Patterico's Pontifications

1/15/2015

No to Mitt Romney

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:31 am



Some of you think Mitt Romney was a wonderful candidate. He was certainly better than Barack Obama. He would certainly be better than Hillary Clinton. I voted for him before and (for what it’s worth, which ain’t much) I would vote for him again in a general election.

But there is absolutely no reason to favor this guy in a primary.

Screen Shot 2015-01-15 at 7.20.36 AM

Conservative principles? Mitt Romney employed Jonathan Gruber before Barack Obama did. ObamaCare was directly based on RomneyCare. Romney thinks we should raise the minimum wage. He is not for the free market and he is not solid on anything I care about.

Managerial experience? I think “managing” things is overrated for a President anyway. I’d much rather have someone with his head screwed on straight, who is intent on making the government smaller, so that you don’t need to have a “manager” in the Oval Office.

Electability? The vaunted manager had an inexcusably crappy get out the vote campaign. What makes you think it would be any different the third time around?

No. Enough. A loser is a loser.

Why am I here? I came here because Mitch and Murray asked me to. They asked me for a favor. I said: “The real favor: follow my advice and fire your [expletive deleted] because a loser is a loser.”

249 Responses to “No to Mitt Romney”

  1. You know what it takes to succeed in politics? It takes brass balls to succeed in politics.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  2. i wouldn’t bestir myself to vote for this romney person

    the bar for bestirring myself to vote gets higher and higher the more obvious it becomes that our sad pitiful little country is a lost cause

    voting isn’t the same as stopping off for some tasty chik-fil-a chicken biscuits you know

    it’s much less fulfilling

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  3. Romney is too squishy for conservatives, and too non-squishy for liberals. Moreover, both sides deem him as a toady of greedy Wall Street. Simply put, the worst of both (or all) worlds.

    Mark (c160ec)

  4. i held my nose in 2012, but never again.

    not for him, or any other “lesser of two evils”… the GOPe can keep it’s “electable” RINO candidates like #CashAndCarry, Mittens, Jeb, Chrissy Creme and all the rest of them.

    if we’re gonna hit the wall, i wanna be going nice and fast, so it’s over quickly. this slow motion train wreck of a collapse is going to kill more people than the other options.

    redc1c4 (cf3b04)

  5. rush limbaugh had an absurdly passionate romneygasm on the radio the day after romney lost

    i doubt he’d have indulged himself so obscenely if he’d actually thought this loser would run again

    but you know I wonder

    but I think a lot of what’s informing Romney’s decision-makings is highly insubstantial stuff

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  6. Mittens needs to find a new hobby: running for offices he doesn’t really want is a stupid way to go through life, and it’s bad for the rest of us as well…

    maybe he should take a year or two off for some intensive therapy?

    redc1c4 (cf3b04)

  7. if he helps nullify jebbie jiggles then i’ve got no real problem looking at his dopey face for a lil while

    huckabee on the other hand is hard to look at because he’s stupid and ugly

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  8. Patterico–

    Romney was governor when the super-majority Dem legislature announced their intention to pass state health care. You make it sound like his idea. In fact he did what a governor should do, and made a workable plan out of a mish-mash, then vetoed provisions the legislature tacked on.

    In 2009 there were serious problems with private health insurance in the US, and there needed to be some reform, particularly with the exclusion of pre-exititng conditions which largely hit middle-aged people. Even the GOP had reform plans. Sadly, the 60% Dem majorities were given carte blanche by Presidnet Empty-chair and the produced a complete travesty. To say they based it on Romney’s plan is at least three Pinocchios.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  9. He went into a prevent defense, which got him beat by Obama.

    AZ Bob (34bb80)

  10. If Mr Romney wins the nomination, I will vote for him in he general election; there’s no other choice. I won’t be voting for him in the primary, but Pennsylvania’s primary occurs too late in the selection process (April 26th) to have any impact.

    My guess is that he won’t be the nominee.

    The realistic Dana (f6a568)

  11. I am getting fed up with people who would rather lose with the purest guy than win with a compromise.

    If the Democrats win the 2016 election, they will win all the elections for the rest of my lifetime. This election is existential and it really does not matter who the GOP candidate is, so long as he wins.

    I would really like to hear how a fringe firebreather is going to win by getting the fringe voters to the polls while holding the middle. That happens so rarely, and under such unique circumstances (1932, 2008) that it will take more than banner-waving to convince me. More often you get 1964 or 1972.

    As for people who say they won’t vote if X is the nominee, go eff yourself. You are the problem, not the solution. I will vote for anyone, Santorum, Christie, whatever, if they get the GOP nomination, and I will trudge through the snow to do it. Because if the Dems are able to institutionalize their corruption this country is over.

    The reality of a two-party system is that when one party moves to the edge, the other one moves towards the middle. It’s so stable because negative feedback systems like this are the most stable.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  12. I may or may not agree with Dana on Romney — it’s a LONG time until I vote and I have an open mind. But I absolutely agree on voting for the nominee. It’s imperative, and it is shameful that people who say the country is drowning will then say they won’t do anything to help because the life-preserver is the wrong color.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  13. OT: The Swiss National Bank floated the Swiss Franc overnight. It was pegged at 1.20 to the Euro, and it promptly rose to about 1.02 to the Euro. Which is to say, if you wanted to convert Euros to Francs, you got 1.20 Francs yesterday, and just 1.02 today (the rate was as low as .80 Francs per Euro briefly.) The DJI started the day down, but this action has probably convinced a lot of folks that holding Euros may not be such a good idea, and what could be easier than buying some U. S. stocks with your Euros while the exchange rate holds. This of course presumes that the Fed will be more responsible than their European counterpart, but you can sell the stocks just as easily as you bought them. Gold also jumped $34 to $1263 per T-oz. The supply of gold doesn’t depend on the Fed nor the ECB nor the SNB.

    Many economic commentators seemed baffled by this move. But this article seems to give a more balanced view.

    We live in interesting times.

    bobathome (d4306f)

  14. i’ll trudge through the snow with you cause snow is fun especially snow what has lots of bunny tracks in it from the night before

    but i won’t vote for romney I’ll just hang out outside while you vote then we can go get pancakes

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  15. i live in #Failifornia, so it doesn’t mater WHO i vote for in November. there is absolutely no reason for me to disgust myself, and surrender my convictions to the GOPe’s slow rolling destruction of America vice the Demonrat’s hellbent for leather approach to the same goal.

    so, KevinM, you can go eff yourself instead: just because you don’t like reality doesn’t change it into something you’re happier with.
    deal with it

    redc1c4 (a6e73d)

  16. #13, Kevin, it’s one thing to be indifferent about the color of the life preserver, it’s another to keep stoking the boiler as the ship steams blindly thru the fog in ice berg waters.

    bobathome (d4306f)

  17. I am getting fed up at being b@tched at by people claiming some kind of purity test because we don’t think Romney is the best candidate, or electable. How many times must be lose before that silly argument goes away?

    JD (86a5eb)

  18. The supply of gold doesn’t depend on the Fed nor the ECB nor the SNB.

    yeah, but if you do not have physical possession of the gold in question, and have verified that it really is gold, you may not be invested in anything but phlogiston.

    redc1c4 (a6e73d)

  19. How many times must be lose before that silly argument goes away?

    well, when you nominate Mittens in 2016, and he throws that election too, will you be willing to admit you have a problem?

    because, if you won’t admit you have a problem, there’s nothing we can do to help you.

    redc1c4 (a6e73d)

  20. To redc1c4 and happyfeet: Remember this time if a squishy moderate Republican wins we hold Congress too. So get you butts out there to vote regardless or the results are your fault! Even with a Romney the R’s in Congress will make him more responsive.

    Hoagie (4dfb34)

  21. “It is shameful that people who say the country is drowning will then say they won’t do anything to help because the life-preserver is the wrong color.

    – Kevin M

    If we are structurally coerced into voting for people who don’t represent our actual views, the country – the political system, that is – SHOULD drown. F*ck it. If our political system has gained self-awareness and an appetite for citizens, we should be trying to kill it as actively as possible.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  22. And just so you know I’m for Scott Walker at this point. But any Republican President teamed up with any Republican Congress is A-OK in my book.

    Hoagie (4dfb34)

  23. As a registered Independent in Florida, I don’t get a vote in the Primary elections. However, In the general election I vote for the GOP presidential nominee, the GOP candidates for Congress, and for the most conservative candidates who can win in all the down-ticket races. Yeah, sure, sometimes it turns my stomach – think John McCain here – but even McVain is overwhelmingly to be preferred over any Democrat since JFK (and I was too young to vote in November 1959).

    When I see Mitt Romney I see a man who didn’t have the courage to call Obama out during the televised debate, he could have killed two birds at the same time, calling Obama a coward and a liar in front of a national audience, and rubbing Candy Crawley’s nose in her duplicity at the same time. Romney stood on the brink of greatness, he had bully pulpit, the right tool in his hands, his opponents had only a thin tissue of lies for defense, and Romney went wobbly, he didn’t have the guts to pull the trigger. And don’t forget RomneyCare was the basis for ObamaCare.

    Jeb Bush is Mr Amnesty. If you liked W’s brand of Compassionate Conservatism, you can vote for a heck of a lot more of it, a belly full of it, and for citizenship for illegal aliens at the same time. Hell’s bells, throw in Obama’s tax disguises and his obsessive/compulsive borrowing and spending too. Now, Jeb Bush isn’t just another shrub, he’s a chip off the old block.

    I’ll skip the obligatory denunciation of the Jersey Pumpkin, he’s already disqualified himself too many times to be taken as anything but a fat fool. It’s too bad, he had real possibilities, but his apatite for the limelight, his penchant for retaliation, and his obsessive sucking up to Obama revealed character flaws sufficient to keep him out of national politics. He’s hit the glass ceiling.

    I could go on, but suffice to say that in spite of the above that I’d vote for any of them (and gladly so, and for any other GOP nominee) before I’d disgrace the nation with a vote for any Democrat.

    ropelight (f47ba2)

  24. 11. I am fed up with morons that are deaf and blind but mercilessly loquacious.

    I am not obligated to buy your crap sandwich because someone is selling one tainted with arsenic, mercury, potassium cyanide and Red Dye 40.

    DNF (846224)

  25. Mr. Hoagie I will tell you what i believe in my heart

    in my heart i believe divided government is preferable to an R government led by recycled trash like Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush

    any idiot can do failure management

    but what Romneycare Romney or an amnesty whore like jebbie jiggles get through Congress is very likely going to be worse for America than the crap Hillary Clinton and her historic old lady boobies *can’t* get through Congress

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  26. happyfeet, you do have a point. I too enjoy the divided government scenario. Always have. But my hope is ( just a hope mind you ) is that an R Congress can push the pres in the “right” direction.

    Hoagie (4dfb34)

  27. Good man. Successful business man. Reluctant political warrior. Terrible candidate. Bored retiree who needs more satisfying things to do with himself. Try philanthropy instead of trying to control the collection and redistribution of taxpayer funds to favored parties.

    crazy (cde091)

  28. It’s primary season and this is the time conservatives are supposed to disagree as we sort out who should be the GOP’s Presidential nominee (or the nominee of the Libertarian Party or whatever Party you like). Debate and disagreement may make some people unhappy but I think it does more good than harm. And even if I’m wrong about it doing no harm, this is what conservatives do. Let’s worry about trying to make up and find common ground later, and focus on screening the candidates now.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  29. Support Romney or don’t. Just keeping your effing eyes on the prize, your heads out of your asses and – fer Chrissakes – REMEMBER WHO AND WHAT THE ENEMY IS.

    Colonel Haiku (b5e7fd)

  30. Divided government can be good from an ideological standpoint, but what we have now is a divided government that is united on crony capitalism. That’s what makes it so dangerous, especially for the middle class.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  31. That’s not a divided government, DRJ.

    I do get weary of the “I’ll sit out this election” stuff. But lots of vocal people disagree. Fine.

    I keep thinking about President Warren. And then I will hear the silliness about how “my vote didn’t matter.” Sheesh.

