Patterico's Pontifications

3/2/2009

Does Policy Matter?

Filed under: General — Karl @ 12:31 pm

[Posted by Karl]

Analyzing Rush Limbaugh’s much-discussed CPAC speech, John Hawkins (who generally liked it) argues that its weakness was the suggestion that all the GOP (or conservatives) needed was a good candidate and that policy was not the problem:

First off, it abandons the whole field of “new ideas” to people who are not conservatives. Liberals are always coming up with new ways to spend our money and grow government.

So if all the prominent “idea men” on “our side” are people who hate social conservatives and love big government, then the conservative movement will have to choose between being forever frozen — or moving farther away from its roots with the adoption of each new idea. That path will lead to a long, slow slide into oblivion.

However, TNR’s infamously Bush-hating Jonathan Chait disagrees:

I think it’s pretty clear that the Democratic comeback since then has had next-to-nothing to with developing “new ideas” and almost everything to do with Republican failure, the state of the economy, and a really effective presidential nominee. yes, Democratic ideas proved more popular, but they really were the same basic ideas the party had advocated for years.

Limbaugh, then, is narrowly right. The GOP’s fortunes are essentially an inverse function of the Obama administration’s fortunes, which is turn depends almost entirely on the state of the world economy.

Although I suspect that Chait and I would disagree over the specifics of “Republican failure,” both positions have merit.  The election of President Obama continues a 16-year cycle favoring relatively inexperienced Democrats preaching the gospel of Hopenchange.  The cycle is likely generational and related to the natural tendency of parties and movements to spend out their political and intellectual capital over time.  Moreover, a review of past presidential campaigns suggests that the winning candidate was generally the superior campaigner.

Nevertheless, policy matters, particularly outside the 16-year cycle.  The continuing deterioration of US financial markets — and in Obama’s job approval ratings — stems in part from a lack of investor confidence in the policy proposals of the Obama Administration. As you cannot beat somebody with nobody, you cannot beat something with nothing — which is why the Left has been busy pushing the meme of the GOP as the party of “No.”  Everyone from GOP strategists to Juicebox mafioso Matthew Yglesias seem to have figured out that there is ultimately more value to winning an issue than winning a news cycle, which may explain Newt Gingrich’s low-profile comeback in Republican circles.

Unless Republicans and conservatives want to simply wait for the current Democrat or progressive ascendency to play itself out, they will need both a good messenger and alternative proposals, much as they had in the late 1970s and the mid-1990s.

Update: Rich Lowry, after noting the vast difference in the market reaction to Obama vs. the market reaction to FDR:

Two political points: 1) Every day the markets continue to slide, it makes it harder on Obama to blame the mess on President Bush and forswear any responsibility himself; 2) if I were Eric Cantor or John Boehner, I’d be talking about a “real recovery package” every day— payroll and corporate tax cuts, regulatory reforms for the financial and auto industries, relief for small business. None of it is going to pass, of course, but it will dispel the idea that they aren’t for anything and show they are zealous about trying to check the economy’s downward slide.

That was supposedly the plan last week, but the GOP on the Hill seems to be lacking follow-through.

–Karl

146 Responses to “Does Policy Matter?”

  1. It’s a conundrum. No policy issue was more salient than energy in 2010 and look what happened. No. I don’t think policy matters so much when your media shares your president’s contempt for America.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  2. oh. Crap. I meant 2008. I’m in a fugue I think.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  3. Gasoline prices fell dramatically the second half of 2008 — starting almost immediately upon the lifting of the ban on offshore drilling. You can go back to July and see oil trading at $145 a barrel, but after the announcement it started a free-fall.

    The free-fall continued past where it might have otherwise stopped due to the downturn in world economic conditions when the US credit market froze up.

    But both served to take energy off the table as a voting issue, and replace it with a generalized economic weakness as the primary voting issue.

    WLS Shipwrecked (26b1e5)

  4. As the Obama economic disaster (plan) drags the markets further into the sewer, it will be easier to get the average voter to focus on Conservative Economic Policy, especially if there is an effective speaker bringing attention to those policies.
    At the moment, the voice with the most reach is El Rushbo; but, that is just a temporary situation, since (as he has often stated) he is not, and will not become, a candidate for anything (why would he want to take a pay cut?).
    It will take someone from within the Party to step up, and generate the enthusiasm among the faithful to move the country back into it’s traditional place in the political spectrum: The Center-Right.
    Rush is there to saturate the airwaves with the Conservative Message; but, we will need another Gingrich-Armey “Contract With America” to rally around, with a standard-bearer more believable than a John McCain, or a John Boehner!
    The rebuilding of the brand starts now, and the goal is to escort Ms.Pelosi to a back-bench following the ’10 Congressional Elections.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  5. Oh, and just a reminder:
    Rush spoke for an hour-plus on Saturday, without a teleprompter, and the place was rockin’.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  6. John Hawkins (who generally liked it) argues that its weakness was the suggestion that all the GOP (or conservatives) needed was a good candidate and that policy was not the problem

    I suspect that what Rush was getting at was that conservative policy was not the problem, and that we need not run away from it as has been done these last several years. I don’t think he said that policy itself was unimportant.

    Subotai (699bed)

  7. Ronald Reagan was a hard core fiscal conservative. Reagan was not a hard core social conservative–I suspect mainly because he did not see it as a role government should have. Regan was a pragmatist, but not in a John McCain way, but as a means to an end. If Reagan couls get half a loaf by compromising (as opposed to no loaf) he compromised, but he was always going for the whole loaf. Reagan set goals and followed them. Republicans have screwed up in recent years in not having clear goals.

    Reagan probably would not have been elected but for Jimmy Carter completely fucking up the country for four years. But that made it easier for Republicans that followed him to get elected. The trouble is many voters now were not even born when Reagan was president or when the Jimmy Carter malaise was in full form. It is probably going to take an Obama Carter redux to turn things around.

    The Reagan model still works: Strong national security, lower taxes, less government, pro civil liberties (including property and gun rights which get overlooked by the ACLU and the Dems), pro life, and pro federalism. It is really not that complicated. And at its core it is not really all that outlaw. It is a message, if presented right, that scores 60%+ of voters. And the reason the GOP has been losing over the last two or three years, is because the GOP was not consistently doing this over the last eight to ten years.

    Joe (dcebbd)

  8. Reagan in his heart believed Captialism was superior to Communism. Those on the left never believed it. Many moderates had their doubts. Reagan believed it.

