Infighting is good: Juan Williams sees Rove-vs.-Palin ‘civil war’ inside GOP

[Agorism]

Juan Williams sees Rove-vs.-Palin ‘civil war’ inside GOP

I don't want an early juggernaut candidate like Bush in 2000 ruining the contest so more infighting is great.


http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/williams-sees-rove-palin-gop-civil-war/



The midterm elections brought big wins for the Republicans but they also exposed fractures within the party. Fox News' Juan Williams described Sunday what he called a "civil war" between the establishment Republicans and the tea party.

"I think there is a civil war of sorts going on," Williams said. "We don't talk about it much -- between the Republican establishment and tea party people. It's Sarah Palin [vs.] Karl Rove if you want to personify it."

In no place were the divisions as obvious during the mid-term elections as they were with opinions on Christine O'Donnell, the GOP's Senate candidate in Delaware.

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin endorsed O'Donnell during the primaries, which may have put the candidate over the top in winning the Republican endorsement.

On the night that she won her primary victory, Rove told Fox News' Sean Hannity that O'Donnell was known for saying "nutty things."
"This is not a race we're going to be able to win," Rove added.

Following O'Donnell's loss in the general election, Rove said, "Look, it gave me no pleasure to say she was unlikely to win."

"This again proves a lesson. This is a candidate right on the issues, but had mishandled a series of questions raised by the press early on in the race about her background and previous statements."

Palin called out Rove by name after O'Donnell's loss. "I look forward to Karl Rove and others looking at...reporting that exit polls are showing that Mike Castle would have even lost to Chris Coons," she said on Fox News. "There was never any guarantee that a hard-core conservative would win in a deep blue state like Delaware."

But Rove's viewpoint may be representative of other establishment Republicans who weren't fond of O'Donnell.

"I think Delaware was a missed opportunity to have a really good United States senator, Mike Castle, and that's why I endorsed him in the primary," New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said on NBC Sunday.

Rove and Palin also clashed over the former governor's new reality show. Rove told the Telegraph that he failed to see how a reality show helped Palin make a serious run at the presidency in 2012.

"There are high standards that the American people have for [the presidency] and they require a certain level of gravitas, and they want to look at the candidate and say 'that candidate is doing things that gives me confidence that they are up to the most demanding job in the world,'" he said.

The next week, Palin compared herself to another entertainer, President Ronald Reagan, to defend her new show. "Those standards have to be high for someone who would ever want to run for president like, um, wasn't Ronald Reagan an actor? Wasn't he in Bedtime for Bonzo, bozo or something? Ronald Reagan was an actor," she said.

"Now look. I'm not in a reality show. I have eight episodes documenting Alaska's resources, what it is that we can contribute to the rest of US to economically and physically secure our union, and my family comes along for the ride because I am family, family is us, and my family comes along on the ride to document these eight episodes for The Learning Channel. ... So Karl is wrong right there in calling it a reality show," she said.

This video is from Fox's Fox News Sunday, broadcast Nov. 7, 2010.

[GunnyFreedom]

Let the Roverites and Palinites kill each other off and the Paulers step into the vacuum.

[Bruno]

Let the Roverites and Palinites kill each other off and the Paulers step into the vacuum.

I would love to see it. :)

[AuH20]

Let the Roverites and Palinites kill each other off and the Paulers step into the vacuum.

I disagree. The palinites are tied to us as well. I'd rather see the palinites win and vanquish the neocons for good. That's not to say that Palin's every philosophical stance typifies their movement, but I'd sure rather see the country move Palin's way as opposed to Rove's.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

Rove & Palin are on the same, how can there be any infighting?

[Agorism]

I disagree. The palinites are tied to us as well. I'd rather see the palinites win and vanquish the neocons for good. That's not to say that Palin's every philosophical stance typifies their movement, but I'd sure rather see the country move Palin's way as opposed to Rove's

McCain kept the base demoralized rather than following one of the candidates that would have had them fired up.

So there are advantages to either side winning although neither one of them is good.

[GunnyFreedom]

I disagree. The palinites are tied to us as well. I'd rather see the palinites win and vanquish the neocons for good. That's not to say that Palin's every philosophical stance typifies their movement, but I'd sure rather see the country move Palin's way as opposed to Rove's.

I don't really see any difference between Palin and Rove except that Palin is a bit easier on the eyes. Policy-wise they both seem to support the same things. Maybe maybe Palin is slightly more fiscally conservative, but what is that a difference of 3%?

