ss_blog_claim=83ff6e5db62e71ab199232b573cecbe0

The GOP’s Unbearable Lightness of Being

by Frumpzilla on June 30, 2009

bigstockphoto_Crossed_Fingers_Behind_Back_1658788Well, frumps, the GOP crime scene cleanup squad was out in force on the Sunday talks, harrumphing, tsk-tsking and stating the painfully obvious in a concerted effort to control the damage done by Mark Sanford, Our Man in Argentina.

The Righteous Right fanned out in all directions – Gov. Tim Pawlenty, R-Minn. covered CNN’s “State of the Union;” Gov. Haley Barbour, R-Miss. weighed in on CBS’ “Face the Nation;” and Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

It makes perfect sense that these guys were out in force on Sunday because they are part of the rapidly dwindling number of Republican presidential hopefuls still standing.   They all needed to get across the message that, despite appearances to the contrary, hypocrisy is not a GOP “core value.”

One refreshing trend that is apparent in these public-speaking engagements, lately, is that the Republican Party is in too much of a shambles this year for this lot to come out swinging.   They’re having to do more actual thinking and less blustering and posturing.   I’m sure that gets Rush Limbaugh’s goat, but it was interesting to glimpse that gothic thought process at work.

Pawlenty, who is likely the most hopeful of the 2012 “hopefuls,” had this to say:

“Any time you have leading figures who are engaged in behavior that is sad and troubling and hypocritical, other people are going to look at that and say, ‘Hmm, they don’t walk the walk.’ And so the words and the actions don’t ring true,” and “it certainly hurts the brand.”

Wow, that’s bold.   Pawlenty was actually willing to use the “H” word but then he had to ruin it by trying too hard to be hip with the “hurts the brand” bit.   I don’t know about you, frumps, but it bugs the hell out of me when politicians refer to their party’s platform as a “brand.”   It just makes the whole business sound a little too sleazy and contrived. 

Pawlenty added:

“And so hypocrisy doesn’t sell, and the Republicans have to be true to their values, be true to their principles and walk the walk.” 

So, are we to infer that the main reason to eschew hypocrisy is that it’s not a great “selling point” ?    What about the fact that hypocrisy is deceitful, irresponsible and reprehensible?  And never more so than in public servants.

Barbour and Romney were more careful about dancing across that minefield.  Romney cut the Sanford discussion off at the legs with this clever ploy: 

“Just talking about the Sanford matter is impolite.” 

He went on to say:

“I just don’t talk about people’s personal problems. I don’t think it’s appropriate, I don’t think it’s polite, and I don’t think it achieves any purpose.” 

How about if you’re funding your personal problems with public monies, Governor?

Barbour said he doesn’t think the scandal will affect a single vote in this fall’s gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia.  Really, Governor?

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who ran for president in 2008, said “the culture of the nation is hurt at such times.” 

He added that:

“Some Republicans won’t live up to the party’s values and its standards of ethical conduct.” 

Last time I checked, adultery and hypocrisy were slightly larger issues than “the party’s values and its standards of ethical conduct.”

All of that made for great, albeit predictable, Sunday entertainment but, of course, these particular politicos couldn’t leave well enough alone and glide gracefully offstage.    They couldn’t resist  winding it up by trying to draw a weird parallel between the party’s spate of sex scandals and their failure to control rampant Federal spending.

The key to the deflection, of course, is hypocrisy. 

Pawlenty said:

“If you’re going to be, for example, the party of fiscal discipline and be the person talking who’s about fiscal responsibility, then you better do that” 

Ah yes, I could feel ‘fiscal discipline’ lurking in the wings.

In the end, Pawlenty was the only one of the three to unabashedly declare his presidential readiness.  When asked about his aspirations, he said:

“I think I can make a contribution, in a positive way, for trying to rebuild this party. And it needs it.” 

I’ll second the “it needs it” part.


  • Share/Bookmark

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

{ 1 trackback }

Posts about Rush Limbaugh as of June 30, 2009 » The Daily Parr
June 30, 2009 at 8:48 am

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

DNLee July 1, 2009 at 12:27 pm

Thanks Frumpzilla! I appreciate the support. Thanks for stopping my my page. I love your layout.

Reply

Frumpzilla July 1, 2009 at 1:06 pm

p { margin: 0; }

Cheers, Danielle, hope the next time we hear from you you're in Antarctica! Anyone here reading this should be sure to hop on over to Danielle's blog http://urban-science.blogspot.com. It's a wonderful thing she's doing over there. Wish you'd been around when I was a kid, D.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: