJ on January 14, 2009 at 11:32 AM
In 1993 I had a lengthy conversation with a well-known evangelical leader. This pastor told me that Bill Clinton invited him to the governor’s mansion for breakfast. This man told me he informed Clinton he would only meet with him if it could be done privately without involving the press. And Bill Clinton agreed, so they met, talked, prayed, etc. The pastor told me he was unwilling to allow Clinton, whom he was certain did not share his values, to use his good name for political ends.
I would like to take Obama at face value, but I don’t. I believe he used Will, Kudlow, Brooks, Kristol et. al. to achieve his political goals and nothing more.
flyfisher on January 14, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Pompus ass…
Not worth reply…
Will be begging for his life while we are defending it…
Former Marine, Father of Current Marine
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Add Steyn,Bozell and J. Goldberg to that list.
thomasaur on January 14, 2009 at 11:35 AM
But don’t try for one at the Hay-Adams hotel, as MC suggests, guys, because all the rooms there are booked up by Obamabots and RINOs.
andycanuck on January 14, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Conservative FAIL.
Kristols a Middle East hawk like Lieberman and that’s it.
The Dean on January 14, 2009 at 11:37 AM
flyfisher on January 14, 2009 at 11:33 AM
Barry does enjoy his photo ops. Remember the military hospital in Berlin? “If I can’t bring my press corp in there, I’m gonna go play basketball. So there.” (imaginary quote)
kingsjester on January 14, 2009 at 11:37 AM
Ed are you falling for the “Obama spell?”
It’s really pathetic. None of these men that visited Obama are conservative. Kristol thinks Obama is a centrist (oh please), Krauthammer was never really part of any party, Will and Brooks are elitist liberals.
Ed you’re not fooling anyone. Obama is using these “conservatives” to trap fools into thinking he is a centrist. He is a far left radical who wants to socialize this country.
If conservatives fall for this trap, we’re over as a party.
jencab on January 14, 2009 at 11:38 AM
FIFY
Rae on January 14, 2009 at 11:38 AM
I forgot to include the Boss in my earlier list.
thomasaur on January 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM
MadCo you either remember me from CQ or not. In the end the main fight that is “fight or die” is to protect the golden goose also known as free market principles. We are likely at the point that if Barry gets his ‘eight to ten years’ he will succeed in destroying our economy as Labour did in England. (which is after all the stated goal of Me$$iah himself and his foreign money backers )
End result if the world really is so desperate for an end to “US Cowboy radicalism” they better fire up their Rosetta Stone Chinese discs.
sven10077 on January 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Pathetic. And these NYT/WaPo approved RINOs are going to start kissing up to The One.
The Dean on January 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM
By the way, I’d like to take a poll, with these options:
A) I’ve accepted the fact that Barack Obama is our president and will try to bring something good out of it.
B) He’s not my president.
C) OSAMA OBAMA MUSLIM BAWRARARARRRR!!!!!
MadisonConservative on January 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM
What is Manly Rash’s new haunt?
I’ll be damn@d if I am gonna give Barry more of a pass than Barry and his ilk gave Bush in 2001…?
sven10077 on January 14, 2009 at 11:42 AM
These guys are conservatves by media standards. It’s easy to forget that there’s a real world out there. If you compared journalists to Republicans in general, Rush Limbaugh would be right about dead center, and these three guys would all be on the left – somewhere between Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter.
There are only two reasons to ever meet with an opponent: if you think he’ll give concessions; or if you’re willing to give concessions to him. Barack Obama is making it perfectly clear that he believes David Brooks and al Qaeda each fall into one of those two categories.
logis on January 14, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Great PR.
Why would it make any difference who he “meets” with? He’s going to do what he’s going to do. If you think that he’s really interested in being a bi partisan, you’re a fool imo.
The only dickering and “conflict” he’ll have with lib/dems is how fast the socialist policies will be implimented.
Its like a Mullah listening to the apostates plea in court..he’s listening and stroking his beard..maybe furrowing his brow in deep thought..but what he’s really wondering about as he glances out the window is, “Shouldn’t that crane with the nooses be here by now?..how long do they expect me to listen to this crap?”
Itchee Dryback on January 14, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Fight or Die, it’s comming soon to a street corner in your town.
It might just come to that, if only in a rhetorical sense rather than purely physical.
Our society is on the verge of being quickly frittered away with outrageous social engineering programs and feel-good policies designed to demolish most everything the nation was built on.
