Patterico's Pontifications


Quote of the Day

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 1:26 pm

“The only thing the Democrats care about is they want her to win.”

39 Responses to “Quote of the Day”

  1. Democrats have always been very supportive of strong conservative women running for office. It is nice to see.

    daleyrocks (940075)

  2. if she wins the SEIU whore guy should buy her a tasty cardomom lemon ginger cupcake for so there’s no bad feelings

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  3. Mike Castle is a Democrat. Who cares if we control the Senate, unless our agenda can win? If I lived in Del I’d vote for her.

    Kevin Stafford (abdb87)

  4. LoL, daleyrocks.

    Christine is in for a very, very hard time if she wins.

    Kathleen Parker (358f54)

  5. if she wins the SEIU whore guy should buy her a tasty cardomom lemon ginger cupcake for so there’s no bad feelings

    Comment by happyfeet

    Well, at least this lines up with O’Donnell’s general approach to using the campaign to buy stuff for her lifestyle (while not paying her obligations to her workers for years, if at all).

    How is Castle a whore? Because he’s a statist? It seems he actually and overtly believes in that crap. He’s not selling out his views… it’s just that his views only line up with conservatives half the time.

    It’s sad that people don’t seem to really understand the problem with Castle. It’s not that he was a successful lawyer, governor, and politician, has some wealth, or that O’Donnell’s been scrutinized and looks really awful. It’s that he’s a genuine statist.

    This is like complaining about Obama because of something other than his policies. It doesn’t inspire confidence.

    If you take Happyfeet’s position of opposing whores, that’s a powerful reason to support Castle against the sell-out. But it’s not really about that for most of Castle’s detractors.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  6. I don’t know, i feel like liberals think the only way to win office is to be more like them. So i take that with a grain of salt.

    I think what troubles me with the “but can she win” question is this. Like take my mom. She probably looks like a typical old lady, but you wouldn’t know that she is one of the saviiest pickers of stock you are likely to meet. And one of her most basic principles is that she never buys stock in anything she herself doesn’t like as a consumer. like she won’t invest in some deptarment store that she personally would never go to. her attitude is that rather than try to guess what other people like, she should instead recognize the best opportunities among what she does like. if you don’t like it, who do you expect to like it instead?

    i think estimating the tastes of others is a dubious game at best. you know it will cost you in terms of your own enthusiasm, and you’re not sure what is lost will be gained elsewhere. i mean the man voted for cap and trade. he was against the surge. yes, winning is important, but i am not sure that being like a lesser version of the other side is the surest path of victory. it seems to confess a lack of confidence in your own positions.

    I mean that surge thing bothers me most of all. Around 9-12 or so i decided the most important issue was killing terrorists. Its not much of a litmus test to say that i want a senator equally gung ho on that issue.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  7. That’s a fair point, Aaron. John Hitchcock has been steadfast in insisting she can pull the general off. I think the evidence is overwhelmingly otherwise, but it’s a legitimate and logical POV. If someone wants to have faith in O’Donnell, that’s what the primary process is for.

    She’s going to have to convince a lot of people who didn’t vote for her in 2008. Nearly 50% than voted for her. I am sure she’s won the nomination, so I hope she can pull that rabbit out of the hat. I don’t find her reliable, but she’s the best option we’ve got in a match against Coons. I’ll just hope for the best.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  8. That all being said, i don’t have a super rigid test for candidates. its more like a few issues litmus test. like in 2008, you know who I wanted to be president? Rudy Guiliani. He had more executive experience than just about the entire field seeking the nominatin in either party and we are getting an object lesson in how important that is. And he had a special status. among all of the people running, no other man would be more likely to make the terrorists go “oh sh-t, we are in for it now” than guilani.

    mind you, i am sure alot of those guys would make fine terror warriors. my joke is that “of all the people runnign that year mccain was the most likely to catch bin laden. And i don’t mean he would order the special forces guys to get bin laden. i mean he would put on the war paint, parachute into bumf-ckistan, chop of bin Laden’s head and bring it back on a pike.” And joking aside, i am sure all of the republicans but ron paul would do a fine job.

    But the terrorists wouldn’t believe it. they though bush was an abberration that all they had to do was survive him and whoever came next woudl be less resolute. And i felt Guiliani and only guiliani would have the kind of public image that would rebutt that assumption. It would be telling the world that we were interesting in a vigorous war on terror.

    Obviously guilani had ALOT of drawbacks on other issues. But he had that, and i wanted him to be president. fwiw.

    anyway, whatever we wanted, we are going to get what we will get tonight. and hopefully one way or the other, this will contribute to a GOP majority.

