Patterico's Pontifications

ding?

Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 9/20/2013 @ 8:46 pm

Ted Cruz is doing exactly what he should do by the people in the state of Texas who elected him.

I am really tired of people who expect him to act differently.

Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 9/20/2013 @ 8:52 pm

I am sick of republicans who would rather attack conservatives than attack democrats.

GOP Voter (0bba89) — 9/20/2013 @ 8:55 pm

It might be a good thing for the Republican part to implode once and for all. Clean house and regroup (or come up with something new and actually effective) and rebuild . The last election exposed the friction between old guard and Tea Party conservatives and it wasn’t a pretty sight. The old guard won’t loosen their grip; it he to be taken.

Dana (6178d5) — 9/20/2013 @ 9:16 pm

Eh… It *has* to be taken

Dana (6178d5) — 9/20/2013 @ 9:17 pm

5. Eh… It *has* to be taken

Comment by Dana (6178d5) — 9/20/2013 @ 9:17 pm

I like the sound of it. Of course, I’m referring to Pyongyang-on-the-Potomac in general.

Cartago delenda est.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/20/2013 @ 9:27 pm

The party is rotting from the inside out.

Icy (ce8a97) — 9/20/2013 @ 10:18 pm

Who the feck is the Peter King, and why do I care what she has to say??

Gus (70b624) — 9/20/2013 @ 10:28 pm

Hear hear! Don’t much care what Peter King thinks–and heck, he may not even think at all.

These old bulls on the Congressional Hill are frequently full of what’s inside a bull’s alimentary canal–lower portion that is.

Comanche Voter (f4c7d5) — 9/20/2013 @ 10:33 pm

Pedro King has got the ear of FOX. Pistol Pete, thereby believes that he is somehow, some sort of EXPERT or BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEG CHEESE. Peter King, is a DEAD ENDER. He is a prime example of the HEH HEH…PETER principle. But Ol Pete thinks he has a bright future……..HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Peter King is a pile of shyte RINO, self righteous loser.

Gus (70b624) — 9/20/2013 @ 10:37 pm

I keep hearing the Old Guard warn that the extremists, the Tea Partiers are going to cost us elections, ad nauseum.

Yeah, those hard core right-wingers McCain and Romney were just too much, eh? Ooorrr, maybe the base didn’t show up in 2012 because Romney was too close to the middle. If he had gotten just the GOP votes that the Tea Party favorite McCain (sarcasm alert-!!) had gotten in ’08, it’d be Prez Romney and no Obamacare right now.

Let’s drop the Einsteinian hopes of electing a lukewarm GOP candidate and nominate someone who both knows what the GOP principles are on paper and has a spine. Watch the excitement meter go off the chart-

NeoCon_1 (a9edc8) — 9/20/2013 @ 11:01 pm

I say Peter King wears his pants backwards, and smells funny.

papertiger (c2d6da) — 9/20/2013 @ 11:05 pm

Lying King represents morons who think like childish democrats.

mg (31009b) — 9/20/2013 @ 11:46 pm

He’s a New York Republican, which is kind of like being a Democrat. He doesn’t like Rand Paul, either. Or Newt Or really much of anyone who isn’t Peter King.

I hear he’s a candidate for President in 2016. Just to show we could do worse.

Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:19 am

Ted Cruz is doing exactly what he should do by the people in the state of Texas who elected him.

I am really tired of people who expect him to act differently.

“Differently” as in maybe competently? Let’s look at the facts. He browbeat the house into taking an unpopular stand, which they did. Now the bill goes to the senate and first he tries to just shrug it off saying there’s nothing he can do (infuriating the house). Then he says he’ll filibuster to stop Reid changing the bill. Ooops. Turns out he can’t. He really should have known that, seeing as how he’s a senator but okay whatever.

Now he has the genius idea that he’ll filibuster the current bill. You know the one that actually defunds obamacare. The one he demanded the house pass. I’m sure they love the fact that the guy who demagogued the issue so hard is now going to filibuster the very bill he demanded be passed. The ridiculousness has reached dangerous levels.

Did he really never even think about what he would do once the bill reached the senate? It sure seems that way.

Tlaloc (d061fc) — 9/21/2013 @ 1:57 am

I am sick of republicans who would rather attack conservatives than attack democrats.

I’m sure the surrender caucus agrees about republican on republican fire.

Tlaloc (d061fc) — 9/21/2013 @ 2:00 am

Well, it’s only been a year since the least election, time to get the 2016 election brawl going…

Alessandra (205de0) — 9/21/2013 @ 2:04 am

The Distinguished Gentleman from New York is worried that a shutdown might cost the Republicans some votes, but he isn’t looking at the picture properly. Thanks to demographic shifts and the requirements of the Voting Rights Act to create majority-minority districts where reasonably possible, we have the GOP (almost) locked in to control of the House at least until the redistricting following the 2020 census. The greatest danger for the GOP right now is that, being within striking distance of Senate control, they will have less chance to take control of the Senate in the 2014 elections.

ObaminableCare is doomed to fail: it was never really meant to create a workable health care coverage plan, but simply to get something passed which would establish the principle that health care is some sort of right and that the federal government is, in the end, responsible for seeing to it that the individual has health care coverage. Then, when this cockamamie program simply falls apart, the liberals will say, “See, we tried to do this through the private insurance system, and it just couldn’t work, and all that’s left to do now is go to single-payer.” The notion that we could go back to 2008, where some people don’t have coverage, would be off the table.

If we don’t have — and win! — this fight now, that’s exactly what will happen: the option of the government not guaranteeing health care for everybody will be off the table. The Democrats know it and the Republicans know it. Trouble is, our last realistic chance to stop it was with the 2012 elections, and we didn’t win those.

The coldly realistic Dana (3e4784) — 9/21/2013 @ 4:46 am

Not having a budget for four years, that’s responsability, being a client of Jack Abramoff,
being enough of a corrupt jackass that Spilotro wanted to blow you up for your doublecrosses. that’s ethics.

narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 4:47 am

But, let’s be clear here: there are only two options if the government is not the final guarantor of health care coverage:

1 – Health care for the indigent will be paid for through higher bills and higher insurance costs to those who do pay for health care; or
2 – The indigent will not receive health care, and some of them will die from illnesses or injuries which would have been treatable.

I am perfectly willing to see possibility number two occur! The question is: are you?

The extremely realistic Dana (3e4784) — 9/21/2013 @ 4:51 am

He browbeat the house into taking an unpopular stand, which they did. Now the bill goes to the senate and first he tries to just shrug it off saying there’s nothing he can do (infuriating the house).

That’s pretty much a lie, right from the start. So I am going to disregard the rest of your comments as they all flow from this false premise.

Paul Zummo (e86a16) — 9/21/2013 @ 4:53 am

Rep. King can be a good prime time TV interview. A couple sentences in response to push button issues.

Where he gets the idea he’s got anyone’s attention is beyond me. Totally disconnected from reality outside NYC.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:24 am

15. TLDR, + signed Tlaloc beats all.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:27 am

Why people should support and vote for Cruz is right here:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/sen.-ted-cruz-gay-marriage-could-lead-to-christian-beliefs-being-punished-a/

There is no freedom of conscience or religion or speech in a society that normalizes homosexuality.

Pick one or the other.

Alessandra (205de0) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:28 am

I think King should run for POTUS in 2016.

I haven’t had a good laugh in awhile.

Icy (6b52ac) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:42 am

as teh Dems assplode
It’s off in TlalaLand
unexpected no?

Colonel Haiku (0e505e) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:44 am

While you’re there reading about the second most hated man in Amerikkka, scroll up for more Obamacare goodness.

Most hated? Cruz obviously, Urkel is still a boy.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:49 am

27. Ooopsie, no linky:

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/09/karl-rove-bernie-madoff-of-republican.html

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:50 am

Yeah, like I wuz sayin’.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/09/not-this-is-creepy/

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:58 am

Peter King is running for president.So the war-addicted spendaholic go along Dem lite police state Republicans have their candidate. Goodspeed, Peter King, you braindead(insert profanity here).

Bugg (f0dbc7) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:02 am

To echo Dana-O’care is designed to have a federal single payer system as the inevitable fallback. The insurance industry either have accepted that or were too stupid to see the inevitable outcome.

Bugg (f0dbc7) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:05 am

Cruz is all hat and no cattle, bless his heart.

But hey, no one in the senate is better at shearing the sheep. Cruz 2016!

Ian (9fe63a) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:05 am

Hillary Clinton 2016!!! How low can it go?!?!

Colonel Haiku (ee5253) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:27 am

Mr Bugg wrote:

The insurance industry either have accepted that or were too stupid to see the inevitable outcome.

The insurance industry, like most businesses, is short-sighted: they want to know what their profits will be next quarter. Obaminablecare promises increased profits through increased sales and increased prices, and for the short and intermediate run, that’s great for them.

For most products, when businesses compete, consumers have the choice of not buying the product at all as well as a choice from which supplier. With some industries, automobile insurance being a good example, consumers really don’t have the option not to buy at all, so while there is some competition for market share, in the end the auto insurance companies know that everybody will have to buy from someone. And automobile insurance is very expensive.

The same thing will happen with health insurance: there will be some competition along the edges for market share, but any MBA can tell you that price is normally a greater contributor to profit than volume, and the competition won’t lead to lower prices.

If it all collapses in ten years, well, heck, today’s insurance executives will already have made a clear pile of money, and can retire in style.

The businessman Dana (3e4784) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:46 am

Dana

King is referring to the fact that Cruz has said behind doors that he has no intention of repealing/defunding Obamacare – he just wanted the house to pass it to “stir things up”

Whether this is real, I don’t know…

We will find out if he tries to filibuster.

Ace is also calling out Cruz that he is basically a fraud as well.

Its a shame that he got everyone hopeful only to internally have the knowledge that he never intended to go through with it.

But even if he did, the Dems control two branches (3 if you count the Supremes) and he knew other than the personal gain he himself has received, their was no chance of success

…….

EPWJ (1ea63e) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:21 am

So when he doesn’t lift a finger in the senate this week, perhaps we will know.

EPWJ (1ea63e) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:23 am

So when he doesn’t lift a finger in the senate this week, perhaps we will know.

So, in the meantime, let’s trash him and impugn his motives. Great idea!

Amalgamated Cliff Divers, Local 157 (f7d5ba) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:34 am

Sorry to disagree, Dana. The insurance industry is by its nature the opposite of shortsighted — its plans are in terms of lifetimes. What it is in, is the business of making money. And it will not care how the money got to its coffers — from the prudence of its insureds or from the arm-twisting of Obamacare. Neither will it care if it sells one $10,000.00 policy or five $2,000.00 policies. And my $200,000.00 brain surgery will be paid by a ten-cent increase in the premiums 2 million others. Have you seen the movie “Double Indemnity”? Edward G. Robinson explains it all to Fred McMurray.

nk (875f57) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:42 am

I’d like to see any of the “non-fraud” Republicans take a shot at defunding this piece of crap. So far, all I’ve heard is a bunch of excuses. So who is bullshitting whom?

Dirty Old Man (261563) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:46 am

A lawyer explaining business to a concrete contractor. What has the world come to? How many cubic yards do you have to sell just to pay the water bill? At how many cubic yards do you start breaking even and watching your margin in order to remain competitive. Same thing with health insurance? The more ~~cubic yards~~ policies, the merrier, no matter how they’re “sold”.

nk (875f57) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:47 am

King is referring to the fact that Cruz has said behind doors that he has no intention of repealing/defunding Obamacare – he just wanted the house to pass it to “stir things up”

Whether this is real, I don’t know…

If you are making the assertion, it is a safe bet it is not real.

JD (191f33) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:49 am

I am SHOCKED that EPWJ showed up to trash Cruz.

JD (191f33) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:50 am

But on topic, I am cheering Cruz on. King is a buffoon. A fat-bellied, jowly hog at the public trough. The only thing he will ever really care about is whether he gets his fill of swill.

nk (875f57) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:51 am

Epwj’ cruz had made no secret of the difficult odds of repealing obamacare without the power to do so.

But obamacare is very unpopular. The gop should take every chance to get democrats on record voting for this disaster. Its a valuable political tactic s well as a long term strategy to reduce suppport in congress for this mess.

dustin (3f2d39) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:55 am

There’s also this blindspot, he had back in the day.

http://reason.com/blog/2013/07/19/angry-bird-update-ira-lover-peter-king-c

narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 8:51 am

Cruz will filibuster but the odds of success are remote. I’m still proud he’s trying. Cruz is willing to risk his chance for national office in order to do what he believes is right and was elected to do — fight the liberal agenda.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 8:54 am

He’s a New York Republican, which is kind of like being a Democrat.

I observed some interesting behavior on this board a few days ago when some regular forumers — who I generally respect — in regards to a few of my postings did a variation of a “you don’t like Obama, so you must be a racist!” routine. Or a bit of the reaction of “no, people like John McCain are not squishy!” IOW, when such non-liberal (if not otherwise fairly conservative) people are expressing a bit of resentment or disagreement about comments that most folks would categorize as rightwing, that sums up where this society is headed.

I mention that because opinion surveys indicate a large majority of Americans even in 2013 are more likely to blame — yep, believe it or not — George W Bush for today’s economic problems instead of Obama. Polls also indicate a growing number of people are becoming increasingly acquiescent towards, if not fully supportive of, socially liberal trends promoted by, among other cliques, GLBT activists. (Although at least pro-choice sentiment apparently is waning throughout the US—although I suspect that issue, one way or the other, has lost its punch among most of the public.)

Simply put, there’s plenty of squish in most humans, and what we’re witnessing right now is a level of left-leaning tilt that probably will do to the US what such a tilt has done to much of Europe or countries like Mexico or Argentina, much less Venezuela.

We’re in for a long, bumpy ride, folks, and there’s no turning back.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/21/2013 @ 8:56 am

I like this thread. Except for some unhelpful (in persuading independents)comments, I find much to think about. Some of the questions that occupy my mine between election times are:

Are my reps representing ME?

