OPINION: Can Palin actually shoot down those liberty-hating liberal elitists?

Frank Gillispie

OPINION: Can Palin actually shoot down those liberty-hating liberal elitists?

Posted by

in Opinions

Friday, September 12. 2008

Comments (6)

America is in an uproar over Sarah Palin. She is, of course, the Republican nominee for vice president. Nearly every person I have encountered in the past two weeks has wanted to talk about her. Some approve of her nomination; some very strongly object.

How did a little known governor of a low population state like Alaska capture so much attention so quickly? What was it in our national political life that set the stage for her? She obviously fills a major gap in our political landscape. I think I know.

In the 20 years that I have been writing political commentary I have encountered hundreds of people who simply do not bother to vote. And most of them give the same reason. “Why bother? They are going to do whatever they want to do anyway.” Millions of Americans take this attitude. They have simply given up on the political process because they see it as a waste of effort. They see the political system as being dominated by a group of elitists who are determined to push their agenda with total disregard of the opinions of the people.

And they are right. This group of mostly Northeastern liberals have gamed control of the political process, including the national media and use them to impose their views on the nation. For many people, the battle is lost and trying to fight the elitists is a waste of time.

Our nation was founded on the principle of individual liberty and personal responsibility. That is a real problem for the elitists. How can they impose their political and social agenda on a people who believe that they have the right and responsibility to make their own decisions without government interference?

The elitists use various methods to discourage people from taking part in the political process. The whole “Politically Correct” movement is designed to intimidate these liberty-loving people by making them feel guilty for their self confidence. Anything that expresses a desire to conduct their lives according to their own beliefs is targeted for assault.

This is the reason for the massive attacks on Southern and rural culture. Rural people, especially those in the South, are supremely confident in their ability to take care of their own needs and those of their family. And if these “hicks” can care for themselves without government programs, then any and all Americans can do so. Therefore any sign of individual competence is immediately targeted.

This problem is so persistent and pervasive that millions of Americans don’t even bother to register to vote. The population of Madison County is approaching 30,000 people, yet fewer than 12,000 are registered, and of those, you can expect 30 percent or more to stay home during elections.

And then comes a politically incorrect, small-town mother who shows that the elitists can be shot down. Suddenly, there is someone who comes from the rural community who has stood up to the elitists and faced them down. Liberty-loving people across the nation see in her proof that they can care for their own without big government. Voters who had given up on ever escaping from government domination suddenly see evidence that they can restore our national values of self confidence and personal responsibility.

Can Governor Palin actually lead a revolt against elitist domination of our nation? Maybe, maybe not. We need to learn more about her to make that judgment. But millions of Americans who’s love of personal liberty has been suppressed seem to think so. It would be nice if it is true.

Frank Gillispie is founder of The Madison County Journal. His e-mail address is frankgillispie671@msn.com. His website can be accessed at http://frankgillispie.tripod.com/

Defined tags for this entry: Frank Gillispie, Opinions

Related entries by tags:

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 Gray on 09/13/08 at 01:20 PM [Reply]

Controlled by Northeastern liberal elitists? WTF? Republicans dominated all branches of federal government from 2001-2007. Even now, two brannches are republican controlled, and the congressional branch is split (Gop has a tie in the Senate).

How anyone can be so misinformed as to blame this crap on liberals is amazing.

#2 Jude on 09/14/08 at 05:22 AM [Reply]

Hockey mom? You betcha! She's full of s**@!!
Good Gawd!

#3 AwakenedConservative on 09/14/08 at 07:44 PM [Reply]

Yeah, "hockey mom." That's funny, because "hockey" is another word for bull manure! Didn't she know that before she branded herself a "hockey" mom? She pretty much came out and told you that she's a bull*###$r! Four more years of this? They have to be kidding...we won't survive four more years of this! I'm a lifelong Republican, but even I recognize "hockey" when I see it. If we have four more years of non-stop Republican spending we won't have, as my grandmother used to say, "a pot to pee in or a window to throw it out of." I, my wife, our son, and most of our church are crossing over and voting for Obama / Biden.

