Patterico's Pontifications

2/20/2014

Thomas Sowell Gets It Wrong on Cruz, Part II: Is He Starting to Come Around?

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:33 am

The peerless Thomas Sowell is better at articulating principles of economics and freedom than he is at analyzing politics, and I probably share that failure with him. I’m about to criticize him again, but my intent is not to dump on this great man . . . and I hope I am starting to notice hints that Sowell “gets it,” at least in part.

Sowell’s latest column starts weak and ends strong, but the strong part undermines the arguments of the weak part so badly that the reader is left asking: so, aren’t you wrong after all, then? The overall impression is one of a column written by a bipolar person, who swings from one pole to the other during the course of writing the piece.

Sowell begins the column by attacking Cruz, putting some predictable meat on the bone of his complaints that crazy Ted Cruz is undermining the electoral prospects of Republicans. Cruz’s sins? 1) Filibustering against ObamaCare and 2) insisting that Republicans attach their names to a vote to continue the suspension of the debt ceiling:

Senator Cruz’s filibuster last year got the Republicans blamed for shutting down the government — and his threatened filibuster this year forced several Republican Senators to jeopardize their own reelection prospects by voting to impose cloture, to prevent Cruz from repeating his self-serving grandstand play of last year.

Basically, Sowell is saying that Cruz done wrong by 1) taking a stand against ObamaCare at some political risk to himself and Republicans, and 2) insisting that Republicans be accountable for their votes on the issue of whether to rein in our insane debt. Those things sound good to me, but Sowell has a reason (if a poor one, in my opinion) for complaining about them: we are putting at risk the re-election of Republicans to the Senate and White House.

But then, Sowell spends the second half of his column explaining why these Republicans don’t really deserve to be re-elected. He doesn’t put it in these terms, of course, but the attack on the GOP establishment is fairly pointed. It starts off with Sowell’s criticism of Republicans’ unwillingness to articulate their principles:

One of their most maddening qualities has for decades been their can’t-be-bothered attitude when it comes to explaining their positions to the American people in language people can understand. A classic example was Speaker of the House John Boehner’s performance when he emerged from a meeting at the White House a while back. There, with masses of television news cameras pointed at him, and a bank of microphones crowded together, he simply expressed his disgust at the Obama administration, turned and walked on away.

Here was a golden opportunity to cut through the Obama administration rhetoric and set the record straight on the issues at hand. But apparently Speaker Boehner couldn’t be bothered to have a prepared, and previously thought out, statement to present, conveying something more than his disgust.

Indeed. The opposite of walking away from the podium and failing to make an argument, by the way, is to stand up and make your argument in a very public way, designed to grip the public’s attention. Something like, oh, say . . . a filibuster. (Or, if you can’t achieve that, a staged quasi-filibuster that resembles the real thing closely enough for government work.) Something like what Ted Cruz did, Dr. Sowell, that you are blaming him for.

At the very end, almost as an afterthought, Sowell says that maybe the problem isn’t just messaging, but a lack of principle:

The Republican establishment has more than a tactical deficiency, however. They seem to have no principle that they offer or follow with any consistency. Their lack of articulation may be just a reflection of that lack of principle. It is hard to get to the point when you have no point to get to.

Ted Cruz filled a void. But the Republican establishment created the void.

Well, yeah. Isn’t that kind of the point?

Here’s the thing. Sowell’s strategy is to get us in control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency, so we can pass a repeal of ObamaCare. But this is not going to be easy. Millions of Americans are being given subsidies as part of the ObamaCare travesty. Electing enough Republicans to control Congress and the White House is necessary to repeal ObamaCare, but it is not sufficient. We also need those Republicans to have spines. As I pointed out in my last post criticizing Sowell, we did not reform entitlement programs during the period when we controlled these two branches of government last decade. Why would it be different now??

If we have a GOP establishment that is too scared to stand up and make a speech about ObamaCare; if we have a GOP establishment that is too scared to either impose the debt ceiling or say why we shouldn’t . . . then we have a GOP establishment that is going to be too scared to repeal a program that gives Americans huge handouts.

I have been right there with Sowell in the past arguing that we have to face some practical realities to get Republicans elected. But my attitude has changed as I watched the re-election of this President, the implementation of this disastrous program, and the constant stream of lies, unconstitutional power-grabs, and thuggery against enemies that we have seen from this administration. At this point, Christine O’Donnell could fly into Washington D.C. on a broomstick and I would cheer her on as long as she voted reliably for my policies.

I’m surprised and a disheartened that Sowell is unwilling to champion Ted Cruz, one of the few people in politics who seems to be standing up for the principles Sowell has spent his professional life arguing for, simply because there might be some short-term political risk inherent in Cruz’s actions. Making a stand despite the politics is what we want in a leader. Holding politicians accountable for their votes is what we want in a leader. Standing up to Barack Obama’s oppressive policies is what we want in a leader.

I hope there is a “Cruz Control Part III” that expands on the end of Sowell’s column — the GOP establishment’s lack of principle — and comes around to the notion that we need people like Ted Cruz.

285 Responses to “Thomas Sowell Gets It Wrong on Cruz, Part II: Is He Starting to Come Around?”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  2. Meh… I’ll see DRJ’s Hensnarling and I’ll raise her Louie Gohmert.

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  3. ” Electing enough Republicans to control Congress and the White House is necessary to repeal ObamaCare, but it is not sufficient. ”

    I don’t believe I can believe this anymore.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  4. We need Rs to steel up for several fights… clearly state principles and why what Obama and the Dems prescribe in nearly every area – domestic and foreign policies – is the Road to Perdition.

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  5. Senator Cruz’s filibuster last year got the Republicans blamed for shutting down the government — and his threatened filibuster this year forced several Republican Senators to jeopardize their own reelection prospects by voting to impose cloture, to prevent Cruz from repeating his self-serving grandstand play of last year.

    The “filbuster” about Obamacare which he abandoned, by the way, and which couldn’t have stopped it, was not, I think, blamed for the government shutdown. It was pure grandstanding, though, and had the effect of attracting attention to the impending opening of the health care exchanges.

    He therefore helped caused the failure of healthcare.gov, but he did not realize it because he did not predict it. Without Ted Cruz the website never would ahve anywhere near the number of hits it got in early October, and he saved the government the expense of advertising it.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  6. Ted Cruz was going around saying past October 1, you won’t be able to reverse Obamacare, which was a lot of nonsense.

    Ted Cruz’s pretend filibuster was maybe one of the things that caused Republicans not to vote for the continuing resolution, but the Republicans would have taken many things in exchange.

    By the way, here also the Republican leadership abandoned the argument that Obama was attempting to make the shutdown a lot worse than it had to be.

    It maybe wasn’t worse than shutting down the lanes on the George Washington Bridge, [I am not sure if it affeted anybody's commute] but Obama was quite clearly behind it, and that is not the way government ought to be run. When Jerry Brown loses an issue, he does not contrive to make things worse – he tries to live with it as best as possible, sometimes outright reversing himself, but not Obama.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  7. Thomas Sowell’s second point:

    and his threatened filibuster this year forced several Republican Senators to jeopardize their own reelection prospects by voting to impose cloture, to prevent Cruz from repeating his self-serving grandstand play of last year.

    Ted Cruz in fact, filibuster the debt ceiling vote (even though he did without speaking – the senate these days makes it easy) and he forced several Senators involved in primary campaigns to break the filibuster, because there was no way this could not be passed without creating a lot of trouble. If that happened, the public would blame the party whose position was mre unreasonable, and trying to gte something, anything, attached to the debt ceiling bill, was more unreasonable than passing it “clean.”

    The debt limit is not a method of controlling spending or borrowing.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  8. Not a filibuster, to stop a bill, but a delay enough to get attention to what you want to say, would actually be reasonable, and the public would not fault anyone who did that as long as nothing bad happened, and delaying the recess of Congress doesn’t count as bad by he public.

    What this amounts to actually is that:

    1) Thomas Sowell should not blame Ted Cruz for the first filibuster, because he didn’t do anything, except make absurd predictions – you could argue what he did before the filibuster did it – but Sowell blames Ted Cruz for something he really didn’t cause.

    2) But Sowell is right to criticize Ted Cruz for the second one, where he made no attention-getting speech, but just forced an embarassing vote.

    Perhaps Cruz wants the primary opponents of McConnell and Cornyn to win. A problem there is that that would give the Democratic candidates a much better chance of winning the general election!

    Millions of Americans are being given subsidies as part of the ObamaCare travesty.

    And that’s not going to go away. But that’s not the problem with Obamacare.

    The trick is to give subsidies without creating a reason not to care what medical providers charge, and without putting people other than the patient or the patient’s family in charge of medical decisions, especially where to go.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  9. 4. Reaching across the aisle to get something done is political kerygma in DC.

    The path to Perdition will not be departed from, not by politicians at any rate.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  10. Red lines:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-20/dozens-killed-ukraines-not-quite-civil-war-white-house-outraged-again

    Watch where you step, the lines are drawn for you, not Ogabe.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  11. I still have that book, Patterico, and I still laud you for sending it. I got a couple hundred pages in before school got insane, but I remember the deal and have the book placed prominently so that I don’t forget it.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  12. 11. What book are you talking about?

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  13. Finkleman, please explain to me the difference between a Progressive with a [D] behind their name and a Progressive with a [R] behind their name, because frankly, I can’t see a hair’s width worth of difference.

    You also seem to forget that on the debt ceiling, Cruz forced six RINOs to change their vote (after they voted against cloture) to side with spineless Republicans who caves because, good gosh, the NY Slime might say something bad about them.

    Or perhaps you are from a state that doesn’t understand the people who are from a state that would rather die on their feet than live on their knees. Ted Cruz is from that state, as am I, and frankly, I am learning two things: my state has nothing in common with the freedom relinquishing states and two, maybe it is time for us to take our Republic back.

    retire05 (531ca2)

  14. Something the Speaker and Co should do, and can do, to engage the TEAs: Move to censure Obama for: the IRS, the NSA, altering laws, lying about Obamacare, etc. IIRC, it only takes a majority to pass.

    Then Cruz can bring it up in the Senate, and let the Democrats defend this stuff in the summer before the midterm.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  15. please explain to me the difference between a Progressive with a [D] behind their name and a Progressive with a [R] behind their name, because frankly, I can’t see a hair’s width worth of difference.

    Teddy Roosevelt vs Franklin Roosevelt

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  16. Hare still partying, turtle still plodding:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-02-19/goodbye-dollar-hello-yuan

    China still can’t supply the world with currency via trade deficits, but then we can’t either.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  17. Teddy Roosevelt vs Franklin Roosevelt

    I rest me case. Different ducks of the same flock.

    The one common denominator is that they all think they are so much smarter than those of us in flyover country and they must nudge, if not push, into things they think are good for us even if we disagree.

    There is little difference between John McCain and the now deceased Ted Kennedy. Both arrogant jerks to wanted to control our lives. And now McCain is campaigning to be the current Lion of the Senate.

    He needs to be in a retirement home.

    retire05 (531ca2)

  18. It’s as if Sowell sees the flaws in his arguments — flaws Patterico has so ably pointed out — but is reluctant to acknowledge them. I can see why. It’s beyond disappointing for Republicans to realize their GOP leaders are unwilling and unable to do what needs to be done.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  19. Shorter Sowell:
    A. Cruz is a counterproductive demagogue who moves the GOP backward instead of forward.
    B. The GOP leadership enabled a counterproductive demagogue to move the GOP backward instead of forward.
    I agree with every word he wrote.

    Bird Dog (130699)

  20. You agree with every word in your strawman, Big Dog, not with what Sowell wrote. There’s a difference.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  21. Take Mike Lee who follows a slightly lower profile, they are stabbing him in the back, the front and the side, back home, for trying to do the right thing,

    narciso (3fec35)

  22. Counter-productive demagogues don’t constructively fill voids.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  23. Narciso, valid point. Lee doesn’t use the tactics of Paul or Cruz, yet the RINOs attack him, as well.

    I still want to know what difference does the tactic for exposing the slugs makes? Cruz is exposing the slugs. And the slugs don’t like it.
    How about McCain shutting down the roll call for the debt ceiling limit vote? Ooops, that got reported anyway. McCain didn’t want those who changed their vote (all six of them) to suffer just because they went along to go along with the RINO leadership (i.e. McConnell).

    And if you think that Ted Cruz is not carrying out the will of his voters, just take a look at John Cornyn’s recent polls.

    retire05 (531ca2)

  24. At this point, Christine O’Donnell could fly into Washington D.C. on a broomstick and I would cheer her on as long as she voted reliably for my policies.

    An understandable reaction given just how leftwing things have grown throughout American society, from economics to culture. So the feeling that one’s back is up against the wall, and one is in a choke hold no less, triggers the sense that desperate times require desperate measures. Imagine what even semi-sane people — much less staunch conservatives — are going through and have been going through in places like Venezuela?

    My only problem with the comments from Sowell is that he doesn’t point out all the opinion polls (although he does mention that it was Republicans, not Democrats, who got the brunt of the blame for the sequester) and then cite all the people probably around himself — and each and everyone of us — from spouses to sons/daughters, from aunts/uncles to cousins, from neighbors to acquaintances, from colleagues to bosses, etc, who fall for liberal rhetoric and the belief that left-leaning emotions are generous, kind, noble, tolerant and sophisticated ones.

    Whoever in the public eye (or even in private) raises that point and, in turn, points out — based on studies and surveys — just how phony and foolish that assumption is?