    Aaron Worthing (b1db52)

  9. Dustin he’s a very bad man you don’t want to get mixed up with Mike Castle it will end badly.

    He’s not staunch not even a little.

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  10. Comment by Aaron Worthing — 9/14/2010 @ 2:06 pm

    Warren Buffett claims he never invests in a business he doesn’t understand.
    He understands insurance, hence GEICO.
    He understands leasing, hence NetJets.
    He doesn’t quite have a handle on IT, so no MS/etc.
    Your Mom sounds very wise.

    AD - RtR/OS! (d1a4d7)

  11. Dustin he’s a very bad man you don’t want to get mixed up with Mike Castle it will end badly.

    He’s not staunch not even a little.

    Comment by happyfeet —

    I think he’s wrong all the time about some major issues. I also know he’s open about it. He was a better governor than California has had in ages, and you should beg your state level Republicans to do as good a job as Castle did. Did you know he balanced the budget? 8 times? And had low taxes? Brought in jobs?

    there’s a reason he does 15 points better than other republicans… he actually is a good man who works hard and earned the love of democrats who don’t care about his (R).

    He’s extremely statist in a time when that kind of idea is crushing our country. But he’s honest about it. This whole line of crap that he’s gay, senile, a thief, impeached Bush, etc is disgusting. People who act that way should grow up. He’s a statist and that’s more than enough information to convince me that he would make a poor senator.

    Also, he’s to the right of several candidates the Tea Party Express has supported and is generally in line with a lot of Republicans in the moronic northeast. It was a sound tactic to support him as the best we could do.

    I wasn’t on board with that tactic, but it was more sound than the O’Donnell RINO tactic. I am tired of supporting RINOs like Castle but I’m sickened at support for RINOs like O’Donnell.

    My take on this race is not to get mixed up with any of them. But I think Castle’s the most conservative person running.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  12. Sarah Palin says O’Donnell is the best choice and that’s good enough for me

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  13. do you think this helps Palin’s image with those who gave up on her due to her Mccain endorsement?

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  14. no I think she looks like she has difficulty discerning when she should make endorsements and when she should find other things to do with her day

    happyfeet (a55ba0)

  15. We agree.

    I was going to see your Palin and raise you a Christie, but let’s not eat too many of our own right now. This primary sucked.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  16. Dustin, in the short term, absolutely. In the long term? That depends on whether O’Donnell wins and, if not, whether it made a difference in the makeup of the Senate.

    Personally, I don’t get why the tea party spent so much effort propping up a has-been in Delaware just to spite Castle rather than using that energy and capital to recruit an energetic up and coming candidate to take on essentially unopposed incumbents in Oregon and New York, but then that’s just me. I’m sure I’m 15 minutes away from being flamed by an O’Donnell supporter that will probably be sending me 200+ emails in the next few months asking for campaign money to prop her up in the general.

    Sean P (4fde41)

  17. Patterico – Dave Weigel is labeling Mark Levin a


    and a

    political hack

    , and his tactics in the Delaware Republican nomination fight

    absolutely pathetic


    Relatively speaking, you are his new BFF, and maybe short-listed for the next Journolist-like list serve.

    shooter (32dc25)

  18. Of course, if she hadn’t endorsed, they would likely have held it against her. This is the seat that the jewel of collosal ignorance, Joe Biden, held for nearly forty years, that in itself is a frightening thought

    ian cormac (6709ab)

  19. Shooter, it’s interesting how Patterico holds true to the facts while the Weigels and Levins decide whether the facts matter depending on the politics.

    I guess you could say this proves Weigel and Patterico are similar, or that Patterico and Levin are similar, by simply relying on samples at various times?

    But actually, this is unfair to Dave. Dave was a bit lame in how he handled his correction, but it wasn’t long before he owned the issue and corrected the record and moved on with his work.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  20. Of course, if she hadn’t endorsed, they would likely have held it against her. This is the seat that the jewel of collosal ignorance, Joe Biden, held for nearly forty years, that in itself is a frightening thought

    Comment by ian cormac

    I think it does paint a picture in an ugly battle that a lot of the people called purists (I don’t think that’s a fair term) will remember. I like Palin, but I had rationalized some of her behavior as a prioritization of honest politicians before policy considerations. I was really surprised she endorsed someone who has the kind of ethical problems many have described.

    But maybe O’Donnell explained them to her, or Palin decided they aren’t as important as ousting a cap and tax jackass.

    As I said, Castle’s got some sensible bone in his body somewhere, due to how he ran Delaware. It’s not enough, but it’s something, and it’s more conservatism than O’Donnell can demonstrate.

