Green Room

Bill Whittle: Why don’t Republicans commit to their own story?

posted at 10:18 am on November 25, 2012 by

I’m a few days late on this video, but as brilliant as Bill Whittle normally is, he’s even more so in this speech given at David Horowitz’ Restoration Weekend a week ago. If we can’t commit to our own message and defend it in the media, why would we expect voters to support it?

Recently in the Green Room:

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 3 4

This. THIS. THIS!

Whittle nails it right here! He’s the only conservative who has nailed down the most important reason (of many) that Mitt Romney lost the election to the worst president in our republic’s existence

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 10:37 AM

This. THIS. THIS!

Whittle nails it right here! He’s the only conservative who has nailed down the most important reason (of many) that Mitt Romney lost the election to the worst president in our republic’s existence

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Romney won that argument. He lost because Obama’s campaign drove people who weren’t even listening to the polls with instructions of who to vote for.

Count to 10 on November 25, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Romney won that argument. He lost because Obama’s campaign drove people who weren’t even listening to the polls with instructions of who to vote for.

Count to 10 on November 25, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Romney won what argument? I don’t understand what you’re saying. He lostthe election. There’s no way to sugar coat that. He didn’t win shit when it came down to what was really important. If we’re going to engage in navel gazing for the next four years, we’d better at least come to the right conclusions. Otherwise, I honestly believe that the GOP doesn’t deserve to continue its existence as a political organism.

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM

If enough people catch on to this, we might have a chance next time. Candidates who can feel conservatism in their bones and be unapologetic about it. They can sell it because they believe it.

Dongemaharu on November 25, 2012 at 11:22 AM

“Stockholm Syndrome”. Yeah, definitely. I also saw this a lot on our side with both “white guilt” and the ludicrous “war on women”. Once we started playing their game by their rules, winning becomes very hard.

eforhan on November 25, 2012 at 11:27 AM

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Indeed. Romney needed to wage war on/in the media, needed to forcefully defend capitalism and liberty.

For example, RomneyCare (and his continued defense of it) showed that Romney did not truly believe in individual liberty.

mockmook on November 25, 2012 at 11:27 AM

This is why McCain and Romney lost in landslides.

If you run to the center, trying to appeal to “independents” and ignoring your conservative base you will lose.

I will never again support a “moderate” GOP presidential nominee.

Norwegian on November 25, 2012 at 11:44 AM

This is why McCain and Romney lost in landslides.

If you run to the center, trying to appeal to “independents” and ignoring your conservative base you will lose.

I will never again support a “moderate” GOP presidential nominee.

Norwegian on November 25, 2012 at 11:44 AM

No offense intended, but I think you’re kind of missing the point. The problem is not with a candidate or even “the candidates.” The problem is systemic. The party is broken. The solution is to cut off donations to it until such time as it withers on the vine and we can start over again with a group of people that believe in what they’re peddling.

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Because the GOP estalibhsment, from whence Romney, McCain, Bush41 and Dole come, is actually a member of the Ruling Party. They only show up at CPAC when running for the presidency,if at all.

McCain, for example, was so worried about his “street cred” as a “maverick” with the NYTimes and invites to Ltterman that in 2007, he tried to senak into CPAC. Instead of giving a speech, he was going to rent a hotel room, and hold court there privately. Unfortunately, he waited to long, and the hotel was booked.

Wethal on November 25, 2012 at 11:49 AM

This. THIS. THIS!

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 10:37 AM

THIS. This is why we lost.

Wake up folks.

faraway on November 25, 2012 at 11:50 AM

THIS. This is why we lost.

Wake up folks.

faraway on November 25, 2012 at 11:50 AM

I hope you’re not accusing me of being why we lost. :P

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Romney won what argument? I don’t understand what you’re saying. He lostthe election. There’s no way to sugar coat that. He didn’t win shit when it came down to what was really important.

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Wait, wait, wait … for six months you purists have told us that winning elections is less important than having the right arguments. Suddenly winning elections is the only thing that’s really important?

Gelsomina on November 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM

..virtually EVERY comment in this thread so far has merit. I cannot bring myself to bag on Mitt Romney who I believe is about as honorable a candidate as we could have. However, he lost.

Since the election, I have made the decision (like many, I am sure) to dial out of politics and devote my energies to the survival and prospering of my family. Unless and until a contingent of U. S. citizens (do not want to use the work “political party”) emerges with an inspiring message enunciating the principles of our Constitution, it will continue to be droning, ineffectual blather and cliches.

Mr Whittle emerged on election night with just such a message capsulized above and expanded upon here. The link is to a talk he did to the Hancock Park Patriots in SoCal. Two things in Mr Whittle’s tone and words strike me: (1) his second amendment remarks are eerily reminiscent of those made by Tom Clancy’s President Jack Ryan in Executive Orders and (2) overall, his response to the personal wealth question is refreshingly like Ronald Reagan’s self-assured cockiness.

