They Hired Pelosi
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; send your tips here.]
Oh, no, it looks like the reverse psychology ninjitsu didn’t work. Pelosi has been elected House Minority Leader:
Democrats in the House of Representatives voted 150-43 Wednesday to keep House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as their leader in the new Congress, a number of lawmakers said as they emerged from the caucus meeting.
By the way, a lot of people have been comparing the Democratic reaction to the election in terms of the stages of grieving. This would be referred to as denial.
Or to find a deeper point in all of this, how many of those votes were based on a fear of being accused of sexism?
And in other news, I just got a breaking news email stating that Murky plans to declare victory in Alaska tonight. Not the outcome I would have hoped for, but what can you do?
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
The most obvious ad for 2012 has already been written. Boehner flied commercial on our dime. Pelosi had her own little air force for her friends and family on our dime.
I can only pray that Boehner’s house is frugal enough that the comparison speaks to some larger issues about Pelosi’s willingness to bankrupt our country for things we don’t need.
It would be hilarious if we could put Pelosi’s jet on ebay.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 12:54 pmNot sure who you would have put in Pelosi’s position. The Blue Dog Democrats got whomped this year, far worse than their progressive counterparts.
I’m guessing….. zero…. since it’s done by secret ballot.
We can reflect on Miller’s hubris as exemplified by his tweets only four weeks ago (how he’s “measuring the drapes”, meeting his “future colleagues”, etc.).
Good times.
Kman (d25c82) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:00 pmThis meme that progressives did better, and the unstated assumption behind it that it was due to their progressivism, is truly cute. Special, even.
Sec prigs like kmart have been so marginalized that their idea of good times Is having a conservative beaten out by a moderate Republican.
JD (c8c1d2) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:07 pmChristmas came early this year!
Thanks Nancy!
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:11 pm“The Blue Dog Democrats got whomped this year, far worse than their progressive counterparts.”
Kman – Because the voters rejected the conservative agenda or something? Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:12 pmDaley, JD
shhh….. if the democrats want to think they should tack even further to the left, do you really think we should try to persuade them otherwise?
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:15 pmNot purely Pelosi’s fault, but the Democrats also lost a record number of state legislatures.
A truly national rejection of the Democratic party.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:19 pmUmmm, are you serious? Even someone with her same progressive views who didn’t act like an ass for 3 years would be an obvious improvement. This is about entrenched power and corruption, not merely policy.
Pelosi’s ‘we’ll have to pass it to see what’s in it’ attitude is not a necessary aspect of hard left politics (except that those politics are necessarily undemocratic in the USA).
It’s the democrat party. They reaffirm all those adds linking the party generally with power for crooks like Pelosi. Those adds were called unfair by many democrats, and now we see just how fair they were.
Miller lost because he exhausted his campaign coffers beating Murkowski in a primary. She knew what she was doing. It’s a red state and a Republican would win, so she let him stake out his positions and strategies on the false premise that she would endorse him and support him if he won the primary. She even went so far as to make a deal with him that they would agree to support whoever won that primary.
And then she broke her word and ran against the primary winner. She had a much easier time funding this campaign, knowing how many Alaskan aristocrats need that federal pork.
I can reflect on this and realize Miller made some major errors and ran against a political machine. It makes Sarah Palin look more impressive. Apparently it’s nearly impossible to beat these hacks.
What’s this got to do with Nancy Pelosi, Kman? Are you just changing the subject? This is hilarious news for the GOP.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:19 pmNo, of course not. I’m just saying that Democrats who tried to placate the right didn’t do so well — in fact, they did worse then progressive Democrats.
So the lesson that many on the left are taking is “Dems, don’t be compromising wimps”.
Kman (d25c82) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:20 pmIn all honesty: yes, the Tea Party in particular should work harder on reforming democrats.
There have to be some socially liberal but fiscally sane liberals out there who can’t stand Pelosi’s ‘shove down throat’ tactics. I wish they would have a Tea Party too because Pelosi as minority leader is actually bad for our country.