On the other hand, with the GOP seeming to bend over on a regular basis for the libs, it might just come down to gathering at a modern-day Lexington Green and refusing to obey our new royal masters.
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Info. please?
thomasaur on January 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Well, considering that Bush chucked those “to save the economy”, I’d say we’re already at that point. Obama can do one of two things: Carry on the Bush attitude, or, and yes this is unlikely but I can dream, he can go back to free market principles and help the economy.
I don’t care WHO is president, as long as they actually improve the economy and the state of the nation. I expect Obama to fail, and so I don’t have my hopes up. However, if he somehow pulls off a miracle, and manages to notice that free market capitalism is the cornerstone holding up our financial dominance, then wonderful. I’ll give him all the credit in the world. Some here wouldn’t give him the time of day if that occurred. That’s their prerogative. Again, country before politics.
MadisonConservative on January 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM
D> I’ve accepted the fact that Barack Obama is our President but won’t sell out my values.
D.
Skywise on January 14, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Ed, you clearly have the ability to do better. Are you being lazy and hoping nobody notices?
C-. No extra credit points.
SKYFOX on January 14, 2009 at 11:49 AM
By the way, I’d like to take a poll, with these options:
I choose “D” as all of the above, depending on the circumstances.
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 11:50 AM
A
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 11:50 AM
I probably don’t have the authority to do this here but, Dude. Soldiers are fighters, we get it, you don’t have to keep proving it to us by uh “battling” your keyboard. It’s probably the only thing you “sit down” with on a regular basis that actually IS calling for mercy as you pound away at the keys in frustration and what borders on teen level angst about the coming Obama presidency. Have you not seen who the man has appointed? It’s free market folks who wanted NAFTA and wall street deregulation. Have you not seen hi war cabinet? It’s pro-Isreal, pro Iraq War hawks who want to send more troops into battle in Afghanistan. All your doing by constantly evoking your military experience (and even more inexplicably, your sons) is providing credence to the lie that soldiers don’t think, they just respond and react. Though based on your “fight or die” foolishness, you probably don’t think that’s an insult.
DeathToMediaHacks on January 14, 2009 at 11:51 AM
M. Rash
E-mail Address:
angelodomini@aol.com
Rash’s email for info on his site.
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 11:51 AM
I may indeed be insane. However, I also don’t believe the “Messiah” garbage will hold up for very long. Yes, he’ll get a pass a lot longer than most, especially a Republican would, but sooner or later as more and more mistakes and scandals occur, it will be harder and harder to sing his praises.
As we’ve seen over and over again, the only thing the American media like better than building someone up is when they tear them down and watch them crash.
JamesLee on January 14, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Is that grape or cherry that your drinking?
If you really believe that BHO is not a far left wing radical, part of the blame America crowd, then God help you.
Enjoy your fantasy…
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 11:55 AM
That really says it all about where HA has gone but I’ll continue anyway.
One of the guys who told us there was no way to win the election with anyone else but john mccain. This is the closest to coming out of the closet that ed has come yet.
The meeting said nothing about barry and everything about our political system. This country is being run by a political class that includes the so called “conservative punditry”. kristol, will, brooks etc. look at themselves as a class above the rest of us and the role they play is mostly for their own profit. What have any of those three done for conservatism or America. ed fantasizes that he is a member of that political elite and will do whatever it takes to get some acknowledgement from them.
peacenprosperity on January 14, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Don’t let others get you down, dude.
Everyone has their own style of expression, obviously including you but for some reason a few of them feel compelled to attack that style. Usually they are the same people who haughtily point out other’s spelling mistakes, as if they never make any of their own.
And thanks for your service and that of your son.
-Former Boatswains Mate, USN-
USS Flint
USS Vincennes
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 11:58 AM
It is a bit worrying because none of the three can be considered firm on the pro-life issue. At best they prefer to shunt that issue to the sidelines, and not soil their hands on this issue when there are “more important” issues to discuss and nice parties to attend.
Thus, this may be an effort to divide off the policy conservatives from the so-called social conservatives.In other words it could be seen as a means of marinalizing the pro-life side if Obama decies to move forward on the Freedom of Choice act.
Blaise on January 14, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Yep.
peacenprosperity on January 14, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Come on, people. How many Republicans have done JACK to shrink the government in the last 20 years?
This comment brought to you by the HotAir Department of Redundancy Department.
gryphon202 on January 14, 2009 at 12:02 PM
BHO, post-partisan?