Unless and until we re-tool to have an inspiring message similar to Mr Whittle’s, we will see a steady parade of entitlement-seeker candidates elected.

The War Planner on November 25, 2012 at 11:58 AM

I hope you’re not accusing me of being why we lost. :P

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 11:54 AM

heh

faraway on November 25, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Bill Whittle is one of the main reasons I subscribed to PJTV.com instead of spending $52 to read Pravda on the Mississippi (Star Tribune)

Amendment X on November 25, 2012 at 12:18 PM

The GOP actually won, but rampant voter fraud re-elected Obama.

nazo311 on November 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM

The electorate reelected a leftist socialist, and the most leftist Marx sympathizing President the US has ever had.

It has become clear to me the GOP needs to educate the electorate about why this was a bad idea, about why big wealth redistributing government is a bad idea, about why trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see are a bad idea, about why too much government meddling in the free markets can be disastrous, and so on and so forth.

No one else will. Quite the contrary, in fact. The entire public education system indoctrinates students about the glories of collectivism and big government and the evils of capitalism (that is, the new socialism). The useful idiots in the MSM, both the “news” and entertainment wings, are squarely behind the socialist, and behind collectivism and big government wealth redistribution. And they will be at least until the new socialism hits too many of them too hard personally. But by then it will be too late. It may already be too late.

The GOP can start by recommending everyone read Milton Friedman’s book, Free To Choose.

Unfortunately, there may be too many big government types in the GOP, along with too many opportunistic career politicians who just want to get elected/reelected.

So a leader who can do this must emerge. Reagan was such a leader. There hasn’t been one since.

farsighted on November 25, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Romney talked like that during the first debate. He should have kept it going.

Red Creek on November 25, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Romney won that argument. He lost because Obama’s campaign drove people who weren’t even listening to the polls with instructions of who to vote for.
Count to 10 on November 25, 2012 at 10:50 AM

How does someone “win” an argument he never made?

logis on November 25, 2012 at 12:59 PM

“but as brilliant as Bill Whittle normally is, he’s even more so in this speech given at David Horowitz’ Restoration Weekend a week ago.”

Brilliant isn’t living in some made up fantasy world.

lowandslow on November 25, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Whittle is always very insightful. But in this case he, and many folks here, seem to be missing the larger, darker point.

An incumbent with numbers nobody has ever survived (unemployment, job approval, right track/wrong track), who essentially had no campaign – and to the extent he did, had a bizarre and ridiculous one (war on women, etc.), won against one of the most impressive individuals ever to seek the office. With turnout DECLINING for the second time in modern history.

No “conservative” message would likely have fixed such an absurd situation. If the bulk of voters are so ignorant or misguided as to be unsatisfied with the disastrous incumbent, yet cannot see that almost any alternative (and certainly Romney) would be dramatically better across the board, then something is wrong with the electorate – very very wrong.

But just to focus on the idea that the right “conservative” messenger would work some kind of magic – what does that assertion imply about the electorate that sat this one out? They are so misinformed, and so clueless about their own system of govt., that they don’t think we’re in an emergency situation, and there is a desperate need to evict the unfit, lawless, and alien bunch in charge? No disrespect meant to anyone here or elsewhere, but to believe anything close to “there’s no difference” in this case was to utterly, and disastrously beclown oneself and damage the country’s future.

One-time event? (not two-time) “Cool” mindless youth culture prevailing over common sense and some American set of political values? Just an absurd playing out of baseless race-guilt? Wrong messenger? Not “conservative” enough? All of them partly true (and damning each in their own right), but hardly an answer. The answer is far, far darker. This is simply not a country that is recognizable to those older than 30.

The millions who didn’t even bother to vote, who seem OK with rather precipitous national decline, who aren’t even interested in an American ambassador being murdered on 9/11 and an administration engaging in a clownish and repugnant act to cloud the situation, who are so stupid they vote for “someone who cares about someone like them” (this incl. the huge swath of ignorant, envious bigots who obsess about Romney’s entirely self-made wealth, many of them normally GOP voters), who barely understand the lawlessness rampant in DC (from the SCOTUS to the agencies to the WH) – I don’t see them being “inspired” by a “conservative”.

