Patterico's Pontifications

5/19/2009

Politics is for Winners

Filed under: Obama,Politics — DRJ @ 2:30 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Barack Obama, explaining to GOP leaders why his stimulus plan should be adopted despite their objections: “I won.”

Lindsey Graham, explaining to a Ron Paul supporter why he isn’t interested in building the GOP around libertarian ideas that he doesn’t share: “I’m a winner, pal.”

— DRJ

20 Responses to “Politics is for Winners”

  1. “open hearts, open minds, fair-minded words.”

    All forgotten

    Neo (46a1a2)

  2. Graham is quickly becoming my least – favorite GOP politico – and this furthers his lead. What.a.narcissistic.douchebag.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  3. Lindsey is so sassy I bet he has to beat the boys off with a stick!

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  4. “I’m a winner, pal.”

    For now.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  5. The only reason Lindsay has attained his Numero Uno position as GOP douchebag, is that Arlen Specter changed party’s.
    It’s hard to keep a good (fill in desparaging noun here) down!

    AD - RtR/OS! (681803)

  6. I’m a winner … who supported John McCain … hmmm

    Harry Arthur (606c8f)

  7. I don’t mean to wish anyone ill but a tracheostomy would look good on Lindsey. It would sound good, too.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  8. Charlie Crist, Florida’s governor, seems to have this same attitude.

    Michael Ejercito (7c44bf)

  9. H/t happy

    Gayest. Senator. Ever.

    JD (2c7553)

  10. Not to put too fine a point on it, but they’re right: politics is the art of achieving elective office in order to put your philosophies and policies into practice as government policy and as law. Winning really is everything; there are no points for second place.

    The nit-picking Dana (474dfc)

  11. Ron Paul, hopefully anyway, would not have had much of his support if the GOP had offered sane iterations of libertarianism and small government.

    Not that Ron Paul had much support at any rate.

    But the GOP has to have some principles, and it’s very hard to see what they are. Libertarianism has some very good basic ideas that can be used to hold together a coalition of people with different views on many other issues, but aligned to keep government efficient.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  12. “…to keep government efficient”

    That’s a GWB attitude, not a Conservative one.
    We want government to be not only small, but very inefficient.
    Inefficiency enhances the Freedom and Liberty of the individual; efficiency, not so much.

    AD - RtR/OS! (681803)

  13. AD, you don’t understand what I meant.

    And if you think GWB was an efficient leader you’re nuts.

    I want a small government that does all the essential things a government needs to do.

    That’s efficiency. Are you talking about efficient politicians or legislatures or something? Somewhere along the line, I think you’re just not understanding.

    Inefficient government is what we have now. It’s huge and unwieldy and takes forever and tons of money to basically do nothing or little.

    Oh well… I get what you’re saying. You want congress to pass fewer laws, etc. Let’s reform it first.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  14. No, I understood. But, GW’s position was as a “Compassionate Conservative” who wanted an efficient,
    large government to do good things for people, as did his father,
    regardless of whether or not those policies were constitutional.
    Our government is inefficient because it is so large –
    so large that no one, not even 535 Mandarins, can keep track of what it is doing.
    What I want is what the Founders wanted, a small government doing only those things specified in the Constitution, and subject to the checks and balances, and obstructions to the rapid, orderly functioning of an obtrusive government, that are built into the Constitution.
    The first thing that is needed is a Chief Executive who will veto every bill that is an infringement of the Liberties and Freedoms of the People – even if is just one minor clause in a long complex bill, it needs to be vetoed.
    Congress is out of control, and has been since the capitulation of the Supremes to the New Deal.
    They stay out of control because we have not had a Chief Executive (well, maybe one) who would rein them in. Even the best horse needs a firm hand on the reins, and we are far from having the best horse.

    AD - RtR/OS! (681803)

  15. Lindsey still thinks he has a shot at the VP job.

    tmac (f9e092)

  16. “Not that Ron Paul had much support at any rate.”

    I’ve seen estimates that five percent of the population is certifiably crazy, so Paul had a natural base to work from. Plus he had the legalize drug crowd and the racists. A real melting pot.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  17. Plus he had the legalize drug crowd and the racists. I have never understood why the NAACP accepted donations from southern bootleggers. I guess all racist groups just want money and power.

    highpockets (4d6731)

  18. When I first read this post, I thought the title was “Politics is for weiners”.

    JD (4b1a03)

  19. JD – 9:41 – Best comment of the night.

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  20. JD, not “weiners”, but “whiners”.

    PCD (02f8c1)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2678 secs.