Dean Barnett's Misguided Attack on RedState
He was for activism before he was against it
By Bluey Posted in Congress | Featured Stories — Comments (16) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Dean Barnett, Hugh Hewitt's sidekick at Townhall, demonstrated yesterday what's wrong with conservative bloggers who get a big head and lose touch with the movement.
After days of making no mention of RedState's effort oust embattled Rep. Ken Calvert from the House Appropriations Committee, Townhall finally weighed in yesterday with a post by Barnett that criticized Erick Erickson for "needlessly purple and hostile" language. Barnett says he doesn't have the stomach for this "war," which he compares to the tactics of the dreaded Markos Moulitsas.
I’m not going to war against other Republicans. I don’t even go to war against Democrats. Especially when there’s a real war going on, such rhetorical table pounding isn’t my cup of tea.
Barnett confirms what I've said is the rightosphere's biggest problem: a lack of activism online. Erickson is using Calvert to fire up the base and send the GOP establishment a message. Barnett, however, would rather play the role of pundit -- an interesting position for someone writing at Townhall, which boasts its own "Action Center" for conservatives.
Read on ...
I’m not into Action Alerts. I’m not into telling you how to protest something or telling you to call Congress. I find the very rare political conference calls that I attend to be a nuisance, even though they do provide a handy opportunity to watch “Family Feud” on the DVR while officially spending my time constructively.
I’m a writer, not an activist, and I have no interest in changing.
It's ironic Barnett takes that position because earlier this year he was leading the charge with Hewitt to turn thousands of bloggers and blog readers into activists as part of the NRSC Pledge, which vowed to withhold money from the National Republican Senatorial Committee for its support of squishy Republicans.
In a January 27 column on Townhall, Barnett wrote about the "civil war" that had broken out in the Republican Party (ironically, not unlike the one that RedState is promulgating today):
But, in fact, this was a good week for conservatives; it was the week conservatives finally fought back and began reclaiming their party. For the past six years, conservatives have withstood the numerous slights and insults of the Republicans in congress.
My question to Barnett is this: Why is your "war" against the NRSC a legitimate cause and RedState's "war" against Ken Cavlert not? You may not agree with Erickson's tactics, but the least we could ask of you is some consistency.
« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for Censorship — Comments (5) | Dem Ethics — Comments (2) »
Dean Barnett's Misguided Attack on RedState 16 Comments (0 topical, 16 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
than selective memory.
Unlike the lefty blogs which routinely cooperate, a lot of conservative blogs seem to think that if a person reads another blog it is a loss to them rather than a gain to conservatism. Therefore they spend as much time running down other conservatives as they do moving the agenda forward.
Barnett's objection smack of simple "not invented here-ism" and the view that assisting with any project or promoting any idea that was not the brainchild of his blog is de facto bad because he has all the answers.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
My impression is that many conservative bloggers, and other Right media pundits, aren't here to advance conservatism.
They use the sound ideas of conservatism to advance themselves.
Working cooperatively, for the advancement of a cause, is unlikely amongst a group of individuals who are So Damned Self-Centered.
"Me First" is the motto.
but the results are the same.
I think you are right, there is a feeling among some conservative bloggers that anything they didn't think of dimininishes them personally because their contribution to conservatism is really limited to self promotion.
There are bloggers who post here, and who have material that is routinely promoted to our front page, yet they don't mention us on their blog or even list us on their blogroll.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
the value of a network is exponentially proportional to the number of nodes. The value of any node is proportional to network its attached to.
They actually devalue themselves by not linking back
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Dean is about half right. Going to war with the Republicans in Congress in such a way is about as effective as the internal struggle over the democrat-choreographed fight over the gay Republican just before the election, or the Dubai Ports deal.
We are fighting a GWOT, including their allies in the democrat party.
Somehow spending this much time on chasing out a Republican, when democrats are very happy with William Jefferson, seems counter productive.
And raising up the rhetorical stakes is hardly helpful against our own.
What good is winning the war if we loose our soul in the process? No, I will not mortgage my values to pay for the war. If we can’t win the war with out making deals with the devil count me out.
And oh by the way, what do you think will happen with Calvert? Democrats will do the same thing with him when it hurts us the most.
"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance"-Socrates(the real one ;)
at least he isn't mine.
Contrary to what Jack Murtha and others would have you believe, 2006 was a referendum on corruption and malfeasance. We got hammered not because of the war but because of Duke Cunningham, Mark Foley, etc.
The fact that the dems are perfectly content to let known crooks like Jefferson, Mollohan, and Murtha (and seemingly Feinstein) hold positions of responsibility is just something we have to live with. We know our people will never get that kind of a pass from the media.
So the question is simple, do we purge our top ranks of these questionable characters and have a chance of regaining the House or do we just go along for fear of hurting feelings?