In whom may I place any trust?

Why vote with (straight party voting)any party over the other(s)?

I believe (because of my own behavior) that we are in a time when independents are most likely to be persuaded by the Republican party, notwithstanding all media reports to the contrary.

What I am looking for (from the R’s) is a show of backbone and unity. But when a football game looks to be not very competitive, the channel gets switched. I agree this is a poor way of thinking.

Gary! I just got the syrup! Thank you! The check will be in the mail Monday morning.

felipe (6100bc) — 9/21/2013 @ 9:09 am

Ugh, “my mind”. Stupid arthritis!

felipe (6100bc) — 9/21/2013 @ 9:11 am

EPWJ is still fighting last year’s TX GOP primary election battle. It’s a little sad, really; although hardly unpredictable.

Icy (6b52ac) — 9/21/2013 @ 9:22 am

I think Cruz has a better understanding of the divisiveness in the R’s and how that has weakened the party. He is looking at the long – term bigger picture. That ability and willingness to d so seems to come easier with youth and those not steeped in an old guard for twenty or thirty years.

Dana (6178d5) — 9/21/2013 @ 9:47 am

King is softer than Christie’s waistline.

mg (31009b) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:10 am

We gotta get the Teaching Tales of our cultures taught again, whether the pagan myths and legends or the Torah or the Bible or Aesop’s Fables …

We have to quit falling into the trap of believing what people say – instead, look at what people *do* …

When a politician promises the Moon, see what he (or she) actually has delivered so far …

The sooner we quit complaining about our side’s politicians not being perfect, and the sooner we point out the good things that they have done and continue to do, the sooner we get the Senate back in responsible adult hands …

And the sooner we get more people to realise viscerally that the *deeds* of this Administration and Senate have been and continue to be harmful to this country (and at so many levels), the sooner we are likely to get back to sanity …

Facta Obamae Delenda Sunt

Alastor (2e7f9f) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:14 am

It’s too bad that politicians never seem to know when not to comment. What did King gain by his remarks? His first thought should have been, is what I’m about to say positive?

Amalgamated Cliff Divers, Local 157 (f7d5ba) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:15 am

47. …I believe (because of my own behavior) that we are in a time when independents are most likely to be persuaded by the Republican party, notwithstanding all media reports to the contrary.

What I am looking for (from the R’s) is a show of backbone and unity. But when a football game looks to be not very competitive, the channel gets switched. I agree this is a poor way of thinking.

Comment by felipe (6100bc) — 9/21/2013 @ 9:09 am

Cruz has always been clear about what he was trying to do. His intent was never to stop Obamacare by making deals with other Senators. He intended to stop it by creating a grassroots groundswell that would compel other Senators to join him.

I really don’t it should be too hard to make the case to independents that defunding and delaying Obamacare is the way to go (since defunding Obamacare won’t halt statutory spending).

It was sold using a pack of lies. Perhaps the biggest lie wasn’t explicit, but the biggest lie is that health insurance equals health care. Large insurers such as Cigna, United, Cedars Sinai are not participating in the state exchanges because they are forbidden from underwriting. Underwriting is of course the backbone of insurance, but the health care policies you’re going to buy through the exchanges are not insurance.

Since companies can’t manage risk, the only way they can keep costs down is by confining the purchaser to extremely narrow networks.

So Obamacare forces you to pay for a wide range of services, many of which you won’t need, and almost no one will accept that insurance.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-insure-doctor-networks-20130915,0,2814725.story

The doctor can’t see you now.

Consumers may hear that a lot more often after getting health insurance under President Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

To hold down premiums, major insurers in California have sharply limited the number of doctors and hospitals available to patients in the state’s new health insurance market opening Oct. 1.

…”These narrow networks won’t work because they cut off access for patients,” said Dr. Richard Baker, executive director of the Urban Health Institute at Charles Drew University of Medicine and Science in Los Angeles. “We don’t want this to become a roadblock.”

To see the challenges awaiting some consumers, consider Woodland Hills-based insurer Health Net Inc.

Across Southern California the company has the lowest rates, with monthly premiums as much as $100 cheaper than the closest competitor in some cases.

…In Los Angeles County, for instance, Health Net customers in the state exchange would be limited to 2,316 primary-care doctors and specialists. That’s less than a third of the doctors Health Net offers to workers on employer plans. In San Diego, there are only 204 primary-care doctors to serve Health Net patients.

California officials stunned, STUNNED, to discover Obamacare produces health care rationing. In Kali if you’re forced onto the exchanges you have four other companies to choose from, if you can afford them. And all of them offer narrow networks.

So welcome to Canada, which pioneered the 10 month wait for a bed in a maternity ward.

Explicit lies. It’s not going to bend the cost curve down for government. It won’t bend the individual’s cost curve down; contrary to what Obama promised your premiums won’t go down $2500 and your boss definitely won’t be saving enough to give you a raise.

The government is coming between you and your doctor. If you go to your doctor for treatment of a burn on your hand, you doctor doesn’t need to know about any drug or alcohol problems you may have had years ago, intimate details about your sexual history, whether you wear a seat belt when you drive, ad infinitum, to treat that burn. But the government will force him to ask in order to put all your “behaviorial data” in a federal database. Which like all databases will be shared among executive branch agencies.

You can’t keep your plan, and you can’t keep your doctor.

The real question now is, can you keep your job? Maybe, but likely only after Obamacare “fundamentally transforms” it into part time.

Essentially Obama is holding the entire federal budget hostage because the GOP won’t let him build a federal database with your intimate, personal information for the convenience of identity thieves and hackers everywhere.

How hard of a sell is that?

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:15 am

If you go to your doctor for treatment of a burn on your hand

That is, if you can go to your doctor.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:18 am

It’s not going to bend the cost curve down for government.

It was disingenuous to claim that by creating a huge bureaucracy with regulatory ambiguity could ever lower costs. They couldn’t sell single payer to America, so they had to destroy the current system to eventually get the government health care utopia they really wanted.

Amalgamated Cliff Divers, Local 157 (f7d5ba) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:26 am

…so they had to destroy the current system…

Like Hernando Cortez burning his ships. There will be nothing to go back to when Obamacare fails and private health care has been destroyed.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:35 am

Who among “genuine” Republicans will oppose a law passed in secret, lacks funding, imposes rationing on seniors, and which exempts Congress as well as illegal aliens? Certainly not McCain, Boehner, Cantor, Ryan, McConnell, or Rubio. Yet these same folk call Cruz a hypocrite for not having the votes?
I just can’t wait for Jeb Bush and Chris Christie to show up and tell us why we’re all wrong about Obamacare.

Dirty Old Man (261563) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:51 am

I think Steyn had it right yesterday, it’s not a party it’s a cult, and I would further add, the Thuggees in Temple of Doom,

narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:56 am

EPWJ is a fraud.
At the time that Megyn Kelly’s switch to Sean Hannity’s 9PM EST prime time spot was publicly revealed, EPWJ claims to have had “inside sources” who told him that Sean Hannity’s show was therefore going to be cancelled by Fox News. As it turns out, Hannity was merely moved to 10PM EST.
EPWJ also claimed his “inside sources” informed him that Roger Ailes was leaving Fox News. As it turns out, Roger Ailes is still with Fox News.

What else has EPWJ lied to us about ?
Having a child studying at West Point ?

Perhaps the “inside sources” EPWJ speaks of are merely the voices inside his head.

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/21/2013 @ 11:01 am

Had occasion to surf onto Martin Bashir. Best I can tell from that show, the Left believes Obama does walk on water,the GOP and especially Tea Party people are evil baby killers, and $17 trillion and debt and counting is no big deal.

Bugg (f0dbc7) — 9/21/2013 @ 11:35 am

Only un-serious people, and upstate NY voters (but I repeat myself) pay any attention to Peter King.

askeptic (2bb434) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:18 pm

ES, they are the Khat voices.

askeptic (2bb434) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:19 pm

Charles Blow thinks the GOP has been hijacked by zealots but it’s the Democratic Party that has been hijacked by its extremists. The Democrats didn’t used to support single-payer health insurance or engaging in wars to make a President look good, but they do now.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:23 pm

Funny how Democrats demonize Republicans for wanting to kill babies. When the Democrats, the party of abortion, has killed 55 million babies since Roe v. Wade.

I no longer know who in Washington really wants to repeal or defund Obamacare. Frankly, I doubt any thing any of them say on any subject.

I fear the Sovereign States are going to disband the current federal government if anyone really wants to straighten out the mess on the Potomac. Washington, DC is not interested in fixing the mess they made.

WarEagle82 (2b7355) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:24 pm

the GOP has been hijacked by zealots

Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:23 pm

Zealots? Really? Heh! I think the Tea Party are squishes on some “conservative” issues, with a more libertarian than conservative bent. Which is great as far as I’m concerned. I don’t want people with HIV to have the fact tattooed on their behinds, either.

nk (875f57) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:30 pm

EPWJ concern troll is concerned.

SPQR (768505) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:37 pm

No Mark, no one was doing a “variation of the you don’t like Obama so you must be a racist” in response to a few your hatey posts. That was your interpretation. You didn’t get it then and you still obviously don’t get it. Also, perhaps for the sake of clarity and honesty you can point to one real person on this forum who has ever suggested Senator McCain is not a mess and that he is currently not a menace to the republic. It is one of the few things that every right leaning commenter on this site does agree about. What do you gain by trying to pretend otherwise?

elissa (e102b3) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:40 pm

This garbage from Charles Blowhard of the New York Times is all just typical crapola emanating from Democrats. In fact, it is one of Alinsky’s rules for radicals;

Demonize your opponent.

The Democrats always manufacture a “sky is falling !” consequence of not going along with their policy initiative.
ObamaCare haddddd to be passed under cover of darkness right away, otherwise people would die in the streets. Well, with all of Obama’s delays, exemptions, and the like, apparently they’re no longer concerned about those people who are dying in the streets who, three and a half years later, are still waiting for their coveted health coverage.

Democrats always pretend to be advocating for a policy in order to prevent people from dying in the streets—except for the victims of inner city violence, the victims of abortion, and the victims of Islamic Jihad—the Democrats are certain to be concerned about preventing people from dying in the streets.

And if you don’t support their policies, they will Tweet that they want your children to die in the streets, as the Democrat Communications director for Sacramento County did yesterday to Ted Cruz’ staffer, Amanda Carpenter.

http://twitchy.com/2013/09/20/may-your-children-all-die-comms-chair-of-sacramento-dems-attacks-amanda-carpenter/

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:44 pm

Blow is often fiskworthy, however his was part of the foolishness that brought the IRS down on the Tea Party.

http://www.mrc.org/articles/charles-blow-black-tea-partiers-engaged-political-minstrel-show

narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:51 pm

Mark, if I may channel a scene from ‘Casablanca,’ I’m shocked to learn that one of your posts includes a mention of gays.
With pressing issues such as Syria, Iran, the UN General Assembly meeting in New York, the debt ceiling, defunding ObamaCare, et al, it is unusual (!!) to see you focusing your attention on gays. Or whatever.

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/21/2013 @ 12:52 pm

Our Windy City barrister wrote:

Neither will it care if it sells one $10,000.00 policy or five $2,000.00 policies.

Actually, yes, the insurance industry certainly would care about that: the administrative costs associated with one $10,000 policy are lower than with five $2,000 policies. Just in that way, alone, price becomes a greater contributor to profit than volume.

Obviously, the risks are different if you are talking one policy vis a vis five, but if you are talking about 10,000 policies compared to 50,000, then the risks should be actuarily balanced.

nk again:

A lawyer explaining business to a concrete contractor. What has the world come to? How many cubic yards do you have to sell just to pay the water bill? At how many cubic yards do you start breaking even and watching your margin in order to remain competitive. Same thing with health insurance? The more ~~cubic yards~~ policies, the merrier, no matter how they’re “sold”.

Again, an error. The number of cubic yards I have to sell to pay the electric bill (to run the well pump; I have no water bill) depends on my per unit return on sales. If I am just breaking even on labor and materials, a million yards won’t pay the sparktricity bill, but if my gross is greater than my costs, far fewer yards will do so.

Fixed costs are more subject to volume, in that you have to achieve a certain volume to cover your fixed costs, but even those are subject to your net per unit sold; variable costs (supposedly) follow volume, though they are subject to economies of scale, and net per unit still controls.

Talk to ten MBAs: you’ll get eight or nine answers telling you that price is the greater contributor to profit compared to volume, and the tenth will be a Democrat.

The businessman Dana (af9ec3) — 9/21/2013 @ 1:23 pm

estone,

More changes are coming at Fox BTW, even more with Hannity. I accept your attempts at apologizing

Look, everyone, is Ted finally going to do something next week, all the bluster, all the blaming his fellow republicans is coming home to roost Monday, Tuesday this week, when he realizes he was only one votes out of 100.

I sincerely hope he does defund Obamacare and then continues with the rest of the entitlements. I hope he defunds the IRS too.

I also want him to defund Iran, Hezbollah, North Korea, China, and Johhny football.

Ted, you are our only hope….

Maybe if he stops the perpetual self promotional tour and brille crème campaign, this will happen, maybe…

EPWJ (bdd0a6) — 9/21/2013 @ 1:51 pm

I hope Ted Cruz is not a relative of Pablo.

Birdbath (716828) — 9/21/2013 @ 1:56 pm

One of the things I liked best about this website in years past is that virtually all the commenters — except for the odd drive-by commenter — made an honest attempt to understand other people’s point of view, instead of trying to play gotcha with their comments or to out-and-out lie about what they said. That’s still true with some, perhaps most, but it’s not true of quite a few. Even some commenters that generally try to be fair-minded don’t seem to care anymore about understanding what other commenters are saying, only about pressing their opinions and arguments on others.