    The notion of “well, liberals are beautiful human souls and they at least mean well, no matter what” is at the core of this mess. I blame the stupidity of that far, far more than I blame the musings of Thomas Sowell or certainly — most certainly — the tactics of Ted Cruz.

    I’m quite sure if the Gallup Poll, Zogby Poll, etc, over the past many years — and particularly after the bogus “sky is falling” sequester (courtesy of the National Park Service, et al) — didn’t reflect an American electorate full of the BS found in people throughout France, Argentina, Greece and Mexico, pundits and politicians like Sowell and Cruz wouldn’t be eyeballing each other with weariness and doubt.

    We have met the enemy (or fool), and it is us. It’s all the people around each and every one of us, assuming we’re not living in a place that’s the ideological flip side to places like the city of Detroit, where 95-plus percent of people think and vote the exact same way.

    Mark (aea093)

  25. Well said, Mr. P. This is the kind of conflict that the R’s will have to resolve amongst themselves first before they can move forward in unity against socialism.

    J.P. (bd0246)

  26. I rest me case. Different ducks of the same flock.

    From the West Coast, the East Coast cities are all the same distance away. That doesn’t mean they are all the same.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  27. Patterico,

    To a lot of folks, Ted Cruz is the guy who fires at the enemy while they are still out of range, ruining the ambush.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  28. ==At this point, Christine O’Donnell could fly into Washington D.C. on a broomstick and I would cheer her on as long as she voted reliably for my policies.==

    But here’s the rub. How does one know in advance (i.e. when they are running for office and soliciting contributions and making promises) how any candidate will actually vote, or how reliably they believe in and will uphold the policies they say they will? This is not a trick question. I am curious why having a self-proclaimed “Tea” label automatically in some people’s minds makes that candidate any more trustworthy and/or more honorable or somehow less immune to power lust and lobbyists’ lucre than any other pol who gets to Washington. There is a blind spot and almost an innocence about this aspect among some conservatives that I have trouble understanding.

    I am not going to get drawn into relitigating the Christine O’Donnell debacle, but anybody with a brain (and especially females with a brain) knew that that woman was a playa and a manipulator. She would have broken the hearts of her most vocal supporters. Guaranteed.

    elissa (ed3dc0)

  29. team r is the presidents posse trying to round up the tea-baggers.

    mg (31009b)

  30. just another troll sucking dollars from the ignorant.
    http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/20/is-ann-coulter-now-turning-on-ted-cruz/

    mg (31009b)

  31. elissa:

    I am not going to get drawn into relitigating the Christine O’Donnell debacle, but anybody with a brain (and especially females with a brain) knew that that woman was a playa and a manipulator. She would have broken the hearts of her most vocal supporters. Guaranteed.

    I don’t claim to have the same finely tuned woman’s instincts you have, but I don’t blame you for not wanting to get drawn into this topic again — especially since it’s obvious you think you know how O’Donnell would have voted and that she would have let Tea Party voters down.

    However, my woman’s logic suggests your certainty that you know how O’Donnell would vote undercuts your simultaneous assertion that voters can’t know in advance how a candidate will actually vote. You say she would have voted in a way that would have broken her supporters’ hearts. If you can be so sure about her vote, her supporters should be afforded the same certainty. Especially women supporters whose instincts are presumably as finely tuned as yours.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  32. It’s obvious our GOP leaders and many Republicans are afraid of change, especially the kind of change the Tea Party represents. But that ship has sailed and while I don’t enjoy the sea change our country has seen/faces, Obama’s Hope & Change has changed America. It will take more fight than McCain, Romney, Boehner, McConnell, Cornyn, et al, have demonstrated to wrestle our country back. I regret that Ted Cruz probably won’t be the GOP nominee because the Party isn’t ready for someone like him, but the nominee needs to be someone more like Cruz than the current Republican leaders.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  33. 27. Patterico,

    To a lot of folks, Ted Cruz is the guy who fires at the enemy while they are still out of range, ruining the ambush.

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/20/2014 @ 10:35 am

    To a lot of folks, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are the kind of guys who talk about setting an ambush but mean this.

    http://www.warinformation.com/images/Iraqi_soldiers_surrender.jpg

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  34. I fully support Sen. Mike Lee and also maintain we need new leadership in both House and Senate. And I like Ted Cruz. Now tell me what isn’t “conservative”, i.e., what is RINO about that?

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  35. Col @34. Amen.

    elissa (ed3dc0)

  36. HEY, FDA: Poop Is Not A Drug!
    Posted at 1:30 pm by Glenn Reynolds

    Oh oh catch that buzz
    poop is drug I’m thinking of
    poop is drug for me

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  37. I mean really, elissa!

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  38. Not with a bang, but a haboob:

    http://thetruthwins.com/archives/dust-bowl-conditions-are-literally-returning-to-the-western-half-of-the-united-states

    34, 35. Incremental progress is a flight of fancy, outside experiential observation.

    Even if it were possible, it would fair as the fly on your windshield.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  39. 28, 31. Let’s not ignore an unqualified good, Mike Castle remains retired.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  40. to teh barricades, gary gulrud! up against teh wall, futhermuckers!

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  41. 27. To a lot of folks, a healthy bump in undocumented Democrats could salvage next quarter’s forward guidance and help with all that inventory gathering taxes.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  42. 18. I’ll take ‘unwilling’ to brand about 250 hamstrung steer.

    I get that a lot of these people are children and parents, friends and neighbors. Beyond that they’ve acquired mammon and sway.

    Impediments to sworn duty.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  43. DRJ–It appears that you found contradiction in my post @28. Perhaps it is there, but I think not. For my statement I relied on Christine’s own personal history, her legal troubles related to misusing campaign contributions, and her obvious lack of intellectual heft as seen in interviews both then and now. I was not relying on “instinct” or “intuition” as you seem to imply.

    I am sorry you chose to focus on the second paragraph of my post rather than on the main paragraph which I had hoped might elicit some discussion and reflection.

    elissa (ed3dc0)

  44. Foreclosures have awakened from the dead, sub-prime car loans are going unloved, pointless student loans up $58 Billion chasing useless distribution credits, and now the last hope for housing is tits up:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-20/rental-bubble-also-bursting

    Have you hugged a banker today?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  45. I’d like Christine more better if she’d run to Sonic and get me some tots

    happyfeet (c60db2)

  46. 43. ” How does one know in advance..? ”

    We don’t. But the endorsement of a major party is a pretty unmistakable indication that the candidate is a stinker.

    And if we actually had sound cause for confidence, e.g., the candidate ran down a Durbin with his Audi, the vote would be wasted anyways.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  47. knew that that woman was a playa and a manipulator.

    While her background wasn’t nearly as tarnished as that of Barack “Jeremiah-Wright” Obama, just a cursory glance at her history made me think any voter in Delaware who was not a liberal/leftist would have been hesitant about putting her into contention. If only for purely tactical reasons, I would have chosen her Republican challenger (albeit, a candidate who was more squishy than her) in the primary, but on the final election night, if her name happened to be on the ballot, I’d still have plucked the chad next to it.

    From a standpoint of strategy and judging the suitability of a candidate, activists in the Republican Party who were oblivious to what O’Donnell was all about remind me of supposedly savvy Karl Rove, who naively assumed that voters of Latino (particularly Mexican) descent are generally of the right — and concluded that opposition to illegal immigration was why they were tilting left — conveniently (or foolishly) ignoring the long-time liberal voting record of a large majority of people in countries like Mexico.

    Mark (aea093)

  48. To a lot of folks, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are the kind of guys who talk about setting an ambush but mean this.

    Are those my only choices?

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  49. Here do I comment…

    The Big Mouth vs. the Stiff Upper Lip

    Dafydd

    Dafydd the Conciliator (763797)

  50. Hm. The “link” facility doesn’t seem to be working at the moment.

    All right, here do I comment!

    http://biglizards.net/blog/archives/2014/02/the_big_mouth_v.html

    Dafydd

    Dafydd the Conciliator (763797)

  51. Mike Castle remains retired.

    I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that Mike Castle would vote for Republican positions more often than Chris Coons does. He voted against Obamacare, for example.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  52. the first rule of fight club;

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303775504579392942097203608?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303775504579392942097203608.html

    yes, that was why Castle voted for the Dream Act, Disclose and New Start and now lobbies for Al Jazeera,

    narciso (3fec35)

  53. 51. The “vote for Republican positions” limb is quite rotten friend.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  54. Dafydd–

    Exactly!

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  55. 52. Al Jazeera. Nobody tells me anything.

    The Obama touch continues:

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100026708/france-is-looking-straight-down-the-barrel-of-a-deflation-shock/

    Chicago is over 6 feet of snow for the season.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  56. As I was pointing out, they aren’t any more understanding of Mike Lee, in fact Colonel Plum has been stalking him back home.

    narciso (3fec35)

  57. 54. Not that it matters to our martyrs, Cruz made it no secret all along that he’s not on the GOP’s side.

    Attacking him for the hurt inflicted seems rather tetched. Its not like the GOP had any intention to good.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  58. Mark @47. supposedly savvy Karl Rove, who naively assumed that voters of Latino (particularly Mexican) descent are generally of the right — and concluded that opposition to illegal immigration was why they were tilting left — conveniently (or foolishly) ignoring the long-time liberal voting record of a large majority of people in countries like Mexico.

    Karl Rove was looking at the percentages of the Hispanic vote George W. Bush got in Texas and also how much the Republican party was getting in California before Proposition 187 in 1994.

    Not a majority, but a substantial minority, getting even as high as 40%, which dropped afterwards.

    And the Republican party has started to lose Asians also.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  59. Colonel Plum? who dat?…Hatch?

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  60. Hatch, Bennett, the whole Clue team.

    narciso (3fec35)

  61. Christine O’Donnell would have had no reason to become another Kirsten Gillebrand, unless maybe offered the Vice Presidential nomination by someone on the left, or advancement in the Senate maybe, or the population of Delaware changed its opinions.

    Or maybe some kind of a job by a Democratic President, or big supporter, but then she’d be out of there, admittedly leaving the possibility she’d resign and let a Democratic Governor appoint a temporary successor..

    Otherwise she could hardly go to the left of Kelly Ayotte.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  62. Ted Cruz does the worst of a number of Republicans in a hypothetical 2016 match-up with Hullary Clinton – Paul Ryan does best. (trailing by 9 points. Cruz trails by 17 points. There is ageneral bias in most polls against the Republican candidate)

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  63. “I’m surprised and a disheartened that Sowell is unwilling to champion Ted Cruz, one of the few people in politics who seems to be standing up for the principles Sowell has spent his professional life arguing for, simply because there might be some short-term political risk inherent in Cruz’s actions. Making a stand despite the politics is what we want in a leader. Holding politicians accountable for their votes is what we want in a leader. Standing up to Barack Obama’s oppressive policies is what we want in a leader.”

    and Sarah Palin fills the bill in every one of these points and MANY MORE!

    joepeh (5e2228)

  64. Ted Cruz does the worst of a number of Republicans in a hypothetical 2016 match-up with Hullary Clinton – Paul Ryan does best. (trailing by 9 points. Cruz trails by 17 points. There is ageneral bias in most polls against the Republican candidate)

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 2/20/2014 @ 1:20 pm

    Those things are terrible predictors of anything. They are a major factor in the ‘next in line’ ways of the power-over-principles GOP.

    The candidates of the GOP have yet to be introduced to the American people. Most of them do not know much about Rand Paul or Scott Walker and could not tell you their current offices.

    The only candidates who can beat Hillary are those who can stand unashamed on a consistent, principled record, and defend it proudly. Flip floppers need not apply, as anyone who saw the limp 2012 general election campaign knows. Someone who can effectively tear down other GOP candidates because they cynically stake out the perfect poll tested position every day soon finds himself in checkmate as the democrat he runs against can call him a hypocrite with the loudness of the MSM.

    To a lot of the more Republicany Republicans, the ones who are really into this, politics is a game with ambushes and tricks and stunts, where everything, including eliminating any control on debt spending, or foisting new entitlements, is some kind of tactic towards a nebulous ends that is simply ‘slightly less bad than democrat policies’.

    To good people, we just want real principles followed as though they are really principles. Because if you don’t really buy your own principles, you can’t hope to win anyone over to them.

    It’s a matter of integrity. For those who just don’t get it, I try to note that flip floppers lose to democrats.

    We’ve tried the prime time slick smooth talking liar types. Let’s try the idealist conservative.

    Dustin (303dca)

  65. Karl Rove was looking at the percentages of the Hispanic vote George W. Bush got in Texas and also how much the Republican party was getting in California before Proposition 187 in 1994.

    But it’s foolish when people like Rove don’t realize just how much reflexive liberalism mucks up the brain of the typical person. Was he even truly aware of the long-running leftism that has dominated much of the electorate of Mexico, in which many of its people have given their version of the Democrat Party (ie, the PRI) an edge similar to that bestowed upon liberals/Democrats in urban America, in places like Detroit or Chicago?

    The only candidates who can beat Hillary

    That someone as corrupt (philosophically, if not financially, or both) and grotesque as her — with her squalid “meaning of is is” familial background, sniper-fire-on-airport-tarmacs honesty and typical “what-difference-does-it-make?!” leftist biases — should nonetheless be immediately assumed to have the upper hand in a future election speaks volumes about how Argentina-ized the US has become and is becoming.