    Me? I think Scott Walker would be a great choice. But oppo research is going full time on these folks, and all the Left needs to do is listen to folks on the right attack various candidates.

    I’ve said for a long time: if it makes Axelrod smile, it’s not good.

    But to each their own. Rather than focus on who is bad, I sure do wish I would hear about who is good, and why. Because that might be constructive, to my view.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  32. If Cruz or Paul win, I hope moderates will vote for them with the same loyalty they want conservatives to show for Romney and Bush.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  33. Good man. Successful business man. Reluctant political warrior. Terrible candidate. Bored retiree who needs more satisfying things to do with himself. Try philanthropy instead of trying to control the collection and redistribution of taxpayer funds to favored parties.
    crazy (cde091) — 1/15/2015 @ 8:48 am

    I agree. I’ll add: Old man, with the deficiencies of testosterone and stamina that afflict old men. We need a wartime capo, not a Mustache Pete.

    nk (dbc370)

  34. I would vote for him, only as the lesser of two evils.

    Unless he admits his mistake in holding his punches in that third debate, he is not candidate material. If he can’t debate the first black candidate, he won’t be able to debate the first woman.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  35. I am getting fed up at being b@tched at by people “claiming some kind of purity test because we don’t think Romney is the best candidate, or electable.”

    JD – I’m getting tired of the Romney bashing by people who couldn’t seem to find a better candidate who could get enough votes to convince people to vote for them instead of Romney. You can’t change history. Get over it.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  36. Chicken or egg?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  37. redc1c4 wrote:

    well, when you nominate Mittens in 2016, and he throws that election too, will you be willing to admit you have a problem?

    Part of the problem with that statement is that “you” is plural: regardless of whom we nominate, he will be someone who has done something really radical like campaign for and win the votes of the Republican primary voters.

    In 2012, Governor Romney won a majority of all of the votes cast in the various Republican primaries; the actual voters preferred him by more than two-to-one over the candidate who received the second-largest number of votes.

    I don’t have much patience for claims that the “establishment Republicans” are somehow going to torpedo the great majority of conservatives; the man who wins will be the man who wins it at the polling places, and if he is an “establishment” type, then that means that the actual Republican voters preferred an establishment type.

    The Republican Dana (f6a568)

  38. Woulda, coulda, shoulda

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  39. BLOW ME!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  40. DRJ wrote:

    If Cruz or Paul win, I hope moderates will vote for them with the same loyalty they want conservatives to show for Romney and Bush.

    Exactly right!

    The Republican Dana (f6a568)

  41. Romney, strong ruthless Republican killer, a wimp when it comes to, well you already know the rest… Lets run Romney again, maybe he can take out another set of Conservative candidates. For crying out loud, he doesn’t want to be President. This is nothing more than a money grab. Pay the asshole off and put him on the sidelines as an attack puppy. And back a Conservative. Moveing on.

    TheHat (58d08b)

  42. Again, the solution is to champion and help support who you like, not spend a great deal of time dissing who you don’t like. I suspect it is some hardwired neurological thing in almost all of us to obsess about the negative.

    I will not sit out elections. I will not use excuses. Too many people risked their lives or died for me to make light of the franchise, no matter how clownish an election becomes. I will vote for the least-statist candidate on the ticket. I always have. The only exception is during third party challenges (Perot), with people running who don’t show stability.

    I think Romney is a nice man, especially compared to the fellow who won. I watched the Left tear the man apart as a person, along with some help on the right.

    So I wish there was a way to get the people who are fired up about hating (fill in the blank) to start explaining who they do like as a candidate, and why. That’s not a bad thing, and I think it positive.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  43. 24.

    I am not obligated to buy your crap sandwich because someone is selling one tainted with arsenic, mercury, potassium cyanide and Red Dye 40.

    The question isn’t what you’ll choose to eat or not eat on election day. The question is what will be crammed down your throat after January 20, 2017.

    Walter Cronanty (f48cd5)

  44. Mr feet wrote:

    but what Romneycare Romney or an amnesty whore like jebbie jiggles get through Congress is very likely going to be worse for America than the crap Hillary Clinton and her historic old lady boobies *can’t* get through Congress

    Judicial nominations. “Nuff said.

    The coldly realistic Dana (f6a568)

  45. And for good or for ill, the personal matters on the Right. The media has made sure it doesn’t matter on the Left. Those are just the rules now due to the Clerisy. I don’t like those rules, but there you are.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  46. Daley – how many times does he have to lose until the electability mantra goes buh-bye? I voted for him, I enthusiastically, so while I understand you are butthurt that he lost, again, why is he the right choice this time?

    JD (86a5eb)

  47. JD, who do you like for the candidate, and why? I really do care about your thoughts on this.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  48. If Cruz or Paul win, I hope moderates will vote for them with the same loyalty they want conservatives to show for Romney and Bush.

    Loyalty demands only work in one direction.

    JD (86a5eb)

  49. Whomever we nominate, there are going to be some Republicans pissed off at our choice.

    The coldly realistic Dana (f6a568)

  50. Simon – Walker and/or Cruz

    JD (86a5eb)

  51. Multinamed Dana, I just wish the Left had the same philosophy.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  52. Clerisy is my word for the day, Simon. Thank you.

    Do you already know “pathognomonic”? It was yesterday’s.

    nk (dbc370)

  53. JD, I think Walker is a great choice. There will be horrific attacks on him because (silly) his lack of a college degree—despite all the boneheaded things we have heard from people with graduate degrees in office. He has a proven track record of reducing government. Serious and sober.

    He will drive the Left nuts. I don’t know how he is in debates, but he seems solid enough in interviews.

    I like the one fellow (can’t find him right now) who described Walker is mild mannered and quiet…and seated upon a throne made of the skulls of his enemies.

    Cruz also drives the Left nuts. This may be a good thing. He is a fabulous debater. I don’t know if he if fully radioactive courtesy of the media, but the best solution is to go out and be witty on talk shows, etc. And I have seen him do that.

    I hate how “bumper sticker”-y our culture has become. But it is. People just spout boilerplate during election season.

    I don’t like being enthusiastic about a candidate—cults of personality and such—but I agree with you. Fingers crossed.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  54. A loser is a loser? Pathetic talk often heard from losers. The all-or-nothing attitude? Quite prevalent among losers as well.

    I’m no Mittens fan so it pains me to defend him…Actually, I’m not going to defend him. I’m opposing the attitude behind the criticism…

    The problem, dear Brutus, lies not in our politicians but in ourselves. The country is headed in the wrong direction not because crappy politicians get elected, but because the people like these crappy politicians. A democratic/republic society cannot be changed from the top down. The top is a reflection on what the people want. Actually, no society really changes top-down. The more the top pressures the people, the more the people fail because they have no buy-in on the plan. Such is why free societies work better than the alternatives. So-called conservatives should understand this but the refrain I see on damn near every blog and such is this hunger for power to change the people from above via politics.

    WTP (bb50a1)

  55. “ObamaCare was directly based on RomneyCare.”

    I am so tired of this ! Kevin M had most of it right.

    The Massachusetts legislature is 80% D. They wanted to do something and Romney approved of the (then) AEI proposal for individual mandate based on the theory (since disproved) that it would help the load on ERs. The bill was passed with an employer mandate which Romney vetoed. It was passed over his veto and Deval Patrick added a bunch of other objectionable ideas.

    The individual mandate was a popular concept for a while but Mass. proved that it does NOT reduce ER use.

    If anybody wants to do an individual mandate it should be for catastrophic coverage which might do some good for trauma centers. It would also be cheap if it was only for catastrophic care.

    Mike K (d85405)

  56. “Daley – how many times does he have to lose until the electability mantra goes buh-bye?”

    JD – Who is chanting an electability mantra? That is your straw man. What I remember in 2012 is the anybody but Mitt effort. Was that about electability? I want Republicans to win the presidency and would support the candidate I like best who gives them the best chance in the primary and then the ultimate nominee. This bibble babble you are speaking makes no sense to me.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  57. nk, let me just say again I would like few things more than the chance to sit and chat with you a couple of times a month over a cup of coffee or bit of ouzo. I enjoy your broad interests and diverse viewpoints. Truly.

    I first read about this idea of the “New Clerisy” here:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2013/01/18/meet-the-emerging-power-class-that-will-ride-high-in-obamas-second-term/

    You have to wade through some bibble babble to get there, but it is worth your time. The media, academicians, and the like…they know what is best for everyone!

    Brrrr.

    As for pathognomonic, I have used the word in a class I teach from time to time. But it applies to society these days, too.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  58. “Daley – how many times does he have to lose until the electability mantra goes buh-bye?”

    JD – I think the better question is how many times to we have to relitigate the 2012 election as so many are doing on this thread before it goes by. I am learning so much by the startling new insights being offered that I can’t breathe!

    Patterico’s post was about Romney running in 2016, not 2012, which involves gaming out who else may or may not run and whether voters are tired of Romney, not a mircrodissection of the 2012 election.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  59. Mr. Feets – When referring to Mitt Romney I suggest you use the words “Those People” instead, it will help clarify your meaning.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  60. Candy Crowley could have won the nomination against team rino’s Romney.

    mg (31009b)

  61. “I am so tired of this ! Kevin M had most of it right.”

    Mike K – Absolutely right, but people wanted a simple talking point. They just took one created by Democrats and didn’t realize it was total crap.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  62. Romneycare Romney is plenty clear I think

    he createred obamacare!

    e and also gads

    let’s work together to keep this bozo out of the white house

    if you bring the soup I’ll bring the oyster crackers

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  63. “Candy Crowley could have won the nomination against team rino’s Romney.”

    mg – She didn’t run in any primaries so there is nothing to support your hypothetical. Thanks for playing.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  64. Candy Crowley could win against boooosh or the breast feeding jersey pumpkin.

    mg (31009b)

  65. It’s about the furthest thing from a “microdissection” to indicate that one is not enthused with a particular candidate.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  66. I like Romney and will vote for him but a younger candidate is fine if he looks electable. The problems with Cruz and Paul are that they are first term Senators. Both are fine talking but so was Obama.

    The complaint about Romney not “confronting” Obama in the debate and the Candy Crowley incident is that these are very unusual events. Jimmy Carter did something like this in 1980 but Reagan responded with “There you go again.” There is a possibility that a candidate can be too aggressive, as Hillary’s opponent in the New York Senate debate looked.

    Reagan was a very skilled communicator. Few are going to be as good at it and also have serious policy ideas.

    Mike K (d85405)

  67. i live in #Failifornia, so it doesn’t mater WHO i vote for in November. there is absolutely no reason for me to disgust myself,

    So do I, and yet I vote for the nominee. Rationalization is no help to me, but if it comforts you, go with it.

    But break it down: Rational Lies.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  68. “Absolutely right, but people wanted a simple talking point.”

    I blame Romney for not doing a better job refuting this. Policy is complicated but he could have pointed out the veto.

    Mike K (d85405)

  69. I was too young to vote in November 1959

    If you had, you would have been a year early anyway.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  70. I am not obligated to buy your crap sandwich because someone is selling one tainted with arsenic, mercury, potassium cyanide and Red Dye 40.

    Buy it or not, you ARE going to eat one or the other.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  71. Daley, Kevin and Mike K… Keep telling it like it is. In all probability, Romney won’t be the candidate, so let’s spend our time perusing the field and rank who we can personally support. We don’t want Clinton or Warren to dance in while bodies are still floating in bloody water, no?

    Colonel Haiku (b5e7fd)

  72. If Cruz or Paul win, I hope moderates will vote for them with the same loyalty they want conservatives to show for Romney and Bush.

    I am not a moderate, I’m a small-government fiscal-conservative social-Libertarian guy who has come to understand pragmatism and the need to get what you can rather than hold out for what you can’t.

    For example I vote for social conservative Republicans even though I support the rights of gays to marry and they don’t. I don’t GET everything my way.

    Romney was not my guy in 2012, but I supported him once he was the nominee. And I’ll support whoever it is this time. Again, it seems some people just DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT “PARTY” MEANS, or what the benefits of standing together are.