    I think the Reagan principals will come back, not out of nostaligia about Reagan, but because they are right. It is a pragmatic reality less government, less spending, and less taxes is better than more government, more spending, and more taxes.

    Joe (dcebbd)

  9. For a party that lionized Reagan, the GOP sure acted like the Dems did in previous congressional majorities. They lost their way, and Bush never met a spending bill he didn’t like – they need to go back to their heritage, and return to the fundamentals that first brought them back into power. Economic policy can still be a winning issue, along with a strong national defense and vigorous foreign policy. But Jindal looked terrible on the GOP address, and the current roster looks woefully short on the charisma front.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  10. Let’s see……………. 2.9 ounce bag of popcorn………. Does anyone know how long I should put it in the microwave for?

    Maybe you guys could agree on that?

    Oiram (983921)

  11. Another truth that we deny, or ignore, at our peril:
    Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
    Most members of Congress think that they are untouchable by the rules that govern the rest of us.
    It is generally their hubris that does them in.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  12. I’d go with the “a little from column A, a little from column B”.

    It’s painful to watch Republican politicians try to make conservative arguments. Whether they’re bad at it because they aren’t good speakers or they’re bad at it because they don’t believe the arguments, either way, they are bad at it and this is a serious handicap to the Republicans.

    Next, the free-spending big government ways of “compassionate conservatism” did tremendous damage to the brand so that conservatives are now compromised when they criticize Obama’s budget and policies. IMO, on the ideas front we need not so much new ideas as a return to first principles and then applying them to the current situation.

    tim maguire (4a98f0)

  13. We could all agree that you are a mendoucheous twatwaffle, Mario.

    JD (2d2bfc)

  14. As we are now discovering (and you can look back on interviews to confirm) the reason that Bush never vetoed a spending bill from 2001-2006 is because he was in communication with the Republicans in Congress and set very specific limits on the sizes of the bills. Maybe those limits were high, but they were limits nonetheless.

    When it looked like Congress was going to exceed them, he warned them before the bill was passed, and the bill got changed before a veto was required.

    Now we are seeing what you get without those limits and that communication.

    luagha (5cbe06)

  15. #12 Could to see that your still adding your B.S. substantive dialogue JD.

    As memory serves your not a Limbaugh fan. Is he a mendoucheous twatwaffle too? I’m guessing you guys are all having a problem agreeing on that one too :)

    Oiram (983921)

  16. I meant:

    #12 “Good” to see that your still adding your B.S. substantive dialogue JD.

    Oiram (983921)

  17. feets(!),

    Also note that the Dems temporarily caved on offshore drilling, an issue driven largely by American Solutions (a/k/a Newt). And during that period of the campaign, pre-meltdown, McCain was trending up, while BO was trending down. That wasn’t entirely due to the energy issue, but it’s a partial demo of how policy can matter in a campaign.

    Karl (39bad8)

  18. Karl, not to mention an example of how dishonestly the Democrats treated policy issues during the ’08 campaign.

    SPQR (72771e)

  19. What substance do you bring, Mario? Unless you count feigned ignorance, or breath-taking stupidity as substance.

    JD (2d2bfc)

  20. #18
    What substance do you bring, Mario? Unless you count feigned ignorance, or breath-taking stupidity as substance.

    Comment by JD — 3/2/2009 @ 2:12 pm

    (Exhibit A)

    Oiram (983921)

  21. SPQR,

    The Dems were dishonest even in the caving; iirc, they tried to undo it in the appropriations process, too. But my focus here was really on whether policy matters in the context of campaigns. Drilling was a policy that put the Dems on defense in the heat of the campaign to the extent that they at least had to pretend to cave, which was of benefit to the GOP/ conservatives.

    Karl (39bad8)

  22. This is supposed to bother me somehow, Mario? Since you have started visiting here, you have created definitions of words out of whole cloth, played stupid when people have provided you endless description and links, and overall have been a passive-aggressive douchebag, not altogether different than many that came before you. Your only saving grace is that you have smaller stones than the ones that came before you, and stop short of the name calling and horrific behavior as the others did. You are the same, just with a little better manners. And I for one, am tired of it. There should be more like Leviticus and aphrael and less like you. Yu shit in the living room of a place I like to visit. Don’t expect me to thank you.

    JD (2d2bfc)

  23. Comment by tim maguire — 3/2/2009 @ 1:56 pm

    A Reminder:
    Not all Republicans are Conservative; and,
    Compassionate Conservatism was a creation of Rove to dress the big-government spending ideas of GWB in a suit that could be sold to the conservative base of the party, and pull the wool over the eyes of independents.
    It was neither compassionate, nor conservative.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  24. There are several issues that will become important for Republicans in 2008. One will be the role of tax policy and small business. Obama is creating that issue as we watch. The left is cheering him on as they are hostile to anyone who owns a business. From Washington Monthly:

    It’s such a simple and obvious sentiment. That it eludes so many conservatives is a genuine shame.

    These people are NOT CONSERVATIVES!!! They are far right radical revolutionaries. The shorter one-word definition of that is “fascist.”

    Hitler also called himself a “conservative” and many legitimate German conservatives voted for him after hearing him say that. They all learned the hard way such was not the case. In fact, the Germans who led the 1944 attempt to assassinate Der Fuehrer were all conservatives. They were all that was left after they let him go after the communists, the social democrats, the christian democrats, the free democrats.

    That said, I personally am just fine with the “real conservatives” in America who have enabled these fascist scum being left to take the consequences, since in this case Little Georgie wasn’t able to get rid of we lefties and we’re just fine at burying the bastards.

    Although having an aging Olongapo boom-boom girl like Michelle Malkin for an enemy is pretty damn embarassing.

    So they are “just fine at burying the bastards.”

    There are a lot of small businesses and they have lots of employees. Aside from taxes, the next big problem for these businesses is health care. We need a Republican proposal that includes universal coverage. That assumes Obama hasn’t destroyed the current system but he will need more time than he has if we can get Congress away from Pelosi.

    The next issue is spending. Bush may have dealt with Hastert privately but it wasn’t enough. There is a basic rule: NEVER TRUST AN ILLINOIS POLITICIAN. Hastert and Tom DeLay ruined the Republican brand for decades.

    National defense may become an issue with the defense drawdown that Obama plans and events, such as a collapse of Pakistan, will drive that issue.

    Another issue is the fact that (sorry) Republican politicians tend to be dumber than Democrats. Smart Republicans go into business. Maybe later they go into politics. I’ve spent a lot of hours with local politicians and state politicians who were dumber than owl s**t. A lot of them were Republicans. We need better candidates.

    MIke K (8df289)

  25. Mike K – How does proposing universal healthcare fit in all that? I do not see how the party can get healthy by betraying their principles even more. I know that it is a popular position, but trading principles for votes rarely works.

    JD (2d2bfc)

  26. AD – RtR/OS,

    Agreed, thoguh I think GWB was fairly honest in outlining where he disagreed with the right (education, immigration, etc.).

    Karl (39bad8)

  27. It is still mind-boggling just how outrageous Obama’s budgetary proposals are. He’s adding trillions to the debt, just over the next 5 years, he’s adding nearly $50K in debt for each household in America. His tax increases will be nearly half a million dollars over ten years for each person who files taxes.

    Half a million. Where are you going to find that amount of money to pay taxes, I wonder?

    SPQR (72771e)

  28. The record shows American swing voters are non-ideological. They don’t buy into the idea that capitalism is good magic any more than they buy into the idea that socialism is bad magic.

    Rather, they vote on the basis of perceived credibility and, by extension, personality. And the foremost question for them tends to be: “What have you done for me lately?”

    “Reagan Democrats” didn’t switch parties because they bought into Reagan’s free-market fables. They switched because they liked him and trusted him. They appreciated his optimism and interpreted his “moral clarity” not as a sign of ideological correctness, but as evidence of strong character. The ideology was part of the picture, since it did help unify and inspire the GOP, but it was the essential element for success.

    Sure, it took a context of the opposition party’s failures under Carter to set the stage for Reagan’s success, but it’s silly to think that people who voted for Carter were suddenly converted into free-market militarists on the basis of Reagan’s persuasive powers. Remember, these are people who later voted for Clinton, then Bush II, then Obama.

    One reason politics seems so absurd is that these non-ideological voters tip most elections rather than voters who embrace “ideas” per se.

    At the moment, the Republicans have very little credibility. They started two unwon wars, one on false pretenses, then steadfastly refused to accept responsibility for the costs of those failures. Instead, they went around claiming victory, blaming messengers and talking about starting more wars in Iran and who knows where else.

    Same goes for the economy. Bush promised tax cuts would exert some magical force on the economy but, alas, no rabbits came out of the hat.

    Now that were in the midst of a rolling collapse of the global economy, the GOP’s answer is to keep asking voters to believe in the same magic, while blaming non-magicians for the fact that the magic tax cuts didn’t work last time.

    Luckily for Republicans, swing voters also tend to have short memories. In a few years, they will have started to forget about why they switched from the GOP to the Democrats. “What have you done for me lately?” they’ll ask the Dems.

    The GOP will then have an opening, but, before then, there’s nothing it can do, short of embracing its failures and demonstrating some sincerity in recognizing why they failed.

    Strategically, the GOP would do well to accept its fate as a minority party for the foreseeable future, including the 2010 election cycle.

    The party needs to find a way to heal the rift between religious conservatives and anti-tax, small l libertarians. That may not be possible, so the party will have to decide which constituency is more important.

    More important, it needs to heal the rift between nativists and “big-tent” Republicans who believe, as Reagan did, that Latinos are, at heart, Republicans. And again, it may not be possible to heal the rift, as the two sides are fundamentally opposed. In that case, they need to decide whether its more important to keep locking down 75 percent plus of the male white vote, while losing big to minorities, or whether it’s time to abandon the nativists to win more minority votes.

    Hax Vobiscum (23258e)

  29. Just remember – responding to a troll just encourages it.

    steve miller (0fb51f)

  30. make that:
    The ideology was part of the picture, since it did help unify and inspire the GOP, but it was NOT the essential element for success.

    Hax Vobiscum (23258e)

  31. Just remember: echo-chamber thinking helped the GOP get to where it is today and will certainly help keep it there.

    Hax Vobiscum (23258e)

  32. I guess the way I saw it was you can only pretend to cave when your media covers for you. Socialists lie and their dirty socialist media is happy to call it black when it’s white. Policy only matters when it’s an issue the Rs are not polling well on. I know this because I used to listen to NPR.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  33. We do not have a Health-Care crisis in American, we have a Health-Insurance Affordability Problem.

    The only solution to this problem that, to me anyway, makes any sense is to scrap the employer-deductability scheme that we entered into as an end-around wage-caps in WW-2, and make health insurance deductable for the individual who purchases it (OMG, wasn’t that proposed by McCain? – and initially by an advisor to Obama before he was an advisor to Obama).

    As long as individuals are frozen out of the decision making process on their own health care, we will have the runaway cost pressures that are driving the system today, which will ultimately result in the imposition of some form of National Health Care with its’ attendant rationing of proceedures and treatment.

    Sort of like the DMV saying that we’re not going to renew your license because there are too many drivers and we can’t afford to expand the highway system.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  34. Notice how it has changed from we lost in Iraq to how it is now un-won?

    The idea that someone to the Left of Mao should be giving political guidance or analysis to RethugliKKKans is laughable.

    JD (2d2bfc)

  35. I like AD’s idea to fix the health care system. I would just add two words to that. Tort reform.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  36. Comment by JD — 3/2/2009 @ 2:54 pm

    If Iraq is now “un-won”, we know who “un-won it” don’t we?

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  37. Mindbendingly stoopid is what Hax is. Trooly!

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  38. AD, and that every war the US has engaged in since the War of 1812 was “un won”.

    SPQR (72771e)

  39. Mike K – How does proposing universal healthcare fit in all that? I do not see how the party can get healthy by betraying their principles even more. I know that it is a popular position, but trading principles for votes rarely works.

    Comment by JD

    Too many people assume that a healthcare system with universal (or near universal) coverage means the Canadian system. France has a system with most of it funded by payroll deductions, fee-for-service and free choice of physician and hospital and including private hospitals and mostly individual doctor practices.

    I’ve put a lengthy analysis of it on my blog. It begins here.

    Our system is distorted by the employer-connected nature of most insurance which was an anomaly of the war and wage and price controls. McCain had a good idea in his campaign to get away from that but he couldn’t explain it and may not have understood it, himself.

    I was an enthusiast for medical IRAs but they are not working and, if we wait to let the Democrats do it, we will have rationing and all sorts of weird mandates. I can see bans on fast food and rules about obesity like those appearing in England.

    What makes the French system work is a bargain between the government and the medical profession that establishes a fee schedule but the medical associations are allowed (unlike here) to negotiate like unions and medical education is free. The fee schedule is not mandatory but the health plans are only obliged to pay the fee schedule. If a doctors wants to charge more, he has to depend on patients being willing to pay it. There is no coercion, so far as I know.

    There is a government paid share, called CMU, which covers the poor. The key to cost control is that, except for hospital costs, you pay the doctor FIRST, then get reimbursed by the plan. Major diseases, like diabetes and cancer, are covered 100%.

    You could say it violates principle, and it certainly does if you are a libertarian. However, a system that is funded by payroll deduction and is free choice based is already more libertarian than what we have now. There are multiple mechanisms for care deliver in France. If you want an HMO, you can have one. The point is choice. We are losing that rapidly.

    Anyway, it is an issue we need to have a policy for.

    If you want an explanation of why medical IRAs don’t work, ask me.

    MIke K (f89cb3)

  40. Liberals like me are quite pleased to hear ideologues that led the GOP into a hole now vehemently insist that only they are qualified to dig it out.

    Keep digging, old boys, keep digging…

    Hax Vobiscum (23258e)

  41. Free medical education?

    Dirty, dirty socialism.

    Bad magic. bad….

    But hey, it might keep health care costs down.

    Hax Vobiscum (23258e)

  42. Meanwhile the financial markets keep voting “no confidence” in Obama and Obama’s tainted economic team.

    SPQR (72771e)

  43. I agree that health care coverage should first be tax deductable – the current system penalizes small businesses and individuals who pay much higher premiums on average, due to the lack of available large – group discounts. Another good idea is a basic catastrophic coverage plan than everyone older than 18 years old must have, similar to the required auto insurance laws currently operating in most states. By enlarging the total insured pool in this manner, insurance companies wishing to do business will not be allowed to cherry – pick among the healthiest individuals. These are not perfect solutions by any means, but at least they’ll start to move the insurance industry in the right direction, along with changing consumer’s behavior in a more proactive and responsible manner towards their health care.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  44. Dude read Atlas Shrugged decades ago, decades ago I tell you, to please an imaginary girlfriend. Explains the perseveration with homoerotic fantasies.

    Heh.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  45. Another ringing endorsement of Obamanomics…
    DJIA….-299.64 (-4.24%)

    Will it find a floor at 5000?

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  46. I’ve heard 3800 will be the floor.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  47. There is nothing new about Marxism. No “new ideas” are necessary to defeat it. Just be honest about who these assholes are and what they are trying to do.

    ccoffer (a131b0)

  48. “These are not perfect solutions by any means, but at least they’ll start to move the insurance industry in the right direction”

    Dmac – In the right direction for whom. Isn’t the insurance industry acting in their own self interest to cherry pick the healthiest customers right now? What incentive do they have to depress their profitability by adding higher risk customers?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  49. “Reagan Democrats” didn’t switch parties because they bought into Reagan’s free-market fables. They switched because they liked him and trusted him. They appreciated his optimism and interpreted his “moral clarity” not as a sign of ideological correctness, but as evidence of strong character.

    They bought into Reagan for the other parts of his ideology, including his social conservatism and his strong foreigh policy stand. And of course Reagan was not the “free market” doctrinaire sort which he has been made out to be.

    BTW, I thought you were banned?

    Subotai (b50864)

  50. The party needs to find a way to heal the rift between religious conservatives and anti-tax, small l libertarians. That may not be possible, so the party will have to decide which constituency is more important.

    More important, it needs to heal the rift between nativists and “big-tent” Republicans who believe, as Reagan did, that Latinos are, at heart, Republicans. And again, it may not be possible to heal the rift, as the two sides are fundamentally opposed. In that case, they need to decide whether its more important to keep locking down 75 percent plus of the male white vote, while losing big to minorities, or whether it’s time to abandon the nativists to win more minority votes.

    I don’t know where we’d be withour ignorant leftwing jackasses like you to explain politics to us. Got any more lefty cliches to throw out? How about Reagan’s speech in Philidelphia to appeal to the KKK? That’s always good for some milage.

    Subotai (b50864)

  51. What incentive do they have to depress their profitability by adding higher risk customers?

    They don’t, Daley – thus the current status quo. But we’ve seen the auto insurance companies still able to maintain healthy profits in those states that require them to cover everyone in the pool of potential customers, despite having to take on a number of high – risk drivers. I see no reason why a similar dynamic could not be achieved regarding the health insurance issue. In this manner, gov’t plays a much smaller role than if we charged down the path of the so – called “universal healthcare,” which inevitably leads to severe healthcare rationing, for both the healthy and the sick.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  52. I don’t know where we’d be withour ignorant leftwing jackasses like you to explain politics to us.

    Please, please DO NOT ENGAGE THE TROLL. If you wonder why, please review the postings from said troll over the prior weeks – nothing good ever comes from it, and the Troll likes it.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  53. Romney dissed Limbaugh in the CPAC by saying GOPers must wish Obama to succeed.

    Andrew (e57bc9)

  54. Outlaw?

    Joe (dcebbd)

  55. I wonder what it must be like working closely with Chris Dodd and Barney Frank….
    Freddie Mac Chief Quits
    Housing lender David Moffett says he will step down by March 13 to return to the private sector
    .”
    And this is a guy who hired on after the big take-over, and he’s bailing.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  56. PSA

    Please do not feed the troll. It simply encourages it to keep pasting content.

    /PSA

    That is all.

    steve miller (0fb51f)

  57. Patterico, I have given up even attempting to read and comprehend your commenters. So I guess if they skip over me it’s fair.

    Michael Steele lost ALL credibility with me today. Scr3w him. I’m letting the NRC know not a dime from me. I’m donating to the National Conservative Campaign Fund from now on.

    Rush has it right. We need the right candidate; the policies and principles are in place. We just need a breathing entity who can articulate them, which WE DO NOT HAVE NOW. (Pardon me, I’ve imbibed a bit because I am that full of rage.)

    I don’t know if this brouhaha is separating the men from the boys but it sure is separating the conservatives from the losers.

    Peg C. (48175e)

  58. Patterico, I have given up even attempting to read and comprehend your commenters.

    Pardon me, I’ve imbibed a bit because I am that full of rage

    Pretty much says it all – why not come back when you’re not stinking drunk.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  59. If Limbaugh actually believed in the power of free markets, free people and free thinking, it wouldn’t even occur to him to wish Obama would fail, since he would be confident that Obama’s failure was assured.

    Limbaugh gives his game away by worrying that Obama will win credit for leading the U.S. back from the brink of collapse.

    If he were smarter and actually believed his own rhetoric, he’d be happily declaring Obama done and over and heralding a sweep for the GOP in 2010 and talking about the positives of who’s going to lead that sweep.

    Dennis Miller takes a much smarter position on this. He says he primarily hopes Obama succeeds because he’s tired of seeing his retirement money evaporate as the market and real estate plunge.

    But if Obama fails, at least conservatives will have the satisfaction of being proven ideologically correct, says Miller. “It’s win-win for me.”

    Hax Vobiscum (23258e)

  60. Blame everything on President Bush. The evilness of Dodd, Frank, Graham, AIG, BofA, Fannie Mae and all those clowns could have been neutralized by a powerful, articulate, popular president.

    Rush is in the business of entertainment. He makes hundreds of millions doing this. Don’t confuse his show, which many liberals listen to because it’s funny, for what the country should do.

    Fiscal conservatism has been completely hijacked, discredited, and run into the ground.

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  61. Policy matters. Otherwise you end up with Mayberry Machiavellis in power.

    imdw (aacaa9)

  62. What is a Mayberry Machiavelli?

    JD (2d2bfc)

  63. Limbaugh is an ass for hoping for failure. He gladly compares his hope for high unemployment, destruction of investments, and collapse of business activity with liberals hoping for the USA to lose the Iraq War. Um, yeah.

    Obama is ruining the country by spending so much. We must hope that the economy recovers, then hope we can obliterate him in the next election for spending so much.

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  64. Probably something oleaginous like a wesson.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  65. Mayberry Machiavelli?

    Ernest T. Bass as a Rovian overlord?

    Dmac (49b16c)

  66. The Left is fixated on hating Rush for the simple reason is that he upstaged their messiah for the entire country to see…
    He riffed for over an hour, without a teleprompter, and never stumbled over himself.
    No wells, no uhms, no you-knows.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  67. Barney Fife + Bernard Kerik = Mayberry Machiavelli

    Dick Cheney + Harriet Miers = Mayberry Machiavelli

    Arrogant Amorality + Self-Regarding Simpletonism = Mayberry Machiavelli

    Hax Vobiscum (23258e)

  68. AD-rts/os-He does that on a daily basis. It is his job. Obama’s job is to fix your savior’s f-up. (Dubya, if you need it spelled out for you)

    Ed from PA (c313be)

  69. How much more of the upper 10%’s wealth will Obama have to destroy before all those upper income earners in the coastal communities will begin to abandon his ship?

    How much damage has been done to Chris Matthews’ portfolio?

    How many more reporters will lose their jobs before the press turns a critical eye on Obamanomics?

    WLS Shipwrecked (26b1e5)

  70. Arrogant Amorality + Self-Regarding Simpletonism = Mayberry Machiavelli Hax Vobiscum

    FTFY.

    Pablo (99243e)

  71. He gladly compares his hope for high unemployment, destruction of investments, and collapse of business activity with liberals hoping for the USA to lose the Iraq War.

    Do quote him wishing for those things, Wesson. I caught the whole speech on CNN and I didn’t hear anything of the sort. The transcript is here, so feel free to note the parts that match your assertion.

    Pablo (99243e)

  72. Comment by Pablo — 3/2/2009 @ 5:07 pm

    There he goes again, expecting facts and data from a Libtard.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  73. Obama’s job is to fix your savior’s f-up.

    Eddie makes an impromptu appearance, replete with frothing mouth and rotted brain. Good to see ya, Heady!

    Dmac (49b16c)

  74. Dmac, so full of hatred? I’ve had half a martini. Just enough to smooth the edges of my outrage today. My comment about the commenters was aimed at the libtard trolls who infest every post of Patterico’s.

    Peg C. (48175e)

  75. “What is a Mayberry Machiavelli?”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayberry_Machiavelli

    imdw (de7003)

  76. Actually, Peg. Today’s a slow day and has been quite pleasant.
    But then, they get their asses handed to them in so many pieces it must have finally seeped into their demented, fermented, minds that “there be dragons there”!

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  77. I find it rich when one of our half-baked libs start to quote, for reinforcement, someone from the “faith-based” community.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  78. “I find it rich when one of our half-baked libs start to quote, for reinforcement, someone from the “faith-based” community.”

    You should look into that guy, DiIulio. Very interesting experience he had.

    imdw (8bb588)

  79. So, Rush blames Clinton for 9/11, 8 months after Bush was inaugurated and WLS Shippy blames Obama for a continuing financial mess, which started four months prior to a Obama’s inauguration. So, Dem influence lasts almost a year into a Republican administration and begins again even before an election win by a Dem!

    I guess WLS really doesn’t accept Truman’s “the buck stops here” as it would pertain to a the Republican (who presided over the single worst corporate loss in history). Damn it, Obama, give AIG its money back. Apparently, you were in secret control, much like Bill Clinton was until October of 2001.

    timb (8f04c0)

  80. The financial condition of the United States Government is wholly at the feet of Pelosi/Reid, since it was their decision to only send a continuing resolution to GWB for the current Fiscal Year thinking that they could get all of the increased spending they wanted with the new President on 20 Jan 09 – which they did, increasing spending by 8%. And, that doesn’t even count the spending for the previous FY which was also a product of the Dem controlled Congress resulting from the ’06 off-year elections.
    Obambi’s influence on the machinations of government in DC has been exponential since his ascension to the position of presumed nominee, relegating GWB to Lame-Duck status. There was one brief period when this seemed in jeopardy, but the Wall Street meltdown (thank you, Lehman Bros) sealed the deal for the Dems.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  81. Arrogant Amorality + Self-Regarding Simpletonism = Mayberry Machiavelli

    Arrogance + Ignorance + Smugness = Hax Vobiscum

    Subotai (e69b1e)

  82. Limbaugh is an ass for hoping for failure. He gladly compares his hope for high unemployment, destruction of investments, and collapse of business activity

    Count me as another person waiting to see you back this claim up with actual quotes.

    Subotai (e69b1e)

  83. My comment about the commenters was aimed at the libtard trolls who infest every post of Patterico’s.

    In that case, please accept my apologies.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  84. Please, please DO NOT ENGAGE THE TROLL.

    Heck, I don’t want to engage it, I want spray roach killer on it.

    I’m a sometime commenter here. I thought Hacks was banned a while back?

    His rote recitation of the same dishonest left-wing talking points on every thread regardless of applicability to topic should grounds for a ban all on its own. But I thought he was stalking one of the regular posters?

    Subotai (e69b1e)

  85. Rush proved one thing. O’Dumbo and his Chief of Staff are operating on the level of a short bus riding pre-school student. They jumped right in the pre-school level fight.

    Give it up on the economy. Until O’Dumbo and his communist followers (led by Reid and Peeloshi) bring the stock market to 15,000 and unemployment to less than 4.5% (where it was when they took over and promised to change the direction of the country) they are guilt of destroying the largest and fastest growing economy in the history of the world. All for political purposes because they knew the democrats were stupid enough to elect them. No democrat makes a remark about the economy to me without getting that fact rammed down their throat, and I don’t care if it’s in the middle of a crowd. Making an a** of them is great fun.

    Scrapiron (4e0dda)

  86. “. Until O’Dumbo and his communist followers (led by Reid and Peeloshi) bring the stock market to 15,000 and unemployment to less than 4.5% (where it was when they took over and promised to change the direction of the country)”

    The market was at 14000 in oct of 2007 and then 8000 On jan 20, 2009. You think at any of those values it may have been overvalued?

    imdw (6bdbeb)

  87. You would think that if our progressive friends had any faith in their Messiah’s moves they would spend their time defending them rather than mischaracterizing and distorting the statements and positions of people such as Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh isn’t running for anything and holds no position in the Republican Party, but trashing him takes the focus off the disastrous dirty socialist moves of H.I.M. Obama.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  88. I thought Hacks was banned a while back?

    He was, but was allowed back in after offering a mealy – mouthed apology to one of the commenters. Still not worth a moment of your time, though.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  89. “The market was at 14000 in oct of 2007 and then 8000 On jan 20, 2009. You think at any of those values it may have been overvalued?”

    imdw – As we’ve seen, 8000 was overvalued based on the expectations for an Obama Presidency, but nobody was really certain how much fiscal trash he was going to ram through during the first 100 days of his reign of terror. October 2007 is a little far back to stretch – are you trying to look like a hindsight hero? Was there more clarity then about the direction of the economy and election? I think not. Hey, but keep trying these nonsense games.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  90. Limbaugh gives his game away by worrying that Obama will win credit for leading the U.S. back from the brink of collapse.

    This made me laugh!

    daleyrocks, you make a good point: People generally attack what they’re afraid of. If Limbaugh were truly just the hack the left claimsh he is, why even waste time even criticizing or castigating him? Why would they even care what he says – which evidences they do indeed listen to him? He’d just be another mouth not worth their time of day. ….and yet so much time and space is indeed devoted to him…

    Dana (137151)

  91. “October 2007 is a little far back to stretch – are you trying to look like a hindsight hero? ”

    Dude wanted it back to 15000 for some reason. I picked 14 becuase that was about around the peak. we lost some 6000 points under the previous regime. Looks like we’re not done correcting.

    imdw (41b4a1)

  92. timb @ 79:

    The seeds for 9/11 were all in place before Bush took office. The perpetrators entered the country under the Clinton Admin., with the exception of a few of the muscle guys. Bin Laden and his network were comfortable and entrenched in Afghanistan. Nothing happened in the months between Jan and Sept. that gave away the plot.

    My comment about Obama destroying wealth has to do with how the market and the economy have reacted to his proposals. He’s not shy about his call for capital to be extracted from the market in order to be made use of by his technocrats. Confiscatory tax rates are clear for all to see in his 10 year budget plan, as are about $8 trillion in NEW debt over that same period.

    I’d like to see an analysis of what the projected deficits will be using more sober growth projections that the “Rosy Forecasts” set forth in his plan.

    Average of private economic forecasts for FY 2010 — 1.8%

    Obama forcast — 3.4%

    WLS Shipwrecked (26b1e5)

  93. Vobiscum gives his game away by getting pantsed on every thread he’s commented on since being allowed to return to this blog.

    Heckuva job Vobiscum!

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  94. “October 2007 is a little far back to stretch – are you trying to look like a hindsight hero? ”

    Dude wanted it back to 15000. I picked 14 because that was about around the peak. We lost some 6000 points under the previous regime. Looks like we’re not done correcting.

    imdw (3dead3)

  95. wls…
    If growth is barely 50% of what they project, we know that revenues will be decreased, and the deficit will therefore explode absent any spending restraint (oh wait, we’re talking about Socialist Democrats here, silly me).
    Without a mid-course change (2010) by the electorate, the economic condition of this country will implode.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  96. The real marking point for checking the DJIA for a turn, is the date in the Primary Season where BHO became the presumed nominee of the Dem Party.

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  97. I can’t remember. Who was in charge of writing the finance legislation in 2007?

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  98. “Dude wanted it back to 15000. I picked 14 because that was about around the peak. We lost some 6000 points under the previous regime. Looks like we’re not done correcting.”

    imdw – Where and when was it overvalued in your opinion?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  99. Let’s see, all taxing and spending must originate in the House of Representatives (if I remember my Constitution correctly), and the Speaker of the House is elected by the majority Party.
    Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): 2007 – ….

    AD - RtR/OS (3120b9)

  100. “imdw – Where and when was it overvalued in your opinion?”

    I’m with mccain adviser kevin hasset: Dow 36,000!

    http://www.amazon.com/Dow-36-000-Strategy-Profiting/dp/0609806998

    imdw (a81897)

  101. Pablo – Rush openly hopes for failure. Failure in reviving the economy is absolutely high unemployment, massive inflation, and lots of businesses going bankrupt.

    Pablo, please explain what you imagine failure of Obama’s economic plan would be, in your rosiest scenario, a scenario which best helps Republicans.

    Look, I’m no liberal. All this talk of blessing Bush’s 8 years of total failure to implement fiscal conservatism is foul.

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  102. Wesson, check your facts on that “Rush openly hopes for failure” bit. Hint: You’re very mistaken.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  103. Ah. Must I remind you not to respond to Snacks Nabisco?

    steve miller (4bda12)

  104. No, you’re not. The context folk are on the warpath.

    “I hope he fails” needs an army of dittoheads to deny it, but it’s gonna help the good guys send them home again in 2010. I’m looking at 63 Senators thanks to Rush. Rush has just McCaskill’d the entire Dem party. Thanks Rush

    timb (8f04c0)

  105. “imdw – Where and when was it overvalued in your opinion?”

    Once again bravely refuses to take a stand on her own question!

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  106. Yawn. Wake me when this latest troll leaves.

    steve miller (4bda12)

  107. BTW, I hope he (Bambi) fails, too. And I hope America wins.

    Parse that. It’s as difficult as parsing what Rush said.

    steve miller (4bda12)

  108. timmah – Let’s focus on the positive, what we commonly refer to as your delusions. Why is O going to succeed? Show your work.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  109. “Once again bravely refuses to take a stand on her own question!”

    You didn’t read the link? 15 thousand is Undervalued.

    imdw (eaf215)

  110. And please do state the object of the predicate. 😉

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  111. Here’s Limbaugh in context

    So I’m thinking of replying to the guy, “Okay, I’ll send you a response, but I don’t need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails.” (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here’s the point. Everybody thinks it’s outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, “Oh, you can’t do that.” Why not? Why is it any different, what’s new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what’s gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don’t care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: “Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails.” Somebody’s gotta say it.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407)

  112. timb still dishonest about what Limbaugh said. Color me surprised.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  113. Yeah, quoting someone is always dishonest.

    Look, I’m gonna be dishonest again:

    SPQR said

    timb still dishonest about what Limbaugh said. Color me surprised.

    Now, all you need is a few million, middle class, angry white dudes to parse that for awhile and tell everyone you were actually surprised and not “shocked.” It’s all in the nuance for you gray are folks.

    timb (8f04c0)

  114. Hax said:

    Same goes for the economy. Bush promised tax cuts would exert some magical force on the economy but, alas, no rabbits came out of the hat.

    Are you sure about this? Putting more money in the taxpayers wallet does, indeed, help the economy.

    When people have more disposable income, they spend it. That improves the economy. Some, the smart ones (unlike me) save it. Both support the economy: One by stimulating the economy, the other by strengthening the value of the dollar. Sending money to the government reduces the ability to spend or save it.

    The government can, of course, do good things with that money. They can support infrastructure and improve defenses, both of which improve our quality of life and make us more willing to invest, which increases the value of the dollar.

    We can print more money, but that deflates its value and makes us more beholden to the bearers of the debt.

    I know that the current President and his advisers are doing their best to stabilize the economy. However, I really believe they are going about it the wrong way. They are moving us closer to socialism. I know that is an attractive bargain, but how well does it really work long-term? How does it reward the individual and initiative?

    Someone can come in an correct me if I’m wrong, but conservatism believes in three basic principles:

    Smaller government;

    Lower taxes;

    and a strong defense (And, by the way, I believe a lot of money is wasted on defense).

    That’s not hard. And it’s not evil.

    Ag80 (3e2c59)

  115. You want policy? Here it is.
    Flat or fair tax. I don’t care at this point. Close the dept of education. School vouchers administered by the states and paid for with federal funds at first then gradually shifting to state funds. Sound money. End farm subsidies. No more ethanol. I don’t think anybody but lobbiests would miss the dept of commerce. Sell off federal lands (the gov’t owns 1/3 of American land) to help pay off the debt. Balance the budget and shrink it by at least a trillion. Term limits. Privatize social security. To bad nobody on our side will fight for any of these.

    Ralph (e0eb85)

  116. Many good people of America see that fiscal conservatism is the correct path. Rush Limbaugh and George W Bush are absolutely not the right people to lead on that objective. In fact, they are the best allies of the left because they are “useful idiots” who claim ownership of the mission, yet are totally incompetent at leading the mission of “fiscal conservatism”.

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  117. Wesson said:

    Many good people of America see that fiscal conservatism is the correct path. Rush Limbaugh and George W Bush are absolutely not the right people to lead on that objective. In fact, they are the best allies of the left because they are “useful idiots” who claim ownership of the mission, yet are totally incompetent at leading the mission of “fiscal conservatism”.

    I can agree with you in some aspects about the former President, although I admire him. But what about Limbaugh? I’ve never heard him veer from the mission of “fiscal conservatism.”

    I suspect something here.

    Ag80 (3e2c59)

  118. Bullesye, Wesson.

    I’m a fiscal conservative and a practicing believer in free-market capitalism, as ideals.

    Where I would disagree with most Republicans is on how to get there.

    Like Wesson says, the Bush/Rush Republicans are all talk, no action. They present free markets and tax cuts as some kind of magic that brings prosperity and government intervention as some kind of black magic that takes it away.

    When they get control, they cut taxes for their richest constituents, start wars and boost spending willy-nilly. When anyone points that out, they call them a communist or an America-hater or a “troll.”

    Now the economy has collapsed and the government needs to step in as a referee and reorganize institutions that are “too big to fail.” Along the way, we need regulations that won’t allow banks to become too big to fail again.

    Only when you have a reasonably level playing field can you expect to have the most vigorous competition.

    Hax Vobiscum (23258e)

  119. Ah, now I see.

    Ag80 (3e2c59)

  120. 100. Pablo – Rush openly hopes for failure. Failure in reviving the economy is absolutely high unemployment, massive inflation, and lots of businesses going bankrupt.

    Wesson–if a DOW at 6750 and dropping is Obama succeeding, what does failure look like?

    Another Chris (a3bb8f)

  121. “Only when you have a reasonably level playing field can you expect to have the most vigorous competition.”

    Because the government must prevent banks from becoming too big to fail and intervene in markets to ensure a level playing field.

    Spoken like a true believer in free markets capitalism!

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  122. “Yeah, quoting someone is always dishonest.”

    timmah – The only quote you provided was “I hope he fails.” What does Limbaugh hope Obama fails at, the War in Iraq, dialogue with Iran, curing cancer, socializing America? It’s a little tough to tell from the quote you provided, which is why people are justifiably on your case. You don’t have to be an asshole if you don’t try to be one.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  123. Hax said:

    “Only when you have a reasonably level playing field can you expect to have the most vigorous competition.”

    And who decides the “level playing field?” You? The President? Congress?

    By definition, a “level playing field” means that all players have the same and equal chance of succeeding. How, exactly, does government make that playing field equal?

    The most vigorous debate comes from equals making their points and accepting defeat when it happens and preparing for wins as they come.

    For the time being, conservatives have to accept our defeat, but we can keep making our points.

    By the way, if I was not clear, I suspect the intentions of Hax and Wesson.

    Ag80 (3e2c59)

  124. Another Chris – At some point us fiscal conservatives need to acknowledge the absolute total failure of president G W Bush. What an asshole. What a pathetic inarticulate moron. What a “useful idiot” for the left, because he is so stupid, because he spends his political capital to run the country into the ditch.

    Fiscal conservatism is the only way this country can survive. Does any politician even want that anymore? Um, no.

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  125. You aren’t by chance a committed conservative for the last 20 years who has voted now for Obama, are you?

    Do you have a newsletter I can subscribe to?

    steve miller (4bda12)

  126. The leftist extremism of Obama is a result of George Bush’s incompetence in dealing with the economy himself. Bush had 8 years to reverse the perverted policies of Clinton/Graham/Dodd/Frank. 2 of those years Bush owned Congress. President George W. Bush is the worst president ever. Fiscal conservatism is the only way this country will survive. Fiscal conservatism is the the only way this country will dig itself out of this hole.

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  127. The leftist extremism of Obama is a result of George Bush’s incompetence in dealing with the economy himself.

    I get it! Bush is not only to blame for what happened while he was Prez, but for what happens while Obama is Prez and the Democrats run Congress! Obama would not be a leftist extremist if not for Bush!

    You might want to take somethinng for that bad case of BDS.

    SteveM (5a7a07)

  128. Fuck all of you Republicans who adhere to this asinine Republican ideology of creationism / anti-abortion / anti-gays at all costs. The financial stability of the nation is at stake, and you guys are most interested in plastering the humans-walked-with-dinosaurs meme on billboards. What The F ?!

    Enough is enough. You guys are idiots.

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  129. Do you have a newsletter I can subscribe to? I’d like to hear more of your views.

    steve miller (4bda12)

  130. I will have to say, the Mobys are becoming less competent. Soon we will have someone posting that he voted for Reagan, but Bush made him vote for Bambi.

    steve miller (4bda12)

  131. […] Karl at Patterico has a slightly different take.  While I agree we will need a better messenger, as argued above, I think that new policy […]

    I’m a victim of the “Moderate Myth” | skewred.com (86aa12)

  132. I don’t care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: “Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails.” Somebody’s gotta say it.

    And, yet when someone says he says it, his listeners run around in a tizzy complaining that the headline he approved is the headline.

    Rush says Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia. An entire thread of well-meaning defenders claim he’s right.

    timb (a83d56)

  133. The irony of someone like the above quoting Orwell is amusing, if not nutritious.

    Eric Blair (8d54e0)

  134. Fuck all of you Republicans who adhere to this asinine Republican ideology of creationism / anti-abortion / anti-gays at all costs.

    The true Moby is thus revealed – nice try, but your mad computer skillz need some serious updating.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  135. Yeah, Eric, your work was noted for its love of demagogues like Limbaugh. But, as always, good to hear form you on the substance of the matter, rather just some witty, droll observation. Makes me wonder if you should just give up the nome de plume, since you are dishonoring it.

    timb (a83d56)

  136. Wow. “Dishonor“? Really?

    Somebody got up on the wrong side of his Procrustean bed this morning. Why so nasty? Didn’t you win?

    But watching you shuck and jive over the past few months over what you believe and don’t believe (and more importantly, what other people believe) makes your own high horse attitude in the post above truly shameful, if not…well, dishonorable.

    You have a good day, Grumpy.

    Eric Blair (8d54e0)

  137. Nobody here denied Rush’s “four words” timb. As usual, you remove the context and completely turn the words around to suit your purposes.

    NEWS ALERT: Barack Hussein Obama is not the United States of America. Barack Hussein Obama is one person. It is possible to hope he fails at what he is trying to do without hoping the United States of America gets hurt in the process. In fact, hoping he fails at what he is trying to do is hoping the United States of America does not get further hurt.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  138. The use of Rush’s “4 words” reminds me of how the Left bastardized those “16 words” in the SOTU.

    JD (4fe80d)

  139. John, it’s nice that you try, but keep in mind the history of this target.

    But it is ironic to see the outrage from the Left over this kind of thing, when taken in the context of the Left’s continual treatment of the former President!

    Eric Blair (8d54e0)

  140. The leftist extremism of Obama is a result of George Bush’s incompetence in dealing with the economy himself.

    Someone hasn’t paid attention to Obama’s entire life history–he was raised by a leftist extremist, was nurtured politically and academically by leftist extremists, and mentored religiously by leftist extremists. Blaming his extremism on Bush is the height of ignorance and stupidity.

    Fuck all of you Republicans who adhere to this asinine Republican ideology of creationism / anti-abortion / anti-gays at all costs. The financial stability of the nation is at stake, and you guys are most interested in plastering the humans-walked-with-dinosaurs meme on billboards.

    And then we have the segue into a completely unrelated bit of bombast on a point that never came up in the thread.

    Joe Biden couldn’t have acted out a better example of complete idiocy. This is what happens when public schools make crafting “socially aware” rather than functionally literate students a priority and combine it with a three-second attention span–you get left-wing Axelturfers that can’t even be bothered to keep the charade up for more than a day before ripping the mask off and screaming their indoctrinated caricatures.

    Another Chris (2d8013)

  141. Fuck all of you Republicans who adhere to this asinine Republican ideology of creationism / anti-abortion / anti-gays at all costs.

    Genius.

    Pablo (99243e)

  142. since you are dishonoring it.

    That takes the prize for Most Ignorant Post Regarding Orwell Ever – at least at this site.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  143. Dmac, he is just trying to be insulting to me personally. That’s all. It’s TTB (typical troll behavior).

    I can see why he gets the reputation he does.

    Eric Blair (8d54e0)

  144. Wesson, not the most coherent of thoughts you got there.

    SPQR (72771e)

  145. The leftist extremism of Obama is a result of George Bush’s incompetence

    Are the sock puppets out today ?

    Mike K (2cf494)

  146. you guys are most interested in plastering the humans-walked-with-dinosaurs meme on billboards. What The F ?!

    What the F, indeed. What stray neuron fired in your kool-aid soaked brain to set that particular thought off?

    Subotai (704b76)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6775 secs.