I see no sense in the Palin win gaining supremacy over the Rove wing when they stand for the exact same things, and a Palin victory is more likely to lull the Tea party to sleep while the exact same agenda is moved on through.

DHS? both
PATRIOT? both
TARP? both
WAR? both

sorry man, I'm just not seeing any difference here. :(

[AuH20]

McCain kept the base demoralized rather than following one of the candidates that would have had them fired up.

So there are advantages to either side winning although neither one of them is good.

It's like a dial. The Neocons are on the far left. We're on the far right. Palin is in the middle. To get where where we want to go, we need incremental gains. There are far too many absolutists who can't see this.

[AuH20]

I don't really see any difference between Palin and Rove except that Palin is a bit easier on the eyes. Policy-wise they both seem to support the same things. Maybe maybe Palin is slightly more fiscally conservative, but what is that a difference of 3%?

I see no sense in the Palin win gaining supremacy over the Rove wing when they stand for the exact same things, and a Palin victory is more likely to lull the Tea party to sleep while the exact same agenda is moved on through.

DHS? both
PATRIOT? both
TARP? both
WAR? both

sorry man, I'm just not seeing any difference here. :(

Like I said, not every one of Palin's personal convictions defines the palinite crowd. They're definitely anti-TARP and not enamored with keeping bases in Europe. Palin has been anointed the defined leader because she has a knack of pushing back against those elite elements of the party.

[GunnyFreedom]

It's like a dial. The Neocons are on the far left. We're on the far right. Palin is in the middle. To get where where we want to go, we need incremental gains. There are far too many absolutists who can't see this.

I'm pretty articulate when it comes to discernment and I just don't see it. You are characterizing it as though Rove were a 10, Palin was a 5, and we are a 1. From where I sit, Rove is a 10, Palin a 9, and us a 1. I'm just not seeing the difference between them like you are. sorry.

[Agorism]

It's like a dial. The Neocons are on the far left. We're on the far right. Palin is in the middle. To get where where we want to go, we need incremental gains. There are far too many absolutists who can't see this

This gets you George Bush (or Sarah Palin)

I'd rather laugh at them.

[AuH20]

I'm pretty articulate when it comes to discernment and I just don't see it. You are characterizing it as though Rove were a 10, Palin was a 5, and we are a 1. From where I sit, Rove is a 10, Palin a 9, and us a 1. I'm just not seeing the difference between them like you are. sorry.

Because you're grouping them together. They're distinct, even though you're microscopically focusing on Palin's personal convictions. Palin doesn't necessarily speak for her people. They aren't robots. The woman has gained a following because she is a fighter, even though she's short on book smarts.

[GunnyFreedom]

Because you're grouping them together. They're distinct, even though you're microscopically focusing on Palin's personal convictions. Palin doesn't necessarily speak for her people. They aren't robots. The woman has gained a following because she is a fighter, even though she's short on book smarts.

Rove doesn't really speak for his people either. The Palin/Rove alleged split seems more about personalities than principles or policies. The whole mess seems irrelevant to me. If I am America and Mao and Stalin are fighting to the death, I don't cheer for either to win, I just hope someone good steps up into the forthcoming power vacuum.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Because you're grouping them together. They're distinct, even though you're microscopically focusing on Palin's personal convictions. Palin doesn't necessarily speak for her people. They aren't robots. The woman has gained a following because she is a fighter, even though she's short on book smarts.

There is very little difference with Rove and Palin. Both support the surveillance war State, both support the War on Drugs, both support foreign interventionism, both support the Federal Reserve, both support corporate welfare, etc. etc. I could go on, but whats the point. Gunny is right on this.

[Agorism]

Palin did all she could to boost John McCain's chances of gaining sole control of the U.S. military when she could have been supporting Chuck Baldwin or sitting out.

I have an low tolerance for party hacks.

[AuH20]

There is very little difference with Rove and Palin. Both support the surveillance war State, both support the War on Drugs, both support foreign interventionism, both support the Federal Reserve, both support corporate welfare, etc. etc. I could go on, but whats the point. Gunny is right on this.

You're focusing on Palin. Palin does not speak for all the people who like her. Do you think they like unbridled illegal immigration even though Sarah ran with the Amnesty king? Do you think they like corporate welfare? That's what I'm trying to communicate to you and Gunny. She has carved out a leadership role because she's a bitch, who doesn't mind calling out the establishment. This dogged nature endears her to mainstream conservatives.

[low preference guy]

Palin is much better than Rove. She helped Tea Party candidates get elected more than Rove did. He is a much more establishment person.