    One thing is sure, though, the soonest anyone gets to vote on this is a year from now, and it is really pretty sad to see intelligent people closing their minds.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  73. Like Rush once said: “Conservatism didn’t lose. It just wasn’t on the ticket.” He said it in 2008 but it applies in 2012 and I’m assuming it will in 2016 as well. If you’re a conservative, you’ve got no party representing you in DC.

    CrustyB (69f730)

  74. Cruz also drives the Left nuts. This may be a good thing. He is a fabulous debater. I don’t know if he if fully radioactive courtesy of the media, but the best solution is to go out and be witty on talk shows, etc. And I have seen him do that.

    He drives me nuts, too, but for different reasons. I have worked in organizations with people-on-a-mission who brooked no fools (people not sufficiently on the same mission) and I gotta tell you they were their own side’s worst enemy. Cruz comes off like that.

    Maybe it’s just the media spin and he’s really not like that at all, but if he cannot overcome that image he has no hope of winning.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  75. Crusty–

    We have two parties: a center-left party currently pulled far left and a center-right party currently smack dab center-right. They move, but they don’t move much and win. Reagan and Obama are the two parties’ recent extremes. Goldwater and McGovern are examples of “too far.”

    If you keep thinking the GOP is a Conservative Party you will continue to be disappointed. Almost always it is nudge-left or nudge-right.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  76. I truly think one of the top requirements for a GOP candidate is the ability of the person and family to handle character assassination. Walker has had as much of that as anyone, except Palin.

    Yes, many will talk about how dumb can you get to elect someone who doesn’t even have a bachelor’s degree, and a whole bunch of other people will say about time, look what the eggheads have wrought, as long as he’s not rich, a lawyer, or both.

    Walker/Jindal, flyover rules!!

    The one thing that would make me enthusiastic about Romney would be if he came out of the gate swinging at the Dems, Obama, and the media. He has the street cred to say “I told you so” over a whole bunch of issues. And he doesn’t have to do it meanly, just factually and firmly and repeatedly.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  77. Kevin M, you and I see the world in a similar way. I do worry about “firebrands.” I remember how Reagan won, and how the Left seemed poleaxed.

    We need to get back to a Big Tent and remember Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment.

    Being pleasant but firm works. Bobby Jindal just gave a heck of a speech, by the way.

    I wish Walker had a JD and had served two terms as governor. I like what he says, very much.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  78. I keep hoping Scott Walker is secretly finishing up his degree behind the scenes (or has already done so) and will post his diploma online when the left heats up their attack on him for his “lack” of educational credentials. It would be terribly funny if he stuck it to them and earned a degree in Gender Studies or something equally worthless, but he’d probably be better served with a degree in Economics or International Relations.

    elissa (749b7f)

  79. Isn’t it also closing your mind to tell people they have to vote before we’ve even had a primary?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  80. I don’t think conservatives or blue-collar independents will care whether Walker has a degree. Moderates and elites might, but they’re going to prefer Romney, Bush and Christie. My concern is that moderates will stay home if one of them isn’t the nominee.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  81. But I’ll cross that bridge if we get to it. It’s much more satisfying to me to look at all the interesting choices this time around.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  82. I keep hoping Scott Walker is secretly finishing up his degree behind the scenes (or has already done so) and will post his diploma online when the left heats up their attack on him for his “lack” of educational credentials. It would be terribly funny if he stuck it to them and earned a degree in Gender Studies or something equally worthless, but he’d probably be better served with a degree in Economics or International Relations.

    I’d love it all the more if he decided against getting a degree and explained it by saying “I want to pose this question to my Democrat friends: George W. Bush has two degrees, a bachelor’s and a master’s. Harry Truman never received a college degree. In your minds, which of the two was the better President?”

    JVW (05e1e2)

  83. Here’s my choices, in order:

    Cruz
    Walker
    Rubio
    Jindal – I like him more than Rubio, but Rubio is a better communicator
    Rand Paul
    Rick Perry
    Mitt Romney
    Chris Christie
    Paul Ryan
    John Kasich
    Jeb Bush
    Allan West
    Ben Carson
    Mike Huckabee

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  84. Romney for Secretary of State!
    Ted Cruz for Secretary of Defense!
    Jeb Bush for Secretary of Commerce!
    Chris Christie for Secretary of the Interior!
    Rand Paul for Postmaster General!

    nk (dbc370)

  85. Thanks, DRJ. I was wondering whom to pick for Walker’s VP: Rick Perry!

    nk (dbc370)

  86. Walker for President
    Susanna Martinez for Vice-President
    Romney for Secretary of the Treasury
    Carson for Surgeon General
    Christie for Secretary of Labor (watch the heads explode!)
    the token Democrat should be Michelle Rhee for Secretary of Education, with a pledge to close that department by 2020

    JVW (05e1e2)

  87. nk,

    I think Perry would be a loyal VP who supports conservative issues. Cruz is smarter about what conservatism means and why it works, but I know people think having executive experience is important. I think having smart support people is more important, as Reagan had, if the goal is implementing your vision — and I think Cruz would be able to put together a better team than Perry. I don’t know about Rubio, Jindal, or Paul, and I suspect Romney, Bush and Christie would pick teams that are too bipartisan for my tastes.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  88. So get you butts out there to vote regardless or the results are your fault!

    ima type this r__e__a__l slow so it has time to sink in:

    i live in the People’s Republic of #Failifornia: it does NOT matter who runs under the Republican flag here because they will NOT win in November. serious conservative or the most electable RINO squish you can find, the Leftard/Free 5hit Army/Illegal Alien bloc will vote for whomever the Demonrats nominate, and that’s all that matters.

    if i lived in a swing state, where it theoretically might make a difference, i’d hold my nose for the greater good, but i have the luxury of being able to stand on my principles here. if you want me to make a futile gesture on your behalf, make it worth my time.

    the national vote totals don’t mean squat, only the Electoral College votes do, and you’re not getting any from here. HTH.

    redc1c4 (4db2c8)

  89. We all know good people who are smart, successful, and happy who have done very very well without a degree. I think having a degree (in most subjects) and undertaking the time, discipline and commitment to achieve it is worthwhile, though. I think the degree is often useful in completely unexpected ways as one goes through life and meets various challenges. I especially think it benefits any president of the United States in this day and age who is operating on the world stage, which requires him or her to have the respect of other leaders, to have one. I’m not sure that guessing whether “elite”, “moderate”, “blue collar”, or “conservative” voters care whether Walker has a degree or not is the best measurement.

    elissa (749b7f)

  90. I like this discussion! So much better than all the weird “Mittens” negativity and fruitless tail-chasing. Thank you.

    Elissa, I hope that you are right and Walker did finish his degree. If so, he should post his transcript. Because you know who won’t. I wonder why? Hee hee.

    I still can’t get that image out of my head:

    “Does Walker sizzle? Not exactly. Is he a particularly charismatic speaker? No, he isn’t,” writes Cromwell. “But does he sit upon a throne made of the skulls of his enemies? Yes, yes he does. The November 4 election proved that in a definitive fashion.”

    http://host.madison.com/news/local/writers/steven_elbow/scott-walker-sits-on-a-throne-made-of-the-skulls/article_05b464c4-85de-55d9-afc3-e9c0b2629e77.html

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  91. So you’re saying it doesn’t matter if Walker has a degree or it does?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  92. “Susanna Martinez for Vice-President.”

    – JVW

    Whatever gets her out of NM is fine with me.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  93. Also, I’m pretty sure that guessing what various demographic groups think and how they will respond is a big part of modern politics.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  94. Texas will take Susanna, plus SE New Mexico. They’re a better fit, don’t you think?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  95. Yeah, probably. Trade us El Paso and you’ve got a deal.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  96. yeah…wouldn’t want to vote for the guy who was RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING. that would be crazy.

    el polacko (4ab512)

  97. We get Hobbs, Jal, Artesia, Eunice. You can keep the Caverns, the mountains, the North and the reservations. We’ll flip for Roswell.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  98. El Paso is already yours, so I’d gladly make it official.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  99. Colonel Haiku – Thanks, but instead of just sharp shooting or just bitching, I think some of our more persistently hemorroidal commentators should just petition the government for a redo of the 2012 election since they seem so fixated on it and mg can add Candy Crowley to the ticket.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  100. We keep Alamogordo, though.e

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  101. And Ruidoso and Cloudcroft. I love all those towns but they need to stay in New Mexico so I have an excuse to visit your beautiful State.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  102. Nobody cares if Putin has a degree or not. Or the leader of any other country, for that matter. Thatcher’s degrees in chemistry did her a disservice, she assumed the Global warming people were objective and thoughtful scientists.

    No matter what a person has a degree in, it would be very unusual if he/she doesn’t have advisors more accomplished in the field (except President Obama, of course). I am sure I could get a PhD in a number of fields (already have a MD) easier than be the Milwaukee Co. Executive or the Gov. of Wisconsin.

    In many ways, a college education reveals one can be goal oriented, delay gratification, work hard, (all relatively…), and has a relative amount of intelligent.
    It says little about character or wisdom or common sense.

    Did anyone suggest to Gates he needed to go back and get his Computer Science degree?

    It would be used against him for not having it, it can be used for him among many. The elites most likely to hold it against him will not vote for a half-conservative repub anyway.
    I do not know how it would turn out

    He has more executive experience than Obama had, more foreign affairs experience than Obama (Madison), more warfare experience (state workers unions), the only thing Obama has over him is a degree from Columbia and a JD from Harvard, how are those helping him be a good president?

    Besides, I think Jindal is a well educated policy wonk for VP.

    I may learn more things about Walker that bother me, but not having a degree is not one of them.

    You know what (lowers voices and whispers) his dad was a pastor, one of those.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  103. DRJ–I can see now that my comment about the 4 Republican demographic boxes you listed was not sufficiently clear. Sorry. My point was supposed to be that there are significant other additional general election voter types to consider pre -election, and world opinion post- election. IOW, I thought the demographics listed were too narrow in scope to be completely useful. No- His lack of a college degree would not stop me from voting for Walker, but I’d like it a lot better if Walker got one before 2016 if he’s planning to run for the presidency. I think that would give added heft to the optics of his seriousness about seeking the presidency as well as burnishing his other obvious qualifications for the presidency.

    elissa (749b7f)

  104. I think what matters on the world stage is whether you can be trusted to do what you say you will do, or at least trusted to do what you are told behind the scenes.

    Of course, like with George W., it would probably take 2 years and one international crisis before the rest of the world can get their minds around a US leader who actually says what he means and does what he says.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  105. Yes, Daley. Saying I don’t want Romney in 2016 is bibble babble microaggression microdissection of 2012. You are so wise.

    JD (995bda)

  106. 83. I don’t have a problem with beauty contests, per se(although the respective positions of Christie and West in this one boggles, having no minimum qualification standard is unacceptable.

    The eminently reasonable simply ignore those outside the clique and proceed on their merry way.

    The Thugs must know aforehand they’ve lost choosing as they will.

    DNF (b86549)

  107. “And Ruidoso and Cloudcroft. I love all those towns but they need to stay in New Mexico so I have an excuse to visit your beautiful State.”

    – DRJ

    Agreed, both because I want you to keep visiting and because Ruidoso and Cloudcroft are far more “central NM” than “eastern NM.”

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  108. I say he should do his job as governor very well and not spend time getting a degree.
    If he wants to attend/take part in various conferences with a lot of academics that sounds great.

    I think a full time job as governor and having a family is a good reason not to take night classes, even if on a computer.
    Have him tell the Chancellor of the UW system to give him an honorary PhD in Political Science,
    or how about an honorary PhD in business Admin with a specialty of labor relations.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  109. Ok, Elissa, but I wasn’t personalizing this. Maybe you won’t hold it against Walker but don’t you think some demographic groups will? I think the ones I mentioned might, but I don’t think it matters in the primary because they won’t be Walker voters anyway. I see his voters as Midwestern conservatives and blue-collar independents and Reagan Democrats.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  110. Mr Jester wrote:

    Multinamed Dana, I just wish the Left had the same philosophy.

