Pages

January 21, 2010

Ten Points (plus and extra one at no charge): The Definitive Brown Post-Mortem

Greetings, once again, Goomba Nation. Listen, real life doesn't permit me to dawdle, ruminate, explicate, excoriate, and motivate to the hilt at times like these. But please bear with me as I spit this out.

Here is what I see in the wake of Tuesday's Massachusetts' stunner:

1) All you pessimists, hand-wringers, "America is Finished!!", Chicken Little Crowd members, and such ... please be quiet and/or move to France, where you belong. Act like Americans, rather than little cats;

2) A happy-warrior campaign style that focuses like a laser-beam on core issues that resonate in the relevant race (usually no more than three) is charming and works like a charm, as well. Brown's campaign was straightforward and simple: a) Stop the health-care monstrosity in Congress; b) Open up the government to where the people can have input into how legislation is being made; and c) treat terrorists like terrorists. And the result of this perfectly-tailored message delivered happily to Mass.: Scoreboard;

3) See #1 and #2: We usually get what we expect in life ... so, get your heads up!;

4) The Tea Party movement has become a force and a great development. The TP has shown the savvy and smarts to rally around the best candidates who can win (yes, these will usually be Republicans), while simultaneously sticking their finger in the eye of establishment types in both major political parties;

5) Speaking of the perfect-church-we-gotta-find-a-new-party-or-something crowd, I see that Michael Savage and Glenn Beck both took shots at Scott Brown on the day after his historic victory. Savage pointed out that Brown may not be a pristine conservative: "Sorry, but he will disappoint some of you." Really? That would be odd ... a politician who might disappoint folks. And Beck took shots at Brown's posing nude in 1982 (during a time when Beck had his own slew of problems, mind you). Beck also, incredibly, criticized Brown for joking that his pretty daughters were "available". Beck said this was bad form -- he would never do such a thing (the horrah) -- and besides, "What would you expect from some one who would pose nude?" ... Wow, so much to say about this, I think I will give it a new number;

6) The sort of you-are-a-perfect-conservative-as-I-see-it-or-I'll-burn-you-at-the-stake conservatism practiced by Beck and Savage is, in the long-term ineffective and always unappealing. Such people are often yelling, chastizing, angry, lecturing, and such. Thus, they never become the fulcrum of the larger conservative movement that actually makes things happen. The judgmental moralism in Beck's statement (particularly considering the timing) is appalling. Beck, Savage and other such High-Minded Independents fancy themselves as the leaders of a great movement, too lofty for mere political parties or movements that are not bestowed from On High, as theirs clearly are. They are Legends in their Own Minds. Beck apparently thought the Tea Parties would become the Tea Party, presumably with him as President, or at least High Potentate of Moral Affairs, Ideological Perfection and Purchaser of Extra Cans of Soup When You Shop Because the World is Ending, Don't You Know?;

7) And re: #6, Massachusetts is not Texas, Virginia. That Scott Brown may not Texas's choice for Senator is not important. What is important that the best, viable candidate wins the election in question. Perfectionism is the enemy of progress;

8) We've spent the last year on the precipice politically. The Democrats have had the presidency, a huge majority in the House, and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and have only the "stimulus" to show for it. Meanwhile, Republicans got far more done previously with less support in Congress. What gives? America remains a center-right country;

9) Whatever happens, America is not a government. America has a government. So, act like conservatives. Nothing that Washington does can define our existence or limit who we are. The sky does not fall and the nation does not fundamentally change because of who is in Washington. It never will. It will only fundamentally change if Americans stop being Americans;

