Playing You For A Fool
The 2012 GOP field is weak.
If it's said enough times it must be true, right? Clearly, that's what the Democrats and their media enablers want you to think.
The next eighteen months are going to be a test—a test of just how much you are willing to be played as a fool. Are you ready to think for yourself, or are you easy prey for furtive liberal efforts to marginalize GOP candidates and portray Obama's reelection as the only rational/inevitable choice given such a paucity of credible challengers?
Before you find yourself intentionally or inadvertently parroting the narrative of the Left, take a step back and objectively analyze the situation.
Consider the list of announced and potential GOP candidates.
Is there something weak about a handful of governors, past and present, among the most accomplished at delivering sound fiscal results that put their states on an ascendant, rather than declining path?
Is there something weak about a number of highly successful businessmen and their track records of effectively managing small and large companies?
Is there something weak about a group of people with invaluable executive experience gleaned from running state governments, as well as private and public companies/organizations?
Is there something inherently weak about people who held senior leadership positions within their party?
Is there something weak about the tough decisions these people had to execute in real time every day about how to balance budgets, create jobs, make difficult cuts, invest in opportunities, etc., etc.?
Does that seem weak to you?
Perhaps they're just weak in comparison to something better?
Reflect on, if you will, the last few Democrat nominees for President—three United States Senators: Gore, Kerry, and Obama. Not one of them with an iota of executive experience or an ounce of business know-how. Are their "accomplishments" really the basis for the Democrat's and mainstream media's assertion that the GOP field is weak?
Maybe they are/were just great career politicians—legislators in the mold of Madison, Clay, Moynihan, or Kennedy? Nope. Any dispassionate and retrospective review of their congressional achievements turns up more bombast than triumph. It's safe to say that the stature of Senator's Gore, Kerry, and Obama emanated near exclusively from their ability to manipulate a liberal-leaning and unctuous media into "reporting" on the seriousness and gravitas of their positions—most of which have proven to be less than credible. Their actual legislative accomplishments (of any significance) are practically impossible to find. By the way, in the name of fairness, all of the aforementioned is also true of John McCain.
Of course, when legitimately weak GOP candidates do inevitably emerge (e.g. Palin, Trump), the Dems and mainstream media are quick to inflate their prospects and damn all others by association.
Don't be made a fool.
Be nobody's fool.
If it's said enough times it must be true, right? Clearly, that's what the Democrats and their media enablers want you to think.
The next eighteen months are going to be a test—a test of just how much you are willing to be played as a fool. Are you ready to think for yourself, or are you easy prey for furtive liberal efforts to marginalize GOP candidates and portray Obama's reelection as the only rational/inevitable choice given such a paucity of credible challengers?
Before you find yourself intentionally or inadvertently parroting the narrative of the Left, take a step back and objectively analyze the situation.
Consider the list of announced and potential GOP candidates.
Is there something weak about a handful of governors, past and present, among the most accomplished at delivering sound fiscal results that put their states on an ascendant, rather than declining path?
Is there something weak about a number of highly successful businessmen and their track records of effectively managing small and large companies?
Is there something weak about a group of people with invaluable executive experience gleaned from running state governments, as well as private and public companies/organizations?
Is there something inherently weak about people who held senior leadership positions within their party?
Is there something weak about the tough decisions these people had to execute in real time every day about how to balance budgets, create jobs, make difficult cuts, invest in opportunities, etc., etc.?
Does that seem weak to you?
Perhaps they're just weak in comparison to something better?
Reflect on, if you will, the last few Democrat nominees for President—three United States Senators: Gore, Kerry, and Obama. Not one of them with an iota of executive experience or an ounce of business know-how. Are their "accomplishments" really the basis for the Democrat's and mainstream media's assertion that the GOP field is weak?
Maybe they are/were just great career politicians—legislators in the mold of Madison, Clay, Moynihan, or Kennedy? Nope. Any dispassionate and retrospective review of their congressional achievements turns up more bombast than triumph. It's safe to say that the stature of Senator's Gore, Kerry, and Obama emanated near exclusively from their ability to manipulate a liberal-leaning and unctuous media into "reporting" on the seriousness and gravitas of their positions—most of which have proven to be less than credible. Their actual legislative accomplishments (of any significance) are practically impossible to find. By the way, in the name of fairness, all of the aforementioned is also true of John McCain.
Of course, when legitimately weak GOP candidates do inevitably emerge (e.g. Palin, Trump), the Dems and mainstream media are quick to inflate their prospects and damn all others by association.
Don't be made a fool.
Be nobody's fool.
Posted by Chuck Dietrick at 5/10/2011 4:58 PM 
Categories: Media Hyprocrisy, Media Bias, 2012 Campaign
Categories: Media Hyprocrisy, Media Bias, 2012 Campaign
I dont think the challenges the Republic party face are based on media messaging. They are based in their ideology.
My favorite quote on this topic leaps to mind "Reality has a distinct Liberal Bias" from Stephen Colbert.
I would also say that any Dem who thinks the 2012 Republic party field is weak is either a fool or an idiot. If you remove the outliers like Trump and Palin; There some heavy hitters in the field. My biggest fear is that Pawlenty gets the Republic Party Nod. He is a mainstream candidate with broad appeal to the independent voters- which both parties need for the win.
Reply to this
JT, I disagree with you on your ideology point. My disagreement is buttressed by the fact that 42% of Americans self-identify as Conservative versus only 20% who identify themselves as Liberal.
There can be some merit to the ideology argument when a fiscal conservative is also a social conservative. Fortunately, social conservatism is much less of a force in the Republican party than it used to be. I will be happy when social conservatism is largely eradicated. There is very little of it with which I agree.
Your point regarding Pawlenty is an astute one. I believe he is the sleeper of the bunch, particularly if Daniels and Christie don't run.
Reply to this