    If they had the same philosophy, they wouldn’t be on the left. If they understood economics, they wouldn’t be liberals. If they thought instead of emoted, they wouldn’t be Democrats.

    The obvious Dana (f6a568)

  111. Absolutely, Leviticus. Even Roswell is borderline. Once you get past the desert and into the foothills is probably the dividing line, both geographically and ideologically — suggesting again how important geography is. By the way, I ordered the Stegner book. Thanks for the suggestion

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  112. The last President without a college degree? Harry Truman, who didn’t do too badly.

    The historian Dana (f6a568)

  113. Multinamed Dana, I have seen freaking Joe Biden for President bumper stickers! Joe Biden! So this tells me that the hive mind gets behind a candidate, no matter what.

    I keep hoping that the Democrats will fracture into Clinton versus Warren factions—with folks who don’t get their way sitting out the election. Except that doesn’t appear to happen.

    Hmmm.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  114. He’s a lifeydoodle who goes to a solidly evangelical church.
    I guess they’ve been too busy trying to hit him over unions and an open ended John Doe unfounded ethics investigation to notice.
    That won’t last long.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  115. Our Philadelphia physician wrote:

    the only thing Obama has over him is a degree from Columbia and a JD from Harvard, how are those helping him be a good president?

    I’d argue that they are helping to make him a bad President.

    The snarky Dana (f6a568)

  116. Hey, once a totally unqualified member of the New Party who is also a friend of domestic terrorists who attends a black separatist church gets elected and reelected for president,
    I refuse to write anyone off. (re Biden)

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  117. Not having a college degree would hurt Walker with Texas liberals — but they won’t vote for him anyway — and probably with Dallas conservatives, my State’s Republican establishment/elites. I don’t think anyone else would care. Some might even Ike it, because it suggests he is’t pretentious and/or has succeeded because of common sense and personal drive. I’m curious how others evaluate this in their regions.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  118. Bingo, your snarkiness!!

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  119. Well, part of a degree from Columbia (he transferred). And we never did see those transcripts.

    Hey, I’m curious. Who else has hidden transcripts? I mean, we got to hear ALLL about GWB and Al Gore’s, John Kerry, etc.

    Funny about that.

    Because if the Preezie has the record I suspect, it might help Walker out.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  120. Roswell is a biker town but there’s a cool nazi cross and you can see a dispirited bald eagle in a cage for free

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  121. The problem with Repugnants is they will not fight, too civilized.

    By refusing them their wont we force the sandwich down their throat. Pity those who refuse to swallow.

    DNF (b86549)

  122. Mr. Walker is cool i’d break him off a piece of my kit kat bar

    but not you Mitt Romney

    no way in hell

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  123. Tell us who you like, DNF. It’s fun. Join in!

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  124. == but don’t you think some demographic groups will?==

    I think it’s possible that independent and crossover voters that are needed for an R win in the Nov. 2016 general might factor in Walker’s lack of a degree should he be our candidate. (And the other side will make that an earth shattering narrative.) That’s why I want him to get cracking!!! :)

    I believe Walker has broad appeal within the various wings and branches and constituencies of the R party and that most Rs would happily and proudly cast a vote for him should he be our nominee.

    elissa (749b7f)

  125. “Absolutely, Leviticus. Even Roswell is borderline. Once you get past the desert and into the foothills is probably the dividing line, both geographically and ideologically — suggesting again how important geography is. By the way, I ordered the Stegner book. Thanks for the suggestion.”

    – DRJ

    That’s the dividing line I was thinking of as well. It really does speak to the power of terrain/geography on political culture -for example, the self-sufficiency required for rural living lending itself to conservativism. I’m fascinated by political geography.

    Glad you’re gonna check out the book! I’ve been meaning to finish it myself, and this gives me the impetus.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  126. We get Hobbs, Jal, Artesia, Eunice. You can keep the Caverns, the mountains, the North and the reservations. We’ll flip for Roswell.

    DRJ, if you are going to give up El Paso then I suggest you demand Las Cruces and Clovis in return, because Clovis where Buddy Holly recorded, so you can run a Buddy Holly Tour Bus straight from the radio station where Buddy got his start to the Norman Petty Studios in Clovis. You should get Las Cruces just because it’s a cool town.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  127. Oh, my, JVW. I didn’t know you are a Buddy Holly fan but you’ve unintentionally insulted my (not to mention Buddy’s) hometown. He’s a Lubbock boy, born and bred. Clovis had nothing to do with Buddy.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  128. I’ m kidding, of course, and Las Cruces is cool. That’s why Leviticus won’t give up Alamogordo. But there is a personality to places like these and I don’t think they fit in Texas — okay, Clovis might, but not the others — as well as they fit New Mexico. If it weren’t for that I’d take all New Mexico, but they are so sensitive about that in NM. Go figure.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  129. i live in the People’s Republic of #Failifornia: it does NOT matter who runs under the Republican flag here because they will NOT win in November. . . .

    if i lived in a swing state, where it theoretically might make a difference, i’d hold my nose for the greater good, but i have the luxury of being able to stand on my principles here. . . .

    the national vote totals don’t mean squat, only the Electoral College votes do, and you’re not getting any from here. HTH.

    I get where you’re coming from, redc1c4, but I think the goal here is to make the Democrat nominee have to defend himself/herself in what are thought to be “safe” Democrat states. In 2004 George W. Bush made John Kerry work to defend states he had to win such as Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota, and that prevented Kerry from spending more time in toss-up states like Florida, Ohio, and Colorado. By contrast, in 2008 Obama forced McCain to spend time trying to hold on to states like North Carolina, South Carolina, George, and Indiana, which should have all been safe Republican states. So the idea of voting for a squishy RINO instead of a rock-ribbed conservative is that the Republican candidate can be competitive in more states and force the Democrat candidate to spend more time shoring up the so-called “safe” Democrat states. That’s why many of us like Walker: we think he can be competitive in traditionally-Democrat states like Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois, and Pennsylvania in a way that a Texan like Cruz or Perry probably can’t.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  130. Oh, my, JVW. I didn’t know you are a Buddy Holly fan but you’ve unintentionally insulted my (not to mention Buddy’s) hometown. He’s a Lubbock boy, born and bred. Clovis had nothing to do with Buddy.

    No, no, read again — I wrote that he recorded in Clovis at Norman Petty’s Studios. I know he’s a Lubbock guy — I visited his grave when I was there a few years back. That’s probably my fault; my comment was a bit muddled in that regard.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  131. Hahaha… vicious Texas colonialism shows its true colors!! Hands off, or we’ll sic a herd of jackalopes on you.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  132. Romney was behind the 8 ball because MassCare took ObamaCare away as an issue.

    Nonetheless he won the first debate ahndily.

    And then….ran like a little nancy who was scared to be called RAYCESS.If he wouldn’t fight for it in 2012, why would 2016 be any different. October 2012 could have been the dumbest month of Presidential campaigning in US history, and we are talking about McGovern/Dukakis levels of incompetence as points of comparison. Difference is those guys couldn’t have won; ROmney lsot a winnable race by running scared.

    PASS. Either be advocate for limited smaller constitutional governance and be ready to battle for it or be gone.

    Might also help if the invade/invite/spend GOP establishment were thrown out in the cold once and for all. Because if they aren’t there is a very good chance the GOP is going the way of the Whigs by 2020. We already have a big spending internationalist party that thinks mass immigration is a great idea. No point voting for Dem Lite when there is already a Dem party.

    Bugg (3a2abd)

  133. Actually I have never been to Clovis, but I want to make the trip. A lot of great Texas artists recorded at the Norman Petty Studios: Buddy, Wink’s native son Roy Orbison, and Littlefield’s own Waylon Jennings, among others. You can still tour the studio by appointment only.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  134. The Philly doc wrote:

    Bingo, your snarkiness!!

    :) I appreciate the title, and shall always answer to Your Snarkiness!

    The appreciative Dana (f6a568)

  135. “I am so tired of this ! Kevin M had most of it right.

    The Massachusetts legislature is 80% D. They wanted to do something and Romney approved of the (then) AEI proposal for individual mandate based on the theory (since disproved) that it would help the load on ERs. The bill was passed with an employer mandate which Romney vetoed. It was passed over his veto and Deval Patrick added a bunch of other objectionable ideas.

    The individual mandate was a popular concept for a while but Mass. proved that it does NOT reduce ER use.”

    So casting the golden idol is an acceptable choice instead of telling said majority of Dems in the state legislature to pound sand and go cast the idol themselves. It’s been a complete Gruberian disaster which he could’ve washed his hands of and had a strong campaign issue. But Romney made the former choice, and there were bad consequences. That speaks of happytalk stupidity. And it’s not leadership.

    Bugg (3a2abd)

  136. Mr Jester wrote:

    Multinamed Dana, I have seen freaking Joe Biden for President bumper stickers! Joe Biden! So this tells me that the hive mind gets behind a candidate, no matter what.

    Hey, at least they’re supporting a white male property owner! :)

    His Snarkiness (f6a568)

  137. Won’t you give the man a chance to even try? This racism of the highest order. Denounce yourself, Pat! Lol!

    The Emperor (36989a)

  138. ““I want to pose this question to my Democrat friends: George W. Bush has two degrees, a bachelor’s and a master’s. Harry Truman never received a college degree. In your minds, which of the two was the better President?”

    Excellent point and one Walker should use.

    Bugg your point is lost on me. There was a time that AEI supported an individual mandate (NOT an employer mandate) so you say that it’s your way or the highway. Maybe you should do some reading about health care economics. You could start here.

    There are, and were, some areas where reform would be helpful. The Democrats were pounding on that issue but had only incompetent ideas. Romney tried to adopt an AEI concept. His mistake, in my opinion, was not to defend his original decision, which could have been explained without too much policy wonkishness. His economic platform was far too detailed and his healthcare platform was not clear at all. McCain actually had an excellent healthcare policy position in 2008.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  139. JVW,

    Heh. I knew you were aware of Lubbock because you wanted a bus tour, and there aren’t many places that are close to Clovis. (Ever been to Tatum?) But as Leviticus alludes to above, we Texans don’t share well and asking us to share credit for our musicians with any other state is unthinkable. Roy Orbison and Waylon, too? What’s next on your list? Cattle drives for Dan Blocker fans from O’Donnell to Oklahoma?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  140. God, I loved Bonanza as a boy. Granted, it was already in re-runs by then. I wanted Lorne Greene as my own dad, and Hoss and Little Joe as my big brothers. Adam I could take or leave.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  141. I’m not sure but I think Petty recorded the McGuire Sisters, too, including a song called Sugaryime. I grew up hearing that song. Are you too young to remember them?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  142. Sugartime. Apparently Auto-correct doesn’t know the McGuire Sisters’ songs.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  143. Sugar in the morning/sugar in the evening/sugar at suppertime.

    Actually they are a bit before my time, but I remember the pretty decent movie that HBO or somebody did several years back about Phyllis McGuire’s romance with mob boss Sam Giancana. John Turturro played Giancana, and Mary Louise Parker (whom I always had a crush on) played Phyllis.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  144. Off topic but I’m down at my mom’s house getting things squared away before an estate sale and came across a copy of the lyrics to “Cat’s in the Cradle” that my Dad had kept put away in a drawer and it brought tears to my eyes. I’d always thought that if a Harry Chapin song ever had an emotional effect on me, I’d be ready to be put down. This may be my last post.

    Colonel Haiku (b5e7fd)

  145. Mike K. –Most historians agree that Harry Truman turned out to be a pretty good “accidental president”. It sounds like a good talking point. But let’s compare apples to apples. He was born in 1884 at a time when even attaining an 8th grade education was not necessarily considered the norm. By the time of his presidency far less than ten percent of American males had completed college so he was hardly an aberration for his time.

