Which Party?
Watching Dana Perino take her well-deserved lumps on Hannity on Tuesday night was one of the few highlights of my day. Dana Perino and the rest of the DC-insider crowd are approximately what the rest of us out here in “fly-over country” refer to as RINOs. They serve the interests of a viewpoint that seeks to avoid conflict and confrontation with no boat-rocking while you [quietly]pay the bills. In short, she serves the Washington DC crowd that isn’t defined by an official party, but instead the all-consuming grasping and groping for power that is the Beltway Axis. Perino got caught by Hannity when he asked her about her earlier reaction to Iowa Tea Party organizer, Ryan Rhodes, who confronted Obama on Monday.
Perino didn’t like it, thinking it disrespectful to the office of the president that some little person(a.k.a. “Hobbit”) from out in Iowa would dare to challenge the President. More, she actually defended Biden, who had called the Tea Party “terrorists” or at least agreed with that sentiment as expressed by Congressman Doyle. While a Republican in name, only the party of Washington DC enjoys her loyalties.
Dana Perino, the Republican? Yes, that one. The former Bush Press Secretary took Obama and Biden’s side in this instance against an average guy who is an Iowa Tea Party organizer. Why would she do that? Well, you tend to speak kindly of those who’ve appointed you to the Broadcasting Board of Governors. You didn’t know that? Most people don’t. Yes, she’s a big government Republican. Are you shocked yet? She also works for a public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller, where she serves as a “Chief Issues Counselor,” and she has acted as Karl Rove’s family spokesperson, informing the media about Rove’s divorce in 2009.
Knowing a bit more about Perino, it’s easier to understand how she’s part of the Washington Insider crowd. It’s small wonder that she’s not a big fan of Tea Party folks. The Tea Party stands opposed to the whole stinking system in which she is thoroughly entangled. When some assert that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats, Dana Perino is of the sort whose behavior tends to substantiate their point.
The Republicans Dana Perino represents are the sort who think Lisa Murkowski is “a strong conservative,” as she herself told Neil Cavuto. She’s also the kind of Republican who doesn’t have any intention of addressing illegal immigration, and attacks those who take a strong stance against illegal immigration. They don’t experience the problems, so it’s easy for them to sit inside their insular DC bubble and tell the rest of us how to live, and chastise us for what we ought to be willing to accept.
Then you hear Perino criticize Sarah Palin as being inauthentic? The irony is amazing, and I’m fairly certain Perino knows it.
If you wonder why somebody like Perino could seem to change sides so easily, it’s because you’ve misunderstood on whose side they really stand. They stand on the side of an establishment in Washington that loves only its own interests. They’re accustomed to being king-makers, and finishing well out of the running simply isn’t their preferred cup of tea. These are people who trade on the power of their insider connections, and that’s all they have to offer.
If you ask me, this is the larger part of what’s wrong with the Republican party. People like Perino don’t stand for much of anything unless it’s to advance their own agendas to the detriment and the expense of the American people. It’s time for a serious reform in the party’s structure, during which Perino and others of her ilk must be unmasked. Along the way, it will result in the restoration of the nation.
When we go to the polls in 2012, for the primaries and in the general election, I sincerely hope it is part of our goal to show people like Perino the door. The problem is that when it comes to Washington DC, Perino and her crowd are the home-team, and we’re just visitors, so if we send in a candidate they did not want, you can expect them to treat that President like an occupying foreigner. They would, in such a situation, act exactly like insurgents in Iraq, seeking to undermine and sabotage such a president every step of the way. That’s part of why they wish to defeat Palin. They’ve seen her clean up Alaska, and they don’t want a repeat in Washington. That’s their turf, and they intend to keep it that way.
Mark, you are of course right about Perino and to her you can add Krauthanner, O'Reilly, boys at the Weekly Standard, and several others. Cavuto, Hannity, Bolling and the weekday morning crew are pretty open minded to life outside the Washington bubble. I am a long time FNC fan and over the last couple of years have had to accept certain facts.
While FNC is much more balanced than the other media outlets, they are still a media outlet. I think they all buy their water from the same vendor and whatever's in it effects some more than others. Not really a bad thing though, keeps us on our toes, keeps us expanding our own sources for information and make us a little more nimble between the ears.
Jim
Mark, you've done it again! GREAT post! I'm with you, maybe if we will all pay attention during all of the speeches, interviews, articles and internet stories, we can finally see who needs to be removed as a true conservative "representative/consultant" or who is a RINO. It's past time for ALL of them to remove their masks, just like the Socialists, Marxists and flat out Communists are now doing. It's going to take discernment on our part to get our Republic back and get it restored! God BLESS!
Well done!
I'd only suggest one small change… Instead of showing them the door, let them support in the bleachers, while the Tea Party and those like Sarah Palin lead.
I’ve been working at the county and local level to make that change happen from the ground up, and that is how we fix this, but it is better to have the RINO’s on our side (as long as not in the lead), than to add to the other side.
I think it could be said, the insiders did not much like Ronald Reagan either, so this is not the first time we’ve been here. Reagan took on RINO Ford in 1976, and if we were smart then and he won in 1976, we could have skipped Carter!
I think Reagan won by leading on principle, but keeping the RINOs along for the ride, that might be the better model, and at some point the RINOs might even figure it out, maybe too much to hope for, but I’m an optimist!
Now we have Carter 2 – Obama, but he is new and “improved” doing damage even faster that Carter 1!
Great analysis. I think we are slightly outnumbered, but one and God is all it takes, and we have substantially more than that – substantially more. We could consider ourselves similar to "The 300", and again we have more than that, but we had better be sold out like them, fight like them, and be willing to fight and give our lives if necessary.
We have a good God, and there is none other like Him. He will never leave us nor forsake us. It is He that we need to be sold out to, put feet to what needs to be done, and watch God see us through.
God bless!
This is exactly why conservatives should give Newt all the support they can and deprive Romney of the 1144 needed for the nomination. If we can get past the first ballot, all bets are off and God willing, we can nominate a conservative candidate we can believe in who will begin to restore this nation and carry new conservative blood to Congress on his coat tails! We have to replace those in Washington who have forgotten why they were sent there and what their job is. It is not about THEM… it is about what is best for America!
Jim, you’re right….it is now next to impossible to get the real scoop anywhere. Even Fox has gone off the tracks. Fortunately, we still have some great radio personalities speaking the truth and true conservative bloggers. If not for that, we’d really be in trouble.