Don't miss a thing!
Get Deace in your inbox.
You know Pawlenty is a fraud don’t you?
Please don’t be deceived by Tim Pawlenty He is an “establishment man” to the core and will not make the substantial change in direction that this country needs to survive.
He will be another George Bush. And we know that a George Bush Republican type always leads to an extreme Democrat next time around.
Bush I led to Clinton
Bush II led to Obama
Gosh I fear where Bush III (Pawlenty?) would lead. Van Jones?
A RINO in office after 2012 would be far worse than Obama. At least with Obama we have an awake, energized conservative opposition ready to oppose every attack against our constitution. When a RINO is in office heck half of the conservatives are trying to defend the indefensible. And in some areas the RINO is able to “Go To China” and push through socialist policies a lot more effectively then when a Democrat tries to do it. After all could Obama have pushed through the Patriot act and even the bailouts if Bush hadn’t done it first? Perhaps, but it would have been much more difficult because of the opposition Obama would have had compared to Bush.
I don’t think the socialists would have been as effective had there not been the RINO administrations in between. Things would have boiled over a long time ago but RINO adminstrations allow the country to acclimatize themselves to and digest the socialism of the last Democrat Administration before moving full steam ahead again.
Where would we be today if Gore won in 2000. Most might say far worse off but we have no idea how 2004 would have turned out. Perhaps people would have finally said ENOUGH and by now good conservative policies would be in place. Regardless we certainly wouldn’t have ever known the name Obama.
But that the case we must not see Obama as the disease. Progressivism is the disease, Obama is just a symptom. If Obama resigned and disappeared from the public scene tomorrow yet the progressive environment that brought him about remained, nothing would change. An anyone but Obama attitude is just a recipe for someone even worse than Obama to com about.
Despite Obama’s ego it is really not about him as much as it is about PROGRESSIVISM, and that is what we risk losing sight of when we make it personal.
I hated Clinton. I really hated Clinton.
Then Clinton left.
Did anything really change?
And yeah I hate Obama too.
But see the Republican establishment uses our hate against us. And so while I do hate Obama I will not allow that to blind me to the truth that Obama isn’t the problem.
He is only a symptom of the problem. Not the problem itself.
We can’t afford to let Obama hate take us over. Because that is what the Republican establishment is counting on.
And the Republican establishment contributes to the situation we find ourselves in.
Say what you want about Obama but at least he is a true believer.
He believes in socialism and has done everything he can to promote it in public life.
Why can’t we have people on our side, the conservative side, who would fight so hard for what is right as Obama has for what is wrong.
You look at Pawlenty and he just says what he thinks he is supposed to in order to get support but then when it comes to following through, he doesn’t. He caves to the Left.
When there was talk about Pawlenty perhaps being McCain’s running mate there was talk of how he was too liberal. Gosh, if he was too liberal to be JOHN MCAIN’S Running Mate then he is certainly too liberal to be President himself.
Why do we do this? Why do we allow politicians to re-invent themselves campaign after campaign. Why are we taken in by what these people say instead of focusing on what they do and fall to do once in office.
Pawlenty has a history of RINOism when actually governing. Compromise is in his instincts. It’s practically in his DNA. Why would that magically change if he became President? We ignored a lot about what Bush did in Texas thinking he would be different as President. Well, how did that turn out?
Deeds are far, far more important than words. And when Pawlenty’s deeds (and lack of them) is compared to his words something doesn’t measure up.
We were conned by Scott Brown. Are we going to be conned by Pawlenty now?
Scott Brown said it the day after the election when talking to the press. He said “we are no longer in campaign mode” which meant forget about what I was saying a few days ago, that wasn’t the real me. It was the most honest and succinct statement of how politicians view campaigning I have ever heard.
They really don’t even consider it lying. It’s just that’s what I have to say to get elected. Once elected I can start compromising and caving in and all of that. So please take what I say with a grain of salt.
Pawlenty has a record. And this record doesn’t really stack up to his campaign. He could sound like the strongest Reagan Republican ever and I wouldn’t care because when he was in office Pawlenty had the option to turn word into deed and he didn’t.
It still remains the case that while we can’t in the end read people’s hearts and we aren’t able to know the future, we can though anticipate future events through pass ones. Far before we knew the mechanics of why the sun rises every morning we knew that we could predict that it did because it has from its past actions.
Pawlenty’s past actions when he got into the whole governing thing was indeed to cave, to go along to get along, not to fight. Bachmann is right. We need a fighter. Anything less will lead to more socialism.
Do you want specifics, well here’s specifics. From an Human events article.
And here are the specifics from CATO.