    …. adults have limited their education to completion of the 8th grade which was typical in the early part of the century. In 1940, more than half of the U.S. population had completed no more than an eighth grade education. Only 6 percent of males and 4 percent of females had completed 4 years of college. The median years of school attained by the adult population, 25 years old and over, had registered only a scant rise from 8.1 to 8.6 years over a 30 year period from 1910 to 1940.

    http://nces.ed.gov/naal/lit_history.asp

    I don’t think one can reasonably compare the circumstances of Truman’s educational attainment in his time and place to Scott Walker’s in our time. Truman, by the way had supposedly hoped to attend West Point but his poor eyesight prevented that.

    elissa (749b7f)

  146. meanwhile, back here in reality, Mad magazine would like a word with all you Mittens fans…

    redc1c4 (a6e73d)

  147. Hang in there Col!!!!! What you’re doing is hard and emotional, as any of us who have done it know well. On the day of my parents’ estate sale several times I actually grabbed items out of potential buyers’ hands because I realized I was not ready to let those things/memories go yet. Embarrassing -yes. Necessary to do –also yes.

    elissa (749b7f)

  148. Romney didn’t attend West Point either cause he was too busy gallivanting around Paris eating stinky cheeses and surreptitiously smoking gauloises behind the louvre with his best friend pinkie and this german exchange student whose name he says he can’t remember

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  149. Duke blinks, backs off Moose Slime Friday jihad call…

    see new poast on that thread.

    redc1c4 (a6e73d)

  150. 135. …That speaks of happytalk stupidity. And it’s not leadership.

    Bugg (3a2abd) — 1/15/2015 @ 12:41 pm

    The GOP is well stocked with happytalk stupidity. And speaking of “not leadership,” let’s take a peek at Boehner. He typifies the establishment Republican. By definition, because apparently the source of his political power is that he can raise money like nobody else. So the establishment obviously likes what it sees.

    He went on the Tonight Show and shared his ideas about leadership. He said he supported the government shut down because (I’m working from memory, so this may not be an exact quote) is that a leader without followers is just some guy taking a walk by himself.

    That’s exactly what somebody who has no clue about leadership would say. And it explains the problem with Boehner, and whoever else the GOP establishment would pick as a so-called leader, on so many different levels.

    First, he thinks leadership is being at the head of a parade. But the parade was going to happen with or without him. He had no role in producing said parade. A leader, though, gets people to want to follow him. So Boehner thinks going along with the herd is leadership.

    Second, he couldn’t make the case for the government shutdown. Which is natural, because he thought the purpose of the parade he hurried to get in front of was a bad idea. This is why the GOP leadership can’t ever make a convincing case for smaller government. Deep down inside, they don’t want smaller government. The Rovian Republicans insisted that we all believe in the same goals, but we just disagreed on tactics. No, that’s not it. We don’t believe in the same goals. The Rovian Republicans, the establishment GOP, doesn’t share the same goals as conservatives. They just pretend to want the same things to get elected. When the Pelosi and Reid crowd calls them a bunch of meanies who want to take away Christmas and push granny off a cliff merely for putting on a show about trying to even just limit the rate of growth of government, they cave because in their heart of hearts they agree with that sentiment.

    They have never found a hill worth dying on. And the reason for that is that they believe the Democrats have the right to all those hills that they retreat from.

    The establishment GOP said at the time that the appropriations bill wasn’t the way to fight Obamacare. They said the debt limit was where they’d best be able to fight Obamacare. Note that didn’t happen. It’s just that the advantage as far as they were concerned is that excuse would put us barbarians off for a few months. And in that time they could come up with another excuse not to fight something they’re secretly supportive of.

    Obamacare is here to stay. That “repeal and replace” crap was just talk. Like John McCain’s commercials about building “the danged fence.” The real John McCain was calling me a racist for not supporting amnesty in 2007. And the real John McCain has declared on the record that the border fence is a bad idea. But only once he was safely reelected by in large part pretending to want to build the fence.

    The tomorrow when the Republicans say they’ll fight Obamacare will never arrive. Instead they’ll use the time to try to come up with some “conservative case” for keeping it around. Just like they came up with a “conservative case” for gay marriage. And no I don’t want to have discussion about gay marriage. I’m just making the point that given enough time the establishment GOP will come up with a “conservative case” for every liberal idea under the sun.

    Obamacare, gay marriage, amnesty, whatever. It doesn’t matter. The fact that Romney was the establishment pick makes my point. Romneycare wasn’t a bug, it was a feature as far as they’re concerned. Marco Rubio made that plain as day when he was lying his arse of about how the Gang of Eight’s amnesty wasn’t an amnesty. And one of the selling points, he thought, was how illegal immigrants wouldn’t get federal benefits. And among those benefits was Obamacare.

    Nobody who thinks Obamacare is a bad idea would talk about it as if it were something desirable that only citizens and legal residents are qualified to get.

    Illegal immigration? That’s an act of love according to the other frontrunner for the GOP nom.

    Steve57 (be0b5f)

  151. Thanks, elissa. Much mirth also to be had! Ran across this clipping from about ’58 or ’59 that I can use to extort 2 cousins who hung their heads in lipsticked shame because of this… http://t.co/BIE9R1tbCb

    Colonel Haiku (b5e7fd)

  152. 88 – Redcic4
    ditto from taxachusetts

    mg (31009b)

  153. Yes, Scott Walker is the only one who has been through the fire and who has fought it and won.

    As for his lack of college degree, I would just answer the critics with a wink, “Well, look at what troubles the Ivy League has gotten us into!”

    Patricia (5fc097)

  154. They have never found a hill worth dying on. And the reason for that is that they believe the Democrats have the right to all those hills that they retreat from.

    I don’t think that’s entirely fair, Steve57. The fact is that zero Republicans voted for Bill Clinton’s tax-raising first budget, zero Republicans voted for Barack Obama’s stupid stimulus package, and zero Republicans voted for ObamaCare. For all the talk about how all Republicans ever do is sell-out and compromise, I think it’s worth noting that they hung together on these key votes to expand government’s reach rather than playing nice with the Democrats to court the media’s approbation. Even the squishes like the ladies from Maine stayed on our side for this vote, even though they were heavily courted to give these bills the sheen of bipartisanship.

    I think we are pretty unanimous in our belief that the GOP doesn’t stand on principle often enough, but let’s not try to convince ourselves that it never happens.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  155. Arroyo Hondo N.M.
    The countryside, the people, the food and the smell of N.M. green chillies being roasted over an open flame.
    Worth living for.

    mg (31009b)

  156. 153-Patricia
    Thanks.

    mg (31009b)

  157. O.M.G! http://t.co/URflCkcFCC

    Colonel Haiku (b5e7fd)

  158. 157: As Chris Rock says. “A man is only as faithful as his opportunities.”

    Gazzer (c44509)

  159. BTW, is that your original X 19?

    Gazzer (c44509)

  160. Colonel, maybe your dad was doing the old navy trick where you put your lighter and cigarettes in the condom so that when you have to swim to safety you don’t ruin them. I just made that up, but it sounds plausible enough.

    And your dad sounds like a cool dude, may he rest in peace.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  161. I don’t think one can reasonably compare the circumstances of Truman’s educational attainment in his time and place to Scott Walker’s in our time.

    I wasn’t commenting on the substance. I thought it was a good rejoinder to an ignorant leftwing snark.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  162. I don’t think one can reasonably compare the circumstances of Truman’s educational attainment in his time and place to Scott Walker’s in our time.

    I don’t disagree, elissa, but I think the argument could easily be made that a college degree in 1905 was way more useful than a college degree in 1990 (roughly when Walker was at Marquette). Walker could really rile up the higher education establishment if he said something along the lines of, “the reason I never bothered to finish my degree is because I saw so many of my generation receive a degree and then be unable to secure meaningful employment. I already had a good job, so getting a degree just for the sake of having a degree seemed to me to be a waste of my time.”

    JVW (05e1e2)

  163. I didn’t go to college either. I was too busy getting an education.

    Gazzer (c44509)

  164. Nope, Gazzer, an ’81 that I bought 8 yrs ago from a good friend who know show to “enhance” the X

    Colonel Haiku (b5e7fd)

  165. Gotcha!

    Gazzer (c44509)

  166. If one looks at all the de-greed people in D.C. and the condition the country is in, Walker is the obvious choice.
    He has what de-greed people will never have. Common Sense.

    mg (31009b)

  167. Take care, Col.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  168. Colonel, I am sorry, as well.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  169. vietnam war draft dodgers for mitt

    vietnam war draft dodger (852b1b)

  170. Death with dignity in Maryland, now!

    nk (dbc370)

  171. Thoughts and prayers, Col.

    mg (31009b)

  172. Tonight,I am going to show you all just a fraction of the multitude of names Perry has used to try to disguise his hatred.

    JD (995bda)

  173. Thanks, all. Really memory lane with what we’re finding… the condom had an expiration date of Jan. 2008, so dad was much more “active” than any of us knew, lol.

    Colonel Haiku (b5e7fd)

  174. JVW @154, I think I was entirely fair. It’s an ongoing problem. When Eisenhower met Khrushchev, Khrushchev gave him a lecture about the joys of socialism. And Eisenhower later stated it was very hard to argue that Khrushchev was wrong.

    Fast forward to 2009. Bush said he had to let go of his free market principles to save the economy.

    Hello! He didn’t have free market principles. But people like Eisenhower and Bush can’t defend free market capitalism because they believe in government. They have completely adopted the notion that a bigger government doing more is a good thing. Bush had a name for this; “compassionate conservatism.”

    Of course Bush didn’t invent the phrase. He was surrounded by people who believed that wanting more government was the compassionate thing to want. One of his speechwriters wrote an article about “big government conservatism.” The very phrase is an oxymoron. But it is almost universally shared by the establishment GOP.

    There is an argument to be made that the political and economic liberty our nation was founded upon is morally superior to socialism. In fact, it’s an open and shut case. What they don’t teach you in (government) schools is that capitalism is based upon unselfish principles. Before you can get what you want in a capitalist system, you have to first provide what others want.

    Socialism is just based upon greed and envy. You focus on what you want, and then you vote to have other people give it to you.

    Socialists, and I’m including American liberals and Soviet prime ministers in that crowd, dress up their greed as generosity. Of course, if you let them talk long enough they’ll eventually admit it’s just bare naked greed. For instance:

    http://www.amazon.com/Whats-Matter-Kansas-Conservatives-America/dp/080507774X

    What’s the Matter with Kansas? unravels the great political mystery of our day: Why do so many Americans vote against their economic and social interests?

    … Charting what he calls the “thirty-year backlash”-the popular revolt against a supposedly liberal establishment-Frank reveals how conservatism, once a marker of class privilege, became the creed of millions of ordinary Americans.

    …A brilliant analysis-and funny to boot-What’s the Matter with Kansas? is a vivid portrait of an upside-down world where blue-collar patriots recite the Pledge while they strangle their life chances; where small farmers cast their votes for a Wall Street order that will eventually push them off their land; and where a group of frat boys, lawyers, and CEOs has managed to convince the country that it speaks on behalf of the People.

    What’s the Matter with Kansas? The people there don’t want to screw “the rich,” which Thomas Frank just can’t understand. Socialists can’t understand why people won’t vote to give themselves bennies at someone else’s expense. They think it’s nuts. But when liberals say “generosity” they mean free s*** for themselves. But they convinced themselves that giving free s*** to almost everyone else (the 99%, the 1% gets to pay for it) while they’re voting to get something for themselves makes their greed virtuous.

    A recent example of that impulse produced the delightful irony of reading about how so many people who were in favor of Obamacare were stunned when their got their insurance bills. They thought somebody else’s premiums were going to go up, not theirs. When they voted for Barack Obama and his fundamentally transformed and more generous America, they’d get cheaper health insurance. They didn’t realize that they were the rich who were going to get cornholed.

    It was in one of the LAT articles that Pat posted. It wasn’t just in that article; it was widely reported.

    To get back to my original point, the problem with almost everyone in the establishment GOP is they also share the same liberal beliefs. They think the Democrats have the moral high ground. That’s why they can’t make the case for limited government. They think that the Democrats are better people then the base they’re unfortunate to call their own because they say they want nice things for everyone, for free. When the Democrats call the GOP base a bunch of mean-spirited racists, the establishment GOP has a hard time arguing against it.

    You say the Republicans don’t stand on principle often enough. I’m saying the problem is that they do.