    Mark (aea093)

  66. If the GOP leadership would finally just stand up to Team Obama and say, “We don’t like ObamaCare—let’s repeal it !” I’m certain that Obama, Hairy Reed, and SanFranNancy would come to their senses and say, “Oh, ok, well why didn’t you say so ? We’ll repeal it !”

    But just in case that doesn’t work, our Plan B should be to win the Senate in November.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  67. Dustin, I appreciate that you’ve given this a lot of thought and that you are trying to educate people on this thread who may view things somewhat differently than you. Here’s what I’d like you to clarify: 1. Do you believe there were enough principled conservatives who sat out the last election and did not vote for Romney (I assume that’s what you mean by flip flopper) that it actually threw the election to Obama? 2. Do you believe that if a principled well spoken conservative wins the GOP nomination that enough left-leaning voters (including social liberals, welfare takers, socialists and union and corporate grifters) will have an epiphany toward conservative policies that it will be able to swing the general election back rightward to victory?

    elissa (ed3dc0)

  68. 62. 65.

    Ted Cruz does the worst of a number of Republicans in a hypothetical 2016 match-up with Hullary Clinton – Paul Ryan does best. (trailing by 9 points. Cruz trails by 17 points. There is a general bias in most polls against the Republican candidate)

    I should correct or clarify something.

    That was an Ohio poll, tajken on th assumption that whoever wins ohio will probably win the elction, not a national one.

    I agree that they are bad predictors. People will find out more. They’ll find out some things that aren’t true, too.

    Comment by Dustin (303dca) — 2/20/2014 @ 2:00 pm

    The only candidates who can beat Hillary are those who can stand unashamed on a consistent, principled record, and defend it proudly.

    The person has got to know what he’s talking about and seem to outclass her.

    Flip floppers need not apply, as anyone who saw the limp 2012 general election campaign knows.

    I think Romney didn’t understand a lot of things, and it showed.

    To good people, we just want real principles followed as though they are really principles. Because if you don’t really buy your own principles, you can’t hope to win anyone over to them.

    I think it helps to take positions, that really are correct, but in the minoroty among intellectuals.

    We’ve tried the prime time slick smooth talking liar types. Let’s try the idealist conservative.

    That’s not Ted Cruz.

    And the idealism is maybe more important than a collection of “conservative” positions.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  69. I haven’t followed the details, and I never was in an O’Donnell fan club,
    but listening to her being interviewed by Dick Morris on the radio recently, some (all?) of the financial irregularity charges were filed in a very suspicious manner and timing and is still under investigation of some sort (not that she is under investigation, but the manner the allegations were made is under investigation). Apparently Morris is quite convinced there is a “there” there, perhaps connected to the most powerful person in Delaware politics.
    Just reporting what I heard.

    OT, has there been any discussion of that proposed FCC questionnaire and such? Sounds like the real goal is 100% a data mining for selective persecution of news outlets that don’t report things the way the FCC wants them supported,
    in an election year, no less.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  70. supported
    reported, sorry.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  71. they conjured up a phony tax lien, among other things, the ethics complaint cooked by Tom Ross
    and the Democratic party, turned out to have no foundation, what so ever, the same sorts of tricks
    are being played against Walker from my Hot Air link

    narciso (3fec35)

  72. Re-educating Republicans is a fool’s errand.

    There is no debt ceiling into 2015. The squeester is effectively ended, 2015 will be an at best an incremental return to the base line, Senate or no.

    In MN, for example, SCOAMF is polling near his national average, meanwhile Smalley is at 54%. A dain bramaged sub-tard who cannot even read his lines.

    The full-court press on Cruz may damage his national polling but it cannot restore Republican tallies.

    The Whigs are history.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  73. Is Stuart Smalley the R’s fault, gg?

    elissa (ed3dc0)

  74. MD, indeed there seems to be something seriously evil in how O’Donnell was treated. I didn’t quite appreciate at the time how the GOP treats usurpers.

    You’ll see the Chris Christie Jeb Bush wing of the party grin a bit at the prospect of the IRS kneecapping the Tea Party, especially as the primaries heat up.

    Dustin (303dca)

  75. On the other hand, if more passionate speeches invoking principles and common sense won’t finally convince Team Obama to repeal ObamaCare, perhaps we could all pool our money together to hire a helicopter to drop pixie dust over the White House and Capitol.

    If that doesn’t work, we may have to rely upon winning the Senate in November. And then the White House in 2016.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  76. Somebody in the state government of Delaware, who had the right to access IRS records, accessed hers I believe, but the IRS won’t say who.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  77. 77. Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/20/2014 @ 4:17 pm

    If that doesn’t work, we may have to rely upon winning the Senate in November. And then the White House in 2016.

    Obamacare will, to borrow an expression, fail because of its own internal contradictions, and Obama will have to confess there is a problem next year or Democrats in Congress will do it for him.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  78. Gary Gulrud,

    Friend, you should post some photos of your underground bunker. Does it look anything like John Denver’s ?

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  79. Oh, we have bigger problems E.S. The traitorous evil elites are cheering on if not conspiring with the Obama WH and IRS to harass other Rs, don’t you know?

    I am simply in awe at half the stuff that I see getting posted here.

    elissa (ed3dc0)

  80. 75. Who else? Norm Coleman, his opponent, was a Dhimmi retread. The Independent party room might appear between the GOP and the DFL.

    There is no conservative representation beyond the Constitution party in fourth place.

    Both Nor Laup and Santorum crushed Willard in MN.

    Sowell has the VOID identified.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  81. Beware false prophets, quacks and nostrums…

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  82. If it hadn’t been for Karl Rove’s sooper-sekrit machinations behind the scenes, Delaware would have elected Christine O’Donnell over Chris Coons in 2010.

    Some people called her a witch. Some people called her a fool. Some people said she was unprepared for the campaign.
    But once the puppeteers in the GOP hierarchy publicly referred to O’Donnell as a usurper—the campaign was effectively lost.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  83. gg- that may explain stuart smalley’s election (although I personally believe it was stolen) but it does not explain his current 54% approval rating. What’s that about?

    elissa (ed3dc0)

  84. This is your high sewage mark, 25%:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/Party-Affiliation.aspx

    Begging is so attractive.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  85. OT: Prince Bandar may have been taken off the Syria account:

    Wall Street Journal: Saudi Arabia Replaces Key Official in Effort to Arm Syria Rebels

    Frustrated Kingdom Sets Out to Assuage U.S. Worries on Extremists in Three-Year Conflict

    Prince Bandar bin Sultan it looks like, is still intelligence chief but now Interior Minister Prince Mohammed bin Nayef and Prince Miteb bin Abdullah, Saudi King Abdullah’s son and head of the Saudi National Guard, are supposedly in charge.

    The article says that Kerry

    in private meetings with U.S. officials, singled him out as “the problem” and complained about his conduct in orchestrating Saudi policy in Syria, according to meeting participants.

    He is also supposedly erratic and hotheaded.

    The article says that Prince Mohammed bin Nayef “has won praise in Washington for his counterterror work against al Qaeda in Yemen.”

    That of course links to this week’s news and amkes me very very suspicious. There was this warning issued about a shoe bombs. now i doubnt very much that al Qaeda would still be working, on its own ona shoe bomb.

    Now this much be an active plot or one believed to be active, for the warning to the airlines to go out. It is probably a sting operation, not so much on al Qaeda, as on the United States (The Saudis, of course would expect us to be grateful for preventing a terror attack, and what better way is there to guarantee that you will forestall a terror attack than to create it yourself in the first place??)

    Although it could be also that the U.S. is in on it. The terror warning would still be issued.

    Another strange thing in the Wall Street Journal article:

    A Saudi analyst who serves as adviser to top royals said the changes signaled the kingdom would also now emphasize diplomatic means, including outreach to and pressure on Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, the main backers of Mr. Assad’s regime.

    “Prince Miteb and Mohammed bin Nayef, they are in charge,” the adviser said. The world will see a “new strategy for Syria—quieter, more open, not too extreme. There will be more politics to it, and probably much less military.”

    What – the Saudis are suddenly foolish enough to believe that diplomacy has a chance of success in Syria? Obama would like to hear that, though.

    There’s another thing in the article:

    The U.S. wants to see the moderate rebels it supports fight both the regime and radical fighters such as the al Qaeda-inspired Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS). Increasingly, this is happening on the ground in Syria.

    except that, that would be new for Obama. Lower ranking people, yes, could think this way. But they’ve got a president who thinks that if Assad falls without an agreement there’d be endless war.

    Maybe it is all right with him if they fight Assad and ISIS concurrently, but not consecutively.

    Last week, with Prince Bandar having stepped away from the scene, Prince Mohammed met with U.S. National Security Adviser Susan Rice ahead of President Barack Obama’s March trip to the kingdom. Prince Miteb has worked with the Russians and other Europeans to make Saudi Arabia’s case for supporting the rebels.

    So it wasn’t Prince Bandar last week in Washington – or was he there, but not the only important person there from Saudi Arabia?

    Mr. Alani said Prince Bandar’s withdrawal was for a “genuine health reason” and began about two months ago. He cited the prince’s lingering back problems from a 1977 incident when he was a fighter pilot and made a hard emergency landing at a Saudi air show.

    Sure.

    That’s Mustafa Alani, a security analyst with the Gulf Research Center who is close to Saudi security and intelligence circles, who told the Wall Street Journal,

    “The Americans have to change their policy, and Prince Mohammed is the right person to take this mission.…He’s the one who can calm their worries,”

    The article also says

    The Saudis now plan to provide rebels with shoulder-fired missiles, or manpads, that can bring down jets and antitank missiles, an Arab diplomat and several opposition figures said recently. If the transfer takes place, it would be the first time rebels have such powerful weapons in any significant quantity.

    The online version of the New York times article Tuesday, but not the printed paper, contained a denial from the administration that Obama had ended his opposition to the supply of Manpads..

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  86. but listening to her being interviewed by Dick Morris on the radio recently, some (all?) of the financial irregularity charges were filed in a very suspicious manner

    When her election was being debated here, I was influenced by comments made by a former insider in O’Donnell’s campaign, who quit her job for both ideological and ethical reasons. That person claimed O’Donnell was (to paraphrase) a political chameleon and not a true conservative, and a flake in the way she was using campaign monies.

    As for the subject of Sowell and politics in America, it’s interesting (and regrettable) how liberal so much of the industrialized world — and the socialism of the Emerging and Third World goes without saying — has become over the past several decades, with the big question of whether the US has caught a major dose of Euro-sclerosis, if not a mild case of Venezuela-itis.

    One of the few other major countries in the world where the prognosis, so far, isn’t quite as worrisome is Japan, perhaps best summed up by the following article.

    Moreover, after learning over the recent past about the surprising bigotry of the top figureheads of the left/Democrat Party in 20th-century America — particularly Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D Roosevelt and Harry Truman — I read one segment below and had another a-ha! moment.

    asia.nikkei.com, February 3, 2014: Japanese and U.S. diplomats are working hard to lay the groundwork for a successful summit when President Barack Obama meets with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in Japan in April. They have their work cut out for them because of one fundamental issue that continues to hinder smoother ties: Obama and his administration represent the Democratic Party, while Japanese lawmakers, bureaucrats and even journalists tend to have a soft spot for the Republican Party.

    [The reason for that is] Democratic U.S. presidents have baggage that does not sit well with Japanese. Woodrow Wilson rejected Japan’s proposal for racial equality at the Versailles meeting in 1919. Franklin Roosevelt forced Japanese-Americans into internment camps during World War II. Harry Truman authorized the use of atomic bombs against Japan.

    Republican leaders, by contrast, have scored important points in Japan. Dwight Eisenhower agreed to revise the Japan-U.S. security treaty, Richard Nixon authorized the return of Okinawa to Japan and Ronald Reagan apologized to Japanese-Americans who were forcibly relocated during the war.

    [Another] reason is psychological. The Liberal Democratic Party and the Republican Party are both conservative. Left-of-center parties took power both in Japan and the U.S. in 2009, creating an opportunity to establish strong ties between them. But the Democratic Party of Japan’s Yukio Hatoyama, the prime minister at that time, failed to do so.

    ^ The Japanese electorate had the good sense in 2012 to pull back from their dabbling with liberalism and left-leaning leaders, to go “d-oh!,” and not allow “progressive” nonsense to go beyond 4 years. Unfortunately, a majority of Americans in November 2012 didn’t have quite as much sense, and the rest is history.

    Then again, maybe the Japanese people have been tricked into thinking a political party called “Liberal Democratic” is liberal, just as many Americans fall for the notion that “Democrat” means one won’t be a garden-variety bigot. Ha-ha.

    Mark (aea093)

  87. I think the foul weather throughout the country is causing interference with some of our friends’ receptors on their tin foil hats.
    But I heard a caller to the Mark Levin Show say that the little toy that comes in Cracker Jack boxes will help with reception.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  88. narciso–If you think Democrat strategists and the media are behind both the attempted Christie and Walker takedowns you are most definitely not paranoid. If you think Karl Rove is behind both takedowns, you are paranoid. :)

    elissa (ed3dc0)

  89. narciso,

    It is not paranoia to recognize that the Left is trying to take down Scott Walker—because the Left is trying to take him down.
    However, it is paranoia if one starts wondering aloud if the GOP is trying to take down Christine O’Donnell Scott Walker or if the GOP is applauding IRS malfeasance in IRS investigations of tea party groups.

    Keep in mind, GOP establishment favorite Mitt Romney was the guy whose tax filings were most famously compromised by Hairy Reed’s unsubstantiated public accusations.
    The notion that the GOP establishment is shaking its pom-poms for that sort of activity should be ridiculed as tin-foil material.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  90. If that doesn’t work, we may have to rely upon winning the Senate in November. And then the White House in 2016.