Oh, and let’s not forget the idiots in Indiana and Missouri, who voted for Romney and against their GOP Senate candidates. Every day of the week, a Dem incumbent utters something that would have been career-endingly stupid and un-American just 15 years ago (incl. the vile, ridiculous president – “vote for revenge” – WTF?). And not on some obscure topic that has essentially zero relationship to likely Senate business, but on key issues of the day. But two candidates make stupid remarks – and these voters think their delicate sensibilities require them to assist the hollowing out of the republic by adding Dem senators to DC? WTFF? The constitution lies in shreds, the institutions it created and meant to preserve it have become a farce or worse, Americans are seemingly happy to surrender their personal freedom and approve ever more intrusive and unworkable limits on liberty – but hey, that guy said something weird about abortion or rape, we’d better send his insane, un-American opponent to the Senate instead. Again, WTFF?

IceCold on November 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Listening to Bill gave me hope, but also made me see that I need to live the conservative message more and not to be afraid to speak the truth. It’s kinda like being a Christian, either you stay quiet in your faith or you boldly proclaim God’s word.

TeaTrekkie on November 25, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Listening to Bill gave me hope, but also made me see that I need to live the conservative message more and not to be afraid to speak the truth.
TeaTrekkie on November 25, 2012 at 1:45 PM

As long as you always remember that the truth HURTS. No liberal will ever be happy to hear it, and they will always attack you for speaking it.

And they will try to imprison you for living it.

logis on November 25, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Gelsomina on November 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM

if you have the right principles and make the right argument on those principles you will win the elections. romney has no principles and after one debate stopped arguing.

chasdal on November 25, 2012 at 1:58 PM

won against one of the most impressive individuals ever to seek the office.

i dont think you know what impressive means. he was a guy who ran several times and only won one election. he declined to run for re-election cause he knew he would lose. on almost every position of note he had held contradictory positions in the past. and on what should have been the biggest issue, obamacare, he was nuetered and couldnt fight it. nothing impressive at all about romney except for the spectacular failure of his campaign.

chasdal on November 25, 2012 at 2:01 PM

FaceDURRRK’d that video, thanks.

Jeddite on November 25, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Wait, wait, wait … for six months you purists have told us that winning elections is less important than having the right arguments. Suddenly winning elections is the only thing that’s really important?

Gelsomina on November 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM

No.
People were pointing out that it was important to win THIS election.
Too bad people were too pure in ideology or too lazy to pay attention.

It.Is.Over.
The best we can hope for now is to Frankenstein a Republic back to some recognizable life in the future.

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Serious question: What exactly would the right argument for conservatism look like today?

S.P. Link on November 25, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Serious answer. It should look like objective reality.

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 2:17 PM

chasdal on November 25, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Sorry…but that response dripped of willful ignorance and group-think.

Who did you vote for?
Just curious.

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 2:19 PM

romney has no principles..

chasdal on November 25, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Pathetic.

Who are you comparing him to?

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Serious question: What exactly would the right argument for conservatism look like today?

S.P. Link on November 25, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Guess you messed the Whittle video. You know, the one at the top of this post.

mockmook on November 25, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Guess you messed the Whittle video. You know, the one at the top of this post.

mockmook on November 25, 2012 at 2:30 PM

That’s not an argument, that’s just Whittle verbalizing a daydream.

lowandslow on November 25, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Brilliant isn’t living in some made up fantasy world.

lowandslow on November 25, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Try telling that to Obama voters.

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 2:38 PM

That’s not an argument, that’s just Whittle verbalizing a daydream.

lowandslow on November 25, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Can you give some examples of what you mean by that? I mean something that Whittle said…and then your response showing what he should have said to be more effective.
I look forward to your insightful advice.
Thanks.

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 2:42 PM

So. Much. Awesomeness. Mind Blown. Sharing with everyone immediately.

CaliSwag on November 25, 2012 at 2:43 PM

In my best Joe Biden ….

Two words: Awesome.

thirteen28 on November 25, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Serious question: What exactly would the right argument for conservatism look like today?

S.P. Link on November 25, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Serious answer: NOT trying to sell someone as conservative who has spent most of his adult life running from conservatism.

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Objective to whom? To the majority that (like it or not, legally or not) won last time, won this time and will win again? The majority to whom objective reality amounts to “Vote democrat = get free money and be approved by your celebrity idols”? That IS the sum total of their objective reality, you know. No matter how Whittle or anyone else suggests we “message” conservatism, the bottom line will always be that we have nothing to prevail against what the communists have delivered to them. Everything we have to offer is intended solely for people of integrity but when the votes are counted, people of integrity will now and forever be in the minority of voters.

Bet on this: Messaging won’t matter. Obama voters know just enough about conservatism to know it’s for suckers.

Welcome to the new objective reality. Not only is it theirs, it’s ours, too.

S.P. Link on November 25, 2012 at 2:45 PM

You sound like a Relativist.
Objective to whom??? Seriously?? To no one. Reality is actually not subject to ideology. In fact the one overwhelming characteristic is that it doesn’t care one sh&t what someone thinks, or believes in. It is what it is.

