I’m taking some heat in the comments to my post this morning regarding Tim Pawlenty — all of it fair. Besides, I like it here in the kitchen. But I’d like to clear things up to a broader forum, so here’s how I answered Rabel’s criticism just a few minutes ago:
To be clear on two things, as there seems to be some confusion — and probably my fault. Terse isn’t always good, you see.
I’m no Palin partisan. Far from it. In fact — and here I go starting trouble again — although I like her, there’s not much chance I would vote for Sarah in any primary. So I’m not tempted to scratch off Pawlenty because he supposedly dissed Palin. It’s clear to me that he did no such thing.
My problem with Pawlenty’s statement is twofold: It’s weak tea (no pun intended) and this is the exact wrong time to make even the smallest concession to the lefty narrative. By weak tea, I mean: Pawlenty didn’t say much at all, and I’d rather have a stand up guy sitting at the Resolute desk. As to his concession, it was tiny but it was there: Words, symbols even, can be bad naughty evil things that make otherwise nice boys shoot at congressmen.
We fight the Left on this and we fight it hard.
I hope that clears things up for everyone.