over establishment. Whichever term you prefer, there are people to whom this moniker accurately applies. Just as we do not want this term overused, we also do not want to attack those who use it appropriately.

I might also point out that while one should not always be judged by who is backing them, it does not mean that it is immaterial. For instance, look who backed Obama. Alinsky, Rev. Wright, etc. His associations with these people were quite indicative of how he has governed. This is not always the case, but it is more often than it is not.

as this thread is more of a response regarding another thread on which we disagreed. This comment had nothing to do with Jordan, Christie, or any of the other half-a-dozen names that you listed.

You seem to have missed my statement in which I said that I see no evidence that Palin is even moving towards the establishment. You also failed to address my points about Obama and his associations.

I have made every attempt to have a civil and rational conversation with you. Let me make one more and perhaps clear the air a little. My deeming of someone being establishment is based on several things, namely their record and their votes. Who endorses them does not necessarily guarantee that they are establishment, but it does raise some concerns.

As to Rove, I am pleased that he donated to Rubio. He was a little late to the game with Rand Paul. But the RNC did not endorse either, so the establishment is alive and kicking.

BTW, have you read Sen. DeMint’s new book? If you do not believe in establishment politicians, you will after reading that book. It is just a suggestion that may help you understand where people like myself are coming from.

With that, I bid you good day and I hope that the next conversation we engage in will be less contentious.

My last two paragraphs are out of order. The latter was not intended as a parting shot.

my definition for you in the spirit of generousity.

One defines someone as establishment based on their VOTES and past RECORD. Who endorses them does NOT define them as establishment, it simply raises concern. This is almost verbatim what I wrote upthread.

I might also add that the original comment that I made DID list Ryan’s support for TARP as problematic. My conclusions were never just based on who endorsed him

I have provided you a definition not once, but twice.

To pretend there is not a rift between the establishment GOP and the Tea Party/Constitutional conservatives is akin to sticking one’s head in the sand. In the end, the goal of the conservatives is to take over the GOP. Have you heard
about the Precinct Projects?

We do not want to maintain the same cycle of corruption, greed, spending, and big government. Many of the DC elite like things the way they are, as long as they are in power.

Lastly on Burke, I think a better question to ask is how Burke woukd respond to someone in a debate who made every effort to define the topic. Would he continue talking past the person to ” win” an argument or respond to the definition provided.

we are just choosing different words. My definition of establishment is not someone who has been in office a long time nor do I define a Tea Party candidate as someone from the “outside” all of the time.

My definition of establishment is an elected official who desires to maintain the status quo in Washington of out of control spending, big government, and corruption. They are more interested in maintaing power than standing on conservative principles and restoring this country.

but I am not one of those people. When I use the term DC establishment, I am using it as the defintion I listed above and I usually try and quantify it by what said establishment person said or did, which I agree with you is important.

I am not really aware of the conflict between Levin and Leon specifically, which may explain my perplexion at the reaction to the word ” establishment” on here lately.

I might also add that just because some people misuse a term does not make said term off-limits or inappropriate. Take the word ” racist.” The Left routinely calls anyone who disagrees with them racist and grossly misapplies the term to fit their own ends. However, their misuse of the word does not mean that if I see a clear example of someone being racist I can no longer use that word.

But no matter what terms or words we choose, we can all agree that government needs to get smaller, entitlements need reform, and the ridiculous spending must stop. In the end, this is all that matters.

Establishment has less to do with how long one has been in office, and more to do what he/she does while in office. It also is not fair to place someone in the DC establishment category based on one or two votes.

It has to be a consistent pattern of squishy votes and obstructing change of the status quo in Washington.