Objective to the actual real world and the ways policies actually have panned out and pointing out the unintended consequences of past liberal failures..

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Romney won what argument? I don’t understand … blah blah blah.gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 10:54 AM

You don’t understand. You’ve proved that to the point of perfection. What did Whittle say about Romney? He praised him. Conservatives who could not bring themselves to celebrate Mitt Romney’s life story, and embrace his qualifications for the job, are morons.

Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 2:59 PM

Can you give some examples of what you mean by that? I mean something that Whittle said…and then your response showing what he should have said to be more effective.

It’s fifteen minutes of wishcasting. What Romney should have said, what Whittle would have done. That’s not making an argument, that’s just indulging in fantasy. This is all Whittle ever engages in, it’s shows a profound lack of seriousness, but it makes a very exciting populous speech.

lowandslow on November 25, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Wait, wait, wait … for six months you purists have told us that winning elections is less important than having the right arguments. Suddenly winning elections is the only thing that’s really important?

Gelsomina on November 25, 2012 at 11:55 AM

“You purists?!” Really? Dude, your guy secured the nomination — AND LOST! And all you can do is continue to rag on us “purists?” Weaksauce man. If you’re going to make tea, try using tea leaves.

Just the other day, I was accused in this very site’s comment section of “offering platitudes, not solutions.” Well here’s my solution, Butch: TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT. These “moderates” aren’t hacking it, and you know it and I know it. And Bill Whittle knows it. We simply can not continue to field candidates whose state policy positions differ almost 180 degrees from the party’s platform.

Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t have a magic wand I can wave to suddenly make all the corruption and disingenuousness go away in the GOP. But I do think that the GOP deserves to wither on the vine, as it will if it continues trying to out-liberal the Democrats. Feel free to disagree with me, but time will tell if I am right about this (as the elections proved me right about Romney mere weeks ago).

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 3:02 PM

You don’t understand. You’ve proved that to the point of perfection. What did Whittle say about Romney? He praised him. Conservatives who could not bring themselves to celebrate Mitt Romney’s life story, and embrace his qualifications for the job, are morons.

Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 2:59 PM

His life’s story and accomplishments didn’t win him the election, BB. In fact, he lost decisively. Either his loss was a fait accompli, or there is something he and the greater GOP should have done differently.

Besides which, I’ve never claimed that the problem was with Romney. Or any other rising GOP star for that matter. The problem is systemic. The problem IS the GOP. And the sooner conservatives realize that, the sooner we can get to the business of setting up a replacement for the GOP.

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Serious answer: NOT trying to sell someone as conservative who has spent most of his adult life running from conservatism. gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Valedictorian, 3.97 GPA in combined MBA and Law, gave his inheritance to his University to create a library in honor of his father, one wife, 5 productive kids, mission work, ministering to members of his faith, using his knowledge and industry to create a fortune for himself and those who invested in him, 7 years of public service without pay, untold acts of kindness, bountiful charitable giving, not one scandal.

And he wasn’t good enough? Nuts.

Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 3:10 PM

It’s fifteen minutes of wishcasting. What Romney should have said, what Whittle would have done. That’s not making an argument, that’s just indulging in fantasy. This is all Whittle ever engages in, it’s shows a profound lack of seriousness, but it makes a very exciting populous speech.

lowandslow on November 25, 2012 at 3:00 PM

So you have nothing. I thought as much.

O.K……forget Romney and Whittle.
In your own words..what should one say in order to be an effective “gatherer’ of conservatives? No “wishcasting”..or indulgences in fantasy, because I know you wouldn’t want to be like ‘them’ and project a lick of seriousness.
Thanks.

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 3:11 PM

And he wasn’t good enough? Nuts.

Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Obviously a non serious wishcaster.
/

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 3:14 PM

Valedictorian, 3.97 GPA in combined MBA and Law, gave his inheritance to his University to create a library in honor of his father, one wife, 5 productive kids, mission work, ministering to members of his faith, using his knowledge and industry to create a fortune for himself and those who invested in him, 7 years of public service without pay, untold acts of kindness, bountiful charitable giving, not one scandal.

And he wasn’t good enough? Nuts.

Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 3:10 PM

I don’t care if he was good enough for you or not. He lost to a guy who hasn’t made a single dime of honest money in his life, nor released a single page of his own college transcripts. And that’e leaving aside the arguably dubious circumstances of Obama’s birth and childhood. All that, and Romney still couldn’t seal the deal — and I took a nice long hot shower after pulling the lever for Romney, to boot.

To those who would accuse myself, Bill Whittle, and others of “wishcasting,” I would simply proffer this: Explain to me what you believe should be done differently to advance conservatism, or explain to me why you do not think anything should be done differently to advance conservatism.

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4