    Steve57 (be0b5f)

  175. I think no college education means a lot more for a 30 yo between jobs than someone accomplished as a major county executive and governor or owner of a major company, etc., etc. An education is to prepare you for later responsibilities, once you’ve succeeded education is an interest unless one is changing careers.

    For me, college was an easy choice and a relatively easy accomplishment. I have a lot of respect for someone who just took on job responsibilities and worked their way up.

    Of course that is only my opinion and I have no idea how widely it would be held. Unless one’s education is directly related to one’s work, it is a proxy for ability and achievement; once one has achieved and demonstrated ability, I don’t think one needs a proxy.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  176. Fresh Oyster Stew tonight, with home made garlic croutons, happyfeet.

    mg (31009b)

  177. U talked me out of the salad I was gonna go home and make

    happyfeet (57ee40)

  178. If we’re talking food, I recently made poached lobster in butter. I doubt it’s heart healthy but I’d never made it that way before, and it was fun. And good.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  179. I also made creamy sausage-potato-kale soup, but without the kale because no one would eat it if it had kale.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  180. Not together, of course. Those were different nights.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  181. Not only do we love the kale, but we grow it in our Square Foot garden.

    Gazzer (c44509)

  182. I learned to like spinach, and they start a kale kraze.
    Did you need a lawyer to defend you for poaching lobster?

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  183. kale unlike mittromney is the future

    happyfeet (57ee40)

  184. If we’re talking food, I recently made poached lobster in butter.

    Woah, that sounds amazing! Are there any two things that go together better than lobster and butter? Verily, none that come to mind.

    JVW (05e1e2)

  185. Dinner tonight! Cauliflower gratin (Gruyere, bacon pieces, eggs and and heavy cream) and roasted asparagus fritatta (eggs, Parmesan reggiano, and mozzarella with a bite of cayenne) Both puffing and browning in the oven as we speak. Very heart healthy and low cal :) But a little goes a long way and they both warm up surprisingly well again the second day.

    elissa (749b7f)

  186. The Census Bureau has a very nice report in pdf format detailing our “educational” attainment. The tables and maps are particularly interesting.

    As can be seen from Table 1 of the report, about 28% of all Americans over the age of 25 have at least a Bachelors Degree, with 30% of those between the ages of 25 and 64 holding BDs, while 20% of those over 65 have BDs (or better.) I suspect that this apparent progress is somewhat less substantial and beneficial for our country than was achieved by the GI Bill graduates following WWII. But the employment statistics suggest that the unemployment rate for Bachelors Degree holders is only about 3% for workers in the 24 to 35 age group. I’m sure this is comforting for those who intend to payoff their $85,000 student loans.

    I think Walker is immune to the attacks that the D’s will launch on him over this issue. He has a sense of purpose that will see him through. And if he should prevail in the debates, then think of the anquish this will cause for those who presume someone like Warren is qualified solely because she has managed to assemble a most respectable resume while being 1/19 Native American.

    bobathome (d4306f)

  187. I’m still learning to use kale. But kale makes good pesto as an alternative to basil.

    elissa (749b7f)

  188. If Romney is a loser good god. What does that make the rest of us?

    Rodney King's Spirit (69985e)

  189. Walker no being a Lawyer is a major selling point if you ask me.

    Rodney King's Spirit (69985e)

  190. If I were Mrs. Walker I’d say to Scott, “Honey, I love you just the way you are, but finish up your degree. It’ll set a good example.”

    elissa (749b7f)

  191. Over at HotAir I read that the GOP is remaining true to form.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2015/01/14/house-votes-to-undo-obamas-executive-amnesties-as-part-of-new-funding-bill-for-homeland-security/

    …The answer, I guess, is that this was always a goodwill gesture to conservatives and little more: They had to do something to exercise their power of the purse, especially after righties handed them control of the Senate. They also knew that that exercise would be futile but that conservatives wouldn’t accept it until Congress was put through its paces and forced a vote in the Senate, at a minimum. Even that seems ill-planned by GOP leaders, though. Since it’s unlikely that McConnell will convince six Democrats to join the GOP in opposing Obama on amnesty, the first big test of the new Republican-controlled Senate is going to be … a painful failure on an issue that conservatives care a lot about. Huh….

    All I expect from this crowd anymore are empty gestures intended to fool me into thinking they intend to do things that they clearly don’t want to do. Since they can’t be honest about what they really believe, they’ll just attempt to lead conservatives on about meaning what they said when they needed votes. They’re just stalling for time until they can start talking about how we conservatives need to face facts and accept whatever it is they let Obama get away with. Because with the passage of time Obama’s actions will change the facts on the ground, so to speak.

    The GOP will not put all those new employees implementing Obamacare at the IRS and HHS out of a job. They aren’t going to put those new immigration employees Obama is hiring to administer his amnesty out of work, either.

    Steve57 (be0b5f)

  192. I am no fan of the paper chase. I’ve had more than my fill of it, and I don’t regret a minute of it, but I am inclined to believe that what the Wizard of Oz told the Scarecrow is more nearly correct.

    And there’s Ecclesiastes, too.

    nk (dbc370)

  193. But people like Eisenhower and Bush can’t defend free market capitalism because they believe in government.

    Eisenhower was a career Army officer who had never worked in the private sector. However, he had good advice and the last balanced budget this country ever had was in his presidency. The phony “balanced budget” of Clinton/Gingrich was a joke. The tax rates were too high under Eisenhower and were probably the source of the recessions under his administration but the conventional wisdom on both sides was still from FDR and not Coolidge.

    Part of the problem and one that is almost insoluble is the entitlements that LBJ left us with. Ryan had some pretty good ideas about Medicare but, of course, the Romney haters will dismiss that as too little. Romney is the only national politician who knows how an economy runs but he “too squishy” for many of you and Cruz, who has also never run anything, is the guy who will solve all the problems. I think he might make a good Supreme Court nomination but not an executive. Rand Paul is interesting but has shot off his mouth enough to discourage me from ever supporting him.

    Walker has run the county and state and might be able to do a good job as president but he is still a one term governor and has not had enough exposure nationally to see how he’ll do. Jindal is even more interesting but seems to lack speaking skills. That can be improved. Christie I am not very enthusiastic about. He does well in the east but I’m not sure he will go over well nationally with his “Sopranos” personna. Perry made a big mistake with his memory lapse in the debates and will find it hard to recover. The Texas governor is a weak office anyway.

    Joni Ernst is interesting for the future and it will be interesting to see how she does in the SOTU rebuttal. She came out of nowhere but looks good. So did Sarah Palin but the left did a real job on her. Ernst will be demonized if she shows potential just as all black conservatives are.

    I was not a Bush supporter in 2000 and was a volunteer for McCain who, I think, is even more conservative than Bush but is idiosyncratic and has a Mexican national as his immigration adviser.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  194. “Everything I’ve ever needed to know, I learned in kindergarten”, was part of the orientation in my daughter’s first day of school. I never had kindergarten. Maybe if I did, I would not have felt a need to go to college.

    nk (dbc370)

  195. Those ingredients sound healthy and delicious, elissa. I’d love both, but my problem is my eaters are picky — hence the kale issue. I thought of trying spinach instead, as MD mentions, but decided against it since the goal is to fix something that would actually get eaten by someone other than me.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  196. At this point, nk, I’m not sure anyone needs school after kindergarten. They can go straight into welfare and the life of Julia/Pajama Boy.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  197. Insured by ObamaCare, of course. Can’t forget that.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  198. Maybe try Swiss chard as a substitute, DRJ?

    Gazzer (c44509)

  199. Swiss chard is entirely too neutral. They don’t even eat Brussels sprouts.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  200. There are two food groups in my house: Beef and potatoes.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  201. And Mexican food. That’s a given.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  202. The problem, dear Brutus, lies not in our politicians but in ourselves. The country is headed in the wrong direction not because crappy politicians get elected, but because the people like these crappy politicians. A democratic/republic society cannot be changed from the top down. The top is a reflection on what the people want. Actually, no society really changes top-down. The more the top pressures the people, the more the people fail because they have no buy-in on the plan. Such is why free societies work better than the alternatives. So-called conservatives should understand this but the refrain I see on damn near every blog and such is this hunger for power to change the people from above via politics.

    I agree with much of this.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  203. You know what’s interesting, DRJ?. I was a really picky eater growing up. Refused to even try a lot of things. Drove my mom and especially my depression era survivor grandma nuts. I always wanted to know “what was in it” or was afraid of what “might be lurking in it” –what they might have sneaked in there to fool me. Since I started doing cooking myself, and so know exactly “what is in it”, though, I’ve become fairly adventurous with recipes and quality ingredients and I enjoy experimenting with foods and types of cuisines that I used to think I would hate. I’m recently starting to get it on with eggplant. I never would have guessed that! It’s hard to explain but I think it proves once again that knowledge is power and that knowledge gives one a sense of control.

    elissa (749b7f)

  204. Romney was governor when the super-majority Dem legislature announced their intention to pass state health care. You make it sound like his idea.

    He made it sound like it was his idea.

    In fact he did what a governor should do, and made a workable plan out of a mish-mash, then vetoed provisions the legislature tacked on.

    No, a Republican governor should not participate in anything that undermines the free market.

    In 2009 there were serious problems with private health insurance in the US, and there needed to be some reform, particularly with the exclusion of pre-exititng conditions which largely hit middle-aged people. Even the GOP had reform plans. Sadly, the 60% Dem majorities were given carte blanche by Presidnet Empty-chair and the produced a complete travesty. To say they based it on Romney’s plan is at least three Pinocchios.

    No, I don’t think so. The basic ideas were the same, and neither is free market. To say “there needed to be some reform” does not justify governmental intervention upon governmental intervention.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  205. re #202: i think i’d agree except , well …
    i remember Ronald Reagan of 1976,1980 and 1984.

    seeRpea (3cc998)

  206. Quit microdissecting the past, Patterico.

    JD (86a5eb)

  207. Maybe this is John Kerry-style quibbling but I don’t think there is a conservative hunger for a top-down change in leadership. What I see is a hunger for a chance for a change in leadership — a desire to see the GOP support politicians who stand up for conservative principles when they govern and not just when they’re running for office.

    It’s frustrating to see Republicans talk the talk when they run for office but ignore those principles when they govern. The only thing I like about Jeb Bush is that he’s honest about who he is and what he stands for. I like that about Ted Cruz, too, but he also stands for conservative policies and principles, and that’s why he’s first on my 2016 list. In an ideal world, Cruz wouldn’t run for President until he had more experience but I don’t see a conservative equivalent in 2016 — except possibly Perry, and he’s tarnished by his earlier run.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  208. Let me add that this primary is that chance. If voters don’t want Cruz or someone like him, that’s fine. I accept what they decide, and my point is I’m glad to see more conservative options entering the race.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  209. seeRpea,
    Reagan was elected in 1980 mostly due to the country being fed up and humiliated by the Iran hostage crisis. He was rejected in favor of Jerry Ford, of all people, in ’76. Nice guy (Ford) but clueless in grasping how economics works. As great a president as Reagan was, he was a desperate choice in ’80. The people changed. As Churchill said, you can trust Americans to do the right thing after they’ve tried everything else. Reagan really didn’t change America all that much except in that his first term gave enough space to Americans to understand their significant potential. But it still was the country changing itself. Once we got fat and comfortable again, we went right back to the same old ways.

    WTP (066be7)

  210. t I don’t think there is a conservative hunger for a top-down change

    You’re missing my point. By the time the election rolls around, the die is cast. To make the changes we need to make we need to change the culture from the inside. Stop supporting leftists in academia with our tax dollars. Provide positive support to struggling families and masses of low skill workers by action in the community showing them how to help themselves. Hands on efforts in a free enterprise context.

    WTP (066be7)

  211. possibly, but if we continue with candidates, who say we ‘have nothing to fear from Barack Obama’ and he’s merely ‘over his head’ we will never know, now this is not merely the candidate’s decision, but the imput of the likes of “Iceberg’ Murphy, ‘Dr, Evil’ and Stuart Stevesn

    narciso (ee1f88)

  212. I like Cruz and Walker. I used to like Marco Rubio, but I grew disgusted with him when he lied about his amnesty not being an amnesty. Not only was it an amnesty, it was a whole bunch of amnesties.