Perhaps this is part of our stressful times and, frankly, with being the opposition party for 2 Presidential terms, but it’s unfortunate for this website.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 2:00 pm

EPWJ, you probably should stop listening to the ~~imaginary inside sources you claim to have~~ voices inside your head.
For the tenth time, Sean Hannity is not leaving Fox News in order to replace Alex Trebek as host of ‘Jeopardy!’

…and the Denver Broncos are not trading Peyton Manning to Jacksonville.

The old retired guys who you tell tall tales to at the lunch counter at your local Denny’s probably enjoy having a kneeslap at your outrageous “insider knowledge” about everything under the sun, so why don’t you just go buy them a danish and a cup of coffee, eh ?

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/21/2013 @ 2:04 pm

Businessman Dana, I could point out that Ray Kroc, J. Joseph Ricketts*, and every hot dog vendor in Chicago, would also disagree with the 9 out of 10 MBAs on price vs. volume, but all that would accomplish would be to show that I hate being contradicted on the internet. When I can just say it. Man, I really do hate being contradicted on the internet!

*Ameritrade was doing daytrades at $0.08/trade, if I remember correctly.

nk (875f57) — 9/21/2013 @ 2:04 pm

I have a problem with King’s inconsistency. In this case, his histrionics include an opposition to ‘shutting down the government’ as well as the healthcare issue, and yet in 1996, he was all for shutting down the government as a response to the budget battle.

In 1996, during Bill Clinton’s presidency, King supported a government shutdown as a response to the budget battle at the time. That year, Clinton went on to win reelection, a massive triumph for Democrats.

Why the difference in concern? Or is it a personal attack on someone younger with a fresher more realistic view and a game plan that intends to utilize an already grassroots majority of support to oppose Obamacare?

“We can’t be going off on these false missions that Ted Cruz wants us to go on. The issues are too important. They’re too serious, they require real conservative solutions, not cheap headline-hunting schemes,” he said.

Old dog, no new tricks.

Dana (6178d5) — 9/21/2013 @ 2:08 pm

Old dog, no new tricks… but same old fleas!

askeptic (2bb434) — 9/21/2013 @ 3:16 pm

I have a problem with King’s inconsistency. In this case, his histrionics include an opposition to ‘shutting down the government’ as well as the healthcare issue, and yet in 1996, he was all for shutting down the government as a response to the budget battle.

Maybe he learned something from that debacle? Just a guess.

Isn’t it a tad ridiculous to say a person is inconsistent just because they changed positions once over the course of 17 years? Do you believe al the same things you espoused two decades ago?

Tlaloc (d061fc) — 9/21/2013 @ 3:24 pm

Tlaloc,

I don’t believe we’re discussing positional change of opinions and positions vs. political tactics and strategies to accomplish an outcome of one’s opinions. They are two very different animals. Judging from King’s recent rant (see Rand Paul) I don’t think he has changed… in any way.

Dana (6178d5) — 9/21/2013 @ 3:39 pm

Ugh. Poorly worded first sentence. Typing on iPhone…. But you get the point…

Dana (6178d5) — 9/21/2013 @ 3:40 pm

As per Peggy Noonan, The One’s own staff calls him Obam-me. WSJ pay wall for a day or 2. That’s gonna stick-

http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/noonan-obama-staffers-nickname/2013/09/20/id/526886?promo_code=EC70-1&utm_source=American_Spectator&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1

Bugg (f0dbc7) — 9/21/2013 @ 3:47 pm

Tlalalala’s faux concern, aggressive ignorance, and diarrhea of the verbose never fails to amuse.

JD (5c1832) — 9/21/2013 @ 4:55 pm

More changes are coming at Fox BTW, even more with Hannity. I accept your attempts at apologizing

Good Allah. Do you still stand behind your original histrionics?

JD (5c1832) — 9/21/2013 @ 4:57 pm

Politicians learn from their political mistakes and try not to repeat them, but their ideological positions should be consistent unless they don’t really have an ideology.

Maybe King thinks it’s a loser to try to shutdown the government today because it didn’t work when he voted for it 17 years ago. If so, that’s a tactical political decision, not an ideological decision. He’s entitled to his opinion about whether that’s a good tactic but others can disagree.

But if King thought it was good ideologically to shutdown the government over the budget when the debt was at $5.2T in 1996, he should think it’s an even better idea when the debt is at $16.7T (and climbing) today.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:03 pm

Yes DRJ, that’s it on a nutshell .

Dana (6178d5) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:07 pm

Crap…*in* a nutshell…

Dana (6178d5) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:07 pm

Yes, it’s climbing….but it’s a SuperSecret Climb!
We’ll have to increase the ceiling to find out what the debt really is.

What if they don’t increase it enough, and the new ceiling is under the hidden debt figure?
OMG!
What a Fluking Disaster.

askeptic (2bb434) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:07 pm

They should force the Adminto explain how the reported national debt went unchanged for so many days.

JD (5c1832) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:11 pm

That is curious, isn’t it? I bet we went over the limit days, weeks or even months ago.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:15 pm

I don’t trust anything that any agency of this Administration says.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:15 pm

Roger that, DRJ. Nothing.

JD (5c1832) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:21 pm

It is only to be believed if reported by Teh Won!/s

askeptic (2bb434) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:29 pm

They should force the Adminto explain how the reported national debt went unchanged for so many days.

They will blame it on the sequester!

EPWJ (bdd0a6) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:42 pm

86. Politicians learn from their political mistakes and try not to repeat them, but their ideological positions should be consistent unless they don’t really have an ideology.

Maybe King thinks it’s a loser to try to shutdown the government today because it didn’t work when he voted for it 17 years ago.

Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:03 pm

I try to avoid using the term ideology in preference for the term principles. When the book the The Bell Curve came out Bill Clinton famously rejected its conclusions because it conflicted with what he said we ought to believe as Americans.

That is an ideological argument. Ideology prevents people from following the facts. Which pretty much sums up the Progressive movement. That’s why to question their mythology prompts them to spew venomous hate speech.

The fact is Obamacare is a train wreck as even one of its principle authors, Max Baucus, acknowledged. To point out the facts touches on their mania.

It leads to this sort of hate filled diatribe, in which the communications director for the Sacremento Democratic party wishes death on the children of someone who works for Ted Cruz.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/09/today-in-twitter-brings-out-the-best-in-people/

Leaving aside all the other reasons to scrap Obamacare, he’s demonstrating why communist dictatorships never lacked for enthusiastic guards at the death camps. And we should put these vile, vindictive people in charge of anyone’s health care.

(Also note that politicians’ children are sacrosanct and out of bounds when the left can accuse the right of even referring tangentially to them when it’s Obama or Clinton, fair game when the left can wish death on them. Children are out of bounds when it’s tactically useful to the left, fair targets otherwise. This is not a principle; they have none.)

So much for the difference between ideology and principles. More to the point, what the hell has King been doing for the past 18 years since the last shutdown? Obviously learning nothing from it. I’m appalled that Republicans like King haven’t been working on a message as to why they’re willing to fight Obama over Obamacare using the only leverage the GOP has. The power of the purse.

Again it seems to me that practically the entire country could have been persuaded to place the blame squarely where it belongs. On Obama and the Democrats, since the GOP is willing to fund the government. Only the Democrats are holding the CR hostage to Obamacare, which is already hurting people.

But King is so gun shy and such a lousy leader he couldn’t think up a way to persuade people that the GOP is in the right here, even though he’s had 18 years to think of one?

I fail to see how he’s thinking tactically. At some point in 18 years a tactical thinker would have looked at the ’95 shutdown (which in fact was neither a disaster for the country or the GOP) and figured out a way to do it better should it ever be necessary again. Which it is now.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:45 pm

AP at hotair just defunded Cruz….

EPWJ (bdd0a6) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:49 pm

Bill Clinton famously rejected its conclusions because it conflicted with what he said we ought to believe as Americans.

That is an ideological argument. Ideology prevents people from following the facts.

To complete the thought, an ideological argument is one that rejects facts that conflict with dogma.

A principled argument is a factually based counter argument.

When confronted with The Bell Curve, Bill Clinton was capable of the first but not the second.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:50 pm

I think of ideology as a system for an economic or political theory, while principles are the fundamental truths that are the foundation for the system. But I can live with either.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:51 pm

There certainly are conflicting ideas about what can and can’t be done procedurally, EPWJ. I’m not a parliamentarian so I don’t really know what to believe.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:59 pm

nobody needs *any* of these whore senators to be as chatty and omnipresent as so many of them are wont to be

they just don’t add near as much value when they open their whore mouths as they think

none of them

happyfeet (8ce051) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:28 pm

Edmund Burke influenced my understanding of the term ideology. Conservatism should be anti-ideology and anti-utopian.

Something either works or it doesn’t. Of course, the utopian ideologues who inflicted Obamacare on us will never admit it doesn’t work. That isn’t the point. They believe certain things because they tell themselves that people who hold those beliefs are morally superior beings. It doesn’t matter if when they impose their ideologies on others if the results are positive or negative. It only matters that they believe those things.

Which frees them to commit all sorts of crimes without a shred of guilt, or wish death upon their enemies’ children (let’s not kid ourselves that progressives like the former communications director of the Sac Democratic party view Ted Cruz as a mere adversary).

To paraphrase Solzhenitsyn, mere hate just makes you a mass murderer like Manson. It takes an ideology to commit genocide like Stalin or Pol Pot.

But I know other people don’t mean the same thing when they use the word.

Speaking of meanings, I meant to make this a question and not a statement.

And we should put these vile, vindictive people in charge of anyone’s health care.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:30 pm

none of these whore senators need to be as chatty chatty and omnipresent a they are wont to be

they just don’t add near as much value as they think they do when they open their whore mouths

none of them

happyfeet (8ce051) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:32 pm

*as* they are wont to be i mean

happyfeet (8ce051) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:32 pm

DRJ

Cruz has been reported to have aid that the defunding thing was to bring the issue to light – or to stir thing up – there is no legislative mechanism to defund, the administration can allocate funds as they please

Cruz knows this, the only was is to delay or to overturn or both, originally always the intent of those horrid “establishment” republicans.

His career like Rubio’s is over this week, and I don’t think he really cares – he was a reckless unserious person.

If he cared he would have focused his considerable abilities to shore up the weaker kneed republicans and pick a handful of democrats to steer this fiscal monster into the garbage bins of history

EPWJ (bdd0a6) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:34 pm

way not was sorry

EPWJ (bdd0a6) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:35 pm

Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 5:03 pm

Maybe King thinks it’s a loser to try to shutdown the government today because it didn’t work when he voted for it 17 years ago.

Neither Peter King, nor any other House Republican, voted for a government shutdown in 1995.

Bill Clinton vetoed the continuing resolution!

Which, unlike this time, did not have any special provisions, or omissions, but just continued spending at the current level, which is what clean continuing resolution does.

That you would say this shows what a good liar Bill Clinton is. And also Charles Schumer. And what happens when people stop defending themselves because the New York Daily News runs a front page cartoon showing them as a crybaby.

(Newt Gingrich’s point was he had gone along on the trip to Yitzchak Rabin’s funeral so that he and Clinton could negotiate, but Clinton refused to negotiate and instead spenmt time playing hearts with New York Daily News owner moret Zuckerman. After Charles Schumer spech on the floor of the House with that front page political cartoon, because that’s what it was, Newt Gingrich stopped defening himself which means he stopped making the situation clear to people. So Clinton could run these ads unchallenged (outside the major media markets of New York, Los Angeles and Washington, so tghat the Republican politicvians wouldn’t notice them)

These were a considerable factor in his winning the 1996 Presidential election.

Newt Gingrich had expected Bill Clinton to take the blame for the government shutdown if he vetoed the continuing resolution. That is, after all, what happened when George Bush (I) had vetoed the continuing resolution in 1990.

And why did George Bush do that? Because of the continuing reoslution of 1987, which had all kinds of provisions in it like one preventing the FCC from waiving the prohibition of a single entity having ownership of s newspaer and a television station in the same city. That was attribited to Sen. Ted Kennedy. It forced Rupert Murdoch to sell the New York Post (he bought it back in 1993 during a crisis when it reearly clsoed) but in Boston he sold his small UHF television station and not the Boston Herald.

So, anyway, in his State of the Union message in 1988, President Ronald Reagan said he would not sign another continuing resolution. Now the only one time that could come up was 1988, and in that year there was no continuing resolution. Neither was there in 1989. In 1990, President George Bush felt in some way bound to honor that pledge at least symbolically. So he vetoed it sand later signed one.

Vetoing the continuing resolution had hurt George Herbert Walker Bush. So Newt Gngrich expected anything like that to hirt Bill Clinton. But Bill Clinton turned the tables and made people beleive that the Republicans were responsible for the government shutdown. Or were more unreasonable.

What he did is keep negotiating on the budget, narrow the differences but leave the situation just short of agreement. So the Republivcans not only were attacked for wantinmg to cut spending but for shutting down the government over practically nothing.

Sammy Finkelman (d7b491) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:42 pm

there is no legislative mechanism to defund, the administration can allocate funds as they please

This is extraordinarily stupid.

JD (5c1832) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:44 pm

http://shakespeare.mit.edu/henryv/henryv.4.3.html

narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:46 pm

Comment by Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:30 pm

. It takes an ideology to commit genocide like Stalin or Pol Pot.

It takes political power to do that.

Pol Pot had no ideology that called for killing people.

It was just that people broke the rules, which he botehred to tell them, and also people couldn’t abide by. Also, of course some people were killed, like anyone wearing glasses, but all that was for reasons of political preservation, not ideology.

Pol Pot had gone to Communist dictatorship school, so to speak, but he hadn’t taken all the lessons. For instance he knew how to rule in the comutry but not how to rule in the city. So the solution was to make everybody go to the country. Where in the country? Where they “came from.”

Some people tried to come up with some ideology that would excplain this, but the Khmer Riuge never had any such ideology. It was all a matter of a dictatorship preserving itself.