    Brought to you by the people that touted Mitt Romney and John McCain as conservative standard-bearers. I am tired of people talking about winning elections when they push this nonsense.

    JD (c0a33e)

  91. The idea that the GOP establishment isn’t in a battle with Tea party ideology is silly.

    JD (c0a33e)

  92. Seriously, we had nothing to fear from Barack Obama, and he’s in over his head, and then they were lining up the Jersey devil, friend of Iman Rauf,

    narciso (3fec35)

  93. And, again, the real RINOs are people who call themselves Republicans but stay home instead of voting, or vote for a protest candidate, if the Republican running doesn’t line up on all their issues.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  94. you want a bucket for that strawman,

    narciso (3fec35)

  95. Team R does not deserve your loyalty, Kevin. They have shown nothing that suggests they have earned it, nor that they value it. They don’t give a shlt about being conservative.

    JD (c0a33e)

  96. You were for Gingrich right Kevin, do you recall the unmitigated carp he had to put up with, where as the really soft touch when challenging the real enemy,

    narciso (3fec35)

  97. 94. I know it might appear tyranny by just another minority but I feel better about TEA chances with the lowly-informed than to somehow convince our apparatchiks that the Supreme Surrender Simians are destined for extinction.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  98. I have no doubt at all that Mitch McConnell would sic the IRS on Matt Bevin if he could. The KKK, the Mafia, and the American Legion Ladies Auxiliary, too.

    Most of us know Christine O’Donnell from the MFM and blogs. Talk about “through a glass darkly”. I’ve never met the lady or heard her speak. Even so, I think she was the genuine article. The “I am not a witch” makes me smile. All women are witches, and of course they lie that they’re not. Unfortunately, most men don’t learn that until it’s too late.

    nk (dbc370)

  99. and the usual suspects prepare their lunches for enemy consumption once again…

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  100. JD,

    Ha, ha, you don’t seriously want to infer that the GOP establishment is applauding IRS investigations of tea party groups, do you ?
    Because that premise is a totallllly different ball of wax than recognizing (as we all do) that there exists tension between GOP establishment types vs those of us who want real conservative principles to triumph.

    In recent years, tea party favorite Mike Lee beat Robert Bennett in the Utah primary, and it was a generally peaceful transition that we all applaud. Charlie Crist, on the other hand, was dragged kicking and screaming away from the podium by tea party fave Marco Rubio, and Crist has since registered as a Democrat.

    But please don’t start up with your stale mantra that I personally believe that Mitt Romney and John McCain are Mt Rushmore “standard bearers” of conservatism. I voted for them (just as you did) because they won the GOP nomination and would have been light years better than Obama. And for all the Monday Morning Quarterbacking that has been done about those two nomineses, nobody was able to defeat them in the primaries when the intramural fight was on.

    I would actually love to vote for Ronald Reagan or Jack Kemp or Calvin Coolidge every year, if I could. But they’re all deceased.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  101. And, again, the real RINOs are people who call themselves Republicans but stay home instead of voting, or vote for a protest candidate, if the Republican running doesn’t line up on all their issues.

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4)

    not only damn, but goddam straight!

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  102. This clutch of Republican loyalists have learned absolutely nothing from Sammy, receiving the rebuttal in silence and returning another day with the same old, dog-tired, cookie-cutter smack.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  103. Yes, that’s the Latourette ‘no true Scotsman’ line,
    the truth there are certain principles that define
    the party, then as now, and when nominees fail to defend them, and worse yet, reach around and undermine those principles,

    narciso (3fec35)

  104. 101. Wisdom dearly earned.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  105. those most convinced of
    their Purity of Essence
    are delusional

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  106. Didn’t you guys hear—elections are now like golf.
    Lowest score wins.

    Stay home on Election Day this November, and Team Obama loses !

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  107. I did nothing of the sort, ES. That you feel compelled to suggest that is my position speaks volumes.

    JD (c0a33e)

  108. I note, without a careful step-thru, the only remaining use of the pejorative RINO is that worn as a badge of honor by the diehards.

    Rather like the n-word, no?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  109. 109. Query: Are you reassured?

    Americans are supposed to be encouraged because, in a spirit of comity, the bipartisan kleptocracy in Washington has nodded through a plan to make things worse.

    So a third of the electorate darkens the electoral booth floor and reluctantly tips the Federal Soviet Republican.

    The Triumphal Consequence will be the strategy of invisibilty among the Lamestream such that we do it all.over.again in 2016.

    Am I wrong?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  110. straight from bemidji
    teh nattering nabob of
    negativism

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  111. JD,

    Good, I’m relieved that you actually disagree with the contention by some of our friends here that the GOP establishment is literally applauding IRS investigations into tea party groups.

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  112. I chalk up Dr. Sowell’s segue as an unfortunate bit of category error, that doesn’t reflect on his body of work, but one notes how much the Chamber, CrossRoads and it’s various spinoffs, seem to willing to stand for no principle and be rewarded for same,

    narciso (3fec35)

  113. It is sometimes difficult to believe that Bob Dylan, Stu Smalley, Walter Mondale, Hubert Humphrey, and Garrison Keillor all grew up in Minnesota…Texas !

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  114. they would rather ‘dissolve the base’ and elect another, that’s what amnesty is about,

    narciso (3fec35)

  115. The Republican establishment has more than a tactical deficiency, however. They seem to have no principle that they offer or follow with any consistency. Their lack of articulation may be just a reflection of that lack of principle

    It seems remarkably obvious that the GOP demonstrated this lack of principle when they reneged on the Contract With America.

    Remember that? Was there ANY significant element of it that they followed through on?

    From Wiki:

    On the first day of their majority in the House, the Republicans promised to bring up for vote, eight major reforms:
    1. require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress;
    2. select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;
    3. cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
    4. limit the terms of all committee chairs;
    5. ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
    6. require committee meetings to be open to the public;
    7. require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
    8. guarantee an honest accounting of the Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.

    Here is a list of the ones they kept, despite being given a majority in both houses by the 2002/2004 election cycle, and hence the capacity to pass every single one of them:

    1. require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress; NO.
    2. select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse; NO.
    3. cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third; NO.
    4. limit the terms of all committee chairs; NO.
    5. ban the casting of proxy votes in committee; NO.
    6. require committee meetings to be open to the public; NO.
    7. require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase; NO.
    8. guarantee an honest accounting of the Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting. NO.

    And I argue THAT, as much as anything, is why 2006 and 2008 went the way they did…

    The Dems had to prove just what a bunch of irresponsible loons they were in order to get enough people pissed off enough at them that people voted GOP again at all. >:-S

    Smock Puppet, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (225d0d)

  116. Speaking of the aforementioned Calvin Coolidge—a true standard bearer of conservativsm—I’m currently reading Amity Schlaes’ wonderful biography of Coolidge, which came out last year.

    One of my favorite anecdotes about him (not sure if it appears in the Schlaes book—am only partially through it) when Dorothy Parker was in attendance at a White House dinner, she famously told the President, “Mr. President, I made a bet with a friend that I could get you to say more than two words to me.”

    His deadpan reply ?
    “You. Lose.”

    Elephant Stone (6a6f37)

  117. Why does “strike” work in the preview, but not in the final result? :-/

    Smock Puppet, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (225d0d)

  118. 108. those most convinced of
    their Purity of Essence
    are delusional

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (0af7d8) — 2/20/2014 @ 5:52 pm

    Yes, the delusional are those who think if they have principles they should be able to articulate them, believe in them, and have a plan to advance them.

    Boehner and McConnell are your pragmatists. Sowell describes them thusly:

    The Republican establishment has more than a tactical deficiency, however. They seem to have no principle that they offer or follow with any consistency. Their lack of articulation may be just a reflection of that lack of principle. It is hard to get to the point when you have no point to get to.

    As I pointed out on the other thread, I suspect Mr. Sowell is right on the money here. I’ve long suspected the same thing. But if he and I are right then all that happy talk about Republicans “sharing the same objectives, just differing on tactics” was one big lie. And two reasons I suspect Thomas Sowell is right is because the GOP was flat out lying to sell amnesty, and the GOP greybeards were lying about the more “favorable ground” on which to hold the fight to extract concessions from Obama was the debt ceiling.

    So what am I to make over that “repeal and replace” promise the GOP once ran on? I expect it to go away.

    I know I must be delusional, but I’m such a puritanical purity purist that I don’t like being lied to just so someone can pretend to be on my side in order to sell me a $chitt sandwich.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  119. Actually, ES, that is not Parker, as far as I know. I also can’t see Parker getting verbally smacked like that.

    I have heard the exact same punch line and context but with a gushing debutante as the butt of it, which sounds reasonably likely.

    Parker’s wit was just as devastating as that of Coolidge. Purportedly, as she grew older some smart-mouthed young thing stopped at a doorway, waved her through, and snarkily said, “Age before beauty…”

    She smiled, and sailed right through, while quipping, “Not at all: Pearls before swine…”

    Another of her devastating responses, she was giving an address at some college, and, during the follow up Q&A some bimbette asked her “If she could use the word ‘horticulture’ in a sentence…

    She said, without a moment’s hesitation, “You can lead a horticulture, but you cannot make her think…”

    No, I don’t think Coolidge would have wanted to risk the kind of comeback Parker might have responded to “You Lose” with… :-D

    Sharp as it was, she was not someone you wanted to verbally spar with — the speed and severity of her tongue-strike was honed at the Algonquin Round Table by some of the sharpest minds of the 20s.

    Smock Puppet, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (225d0d)

  120. 48. To a lot of folks, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are the kind of guys who talk about setting an ambush but mean this.

    Are those my only choices?

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/20/2014 @ 12:39 pm

    I wasn’t discussing your choices, Kevin. I was pointing out there has never been any ambush for Cruz to ruin.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  121. “Boehner and McConnell are your pragmatists.”

    You are wrong. I say out with the old, in with the energetic youngbloods. I’m just not a fan of sitting on my hands in a fit of pure pique, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, or burning the village to save it.

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  122. P.S., the version I heard was a slight variant on yours:
    “Mr. President, I made a bet with a friend that I could get you to say more than two words to me.”

    The version I’ve seen was — again, picture some SYT (sweet young thing) at her debut:
    “Mr. Coolidge, my friends bet me you wouldn’t say more than two words to me all night!”

    Followed by his laconic
    “You lose.”

    Smock Puppet, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (225d0d)

  123. I suspect that is part of the dumb or shallow template that they’ve pegged on every Republican back to whenever, Coolidge was much more then the public image, by contrast Hoover was less, although he had pretense to greater understanding,

    Stevenson was so brilliant, yet Eisenhower won two terms, same for Carter, and those scintilating firecrackers Dukakis and Kerry,

    narciso (3fec35)

  124. 116. Evidently, Loyalty, independent of its object, is an unassailable, raison de etre all on its own.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  125. 126. “Boehner and McConnell are your pragmatists.”

    You are wrong. I say out with the old, in with the energetic youngbloods. I’m just not a fan of sitting on my hands in a fit of pure pique, throwing the baby out with the bathwater, or burning the village to save it.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (0af7d8) — 2/20/2014 @ 6:41 pm

    Who are these energetic youngbloods of which you speak who you don’t think are trying to burn villages or throw babies out with the bathwater?

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  126. 118. Oh, and Revenoos! Good bye entitlements! Retail nirvana!

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  127. those who voted for this yutz, put your hands down;

    http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/02/20/ukraine-us-ignores-repeated-calls-chuck-hagel/

    narciso (3fec35)

  128. We’ll, Steve since you ‘ve expressed an interest, I like Mike Lee, Cruz is good, McCarthy in Cali is pretty good and I think old timer Louie Gohmert is an honest, clear thinking man. What I can’t abide are the ideologue types who say my way or the highway, and who would rather ensure 100 years of leftist governance than make a single compromise with those on the same side. I worked my ass off carting older voters around this last election, so I like to think that I walk the walk and don’t just flap my gums looking for someone to pin the blame on for a loss that will haunt America for generations.

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  129. Screw house of cards and anything that nitwit Spacey is in.

    Colonel Haiku (0af7d8)

  130. To be fair to the yutz, narciso, look at his boss. He’s the reason they’re blowing off the messenger boy’s phone calls.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  131. True, he’s an easy mark, like those businessman so tied to the Chinese, that the chains threaten to drown them.

    narciso (3fec35)

  132. Hagel was so tied to foreign interests, that lean toward Hamas, and the Iranians, and the Russian oligarchs, one is surprised he knows which way to turn, but he was one of those who ‘grew in office’ past his provincial attitudes,

    narciso (3fec35)

  133. To that list, Colonel, I’ll add Trey Gowdy of South Carolina. And though he’s no youngblood Jeff Sessions of Alabama.

    Since this isn’t a johnson measuring contest I won’t list what I’ve done to try to get people elected. So moving on to the substance.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/11/conservatives-question-us-chamber-plan-to-spend-millions-to-defeat-tea-party/

    “In 2014, the chamber will work to protect and expand a pro-business majority in the House and advance our position and our influence in the Senate,” Chamber President and CEO Tom Donohue said Wednesday. “We will support candidates who want to work within the legislative process.”

    Donohue, in his annual State of American Business speech, didn’t single out the Tea Party specifically but said afterward the chamber’s frustrations are with the movement’s extreme faction and politicians who have linked themselves to the Tea Party.