    A lot of different takes on a very lame primary that I hope hasn’t caused too much damage to the various different sides and our coalition.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  21. I’ve seen how the game has been played in Florida, with Crist responsible for putting in charge those
    who depleted party war chests, to the tune of millions of dollars, in Pennsylvania, in Alaska
    with the Murkowski dynasty and the proxy against
    the Palin forces. I saw what happened two years,
    by a party apparatus, who didn’t care about the wider issues and thought one could forfeit the
    election, and backstab the only one who thought
    it was worth fighting. I’m particularly dissapointed that the WS chose to carry Castles’ water

    ian cormac (6709ab)

  22. I think Republicans need to understand that this isn’t about THEM. The souring of independents on Obama and Democrats in general doesn’t mean that independents are suddenly Republicans rooting for the Republican party to win like good little Republicans. The nation is an ass-kicking mood. Republicans are not exempt.

    For Republicans “to win”, Castle is your short-term strategy. Long-term dumb, though. Republican leadership is already sounding like they are preparing for don’t-rock-the-boat. One session of country club, do-wrong or do-nothing-at-all McCain-style Republican leadership for the next couple of years will lead to a resurgence of Democrats and Obama, just in time for 2012. Enough already!

    Taking these risks may not be electorally smart short-term, but for the long term, conservatives must be elected, as many as possible, even if it means taking some big risks. The more conservatives, the more voices clamoring for action, even if they don’t have the majority. What use are Republican voices clamoring to not rock the boat?

    Cars (840f3d)

  23. I must say I was happy to see O’Donnell win. And I think it’s unrealistic to say she isn’t a viable candidate given the fact that Nov. 2 is 50 days away. Taking that approach in this election year is defeatist, and not reflective of what has already been happening in the other upsets. The mood of the electorate is not like other years, and the results are showing it.
    But beside all that, those who think that having 50-51 R’s in the Senate is such a big deal are kidding themselves. Think about how it was when that situation existed last time. We still had R’s jumping ship on critical votes. There are still way too many RINO’s that pretty much negate the conservative agenda.

    FrankM (dc2516)

  24. As a Democrat, I have typically been happy to see Tea Party candidates win GOP primaries, simply because I don’t think Tea Party fervor covers a broad enough political spectrum… which bodes well for Democrats in general elections.

    But I’ve also learned never to underestimate my party’s ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. (Sigh)

    Kman (d25c82)

  25. careful tactical positioning of a political opponent through the primary process always works to the advantage of those doing the positioning. Just ask Gray Davis after he got rid of Richard Riordan – Yep, we were all SO much better off…..

    Californio (3bf280)

  26. you guys have A Problem.
    will blue delaware vote for a young-earth creationist?

    CHRISTINE O’DONNELL: Well, creationism, in essence, is believing that the world began as the Bible in Genesis says, that God created the Earth in six days, six 24-hour periods. And there is just as much, if not more, evidence supporting that.

    just like Palin– lack of adequate vetting. praps you could have stopped her if you had looked that juicy tidbit up.
    lotta scientists and engineers in delaware.

    The state ranks second in civilian scientists and engineers as a percentage of the workforce and number of patents issued to companies or individuals per 1,000 workers.

    did you know 94% of scientists are NOT-conservatives?

    wheeler's cat (abf765)

  27. Well, kman, if the democrats want to attack someone’s faith, like Wheeler and Rachel Maddow, I think you’re right that your party will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

    That is the hope for me, in this case.

    Folks who make up crap about all scientists being democrats? Yeah, I expect that kind of rhetoric to backfire. It’s one of O’donnell’s hopes. For many, many years, the right has been kicking the democrats’ asses when they decide someone doesn’t have the right skin color, or is the wrong sex, or has the wrong faith.

    I don’t think Delsware voters give a crap about that stuff. The era of bigot democrats like Wheeler’s cat is coming to an end, and Delaware voters have help accelerate that by making sure this kind of attack, which has gone mainstream on MSNBC, backfires.

    If you choose to believe Huffpo’s BS that scientists are all liberals, be my guest. See you nuts in November. O’Donnell might not win, but the bigots are going to lose a ton of power anyway. Fact is, it’s just pathetic to pretend most Scientists aren’t, just counting academics. Of course almost no academics are conservatives, because they are thin skinned and intolerant. Most engineers, economists, people who are developing and relying on the scientific method, long ago left the Hide the Decline academy.

    Good luck with that!

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  28. I’ve read Michael Mann’s emails and the replies he got. We understand that if a scientist doesn’t tightly walk the line on liberal orthodoxy, they are persecuted. They will be denied entry to peer review. they won’t be given tenure. And that’s at best.