Sammy Finkelman (d7b491) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:47 pm

Comment by Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:30 pm

Of course, the utopian ideologues who inflicted Obamacare on us will never admit it doesn’t work.

There is the claim that they will, and then propose single payer, but this is misinterpreting what Obama once said in an interview.

They will admit it doesn’t work, but only after it actually has had a chance to not work.

Sammy Finkelman (d7b491) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:49 pm

Actually, Steve, that’s not exactly right;

In 1951, he joined a communist cell in a secret organization known as the Cercle Marxiste (“Marxist circle”), which had taken control of the Khmer Student’s Association (AER) that same year. Within a few months, Saloth joined the PCF. His poor academic record was a considerable advantage within the anti-intellectual PCF who saw uneducated peasants as the true proletariat.[citation needed]

narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:50 pm

107. Comment by JD (5c1832) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:44 pm

there is no legislative mechanism to defund, the administration can allocate funds as they please

This is extraordinarily stupid. </i.

Going along with it us maybe extraordinarily stupid, or corwardly. The idea itself isn't stupid, if you understand the purpose is not to do anything about Obamacare, but to hurt the Republican Party.

It could be a motive is fundraising.

More likely, this is a virus that David Axelrod, or somebody, infected the Republican Party with.

Sammy Finkelman (d7b491) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:53 pm

Not true, JD. It’s not rare for Congress to defund things.

For instance there is a law on the books which states that convicted felons can petition the BATFE to restore their 2nd Amendment rights. The BATFE has the legal authority to do so. But Congress has stated in every budget/CR since 1992 that no funds can be used for that purpose.

So it’s a moot point. It’s been defunded.

Now, you have a point that the majority of the spending on Obamacare in 2014 is statutory and not discretionary.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:56 pm

Pol Pot had no ideology that called for killing people.

Yes, Sammy, he did. It’s called communism.

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Quotes/leninkeyquotes.htm

From the 1 September 1918 edition of the Bolshevik newspaper, Krasnaya Gazeta:

“We will turn our hearts into steel, which we will temper in the fire of suffering and the blood of fighters for freedom. We will make our hearts cruel, hard, and immovable, so that no mercy will enter them, and so that they will not quiver at the sight of a sea of enemy blood. We will let loose the floodgates of that sea. Without mercy, without sparing, we will kill our enemies in scores of hundreds. Let them be thousands; let them drown themselves in their own blood. For the blood of Lenin and Uritsky, Zinovief and Volodarski, let there be floods of the blood of the bourgeois – more blood, as much as possible.”

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:00 pm

There are lots of examples I can use that show that “revolutionary terror” was absolutely at the heart of instituting communism.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:01 pm

Pol Pot had no ideology that called for killing people.

Sammy, how can you say this? What do you think it was then that caused him commit the genocide that he did? What motivated him at the core? If not ideology, then what?

Dana (6178d5) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:05 pm

Sorry, read too far, Steve,

It’s the same Jacobin sensibility that reigned during the Terror, it’s that old, Abilio Gonzalez
of the shining path had a similar view, so apparently bringing up to date, did Bill Ayers, if
“Prairie Fire’ can be considered representative of his thoughts at the time.

narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:07 pm

I’m unclear as to how there is no legislative mechanism to defund, that the administration can allocate funds as it pleases.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/general.html#firearms-relief-alternates

Q: How can a person apply for relief from Federal firearms disabilities?

Under the provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), convicted felons and certain other persons are prohibited from possessing or receiving firearms. The GCA provides the Attorney General with the authority to grant relief from this disability where the Attorney General determines that the person is not likely to act in a manner dangerous to the public safety and granting relief would not be contrary to the public interest. The Attorney General delegated this authority to ATF.

Since October 1992, however, ATF’s annual appropriation has prohibited the expending of any funds to investigate or act upon applications for relief from Federal firearms disabilities submitted by individuals. As long as this provision is included in current ATF appropriations, the Bureau cannot act upon applications for relief from Federal firearms disabilities submitted by individuals.

[18 U.S.C. 922(g), 922(n) and 925(c)]

It certainly appears to me there is such a legislative mechanism.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:09 pm

111. Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 6:50 pm

His poor academic record was a considerable advantage within the anti-intellectual PCF who saw uneducated peasants as the true proletariat.[citation needed]

I don’t think you’ll find any citation, (that isd not an foreigner’s interpretation of why they emptird the cities) because I don’t think the ever said that.

Their whole auto-genocide was a result of the fact that when they went to Communist dictatorship school, they didn’t take all the courses. Or they weren’t given them anyway.

Sammy Finkelman (06be8f) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:17 pm

Comment by Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:09 pm

It certainly appears to me there is such a legislative mechanism.

That dals with an annual appropriation – however, this year, no appropriations bill altogetehr have bene passed into law.

Everything depnds on the details of the laws, but you are also dealing with the great constitutional lawyer, Barack Obama, and you know that constitutional lawyers can twist words all out of their correct meaning.

Maybe what this would do is stop the advertising program they have in mind for enrollment.

Sammy Finkelman (06be8f) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:21 pm

114. 115. That ideology provides an excuse for killing people, in general, but does not say who or whom.

Sammy Finkelman (06be8f) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:22 pm

Basically rule violaters or people who can be counted on to violate the rules.

Sammy Finkelman (06be8f) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:23 pm

Yes it does, he lives in the city, the middle class, which is always the leading opposition of revolutionaries.

narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:38 pm

It only justified killing opponents in general.

It might be the case that opponents are to be found in cities, but there’s nothing there about who are the enemies, or exiling people – and the truth is even that about killing their enemies is an after the fact rationalization.

Sammy Finkelman (06be8f) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:46 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/22/us/politics/reignited-battle-over-health-law.html?hp&pagewanted=all

Starting this week, the White House will kick off a six-month campaign to persuade millions of uninsured Americans to sign up for health coverage as part of insurance marketplaces that open for business on Oct. 1. If too few people enroll, the centerpiece of the president’s Affordable Care Act could collapse.

Sammy Finkelman (06be8f) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:47 pm

121. 114. 115. That ideology provides an excuse for killing people, in general, but does not say who or whom.

Comment by Sammy Finkelman (06be8f) — 9/21/2013 @ 7:22 pm

WTFO?

In general they did say who or whom to kill.

let there be floods of the blood of the bourgeois – more blood, as much as possible.

Moreover, they moved on from generalities into great specificity about who or whom to kill.

Are you running a fever, Sammy?

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 8:06 pm

Btw, little surprise, here;

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/09/21/Exclusive-Rand-Paul-AP-has-it-wrong-I-m-fighting-Obamacare-as-hard-as-I-can

this is their major gripe with the Tea PArty, which is lower middle class to middle in it’s orientation,

narciso (3fec35) — 9/21/2013 @ 8:09 pm

http://espressostalinist.wordpress.com/2012/03/13/lenin-on-the-kulaks/

We all know who that internal enemy is. It is the capitalists, the landowners, the kulaks, and their offspring, who hate the government of the workers and working peasants-the peasants who do not suck the blood of their fellow-villagers.

Not to mention priests, and also merely those who were believers who wouldn’t renounce their faith.

Seriously, Sammy, WTFO?

The communists’ ideology didn’t tell them who to kill?

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 8:09 pm

54. Nice summary.

BJ told DeLay that if they’d held out just another day during ‘The Shutdown’ he would have broken.

The trick this time is to hold out just long enough that the Dhimmis lynch him they own damn selves.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/21/2013 @ 8:20 pm

No Mark, no one was doing a “variation of the you don’t like Obama so you must be a racist” in response to a few your hatey posts.

Elissa, the very fact you judge my posts as “hatey” is pretty much in line with all the modern-day (mainly) liberal dopes who love to deem commentary not stamped with the left’s political-correctness seal of approval as hate. BTW, the analogy in this particular instance was that my antipathy to the GLBT agenda therefore must stem from homophobia (ie, an unnatural fear of) or closeted homosexuality.

As for my mentioning John McCain, I was using him as an analogy in terms of those Republicans who claim he isn’t ideologically squishy in the same way that some forumers may believe Sammy F isn’t tilted to the left. That latter assumption makes me chortle even more based on Sammy in this particular thread rationalizing away the ruthlessness of Pol Pot vis-a-vie his ultra-liberalism, which is reminiscent to me of all the leftists — particularly in the ivory towers of academia — who continue to rationalize away the ruthlessness of Castro, Stalin, Mao and Hugo Chavez.

econfaculty.gmu.edu: Most Marxists would recoil at the suggestion that Pol Pot is the logical conclusion of their social philosophy, yet any honest assessment of Marx’s theory cannot conceal the fact that the radical egalitarianism of the Khmer Rouge is precisely what Marx predicted would be the ultimate culmination of all human history. It must be clearly kept in mind that industrial socialism, as it was known in the former Soviet Union and other mainstream Marxist states, is not the endpoint of Marx’s philosophy of history. In his view, the abolition of capitalist production relations is only the first stage of the worldwide proletarian revolution.

If the impossibility of accountability and economic calculation under pure socialism weren’t absurd enough, the notion that a rational economy can survive an abolition of the division of labor and suppression of individuality is sheer lunacy. Most Communist movements, faced with the utter infeasibility of industrial production under socialist central planning (let alone an abolition of the division of labor), chose to reconcile themselves with capitalism in various ways and to defer the Marxist ideal of higher Communism to a remote future that would conveniently never come.

Maoists were always more enamored of the pure Marxist ideal than their Soviet counterparts, and after the Sino-Soviet split of the late 1950’s the Chinese Communists made a couple of attempts to radically communize China, the “Great Leap Forward” which attempted to decentralize industrial production and the “Cultural Revolution” which attempted to alter people’s attitudes in line with the expected communist transformation of human nature… Fortunately, most of these unreconstructed radical Maoist movements have failed to take power (e.g. the Shining Path in Peru), but there was one horrible exception in the mid 1970’s: Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/21/2013 @ 8:57 pm

Comment by Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 8:09 pm

The communists’ ideology didn’t tell them who to kill?

Kulaks? In Cambodia?

No, first they decided to kill this or that group of people, then listed them.

Bourgeois? What is the world is that? It’s a term from France, used as an excuse in Russia in 1918.

What has that anyway to do with Cabodia?

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/21/2013 @ 9:06 pm

It’s an interesting exchange, Sammy. In a Chinese curse, “may you live in interesting times,” sort of way.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 9:33 pm

It’s a term from France, used as an excuse in Russia in 1918.

Are you ****ing kidding me?

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/21/2013 @ 9:35 pm

Mark:

As for my mentioning John McCain, I was using him as an analogy in terms of those Republicans who claim he isn’t ideologically squishy in the same way that some forumers may believe Sammy F isn’t tilted to the left.

I think this may be a reference to one of my earlier comments. If so, you misunderstood my comment.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:49 pm

Or you are misrepresenting it, but I prefer to think you misunderstood it.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/21/2013 @ 10:49 pm

#108. Thanks for the Shakespeare, Narciso. I loved Kenneth B’s turn as King Henry. Good night, all.

felipe (6100bc) — 9/21/2013 @ 11:29 pm

I thought it was the other Hobbes (fool me), but this is still good:

nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 12:17 am

Link http://imgur.com/flfWtAt

nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 12:17 am

Kulaks? In Cambodia?

No, first they decided to kill this or that group of people, then listed them.

Bourgeois? What is the world is that? It’s a term from France, used as an excuse in Russia in 1918.

What has that anyway to do with Cabodia?

Comment by Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/21/2013 @ 9:06 pm

Wow! At some point you may want to check your meds for contraindication.

Amalgamated Cliff Divers, Local 157 (f7d5ba) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:25 am

ooh look it’s Sunday which the calendar says is be nice to Sammy day ok I’ll go first

hi Sammy you make nice thoughtful comments thank you here is a singing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV8dJIglTyI

happyfeet (8ce051) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:54 am

Actually, Sammy’s comment about Pol Pot and the other murderous Commies was right on. Those murderous c**ts just used empty words to excuse their murderous c**iness. “Ideology” is turned on its head when applied to them.

(happyfeet, you inspire me to a different level of wordsmithingness, you know that, right?)

nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:03 am

Off topic maybe: That mall siege in Kenya is still going on. 59 confirmed dead, over 1,000 rescued or escaped or released, one gunman was captured but died in a hospital.

Terrorists, this time, weren’t try to kill everyone, but let a lot of Moslems leave early on, probably because killing everyone makes too many enemies. They may be connected to al Shabab in Somalia. At least, anyway, an al Shabaab Twitter account is being used to claim responsibility. Claims of responsibility are always lies – not just about the motive, but about the organizational structure of who’s doing this, and are always designed to protect somebody. What little is true – that it’s Islamic extremists – is probably obvious.

Some relatives of the president of Kenya were killed.

It is now a hostage situation. Maybe. It could be all the people inside still alive are hiding. Kenyan government is proceeding cautiously, trying to avoid more innocent people losing their lives.

The mall may have been picked for the attack because it is owned by Jews. (Israelis) plus what goes on there is nothing Islamicists like. They watch movies and eat. Probably play music too.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:18 am

Rep. King […] Where he gets the idea he’s got anyone’s attention is beyond me. Totally disconnected from reality outside NYC

Um, he’s not from NYC.

Milhouse (3d0df0) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:11 am

King is referring to the fact that Cruz has said behind doors that he has no intention of repealing/defunding Obamacare

That’s a fact, is it? You know this how?

Milhouse (3d0df0) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:15 am

Cruz will filibuster but the odds of success are remote.

No, he will not filibuster the House resolution. There’s some nifty ju-jitsu going on here; conflating opposing cloture with filibustering. “Filibuster” means an act of piracy; attempting to speak a bill to death is a filibuster, a minority holding the senate hostage. Voting against cloture can enable a filibuster, but it is not itself the filibuster. When a cloture vote is called to stop an ongoing filibuster it’s somewhat fair to conflate the two, and say that those opposing cloture are in effect holding up the senate from going about its business. But when the cloture vote is called without any ongoing filibuster, or any prospect of one, then voting against it means voting for the senate going about its normal business, in its normal manner (which includes the potential for a filibuster hanging over every vote). And that is what Cruz is fighting for. Keeping the normal rules, not with a view of filibustering the resolution itself, but with a view to filibustering any attempt to add funding for 0bamacare, an attempt that ought to be filibustered.