10) The Demo juggernaut in '09 was stopped by an engaged citizenry. Think about how close the Demos were. They tried to ram HCR through before the summer recess. Then, they went home and got an earful. They came back and twisted arms in the House and barely passed the "public option". Then, the Senate started its shenanigans, with each delay pushing the goal posts back. A few senators stood tall and stripped the public option, ultimately forcing a future compromise with the House (which had its own fragile coalition in place). Then, the backroom dealing, Cornhusker Kickbacks, and such went into high gear and support for the Demos and their plan collapsed and Brown soared in the polls. Here is the bottom line: Each day of fighting the good fight pushed the furiously-scrambling Demos one day closer to Jan. 19. Each delay forced, argument made, vote taken -- though they may have seemed futile at the time -- was part of this victory. Never, never, never give up fighting the good fight. Fighting for what you know to be right is a victory in and of itself. And if we do not faint, well, then sometimes the Lord allows us to rise up on the wings of eagles; and finally

11) The poetry and irony that was Brown's victory -- becoming the first Republican to win a Senate Seat in Mass. since 1972?, coming from 30 points down in the polls in a month, facing down the Mass. and Kennedy machines, forcing Obama to Boston, campaigning principally on being the 41st vote to stop Ted Kennedy's dream of universal health care, and then taking the very seat that Kennedy held right before the moment when the Demos had worked it all out to get health care to House and Senate negotiators to pass the greatest reduction in American freedom in a generation ... and doing all this with style, humor, and a pick-up truck -- you know, it almost makes you believe in God.

And if indeed He's there, well, then all things are possible.

28 comments:

Doom said...

I would like to argue, and there are a few bones of contention, but in the final score, good shot. Uhrm, is that the type of reaction you were looking for? I hope so. I also hope more conservatives can let their personal fancies go by the wayside for the good of us all.

Cheers! Hmm, I might really go have a beer, in that vein. So, really, cheers!

Anonymous said...

Doom, thanks. As for the reaction I was/am expecting, honestly, I didn't think of that. I would expect conservatives to be tough-minded, independent thinkers and usually get to near the same grid square of each other (but not necessarily land on top of each other, in fact usually they won't). Ideological purity or complete agreement with me is not the test.

On the other hand ... for the Becks and Savages of the world, well, you look at their body of work and form your own conclusions.

Part of this is driven by ... they are more libertarian (Beck) or populist (Savage) than conservative. This doesn't mean they are bad guys for thinking this way, but that's what they are.

But there is something more at work with these gents, methinks.

In that regard, I ran out of breath while venting, but consider this: Beware of some one who likes and/or can embrace movements only if he leads them.

Timeshare Jake said...

Concerning number four I have noticed politicians like Mark Kirk have jumped on the Scott Brown bandwagon, but doesn't have a clue what it really stands for.

Subvet said...

Very well written. Bravo.

cathysue said...

i fall into category #1 too often. it's hard to keep your head up when day after day, bad news hits from the left and right. but it only consumes me in phases. great post. reminds me of mel gibson's pep talk in Braveheart.

Opus #6 said...

We need to be careful we don't become trolls on our own websites. Talking gloom and doom in the days running up to an election is NOT the way to motivate people. Keep it to yourself if you tend toward pessimism.

Fredd said...

I have never had much use for Michael Savage, the bomb throwing, lightening rod maniac. Beck, on the other hand, always bothered me, but I couldn't exactly put my finger on why; he sounded conservative, but there was just something...I couldn't stand to watch him because of his goofball mannerisms, primarily.

Thanks, DC, for clearing up my fog on Beck; he is a utopian conservative, and he proclaims that if it's not perfect conservatism, torch it.

Anonymous said...

I am enjoying the heck out of Obama's reaction to the Mass Mess. Seems the public voted to voice their anger with Bush.

This guy ain't never gonna change.

Hoping the Blind Will See said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Appreciate the comments.

Labkitty, I hear you. We all have our days. We need to remember to pick each other up when they hit and then remind each other of what is true. Press on. The righteous falls seven times but rises up eight.

Opie, you are so right ... trolls on our own sites. We generally get what we expect. Our attitudes infect those who we contact.