This is great news for GOP election prospects, and I’m looking forward to the great ads and condemnations, but the democrats made a decision today to double down on bets we’re all losing.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:23 pmthey did better than they could have been by being ideologues.
Only a moron pretends refusing to compromise this year, for democrats in particular, was a good idea.
House races just work such that the moderate members are in the more volatile races. Your entire argument shows a basic ignorance of America politics that rivals your inability to tell if you’re talking about the US Constitution or some state’s constitution.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:25 pmCan’t put “Pelosi’s jet” on eBay, it belongs to the 89th Airlift Wing, USAF, Andrews AFB, MD.
AD-RtR/OS! (68ed01) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:25 pmPlease, kmart’ let that be the lesson you take from this. Please please please please please please please please.
JD (c8c1d2) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:26 pmUnder threat of what — the Tea Party will stop voting for Dems??
Kman (d25c82) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:27 pmFor many on the left — myself included — we think our Democratic leaders compromised too much too quickly, only to have the Republicans procrastinate and delay and THEN vote us down on many things.
Anyway, my “takeaway” from the election isn’t, sadly, what most of you hoped it would be. The GOP won because the economy was still bad, and that makes people fearful. It’s stupid to think the midterms posed any kind of permanent conservative revolution for which the Democrats must now go through some wholesale change.
Bookmark this comment — you’ll want to use it two years from now. Well, you think you will.
Kman (d25c82) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:32 pmPlease please please please please please please, kmart. Add that to the list of lessons you should take from the elections.
JD (c8c1d2) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:35 pmMurky…
AD-RtR/OS! (68ed01) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:35 pmWell, the people of Alaska have gotten what they wanted, the bastards.
Now will be the time for the indictment-watch countdown:
2,190 days and counting….will she make it clean to the end?
Kman
are you too blinkered by your liberalism to realize the real reason why the blue dogs were clobbered?
You see you act as though the distribution of blue dogs is random. It is not. The more conservative the district, the more likely they are to run a conservative dem. I mean you aren’t going to run a John Kerry for senate in Virginia. But you will run a Jim Webb, who was actually a republican at one point in his life. But Webb has to be feeling nervous right now, and you would be a fool to claim that his chances for reelection would improve if he voted and talked more like John Kerry.
So the reason why the blue dogs were disproportionately clobbered was because they were placed in disproportionately conservative districts, and however conservative their individual votes were, their first vote, for Speaker Pelosi, made a liberal agenda possible.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:36 pm#15 is funny. Odd thing, is Pelosi and Reid are applauding.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:43 pmOf course. That’s why it was futile for Democrats in those states to try to move to the right. They weren’t going to outflank their opposition, and they de-motivated whatever base they once had.
Kman (d25c82) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:44 pmkman
Go on, keep believing that this is anything but a center right country, and that we just need a true liberal to bring us out.
Fool.
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:46 pmCompromised too much too quickly.
That’s just pure denial.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/17/2010 @ 1:49 pmCould the GOP have gotten a better early Xmas present than this? They get to kick Pelosi around in 2012 too! Sweet!
Tim (b0bef9) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:01 pmit shows how much the democratic party cares about what the majority of the people think. they think they have a problem communicating with the american people. well its nowhere near as bad as the problem we have communicating with the democratic party. when only 11% of the people think you are doing a good job and you get to keep your position it shows the utter arrogance and contempt in which the democratic party holds the will of the people.
tommy mc donnell (397858) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:07 pmKman, just an obersvation, but Democrats and progressives don’t “move” to the right, they fake a move to the right and then move hard left once their lies lead to their election.
Why did this election go so bad for lefties? Because the biased MSM no longer controls the media and by extension the message. The truth is getting out there and people really do see what the left is about – and tyranny is not all that appealing.
It will get even worse for progressives/socialists/communists unless Obama can shut down alternative media and talk radio.
Silence that dissent Obomba!
Marko (dd04a9) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:07 pm“only to have the Republicans procrastinate and delay and THEN vote us down on many things.”