    When kali decided to give driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, the La Raza types (not that group necessarily, but illegal immigration enthusiasts in general) advised certain illegal alien not to apply for licenses. Because the application process will incriminate a substantial number of them. For instance, if they applied for a license before AB 60 became law using a fake identity.

    Kali lists income tax returns as acceptable documents to establish identity and residency.

    https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/wcm/connect/11a86d62-f848-4012-bc7d-4192bdef4f00/doc_req_matrix.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

    I find that amusing, as to have an income tax return illegal aliens would have to have had perjured themselves when they signed their I9 form swearing that they were legally able to accept employment in this country. That’s one felony. The document fraud they committed to support that claim is another felony.

    Then we get into identity theft. 75% of working age illegal aliens use false SSNs to get jobs. It’s a joke to call illegal aliens undocumented. They have piles of documents. They’re just fraudulent documents.

    If anybody believes the feds are going to hold these people accountable for all the crimes they committed after illegally crossing the border, I have a bridge to sell you. Or, rather, Marco Rubio would like to sell you a bridge. The feds aren’t prosecuting them now. But if an illegal alien steals your SSN a) it will ruin your life and b) the IRS will not tell you who stole it even though over 95% of SSN thieves use their own names. So the feds know who these people are, and where they live. And it’s their policy to keep that information to themselves.

    This isn’t a minor problem. These are serious felonies, and they aren’t victimless crimes. Millions of kids will find out when they grow up and try to get jobs that somebody ruined their credit, they have a criminal record, and they owe the IRS a lot of money. Meanwhile the illegal immigration enthusiasts in government, business, the media, and most of all the activists will defend their victimizers by arguing that these were crimes of necessity. Mean, nasty US law “forces” them to commit these crimes. And only mean, nasty Americans like me would dare hold it against them.

    That wasn’t the only thing Rubio lied about when he was trying to sell his amnesty plan. And there is no other word for it; he didn’t just make a few factual errors or “misstatements.” He lied, and he lied a lot. The insult to my intelligence was too much to overlook, so he’s off my list of candidates that I can support.

    Steve57 (be0b5f)

  213. re #209: I think you are doing revisionist history. First off, Reagan was hardly rejected in 1976 as it was quite a primary. He may have even won if the delegate choosing had been by popular votes.
    2nd and more germane, Reagan took the bit in preaching that anyone in the USA could improve their lot if they wanted to work at it. That the light at the end of the tunnel was not an approaching train and that there was a way out (especially in 1980).
    And he did much , much more in showing and preaching the way.

    seeRpea (3cc998)

  214. I’ve noticed you have to omit facts, in order to make ‘the narrative’ fit,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  215. 123. As I indicated on the earlier thread Walker among loyal party apparatchiks.

    Hitchcock and I think much alike judging horseflesh, I agree with War Eagle in looking to Cruz, et al., to dispense with ratbastards en toto.

    The likelihood I’ll be voting for a major’s nominee is vanishingly small.

    I think sicko and I are just waiting on events,

    DNF (7a5911)

  216. WTP,

    I think I understood your point. I agree we need to try to change the educational and entertainment cultures, but it could take decades to do that and I don’t think we have that much time. I’m not saying don’t do it — we should — but that alone isn’t enough.

    I think it’s also possible to change the culture by offering a conservative candidate who can articulate the choices between liberalism and conservatism, but that only works if the candidate(s) can communicate well and if enough people are open to the conservative choice. I think there still are enough who are open to that choice but we’ll see, won’t we?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  217. The basic ideas were the same, and neither is free market. To say “there needed to be some reform” does not justify governmental intervention upon governmental intervention.

    I am all for a free market health plan and I think we might get one AFTER Obamacare collapses. The individual mandate was an experiment that was not tried but which probably would not have had much effect since ER visits are way up in Mass. You can’t seek free market health care since we have never had it since health care became useful, about 1935. The first insurance was in 1885 and I have the story in my book. What I think might happen, and should happen, is to make Obamacare voluntary and allow alternatives. That would avoid a direct head on collision with the Obamabots. Making it “voluntary” would allow the Obamabots to sign up and pay for the ridiculous mandates. Of course subsidies would end. It is really just Medicaid for all. MediCal here in California.

    Then everybody else could choose a free market plan and the rest could flail around while we go on our own way. It might take a while to get the Medicaid subsidies whittled down.

    The question always has to be: “Is this the hill we want to die on today ?” Some, and I worry that Cruz is one, prefer a glorious death.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  218. Steve, I need to renew my drivers license next month and my wife’s expired on her birthday yesterday. We both tried to make appointments to renew. The DMV is swamped with illegals. The first appointment she could get was in March.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  219. 207. Maybe this is John Kerry-style quibbling but I don’t think there is a conservative hunger for a top-down change in leadership…

    DRJ (a83b8b) — 1/15/2015 @ 6:17 pm

    That brings up an important fact. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted for Kerry unanimously. When John Kerry was confirmed by the Senate only three Republicans voted against him. Cruz, Cornyn, and Inhofe. Kerry got 94 yeas. Kerry himself voted present. Only two Senators didn’t vote, and one was a Democrat. I don’t know why Hoeven (R-North Dakota) didn’t vote, so I don’t know if the number of Republicans who had a problem with Kerry is 3 or 4.

    But it’s an alarmingly small number in any case. Kerry is a disaster as SecState. And he was a predictable disaster. He was also an embarrassment when he chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He was consistently wrong about everything important during his entire career. Syria, anyone? That Assad, he’s some reformer. I’m sure he was a charming companion when Mr. and Mrs. Kerry had dinner with him in Damascus, though. The guy is so dense, he once praised the Syrian government’s support for the Arab League’s plan to support indirect peace talks between the Israelis and the Palestinian authority.

    Kerry was getting his ideas from the NYT (big mistake) and the NYT misquoted the Syrian foreign minister. The official Syrian press agency made it clear that Syria did not support the Arab League’s plan. In fact, not being content with only not backing the Syrians criticized Fatah for even entertaining the possibility of negotiating with the Israelis. They also attacked the US by name in their press release.

    Kerry was still in his “Assad is a moderate” phase, and that NYT article was his evidence. So he praised the Syrians for conduct that never happened. In reality the Syrians were doing the exact opposite of what Kerry thought they were doing. This wasn’t just wrong, it was delusional. No sane person, if they were keeping up with events, would have ever been under the impression that Assad was a reformer and that Syria was playing a constructive role in the region. The Syrians had taken every opportunity to give the US the finger. For instance, in 2010 (when Kerry was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee) the US sent a delegation to Syria to try to convince Assad to back off from their support for Hezbollah and to put some daylight between their government and the Iranians.

    As soon as the delegation left, Assad made a point to very publicly invite the leaders of Iran and Hezbollah to visit. When he met with Hezbollah’s leader he said it was vitally important to support “the resistance.” That was the exact opposite of what the US wanted; instead of moving away from their support for Hezbollah and Iran Assad doubled down on it.

    That happened just days before Kerry waved that NYT article around in the Senate in praise of Syria’s support for an Arab/Israeli peace deal. People throughout the M.E. were amazed that anyone could be that dense. The Syrian government repeatedly went out of its way to insult the US every chance it had, and the chairman of the (expletive deleted) foreign affairs committe has no clue about it. Instead he lives in an alternate universe where Syria supports US policy.

    He was simply refusing to deal with reality. I have no evidence that Kerry ever dealt with reality. And why is that important? Because after voting to confirm Kerry twice, John McCain started blasting Kerry for presiding over a “trifecta” of disasters. When Kerry came before the committee after becoming SecState, McCain told him to his face to wake up and “recognize reality.”

    John McCain was in the Senate for 20 years with Kerry. In all that time Kerry never even had a casual relationship with reality. Now, McCain figures that out?

    “Maverick” isn’t an outlier in this case. Almost all of the GOP Senators voted to confirm Kerry. Some of them even lavished praise on Kerry, talking about what a wonderful SecState he’d be. They joined the Democrats in giving Kerry a round of applause after he was confirmed. Not one single GOP Senator should have voted to confirm Kerry (neither should have any of the Dems) if they gave a damn about the country. He was a train wreck as a Senator. It shouldn’t be a shock that he’s still a train wreck. And the train was always “hiding” in plain sight, right there for everyone to see, if they would have just opened their eyes. It’s like one of those movies where someone hears a strange noise in the basement, so they gather up the whole family to go take a look at what’s going on. Everyone except the characters in the movie can see what’s coming next, and that it won’t end well.

    The problem is that these politicians are way too chummy with each other. Clearly the GOP Senators who voted to confirm Kerry valued their personal relationship then doing the right thing for the country. That’s a common problem, and it’s an important piece of the puzzle about why Republicans consistently disappoint. When voters send Republicans to DC, those Republicans generally change a lot. They care more about being liked by the people they see and work with every day than pleasing the voters back home. And the people they see and/or work with on a daily basis, inside and outside Congress, are overwhelmingly liberal Democrats. So most GOP pols end up going native.

    Steve57 (be0b5f)

  220. “No, I don’t think so. The basic ideas were the same, and neither is free market.”

    Patterico – You need to do some research amigo.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  221. Lurch is a knave of remarkable depths, beside the Viet Minh delegation, he’s been a mark for the Sandinistas, a clear sign of enemy action,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  222. I am curious who Cruz’ close associates or advisors are. With whom does he hang and shoot the breeze? When he is considering ideas and strategies, who does he bounce them off of? Does anyone here have insight to this? It often seems that he gives off the vibe of a lone wolf but I’m sure he has others in his orbit. I’m interested in knowing the company he keeps.

    elissa (749b7f)

  223. this was his debate partner at Princeton, and he’s been regarded as a close advisor,

    http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/print-edition/2013/05/24/david-panton-builds-wealth.html

    narciso (ee1f88)

  224. Cruz the bomb-thrower, or not.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  225. When Eisenhower met Khrushchev, Khrushchev gave him a lecture about the joys of socialism. And Eisenhower later stated it was very hard to argue that Khrushchev was wrong.

    Only the effects of squish-squish to the core can make a non-liberal think or feel that way. But Eisenhower wasn’t all that different from the squish-squish of Republican Herbert Hoover, who in the 1930s thought the proper response to the Great Stock Market Crash of 1929 and ensuing Great Depression was to hugely ratchet up income taxes.

    Unbelievable.

    Almost every big blunder by a Republican or non-liberal president has been when he allowed the little liberal voice in the back of his brain to get the better of him. Hence, Ronald Reagan going against his publicly stated policy and secretly negotiating with hostage-taking Iran, or the “read my lips, no new taxes” falseness of George Bush Sr, or the lightweight liberalism oozing out of no less than Richard Nixon.

    BTW, I originally had a vague awareness of the Great Depression lingering on for years and years, and supposed experts in the field of economics being puzzled why that was. Or why Franklin D Roosevelt and his beautiful compassion didn’t have as much of a, or really any, positive effect on the financial anomie of the US. Then I read about the way the income tax structure was altered during the 1930s and 1940s, and thought “ya gotta be kidding me!” It was at that moment the people who couldn’t understand why the Great Depression was so great struck me as being similar to people who observe others binging on sugar 24/7, 365 days of the year and asking: “I can’t figure out why everyone is so fat and keep getting so many cavities?!”

    Mark (c160ec)

  226. re #218: make an appointment with the DMV??!?? Where do you live? Never heard of that, just walki in and get it done. Sometimes if things were slow you had to wait for 4 people to show up so they could process the photos (not an issue anymore, they do singles now) or you picked a bad time (drivers class getting their stuff, Tuesday after 3 day weekend , and the like) and have to wait in queue for 45 minutes. But make an appointment?

    seeRpea (3cc998)

  227. Mike @218, I’m not clear on what you’re driving at. It’s not a contradiction that illegal immigration activists are telling some illegal aliens to avoid the DMV and the others are still overwhelming the place.