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
The larger problem in this Country is why the FBI would go after Calvert at all, when two people who bribed Jefferson are in jail and he hasn't been charged. As well, they'll go after Rush for using prescription drugs, but not after Robert Kennedy, after he admitted abusing them and driving into the Capital in D.C. Streiff is right, might as well get rid of our own before the FBI tries, as they won't go after ANYONE on the other side. This very fact, the double standard in this Country, with the crazy investigations into the 8 firings at Justice, make it obvious which party wants to keep their people in positions that decide who is and isn't prosecuted. (Clinton fired them all; Bush let the Clinton people stay.)
This double standard is what on which we should focus. THAT problem makes the Calvert situation look like and Easter egg hunt.
Buhhhhhhhht maaaaaaaaaa Bobby is doing it too....
Nope doesn't cut it with me.
"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance"-Socrates(the real one ;)
Nonetheless, I submit that is over. Personally, I have been somewhat vexed on the issue and related tactics. Frankly, it did cross my mind this was KOS-Esque in terms of the approach and volume. However, I would expect Barnett to be better at expressing his views without resorting to such complete nonsense.
Many here have much more political experience than I and it is indeed a contact sport. However, I would have liked much more intelligence on Calvert before going to war. That said, I did my own research and found his record appalling and highly questionable for an Appropriations position.
The failure of our leadership to see beyond politics in order to make the best decision for this party is their real failure. In my opinion, his other transgressions plus the FBI investigation makes Mr. Boehner’s decision to stay with Calvert even more incomprehensible. Holistically, that makes this a very bad decision which could have been avoided.
In terms of the future, what happens if closer to the election cycle the FBI closes in on Calvert. Did Boehner ever consider that factor? It does not appear so. That is very bad judgment from our supposed leaders and makes one curious about what the future holds.
Overall, I prefer to save the metaphorical “war” for our opposition. They do not have any vision for this country and are bereft of even any idea of what leadership actually is. That is where we can truly makes gains with a populace completely befuddled by their actions since November.
However, I do support the effort to get our leaderships attention on this. There are many folks such as myself on the edge of this discussion that while perhaps in disagreement with the tactics, are in complete agreement with aims and objectives. So while some of us part on Eric’s methods, which are arguably effective, we agree these types of decisions do not bode well for the future of this party. I hope Mr. Boehner realizes that and listens very carefully.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
Contributor to The Minority Report
And I think that 2 fabulous "Field Generals" would be Tom Delay and Newt Gingrich!!
Tom, I know you read here and you are a former DC insider. Help us wage this battle!
These morons are about to adopt an amnesty bill, they havent been listening to us for a long time, they are spending too much money that we dont have and they need to know that we are the party of honesty and ethics and hard work for the People; regardless of what they have doing in DC for the past 10-15 years!
Real People dont listen to them! Trust me.
I have a problem in general with the "do this or else" approach that we've seen here on multiple occassions.
"Do this or we won't send you money. Do this or we won't send you money. Do THIS or we won't send you money."
1) I have a problem with it because it distracts from even BIGGER problems (not saying that Calvert's not a problem) -- like the soon to be passed amnesty bill.
2) You can only threaten the NRCC so many times (reiterating my main point above). I've already told them I won't give to them until they stop getting involved in primaries so telling them I won't give till the kick Calvert off of appropriations doesn't seem like a big threat.
3) We're mostly making staffers lives misreable. Are we really getting to the members?
4) Let's say that a John Linder doesn't go along with us. Are we really willing (even if we were so able) to throw Linder under the bus because of Calvert? I think for most of us, the answer is no. I think Linder probably thinks that the answer for his district is no. Linder is one of the good guys, even if he's wrong on this issue.
I agree that the Calvert decision is wrong, but then Calvert shouldn't even be in congress IMHO.
Romney or Fred.
Currently writing non-political stories over at first-cut-stories.blogspot.com
Mr. Barnett may well deserve the criticisms lodged against him. Still, "rhetorical table pounding" resonates. Writers on this site do have a tendency to grandiloquence; at times it reads like an "Education Of Hyman Kaplan" parody. The bellicose language is often out of scale. And the signature quotes at the end of many comments add to the sense of self-inflation. Less is more, no?
like bashing each other.
That's too bad. As streiff alludes to above, the lefty blogs gain some benefit from cooperating, from massing their efforts and strengths.
It would be nice if our side could do the same thing. Oh well...
They (i.e., the HughHewitts) have "VictoryCaucus," we have "WeWinTheyLose". I think one common site, which pooled all our talent and resources, would be a better platform for combating Dem defeatism and MSM indifference. But...
I'm with ya. I'm stickin'. But, whatever the transgression was that set Hugh Hatfield against Redstate McCoy, just be sure it's worth risking a dividing house of conservative opinion and online action, in a time of real war.
P.S., Bluey, you appear to be speaking for "the movement" in your first paragraph. Are you sure you should be assuming such airs?
"Who will stand/On either hand/And guard this bridge with me?" (Macaulay)
Your ruffling feathers. I totally agree with what you’re doing. Clean house now our have it cleaned by the voters with a Democrat.
I expect more from my elected representatives. Call me old fashioned.
"I know nothing except the fact of my ignorance"-Socrates(the real one ;)