Richard W. writes:
The American Thinker’s take on Palin’s speech is quite different from yours. They see it as a rousing repudiation of Bush era milk-warm conservatism and a back-to-basics movement that supports the Constitution. I found the difference interesting. (The comments are also interesting).LA replies:
I like the drift of this article. I’m all in favor of a rebirth of a genuine conservatism that resists and seeks to roll back inordinate and unconstitutional federal power. I just didn’t hear serious statements to that effect in Palin’s speech. Further, given Palin’s various emotional commitments, e.g., in favor of expanded federal involvement in care for special needs children, in favor of federal “civil rights” laws that have forced school districts to terminate boys’ athletic programs, in favor of legalizing illegal aliens instead of making them leave, I don’t regard her as believable when she calls for a rollback of the federal government and a return to constitutionalism. I think she’s indulging in empty rhetoric.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 08, 2010 04:57 PM | Send