Kman – Those Republican major, oops, how gig the Republicans delay and vote you down again?
I want to bookmark your comment purely for that nonsense.
How many years ago was it that Howard Dean was running around the country specifically recruiting Blue Dogs to run? Now you are repudiating them just a few years later when the mood strikes? Pure comedy gold.
That just shows a lack of any core philosophy on the left, pure political opportunism. It also shows in the way you play identity politics. Use minority groups at election time then screw them.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:09 pmI recognize that. Her pilots and crew signed up to defend the USA from threats. That plane was purchased for the same purpose. It’s not really ‘Pelosi’s’, but she used her power to steal its use, and their labor, because she wanted an incredibly wasteful luxury.
Boehner is simply going to fly commercial.
The USAF must not need the use of this jet if they could spare it for such a waste. No insult intended to the service, but it would be great if we could just sell the jet as a statement about reforming this type of waste fraud and abuse.
I’m sure, as minority leader, Pelosi will demand all sorts of special services. Limos, planes, etc. We need to be upfront about the problem. It’s not a trivial amount of waste just because we are spending so much money on other things.
We need a few transportation aircraft, but this luxury crap needs to go. If we need to shuttle VIPs in an emergency, they can take a C-130.
Yes. In other words, I hope fiscally conservative democrats, who are socially liberal, continue to join the Tea Party. We have many hundreds of thousands of such people, but I want tens of millions of such people.
Of course, you’re only pretending the Tea Party is Republican now in an ad hoc fashion.
Note the date… you said that only a few days ago. You like to make incredibly weak claims and pretend they prove everyone wrong, but no one pretends this house majority is permanent. Hell, most of us recognize that if the House can’t govern our spending to sanity, they will lose our confidence quickly. You’re running out of straw to burn.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:11 pmDemocrats giving in and compromising, failing to get the public option and move further left, caused seniors, women, young people, and independents to move to the right.
Sure, that sounds plausible in an alternate universe.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:12 pmIt’s like he didn’t pay attention to how Obama won in 2008.
The United States trusted the democrats on their promises to be transparent, conservative on spending, and listen to the people. Those were lies, and now it is harder for democrats to pretend to be conservative.
this is a major element of the 2012 election for Obama.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:13 pmListening skills and self- introspection by The Pelosi Cabal is non-existent.However, arrogance and hubris conjoined with utter contempt for free market economics is a hallmark of this crowd.Hopefully, by 2012, this crowd will diminish in size and power.
MIKE191 (3036b3) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:15 pm“they did better than they could have been by being ideologues.”
Who’s to say they weren’t being ideologues?
imdw (ca9f6c) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:21 pmGosh, who’s to say that you actually wrote that?
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:22 pmRead the entire thread before trying to pick something out to make some empty snort comment like that.
Your comment makes no sense in context of people who compromised their ideology, idiot.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:23 pmI mean, with all the spoofing and all.
Look: if you are going to play troll games, you need to lighten up. Trolls ask questions and shuck and jive. That’s all you are doing. It’s old.
If you want to be taken seriously (yeah, as if), the write to Patterico. Ask to write a guest post outlining your beliefs. Right now, Patterico thinks you are a troll; he said so.
You can prove him wrong, and actually contribute to discussion.
Or you can continue to be a troll.
I know which you will choose. So does everyone else.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:24 pmDustin, now that Princess Nan doesn’t need whatever Exec-jet she was using, it will be available for Queen Janet.
AD-RtR/OS! (68ed01) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:27 pm“Your comment makes no sense in context of people who compromised their ideology, idiot.”
I don’t think the blue dogs were compromising their ideology.
“shhh….. if the democrats want to think they should tack even further to the left, do you really think we should try to persuade them otherwise?”
I don’t think it’s a question of tacking to the left. I think its a question of delivering what is popular and what people who elected them (and did not show up again this time) wanted. So that means doing things that are popular (like a public option) rather than unpopular (like a mandate). Things like delivering jobs and economic growth (a priority for people) rather than cutting the deficit (not a priority for people).