About as much as Lenin was.
notagool on January 14, 2009 at 12:02 PM
Okay, I’m not getting your points today. You reacted to a couple of fairly mild comments by calling the commenters “Birchers”, after seeming to argue earlier in favor of “fierce partisan loyalty” at sites like Hot Air.
While I wouldn’t do it because its an outdated joke, calling Barry “Osama Obama” is not as extreme as you would make it out to be, particularly since it was Ted Kennedy who first coined the term, albeit inadvertently. As for saying that Kristol/Brooks et cetera are more conservative than Allah, I would stronly disagree with that, but it’s hardly so controversial that that relegates the commenter to the “Bircher” category.
Buy Danish on January 14, 2009 at 12:02 PM
And I bet barry would sit down to dinner with Rush before the three sissies krystol, will and brooks would.
peacenprosperity on January 14, 2009 at 12:03 PM
I will get called a right wingnut zelot but i really do believe, and am fearful for, a vastly weakened America. A country that will not defend itself, BHO has stated that he would not use our nuclear weapons even in defense. He stated he will cut billions for defense, has called for talks with those publicaly stating that they will see America destroyed. But I’m the one who is crazy for listening and believing that we are in real trouble in our own cities and towns as terrorist plot our demise…
Odd, but I remember other patriots who were called crazy at the time by early warning of impending doom, calling out evil by name… Those men were proven by history to be factualy correct.
For America, I hope I’m not one of them… I gotta be wrong.
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 12:03 PM
My midpoint is considerably to his right.
whitetop on January 14, 2009 at 12:06 PM
And I’m Donald Trump.
Knucklehead on January 14, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Blaise on January 14, 2009
If those elites succeed in redifining “conservatism” as something it never was, they may well destroy it as a
viable political philosophy. Ed and AP appear to be on board with this. They aren’t elites, but they wish to be and they have adopted the “fake it until you make it” path to success.
SKYFOX on January 14, 2009 at 12:08 PM
redifining = redefining
SKYFOX on January 14, 2009 at 12:09 PM
And I’m Donald Trump.
Knucklehead on January 14, 2009 at 12:06 PM
You’re fired.
Bishop on January 14, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Agreed.
Although thanks to Bill K. for cheering for Palin to be picked early on. I like him for that, but please no more neo-conservative save-the-world stuff for now. I’ve had enough.
Sapwolf on January 14, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Fierce partisan loyalty differs from fringe lunacy. The former sees no need to constantly be seeking the expunging of those who don’t fall into lockstep, whereas the fringe does. The regular excoriating of the hosts of this site is not partisanship, it’s demagoguery. It’s the elastic reaction of eight years of BDS, culminating in a plague of ODS, which isn’t going to help this country, or help us fight him on every liberal decision he will make.
Two months ago, it was understandable that we had just been through a rather trying election, filled with a lot of disappointment, and people needed time to recover. Well, we’re a week from inauguration. Time to put away the kleenex and start being constructive. Continuing to call into question the values of people who don’t react to the next president as “duh 1″ is the lamentation of those who can’t get over losing, and they’re just as annoying today as they were the last two elections. Doing so while also discussing armed revolution due to losing an election, where we ran one of the weakest, most liberal republican candidates ever, is Bircher talk.
MadisonConservative on January 14, 2009 at 12:13 PM
It’s easy to be bipartisan when Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin.
When amnesty is passed, it will be bi-partisan with McCain leading the way. When the $1.5 trillion stimulus is passed, it will be bi-partisan with RINOs like Arlen Specter leading the way.
With maybe the exception of abortion and gay marriage, there is really no difference between Reps and Dems anymore. And so by definition every bill that is passed is bipartisan.
angryed on January 14, 2009 at 12:15 PM
Ed and AP:
How about you invite Obama to your radio show?
I mean it. At least let the guy know where we stand. What are our fears.
Did you notice how the rhetoric on his Change site got really light after people began buying up guns in huge numbers in anticipation of Hollow Man taking them and creating a civilian defense force?
Get him on HotAir if he REALLY wants to reach out. AP gets his precious ratings, Ed gives him the nice and chummy side of conservatism, and O-man knows where we stand.
I’m serious. It doesn’t hurt to ask. Afterall, we didn’t totally dis the guy like Oprah dissin the Cuda.
Sapwolf on January 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM
ManlyRash has a site? Where? I miss that old bugger.
LimeyGeek on January 14, 2009 at 12:17 PM
I wish Rush had actually gone to that dinner, but he probably wasn’t even invited.