    “It’s people who don’t want to play,” Donohue told Fox Business, referring to last year’s budget stalemate that partially closed the federal government for 16 days and the ensuring debt-ceiling negotiations that almost resulted in the same outcome.

    “The Tea Party has lots of good ideas,” Donohue said. “But those people are not helping us.”

    And there’s a reason they’re not helping them.

    https://www.uschamber.com/issues/

    Health Care
    The Chamber has long supported health care reform that addresses the uncontrollable costs of our current health care system, improves the overall quality of health care, and expands meaningful coverage to the uninsured. In light of the serious consequences of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) that are affecting employers and employees alike, it is crucial to continue to evaluate reform options that decrease the current strain on our nation’s job creators. As the recently released report from the Chamber’s Health Care Solutions Council delineates, further reforms are necessary if we are to realize lower costs, innovative and high-quality care, and better health for all Americans. A sustainable health care system must build upon the successes in the private sector and reinforce the strengths of the employer-sponsored health care system instead of imposing mandates, new taxes and penalties, and limiting flexibility.

    Immigration
    America has had the opportunity to grow and thrive because we have attracted and welcomed the most talented and the hardest working people to our shores. The U.S. Chamber has collaborated with a variety of odd bedfellows including faith organizations, law enforcement, and ethnic groups to build a movement for commonsense immigration reform that strengthens border security, expands the number of visas for high- and lesser-skilled workers, makes improvements to the federal employment verification system, and provides an earned lawful status for the undocumented with no future bar to citizenship. The door to the American dream must always remain open.

    If these people end up picking the candidates, then I am not working to hasten the loss that they’d call a win that will haunt America for generations to come. If not forever.

    The “purist” in me still demands the GOP actually do what it promised and repeal and replace Obamacare. Not “reform” it because that’s just job security for liberals. They will continue to break the health care system and grow government for the rest of our lives. It can not be fixed. It was not designed to ever be fixed any more than it was designed to provide anyone with health care. It was designed to be a moneypit.

    And the games over if the open borders crowd gets it way.

    Count me out as a team player if the loyalty test the team captain demands is to help him throw the game.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  134. Ukraine will be what Putin wants. Hagel, Kerry and Rice should join Obama for a foursome, on the golf course, for as fully a productive use of their time as trying to intervene in Ukraine. Russia has always (and I mean since before Peter the Great always) wanted and had a buffer zone. If Ukraine looks like it’s going to go West, Putin will annex the Eastern half and Estonia too. And we will do nothing about it.

    nk (dbc370)

  135. I present that as Exhibit A, in the exhibits.

    narciso (3fec35)

  136. Strassel is another tool of team r’s gestapo.

    mg (31009b)

  137. Mr. McConnell holds the same positions as Mr. Cruz on spending, ObamaCare, gun control, etc. His sin? He has refused to ask Republicans to run into the Obama fixed bayonets, a la the Cruz shutdown.

    His sin? Saying he wanted to do just that, Ms. Strassel. “Run into Obama fixed bayonets,” or more accurately actually show some backbone and demand concessions from Obama in exchange for extending the blank check, right up until he showed his hand. And it was give Obama everything he wants all along.

    I am getting very tired of being lied to just to string me along so I’ll stick around for another Republican Dunkirk.

    I know, that makes me a puritanically pure reich-wing ideologue.

    Speaking of being lied to, remember this?

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/marco-rubio-in-immigration-reform-legalization-comes-first-it-is-not-conditional/article/2531504

    In a Spanish-language interview Sunday with the network Univision, Sen. Marco Rubio, the leading Republican on the Gang of Eight comprehensive immigration reform group, made his strongest statement yet that legalization of the nation’s estimated 11 million illegal immigrants must happen before any new border security or internal enforcement measures are in place, and will in no way be conditional on any security requirements.

    Funny. That wasn’t what the pro-amnesty Republicans were telling me in English.

    You know, there’s a way to get me to support people I don’t agree with 100% of the time.

    Don’t lie to me to get my support.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  138. 142. I don’t mean to be needlessly snide Ms. Strassel but “blowing .. a shot at a Republican Senate Majority”?

    Is the goal giving the electorate practice in unseating the Borg at the dais?

    We are looking at 18 months of World Disorder, a year of which would be, odds as they stand, under Boehner-McConnell Congressional steerage.

    Do you really expect a gathering clamor for more of the same?

    You yank but its an unsatisfying tease.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  139. 146. “I am getting very tired of being lied to just to string me along so I’ll stick around for another Republican Dunkirk.”

    ROTFL

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  140. Mr. Sowell, Ms Strassel, and, oh sure, you too Ms. Coulter, you Lights of the Right, are you not as we are agreed that Spokesperson Crack Whore intends us real harm?

    If not you should get your heads around that before the real wake up call.

    A good number of us intend the Republican Party mortal injury. Senator Cruz may just seem so disposed, but if he isn’t already we’ll train him.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  141. 141. I’ll buy that, as a best possible outcome, even.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  142. 151. Money quote:

    Simply put, Ted Cruz — like Ronald Reagan before him — understands what it takes to make a majority. And he’s doing it.

    Shaming, lying, bullying, not hardly.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  143. Oh.my.god Mooch is part of a degenerate comedy skit with Fallon and Will Ferrell in teenie drag.

    Eeewww.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  144. A classic example was Speaker of the House John Boehner’s performance when he emerged from a meeting at the White House a while back. There, with masses of television news cameras pointed at him, and a bank of microphones crowded together, he simply expressed his disgust at the Obama administration, turned and walked on away.

    Probably help if Weepin’ Johnny could stay sober until lunchtime once in a while.

    Ken (5f3bec)

  145. My wife and I could not believe what we were seeing, gary.
    wrong, just wrong.

    mg (31009b)

  146. 158. Indeed. Opening the SOTU he was obviously potted.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  147. 159. On many levels.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  148. Fallon is a disgrace.

    mg (31009b)

  149. I kinda like Fallon in his current gig, and really I could be in the same room with Mooch and remain pleasant..

    But this crap is gay.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  150. I miss the great Carson.

    mg (31009b)

  151. Ok propaganda is the excuse, .. for the depravity.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  152. 164. I can’t see Fallon working this hard for years and maintaining the edge.

    It will get sick.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  153. People were asking, “What’s a RINO?” This.

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/hotline-on-call/guess-who-s-funding-the-republican-civil-war-20131209

    Guess Who’s Funding the Republican Civil War
    Labor unions. And they’re doing it through a pro-business Republican PAC.

    …But the scale of these six-figure donations—$250,000 from the Operating Engineers and $150,000 from LIUNA—makes this effort distinct. Plus, the money is coming as the Main Street group has been publicly declaring its intent to crush tea-party challengers in Republican primaries, going head to head with conservative bankrollers such as the anti-tax Club for Growth.

    “Hopefully, we’ll go into eight to 10 races and beat the snot out of them,” Main Street President Steven LaTourette told National Journal in October.

    LaTourette is a former GOP congresscritter from Ohio and all around sewer rat.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  154. I don’t have Fallon fever.

    mg (31009b)

  155. LaTourette/Norquist 2016

    mg (31009b)

  156. Cruz is smart, articulate and unafraid. The left and the press will do everything they can to derail whatever ambitions he possesses.

    His primary fault is he is not an insider.

    However, I can see him as presidential material and I would vote accordingly.

    When the traditional right and left oppose you, you are doing something right.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  157. We’ve tried the prime time slick smooth talking liar types. Let’s try the idealist conservative.

    Yeah, cause they came flocking to Goldwater. I bring this up because that’s what happened the last time a pure, uncompromising, dedicated capital-C Conservative ran. And the bunch that nominated him sounded pretty much what we are hearing now.

    Maybe we just didn’t yell loud enough! I mean Obama thinks the problem with Obamacare is that people didn’t know enough about it, and while that is correct, it’s not quite correct in the way he means it.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  158. I will point out one thing to people who love Cruz: if the Republicans do NOT take the Senate in 2014, he and his insurgency is going to get ALL the blame and his chances of a GOP nod in 2016 are nil.

    So, focus on winning as a Party rather than this stupid stupid infighting.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  159. 171. I know there’s some confusion on the subject but I think there’s room for the GOP to run their usual moribund sack of sh#t and run a conservative heart throb in a three way.

    The big donors can knock themselves out funding both majors, and then trip headlong into the Potter’s field.

    We’re just in the warm up mode now, Cruz is recruiting the refugees.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  160. 172. Is THAT A THREAT, big guy?

    Boo hoo, I’m soiling myself.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  161. Sorry Kevin M, Your party stinks the way it is now. The toilet is clogged, time to flush.

    mg (31009b)

  162. Team R does not deserve your loyalty, Kevin. They have shown nothing that suggests they have earned it, nor that they value it. They don’t give a shlt about being conservative.

    Depending on what you mean by “Conservative”, I might not give a sh1t about it either. Fiscal conservatism, balance budgets, low taxes, federalism, classic liberalism, these I am down with.

    Caring about who sleeps with whom, or what God intends for us, or trying to undo Roe after 40 years of unremitting failure? Not so much. I will vote for a Republican SoCon candidate in the general election, and walk through snow to do it, but in the primaries, not an effing chance.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  163. Cruz is only an anethema because we allow it.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  164. I say use the GOP for all its worth but don’t waste any time, energy or money on the Blue States.

    Fine if a TEA wants to wade into a GOP primary in a Purple State to stir the pot. There are millions longing for an actual contest, as in the MN caucus.

    But it would be an error to contest the 2016 election under the Republican banner, consorting will useless ph#cks and skanks.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  165. Cruz is a victom of evrrybody shood be pezzydent syndrome

    failmerica got a way bad case of this when they elected a glorified food stamp

    twice

    next thing you knew we were treated to the presidential ambitions of Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Jon Huntsman, Horny Pizza Boy, Huckabee and his draping folds of excess skin, plus baby-in-a-box dude

    America just STOP it you’re embarrassing yourself

    and me

    and I’m about tired of it

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  166. Actually, the party stunk 1989-2011. Romney was the best potential President we have run since Reagan. W was a clown, but I voted for him twice, but he was still a clown. Just a lesser clown. Don’t get me started on Dole.

    But major parties will ALWAYS ALWAYS contain useless twits. You cannot have a monolithic major party. You can either accept that, or turn the major party into a minor party.

    You haven’t lived until you see 3rd-party candidates in debate. The purity wars you saw in 2012 GOP debates were mild compared to what goes on in minor parties. But they are pure.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  167. Politics!

    we should all read the Bible together one night and pray

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  168. cause that will help

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  169. 178. From the consultant borehole, that is.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  170. you buying a houseboat and heading to cancun, happyfeet?

    mg (31009b)

  171. 180. See, ditching you losers has nothing but upside.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  172. We’re just in the warm up mode now, Cruz is recruiting the refugees.

    Say hello to Pat Buchanan when you see him.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  173. why should i care if the RINOs win back the senate?

    after all, they’re still going to vote like demonrats, so what’s the difference?

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  174. 181. Great idea. Lets begin with 2nd Kings Chapter 10.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  175. We have been making adjustments on what we spend money on the last few years in our household. We are prepared for life without team r. They are one highly over rated group of selfies.

    mg (31009b)

  176. 146. Comment by Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/20/2014 @ 8:14 pm

    {Rubio said] legalization of the nation’s estimated 11 million illegal immigrants must happen before any new border security or internal enforcement measures are in place, and will in no way be conditional on any security requirements

    That wasn’t what the pro-amnesty Republicans were telling me in English.

    I think they were. Rubio has two stages: Legalization and then, if border is suppsedly secure, permanent residence. This is well known, and critized by Democrats.

    http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/224423-la-mayor-rubio-dream-act-would-create-second-class-americans

    Rubio’s alternative, which he has yet to formally introduce, would give students legal status through non-immigrant visas, but not citizenship.

    That’s what in the quotation contained in the Washington Examiner article:

    First comes the legalization. Then come the measures to secure the border. And then comes the process of permanent residence.

    See also:

    http://www.christianpost.com/news/path-to-citizenship-is-dead-path-to-legalization-still-possible-immigration-reform-advocates-say-109360/

    November 22, 2013…

    Republican leaders are now working on legislation that would provide legalization, but not a path to citizenship, for current unauthorized immigrants, the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the NHCLC, explained. And, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who has been a leading spokesperson for those opposed to the Senate’s immigration reform bill, told Rodriguez he could support such a plan.

    Except Rubio may be leaving out a little caveat in the Spanish version. The legalization might expire I think, in this plan, under certain circumstances.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  177. no houseboat but

    Augusta Georgia’s looking pretty good

    you could conceivably maybe live on the river there

    i might google laters

    that’s an interesting idea

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  178. I hear they need caddies in Augusta.

    mg (31009b)

  179. 172. …So, focus on winning as a Party rather than this stupid stupid infighting.

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/20/2014 @ 9:45 pm

    Don’t tell us. Tell LaTourette and the Chamber of Commerce.

    Of course, they don’t think that the infighting is stupid because if the Democrats win they win, too. They get Obamacare and amnestied cheap labor.

