dinner at George's

[Sisyphus]

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/obama-dines-with-conservative-columnists/

 

So what do you think they talked about?

[iNow]

Obama: "So, what types of things are you most concerned I will do? What types of things do you want me to consciously try to avoid? What about my policies do you support? Let's find common ground, and go from there. We certainly agree on more than we disagree, and I'll need your help to get our country out of this mess."

 

George and Gang: "This may not be so bad. I find you to be level headed and open to well formed arguments. First, you're going to spend way more than I'm comfortable with, so how about we start with that. Now, pass the the Pinot..."

 

 

I suspect George Will is going to talk about it on Sunday morning on This Week.

[Pangloss]

Windows 7 vs Ubuntu.

 

But seriously, George Will probably pontificated about the affect of the election on the upcoming baseball season, and they all snickered about Sam Donaldson's new hairpiece.

 

But really seriously, I think they probably talked about the campaign. Bill Kristol probably apologized for the gaff over his mistaken reporting that Obama had attended one of Rev. Wright's more outrageous sermons (as he did publicly earlier).

[Sisyphus]

What occurs to me is that there isn't much to apologize for. Or, at least not as much as you would expect. I don't know about the others, but I regularly read Brooks' and Will's columns throughout the campaign, and a lot of them were downright complimentary. Especially interesting considering the large demographic who were (and I guess still are) convinced that Obama is "the most liberal Senator," a communist, a black revolutionary, a secret Muslim, a pal of terrorists, the literal Antichrist, etc. The dinner itself is probably of little significance, but it's an interesting symbol. I know I've pontificated on it before, but there's a real split among "conservatives" that seems like something we haven't really seen before, combined with (apparently) the least partisan PEOTUS in recent history. Reallignment, anyone?

[john5746]

They talked about Sarah Palin.

[ParanoiA]

I know I've pontificated on it before, but there's a real split among "conservatives" that seems like something we haven't really seen before, combined with (apparently) the least partisan PEOTUS in recent history. Reallignment, anyone?

 

I caught a little of Rush talking about this today. I think he may be right here, in that he thinks republicans are trying to appear 'agreeable' because they're tired of looking "heartless"( a popular conservative mark ) and negative.

 

Although, I'm wondering if the blue blooded republicans are going to take control of the party. That would be a boost for them with liberals, but horrible for protecting the constitution. We won't have any small government parties anymore. Well we don't now, I guess....

 

Come on Libertarian Party...time to make your move!

[ecoli]

HA... they called David Brooks a conservative.

 

@ pangloss - the LP will never make their move.

[Pangloss]

Poor Rush. He never will get it.