    Of course, after 50 years of this, there aren’t many people left in the academy who aren’t liberals. And yet we know that science students and engineers and such are mostly conservative. Wheeler’s cat posts powerful proof … it just goes in the opposite direction of where he thought. Democrats cannot stand diversity.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  29. I know this is offtopic and I’m feeding a troll, but I have one more thought you guys get to read because I’m bratty like that.

    You rarely read a liberal say “this is my hypothesis about this scientific principle. Let’s test it and see if it proves my theory.” Instead, you hear “these are the people we have decided have authority, who kick anyone out who doesn’t agree with them, and they are special and we should agree with them.”

    Of course such a system will be stale and uniform. And wrong. they said global cooling, then global warming, then global cooling and now it’s warming again. Actual scientists.. the ones who don’t see science as political, tested the hypo that the martian rovers would experience similar temp changes to Earth because solar activity and not CO2, was the primary driver. And that hypo has been verified. They don’t take popularity contests because that isn’t scientific. but those guys don’t get the Wheeler’s Cat stamp of approval, I guess.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  30. “Well, kman, if the democrats want to attack someone’s faith, like Wheeler and Rachel Maddow, I think you’re right that your party will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.”

    Ah, but for O’Donnell, creationism isn’t about “faith.” She said it had “evidence.”

    imdw (8a8ced)

  31. And Obama’s church has evidence that the CIA invented AIDS and Jews are subhuman. So?

    Wheeler’s cat is posting a Pew Poll that was widely discredited, and now he’s posting attacks on religious views that are perfectly compatible with society.

    You guys really do belong on team (D). If O’Donnell were black, you’d be bashing that too. No doubt about it. Libs can’t stop bashing O’Donnell in sexual terms or religious terms, after all.

    I guess I’m not supposed to attack your personality, or I’d point out that you’re a great example of folks bashing MLK as a commie (classic democrat) or bashing jews. You could be Jimmy Carter or Rev Wright!

    No, I’ll stick to what we see here. It’s bad enough.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  32. “And Obama’s church has evidence that the CIA invented AIDS and Jews are subhuman. So?”

    So, I’d like to hear more about AIDS from O’Donnel.

    “I guess I’m not supposed to attack your personality, or I’d point out that you’re a great example of folks bashing MLK as a commie”


    imdw (8bb588)

  33. Dustin, ima grrl, and my point is, people dont vote for YEC candidates in general.
    its too extreme.
    the PEW poll is not discredited, but YEC sure is.
    also, 70% of post baccs vote democratic.
    who teaches in universities? teaching research scientists and post baccs.
    What do you expect after 50 years of IQ-baiting and anti-intellectualism?

    wheeler's cat (abf765)

  34. Meme #6, people. Predictable.

    JD (8ded14)

  35. that doesnt mean it isnt a true meme.
    JD would like to pretend.
    the truth is people dont vote for YECs…..too extreme.
    they worry their children will get an inferior education, even if they might be sympathetic to creationism.

    wheeler's cat (abf765)

  36. Your gibberish is simply a figment of your fevered imagination, nishit the eugenecist.

    What do your “muslim” faith tell you about creationism? Other than you, who is talking about YEC? Nevermind, the fact that I know what your imaginary anachronisms mean is sad. Get help. Quit making things up, and quit arguing with the voices in your head.

    JD (8ded14)

  37. What does your “muslim” faith teach you in re. creationism?

    The rest of yours is your standard gibberish, your standard litany of idiocy, arguments with the voices in your head, etc …

    JD (8ded14)

  38. Wheeler’s cat, I honestly do not understand what you’re saying, beyond that you’re female (pardon me).

    I enjoy discussions about religion, but you rely on acronyms I am totally unfamiliar with. Please assume I am a layman on this topic.

    Also, yeah, the Pew poll is laughably discredited. Sorry. It’s a shame to see people try to create some kind of orthodox science. I consider that to be very dark.

    This is science, and it’s shameful to see it politicized by the left. There is ironclad proof that it is, thanks to the sick consensus reached in the Hide the Decline emails to silence anyone observing an actual scientific process, for fear of exposing truth.

    It’s strange that you are a bigot against the religious views you deem wrong at the same time you insist there is a right politics for scientists. No wait… I didn’t mean strange. It’s perfect. The termination of science for politics lines up well with other bigotries.

    Me, I am not worried about someone’s personal relationship with God.

    Dustin (b54cdc)

  39. It just makes things up, Dustin. It is a certifiably insane delusional idiot. Objectively.

    JD (8ded14)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1361 secs.