And Freddy, back at you. I've always felt that way about Beck, too, even before his meteoric rise. Hate to break it to him, but he's got a good voice and good luck. He so wants to be the next Rush, only smarter and more pure, of course. BTW, life (and people) are complex. I know you know this. Beck's Christmas Book was outstanding, and he's done some good stuff. He just thinks he's all that, and the country will perish without his virtue and wisdom. He's not that big. None of us are.

Hoping the Blind Will See said...

While I appreciate the position you've stated in this Post DC, I am not in complete agreement. Though it may come across like it, this is not an attack on you or anyone else specificlly and I hope it isn't offensive. Who knows, maybe it'll spark some additional dialogue.

There is a far more sinister force at work in America than Democrats versus Republicans. And anyone who doesn't believe that (and there are plenty of people out there like that) is either blissfully ignorant, politically blind, or lacks the desire to look at a bigger view of where we were as a nation versus where we are and what we stand still to lose.

In my opinion there is nothing wrong with people wanting a more conservative candidate to run in ANY race. Will that always happen? No! But that doesn't mean we can't keep searching. When we give up the "governmental dream" of the Founding Fathers because there's no one better to run, we'll be in sorry shape for sure.

Anonymous said...

Hoping,

Re: offending me, see my first comment. We need not be complete ideological clones of each other on the right.

But I wonder ... Do Beck, and Savage, and, dare I say it, you believe this?

I don't disagree with what you are saying. Who said (certainly not me) that this is about Demo vs. Repub? We should always try to get the best candidate we can for a particular race. I agree this should be the most conservative candidate ... usually.

But say, if I ran in Mass., would I win? I would be the best candidate (I always am, unless Beck is in the race ... ;), but would I win?

Here is what I want you to think about ... I think we should elect the best candidate (as conservative as possible) who has a real chance to win. Please don't write me in, in other words.

On our side, we fight these battles out in the primaries. As you said, we should be wanting the more conservative candidates. I agree. But decisions about who to run are made in primaries. In the real elections, wishful thinking about who should have been running gets us people like Bill Clinton elected (see Ross Perot).

You go to battle with your side in primaries. Then you turn your guns on the Demos in the general.

Anonymous said...

And Nicholas ... re: Obama not gonna change. But can we hope?

Anonymous said...

"We generally get what we expect. Our attitudes infect those who we contact"

DC, I love blogging because it has the potential of being so far reaching. When we go off on our patriotic tantrums, it's amazing how often we've drawn comments from Romanians, Brazilians, Greeks and Spaniards making the same complaints about their leadership.

We're sowing seeds. Opie is right on the mark. Our written words are of some importance, but most times, our emotions, our passion and our willingness to speak out mean just as much.

Folks can sit on the couch and ride an emotional roller coaster. OR... they can check into their favorite blogs and take strength from others.

I especially enjoy Teresa. She's primal in her conservatism. Can you imagine some silver-tongued Lib trying to finesse her into changing her mind? Said Lib would be lucky to escape uninjured. That passion is contagious.

WomanHonorThyself said...

amen DC!! all things are possible. ..Cheers!!!

Anonymous said...

Nicholai,

Alls I have to say to you and WomanHonorThyself is ...

Amen, Rhod.

Anonymous said...

And Nick, I am going a little retro-retro with the Avatar. But pls keep my actual photo up on the masthead here (in my full military regalia). I like to use them both.

Anonymous said...

I'm thinking of trimming that mustache in Photoshop. I'm aiming for a Village People look.

Anonymous said...

Amen Brother Well Said

Anonymous said...

And amen, Fuzz. Keep the faith.

Rhod said...

Brown was our Black Swan, the unpredictable, completely unknown element that changes all, or some, of the facts. I hope. I'm a bit more skeptical of the world than DC. Things tilted in our favor, just barely.

As for Beck, he started at WELI in New Haven before he syndicated. You think he's a dogmatic sentimentalist now? He was worse then.

Anonymous said...

Rhod, I am skeptical of the world, too, but probably articulate it in a different way. I am skeptical that human nature and institutions can be perfected. But about those things that transcend the foregoing, I remain very optimistic.

As for Beck ... yikes. But since you have supplied the evidence that he has strayed from his perfect dogma since he was syndicated, can he now be prosecuted for heresy?

Rhod said...

DC, when I commented, I had just arrived from a trying day - I was too curt in re your terrific post.

I know you're skeptical, and the source of your skepticism and distrust is our crude humanity. I agree across the board.

It's your optimism - it's both inspiring and, to a man rooted in The World like me, doubtful. I expect everything to be set right over time, all lies punished by the truth, and all deeds compensated in their proper way.

I was simply surprised that it seems to be happening so quickly. It makes me nervous.

Anonymous said...

Rhod, no sweat. No worries on my end. I didn't take it that way, at all.

I know what you mean, and your point is well-taken. Things like the astonishing victory of Brown are so incredible, we have to pinch ourselves ... and get back down to earth. There will be tough days (many) ahead.

It's a great time to regroup around the fire and see where we are and how many bullets we dodged in '09.

You are a good balance/sounding board for me ... sorta like the yin-yang deal ... as opposed to the ying-yang (that would be Goomba). Oh, my. I'm getting punchy.

BTW, I am with Goomba ... I'm still laughing about your morning honk for Dodd. Beautiful.

Fuzzy Slippers said...

Nice post, DC! And yay! So glad you nailed the "party purist" crap; that stuff drives me right up a wall. Did Ronald Reagan not welcome moderates? Of COURSE he did.

And I do want to add, too, that I, a person who lives in Massachusetts, was not a little put out by the damning things said about Mass before Brown gained his momentum. No one wanted to listen to me (or others) when we said he could win, that the break down was more indies than dems and reps and to forget the 3 to 1 dems to reps numbers, that it wouldn't matter with the bulk of voters being indies and in this political climate. Anywhoo, I needed to get that off my chest. Yay! :)

TS/WS said...

Nervous indeed. This is the Silver Tongues Realm. We can take a good win in stride. But we never should let our selves be culled into the area of self assured. Thousands of years of practice is what we are up against. Yes the art of deception is the oldest profession.
King Arthur will never tire of his reclaiming of his Camelot-and reining in the children of the Isles, back in to the fold is a twofer as well.
The Founders knew this and gave us the The Sword to use for our independence. Do we have the intestinal fortitude as they. To keep the Republic they gave. The Bill of Rights is the other edge that make ours a double edge. The mighty Sword that broke Excalibur- and Shall Again!
I do not fault Savage and Beck for trying to keep us on our toes.
A false sense of security is one way for taking one step back and two steps forward-these tireless adversary agents of the realm of darkness use to often without to much exposure.
For now we can bask in the win. Don't let out guard down, and use the Freedom of Speech that shall not be abridged.
The Founders did not trust Congress. They wrote: Congress shall not, can not, is refrained from and so on and so on.
Respecting, is the word in the 1st amendment; meaning- concerning/about.
That is what McCain-Feingold was about. The Supremes shot down. Another win for our side.

Opus #6 said...

McCain-Feingold did not prevent Obama from receiving millions in foreign money from anonymous VISA gift cards.

Anonymous said...

Fuzzy S., thanks. Good for you, not giving in to what others said couldn't be done.

They Say, no one is going to get cocky ... at least around here. But you have to be confident. Look at Fuzzy.

You lost me with the sword stuff. And as for defending the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic, some of us around here have done that.

As for Savage and Beck, who knows what their motives are? If their purpose is to keep us on their toes, we don't need them to do that. A conservative should know that we do that for ourselves. And I would suggest they are not performing this function. Really, both are a little crazy and amount to about a pimple on Rush's left buttcheek.