That also means not doing things that lead to recent headlines like ‘obama’s commission wants to cut your social security’ etc… Which are not popular things to get behind.
imdw (3ac9fb) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:30 pmDid you read the read the thread yet? We’re talking about comprimisers who unanimously supported Pelosi before the election, but then tried to say they didn’t support her.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:35 pmYou expect reading comprehension?
AD-RtR/OS! (68ed01) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:36 pmFrom something that is barely sentient?
Good Luck with that.
“So that means doing things that are popular (like a public option)”
imdw – The myth of the public option being popular is based entirely on surface level polling without explaining to people what it entailed. In polls where the questions went down a layer or two, asking if you wanted the government making your health care decision, etc., the option became as unpopular as ObamaCare itself, polling well under 50%.
It’s popularity was a complete liberal myth. When actually explained, people disliked it. Go figure.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:37 pm“Do you want free health care for all, an end to human hunger, and world peace?”
Yes!
“Do you want policies that aim to do this, but actually cause massive economic problems, instrusive government, lack of choice, are extremely expensive, and make the problems worse?”
Not really.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:48 pm“imdw – The myth of the public option being popular is based entirely on surface level polling without explaining to people what it entailed.”
I think that is consistent with finding that it is popular enough to lead to election consequences.
“In polls where the questions went down a layer or two, asking if you wanted the government making your health care decision, etc., the option became as unpopular as ObamaCare itself, polling well under 50%.”
Oh is that how the public option worked. So it would be unpopular. Like medicare.
But note you’re missing something. This may be a little subtle, but its also about things being popular to the people that elected the dems.
imdw (dce6ae) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:48 pmthis is good news. the fact that Pelosi is unable to suppress her arrogance and leftist idiocy – even for the cameras – means that true Leftism will be on display for at least until 2012.
ShyAsrai (236a14) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:53 pmHere’s another popular one: end DADT.
imdw (011cd2) — 11/17/2010 @ 2:56 pm“but its also about things being popular to the people that elected the dems.”
imdw – You mean like seniors, women, young people, and independents who broke more for Republicans this election?
“So it would be unpopular. Like medicare.”
For people not already on Medicare, what’s not to like!
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 3:07 pm“imdw – You mean like seniors, women, young people, and independents who broke more for Republicans this election?”
I mean like people who didn’t show up in 2010 but did in 08.
Another popular one: middle class tax cuts.
imdw (e62ae1) — 11/17/2010 @ 3:11 pmbut its also about things being popular to the people that elected the dems.
Which is why the Dems lost 64(?) seats in the House, 6 seats in the Senate, and 680(+/-) seats in State Legislative bodies across the country.
AD-RtR/OS! (68ed01) — 11/17/2010 @ 3:11 pmAnother burst of such popularity and their won’t be any Dems in elected office anywhere except the Upper West Side, San Francisco, and the West Side of Los Angeles (Chicago doesn’t count as there hasn’t been an honest election there since Al Capone moved from NYC to The Windy City).
Failure of the pubic option cost blue dogs support !!!! Please please please please please hire dimwit to be your new message coordinator.
JÐ (85b089) — 11/17/2010 @ 3:13 pm“I mean like people who didn’t show up in 2010 but did in 08.”
imdw – Do you usually compare midterm election years with presidential election years?
Who didn’t show up and why was their enthusiasm down? Be specific.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 3:19 pmWaiter, another order of Obama throat yogurt for imdw, please.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 3:21 pmHow many Blue Dogs will switch parties before summer? My bet is 10
Dennis D (e0b996) — 11/17/2010 @ 3:40 pm“Which is why the Dems lost 64(?) seats in the House, 6 seats in the Senate, and 680(+/-) seats in State Legislative bodies across the country.”
Indeed. I don’t think this was because they gave people what they were elected to do.
“imdw – Do you usually compare midterm election years with presidential election years?”