#4 ConservativeForObama on 09/16/08 at 06:24 AM [Reply]

The only "elitist" is John McCain as he is weighing in with personal wealth, real estate, investments, homes and inheritances worth well over 100 million dollars. 100 MILLION! And he still collects his TAXPAYER FUNDED pension! THAT is truly ELITIST. If you make over 5 million a year (McCain's stated benchmark for "wealthy"), vote for McCain. Everyone else, vote for Obama. Otherwise it's 4 more years of the last 8...rich get richer, and the last surviving members of what used to be America's "middle class" get wiped out with the rest of the American economic victims of Bush/McCain policies. Yes, I am a lifelong Republican proud to be voting for Obama. And at least one of our Republican state representatives told me he was voting for Obama as well because the Republicans are on a huge war / spending spree and absolutely killing the budget and skyrocketing the national debt.

#5 kevin w on 09/19/08 at 07:41 AM [Reply]

This is very interesting! I never thought about it this
way.
Perhaps this is why so many physicians are conservatives or
Republicans.
Thoughtful Point of View
the Democrat Party has become the Lawyers' Party.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton
and Michelle Obama are lawyers. John Edwards, the other
former Democrat candidate for president, is a lawyer, and so
is his wife, Elizabeth. Every Democrat nominee since 1984
went to law school (although Gore did not graduate). Every
Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for
Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school. Look at the
Democrat Party in Congress: the Majority Leader in each
house is a lawyer
The Republican Party is different. President Bush and
Vice President Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen.
The leaders of the Republican Revolution were not lawyers.
Newt Gingrich was a history professor; Tom Delay was an
exterminator; and, Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not lawyer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.
Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer?
Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won
the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running
against Ronald Reagan
The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real
work. The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats
mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney,
or who heal the sick, like Frist, or who immerse themselves
in history, like Gingrich.
The Lawyers' Party sees these sorts of people, who
pro vide goods and services that people want, as the enemies
of America. And, so we have seen the procession of official
enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party, grow
against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical
companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast
food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers,
and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.
This is the natural consequence of viewing everything
through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by
successfully representing their clients, in this case the
American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they
seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to
overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to
favor their side.
Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But
it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When
politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as
clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the
role of the legal system in our life becomes all consuming.
Some Americans become 'adverse parties' of our
very government. We are not all litigants in some vast
social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic
that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from
courts, and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by
judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by
omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives.
America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is
modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the
most important decision for our next president is whom he
will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and
the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal
prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as
happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay,
then the power of lawyers in America is too great. When
House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our
efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us,
then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.
We cannot expect the Lawyers' Party to provide real
change, real reform, or real hope in America Most
Americans know that a republic in which every major
government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges
is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans
grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at
the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that
more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral
values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.
Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be
brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely
dictate American society and business.
Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard
work.
Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers
with more power will only make our problems worse.

thomas jefferson ( a democrat that i would have liked ) said a goverment thats big enough to give you all you need is also a goverment big enough to take all you have ! McCain / Palin 08!

#6 kevin w on 09/19/08 at 07:42 AM [Reply]

If there is anyone out there that doesn't know this; just remember who did this when you vote....
Our Social Security

Franklin Roosevelt a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary,
That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program,
That the money the participants elected to put Into the Program would be deductible from Their income for tax purposes each year,
That the money the participants put into the Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would Only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and
That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income. Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and if we get a Social Security check every month we are finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government and now to Dwight Eisenhower
34th. President, Republican,
in 1958 the first year that Congress voted to remove funds from Social Security and put it into the General Fund for Congress to spend.
If I recall correctly, it was a democratically Controlled Congress. And From what I understand, the Congress logic at that time was that there was so much money in Social Security Fund that it would never run out / be used up for the purpose it was intended / set aside for. Then comes Lyndon Johnson 36th.President,a Democrat
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the Independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the General Fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson a Democrat, and the democratically Controlled House and Senate.
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax Deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democratic Party. Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?
A: The Democratic Party, with Albert Gore, Jr. (Al Gore) casting the 'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S. Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving Annuity payments to immigrants?
A: That's right! (Jimmy Carter) a Democrat, and the Democratic Party. Voted to give
Immigrants who moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! TheDemocratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it! Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!
And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!
If enough people read this, maybe a seed of Awareness will be planted and maybe changes will evolve. Maybe not,

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment: E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.

Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
Phone*

What is four plus one?
: Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry
: Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

OPINION: Can Palin actually shoot down those liberty-hating liberal elitists?

MadisonJournalTODAY

OPINION: Can Palin actually shoot down those liberty-hating liberal elitists?

Recent Stories

Recent Comments

Sister Sites

Archives

Community

Keyword Tags