That he doesn’t think this will succeed is simple honesty. Do people think one should only attempt things one is guaranteed to succeed at?!

Milhouse (3d0df0) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:29 am

Your kid says “give me lunch and cigarettes”. You say “you’re welcome to whatever you like for lunch, but I’m not enabling your slow suicide”. They say “if you don’t give me cigarettes I will refuse lunch”. You say “suit yourself”, and they then call Child Protection and claim that you’re starving them.

Milhouse (3d0df0) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:38 am

The bill was only passed through legerdemain;

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/09/one_weird_trick_to_expose_the_truth_about_obamacare.html

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:42 am

And because I’m fond of gnashing teeth;

http://www.caintv.com/in-absolutely-awesome-piece-pa

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:46 am

Only un-serious people, and upstate NY voters (but I repeat myself) pay any attention to Peter King.

He’s not upstate either.

Milhouse (3d0df0) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:47 am

47. BTW, Felipe, no preservatives, once open use with some dispatch. Will develop mold even in the fridge in a month or so.

I’m liking how the slutty flight attendant that’s so a week ago yesterday gets a Drudge top and center linky.

Dick Cheney, now there is passé.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:55 am

I don’t always agree with him but unlike most, every time I check him out, he’s said something useful, he requires assent or refutation.

VDH, Fernandez, even Spengler I can’t quite say the same.

http://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2013/09/19/defund-obamacare/?singlepage=true

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:12 am

Milhouse -I know it to be a more than strong rumor, because he told many others.

EPWJ (016f5f) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:19 am

The Huntress, knows you’re joshing, gary,

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:24 am

JD

Please entertain us with your vast knowledge of any program that a continuing resolution defunded.

EPWJ (016f5f) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:28 am

JD

Also please entertain us with your theories as to how a one part of one branch can tell the other two parts of the government to do their bidding.

please cite an example, since you set yourself out to

EPWJ (016f5f) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:30 am

nk wrote:

Actually, Sammy’s comment about Pol Pot and the other murderous Commies was right on.

When radicals seize power, they have to do something actually radical, to prevent something radical from happening to them. For Pol Pot, the emptying of the cities was such a massive undertaking that it kept the Khmer Rouge — which was never very large — from raising other leadership against him, and it pretty much worked until Vietnam invaded.

The Vietnamese had a handy puppet Khmer Rouge defector available; Heng Samrin defected because he was about to be purged anyway.

China was the Khmer Rouge’s only real supporter, and Pol Pot’s “agrarian communism” wasn’t all that far removed from the Cultural Revolution and the Down to the Countryside movements ordered by Mao Tse-tung.

The anti-communist Dana (af9ec3) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:30 am

JD

Also please share with us your special knowledge of politics on the hill how the house can tell the president and the senate – while being held by opposite parties – that everyone has to listen to them.

Follow that up with one senator and how he can influence the other 99

EPWJ (016f5f) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:31 am

Peter Kinmg is from Long Island. Several times he’s pretended to be interested in running for higher office, particularly the U.S. Senate – he always never did it, maybe because he couldn’t raise enough money. Maybe the talk helped make sure his district was preserved.

He is something of a fraud. (Peter King) That probably gave him the courage to say something against Ted Cruz.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:36 am

Well Tip O’Neil, must have forgotten that rule.

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:37 am

but hey, lets all smash those pesky rino’s and make damn sure the house has new ownership next election!

This msg brought to you by “the genius’ of being angry at both parties, even though only one party has caused all the damage” club for venting

the whining,,,,,

EPWJ (016f5f) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:38 am

When the cloture vote is called without any ongoing filibuster, or any prospect of one, it’s an attempt to prevent amendments being offered.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:38 am

Sammy

def: Fraud(noun)

THE ACT OF buying radio ads, raising money to defund Obamacare, while all the time never intending to do anything

-see sarahpac

EPWJ (016f5f) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:41 am

EPWJ wrote:

Also please entertain us with your theories as to how a one part of one branch can tell the other two parts of the government to do their bidding.

The Supreme Court has told not only the other two branches of the federal government, but also all of the state governments, how they may act on a whole host of issues.

Up next: not only has the Supreme Court ignored the Constitution in approving of Affirmative Action, but is deciding, in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, whether a state violates the Equal Protection Clause by amending its constitution to prohibit race- and sex-based discrimination or preferential treatment in public-university admissions decisions, in effect, whether a state must have an Affirmative Action program.

The historian Dana (af9ec3) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:42 am

155. Word to the unwise: It’s best to have something, like a freaky roundhouse kick outta nowhere, a throwing knife in your boot, or a sub-compact .32 caliber in your armpit, anything before you taunt the second.

Try perusing Feldman or McCarthy linked above, and attempt to understand what one is up against.

Otherwise just continue to be an embarrassment to your kin, an utter dumbsh*t.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:44 am

EPWJ wrote:

Also please entertain us with your theories as to how a one part of one branch can tell the other two parts of the government to do their bidding.

The Constitution very clearly states that all bills for raising revenue must originate in the House of Representatives. Thus, if the Senate and the President and all fifty of the states want a tax increase, but the Speaker of the House does not, he can refuse to let such a measure be voted on in the House.

The Constitutionalist Dana (af9ec3) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:48 am

EPWJ wrote:

Also please entertain us with your theories as to how a one part of one branch can tell the other two parts of the government to do their bidding.

If the President of the United States favors a particular treaty, as does the House of Representatives and a majority of the Senate, but just 34 Senators oppose it, it cannot be ratified.

The Constitutional historian Dana (af9ec3) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:51 am

Maybe he needs to reacquaint himself with School House Rock.

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:52 am

153. While I try to keep everyone off balance with my canned bat whispering ways, you’re right I don’t even want to fool absolutely everyone.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:52 am

Milhouse -I know it to be a more than strong rumor, because he told many others.
— “In fact, he told all 2 million Jooos in Iran … and they told me.”

Icy (e8ca44) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:53 am

Maybe he needs to reacquaint himself with School House Rock.
Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:52 am

— Whoa! That’s a little bit radical, don’t ya think?

Let’s start off with School House Polka.

Icy (e8ca44) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:57 am

def: Fraud(noun)
THE ACT OF buying radio ads, raising money to defund Obamacare, while all the time never intending to do anything
-see sarahpac
Comment by EPWJ (016f5f) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:41 am

— I think the rodeo has found it’s new clown.

Icy (e8ca44) — 9/22/2013 @ 7:01 am

JD

Also please share with us your special knowledge of politics on the hill how the house can tell the president and the senate – while being held by opposite parties – that everyone has to listen to them.

Since I never said that, I really don’t feel compelled to answer your silly question.

JD (9c73be) — 9/22/2013 @ 7:03 am

‘much too silly indeed’ summon Zombie Graham Chapman,

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 7:06 am

I’m liking how the slutty flight attendant that’s so a week ago yesterday gets a Drudge top and center linky.

When? How did I miss it? Nobody tells me anything.

nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 7:08 am

JD

Please entertain us with your vast knowledge of any program that a continuing resolution defunded.

I don’t know that a CR has ever defunded a program. Never claimed that. For the same of discussion, let’s assume it has never happened. There is a world of difference between hasn’t been do e and cannot be done.

JD

Also please entertain us with your theories as to how a one part of one branch can tell the other two parts of the government to do their bidding.

Never claimed that either. A pattern is developing.

JD (9c73be) — 9/22/2013 @ 7:11 am

161. Precisely.

And prolong the torture of L’Enfant terrible.

We wouldn’t mess wit youse if it wuzn’t so entertaining, Soft Bottom.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 7:15 am

Even tho its total BS, Lew has gone on record the hard date for Treasury lock down is Nov. 1.

The fact that Boehner finally blinked means that a shutdown is a real possibility and default by our enemies in Government is a risk.

Somehow Boehner has decided his risk is worth taking vs. losing the Speakership and getting primaried.

Il Douche cratering has a lot to do with that, he’s in need of an intervention.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 7:25 am

Milhouse -I know it to be a more than strong rumor, because he told many others.

I don’t suppose you can substantiate your asspull. Likely SOOPERSEKRIT insider knowledge from an international investment seminar.

– “In fact, he told all 2 million Jooos in Iran … and they told me.”

This.

JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 7:28 am

So St. Mark, you apparently believe you are uniquely permitted to assume, opine, obsess, insult and publicly pass judgement (sometimes cruelly so) on people and situations. And, boy oh boy, you are always quick to prove your mettle in that area. No self-reflection is ever in order for you. When I refer to some of your past comments as “hatey”, in your mind and in your words I am just “pretty much in line with all the modern-day (mainly) liberal dopes who love to deem commentary not stamped with the left’s political-correctness seal of approval as hate.”

Good to know.

elissa (e102b3) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:22 am

When the cloture vote is called without any ongoing filibuster, or any prospect of one, it’s an attempt to prevent amendments being offered.

In this case, it’s the exact opposite. It’s being called in an attempt to allow amendments to be offered and passed by a simple majority. If it prevented amendments, Cruz would be all for it.

Milhouse (0ea53d) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:30 am

180. You’re right, cloture ends deliberation. After such point, the defund provision would be easily struck.

I read too quickly a convoluted construct I’m capable of myself.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:41 am

I have a problem with King’s inconsistency. In this case, his histrionics include an opposition to ‘shutting down the government’ as well as the healthcare issue, and yet in 1996, he was all for shutting down the government as a response to the budget battle.

In 1996, during Bill Clinton’s presidency, King supported a government shutdown as a response to the budget battle at the time. That year, Clinton went on to win reelection, a massive triumph for Democrats.

Why the difference in concern?

While I agree with Cruz and disagree with King, that is not a valid argument to make against him. If I were him I would answer you that the difference is that that was before we saw what a disaster it turned out to be, and this is after. I would say that King has learned from experience that sticking a fork in the outlet is a bad idea, while Cruz is the foolish child who insists on learning from his own mistakes instead of from those of his elders. I would say that passing a halfway-decent budget and daring the president to veto it and defund the government seemed like a good idea in 1995-6, since it had worked so well for the Democrats in 1987, but the results speak for themselves, and show that it’s a tactic that only works for Democrats, not for Republicans, so they should not repeat the mistake now.

I don’t agree with any of that, but it is a logical and consistent position to take.

Milhouse (0ea53d) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:49 am

182. In fact, the GOP’s loss in Congress is mythology as DeLay yesterday recounted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_1996http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_1996

DeLay had the swing GOP up 3 in Senate and I’ve seen the House swing down 4, in any case, the House retained a huge majority.

The real disaster was the House pogrom versus Gingrich, coordinated by Paxon, abetted by Armey, and chiefly benefitting Boehner.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:07 am

The good news going forward is Denis McDonough is no Jack Lew. Having totally butchered ME strategy they will screw up the CR/Debt Ceiling handoff and Amnesty will never see the light of day.

Their trusty Syrian Rebels dropped a mortar on the Russian Embassy yesterday in Damascus. Look for Sunni azz on the Barbie.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:15 am

Milhouse @ 182,

Your assessment requires giving King the benefit of the doubt. I choose not to, as I see no reason to given his antics and stances. And that too might be deemed logical and consistent.

Dana (6178d5) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:21 am

Walid Shoebat:

http://shoebat.com/2013/09/21/pickering-asked-benghazi-botched-kidnapping-plot/?

The levee is gradually being undermined.

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:36 am

Thanks for the heads-up, Gary. It will be consumed in one sitting by many.

# 183

Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name

What to do?

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:37 am

As I understand recent reports, Reid will be able to use procedural maneuvers to avoid a filibuster in the Senate so the real battle will happen when the Senate strips ObamaCare out of the House bill and sends a funding bill back to conference in the House.

But, you know, the story seems to change everyday. It seems like a fluid situation with a lot going on behind the scenes. The reports that Boehner may be taking a harder line are especially interesting. If they are true, does it signal he’s under a lot of pressure from conservatives and he wants to keep his Speakership in 2014?

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:38 am

I think this may be a reference to one of my earlier comments. If so, you misunderstood my comment.

DRJ, I was referring to people who believe Sammy doesn’t lean left. If you believe otherwise, I’m curious about what specifically leads you to draw that conclusion. I’m willing to say my revised impression of him isn’t accurate, since I admit that I originally guessed he perhaps was a nominal, wavering Republican or a squishy independent.

In the case of Peter King, I don’t know enough about his history and background to say with full confidence that his comments about Cruz are motivated by either A or B, or maybe C. However, from a purely tactical standpoint, it’s not helpful to the cause (or strategy) of shutting down Obamacare for King to be spending time razzing its critics instead of its supporters.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:38 am

187. Thanks for the correction:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections,_1996

gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:41 am

The other link that Shoebat has to al Azm’s training in the US, is very interesting.

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:49 am

So St. Mark, you apparently believe you are uniquely permitted to assume, opine, obsess, insult and publicly pass judgement (sometimes cruelly so) on people and situations

Elissa, so how do you respond to those people who often describe contrarian comments in this forum as coming from “trolls” or a case of trolling? Is that “hatey” or cruel?

Moreover, the description I gave previously about my antipathy to the GLBT agenda being treated by a forumer with suspicion or resentment, and that being similar to the way that various liberals notoriously deal with anti-Obama comments as supposedly originating from a place of racism, still stands.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:49 am

FWIW, DRJ — since my wording in #189 implies I already don’t agree with my more recent critique of a forumer — I should have written: “I’m willing to say my revised impression of him may not be accurate…”

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:55 am

Mark, Sammy himself courageously and directly responded to your conjectures by clearly stating his voting history on another thread recently. Did you miss it?

elissa (e102b3) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:55 am

141. Actually, Sammy’s comment about Pol Pot and the other murderous Commies was right on. Those murderous c**ts just used empty words to excuse their murderous c**iness. “Ideology” is turned on its head when applied to them.

Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:03 am

No, the truth of political ideology is starkly illustrated by them. Empty words don’t inspire the number of people they needed to commit their atrocities to actually do the deed. Only a faith system that people truly believe in can kill millions.

I know the etymology of the word “ideology” means the study of ideas, but the fact of the matter is that ideologues incorporate myth and superstition into their faith systems. Don’t believe me? Look at North Korea. The Kim’s hold on that country isn’t just due to their stalinism, but they incorporate confucianism and legend as well. Their words may seem empty to you, nk, but the guards at the total control camps brutalizing the prisoners believe them. And that’s what counts.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:13 am

194. Mark, Sammy himself courageously and directly responded to your conjectures by clearly stating his voting history on another thread recently. Did you miss it?

Comment by elissa (e102b3) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:55 am

elissa, did you miss the fact the Pope reads this blog?

When he made his recent comments about how the church can’t just talk about things like homosexuality all the time, every time, I realized he had to be reading certain comments here.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:19 am

196. The Pope reads and responds to some letters sent to him, but there’s no reason for anything from this blog to get to him, even thirdhand.

A similarity might however not be a coincidence, in that there might be a common source for something on this blog and something the new Pope read..

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:29 am

LOL. Trolls come to sites such as here purely to misdirect, disrupt, and incite for sport. That is the sole purpose of their presence, they are obvious about it, and they richly deserve what they get thrown back at them in the way of push back and challenges. I think most normal people can rather easily tell the difference between a common troll and someone who is a good faith commenter.

elissa (e102b3) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:29 am

Sammy, Steve57 was being humorously sarcastic while making a point. I’m pretty sure Steve is aware that the POpe does not regularly read Patterico!

elissa (e102b3) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:33 am

195. Comment by Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:13 am

Empty words don’t inspire the number of people they needed to commit their atrocities to actually do the deed. Only a faith system that people truly believe in can kill millions.

Empty words don’t do it, bit ambnition, and self-preservation, and a feeling of being trapped does.

Even when adherence to an ideology seems to be a strong element of what’s going on, and the people involved do things withouyt being specifically told to do them, it can be, and is, faked for the sake of ambition and self-preservation.

The Khmer Rouge in particular used teenagers for a lot of things, probably because teenagers have a harder time seeing a way out and may be ambitious (and may care less)

When an evil system suddenly comes to an end, many of its minions have no trouble stopping doing what they are doing. And it’s not that they suddenly saw the light.

Now in North Korea where this has gone on a long time, and people may have no other source if information, the cult may have some believers, but even there that’s collapsed.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:36 am

Steve57, Are you serious? Or is my “gullibility circuit” shorted? I have read, very closely, the transcript of the Pope’s interview in its entirety. I admit I cannot say the same of this blog. Which may explain why I have not come to the same realization as you, so, would you (for our edification) identify what you believe were the “certain comment” on this blog?

I have a feeling I should do a “level one diagnostic”.

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:37 am

I believe that in most cases people participate in murders for reasons of ambition or their idea of self-preservation – ideology is no more a motivating factor than it is with the Mafia.

Although there being an ideology – which is not always present – makes it harder to broach the topic of rebelling or mutinying.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:39 am

Level One diagnostic complete.

Prescription: Face-palm.

Conclusion: Never kid a Catholic on a Sunday.

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:41 am

Mark,

I was the one who previously said that I don’t think Sammy is a liberal. What I object to is the suggestion that saying someone isn’t a liberal can be accurately restated by saying he tilts to the left. Those are not the same.

I also said I don’t think it matters. For the record, what I meant by that is that it’s none of our business what Sammy is. What matters is the logic of what he says.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:43 am

196 almost sounded like a non sequitor, linked by the idea of reading the blog. What was the point? That it’s unreasonable to expect anyone to read everything on this blog?

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:45 am

Well said, DRJ.

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:46 am

196. The Pope reads and responds to some letters sent to him, but there’s no reason for anything from this blog to get to him, even thirdhand.

A similarity might however not be a coincidence, in that there might be a common source for something on this blog and something the new Pope read..

Comment by Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:29 am

Oh dead Lord. Are you kidding me?

JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:46 am

felipe,

That constantly happens to me on the Internet and rarely in real life. There are so many visual and audio cues that signal sarcasm in real life that are missing on the internet. Apparently I really rely on those cues.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:51 am

Lol, Steve, actually the Pope’s word are very much in line with even Paul’s beliefs

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:51 am

Perhaps it’s that way for Sammy, too.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:51 am

Sammy, I think Steve was channeling “you” in that “non sequitur”. Resulting in an EMP blast that took out certain circuits in my brain.

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:51 am

Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:38 am

Reid will be able to use procedural maneuvers to avoid a filibuster in the Senate so the real battle will happen when the Senate strips ObamaCare out of the House bill and sends a funding bill back to conference in the House.

They’ll send it back at the last possible moment.

On Fox News Sunday, Senator Ted Cruz for the first time, revealed his thoughts for the end game.

if Harry Reid kills this bill in it the Senate, I think the House should hold its ground, and should begin passing smaller resolutions one department at a time. It should start, continuing resolution focused on the military — fund the military, send it over, and let’s see it Harry Reid is willing to shut down the military because he wants to force ObamaCare on the American people. I think that would be a very perilous decision for Harry Reid to make and if the House can keep driving this — look, the House is the only body where the Republicans have a majority and so the House has to lead on this.

They could have started out that way too.

I think Obama would be correct that no president has ever been forced to go along with something that did not have a majority in boith houses.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:52 am

Even the pope’s hat reads this blog. Y’all need to learn to recognize.

Dustin (4efc25) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:52 am

Yes, DRJ, people like we need the /sarc tag.

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:54 am

I was not serious.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:58 am

Still, that was very well done, Steve57.

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:00 am

Comment by Milhouse (0ea53d) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:49 am

I would say that passing a halfway-decent budget and daring the president to veto it

I don’t think they passed a budget. They passed a continuing resolution. They were negotiating over the budget maybe, and Clinton had dekiberately narrowed down the differences to the point where the differences were small and the Republicans almost agreed with him.

seemed like a good idea in 1995-6, since it had worked so well for the Democrats in 1987,

No. A president vetoing the continuing resolution had hurt a president in 1990. 1987 was the time a continuing resolution oassed with lost of secial provisions in it, that could never have passed iuf they weren’t in this must pass bill.

Senator Inouye arramnghed for money to go to help Lubavicher schools in France established for Jewish refugees from Algeria from the 1960s. (it seems like the Establishment Clause doesn’t apply to foreign aid.)

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:02 am

I am pleased I briefly achieved Orson Welles “War of the Worlds” credibility, though.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:02 am

Thank you, felipe.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:03 am

Oh dead Lord. Are you kidding me?

Comment by JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:46 am

Mistake in typing you make, yes? My Lord, dead He is not! Much alive, He is! Coming soon, He is! Holding up head, Yoda is!

Yoda (a84075) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:03 am

Texans love dirty politics.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:04 am

Dustin’s Popehat addition is good, too.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:05 am

“Also please share with us your special knowledge of politics on the hill how the house can tell the president and the senate – while being held by opposite parties – that everyone has to listen to them.”

EPWJ, please share with us which incompetent school failed to teach your troll ass basic Constitutional law.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:09 am

“’war of the Worlds’ credibility” -Steve57

LOL, I like it! That is exactly what you achieved.

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:12 am

222. Dustin’s Popehat addition is good, too.

Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:05 am

Yes. I wish I had stole that witticism before he used it.

Damn you, Dustin!

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:13 am

Sammy:

They could have started out that way, too.

Could they? Look back at what was happening 2-5 weeks ago, Sammy. Were Boehner, Cantor, etc., on board with what Ted Cruz wants — that the debt ceiling be linked to ObamaCare defunding? I don’t think they were.

I submit the pressure from the conservative Senators helped pressure the House leadership to move right.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:15 am

“Also please share with us your special knowledge of politics on the hill how the house can tell the president and the senate – while being held by opposite parties – that everyone has to listen to them.”

Not know Bantha Poodoo about anything, he does not! If House refuses to fund anything, not funded it will be, most definitely everyone listen they will! Like EF Hutton they are! Strong in the dumb side you are Eric. So strong with the dumb side of Force, causes Yoda to do this:

. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .“~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./…..\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>–==“
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`

Yoda (a84075) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:16 am

For anybody who might be in the mood I am linking to short excerpts of some of the better classic conversations from Alice in Wonderland. I find many of them uncannily similar to some of the conversations on Patterico’s of late. 🙂

(A sample)
Mad Hatter: Why is a raven like a writing desk?
Alice: Riddles? Now let me see… why is a raven like a writing desk?
Mad Hatter: I beg your pardon?
Alice: Why is a raven like a writing desk?
Mad Hatter: [alarmed] Why is a what?
March Hare: Careful, she’s stark ravin’ mad!
Alice: But it’s your silly riddle. You just said…
Mad Hatter: Easy, don’t get excited!
March Hare: How about a nice cup of tea?
Alice: “Have a cup of tea,” indeed! Well I’m sorry, but I just haven’t the time!
….
White Rabbit: Your Majesty, members of the jury, loyal subjects… and the King… the prisoner at the bar stands accused of enticing Her Majesty, the Queen of Hearts, into a game of croquet, thereby and with malice of forethought, molesting, tormenting, and otherwise annoying our beloved…
Queen of Hearts: Never mind all that! Get to the part where I lose my temper.
White Rabbit: …thereby causing the Queen to lose her temper.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0043274/quotes

elissa (e102b3) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:19 am

Hey, I see Jean-Luc Picard in my screen!

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:20 am

Specifically, here’s why I think it mattered: A couple of dozen representatives pushing for defunding ObamaCare get some attention in Roll Call, The Hill, and the representatives’ local media … but that’s it. That doesn’t put much pressure on the House leadership.

But Senators are higher profile and get more press, especially national press, than representatives. Senators rumored to be 2016 candidates or that the media loves to vilify get even more coverage, and that tends to get noticed and result in more constituent calls to everyone. (I think EPWJ also mentioned this has generated calls and fundraising.) Cruz even said part of his goal is to energize the grassroots, and maybe it’s working to push the House leadership to the right.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:26 am

Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:15 am

Could they? Look back at what was happening 2-5 weeks ago, Sammy. Were Boehner, Cantor, etc., on board with what Ted Cruz wants — that the debt ceiling be linked to ObamaCare defunding? I don’t think they were.

They have much sooner switched to an idea of linking Obamacare only to a small portion of federal spending.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:29 am

When one facepalm not enough, Felipe, 2 or even 3 had can be!

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/175/315/PicardDoubleFacepalm-1.jpg?1316330080

http://www.bestrank.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/double-facepalm-picard-riker-2-1.jpg

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/538085_601681046514741_1864966417_n.jpg

Even one just for lookings sake, some humans call eye candy they might:

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x54/TrueX-Ray/TNG%20Caption%20This/TNGCaption132e.jpg

Yoda (c1642d) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:32 am

* They could have much sooner switched….

Tying not funding Obamacare to not passing something else, less critical than all non-discretionary and non-emergency spending, could go on for some time.

I am not sure what they want to do anyway.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:32 am

So who are the future Steve Schmidt’s and Nicolle Wallace’s

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/09/22/Palin-to-Chris-Wallace-Release-Names-of-Top-Republicans-Who-Encouraged-You-to-Trash-Cruz

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:54 am

I am going to go on a limb and say that Chris Wallace is “economizing” on the truth and exaggerating “top” Republicans. But what do I know? The “shivs” are real but are the flags real?

felipe (6100bc) — 9/22/2013 @ 12:05 pm

Sammy:

[Try] not funding Obamacare to not passing something else, less critical than all non-discretionary and non-emergency spending, could go on for some time

You have to play the cards you’re dealt, Sammy. Right now, the Democrats only care about raising the debt ceiling so they have an incentive to come to the table, and that gives the GOP leverage. What leverage do the Republicans have with an issue that doesn’t matter to the President or the Democrats?

Should the Republicans offer a bill that makes concessions on amnesty or gun control just to get them to the table? Would that really make sense to you from a political or a tactical standpoint?

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 12:22 pm

DRJ, the mistake that the GOP has been making is passing CR’s at all.

the House should pass a full budget and then recess. CR’s have destroyed accountability for the Federal govt budget deficits.

SPQR (1ec81f) — 9/22/2013 @ 12:49 pm

The continuing resolution is a replacement, not for a budget, but for appropriations bills. I am not sure what the budget bills actually do.

Not one appropriation bill has passed this year.

The process is COMPLETELY broken.

Now my idea was simply to tie every particle of spending to some revenue source, including borrowing, and abolish the budget. That at least could work.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 12:54 pm

This is breaking news…

EPWJ claims he has “inside sources” who inform that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning. In all time zones, even !!!

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/22/2013 @ 12:59 pm

Ted Cruz is like the dog who chases cars, and finally catches one.

Don’t get me wrong, I like his position on this. But not enough Americans do. We have ‘tipped’, and the “Free $hit” crowd has won. Can’t Republicans just find ONE battle we can win?

TimesDisliker (72cadf) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:00 pm

Sammy – it is completely BROKEN since the Dems decided to quit passing budgets under Bush, and then for the entire freakin first term of Obama. This began when the Dems controlled the House and Senate.

JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:01 pm

240. …Can’t Republicans just find ONE battle we can win?

Comment by TimesDisliker (72cadf) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:00 pm

Not if America has “tipped” and the “Free $hit” crowd is in charge they can’t.

If that’s the case, what exactly can conservatives win?

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:03 pm

SF: [Try] not funding Obamacare to not passing something else, less critical than all non-discretionary and non-emergency spending, [This] could go on for some time.

Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 12:22 pm

You have to play the cards you’re dealt, Sammy. Right now, the Democrats only care about raising the debt ceiling so they have an incentive to come to the table, and that gives the GOP leverage.

No, they care about other things, and the debt ceiling is simply too much. It’s the nuclear option.

Tying something to legislation like the debt ceiling might make sense if there was a majority in both houses for it, and it was being blocked by the leadership in one House, or the rules and if there was a veto threat, it would be overidden.

What leverage do the Republicans have with an issue that doesn’t matter to the President or the Democrats?

Find something relevant that they do want, and in the end, you might get a modification – a change that sufficient Democrats actually agree with but are embarassed to admit.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:04 pm

==We have ‘tipped’…..Can’t Republicans just find ONE battle we can win?==

That’s an interesting question. What battle(s) do you think might qualify and be worth fighting?

elissa (8fed7c) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:06 pm

That’s an interesting question. What battle(s) do you think might qualify and be worth fighting?

None. The fights to not nominate people like McCain and Romney have proven that. The establishment would rather trash conservatives than be conservative.

JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:14 pm

Should the Republicans offer a bill that makes concessions on amnesty or gun control just to get them to the table? Would that really make sense to you from a political or a tactical standpoint?

The Republicans are probably more strongly committed to their point of view on these things than the Democrats are to letting Obamacare go forward. The Democrats also don’t actually want gun control. Some immigration changes might be folded into a budget or tax bill.

The situation is that bills can become law generally speakinmg if they have about 40-45% of the Repunblicans, maximum. Democrats are more tightly bunched than Republicans. Gaining more than 45% of Republicans loses more Democratic votes than Republican votes gained.

You can pass bills in the House with almost all Republicans voting for it but such bills go nowhere and they are not good bills either. In the end Obamacare needs to be replaced not just repealed. Bills that are going nowhere can get most of the Republican caucus. Bills with maybe 30% of the Republicans can also pass.

Congress is deadlocked because bills that get a majority of House Republicans and few or no Democrats simply cannot pass the Senate.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:16 pm

Trading the Dream Act for postponing and maybe modifying Obamacare – maybe that actually could work.

The Dream Act for a border control bill is dead.

You could get a bill that left both issues not completely settled, and Obama might sign it.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:17 pm

241. Comment by JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:01 pm

Sammy – it is completely BROKEN since the Dems decided to quit passing budgets under Bush, and then for the entire freakin first term of Obama. This began when the Dems controlled the House and Senate.

Budget bills are a way around the filibuster rule in the Senate, so now Harry Reid’s not offering any more budget resolutions. They did pass one because Congressional pay was tied to the Senate passing a budget resolution when the debt ceiling – or as it the continuing resolution? – passed this spring, but there it stopped. No conference committee.

It’s broken because in general leading members Congress prefers to pass emergency legislation, as provisions that will never otherwise pass can be gotten in it, or they are happier with the results when there is no budget.

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:23 pm

I like your style, SPQR.

Sammy – I don’t have time to read your responses today but thank you for the conversation.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:26 pm

@steve57, elissa, JD, thank you for responding. Here are some issues I think could get the support of the American people (if not the moneymen and bundlers and corporations).

Borders – American people would solidly get behind regulating borders, and knowing who is (and isn’t) in country. But GWB himself said “the country needs chicken-pluckers, too” and we know the rest of that story. But even though big contributors want the cheap labor to flow, the American people have a critical mass for controlling the border. Look at the buzzsaw Rubio ran into, and rightly so.
Language – English is the money language, the language of medicine, science, diplomacy (not French), air traffic control, finance, the internet, etc. Americans also have a critical mass for English use in U.S. government and education. It helps nobody to make it easier to live in Los Angeles for 60 years and never learn English.
Culture – Americans can also get behind a standard level for personal behavior. Imagine if a politician stated that thuglife and criminal behavior should be punished (not just “frowned upon”). If Obama said it, it would be amazing and he would get twice the support he would lose. If an old white Republican said it, after 40 years of a mediocre career, it would just be weak sauce (picture Gingrich or McCain saying it now, with nothing to lose…ugh!)

We are losing ground on these issues every day, with the pushes for amnesty, lowering the bottom-of-the-bucket on minimum wage, subsidizing out-of-wedlock births, etc. But maybe just pick one of these: what happened in Benghazi, James Clapper lying under oath, Eric Holding lying under oath, the IRS and Lois Lerner lying under oath, Congress passing a budget as required by law, etc. Is there one Republican who can find something in his/her own district where spending could be cut? It is just waiting for us, but pick one and win. Yet Republicans are mired in these loser issues that go nowhere and cement the image of out-of-touch ineffectual idiots. Moonbase, anyone?:-)

TimesDisliker (72cadf) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:43 pm

235. I think Chris Wallace said today that before Ted Cruz was interviewed on Fox News Suinday today, he was given a bunch of unsolicited research and questions to ask – by some Republicans.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday-chris-wallace/2013/09/22/sen-ted-cruz-talks-defunding-obamacare-will-assad-meet-deadline-getting-rid-chemical

WALLACE: Karl, this has been one of the strangest weeks I’ve ever had in Washington. And I sat that, [sic – I think he must have actually said “said” or “say” that] because as soon as we listed Ted Cruz as our featured guest this week, I got unsolicited research and questions, not from Democrats, but from top Republicans who — to hammer Cruz…

Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:43 pm

The benefit of the GOP strategy of eliciting the Senate to take another vote on ObamaCare is that it will require Senators in red/purple states who are up for re-election in 2014 to either confirm their support for ObamaCare, or flip-flop.

Landrieu in LA, Pryor in AK, Udall in CO, Shaheen in NH, Hagan in NC, et al, step up to the plate.
Y’all pontificate about democracy, will git ‘yo fat rear ends in the Senate chamber and vote !
Let the voters know where you stand.

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/22/2013 @ 1:47 pm

Why is a raven like a writing desk?
Poe wrote on both.

And this quote from Alice kind of describes my experiences on the internet.

nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:18 pm

Poe died in the gutter in Maryland.
Maybe that says something about the DC area.

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:23 pm

Cruz exposed by Wallace

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-wallace-grills-cruz-youre-going-to-block-senate-from-taking-up-a-bill-you-support/

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:25 pm

EPWJ – were you the secret insider that dished the dirt to Wallace prior to the interview?

JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:33 pm

“It seems to be a law of nature, inflexible and inexorable, that those who will not risk cannot win.”
– John Paul Jones

Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:36 pm

JD

Yes I forwarded it right after your secret files you claimed to have on an Alaskan senator were sent to the FBI’s Indy office where you have an open appointment…..

There was no “information” forwarded to Wallace but thousands of emails and phone calls from all enraged republicans everywhere wanting this fraud, elected by democrats, out.

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:38 pm

EPWJ claims he has “inside sources” who tell him what is going on at Fox News.
Unfortunately, those “inside sources” only tell him what is going on IF the wind is at least 10 miles from the southwest when his tin foil hat is adjusted so that it is facing Mecca. And his Fruit Loops decoder ring must be activated. And only on days when Denny’s serves Navy Bean soup. And only on days when…

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:42 pm

Eric–entirely putting aside the personality stuff which you seem to dwell on, and also leaving aside the blog infighting–what do you want to happen with respect to Obamacare? What do you think the congress should do, or how should it be used in that regard? What do you think should be done with respect to the debt limit? How do you propose to accomplish it with the players on the field?

elissa (8fed7c) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:49 pm

Yes I forwarded it right after your secret files you claimed to have on an Alaskan senator were sent to the FBI’s Indy office where you have an open appointment…..

Your pattern of making shlt up continues apace.

There was no “information” forwarded to Wallace

That is exactly the opposite of what he claimed. But your know more about Ailes, Hannity, and Wallace know about their own business.

JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:56 pm

Up here in Gold Beach
on southern Oregon coast
time almost stands still

Colonel Haiku (780923) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:58 pm

Elephant Stone, he does not know a hawk from a handsaw.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:39 pm

http://datechguyblog.com/2013/09/21/why-is-obama-so-angry-to-have-a-political-win/

I like the way datechguy puts it. Why is Obama so angry if its the GOP making the mistakes ?

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:42 pm

SPQR,

So you’re saying his antenna is probably receiving “insider” messages from Marvin the Martian ?

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:42 pm

San Fran Nan’s spirit
lives on in teh hairy legs
of grey haired hippies

Colonel Haiku (fa70e5) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:44 pm

I ate teh mushrooms
they told me not to do it
dangerous pizza

Colonel Haiku (9fea4c) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:48 pm

JD

So you haven’t forwarded your “secret” files yet – figures

Oh more changes coming at Fox they have high ratings but also high payroll

I think most of the changes are good, I’m surprised Kilmeade hasn’t been promoted

Watch for a Gibson style Doocy exit in the next few months

or will he????

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:49 pm

I don’t have any secret files, and never claimed to, so your silly childish question is irrelevant and dishonest.

Colts @ 49ers is fun

JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:55 pm

You claimed Hannity and Ailes were going to be gone. Not so much.

JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:55 pm

Goin’ Rogue up here

Colonel Haiku (780923) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:57 pm

What is wrong with 9ers!?!? Losing to Indy!?!?

Colonel Haiku (780923) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:59 pm

Elissa

Uh, JD and his ilk are the one’s infighting, they give THOUSANDS of unfounded, uncalled for, libelous attack – when I snark once or twice – then the fainting couches come out.

But to answer uit is first the tea party needs to temper their expctations with a national ADULT campaign to elect NON DEMOCRATS to the senate – since their power has been to pick horrid candidates, mostly losers -they need to stop.

Second, not only should Obamacare be repealed but a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget and outlawing any long term entitlements

That includes flood insurance, disaster insurance, public education, social security, medicare, EIC, Agricultural subsidies.

There should be national tort reform, the legal profession and rules of evidence need to be rewritten as case law has distorted the process beyond reasonable repair.

Compulsory national service for 5 years, then go to college.

America is more than a great place – its the only place that makes a difference in the world, I have had the honor and deep priviledge to work hand in hand overseas and more and more appreciate the wonderous gift we have been given by our fore fathers so long ago

but most of the creeps here in the comment section are beyond redemption and should perhaps go get some real jobs out of the country to appreciate what they have and appreciate how rich our poor are.

Look how these “experts” pick on Sammy whether you agree or disagree he doesn’t deserve the vitriol pointed at them

that’s all you really need to know about their character….

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 3:59 pm

JD – ha! You have “ilk” but I have a “cabal”.

I iz so much classier than you.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:04 pm

JD

Ailes is gone, so is Hannity, 9pm is the dead zone – its just a matter of a few months – its too bad he and Colmes had something going but the hysterical shout fests have tempered investers –

, Kilmeade is hot, Gutfield is hot, Doocy’s son is getting notice, they have a bullpen that will go elsewhere if they don’t get playing time.

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:04 pm

SPQR

Hey you also have a classroom remember?

yeah you forgot about that little deception trying to pal along with that guy who claimed to have a PHD in genetics from a University that until just recently offered a PHD in genetics…

Concerned troll SPQR..

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:07 pm

SPQR

Hey you also have a classroom remember?

yeah you forgot about that little deception trying to pal along with that guy who claimed to have a PHD in genetics from a University that until just recently offered a PHD in genetics…

Concerned troll SPQR..

What a bizarre incoherent load that is, EPWJ. Deception? What deception? Dude, put down the bottle.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:11 pm

Okay I understand the fig leaf got ripped off the marble statue of Tedious Cruzus at the museum of snark and you guys need to make more libelous unfounded, undocumented personal attacks to vent your embarrassment and agony of backing yet another long promising, short delivering ego maniac. You meant well as usual…

JD, so did you finally tear down those posters of Lance yet?

just kidding, man you guys need a hobby

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:13 pm

“… just kidding, man you guys need a hobby …”

ROFL.

At least our hobby does not involve cracking a paper tax stamp from the ATF to open.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:15 pm

SPQR

Oh you and your “Students” comments when you couldn’t come up with an argument some time back – is it possible you have created so many persona’s here at Patterico that you cannot recall them all

Figures I stop counting all your personas at 11 they were just too many…

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:15 pm

Nonsense, EPWJ, I’ve never used any other nicks than “SPQR” and variations on this blog.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:16 pm

Okay you guys have a good week, take care – be nice to Sammy and those who dare to state an opinion other than what rattles around in your heads

take care

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:17 pm

Ailes is gone, so is Hannity

This is objectively untrue.

JD (5c1832) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:17 pm

Eleven personas? Heck I have a hard enough time keeping this one straight. 😉

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:20 pm

SPQR

Nonsense, EPWJ, I’ve never used any other nicks than “SPQR” and variations on this blogIf

I was as seemingly disingenuous as you tend to be at times I would forget what I said too, but then again my daughter just got engaged to her west point boyfriend they are posting to Germania and then in theater in a few weeks and I won’t be blogging as much anymore.

In other words, I wish you well, in whatever fantasy life you have this week 🙂

That was a joke…

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:21 pm

Oh good lord , this thread sure ran off the rails and down the cliff. Jabberwocky nonsense. Meh.

Dana (6178d5) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:26 pm

Eric–you gave some answers/plans for long term. Fine. What I asked you though is what do you propose for right now. For the immediate problems. For the next week. The next two weeks. The next two months. What do you want the house and senate R’s to do? How do you want them to go about doing it in such a highly partisan environment. What tactics do you see as possible for Republicans currently in Washington ? How do they work around Reid and Pelosi and Obama who want totally different results? These are the things, the answers that are so elusive, aren’t they? And the continual internal party blame game and demonization solves nothing whether it’s played out in the media or within a blog or in the corridors of congress. This is the army we currently have to go into battle– and the opposing army we are fighting is known to us all.

elissa (8fed7c) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:27 pm

Eating road kill obviously has done some damage, EPWJ.

mg (31009b) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:28 pm

JD

So you say…

So says JD

Yeah and Shep just got promoted to fetching coffee and making sure the limos arrive to pick up guests…

yes JD has the inside knowledge (well just any knowledge)

JD, pumpkin, when important people like a VP or a star are gotten rid of, they aren’t fired, they are sent to exciting new opportunities, like a VP of Finance at a Fortune 10, that right 10 company, he didn’t listen and he was transferred from his position of overseeing the largest manufacturing company in the world’s financial affairs to overseeing a exciting new retail opportunity in Europe – that’s right he’s the VP of 7/11 stores in Europe….

eh, its all in how its worded.