    But again, why should I support the junior members in the Pelosi/Reid/Obama/Clinton conspiracy if the pro-Obamacare, pro-Amnesty PACs get their way? Why should I care if we’re screwed either way, just slightly more slowly? The establishment groups are working to lock in Barack Obama’s fundamental transformation.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  180. 186. You’re not from around here, are you Sojourner?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  181. golf makes me itch

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  182. meanwhile, here in Failifornia, the state idots & the RNC have decided this idiot is our best candidate.

    and he promptly set about alienating his core constituency so he could try and win leftard votes. From the California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees FB page:

    California, here is your GOP front-runner: “If you’re a single issue voter, and you just want someone to give you a full capacity assault rifle magazine, God bless you, you can go vote for somebody else.” Tell Neel Kashkari that he’s WRONG about the Second Amendment on Twitter if you disagree –> https://twitter.com/neelkashkari

    https://www.facebook.com/calffl/photos/a.260274174021189.56879.253180968063843/616257071756229/?type=1

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  183. That’s not Ted Cruz.

    And the idealism is maybe more important than a collection of “conservative” positions.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (3015b5) — 2/20/2014

    I believe in Senator Cruz, but personally do value executive experience. I’m hoping for Scott Walker, but I am always happy to compromise on the details so long as we get a real leader with integrity and faith in limited government.

    My views are simply sufficiently different from someone who thought Romney was an acceptable or even ideal candidate that I think his supporters might as well be democrats. They certainly are not after what I’m after. They are political opponents, not allies, and it is no surprise that reform and limited government that the Tea party wants has them so upset and full of sophist objections about tactics. They don’t want to just up and admit how much they hate the idea of cutting entitlements now (and coincidentally, they are mostly boomers who are getting the sweet end of the generational theft in progress).

    Anyway, Texas has almost no say in the primaries, which is a big reason why the GOP has picked a lot of losers.

    Dustin (621e43)

  184. 141. Comment by nk (dbc370) — 2/20/2014 @ 7:56 pm

    Hagel, Kerry and Rice should join Obama for a foursome, on the golf course, for as fully a productive use of their time as trying to intervene in Ukraine.

    Wait a second. I think Kerry is actually making some progress. He threatened personal sanctions against people in the Ukraine (maybe no visits to U.S. – and even Europe, meaning no place to escape to and protect their money.)

    That actually seems to have cause Yanukovych to back down again.

    Or maybe not:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/21/world/europe/ukraine.html?_r=0

    Every time Yanukovych backs down, it looks like Putin hardens his heart. Unless of course ethe whole concesson business is a fraud to make it easier to crack down.

    He is losing allies. All kinds of members of the government arequitting or being fired. And even the oligrachs don’t want Russian domination, because Putin could destroy them.

    Russia will not invade – Putin may not even have the soldiers willing and able to do this.

    Russia has always (and I mean since before Peter the Great always) wanted and had a buffer zone. If Ukraine looks like it’s going to go West, Putin will annex the Eastern half and Estonia too. And we will do nothing about it.

    Putin’s weaker than he may at first appear. He goves the impression of being very careful. There is something the west can do that would trump him.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  185. 181. I was wrong read chapters 9 & 10. The opening lede:

    Jehu Anointed King of Israel

    9 The prophet Elisha summoned a man from the company of the prophets and said to him, “Tuck your cloak into your belt, take this flask of olive oil with you and go to Ramoth Gilead. 2 When you get there, look for Jehu son of Jehoshaphat, the son of Nimshi. Go to him, get him away from his companions and take him into an inner room. 3 Then take the flask and pour the oil on his head and declare, ‘This is what the Lord says: I anoint you king over Israel.’ Then open the door and run; don’t delay!”

    4 So the young prophet went to Ramoth Gilead. 5 When he arrived, he found the army officers sitting together. “I have a message for you, commander,” he said.

    “For which of us?” asked Jehu.

    “For you, commander,” he replied.

    6 Jehu got up and went into the house. Then the prophet poured the oil on Jehu’s head and declared, “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘I anoint you king over the Lord’s people Israel. 7 You are to destroy the house of Ahab your master, and I will avenge the blood of my servants the prophets and the blood of all the Lord’s servants shed by Jezebel. 8 The whole house of Ahab will perish. I will cut off from Ahab every last male in Israel—slave or free.[a] 9 I will make the house of Ahab like the house of Jeroboam son of Nebat and like the house of Baasha son of Ahijah. 10 As for Jezebel, dogs will devour her on the plot of ground at Jezreel, and no one will bury her.’” Then he opened the door and ran.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  186. 197. I like Walker and I agree an Executive is an important qualification.

    In the same breath I have to say Palin and Cruz are running point on this movement and anyone who’s coming along, whatever their capacity or eventual rank, will have to fall in.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  187. I’m hoping for Scott Walker

    Yes, well, watch what happens the moment he says something pragmatic that the one-fell-swoop crowd thinks is “just like the Democrats.”

    To people who think there is no difference between D & R, well, you really have no idea where the majority of the people are, nor where to get a map to find them. To get your way, you’ll need tanks.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  188. 199. Things are maybe at the point where you wouldn’t need an Prophet Elijah to anoint someone ruler of Ukraine – at least if the person was capable of mounting a coup.

    Kermit Roosevelt once did something like this in Iran, when he brought back the Shah.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  189. To get your way, you’ll need tanks

    that would explain why your presentdent is Handing out MRAPs to cops like they were matchbox toys…

    the good thing is that most cops have no idea what their vulnerabilities are…

    i foresee very expensive bonfires occurring throughout the country if they don’t back off the full fledged run at open fascism.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  190. 201. “To people who think there is no difference between D & R”

    You read with indifference. No one has said there is no difference, only that the ends are acceptable to each but for the trim and detailing.

    This must of needs be an asymmetric contest, Blue states, the Lamestream, and big donors cannot be courted let alone obeyed.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  191. 202. You know Sam, it was Elisha, and the Lord not some Kermit.

    You are not close to understanding.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  192. 176. …Caring about who sleeps with whom…

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/20/2014 @ 9:53 pm

    I couldn’t let this clumsy sleight of hand go. Defending marriage from the anti-western civilization types has nothing to do with caring about who sleeps with whom. Gays have been sleeping together for thousands of years without benefit of marriage under various levels of tolerance. I don’t care who sleeps with whom, either, but I do care about the campaign to destroy marriage.

    I realize you don’t find the facts in record compelling, Kevin, but when Blackstone commented on the English common law as it related to marriage (I’ll spare you the direct quotes since you don’t find them compelling) he was not far removed from the time when marriage was not a matter of English common law at all. It was a matter of cannon law for the Church. And the entire reason it became a matter of the civil law was because there was a compelling societal need to channel and regulate procreation and child rearing.

    So, you’re saying that we as a society have no interest in responsible procreation?

    Good luck with that fiscal conservatism since somebody is going to have to pay to raise all those single moms’ kids.

    http://thelifeofjulia.com/

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  193. Not that we’re left entirely without social institutions that are primarily concerned with children.

    There’s abortion, of course.

    And now euthanasia.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/371222/pushing-child-euthanasia-la-times-wesley-j-smith

    This is what a society on suicide watch looks like.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  194. Wait a second. I think Kerry is actually making some progress. He threatened personal sanctions against people in the Ukraine (maybe no visits to U.S. – and even Europe, meaning no place to escape to and protect their money.)

    That’s only because of the carbon emissions from all that fighting, Sammy. You know, the major global threat and all.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  195. smock puppet #119 … are you out of your tiny gourd ? Quoting Wiki about politics ?

    (Sorry about the delay – I just got round to this post and comments)

    Senate 2 1995 passed and signed into law Jan 23, 1995

    Text of Senate 2

    Senate 2 (in 1995) replaced HR 1 – H.R. 1 (104th): Congressional Accountability Act of 1995

    Text of HR1 (which was superseded by Senate 2

    Those of us with brains and integrity only rely upon Wikipedia as a starting point in political matters. Anything vaguely pro-conservative seldom survives there …

    If you had been quoting Wiki honestly, you would have also quoted from a bit further down in that article (beyond where low-info voters read) where it says

    Whatever the role of the Contract, Republicans were elected to a majority of both houses of Congress for the first time since 1953, and several parts of the Contract were enacted. Some elements did not pass in Congress, while others were vetoed by, or substantially altered in negotiations with President Bill Clinton, who would later sarcastically refer to it as the “Contract on America.”[6][7]

    Would you care to explain how that becomes

    It seems remarkably obvious that the GOP demonstrated this lack of principle when they reneged on the Contract With America.

    You go off into the weeds in very-leftist field when you get to

    despite being given a majority in both houses by the 2002/2004 election cycle, and hence the capacity to pass every single one of them:

    – {my emphasis}

    Alastor (2e7f9f)

  196. Here you go Kevin:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqyOAG521ZY

    Fred Siegel “The Revolt Against The Masses: How Liberalism Has Undermined The Middle Class”

    I don’t know Fred Siegel’s politics with any certainty, but I can guess. But he is a former professor of history and the humanities and a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute. Which ain’t no hotbed of conservatism, to say the least.

    This is about the roots of modern American liberalism and is about an hour long. It’s not really about marriage (although he does touch on the fact that early liberal writers tried to do to undermine middle class sexual mores).

    But the fact is that liberals couldn’t have undermined the middle class in America without first convincing people that social issues aren’t fiscal issues. Then they could go on to convince people that social conservatives (i.e. people who defended middle class social values) are just small-minded provincial prudes.

    I’d say they’ve been very effective, Kevin. But again, say good bye to fiscal restraint.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  197. 209. Thanx for the redress.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  198. 172. …So, focus on winning as a Party rather than this stupid stupid infighting.

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/20/2014 @ 9:45 pm

    Don’t tell us. Tell LaTourette and the Chamber of Commerce.

    Comment by Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/20/2014 @ 10:17 pm

    So, let me get this straight. Their stupidity gives you license to be just as stupid?

    Besides, I don’t recall LaTourette having the backing of the US Chamber of Commerce. They may have some of the same goals, but LaTourette is a clown who just wants to be important again. Don’t let him live rent-free in your head.

    And anyway, who listens to a guy with a name like that?

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  199. i’m a buy my own full capacity assault rifle magazine God bless me

    and then I’m a figure out what to do with that package of frozen scallions

    it turns out that neither monday tuesday wednesday thursday friday saturday or sunday is “frozen scallion night” at casa pikachu

    who knew?

    nobody tells me anything

    and you know I’m getting to where I’m kinda ok with that

    every day is a fresh adventure

    possibly involving “trader joe’s frozen scallions”

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  200. I’d say they’ve been very effective, Kevin. But again, say good bye to fiscal restraint.

    You mean like W’s fiscal restraint? Clinton was more restrained than Bush, and harsher words were never said.

    Yes, I insist our PRESIDENTIAL candidate be a strong fiscal conservative. Oh, I’ll vote for anyone who isn’t Hillary, but in the primaries I will want the best I can get who can 1) win and 2) lead.

    But we aren’t there yet. We have the best chance since 1980 to retake the Senate in the midterms, with 6 or 7 seats leaning our way already, and 6 or 7 more in play. Now is the time to row forward as a team, and this guy Cruz is smashing holes in the boat.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  201. #206:

    IMHO, Churches should never ever use the words: “By the power invested in me by the state of ____….”.

    The moment they do, they have thrown off those thousands of years of religious and social teachings and put themselves at the mercy of the civil authorities.

    A wedding in a church should be before God and have nothing whatsoever to do with the state’s legal institution. If you want the state to recognize the marriage, you should get a license (another thing God doesn’t need) and go down to city hall and say or sign or whatever.

    The Catholic Church already ignores the state’s ideas of divorce. They should ignore their ideas of marriage as well. Perhaps they could use the term “Holy Matrimony” instead and let the state do what they want.

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  202. roll them scallions in batter and deep fry them!

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  203. batter is not allowed

    I’ve already said too much

    oh crap they’re coming

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  204. Good luck with that fiscal conservatism since somebody is going to have to pay to raise all those single moms’ kids.

    Why do you support the welfare state?

    Kevin M (dbcba4)

  205. 212. …Besides, I don’t recall LaTourette having the backing of the US Chamber of Commerce. They may have some of the same goals, but LaTourette is a clown who just wants to be important again. Don’t let him live rent-free in your head.

    And anyway, who listens to a guy with a name like that?

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/20/2014 @ 11:45 pm

    Who listens? The usual suspects. Susan Collins, Mark Kirk, and John McCain. And a host of congresscritters.

    http://www.republicanmainstreet.org/members/

    I’m aware of the existence of sewer rats. They don’t live rent free in my head, but I’m curious to know how I’d be stupid if I don’t help them further their goals.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  206. America!

    [jack-off motion]

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  207. our esteemed would-be Governor Cash N Carry (Rino) also thinks M-1 tanks are invulnerable, among other idiocies. he also held a position in Obumble’s first term.

    this is a real winner the GOP wants to run. i’m sure i can count on him to NOT fold on key conservative issues… in fact, i’ll bet my Miss America crown and trophy on it that i won my senior year in high school.

    http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/02/gun-owner-kashkari-says-hes-not-running-on-second-amendment-agenda.html

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  208. Now is the time to row forward as a team, and this guy Cruz is smashing holes in the boat.

    A boat that is rudderless, thanks mainly to the various members of the Republican Party who are BOTH ideologically and tactically dumb.

    I don’t mind people being bothered by a Ted Cruz if it’s only — repeat: only — for strategic reasons. But if someone like, say, a Thomas Sowell is unhappy with Cruz for ideological reasons (although I don’t think that’s the case with Sowell), hold it right there, pal. Put your hands up and move slowly away from the car.

    Mark (aea093)

  209. 214. I’d say they’ve been very effective, Kevin. But again, say good bye to fiscal restraint.

    You mean like W’s fiscal restraint? Clinton was more restrained than Bush, and harsher words were never said.

    Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/20/2014 @ 11:53 pm

    He’s a good example of what I’m talking about.

    Bush’s “compassionate conservatism,” big government conservatism, is not conservatism. There is no fiscal conservatism without social conservatism. When conservative social values have been destroyed or marginalized, then liberal social values determine the spending priorities. The best they can offer as they accept the premise that liberal values should be driving the agenda are slightly less expensive versions of what the liberals are demanding. Such as Medicare part D.

    And that’s what I meant by saying the liberals have been very successful. Very successful at convincing people that conservatives social values are mere fig leaves for bigots who are interested only in intruding on people’s sex lives, for instance. You certainly are convinced of that, for rather than referring mention marriage at all you talk about social conservatives as if all we’re interested in “who sleeps with whom.”

    Since you’ve been convinced that society has no interest in maintaining and supporting marriage as the means for channeling and regulating responsible procreation, the reason it exists at all as a matter of civil law and a purpose it served until the liberals embarked on their project to dismantle it in their war on middle class values, then how do you possibly think you’ll be able to defend your fiscal conservatism?

    You’ll just be another heartless scrooge who doesn’t care about children who need to be fed, clothed, housed, and of course cared for medically.

    A function once performed by a father within marriage, but you agree marriage isn’t about that anymore. That’s just so bourgeois.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  210. 221)Talk about epic fail, we’re talking the Pierre rinfret of California, is Schmidt representing him,

    narciso (3fec35)

  211. 213. Trader Joe’s here had some food quality issue a couple few months back, a big recall I think.

    World Market was already kicking its butt and taking names, moving next door, pushing it into snow banks.

    I felt a twinge of sadness, while I wasn’t hating on the GOP on my breaks from H8ing on Crack Whore.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  212. So Ukraine strongman has called early elections. Wonder why? Russia isn’t buying $2 Billion in bonds.

    Seems like pocket change in Amerikkka. MN’s State budget is pushing $40 Billion.

    Maybe cobbling together receipts is tough all over?

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  213. “My views are simply sufficiently different from someone who thought Romney was an acceptable or even ideal candidate that I think his supporters might as well be democrats”

    Thems fightin’ words, bruva, and they only serve to push you toward the fringe.

    Colonel Haiku (7678db)

  214. People that delight in pushing the olfactory organs of those who agree with them on most critical issues/policies into the poo are extremist sh*t disturbers and I question their motives.

    Colonel Haiku (7678db)

  215. Interesting to see who the producers and the “takers” are…

    http://kaching.tumblr.com/post/63011092756/ratak-monodosico-percent-of-people-of-food

    Colonel Haiku (7678db)

  216. NBC is trying to the point of bullying participants and commentators to manufacture controversy over Ladies’ Skate result, homie winner stumbled.

    No one is helping. She did two extra jumps.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  217. Look out for falling bankers:

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/rbs-reduce-headcount-quarter-revamp-082124182.html;_ylt=AwrBJR.gVAdTLEcAMPnQtDMD

    Sometimes lost in the hue and cry over Western public debt, GB’s total Financial debt is 1000% of GDP.

    Miss a rent payment here, a payroll there and pretty soon you’re selling Chicklets on the street corner.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  218. #230… Saved by Belgium, i.e., teh EU … Wonderful!

    Colonel Haiku (7678db)

  219. 227. The Washington General fans are livid, pissed the Globetrotters won’t pay their slobs’ travel but are contracting scab teams at venues in the hinterlands.

    Sucks to be youse.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  220. A minor annoyance for Jamie D.:

    http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA1J21W20140220?irpc=932

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  221. We appear to be so screwed… http://ace.mu.nu/archives/347313.php

    Colonel Haiku (7678db)

  222. Yeah, let’s make Mitch Majority Leader. That’ll fix every little thing.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-20/food-inflation-coming-back

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  223. Comment by Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/20/2014 @ 10:50 pm

    …Blackstone…was not far removed from the time when marriage was not a matter of English common law at all. It was a matter of cannon [canon] law for the Church. And the entire reason it became a matter of the civil law was because there was a compelling societal need to channel and regulate procreation and child rearing.

    I think the reason must have been that the Kings of England wanted to treat married men differently than unmarried, so they had to know who was married.

    Here is Wikipedia on Civil Marriage in England:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_marriage
    In medieval Europe, marriage was governed by canon law, which recognised as valid only those marriages where the parties stated they took one another as husband and wife, regardless of the presence or absence of witnesses. It was not necessary, however, to be married by any official or cleric. This institution was cancelled in England with the enactment of “Lord Hardwicke’s Marriage Act” of 1753, which required that, in order to be valid and registered, all marriages were to be performed in an official ceremony in a religious setting recognised by the state, i.e. Church of England, the Quakers, or in a Jewish ceremony. Any other form of marriage was abolished.

    Children born into unions which were not valid under the Act would not automatically inherit the property or titles of their parents. For historical reasons, the Act did not apply in Scotland. Consequently, until 1940, it continued to be enough in Scotland for a man and a woman to pledge their commitment to each other in front of witnesses to legalise their marriage. This led to an industry of “fast marriages” in Scottish towns on the border with England; the town of Gretna Green was particularly well known for this.

    In 1836, the requirement that the ceremony take place in a religious forum was removed, and registrars were given the authority to register marriages not conducted by a religious official.
    In England, therefore, civil marriage only came into existence in 1836, although before 1753 no kind of official of any kind was necessary.

    I think that Wikipedia has to be wrong there when it seems to spell out a limited number of religions whose officials could perform marriages.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  224. 236. Are they counting children as recipients of means tested benefits?

    And, when it comes to workers, are they counting only full time workers, and not members of their families??

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  225. 202. 205. Comment by gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/20/2014 @ 10:50 pm

    You know Sam, it was Elisha,

    Oh, right, yes. Except that it wasn’t even Elisha himself, but one of his followers who actually did it. It was all continuing the work of Elijah.

    and the Lord not some Kermit.

    Yes, but I was saying the situation in Ukraine might be now that Victoria Nuland or the U.S. Ambassador could do it, and it would work if they picked the right person, in terms of acceptance to other people and ability to pull this off. And you might not need special help from the Lord to find an appropriate person.

    But he won’t think of it, and Obama wouldn’t authorize it.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  226. 240. There are two ways to read any account, fiction or non-fiction.

    You can give yourself over to the author just to see whether he has something.

    Or you can stop at every image, turn it over like a rock and inspect it, suppose its reason for being just there, etc.

    If you’re really with it, you can almost seamlessly move between the two, particularly if you’ve completed the work in the first mode, reading for comprehension of the whole.

    I don’t care if you are Jewish, there is nothing you can teach me.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  227. Just a small profit is all everybody needs.

    nk (dbc370)

  228. 241. “there is nothing you can teach me.”

    Ok, I’m sorry, about reading a story suspending disbelief.

    I did learn a little something from you about the loss of the `ayin guttural in modern Hebrew amateur scholarship.

    gary gulrud (e2cef3)

  229. 119. Comment by Smock Puppet, “Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses.” (225d0d) — 2/20/2014 @ 6:26 pm

    4. limit the terms of all committee chairs; NO.

    They did keep that, and some Chairman had to leave.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/30/washington/29cnd-hyde.html?pagewanted=print

    Because Republicans imposed term limits on committee chairmen, Mr. Hyde led the Judiciary Committee from 1995 to 2001. Then he became chairman of the International Relations Committee, where he led successful efforts to commit the United States to invest $5 billion over five years on combating HIV/AIDs around the world. He did not run for re-election in 2006.

    Also:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/18/us/politics/18warner.html?pagewanted=print

    Mr. Warner, who is losing his senior position on the Armed Services Committee as a result of term limits, said he intended to ask his Republican colleagues to elect him as the ranking Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, which is likely to address global warming issues in the new Congress.

    Later, the term limits apparently were abolished by the Democrats:

    http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/does-removal-term-limits-portend-revival-committee-system

    One of the changes made in the new House rules adopted last month was the abolition of term limits for committee and subcommittee chairmen. Republicans had instituted the six-year limits when they took control of Congress in 1995. ….

    Republicans characterized last month’s elimination of term limits as a backward step that would lead to the same cozy relationships that previously existed under Democratic majorities. The Democrats, on the other hand, pointed out that much had changed since the old days of independent committee barons and that committees are now firmly under the control of the majority party leadership and caucus….

    ….The Republicans’ complaint that the abolition of committee chairmanship term limits is a backward step has not gained much traction, in part because the GOP had already abolished the term limits that they had earlier imposed on their own Speaker and Rules chairman. The cause does not have the same public appeal that it did back in 1992 and 1994, perhaps because people have seen what a disaster term limits have been in state legislatures….

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  230. Comment by gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/21/2014 @ 6:47 am

    Or you can stop at every image, turn it over like a rock and inspect it, suppose its reason for being just there, etc.

    I do that with factual accounts. Example: Is it logical for New Jersey Governor Chris Christoe to have deliberately created a traffic jam by the George Washington Brdge? No. So he didn’t authorize it. Is it logical that the motive was that the mayor of fort Lee did not endorse him for Governor? No, so it wasn’t the motive. Is it logical that there was a real traffic study? No, so there was some ulterior, probably corrupt motive.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  231. The interesting question is: Why is it that the protests in Venezuala are doing worse than the protests in Ukraine.

    Vladimir Putin, head of a giant state, is having much more trouble maintaining a puppet state than Fidel and Raul Castro who rule only Cuba, and actually have to take money from their puppet state, not give it money!

    What’s the difference?

    1) The Ukrainian insiders have much more of a relationship with the United States and other democratic states, and are concerned about their ability to visit, invest, transfer ill=gottem gains (money) to family and associates, etc.

    2) The Ukrainian insiders are much more afraid of being harmed by Vladimir Putin than anybody connected to the Venezualan government is afraid of being harmed by Fidel Castro.

    3) The Venezualan insiders are afraid of the aftermath of a revolution; the Ukrainians, not so much.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  232. 227. “My views are simply sufficiently different from someone who thought Romney was an acceptable or even ideal candidate that I think his supporters might as well be democrats”

    Thems fightin’ words, bruva, and they only serve to push you toward the fringe.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (7678db) — 2/21/2014 @ 4:55 am

    You have an odd way of defining the fringe, sir. Some of the people behind the current crop of candidates are Democrats.

    Republican Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert is launching a new political action committee to help defend House conservatives from 2014 attacks from mainstream Republican PACs, Gohmert announced exclusively to The Daily Caller.

    The new GOH Conservative PAC, inspired by the Senate Conservatives Fund, “defends conservative Republicans from the attacks that come from the mainstream,” Gohmert told TheDC. “That’s been a problem, we’ve seen in some races, where we’ve had leadership come and play and there was no counterbalance. So I’m going to do something about it.”

    Gohmert detailed a long history of struggle and a do-nothing spirit within the Republican caucus, and the “depression” conservative House members felt when Speaker John Boehner conceded that Republicans shut down the government, a statement that must have been based on “reading the mainstream media and failing to read the record.”

    Gohmert makes an excellent point. The GOP was willing to keep the entire government open for (eventually) one simple concession. A delay of the individual mandate. It was Obama and Reid who were willing to kick over the entire table.

    Which, again, makes me doubt that people like Boehner ever meant it when they ran on repeal and replace.

    Gohmert bristled at common attacks on the Senate Conservatives Fund, which was slammed as “unproductive” for the party by GOP Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

    “It’s about defense,” Gohmert explained. ”I haven’t heard any criticism yet. There are [other] people out there raising money. They’re raising money to help people that are not traditionally conservative.”

    The Daily Caller recently reported that moderate Republican Steve LaTourette’s Washington-based super PAC Defending Main Street is mostly funded by labor unions.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/18/rep-louie-gohmert-launches-conservative-pac-to-defend-candidates-against-establishment-republican-attacks/#ixzz2tz7NKmZc

    Earlier you said that you liked Gohmert. Is he “fringe,” too?

    Kevin M. says that just because LaTourette acts stupidly doesn’t mean I have to act stupidly. But the fact is if LaTourette has enough union cash behind him and acts stupidly in concert with his fellow travelers Collins, Kirk, McCain, and a host of like-minded congresscritter that does compel me to act against him. Obviously Gohmert has concluded the same thing.

    Do you think Gohmert is acting stupidly by forming a PAC to defend against these attacks intended to advance union-backed Democrats in GOP clothing?

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  233. Gohmert laughed about Bob Woodward’s recent reporting that Sen. Ted Cruz eats alone in the Senate cafeteria, but made clear that in-fighting within the GOP and discontent with the current House leadership is a serious problem.

    “People are not thrilled when you stand up and criticize your own party leaders. I say, ‘Look we made promises of what we would do when we were elected.’”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/18/rep-louie-gohmert-launches-conservative-pac-to-defend-candidates-against-establishment-republican-attacks/#ixzz2tz8q1EcD

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  234. That was directed at a particular “contributer”, Steve. Romney was/is no more a Democrat than you. I support what Gohmert is doing. Look, chewing one’s own foot off does not guarantee success in an election.

    Colonel Haiku (f5f7a0)

  235. I was just trying to find out where the borders of “the fringe” were demarcated.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  236. It was a philosophical question about LaTourette. If LaTourette acts stupidly, and someone acts in response, does that mean the respondent is acting stupidly?

    He may be a clown and a sewer rat, depending upon your POV, but that doesn’t mean clowns and sewer rats can’t be consequential. Just look at the Obama administration and the mess we’re making.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  237. mess they’re making.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  238. Avoid La Tourette Syndrome, goddam it!

