Saying that everyone will have equal access to health care if the government takes care of it is like saying that everyone has equal access to education under our current system.
In the run-up to the election, there was a runaway bestseller penned by the champion of disaffected conservatives angry at a system that they felt excluded by. This challenger, brought to prominence by Arizona Republicans, has the support of the grassroots against the establishment’s choice of a Northeastern governor with a centrist track record and will go on to face a liberal president intent on seeing the government’s role in the economy expanded. The election I’m speaking of is 1964.
Rush’s visit to the hospital has revealed the beast in progressives. They want quality health care for all — unless they disagree with the patient’s political beliefs. They want compassion for drug addicts — unless they’re conservative talk-show hosts who stumbled into the problem through a medical injury. They care about sensitivity and bridging the gaps between ideas — unless it’s when dealing with a conservative.
What does it say about Ben Nelson’s view of his constituents that he thought that they would appreciate getting a bribe?
Argentina just legalized gay marriage. It’s astonishing that New York lags behind South Africa and Argentina when it comes to the legal treatment of homosexuality.
It’s a testament to how someone can repair her image that Hillary Clinton is one of the most-loved figures in the United States right now. Two years ago, she was thought of as the queen of polarization. America has now reached a consensus on her, and they like what they see. It goes to show that nothing is etched in stone: Sarah Palin can indeed turn her image around. But she’ll never get higher than 51% with the track she’s currently taking.
Could there possibly be a more Romneyesque title than “No Apology: The Case for America’s Greatness”?
Ask your non-politically engaged friends if they know who Bobby Jindal is, and how they thought his response to Obama’s State of the Union address went. They’ll likely look at you blankly. In other words: we often overstate insignificant events because we cannot look outside of the bubble that we live in. Jindal is the 2012 VP frontrunner. Romney would pick him, as would Huckabee. Sarah Palin would more likely choose Rudy Giuliani.
What was Kay Bailey Hutchison thinking? While I support her bid, I do not believe that she has much of a chance of winning in this environment. Why does she think that the base wants to take someone from Washington and put her in the governor’s mansion?
Who are the modern-day philosophers and intellectuals of the right? Beyond Thomas Sowell, I am hard-pressed to think of any writer whose output is truly remarkable. When we look back in fifty years, who will be our Ayn Rands, Russell Kirks, Murray Rothbards, Irving Kristols, Leo Strausses, Richard Weavers, and Friedrich Hayeks? I cannot think of anyone outside of Thomas Sowell who has continually impressed me in that regard.
Talk to Alex Knepper at apkkib@aol.com
December 31st, 2009 at 1:49 am
I agree that only a very, very small minority of voters know who Bobby Jindal is, much less what kind of a speech he gave. But I don’t think it wise to underestimate the power of the king makers.
December 31st, 2009 at 1:59 am
Pretty clever second paragraph…but was Goldwater ever within 3-6 points of JFK in the year before the 1964 election, let alone three years before the 1964 election?
December 31st, 2009 at 2:26 am
Since rigorous thinking will lead to pessimism most conservatives find it easier to look to talk show hosts for political thought. Or we look to former journalists and their hanger-ons for deeper political thought.
I think we have writers with impressive output (at least on my wing of the party, I don’t know about the libertarian wing). They’re little known as we no longer look for them.
December 31st, 2009 at 3:05 am
I love AK but why is he writing 50% of the FP’s?
Was there a purge??
December 31st, 2009 at 3:08 am
Romney is no Rockefeller!
And Palin is no Goldwater – although she’d win about as many states.
December 31st, 2009 at 3:57 am
Alrighty, Heath, I wrote 2 of the front-page posts today. Also, I feel like I haven’t been contributing as much lately. Guess if the perception is otherwise, I can take a break, right?!
December 31st, 2009 at 4:31 am
Sorry AK I think that was my mistake. Went away for a week and missed a whole lot of non AK posts.
Happy New Year and please try to be more objective about the great Mittens in 2010.
December 31st, 2009 at 6:44 am
Alex,
Could there be a more Knepper-esque title than ” Random Thoughts?”
December 31st, 2009 at 6:45 am
“great Mittens”?!?
Oh my.
December 31st, 2009 at 7:20 am
8 – LOL.
December 31st, 2009 at 7:40 am
We’re certainly glad to learn you’ve been set free again. You’ve never seemed to be that much of a threat to the public at large.
December 31st, 2009 at 9:13 am
Alex,
Krauthammer is there. Niall Ferguson also.
December 31st, 2009 at 9:43 am
Alex,
I met Barry Goldwater in 1963. I was County Chairman of Goldwater for President in 1964. I was on the State Committee for Goldwater in 1964. I liked and admired Barry Goldwater.
Sarah Palin is no Barry Goldwater
December 31st, 2009 at 10:08 am
I think Ted nailed the future (2012) back in his Sept 2009 blogsite:
http://palinrubio12.blogspot.com/
December 31st, 2009 at 11:01 am
One could read last fall as the ’64 campaign in microcosm, and it wasn’t because the candidate was from Arizona. History doesn’t repeat but it does rhyme
December 31st, 2009 at 11:14 am
The Rhyme we need to hear is the voice of Ronald Reagan. It can not be a carbon copy, but one that mirrors the presentation of success. The person should stand on their own two feet and address the issues of today without forgetting the valueable lessons of the past. Strong, clear, and concise. Humor, crafty, and resonating. Thats the Rhyme and the reason.
December 31st, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Scalia’s still out there as well, largely defining originalism in his opinions. Though he’s not quite as effective as he once was.
It is a problem though. The steady drip of the intellectual architects of the conservative revolution passing away over the past half decade rather highlights that.
December 31st, 2009 at 3:16 pm
12 – Krauthammer hasn’t ever written a book. He’s a smart guy, but what’s he leaving us with? Columns are ephemeral; we need some political theory, a sweeping analysis a la “The Conservative Mind” or “The Road to Serfdom” or “Atlas Shrugged” or “Ideas Have Consequences.”
Robert Kagan’s pretty good, but he’s narrowly-focused and very aloof.
January 1st, 2010 at 3:40 am
“It’s astonishing that New York lags behind South Africa and Argentina when it comes to the legal treatment of homosexuality.”
Even liberal New Yorkers have the remnant of Christian theology as their foundation. Do you want people to believe that there is no difference between women and men?
January 1st, 2010 at 8:08 am
19 – You must be new! I’m the resident godless homosexual right-winger. Welcome.
January 1st, 2010 at 6:42 pm
Argentina on a whole, did not legalize gay marriage. Only a small area did. My father in law is working to ensure that the providence of Santa Fe does not legalize gay marriage, and I assume the Catholic Church will also be flexing it’s arms there.
Goes to show what happens when you elect a unqualifed bimbo to lead your country. Cristina F was voted in because of her looks, and not her qualifications. Let’s not repeat Argentina’s mistake.
January 2nd, 2010 at 4:52 am
Alex, I was quite aware of your viewpoints. However, I was only addressing your astonishment. Even if you disagree, every state, even liberal ones like California, New York, and Oregon have rejected gay “marriage”.