So many VP’s I got rid off left to seek exciting opportunities or spend time with their families – dude they were fired

FIRED!!!

Hannity had a great run, he went to tea party, they got rid of Beck, they love Hannity, he’s a super nice guy, but its in the end a business.

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:28 pm

EPWJ, unfortunately, I am unable to reassemble your incoherent babble into something intelligible enough to even guess what it is you think you’ve “caught” me on.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:29 pm

So, when you are taken out of the trailing slot of the top show in all of cable television and put in the worst slot for all of cable television

sure in that box of manure – there must be a pony right?

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:30 pm

SPQR

If I pretended to be as many people as you seem to pretend here yeah I’d call it incoherent.

Hey, go back to picking on Sammy with all your “expertise”

after all – this is what you have….

enjoy

EPWJ (c3dbb4) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:32 pm

Shorter EPWJ: “Waaaaaaaauuuuugghhh!!! I wanted Dewhurst!!!”

Icy (e8ca44) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:42 pm

You claimed Hannity and Ailes would be gone. They retain their jobs and contracts. Rather than admit you were just making up a new asspull, you claim their really are gone, because Hannity is in a different prime time slot? Which leaves your Ailes gibberish still out there. It takes no special knowledge on my behalf to point out that they retain their positions. Ailes said so while you were making this all up. That you continue with your claims is simply delusional. How do you square them retaining their jobs with you claims of knowledge that they would be fired?

JD (03db5b) — 9/22/2013 @ 4:48 pm

“…So many VP’s I got rid of…”

Oh, my. Some things never change.

http://www.bigfishgames.com/online-games/4445/whackatroll/index.html

Have fun.

Simon Jester (809716) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:03 pm

So Simon, you waltz in here, sniff the foul air and immediately decide to move on to greener pastures? Some friend you are!

elissa (8fed7c) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:09 pm

Well this is just accidental, sure;

http://twitchy.com/2013/09/22/ted-cruz-admits-he-wasnt-alive-to-nuke-north-carolina-in-1961/

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:10 pm

Oh, elissa, I think the world of you! There are so many very cool commenters; people who post things I find interesting and informative.

And then there are the people nuttier than payday bars.

It’s kind of hard to find the good posters, some days.

I guess I do waltz from time to time. But I like rhumba better. I’m too old for tango, sadly.

Simon Jester (809716) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:13 pm

narciso, oops, I was born by then. I better start working on my alibi.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:14 pm

How’s Manuel O’ Kelly, Simon.

narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:19 pm

I’m sure I’m not the only one who wishes you’d rhumba in more often, Simon Jester.

elissa (8fed7c) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:21 pm

SPQR, a bunch of my progressive friends have been posting on that H-bomb issue, saying “see how bad our government is.” They seem to forget who was President at the time.

And I find that not a single one of them knew about, heard of, or were concerned with the Kyshtym Incident:

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

Heck, or even Unit 731:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

But boy howdy, do we ever hear about what we do wrong.

Just more of Teh Narrative™, as usual.

By the way, it sounds like we are in the same cabal. When is the next meeting? I think I was supposed to bring the chips and guacamole.

Simon Jester (809716) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:23 pm

Simon, you are kidding right? A nuclear bomb is dumped in an aircraft accident, and does not go off, and this is some huge story of government evil?

Its not really news, its been unclassified info for years that after this accident and the one off the coast of Spain that the interlocks on nuclear weapons were redesigned.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:25 pm

Manny is just dinkum, narciso. A good cobber.

Elissa, my many thanks. I just want to be happier and not grumpier when I do.

Simon Jester (809716) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:27 pm

You have to get your mind right, SPQR. What we do is always worse than what other nations do.

It’s a weird kind of pathological narcissism.

But I think this explains it best:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704147804575455523068802824.html

I am pretty sure that informs the White House these days. I have no idea what Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi believe.

Simon Jester (809716) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:30 pm

Simon, there used to be a heck of a good blogger back during the ol’ “Porkbuster” days that blogged under “Simon Jester”.

Related?

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:30 pm

1987 was the time a continuing resolution oassed with lost of secial provisions in it, that could never have passed iuf they weren’t in this must pass bill.

But only after Reagan tried resisting, and the government shut down for a very short time before he caved.

Milhouse (82b1e0) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:31 pm

Ah, crap, my cellphone just lit up with NWS alerts. And just what we didn’t need – a line of thunderstorm cells rolling through Colorado Front Range.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:35 pm

I have a new thread on the defunding effort with Cruz’s comments on Fox News Sunday today.

Patterico (9c670f) — 9/22/2013 @ 5:59 pm

SPQR, I think you have me confused with another person hiding behind a Heinleinian construct. Our host knows who I am. We have e-mailed before, a long time ago.

Simon Jester (809716) — 9/22/2013 @ 6:48 pm

No prob, Simon. It wasn’t an accusation.

SPQR (768505) — 9/22/2013 @ 7:06 pm

I was the one who previously said that I don’t think Sammy is a liberal. What I object to is the suggestion that saying someone isn’t a liberal can be accurately restated by saying he tilts to the left. Those are not the same.

DRJ, I still don’t know the specifics of why you conclude what you do. Also, a comment that someone isn’t a liberal but tilts to the left is a contradiction in terms and doesn’t make sense to me. You misunderstood my point if you’d think I’d ever say something like that. Or I really can’t figure out how you define ideological orientation if you don’t think “liberal” and “left” (eg, leaning to the left) are the same.

I also said I don’t think it matters. For the record, what I meant by that is that it’s none of our business what Sammy is. What matters is the logic of what he says.

Even more so in a thread about the motives behind why King is slamming Cruz, the nature of a person’s political biases does matter to me. Because I’m interested in the so-called Roshomon Effect — meaning, for example, 4 different people having 4 totally different opinions on a person or situation that’s being analyzed — trying to figure out what is fueling the viewpoint of someone, particularly if it’s contradictory or goes against cold reality, is important to me.

Knowing whether someone leans left or right certainly doesn’t seem like one of those very personal issues that are best left in private, even more so since this is a political blog and just about all of us are posting anonymously. Moreover, it’s not like I’m assessing whether someone’s sex life or level of income, or history of drug use, or scholastic GPA, is affecting his politics.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:01 pm

I was the one who previously said that I don’t think Sammy is a liberal. What I object to is the suggestion that saying someone isn’t a liberal can be accurately restated by saying he tilts to the left. Those are not the same.

DRJ, I still don’t know the specifics of why you conclude what you do. Also, a comment that someone isn’t a liberal but tilts to the left is a contradiction in terms and doesn’t make sense to me. You misunderstood my point if you’d think I’d ever say something like that. Or I really can’t figure out how you define ideological orientation if you don’t think “liberal” and “left” (eg, leaning to the left) are the same.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:03 pm

I also said I don’t think it matters. For the record, what I meant by that is that it’s none of our business what Sammy is. What matters is the logic of what he says.

Even more so in a thread about the motives behind why King is slamming Cruz, the nature of a person’s political biases does matter to me. Because I’m interested in the so-called Roshomon Effect — meaning, for example, 4 different people having 4 totally different opinions on a person or situation that’s being analyzed — trying to figure out what is fueling the viewpoint of someone, particularly if it’s contradictory or goes against cold reality, is important to me.

Knowing whether someone leans left or right certainly doesn’t seem like one of those very personal issues that are best left in private, even more so since this is a political blog and just about all of us are posting anonymously. It’s not like I’m assessing whether someone’s sex life or level of income, or history of drug use, or scholastic GPA, is affecting his politics.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:04 pm

This blog’s filter sure does act in mysterious ways. If the following somehow, finally, gets through, halleluiah.

I also said I don’t think it matters. For the record, what I meant by that is that it’s none of our business what Sammy is. What matters is the logic of what he says.

Even more so in a thread about the motives behind why King is slamming Cruz, the nature of a person’s political biases does matter to me. Because I’m interested in the so-called Roshomon Effect — meaning, for example, 4 different people having 4 totally different opinions on a person or situation that’s being analyzed — trying to figure out what is fueling the viewpoint of someone, particularly if it’s contradictory or goes against cold reality, is important to me.

Knowing whether someone leans left or right certainly doesn’t seem like one of those very personal issues that are best left in private, even more so since this is a political blog and just about all of us are posting anonymously.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:09 pm

DRJ, this blog’s wonderful, sensible filters (probably configured by the same geniuses responsible for Obamacare or the IRS’s policies towards 1099 groups) have worn me out. I tried to respond more completely to your comments, but only a fragment above made it through and the rest is lost in cyberspace.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 8:13 pm

Mark, I see five comments of yours since SPQR’s last comment.

Dustin (303dca) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:50 pm

I approved a few of Mark’s comments within the last hour. Not sure why they got caught up. I have been working all day with only breaks in between. Your tax dollars (well, some of yours) at work.

Patterico (1b8ba9) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:56 pm

Oh, sheesh, Dustin. My bad. LOL.

That filter is doing a number on me. The last time it screened my post out (or a few of them entered in quick succession), I expected it would eventually let that text leak through, but it never did. So this time around, I figured the filter was totally, permanently sieve-proof, so I tried to adjust and modify my posts to see what finally would squeeze through.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 9:58 pm

I approved a few of Mark’s comments within the last hour.

Patterico, I recommend the interface of your forum eventually be modified to include a delete button for the user. Until then, please strike #315, 316, 317.

Mark (58ea35) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:02 pm

SPQR, I thought you had gotten a few ilks in your time, too? You like the .300 magnums, right?

nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:05 pm

==Because I’m interested in the so-called Roshomon Effect — meaning, for example, 4 different people having 4 totally different opinions on a person or situation that’s being analyzed — trying to figure out what is fueling the viewpoint of someone, particularly if it’s contradictory or goes against cold reality, is important to me.==

That’s fine, Mark. But perhaps you could do that same full analysis that you find so intellectually interesting –but do it for your own private use and edification–and then keep it to yourself instead of making all your observations and guessings so public and personal, it would sit better with other readers. I don’t intend to speak for DRJ but I think that is what she was driving at in her comment to you.

elissa (8fed7c) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:07 pm

323. SPQR, I thought you had gotten a few ilks in your time, too? You like the .300 magnums, right?

Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:05 pm

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I am compelled to interject. I love the 30-06. But if you can’t get it done with the ought six, and there’s little you can’t do with an ought six, what you need is a bigger bore. Not a faster thirty caliber bullet.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:39 pm

I don’t know for a fact that SPQR likes the .300 or even the .300 series like the .338. I was just asking. I don’t remember what he said he got his ilks with.

nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:59 pm

Mark,

I agree my earlier comparison wasn’t that clear. Let me try one more time: I said I don’t think Sammy is a liberal and you responded by saying you disagree because you think Sammy tilts left. I don’t think those are necessarily inconsistent statements. Isn’t it possible for someone to tilt left without being a liberal, just as someone can tilt right without being a conservative?

Also, I like to think about what motivates public leaders and people in the news to do certain things or hold certain beliefs, but like elissa I don’t see the point of doing that with commenters here. It makes them the focus instead of their statements, and no one comes here to be psychoanalyzed.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:20 pm

I should add that those are my recollections of what we said, but so much has been said that I’m not completely sure anymore.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:23 pm

326. I don’t know for a fact that SPQR likes the .300 or even the .300 series like the .338. I was just asking. I don’t remember what he said he got his ilks with.

Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/22/2013 @ 10:59 pm

Now that’s what I’m talking about.

Me and my ilk never got a Colorado ilk, but I’ve shot a ton (literally) of ilk sized game and their ilk with a .338 Win Mag. Cape Hartebeest, Gemsbok, Mountain Zebra, whatever, it just puts ’em down.

Steve57 (a256f0) — 9/23/2013 @ 12:11 am

“It’s not like I’m assessing whether someone’s sex life or level of income, or history of drug use, or scholastic GPA, is affecting his politics.”

Mark – You forgot to add religion to the list, but I wonder how people here might have gotten a different impression of what you have been doing? Brain teaser, that one.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/23/2013 @ 12:32 am

Mark – How do you feel about the work of Judy Garland?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/23/2013 @ 12:33 am

For the wily and elusive scopum chartarum, .308 Match for me.

nk (875f57) — 9/23/2013 @ 12:37 am

EPWJ, you may want to inform your physician that the prescription drugs aren’t working for you.
You claimed the “insider sources” ~~inside of your head~~ at Fox News told you that Hannity was going to be fired, and that Ailes was leaving the network, too.

Neither of those things happened.

You made up a story about having “inside sources” because you wanted to sound important. Your predictions about Hannity and Ailes were dead wrong, but you refuse to man up and admit it.
If you realllllly had an “insider” who gave you bad information, you would simply be able to say, “Oh well, my friend gave me bad info. Sorry, everybody.”

But your self-worth is wrapped up in the phony story, and you cannot divorce yourself from it.
Look, if you want to sit around with a bunch of retired guys at Starbucks or Denny’s and tell tall tales, that’s understandable. But why do you feel the need to impress people on the internet ?

Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/23/2013 @ 9:51 am

nk, your memory is good. I’ve recently been carrying a .300 Win Short Mag chambered Tikka T3 rifle for ilk hunting. Err, I mean elk hunting.

SPQR (768505) — 9/23/2013 @ 9:58 am

9/20/2013

Peter King Says Ted Cruz Is a Fraud

334 Responses to “Peter King Says Ted Cruz Is a Fraud”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out