    Colonel Haiku (f5f7a0)

  239. In the Wall Street Journal:

    Potomac Watch

    Strassel: Another Misguided Cruz Missile

    Ted Cruz is aiming for Mitch McConnell, but he may blow up the GOP’s chances for a Senate majority in November…..

    …Members of Congress routinely cook up situations that force opposing parties to take “tough votes.” This may be the first time a senator did so solely to damage his own party. It may also be the first time a senator has used the privileges afforded him under Senate rules to benefit a small and coordinated band of conservative campaign groups. Their No. 1 target is Mr. McConnell, who Mr. Cruz hasn’t forgiven for failing to embrace his damaging shutdown.

    …Within minutes of Mr. McConnell voting to proceed, his opponent in the Kentucky primary, Matt Bevin, had tweeted out that his rival had given “Obama another blank check.” …

    …On Thursday, Mr. Cruz told me his debt procedure was a matter of principle, though he acknowledged an “additional benefit” was the “transparency” he’d forced on Republicans. He told me he had not “spoken to anyone at SCF in months.” However, when I asked if anyone on his staff had been in contact with outside groups about his debt-ceiling procedure, he acknowledged: “My staff periodically speaks with people across the conservative movement.” He added, “But the debt ceiling vote occurred suddenly and it was a surprise to everybody when Republican leadership asked every Republican senator to consent to letting Harry Reid raise the debt ceiling.”…

    …None of this is about substance. If political principle were at stake, one would assume these outside groups—so keen on purity—would have already dropped Mr. Bevin. It came out recently that he had once praised the very bank bailouts that he has been slapping Mr. McConnell for supporting.

    Mr. McConnell holds the same positions as Mr. Cruz on spending, ObamaCare, gun control, etc. His sin? He has refused to ask Republicans to run into the Obama fixed bayonets, a la the Cruz shutdown. Groups like SCF and Heritage Action want to replace the leadership with more of their own kamikaze caucus. They also understand there are far more fundraising dollars and media attention in attacking fellow conservatives.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  240. Later news about Ukraine:

    Russia wa sinvolved in the negotiations that Yanukovych was doing with the opposition. Taht did not sound good.

    But then he lost control of Parliament. He signed an agreement but Russia didn’t – i.e. without the agreement fof Russia.

    The Parliament voted to free Yulia Tymoshenko (it would decriminalize the article of the criminal code she was convicted under) The European Union diplomats had ceased bothering to mention her.

    The Interior (police) Minister resigned (or was fired by parliament)

    Ukraine’s Parliament voted to restore the 2004 constitution that limits presidential authority.

    Putin can entirely blame himself. Even the insiders are more afraid of what will happen to them if Putin gains more control than they are of a democratic trend.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  241. nk == you were saying…

    But in the mneantime, Obama and Kerry can’t stop Castro from taking over Venezuala. They are floundering in Syria.

    The big difference is that the governments, and the people close to the governments of Venezuala and Syria are not afraid of their patrons. (Syria doesn’t risk being sucked into Russia, unlike Ukraine)

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  242. News story:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/22/world/europe/ukraine.html?hp

    Ukraine Leader Agrees to Deal Amid Move to Free Archrival

    KIEV, Ukraine — The embattled president of Ukraine, whose shift toward closer relations with Russia provoked the deadliest political crisis in his country’s post-Soviet history, signed a compromise deal on Friday that will diminish his power and watched helplessly as an emboldened Parliament voted overwhelmingly to free his imprisoned rival and grant amnesty to all protesters.

    The agreement signed by President Viktor F. Yanukovych and leaders of the opposition, mediated by European and Russian diplomats, commits him to early elections and reduces some presidential authority. Although Russia declined to endorse the deal, and many protesters — suspicious of the president’s motives — said they wanted Mr. Yanukovych to resign, opposition leaders said they hoped to persuade the skeptics and end a bloody standoff that shocked the nation and much of the world.

    Sammy Finkelman (3015b5)

  243. Sowell, Part III: Sowell doubles down on Cruz, comparing the Republican leadership to George Washington and the Allies in WWII. Meanwhile, Sowell thinks Cruz is the guy who would have caused Washington to lose the Revolutionary War and the Allies to lose WWII. I think it’s fair to say Sowell isn’t “coming around” on Cruz, unless he’s coming around to stab him in the back.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  244. Lotta that goin’ around…

    Colonel Haiku (ec37e2)

  245. A lot of what, Colonel?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  246. Sowell, Part III: Sowell doubles down on Cruz, comparing the Republican leadership to George Washington and the Allies in WWII. Meanwhile, Sowell thinks Cruz is the guy who would have caused Washington to lose the Revolutionary War and the Allies to lose WWII. I think it’s fair to say Sowell isn’t “coming around” on Cruz, unless he’s coming around to stab him in the back.

    Sowell’s analogies fall short of the mark. As I will show in my next post, there is another, different war analogy that shows why people fight battles even when they seem certain to lose.

    Once again, Texans get it when others don’t — I probably don’t even have to tell you guys which battle I am talking about.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  247. Of course the Alamo, and then there’s Thermopylae,
    which Herodotus relates in almost as phantasmagoric terms as Frank Miller’s screenplay,

    narciso (3fec35)

  248. I still have that book, Patterico, and I still laud you for sending it. I got a couple hundred pages in before school got insane, but I remember the deal and have the book placed prominently so that I don’t forget it.

    I’m glad, Leviticus. I’d be interested in your reaction to it, but I have not pressed for it because I believe that reading it will be more valuable when the impulse comes from within, rather than from outside obligation. To make that even clearer: I release you from any obligation to read the book. But I still hope you do finish it. If you do, I’ll be here to get your reaction.

    I will admit that I have come around to some degree towards your point of view with respect to certain topics you have raised here at times. You have argued that there is little difference between the parties and I tend to agree with you more and more on that. You have also questioned the basis of the social contract, and I have since heard arguments that cause me to be more interested in that topic as well.

    We can all learn from each other. Nobody has a monopoly on wisdom or truth.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  249. A lot of what, Colonel?

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b)

    Back-stabbin’

    Colonel Haiku (ec37e2)

  250. Dr. Sowell, seems to think the GOP will go ‘vroom just like the Norwegian Blue’ there’s little grounds for that,

    narciso (3fec35)

  251. 20. “You agree with every word in your strawman, Big Dog, not with what Sowell wrote. There’s a difference.”

    There’s no strawman, Steve. Sowell was saying a pox on both. Strassel explains how Cruz is being a counterproducive demagogue.

    There was only one point to Mr. Cruz’s action: To force Republican colleagues, in particular Mr. McConnell, into voting “yes” to proceed to the actual bill. Mr. Cruz has admitted as much, bragging to radio host Mark Levin the next day that his colleagues’ “heads exploded” because he’d “forced” them to “tell the truth”—namely, that they “wanted” to give Barack Obama a “blank check to raise our debt.” Never mind that every Republican, once past the Cruz show vote, opposed the increase on final passage.

    I think it’s fair to say that Ted Cruz is Harry Reid’s best Republican ally.

    Bird Dog (130699)

  252. No, Sowell is not saying “a pox on both.” That’s your mischaracterization of what he’s saying. Hence, a strawman.

    At this crucial juncture in the history of America, internal battles within the only party that can turn things around are the last thing Americans need. Moreover, each side in this political civil war has all too many valid criticisms of the other.

    The attempted misdirection to Kim Strassel’s WSJ editorial is telling, because it sheds no light on what Thomas Sowell was saying. But of course, you can’t support your strawman that Sowell is calling Cruz a “counterproductive demagogue” with Sowell’s own words. Counterproductive demagogues due not fill voids by making valid points.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  253. Obama did say he would have more flexibility to deal with Russia and Putin in his second term.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  254. We can’t know how or why the men of the Alamo stood. We don’t know how they fell. But they stood for an idea and a dream. Their friends from Goliad were gone and Sam Houston was too far away to help.

    They came from Vermont, Kentucky, Tennessee, North and South Carolina, Alabama, Georgia, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Maryland, Arkansas, Rhode Island, and Mexico, England, Scotland, Denmark and Ireland. Less than a handful were black. More than a handful survived the Siege of Bexar.

    They all died.

    Remember Goliad, Remember the Alamo.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  255. Well said, Ag80.

    felipe (6100bc)

  256. There’s something about the Alamo that appeals to people of all ages. My kids spent the first 10+ years of their lives begging to visit the Alamo at every vacation. Amazingly, they wanted to go to the Alamo even more than a water park or theme park like Six Flags. For some Alamo aficionados, like my family, it’s the valor and sacrifice of the Texian and Mexican defenders that captured our imagination. For others, it’s the historical appeal of an event that seems larger-than-life. And for a few others, it’s that the defenders’ sacrifice seemed to be in vain. It wasn’t in vain but, even if it had been, it shows that Texians have always been willing to give their lives in freedom’s cause.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  257. The reason “Remember the Alamo” and “Remember Goliad” is important is because Mexican General Santa Anna killed everyone who opposed him in those battles. Choosing the Texian side was choosing death if Santa Anna prevailed, and he forced everyone in Texas to take sides. No one could be a moderate fence-sitter then.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  258. Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/21/2014 @ 8:45 pm

    And Putin will have more flexibility in dealing with Ukraine once Sochi is finished.

    askeptic (2bb434)

  259. When the ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine declare their “independence” and move to secede from Ukraine (and the same possibly for Estonia), with Russia’s diplomatic and military support, will they be like the Texians at the Alamo?

    nk (dbc370)

  260. No, that would be like how Budapest and Prague turned out;

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-ukraine-crisis-interior-20140222,0,3528723.story

    narciso (3fec35)

  261. If you mean there will be Russian tanks in Kiev, I doubt it. If you mean that Kiev will try to suppress an uprising in the Crimea like I described above, it will face Russian tanks. Russia does not need all of Ukraine and it would not be worth the trouble to try to take it. But it will intervene for that part that serves its strategic interests as it did in Georgia.

    nk (dbc370)

  262. Eastern Ukraine could very well be South Ossetia and Abkhazia, as in the last Caucausus intervention,

    narciso (3fec35)

  263. 267. “Counterproductive demagogues due not fill voids by making valid points.”

    Speaking of strawmans, Steve. Pretty much anyone with an eloquent voice can fill a void when the existing leadership does not provide an eloquent voice of its own, be it a legitimate leader or a counterproductive demagogue. Your “valid points” defense is largely irrelevant. The issue is the methods and tactics employed by Cruz and his defenders. It couldn’t be more obvious that the partial government shutdown was a political loser for the GOP, and a debt-ceiling stand-off is also a political loser for the verysame reasons. It is also a loser strategy to push for the nomination of TP candidates who are sure losers in the general election, and it’s a loser tactic to fight more against your own party than the other party. And what has Cruz accomplished in his 14 months in office? Pretty much nothing. He has relegated himself to the backbench.

    Bird Dog (130699)

  264. What does Boehner have to show for four years in leadership,

    narciso (3fec35)

  265. Big Dog, those are your words. Not Sowell’s. You mischaracterized Sowell’s words to reflect your views yet attribute those views to Sowell to give it an authority it otherwise would not have had.

    Which is why I called it a straw man. Simple, no?

    That’s your argument. Make it yourself.

    Steve57 (a7ff60)

  266. What does Boehner have to show for four years in leadership,

    It would be interesting to see him post comments in this forum, because then we’d get a fairly good sense of both his political philosophy and tactical acumen. Right now, I’m not truly sure if he’s way too squishy on the first, and therefore more likely to be dumb on the second.

    If he’s rather rubber kneed about the left — about Obama — then I can easily imagine him saying: “Gosh, darn, those liberals are such nice people, and nice people have wonderful intentions, and maybe left-leaning biases aren’t so bad after all. The compassion in my heart is starting to spring forth, and I’ll have to vote accordingly.

    “By the way, I understand the Latino community is dewy-eyed over liberalism because of the Republican Party’s opposition to illegal immigration. Oh, oh, and oh, my! Meanies like us, whether here or probably in Mexico too, must be to blame. Let’s change who we are!”

    Mark (aea093)

  267. “We can all learn from each other. Nobody has a monopoly on wisdom or truth.”

    - Patterico

    That is one of several important life-lessons that I learned on this site, from you and some of the other folks here.

    Leviticus (1aca67)

  268. 278. Comment by nk (dbc370) — 2/22/2014 @ 5:58 am

    If you mean there will be Russian tanks in Kiev, I doubt it. If you mean that Kiev will try to suppress an uprising in the Crimea like I described above, it will face Russian tanks.

    Russia does not need all of Ukraine and it would not be worth the trouble to try to take it. But it will intervene for that part that serves its strategic interests as it did in Georgia.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 2/22/2014 @ 6:02 am

    Eastern Ukraine could very well be South Ossetia and Abkhazia, as in the last Caucausus intervention

    The non-eastern part seems to include a lot of what was inside the Soviet Union in 1939. There’s also a Russian speaking part. Kharov was actually the Soviet capital.

    There’s also the Crimea, which Khrushchev transferred to the Ukraine in 1954, at a time when internal Soviet borders didn’t mean anything or meant almost nothing. At the end of 1991, it wound up outside of Russia.

    Yankovich hmslef s Byelorussian, which has its own dictator. No revolutionn there – it’s all under one-man control.

    It’s in these countries that are not pure autocracies that you get this resistance to being dominated by Russia.

    Sammy Finkelman (2b1acb)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6160 secs.