[Brett85]

There is very little difference with Rove and Palin. Both support the surveillance war State, both support the War on Drugs, both support foreign interventionism, both support the Federal Reserve, both support corporate welfare, etc. etc. I could go on, but whats the point. Gunny is right on this.

I think that Palin is probably much less of a drug warrior than Rove. On the Judge's show she basically said she would decriminalize weed, and I think she would probably support states' rights on the issue.

[Agorism]

You're focusing on Palin. Palin does not speak for all the people who like her. Do you think they like unbridled illegal immigration even though Sarah ran with the Amnesty king? Do you think they like corporate welfare? That's what I'm trying to communicate to you and Gunny. She has carved out a leadership role because she's a bitch, who doesn't mind calling out the establishment. This dogged nature endears her to mainstream conservatives.

Pay no attention to the noise my friends.
YouTube - Iraq Veterans Against the War protester at RNC (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGscsnUSBYQ)

[anaconda]

I disagree. The palinites are tied to us as well. I'd rather see the palinites win and vanquish the neocons for good. That's not to say that Palin's every philosophical stance typifies their movement, but I'd sure rather see the country move Palin's way as opposed to Rove's.

I think as long as we have foreign interventionism the neocons will remain in the picture. Palin needs to tell her sheep followers that these wars are bankers' wars, not patriotic wars.

[AuH20]

Palin is much better than Rove. She helped Tea Party candidates get elected more than Rove did. He is a much more establishment person.

Being secluded in a cozy libertarian bubble, it's easy to see how people can label all non-Paul republicans as neocons or as all the same, but I know the factions very well. This shortsightedness also applies to mainstreamers who label all Ron Paulers as truthers and anti-semites. I wish it was that easy but it's far more complex than that. I'm not a Palin fan but to take the people who like her and equate them with Rove is ridiculous. Philosophically, those people aren't that far from Ron Paul. I'm not telling folks to vote for Sarah Palin, but to examine the issues instead of one individual.

[Agorism]

I am fine with Palin supporting Rand Paul for senate.

What is not OK is allowing her or John McCain to get anywhere near the White House.

...ever

[low preference guy]

^^ Agree with AuH20 two posts above.

Just answer a simple question: Who is more likely to be a headache for Mitch McConnell? Palin or Rove?

[AuH20]

I am fine with Palin supporting Rand Paul for senate.

What is not OK is allowing her or John McCain to get anywhere near the White House.

...ever

Agreed. But I'll take her supporters in a heartbeat.

[AuH20]

^^ Agree with AuH20 two posts above.

Just answer a simple question: Who is more likely to be headache for Mitch McConnell? Palin or Rove?

Those republican internal memos leaked about the GOP big whigs wanting to do all in their power to shortcircuit a Palin 2012 run, may have really riled her up. Like I said, she has a major chip on her shoulder, which isn't good for the establishment.

[Imaginos]

Rove & Palin are on the same, how can there be any infighting?
Exactly.
This is text book description of 'distraction strategy'.
Both of them working for the same team, just like the GOP and the Dems working for the same team.

[AuH20]

Exactly.
This is text book description of 'distraction strategy'.
Both of them working for the same team, just like the GOP and the Dems working for the same team.

Not true though. They will do all in their power to make certain she is not the 2012 nominee. She is their enemy.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44449.html

[Tyr]

Not true though. They will do all in their power to make certain she is not the 2012 nominee. She is their enemy.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44449.html


Not quite. This would be a case of, in Jesse Ventura speak, a WORK. They are working the audience. Rove, being tied to George W. Bush and generally regarded as a snake oil salesmen isn't likely to garner much support from Conservatives. What's the next best thing? Cut promos with the face in the charade, Sarah Palin, propping her up as the anti-establshment, anti-Rove "pittbull."

The reality is they ARE on the same team, they ARE aligned and she ISN'T one of us. Getting Palin elected is getting the female Bush placed in power.

[AuH20]

Not quite. This would be a case of, in Jesse Ventura speak, a WORK. They are working the audience. Rove, being tied to George W. Bush and generally regarded as a snake oil salesmen isn't likely to garner much support from Conservatives. What's the next best thing? Cut promos with the face in the charade, Sarah Palin, propping her up as the anti-establshment, anti-Rove "pittbull."

The reality is they ARE on the same team, they ARE aligned and she ISN'T one of us. Getting Palin elected is getting the female Bush placed in power.

Let me explain it to you. The GOP is only concerned about power. If Palin runs, nets close to 40% nationally, it will have a terrible downstream effect on every republican candidate.