I thought this is what you’re doing….
imdw (05d41e) — 11/17/2010 @ 5:37 pmYes. In other words, I hope fiscally conservative democrats, who are socially liberal, continue to join the Tea Party. We have many hundreds of thousands of such people, but I want tens of millions of such people
Question to Dustin (and anyone else who cares to comment): have you actually met Democrats of that ilk? Perhaps it’s because I live where I live, in a heavily Democratic area, but I have yet to encounter even one Democrat who will admit to supporting the goals of the Tea Party–much less the movement itself. Those I’ve met who do support the Tea Party all identify themselves as Republicans, and if I were to confine myself to my personal experience, I would have to classify “Democratic supporter of the Tea Party” as a political myth. Or at least an urban legend.
It does make some sense for the Tea Party to work with Democratic candidates–by which I mean, “blue dog” types who could challenge liberals in heavily Democratic districts (for instance, the one I live in, which sends Debbie Wasserman Schulz to Congress). The challenge might not be successful, but if it was would mean a Blue Dog would replace a true progressive–and even if unsuccessful might motivate the progressive to tack more to the center.
And I think that Kman’s initial point is valid: just because the electorate has rejected the Democratic Party this time, does not mean they have accepted the Republican Party. The GOP merely benefited from the mechanics of our two party system. If you actively dislike option 1, then you must vote for option 2, or sit out the election all together. (There, I’ve probably said it better than he could.)
And one final observation: your schadenfreude over Pelosi’s election is a little misplace, because she is not the face of the Democratic party. That position is currently occupied by Obama.
kishnevi (a6ffde) — 11/17/2010 @ 5:51 pmDo you find that the tea party is a home for hte ‘socially liberal’ ? What makes you say that?
imdw (3ac9fb) — 11/17/2010 @ 7:07 pm“And one final observation: your schadenfreude over Pelosi’s election is a little misplace, because she is not the face of the Democratic party.”
kishnevi – I think not. Pelosi provides more than ample campaign fodder against the Democratic party in addition to Obama. Reid as well. We can always use more villains.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 7:58 pm“I thought this is what you’re doing….”
imdw – No, it’s stupid to do that. Turnouts are completely different. You were the one who made reference to two years ago.
daleyrocks (940075) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:01 pm#53, No, it’s not particularly liberal on social issues, it just isn’t about them at all. It includes people with all sorts of views on them. Why would you think otherwise? Anyone who’s been following the tea party movement since its beginning knows this.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:24 pmThis is the truth. In some sense, I think a lot of these voters actually are deciding to give the Republicans some power… they are trusting them with a second chance. They aren’t permanent devotees or anything.
I have been to many Tea Parties and have met people who claim to be democrats, convincingly. This may be because I live in the Austin, TX area, where there are a lot of moderate democrats.
For sure, the notion of socially liberal and fiscally conservative Tea Partier is not unrealistic. Some Tea Partiers think social issues are of no relevance to our goals.
I only know a couple of democrat Obama voters who actually talk about politics enough where it’s clear they have reconsidered. I think that kind of confession is pretty rare.
That depends. One problem the dems have had is that their big face of the GOP tends to be Rush or Palin… and it’s hard to tie them to anything the government has actually done.
Pelosi can be tied to some amazing wrongs… she actually boasts about passing legislation she doesn’t understand yet. She’s just an easy target. I think it will be difficult for the dems in 2 years because Boehner is simply a better steward of power.
The Tea Party is grassroots. It’s whatever it is. Show up, and be part of it. I think the only common denominator is concern over the huge level of government spending. You see war supporters and opponents, gays and straights, blacks and whites, etc etc.
Some, like Demint, insist you are promoting social conservatism if you’re a Tea Partier. He’s just clawing for power when he does this, and it’s highly counterproductive.
In fact, the people who should be most concerned about the growth in government are those who want social entitlements to survive. They won’t if we run out of money. All reasonably intelligent Americans are some degree of agreeing to the notion of reducing the current spending level, in order to prevent a disaster. It’s really a matter of how far we go.