    It isn’t as if the guy I heard interviewed was saying the DMV would be on the lookout for all forms of document fraud. Just what had been committed at the DMV. specifically for people who had frudulently got a l

    Steve57 (d8c155)

  228. A license or ID in the past using a false or stolen identity.

    I do think it’s funny that the DMV will accept tax returns as proof of resdency and/or identity as the very fact an illegalmalien would have a tax return is absolute proof that individual committed perjury and document fraud since to work illegally in this country. But it isn’t as if I expect illegals to be stupid enough to pick the one document that’s proof positive of two federal felonies when there are so many others they can use instead. And on top of that I would expect the people at the DMV to turn a blind eye to any evidence of fraud that doesn’t concern them.

    Steve57 (d8c155)

  229. Mike K wrote:

    The basic ideas were the same, and neither is free market. To say “there needed to be some reform” does not justify governmental intervention upon governmental intervention.

    I am all for a free market health plan and I think we might get one AFTER Obamacare collapses.

    It doesn’t matter how the government intervenes: if it intervenes, it’s no longer a free market, but, at best, a regulated one.

    Let me be brutally honest here: if health care were truly a free market, then those who could not afford to pay for health care would not get it, other than by relying on private charity, even if that meant that such people would die due to the lack of care.

    I am willing to say, straightforwardly, that I am committed enough to the concept that people should not get something for which they cannot pay that yes, I am willing to see those who cannot pay for health care, or food, for that matter, suffer for the lack of it, even if that suffering includes death. And I’ll also bet that very few others in this forum would say the same thing about themselves.

    The cold-hearted Dana (f6a568)

  230. But then, will we have enough souls to feed our Dread Lord Cthulhu when he breaks free of the Outer Darkness and returns to rule over his Domain?

    Get real. Government largess is as old as government. Whether the chief gave a portion of the mastodon to the widows and orphans of the tribe or whether Pompeii scattered coins to the populace in his triumphal parade. This “private charity” BS is BS. Kings, tyrants, city-states, theocracies were doing it long before Carnegie decided he wanted to be remembered as a charitable man and not a greedy money-grubber.

    nk (dbc370)

  231. Mitt Romney.

    WRONG for seniors.

    WRONG for Illinois.

    happyfeet (831175)

  232. On the whole, Republicans don’t want to win. They are comparatively expert at making lemonade and congenitally prefer the status quo with filigree about the margins.

    QED we are regaled for the umpteenth iteration that the system, RNC designed primaries will work provided the disenfranchised simply follow the faithful’s consensus.

    Never you mind that consensus is purchased and the faithful wholly owned by the Kabuki puppet masters ensuring an outcome in the latter’s favor.

    By all means, have it your way.

    DNF (7a5911)

  233. here’s a fun contribution to the food discussion

    the key word is *disproportionately*

    Colorado is most worrisome I think, even more worrisome than Iowa or Minnesota to my thinking

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  234. 233. On the whole, Republicans don’t want to win…

    DNF (7a5911) — 1/16/2015 @ 6:49 am

    No, they don’t. And the Holder confirmation hearings were an even better demonstration of that fact than the GOP’s appalling performance when confirming Kerry.

    Quite a few prominent and influential Republicans lobbied Congress in favor of Holder’s confirmation. For instance:

    http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/01/gop-lawyers-sign-up-in-support-of-holder.html

    Jeff Sessions, I’m sorry to say, was one of the Republican Senators who was full of praise for Holder. And he was one of the 19 GOP Senators who joined the Democrats and voted to confirm. Two years later many of these same Senators claimed to regret their votes, that they didn’t know he’d turn out to be this bad. But they had every reason to know how bad he’d be before they voted to confirm him. Sessions praised Holder’s experience as Assistant AG under Clinton. It was precisely that experience that disqualified him. And if Senators like Sessions wanted to talk about Holder’s experience it really would have behooved them to know what it was they were talking about. Either they didn’t know of his track record, or they didn’t care.

    We don’t need to get into everything that shows Holder is unfit to be the chief law enforcement officer of the US, that he is constitutionally incapable if impartially enforcing the law, such as those horrible FALN members he convinced Clinton to pardon or his very race conscious selective-enforcement of federal election laws. Just Holder’s actions and statements concerning the Marc Rich pardon are enough to illustrate that no Senator should have voted to confirm him. And about half the GOP Senators did vote against him, which is to their credit, but I don’t know how much of that was based upon principle and how much was just political posturing. Holder did an end-run around established DoJ procedures, cutting the career prosecutors in the Rich case out of the loop. The DoJ lawyers would not have supported his request for clemency. In fact, they had so much contempt for Marc Rich they wouldn’t even talk to his lawyers anymore.

    So Holder had his lawyers bring the request for a pardon directly to him at the WH. He then passed it on to Clinton with his recommendation to grant the pardon.

    He clearly understood what the attorneys in his own department had to say about Rich, and if Holder followed the proper procedure they would have had the chance to say it. So he didn’t let them know about it.

    These are facts. Holder left a paper trail. Or, rather, an email trail. I suppose he learned his lesson and that’s why as AG he established a policy of wiping servers (and turning a blind eye when other departments and agencies did the same) so nobody could find any incriminating emails. The Senate Judiciary Committee that voted to confirm Holder as AG had those emails. Yet they didn’t read them apparently to prepare for the hearings. Had they lifted a finger to prepare they would have known Holder lied to them about the Rich pardon.

    Holder pulled his SGT Schultz routine that we’ve all come to know and love. He never knows anything he’s supposed to know, he never read the documents that cross his desk, and he never reads his emails. He claims not to have read something so often, I keep waiting for a congresscritter to ask him straight up if he even can read. Anyhoo he claimed he didn’t know about Rich’s criminal past, and that had he known he wouldn’t have made the “mistake” of recommending that Clinton pardon him. But Holder was intimately familiar with Rich’s past, and the 1990s Eric Holder impeached the 2009 Holder’s sworn testimony. Back then he was the lead attorney in a lawsuit against a Swiss company that concealed its relationship with Rich when it bid on a contract with the USG. You see, Marc Rich was a principal with that company and the USG can not do business with fugitives from US justice. It’s against the law. As the government’s lead attorney Holder himself gave statements to the LHMFM about the case. The attention hound didn’t delegate that task to any underling, he personally went in front of the cameras to talk about the serious nature of Rich’s crime and how rotten and dirty and sneaky it was for that Swiss company to defraud the USG by attempting to hide the fact that scoundrel was involved in the company. His statements to the press show he had detailed knowledge about the subject that he would later falsely deny he knew. He knew all he would have needed to know to make an informed clemency recommendation. He knew what the New York prosecutors knew, and would have compelled them to passionately argue against pardoning Rich. Which is of course why Holder made very sure they didn’t find out that a pardon for him was in the works.

    But then those prosecutors were career DoJ attorneys, and Holder was/is a political appointee. Holder was/is very political. Clearly Rich’s political donations through his wife bought special consideration.

    Those Senators who later claimed to be so disappointed by Holder for behaving like a partisan hack had the information to know that Holder has always been a partisan hack. They either didn’t read it, or they did and didn’t care. Either way they didn’t do their jobs and vet this guy. That’s one of the things that’s wrong with DC. It’s like a club, and everybody is too chummy with everyone else. When Republicans like former AG William Barr started vouching for the guy, Holder’s confirmation became a foregone conclusion. They were already inclined to give in to Obama because he was riding a wave of popularity. When their friends weighed in and supported Holder’s nomination, the results were a foregone conclusion. Not all these friends were Republicans by the way. Former AG Griffin Bell was I believe a Democrat. But he was a member of the club, and consequently some GOP Senators just took his recommendation at face value. In fact, those were Sen. Isakson’s (R-Georgia) exact words when he was trying to excuse his vote for Holder’s confirmation that he later said he regretted. He said he took Bell’s recommendation “at face value” when he went was interviewed by Greta Van Susteren on Fox. Now he’s disappointed in Holder. Well, that’s what you get when you take actions based upon accepting your cronies’ words at face value and don’t do any checking on your own. Disappointment.

    When you look at how the Republicans played the patsy during Holder’s confirmation process Holder basically is treating the GOP led Congress with the contempt they asked for. If the Republicans didn’t want an AG who would lie, mislead, stonewall, and ignore Congress they shouldn’t have let him get away with it as his confirmation. But fighting Obama to win just wasn’t something they could stomach at the time. Or ever, based upon their preemptive capitulation during the lame duck session. Also they apparently didn’t want to ruin the nice, congenial in-crowd atmosphere.

    Steve57 (f1883e)

  235. re #233 and #235, i think they are both spot on. I can not remember the names of the GOP leaders in the House of Reps in the ’80s but they were definitely in the mindset of loyal minority opposition. Even Pres Reagan could not break them, it took Newt Gingrech and …
    the present Speaker of the House to break them.

    Now, JB seems more interested in winning strange new respect {sigh}

    seeRpea (3cc998)

  236. Bob Michel and Bob Dole, respectively,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  237. no, Dole was in the Senate. and he actually fought. it still gnaws at me that Pres Reagan did not support the welfare reforms Dole pushed through.

    Michel , yeah, he was the Minority Leader. Rush used to be driven crazy by the guy. But who was the Republican “whip” ?

    seeRpea (3cc998)

  238. Trent Lott, as surprising as that sounds now,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  239. 238. Is there a point in all this? I see no particular direction but meander.

    DNF (7a5911)

  240. 240 , so stop reading this thread.

    seeRpea (3cc998)

  241. Romney is the answer to a question no one asked,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  242. Of course, littering establishes squatter rights.

    DNF (7a5911)

  243. 242. Thank you. See? It’s always something.

    DNF (7a5911)

  244. I’m no fan of Romney. It seems to me that Mitt is a slower learner and, generally, a more timid politico than one might expect from a candidate with his pedigree and business experience. I always figured Bain operated in the rough and tumble end of the business world. Not so, if Mitt is any indication. Also surprising was that a man with such high standards of personal morality could lack any semblance of a political compass. Like so many pols, in Romney there is less than meets the eye. I think his political presence can be summed up in two words: That’s it?

    With that description, you’d think that such a man would have never made it to the political big leagues. Not so. I’d rank him among the top two or three pretenders in the last go round. Others ranked him higher. Why? Because there is some evidence of a high functioning brain, because half a soul is better than no soul whatsoever, and because a ham sandwich is better than our distinguished GOP field of Mohammed, Jugdish, Sydney and Clayton. And you tell us that Mitt should sit out the next round because he’s just a has been, when some truly execrable retreads will be tossing their hats in the ring? I’m not buying it. (Bye the bye, I heard Jugdish has already announced his candidacy). Sorry, but I need more of an argument than “been there, done that.” After all, Nixon was quite the has been when he made mincemeat of Humphrey in ’68. I think politicking at the highest level has more to do with stamina than with cajones, anyway. Let him make his pitch.

    Finally, I’ve lived through Presidents 34 through 44 and have strong memories of 35 on. Of all these men, I can count 3, maybe 4, who had brass balls. Most had undescended-testes.

    ThOR (a52560)

  245. Mitt Romney wrote that he didn’t understand most things and only invested in what he knew.

    You can’t avoid subjects in public office.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  246. ThOR (a52560) — 1/16/2015 @ 12:26 pm

    After all, Nixon was quite the has been when he made mincemeat of Humphrey in ’68.

    One thinbg that maybe mattered: he had never been an executive.,

    As soon as he came into office he was overwhelemed and Haldeman became his screener.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  247. We don’t need a ‘manager’, we need leaders.
    Leaders know how to find the best person for the position, delegate authority and responsibility to that person, and then to hold them accountable if things turn to crap (See: Sibelius, for how not to do something), and to praise and promote them for doing an exemplary job.
    Mitt is not a leader.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  248. 248. Concur. Adding, Willard led cram sessions and demonstrated in the debates being an excellent student. That has not made him a scholar, a communicator, he has no vision or passion to share.

    Moreover, with his quarry cornered he had neither the heart nor the commitment to finish him.

    Not worthy.

    DNF (92e3e8)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6617 secs.