November 16, 2010

Murkowski - leading but not a leader

Murkowski was on with Katie Couric and as expected, she trashed Sarah Palin as not profound and a deep enough a  thinker to be President. Specifically it was Palin's lack of "intellectual curiosity" she was concerned about. Palin backed Miller in the Alaska senate race, so you'd expect there to be some bad blood there. But while the Alaska results aren't in yet, the voting and campaigning is over. The rule of not bad mouthing other Republicans or conservatives, is smart. If ever there was a time for it, it would be now. 

But as if that weren't enough of a violation of Reagan's first rule, Murkowski went on to commit a number of other conservative faux pas that clearly show why she lost the primary and why she probably will beat Miller by sucking in Democrat votes.  She's just a bit liberal. 

She went on in the interview to praise Mike Castle in Delaware, who defeated Tea Party candidate Christine O'Donnell. That's just clique thinking at it's worst. It goes a long way to proving that she still has that entitlement mentality. She's not about conservative politics at all, she's about Murkowski. She IS Charlie Crist.  Murkowski is clearly no fan of Tea Party politics, as this additional evidence indicates. But to embrace someone in Castle who has embraced socialism and not vehemently renounced it as wrong, and it is not a good sign. 

And it still gets worse. She seems to think that if President Obama does well, the country is doing well. How blinkered do you have to be to think that way? Left blinker - mainstream media. Right blinker - her entitlement mentality (for herself, I'm not talking Medicaid here). That leaves her little vision beyond the framework that is clearly on the wrong track. 

Allahpundit at Hot Air makes the case on her coziness and less than heartening remarks as far as conservatives are concerned:

I've always been one to follow the idea of nominating and electing the most conservative but winnable candidate in a race. I've also argued that coming together after the primaries and after elections, even trying to work with RINOs on some things is better than freezing them out just because the numbers game means you have to do so. But the direction of Murkowski's comments are making it much more difficult to make those ideas a blanket set of rules. Maybe engaging those who are trashing their own side should only apply when they are still reachable.  Reach out to them and if spurned, spurn back.

Can Murkowski support a conservative agenda item? Sure, in some cases, perhaps many. Is she a visionary on where the country needs to go to get out of the swamp of debt and progressivist government? Not with those blinkers on. If she beats Miller she will continue to caucus with Republicans. But considering that America has over 300 million people and the Senate only has 100 Senators, the Senate needs real leadership, not beltway thinking.  The country is in need of a serious, principled make over.  Should she really be one of the 100 leaders in the Senate driving the country towards fiscal and regulatory sanity?  I for one don't think she has made her case, and I don't believe she can. If she wins she will have 6 years to do so, but she's got a lot to prove. 


  1. It wasn't Reagan's "First Rule," it was the "11th Commandment" not to trash other Republicans.

    But Murkowski got on the short end of Palin's violation of Reagan's rule, and who could blame her for pointing out Palin's glaring intellectual shortcomings?

    Palin and Joe Miller have given the other AK Senate seat to the Democrats, because Murkowski no longer owes the GOP the time of day.

  2. Repack;

    You are absolutely correct on the first rule versus 11th commandment. It goes to show that I shouldn't be blogging remotely while in transit - it's not, uh - robust.

    As for the Murkowski issue - I disagree with your comment about handing the seat to the Democrats. It would appear that the she will caucus with the GOP and that she will keep her senate committee spots. So she does owe a little to the GOP more than the time of day. If she were to caucus with the Democrats she would not win re-election in 2016.

    Granted, that is a long wait for conservatives. And granted it's likely she won't vote the party line all the time. But she won't be hostile to the GOP either. Effectively Alaska has gone from a conservative seat to a semi-RINO seat for the time being. It could be worse, but it could be better - and eventually it will.

    You can argue that the Tea Party damaged some conservative wins, but overall they certainly helped.

    As an aside, pointing out someone's intellectual shortcomings is the debating equivalent of calling someone fat. It's insulting and does not promote reasoned debate. That's true for all sides who employ such tactics.


Disagreement is always welcome. Please remain civil. Vulgar or disrespectful comments towards anyone will be removed.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share This