Ryan Gandy on January 14, 2009 at 12:17 PM
Grassroots third-party is needed if the GOP does it the old inside-the-beltway way. Palin can be the first POTUS candidate. She’ll lose and split votes, but send the message that due to the GOP being the same as the Dems, let’s put 3 players out there.
The GOP and the conservative movement CANNOT be run by the inside-the-beltway anymore. It must be independent of Washington in its power and base.
Blackwell is the one that seems to understand this the most of all the RNC candidates.
Sapwolf on January 14, 2009 at 12:20 PM
MrScribbler on January 14, 2009 at 11:09 AM
I wouldn’t consider Brooks a conservative, but I don’t really know enough about Will or Kristol to make that same conclusion. Please enlighten me as to how you reached it.
Ryan Gandy on January 14, 2009 at 12:25 PM
I disagree. Here’s some news for you and Ed. All that “post-partisan” really means is that Democrats shouldn’t be criticized. Criticism was all the rage while Republicans were in charge, but that has changed now that Democrats are in charge. Now, anyone who criticizes the President really is unpatriotic.
For example, this coming Independence Day will be the most patriotic in living memory, because Republicans will always love America and Democrats will finally love the government. America can only be post-partisan as long as Democrats are in charge. And, of course, the few crumbs that Obama offers to conservatives will be heralded as proof of his almighty centrism. As if George Bush were some right-wing extremist.
Does anyone remember Bush hosting “listening session”, inviting all the former secretaries of state for their input on how to handle Iraq? How did the media treat that? It was portrayed as a publicity stunt, and no more. Meanwhile, Obama’s meeting with a few liberal Republicans shows how awesome he is.
How about I use Obama’s example as my post-partisan model? “Don’t be bamboozled. Don’t buy into it.” That’s how he supported Bush. Wouldn’t it be fair that that’s how I support him?
JohnJ on January 14, 2009 at 12:26 PM
So much wrong here, not sure where to start…
We are reacting to a man, a far left radical man, who, in his own words, want to re-distribute our money to those that do not work and pay taxes. We are reacting to a man who has, again in his own words, said he will cut our defense, our military and refuse to use our nuclear deterant, even if attacked. We are reacting to a man who’s own bboks talk about revenge against “white” men, against Amrican values. If we are a bit fearful could it be that the far left, with it’s BDS, is now in power totaly and is out to destroy the very fabric of what Consevatives hold dear? Is it wrong to have ODS based on the man’s own words and actions? I guess you would pefer to roll over and play dead, hope he leaves you and yours alone? Hope the Messiah, (btw, not my name but the radical Farakhan’s word for our next President), passes over the issues you care about? That’s what I mean when I say I’d rather fight. I refuse to sit by while Rome burns, at least I can get a single bucket and try to do what I can as one lone voice. But when one bucket becomes another and another, another, another… We can put out the fire before all is destroyed. I guess you can sit back on your butt and watch, maybe we’ll save your house, maybe not… The nanny state BHO has promised to millions will build you another, no worries.
Mark Garnett on January 14, 2009 at 12:26 PM
And we have a winner.
Knucklehead on January 14, 2009 at 12:31 PM
I agree 100%. While I’m horribly dissapointed in the outcome of the election, the fact remains that BHO is (or will be in a very few days) the President. And 4 to 8 years of ODS in reaction to BDS isn’t going to help things any. We shouldn’t stoop to the Left’s level now that we’re in the position they were in 8 years ago. We’ve prided ourselves on being the adults in the political debate, now’s the time to put our money where our mouths are.
Rage may have worked for the Left but they had the MSM running interfereance for every crazy stunt they pulled over the last 8 years. It’s not going to work for us – the MSM will report on each and every incident as if it’s the end of the world (and probably also bring out cries of RAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST to boot).
Do I hope Obama is a weak President who p*sses our country away? No, I actually hope he’s successful in keeping us safe from terrorism and helps rescue the economy (based on fair-market principals, of course). I may think he’s going to fail miserably, but I don’t hope that he will. Hoping a weak, disasterous Presidency for our country is crazy, especially in a world as dangerous as ours is. And if that somehow makes me not a conservative anymore, then the Reagan Revolution truly is over.
crazy_legs on January 14, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Sadly, it seems this last election not only brought the crazies out of the woodwork, but they’ve gained a number of disciples.
MadisonConservative on January 14, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Obama wins.
Reading (some of) the comment war it is obvious that Obama wins just by sitting down with ‘conservatives’ at an off the record meeting.