And I guess you can ignore the specifics like we did when the specifics about what Bush did as governor of Texas. You can just judge his “re-imaging” for after all we seem to allow politicians to re-image themselves to fit each campaign cycle regardless of whether it measures up to geeky things like public records while governing.
But if you do, don’t be surprised if he does get elected President for him to start going all wobbly on you. Just like Bush did. For what I see from Pawlenty is a lack of sincerity. A man “in it for the game” doing it for his career instead of a man who is really committed to restoring this once fine republic.
Measuring sincerity is difficult I know because it means to look beyond the words and read between the lines but we in the rest of the country are counting on you to do just that in Iowa. I pray you don’t let us down.
You are talking about this quote, right Beth Ann
“just so we are past campaign mode…”
You are right, these politicians don’t even consider it lying. It’s the “mode” they are in.
So why should I trust anything that Pawlenty has to say in “campaign mode” when always in the past in “governing mode” he has been a RINO?
There’s a a big credibility gap with Pawlenty. Yeah talks a good talk. But yeah when you do look at how he governed you see a big difference.
Wow, yeah forget what I was saying just a few days ago. I was conning the Tea Party. Now that I am elected this is what I will REALLY DO.
Talk about Charlie Brown, Lucy and the Football. I guess the Tea Party forgot to have it notarized.
Some of us are going to have to ask is sincerity important?
Is it important for a politician to believe what he says?
I say that because some might want to say well even if Pawlenty doesn’t believe his rhetoric still he will follow through because he knows that if he doesn’t he won’t get re-elected.
I guess that is saying that while it is okay for the Left to elect their true believers to office the best we can hope for are pragmatists who really couldn’t care less about governing in a Leftist or a conservative matter and only behaves in conservative matter because they think it will get them what they want politically.
That’s the best we can hope for.
But if that is what we get, then sorry, they will not stay on the conservative path on a Federal Level. Say Pawlenty does get elected but the starts governing as President as he did as Governor, will he lose a lot of support by doing that or will most, and I say most conservatives still stand by him as the “lesser evil in 2016″?
Well I think we know the answer to this. And since we are relying on him to just be a crass politician it just makes sense for him to move to the left because since the lost to his support for doing so is minimal there’s a potential greater gain.
So, if we don’t care about him being sincere we should.
Or we might just find out after all his good sounding speeches, his good “ear tickling”, hitting all the right notes none of that was “notarized” and at the end of the day we will be flat on our back, a position that seems to be typical for grassroot conservatives.
The truth is that the RINOS and the Demos are taking us in the same direction. If we are going in the same direction then I rather go with the DEMOS.
I know it sounds illogical but I never thought time was on our side and at least with the DEMOS opposition gets built up against them from conservatives. In that respect I believe we have more of a chance. Not much more of a chance but more of a chance. With the RINOS they mute conservative opposition.
If you want to understand the clip well if we are going to go any way I rather us go down with a flair instead of just slowly watching our orbit decay. It was all just a matter of time anyway. What’s really one additional hour in the whole scheme of things.
Do you believe the oft quoted statement that those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it?
Do you believe, when trying to anticipate the behavior of an individual, the way that would give you the best chance of being correct is to look at prior behavior?
Look, we all know of cases of where people do change.We do know of cases of where someone had stopped a prior destructive behavior and has fundamentally changed as a person.
But far more common is a case where the person says he is going to change, perhaps even thinks he is going to change, but sadly falls back into the old destructive behavior.
I am one who believes while none of us have 100 percent foresight, seeing how a person has behaved in a similar situation in the past DOES give one a perspective on LIKELY not certain, but LIKELY future behavior. And one can go with the odds or one can hope for the longshot which does indeed come through, rarely but it does.
To believe what Tim Pawlently says now you have to believe that he has FUNDAMENTALLY changed from the person he was as governor. Again, sure that’s possible, but is it LIKELY?
Look insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. We have had a case previously of a governor who ran as a fiscal conservative but whose record of government showed something different. Please read about it here.
In the end believe Tim Pawlenty’s “ear tickling” hey, isn’t that what conservatives always do! But if he wins and then starts stabbing you in the back don’t pretend you didn’t know that was going to happen. You knew. Or at least should have.
I am just sad that conservatives say they believe in common sense but common sense says when behavior conflicts with rhetoric you put more weight on the behavior than the rhetoric. But for Pawlenty we just throw his whole political history out the moment he “sounds good”.
It just bothers me when a politician totally changes his image.
Check out this video and compare it to how he tries to portray himself now.
Copyright © 2012, Steve Deace, All Rights Reserved.
Web Design & Consulting by Focal Point Digital Marketing