This is difficult for you to understand because you’re not even past the ‘don’t threaten people’ or ‘don’t laugh at rape’ stage. We don’t really want you in the tea party, so don’t sweat it. I hope we get Kishnevi, Aphrael, Leviticus, etc.
If I didn’t think we were in such a serious condition, maybe I’d rather we stratify, but right now I think we should all agree to solving this problem immediately. We need to start running budget surpluses and shrinking the government.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:25 pm“imdw – No, it’s stupid to do that. Turnouts are completely different. You were the one who made reference to two years ago.”
You know you’re making a comparison with the past when you say “You mean like seniors, women, young people, and independents who broke more for Republicans this election?”
But you and I agree this was a turnout problem.
“It includes people with all sorts of views on them. ”
It might. But there’s a skew. Polls of tea party supporters show them having a difference from the general public over social issues like gay marriage, access to abortions and the Roe v. Wade decision. And these differences are not in the more liberal direction. They’re also more likely to say that the policies of the obama administration favor blacks over whites.
However, they pretty matched the public when they were given the choice between balancing the budget and reducing unemployment. Both preferred the latter.
imdw (1a172e) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:36 pmSomeone should keep a scorecard of the number of asinine memes that dimwit trots out. It would only be a figure slightly greater than the number of names it has used here.
JD (c8c1d2) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:41 pmThat’s a fallacious argument.
In fact, it appears to even admit the opposite of what imdw is claiming. If there’s no place for social liberals in the Tea Parties, then it wouldn’t just skew a bit… it would skew 100%. Apparently imdw knows for sure that there are many social liberals in the Tea Party, just as I know first hand.
It’s obvious that the group is conservative on finance and that will bleed across other issues some, but there’s no reason why a person who is social liberal couldn’t also decide to support the Tea Party’s aims on taxes and spending. They do not contradict.
I suspect everyone who actually pays attention to the news admits this has been proven. Is this supposed to mean something? Any civil rights follower who isn’t ignorant has a problem with the way Obama handles justice.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:49 pm“I suspect everyone who actually pays attention to the news admits this has been proven. Is this supposed to mean something? ”
It just means one way that the tea party supporters are different from the general public.
imdw (a863d5) — 11/17/2010 @ 8:58 pmExactly… these are people who pay attention. They don’t rely on network news and newspapers alone, because they aren’t morons.
They realize it’s been proven that the DOJ does favor blacks over whites in its enforcement of certain laws.
to be an informed leftist democrat is to have a real crisis about who to support. Surely, the GOP is the only possible way to save their favorite programs. Obama already canceled social security with his amazing ability to spend money. On the other hand, a lot of these programs will be cut back if the Tea Party gets her way.
That’s a call for a major compromise, but its an offer the informed left can’t refuse. The scenario where we actually pay for current obligations under all these entitlements is a fantasy that can never be. Paul Ryan style trimming of these programs really is the only way to keep them at all.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 9:07 pm“They realize it’s been proven that the DOJ does favor blacks over whites in its enforcement of certain laws.”
How simple it must be for you. Do you think tee pees racialize, say, the bailouts?
imdw (41a598) — 11/17/2010 @ 9:10 pmDustin- mock and scorn. Point and laugh. Engaging a cowardly liar is a fools errand.
JD (c8c1d2) — 11/17/2010 @ 9:12 pmJD, I’m just glad this chump doesn’t know where my wife works or what my mom’s address is.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 11/17/2010 @ 9:15 pm“Polls of tea party supporters show them having a difference from the general public over social issues like gay marriage, access to abortions and the Roe v. Wade decision.”
I’m a heroin-vending-machines-on-playgrounds libertarian, and I’m against the “general public” on two of those.
“They’re also more likely to say that the policies of the obama administration favor blacks over whites.”
Any increase in government helps blacks over everyone else, at least in the short term.
kishnevi: “have you actually met Democrats of that ilk? ”
I work with quite a few. They’re technocratic engineer types who would be fine with socialism if someone could make it work. In the meantime they prefer crappy government to more crappy government.
el duderino (0abe5e) — 11/17/2010 @ 9:17 pm