The resulting flame war between social-conservatives, fiscal-conservatives, moderate-conservatives, and other hyphenated-conservatives is exactly what Obama hopes to accomplish.
The gullible are fooled, the partisans are offended at the stupidity.
Slick doesn’t begin to tell the story.
Skandia Recluse on January 14, 2009 at 12:39 PM
Where did either of the comments that led you to call the commenters “Birchers” advocate armed revolution?:
Kristol, Will and Brooks are in no way conservatives, unless you’re comparing them to Osama Obama.
Ed, you’re slipping.
MrScribbler on January 14, 2009 at 11:09 AM
———————————————
They are more conservative than Allahpundit, though…
The Dean on January 14, 2009 at 11:10 AM
While I agree we have to be reasonable with our criticism of Obama, and believe that it is unseemly to “excoriate the hosts”, those particular comments do not seem to qualify as unhinged statements or “fringe lunacy”, and calling them “birchers” strikes me as a bit pot/kettle-ish.
There are plenty of over-the-top comments which do deserve a dressing down. I just don’t think that those two merited that particular response.
Buy Danish on January 14, 2009 at 12:40 PM
Isn’t Kristol the guy who invented the word “neocon”?
logis on January 14, 2009 at 12:41 PM
Right on. You fight tooth and nail using whatever means you have. I don’t have ODS. I do believe O-man is a socialist and wishes to use the growing power of the federal government for his purposes and to try to build heaven on Earth. If he is smart, he will learn that is impossible and leads to evil in immense proportions. But, it is more likely he lacks wisdom, an understanding of the Founding Fathers, has a DEEP contempt of the Constitution, will not trust the American People, and really wants to be a nice Hugo Chavez baiscally. He is insecure, had no father, and shows those signs of immaturity you would expect from someone in that situation. I’m guessing that he is very unsure of himself now that he is taking office because almost everything in his life was given to him. Now, he faced with his FIRST REAL challenge in his life and he is realizing how inadequate he is.
I feel sorry for him, because he is so woefully unprepared to be an executive.
However, its time we rose up, reorganized with a conservative movement independent of the inside George Will crowd or DC circuit, and fight Dems, Leftists, DC government with every molecule in our bodies over EVERY FRONT: radio, TV, print (although this is dying out), universities, think-tanks, blogosphere, streets, schools, etc.
One thing I would like to see the RNC promote is a series of maybe 3 courses on conservatism. This course would cover conservatism and from different angles such as philosophy, theology (within different religions), freedom, the Constitution, economics, government.
A simple but powerful short 3-month curriculum to teach Americans what conservatism really IS. This would do so much to reach out to people who have ridiculous beliefs about conservatives.
Think of it as a Catechism for the modern Conservative Movement.
This is what we need ASAP.
Sapwolf on January 14, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Well, by the same token, I also agree with Mark Garnett. If Obama tries to pull the country too far to the Left, or diminishes the military, or does his whole “spreading of the wealth” thing, then of course we should fight him. But rage and ODS isn’t going to help. The way the MSM will report it, it will actively hurt any chances we have of stopping or reversing anything and before long any critisism we have will be looked on as “only those right-wing kooks again.”
crazy_legs on January 14, 2009 at 12:43 PM
It was clear where the discussion was heading with that start. Not to get on a high horse, but it reached the destination pretty quickly.
MadisonConservative on January 14, 2009 at 12:47 PM
It’s a pretty safe bet that Obama is not going to suddenly desert the ones who brought him here. But his background is far more in social issues than in foreign policy ones, and whatever government tinkering he has planned, he, Alexrod and Emanuel appear to recognize — as many of his supporters don’t — that if they go full moonbat on foreign policy on Jan. 20, a lot of the U.S. (and probably Blue State areas more than Red ones) are going to pay the price in the future.
He doesn’t care that much about foreign policy, except that it doesn’t cost him at the polls in 2012, so at least on that issue, Obama for now may have more common ground with Will, Brooks and Kristol than he does with any of the foreign policy experts on the Daily Kos or Huffington Post. The problem will be if Barack’s charm offensive results in those three softening their positions on Obama’s domestic social agenda in their future columns and/or TV punditry (my guess is Kristol, no; Brooks, yes; while will will say the people get the government they deserve and be oblique in his criticisms of the president, but tougher on the ones in Congress sending those ideas up for votes).
jon1979 on January 14, 2009 at 12:47 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »