Patterico's Pontifications

Ding!

Karl (f07e38) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:01 am

The left always tells us who they are most afraid of by whom they attack most vigorously. There is a reason Perry is getting the Palin treatment. It is the same reason he very well may be the next President. Cheers –

agimarc (324b03) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:13 am

Is she paid by the word?

If not, she’s devalueing her work by spewing so much for so little.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:23 am

There’s no way an establishment blogger on the Democratic side would get such a hard-on for one candidate that they’d attack the candidate that obsessively.

Yeah, I can’t agree with that.

MayBee (081489) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:30 am

Calling Rubin out as a lefty is ludicrous… and evidence of the knee-jerk reaction of (some) conservatives to label as an Obama-loving liberal anyone who doesn’t agree with them on each and every issue.

Rubin represents the “establishment media’s efforts to manufacture center-left consent”? Assuming you meant ‘dissent’, you’re kidding, aren’t you? Unlike as with Douthat or Brooks, I can’t recall her ever writing anything remotely complimentary about Obama.

So Rubin doesn’t think much of Perry? Big whoop. Fact, not many GOPers are that impressed with Perry, evidenced by his latest (<10%) ratings. Count me among them. It isn't because of Rubin that Perry went from presumptive nominee (now, who was that who wrote that Perry was the likely nominee?) And while I could get by with her posting 6 times a day criticizing Perry, it ain't her fault that Perry keeps doing or saying dumb things.

steve (369bc6) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:48 am

Projection much?

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:49 am

That was directed at the Rubinbot Steve.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:49 am

While Jennifer Rubin is giving Gov Perry “the Palin treatment,” there is an important distinction to make as to the reason why.

Gov Palin was given ‘the treatment’ to help ensure an Obama victory; Gov Perry is being subjected to similar tactics in an attempt to solidify the front-runner status of either (if you’re on the right) the candidate most likely to defeat Obama, or (if you’re on the left) the most palatable replacement for Teh One-Term Lightworker.

Icy (222796) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:53 am

I’ve been sampling Rubin since she was at Commentary following Insty’s links.

She’s been all in for everyone on the left of center at one time or another, even dissing Romney when there was a chance he’d be dumped for a Daniels or Christie.

She’s been a Democrat more recently than Perry.

Good writer but tendentious and no honest broker. If you watch Faux News then by all means read Rubin. Stick with the echo chamber brainrinse.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:02 am

steve,

The phrase “manufacturing dissent” is linked. I can’t make you read it. But I can dismiss your comment if you don’t.

And I imagine that if I were to give Mitt the treatment Rubin gives Perry — which would be astonishingly easy to do, btw — I think you might be as irked as people like Erickson are about Rubin. I don’t do it because I think it’s intellectually lazy. Rubin bizarrely seems to be claiming that attaching herself to one candidate’s posterior somehow makes her independent or something. It borders on the Orwellian.

(Incidentally, you are right that Perry is mostly to blame for his current position. But you may be underestimating him in a way that Romney and Rubin are not.)

That said, I hope my post makes clear that my problem is less with Rubin than it is the MSM.

Karl (f07e38) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:11 am

8. Facile analysis is still free, keep that day job.

An authority of no less stature than Stan Greenberg blew away the notion that Indies are a faceless group of so-libs, swinging with the political tides.

In fact, they are a bimodal population. One quarter, 10% of the electorate, are swingers, tending to vote Democrat as they hate Republicans more than death itself.

The bulk of the remaining 3/4 of Indies, so-cons, are right of center disenfranchised conservatives. If they swing it is only to third and fourth parties or to not vote at all.

This group outnumbers Republicans. Who knows how many will hold their nose and vote Romney, but no more than half is a good bet. Romney as datechguy and Dana Loesch just said two days ago is Obama’s best chance. Period.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:15 am

Romney, as all the candidates, is polling behind the generic Republican.

In the east, MA is virtually alone as an open primary. Anyone recall how DE 2010 Senatorial primary fell? Romney may do well in PA and north but outside the Mormon west and FL he will suck wind before and after August in Tampa.

Expect Obama to pick up the 16 bluest states where Romney is “strong” and is certain to waste the bulk of his popular vote. In the Heartland he will disappoint. FO GOP.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:25 am

I wouldn’t be irked. I’m not a big Romney fan. And why is it intellectually lazy to swing away at such an easy target as Perry? I haven’t noticed anyone on the right refraining from going after Obama, who presents even easier pickings than Perry. And to not pick on the guy for being an easy target perversely rewards him for being such an easy target. Is it only those who have more substance who are to be targeted? My suggestion to Perry and his supporters (do you know where I might find one?) is to get stop griping about the coverage he gets and stop doing things that generate the complaints. After all, if Perry can’t handle the heat of a Rubin, how is he going to handle the MSM, Obama, Putin and all the other problems a President is going to have to deal with?

Thanks for pointing out that underlined bold blue type is a link to another website. Yes, I read your column, in fact I read it a long time ago. And yet, somehow surprisingly, I still disagree that Rubin is a case of the MSM framing the debate in a way that doesn’t touch the extreme. She sure isn’t in the mushy middle of the kind personified by Brooks (and, for that matter, Romney).

And what is your issue with the MSM, at least as relates to Rubin? That the Washington Post, a newspaper written and primarily read by liberals doesn’t have more conservatives writing for it? Or that they hired one who doesn’t satisfy all of the conservatives all of the time?

steve (369bc6) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:29 am

“one who doesn’t satisfy all of the conservatives all of the time”

The issue here is obviously not Rubin.

In 2008 Romney got 94% of the Mormon vote in NH(Podhertz). In NV he got greater than 90%(MSNBC).
The only ‘conservatives’ Romney satisfies share his religion.

Moderates and liberals who self-identify as ‘conservative’ are confusing taste and style for substance.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:41 am

Romney has to ‘virtually waterboarded’ into supporting the ballot proposition, at the call center, that he shows up. On the opposite side,
he still entertains positive thoughts about MassCare and is very splungy on AGW. It’s not about his religion, in fact I expected Mormons to be made
of hardier stuff, truth be told,

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:48 am

In 2008 Romney got 94% of the Mormon vote in NH(Podhertz). In NV he got greater than 90%(MSNBC).
The only ‘conservatives’ Romney satisfies share his religion.

Not to pick on you, but the accuracy of the last sentence can not be inferred from either of the first two sentences.

steve (369bc6) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:50 am

I like Rubin’s writing, but it’s clear to me that she and most establishment Republicans are very afraid of Perry. I think they fear he will actually try to implement the small government principles that most Republicans promise but fail to live up to. I understand the establishment’s fear because conservatives are typically leery of big change, and a real attempt to roll back government would be a big change. But times have changed and I think the Republican establishment would be wise to change, too.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:54 am

steve,

My dissatisfaction with the MSM is that even when they claim to represent conservative views, they make sure it’s only “acceptable” (i.e., left-of-center) views. Where are right-of-center viewpoints regularly portrayed by the New York Times or Washington Post as anything other than bizarre or extreme?

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:59 am

DRJ: from this establishment Republican, it isn’t that we’re afraid of Perry, it would be more accurate to say that we just aren’t as easily impressed with him as some (hint…. K___) are

in no particular order, a sampling of why we’re ~~afraid of~~ not impressed with him

1 – his immigration stance
2 – his reminding me of another Texas Governor who didn’t impress people with his speaking style
3 – his crony capitalism
4 – his belief that government creates jobs (why else would he take credit for the jobs created in Texas?)
5 – his wanting it both ways with the preacher who attacked Romney/Mormonism

This doesn’t mean that we wouldn’t prefer Perry over Obama, just that we aren’t that impressed with the guy and wish there was someone better.

steve (369bc6) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:00 pm

And by the way, I don’t mean to turn this into a bash-Perry string (K___ wouldn’t like that), but rather to make the point that there are substantial reasons to not support Perry, that failing to support him doesn’t make one a tool of the MSM.

steve (369bc6) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:01 pm

May the candidate that is best able to clearly and concisely lay out his/her well-thought-out plans for righting our Ship of State be the candidate selected by Republicans to unseat Obama in November 2012.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:01 pm

his wanting it both ways with the preacher who attacked Romney/Mormonism

This was exemplified the other day when Perry said his own pro-life stance wasn’t just an “article of faith”. Between something like that and Perry not knowing that someone (even a buffoon like Bill O’Reilly) would ask what the impact to revenue of Perry’s 20/20 plan would be raises questions on his competence.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:05 pm

on about his competence.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:06 pm

steve,

why is it intellectually lazy to swing away at such an easy target as Perry?

Really? Seriously?

1. If Perry is an easy target, then swinging day after day at him is the definition of lazy.

2. But Rubin is swinging at him precisely because she knows what Romney — and anyone else paying attention — still knows, i.e., Perry remains the main threat to Romney. This puts her in the uncomfortable position of having to swing away obsessively at someone who is an easy taget (but not one who can be ignored). Now that her other preferences are foreclosed (Christie, Bolton, etc.) she is choosing to behave like a rabid partisan for someone who is not even her first choice. It’s sad, particularly in a primary contest.

3. Either I am a terrible writer or you are a terrible reader, so let me try again, more succinctly. My point is that the larger issue here is that the MSM circumscribes what is presented as “acceptable” conservatism to the mass audience not actively following politics. This is limited to the Brooks/Douthat school, the Northeastern neocon types like Rubin and Thiessen, and “libertarians” of the Weigel school, who claim to be of the right while privately cheering for the passage of Obamacare. The MSM will not hire people who are more representative of grassroots conservatism, because to do so would be to implicitly legitimize various views the MSM wants to de-legitimize.

I am suggesting the current reaction against Rubin among a lot of the right is really a proxy reaction against that phenomenon. After all, there are others in the Rubin vein who do not get the same level of criticism — for example, most of her former colleagues at Commentary. I woiuld suggest guys like Tobin (who is every bit as pro-Romney) don’t get the scrutiny Rubin does because he’s at Commentary, rather than the WaPo.

Want a variation on this theme? Take to William Kristol’s continuing, comical search for additional GOP candidates. If he was still a NYT columnist, instead of relegated to the Weekly Standard, he’d be getting much more grief from fellow conservatives.

Karl (f07e38) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:09 pm

Texas, and maybe North Dakota are the only places that are really producing jobs, so it’s somewhat
important to suggest why that is so. His immigration is problematic, but then so is his main primary opponents, typified by the phrase, ‘we can’t have illegals here, I’m running for office’

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:11 pm

DRJ, this line from Michael Barone pretty much covers what is happening, both with Perry and with Cain:

“I call it the revolt against the experts.”
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/barone-revolt-against-experts-helps-herman-cain?utm_source=Washington%20Examiner%20Political%20Digest%20-%2010/26/2011&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Washington%20Examiner:%20Political%20Digest

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:12 pm

16 “Not to pick on you”

Feel free. Rubin was a Southern CA Democrat thru the 90’s after Perry had switched. ‘Non-liberal’ is a perfect characterization.

Millionares number 1.5 million. Perhaps a smattering are so-con but they can be expected to be self-interested and support nibbling around the edges of the tax code and therefore support Romney.

Of the remainder, so-cons persuaded that Romney is “presidential” and anyway ABO, that they’re either too busy or are simply willfully uninformed proves nothing.

It is not in their self-interest to vote for Romney.

Mormons are predominantly so-con from rational self-interest. Mormons vote for Romney above 90%.

QED, “conservatives” supporting Romney for reason are overwhelmingly Mormon.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:13 pm

steve (as you commented about me while I was commenting),

Am I impressed with Perry as a candidate? Considering that I compared him to the rather spectacular failure of Phil Gramm, I would say the answer is “No.” Indeed, while everyone else has been blaming Perry’s position on his debate performances, I have been the one pointing out that his problems go beyond style — Romney has successfully (and somewhat unfairly) damaged Perry with seniors on entitlements, while other conservatives are offended by his tone and positions on issues like the Texas Dream Act and crony capitalism.

My consistent position has been that I would prefer someone more conservative than Romney, but that Perry — the most plausible alternative on paper — may not prove to have the skills or national campaign experience to achieve critical mass as NotRomney. My other consistent position is that all of the major GOP candidates have major flaws. That’s why I find Rubin’s relentless cheerleading for a guy who wasn’t even her first choice annoying on its merits. Even so, I believe most would not be nearly so annoyed by Rubin if it wasn’t part of the MSM’s attempt to define the acceptable boundaries of debate.

Karl (f07e38) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:22 pm

So what you’re trying to tell me is that Fox, who has something like twice the viewership of CNN and 10 or 15 times that of MSNBC, and Rush Limbaugh, who claims 20 million listeners, have little or no power over the media compared to NYT and WaPo, both of whom – like all newspapers – are losing readership by the thousands.

J (50ec23) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:24 pm

Karl: I’ll go for neither of the two options.

I think you’re wrong that the reason the Post doesn’t present more conservative viewpoints (the Ds and Es?) is because they fear that would legitimize those views; the liberal editors at the Post can’t envision anyone being swayed by those views (Heck, they can’t imagine anyone being swayed by the likes of Romney or McCain). To the Post, those views are held by wackos, and their readers gain nothing by learning of them. It’s the same reason their science pages don’t include views from creationists; they’re not afraid their readership is going to start thinking the world really did begin just 5,000 years ago.

The Post readership is primarily liberal/left of center, conservatives left a long time ago. It makes business sense for the Post to include things that their readers find of interest. Their responsibility isn’t to expose people to (more) conservative thoughts. Fox can do that.

And how wrong would I be if I say that you’d have much less of a gripe with Rubin if she had gone after the other easy target, Romney? It isn’t that she is focusing her fire on one candidate, it’s that she is focusing on the candidate who someone else likes.

steve (369bc6) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:35 pm

26. Barone is on target, again.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:35 pm

Rick Perry… Not Ready For Prime Time:

“Yesterday Rick Perry made the astonishing claim that it was a mistake for him to participate in this year’s GOP presidential debates:

“These debates are set up for nothing more than to tear down the candidates. It’s pretty hard to be able to sit and lay out your ideas and your concepts with a one-minute response,” the Texas governor told Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly. “So, you know, if there was a mistake made, it was probably ever doing one of the [debates], when all they’re interested in is stirring up between the candidates instead of really talking about the issues that are important to the American people.”

The mind boggles. Perry regrets participating in the debates because, by his own admission, he has not performed well in them. But voters expect presidential candidates to be able to articulate their ideas, answer questions and respond to criticisms. These are not optional skills for a presidential candidate. The idea that Perry could have stayed away from the debates, on the ground that he isn’t very good at them, and remained a serious candidate for the GOP nomination seems almost delusional.

Then there is Perry’s bizarre excursion into birtherism:

In an interview with Parade Magazine published Sunday, Perry said he does not know if Obama’s birth certificate is authentic. He continued to press that point in an interview with John Harwood of CNBC and the New York Times that aired Tuesday, saying: “It’s a good issue to keep alive. . . . It’s fun to poke [Obama] a little bit and say, ‘Hey, let’s see your grades and your birth certificate.’ I don’t have a clue about where the president — and what this birth certificate says.” ”

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/10/rick-perry-not-ready-for-prime-time.php

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:42 pm

steve:

[The Washington Post’s] responsibility isn’t to expose people to (more) conservative thoughts. Fox can do that.

That’s hilarious. When did WaPo change from being a national newspaper to an opinion magazine? (Don’t answer that. I already know.)

And you and Rubin are afraid of Perry or you wouldn’t be so upset by his opinions and what he represents.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:44 pm

Mormons are predominantly so-con from rational self-interest.

Beware of those who pontificate about that (e.g., “motivation”) which they have no knowledge of.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:45 pm

Obviously I should have added ColonelHaiku to that list of people afraid of Perry.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:46 pm

By all means… let Perry shout his plans from the rooftops… expose them to the light of day. It’s great that he is finally telling us what he’s all about. It’s a good thing.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:48 pm

Not at all, DRJ. You confuse apprehension for fear.
If he is nominated, I will whole-heartedly support the man.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:50 pm

guns… energy… pro-life… “look what we done in Texas”… we need more!

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:51 pm

“Even so, I believe most would not be nearly so annoyed by Rubin if it wasn’t part of the MSM’s attempt to define the acceptable boundaries of debate.”

Karl – Seriously?

If Rubin took her 36,000 words of cheer leading back to Commentary and WaPo replaced her with another “Conservatives in the Mist” Weigel type, you would stop thinking Rubin was an obsessive and lazy groupie who’s thoughts should be dismissed?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:51 pm

Any of the candidates that have been in the debates – including Ron Paul – would make a better president that the current occupant of the Oval Office.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:53 pm

and Jennifer Rubin rocks!

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:55 pm

Some are prepared to ride that Purity of Essence sleigh all the way down the mountain into the Valley of Despair.

Me? I just want the best candidate who has a chance of defeating Obama, given all of the roadblocks that will be put in place.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 12:58 pm

“I think you’re wrong that the reason the Post doesn’t present more conservative viewpoints (the Ds and Es?) is because they fear that would legitimize those views; the liberal editors at the Post can’t envision anyone being swayed by those views”

steve and Karl – Doesn’t WaPo run George Will and Charles Krauthammer columns? It’s not the paper’s readers are completely isolated from conservative voices if they want to read them.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:02 pm

The left trying to make the Occupy Oakland protesters out to be heroes when they are nothing but rioting thugs.

Who is Rubin in the tank for?

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:03 pm

29. ” Fox can do that.”

Gallup has 2/3 of Fox viewers as Republican Party members.

Kinda blows your point as targetting “conservatives” as their market. Token opponents of Progressivism rather.

33. “Beware of those who pontificate about that (e.g., “motivation”) which they have no knowledge of.”

Ignore Hai on every issue imaginable, dear Reader.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:04 pm

DRJ: again, we’re not afraid of Perry, we’re just not as easily impressed as some. If I’m afraid of anything, it’s that he’d blow it as the nominee and hand Obama another term.

steve (369bc6) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:06 pm

DRJ

Fox just said Romney’s damaged, he cant win the general election – another Shep Smith attack on Perry – now the meme is the Perry’s too far behind “Leave ~~Whitney~~ Romney alone” wailed shep right now as I’m typing this

Perry scares people and inspires people – and he finally remembered my advice to him that wasnt well received here was that participating in the debates are a mistake – he wasted a month letting also rans get traction by cheap debate tricks and gotcha moments by scared centrists like Kelly and all the lefty’s

He should have been going town to town instead of listening to a bunch of lies and distortions

EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:07 pm

“Some are prepared to ride that Purity of Essence sleigh all the way down the mountain into the Valley of Despair.”

Colonel – Naw, me I just want to be able to openly and peacefully carry a pair of Colt Anacondas and sip adult beverages with the top down as I cruise roads my money pays for. You can’t do that right now in my socialist paradise.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:07 pm

Daleyrocks: I know the Post runs Will and Krauthammer, but both of them are also establishment Republicans, they don’t offer up the conservative viewpoints Karl thinks the Post should be offering up.

steve (369bc6) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:08 pm

The reaction to Rubin attacking Perry comes mainly from Perry supporters, just as the reaction to her support of Romney comes from Romney-haters.

daleyrocks has a point @ #38 above. Rubin would not be suddenly approved of if she were still at Commentary and writing the same posts.

Erickson shills for Perry and Stacy McCain does the same for Cain. So what?

Seriously, of all the shoddy reporting in the news columns of WaPo, the one which is most reprehensible and symptomatic is Rubin’s opinion blog?

Estragon (eed556) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:09 pm

EricPWJohnson – Shep is the most credible person on television. Thanks for playing.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:10 pm

42. “Doesn’t WaPo run George Will and Charles Krauthammer”?

AhHahahahaha. That explains their appeal to baseball fans and Hummel collectors.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:11 pm

50. “Shep is the most credible person on television”

Forgot the /sarc tag.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:15 pm

“That explains their appeal to baseball fans and Hummel collectors.”

gary – I really need your latest walleye on a stick recipe.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:17 pm

Comment by ColonelHaiku — 10/26/2011 @ 12:42 pm

Wasn’t it the reporter who brought up the “birther” issue, and wasn’t it the Gov who tried to dismiss it with a touch of snark?

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:25 pm

Comment by ColonelHaiku — 10/26/2011 @ 12:58 pm

The best candidate that can defeat Obama is himself.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:27 pm

Fox news panel just reported that internal survey’s are showing that Romney has slipped into second place now in NH, OH, PA, NY, SC, FL, and IA

Cain, Paul Gingrich and Perry are all rising still in the polls – Romney is slipping below the magic 20% mark

Its still way too early, and specualtion is that the undecideds are still 1/5th as the Democrat/independents are flocking to decide the Republican race since Obama is runnning unopposed so they dont have to choose on the democrat side

EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:39 pm

53. Gallup has 20% self-identifying as Liberal, the remainder roughly split between Moderate and Conservative.

Perhaps when seated next to Cokie Roberts Will seems conservative, or when seated next to Kristen Powers Krauthammer appears right of center.

Words mean things to people. Calling a former speechwriter of Carter, without an intervening epiphany, ‘conservative’ is abusing our language.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:42 pm

Romney against the carrying of handguns and the consumption of alcohol.

He also passed soe of the strictest air quality standards for a state above and beyound the already industry choking federal regulations

But as fox News Fran Luntz, Kelly, O’Reilly and Shep say – “Leave ~~Britney~~ Romney Alone!”

EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 10/26/2011 @ 1:43 pm

48. “they don’t offer up the conservative viewpoints Karl thinks the Post should be offering up.”

I think Karl has taken pains to correct this misunderestimation. He thinks Rubin is carrying water for the Establishment. In fact, it is you who say they are incapable of seriously regarding conservative viewpoints and anyway have no commercial self-interest in providing same.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 2:00 pm

Democraps intimidate voters all the time but It’s evil when republicans do it.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 2:11 pm

An iraqi war veteran has a brain injury because of the cops. in oakland.

Oh no.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 2:14 pm

daleyrocks,

If Rubin took her 36,000 words of cheer leading back to Commentary and WaPo replaced her with another “Conservatives in the Mist” Weigel type, you would stop thinking Rubin was an obsessive and lazy groupie who’s thoughts should be dismissed?

I thought I made clear by the comparison to Tobin that if Rubin was doing her thing at Commentary, it would not elicit the same type of ire from people like Erickson (who, afaik, hasn’t jumped on Tobin the same way). I would still think Rubin was an obsessive and lazy groupie, but much less worth writing about, because she would not afford the opportunity to raise the larger point of the post.

—

steve (and others)

Of course the reaction would not be the same if Rubin was pro-Perry. Rather, the reaction would be stunned disbelief. The point is that the WaPo would never hire someone disposed to be as pro-Perry — or pro-Cain, or pro-Bachmann — as Rubin is anti-Perry. And when I write this, I don’t want it to devolve into a discussion of personalities. This is why I’m not concerned with whether Perry (or Cain, or anyone else) is an easy target; Romney is an easy target for anyone so inclined (I’m not, both because it would be equally lazy and ultimately counter-productive). The point is that a Romney/Christie supporter represents the outer bounds of what the WaPo deems fit to print — and that’s a big factor in the reaction against Rubin.

Karl (f07e38) — 10/26/2011 @ 3:31 pm

Re: post #47… funny stuff, daley!

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:04 pm

gulrud… all anyone need do is google your name and follow the links to the comments you’ve spread like so much bovine fertilizer across the web. Quite enlightening, in a dark sort of way!

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:08 pm

Romney against the carrying of handguns and the consumption of alcohol.

a bad combination, johnson.

I’ll never forget the time our new executive director gave me a ride to the airport after a staff conference in San Antonio. I opened the passenger door to his new Ford F-150 and the beer can empties just cascaded out. We laughed and I told him that Texas is a long, long way from California.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:14 pm

Wasn’t it the reporter who brought up the “birther” issue, and wasn’t it the Gov who tried to dismiss it with a touch of snark?

AD… maybe after he was advised that a stupid comment followed by more stupid comments wasn’t the sort of discipline his new campaign advisers had in mind when they signed on. Truth be told, Perry doubled down on his original silliness.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:18 pm

Anytime a politician can tell a hostile media type to STFU in so many words without specifically saying that, is a good day in America.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:24 pm

ColonelHaiku, does it give you a thrill to misrepresent Perry’s responses on the birther crap?

SPQR (26be8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:24 pm

even better if he can do it without making a fool of himself before making that righteous stand!

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:25 pm

Not from what I’ve read, SPQR.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:26 pm

ColonelHaiku, perhaps you would like to be a bit more specific? Would you like to quote EXACTLY what Perry said that set the left wing media’s pants on fire claiming Perry was a “birther?”

Then, as you go on to say that Perry admitted it was a mistake to participate in the debates. Now, I know you are not stupid, and you know, and I know, that is not what he said since you go on to quote Perry.

The problem I have with you, Haiku, is that you are dishonest in that you try to spin what was really said to mean what you want it to mean.

You are like all the yapping heads that say they don’t like Perry’s “immigration” positions but never quote what Perry has said about “immigration”, not to be confused with “illegal” immigration and can only use an in-state tuition reference confusing it with actual border security.

You are like those people. Dishonest spinners and people should refuse to respond to you.

retire05 (a9f846) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:27 pm

I haven’t seen the video, but from what I read, I don’t think Perry was the one who came off the fool.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:27 pm

ColonelHaiku, either you are not actually reading, or you have no ability to detect sarcasm and ridicule.

Neither speak well.

SPQR (26be8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:29 pm

steve,

Romney supporters are afraid Perry will beat their man. Others, like you, are afraid Perry can be nominated but can’t beat Obama. But if the only way the GOP can win a Presidential election is by nominating one of the least conservative Republicans in the field, we might as well give up now.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:30 pm

SPQR, the only talent Haiku has is for spinning. If he admits what was actually said by Perry, he wouldn’t have anything to complain about.

Obviously, Haiku has no life since everytime I come here, he is actively here. Maybe he could join the OWS crowd if he needs something to do.

retire05 (a9f846) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:31 pm

retire05, actually at times I’ve enjoyed ColonelHaiku’s commentary.

Its the Romney fandom that I find offputting.

SPQR (26be8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:33 pm

“Governor, do you believe that President Barack Obama was born in the United States?
I have no reason to think otherwise.

That’s not a definitive, “Yes, I believe he”—
Well, I don’t have a definitive answer, because he’s never seen my birth certificate.

But you’ve seen his.
I don’t know. Have I?

You don’t believe what’s been released?
I don’t know. I had dinner with Donald Trump the other night.

And?
That came up.

And he said?
He doesn’t think it’s real.

And you said?
I don’t have any idea. It doesn’t matter. He’s the President of the United States. He’s elected. It’s a distractive issue.”

http://www.parade.com/news/2011/10/23-rick-perry-hates-to-lose.html

Correct (as in smart) answer would’ve been: “Obama was born in the USA. End of story and your dumbass questions.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/281080/perry-wont-state-obama-definitely-born-us-katrina-trinko

“Perry wading into this swamp is stupid and ill advised” – Rich Lowry

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:37 pm

According to Politico, “The Rick Perry relaunch has finally arrived.”

‘We’re told the Texan will “wage a more focused and aggressive campaign.” Perry’s new consultants are a “roster of some of the most nationally seasoned and toughest names in the Republican media world.” Not only that, “They’re disciplined.” And oh, how it shows. Because only a disciplined, well-oiled, purring-with-efficiency campaign would have their candidate double down on the birther story on the very day he releases his long-awaited economic plan.’

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/25/perry-campaign/

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:40 pm

Gigi, am I a fool without a mind
Or have I merely been too blind to realize?
Oh Gigi, why you’ve been growin’ up
Before my very eyes

Gigi, you’re not at all
The funny awkward little girl I knew
Oh no, overnight there’s been
A breathless change in you
[ Lyrics from: http://www.lyricsfreak.com/p/perry+como/gigi_20106806.html ]
Gigi, why you were tremblin’ on the brink
Was I out yonder somewhere blinkin’ at a star?
Oh Gigi, have I been standin’
Up too close or back too far?

When did your sparkle turn to fire
And your warmth become desire?
Oh, what miracle has made you
The way you are?

Oh Gigi, have I been standin’
Up too close or back too far?

When did your sparkle turn to fire
And your warmth become desire?
Oh, what miracle has made you
The way you are?

Icy (222796) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:40 pm

I just want the best candidate who has a chance of defeating Obama, given all of the roadblocks that will be put in place.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:41 pm

“The New York Times published a condensed, edited transcript of an interview with Rick Perry today. Much of it was devoted to a defense of his flat tax proposal. Perry held his ground well in those questions and refused to concede that an abandonment of progressive taxation was unjust or that allowing the wealthy to keep more of their own money would harm anyone else.

But unfortunately for Perry, the Times reporters thought to ask him about his absurd comments about President Obama’s birth certificate, and the Texas governor responded by digging himself deeper into the hole he previously dug on this issue:

Q. Why did you choose to keep the birther issue alive?

A. It’s a good issue to keep alive. You know, [Donald Trump] has got to have some fun. It’s fun to poke him a little bit and say, “Hey, let’s see your grades and your birth certificate.” I don’t have a clue about where the president — and what this birth certificate says. But it’s also a great distraction. I’m not distracted by it.”

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/25/perry-birther-times-interview/

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:43 pm

There’s more info out there re: Perry’s dumbass comments regarding the birther stuff. Whether he thinks he’s having fun or not… not a smart play!

Can y’all get to that?

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:46 pm

ColonelHaiku, I’ve spent a lot of time ridiculing Birthers, but Perry’s comments all make sense to me.

Why you miss the context that is so plain is a puzzle.

But you need to face it, Romney would make a terrible candidate – he’s compromised himself so much that he would lack credibility as a standard bearer for the GOP. Quit listening to Hugh Hewitt.

SPQR (26be8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:50 pm

Care to reconsider your intemperate remarks, SPQR? I am no more a cheerleader for the Romney candidacy than retiree05 or Dustin is for TigerBeat Rick Perry.

As I’ve stated several times, I can and will support Perry if he’s the nominee. I will do so gladly, with a song in my effing heart, as I know he’d be a better president than Barry Obama.

Retire05, you can put it up your strada chocolada, my friend.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:51 pm

“…his absurd comments…”

Col, that’s your interpretation.
Not everyone shares your view.
Some of us think he was trying to change the subject without taking a position.

What part of “…I don’t have any idea. It doesn’t matter. He’s the President of the United States. He’s elected. It’s a distractive issue…” , do you not understand?

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:51 pm

Rick Perry has lost support ever since he entered the race, SPQR. He can’t think on his feet and the last thing this country, let alone the Republican party needs is another guy who can’t even articulate if complete sentences. He hasn’t even convinced himself that he wants to be president, much less the rest of America. Not my first choice, but support him, I will, if he somehow gets the nomination.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:54 pm

Col, that’s your interpretation.
Not everyone shares your view.

Is that ever the case?!?! Many people who I respect do share the view. It was another unforced error, irregardless. The smart play would’ve been to dismiss it completely, then say “enough of the dumbass questions!” If he’d done that, just think of the support he would have garnered. What’s so hard to understand about that?

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:58 pm

Being cutesy about it was stupid and decidedly “un-Texan”.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 4:59 pm

What part of “…I don’t have any idea. It doesn’t matter. He’s the President of the United States. He’s elected. It’s a distractive issue…” , do you not understand?

Comment by Another Drew

How about that smart, doubling down play he made with the NYT the very next day, AD? What was intelligent about that?

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:01 pm

I have a sneaky suspicion that he doesn’t really believe that the NYT has all that much influence within the GOP Primary;
or, he just doesn’t care if people think this is important or not.
I think the controversy says more about those that are raising it, than about Rick Perry, who thinks IMHO it is really all quite silly.
If he “dies” on this battlefield, he can always just go back to Austin and be Governor for as long as he chooses.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:14 pm

ColonelHaiku, my remarks are intemperate?

Good.

SPQR (26be8b) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:19 pm

Being cutesy about it was stupid and decidedly “un-Texan”.

I think that it can be said that Rick Perry, like many who have risen from the hard-scrabble in the West, does not suffer fools gladly.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:24 pm

Just that sarcasm thing, spqr.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:24 pm

I think that it can be said that Rick Perry, like many who have risen from the hard-scrabble in the West, does not suffer fools gladly.

Probably better to not be thought of as one before you slap leather, AD. Just sayin’…

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:26 pm

you FansofRick (FoR) should realize that most of America doesn’t know Mr. Perry as well as you think you do. They see him being caught clueless when asked about the impact of his new tax plan on tax revenue and acting cutesy about the “birther” stuff and are left scratching their heads.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:30 pm

I, like SPQR, think that the problem here is not with Perry, but with your perception of Perry.
Perhaps you should step back from the desktop, and go have some dinner, and perhaps indulge in some liquid “attitude adjustment”?
This entire controversy might have a quite different appearance come the dawn.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:30 pm

94- Well, at least he hasn’t scheduled his advance men into 57 states.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:32 pm

I, like SPQR, think that the problem here is not with Perry, but with your perception of Perry.

When he’s polling at 6%, it seems I’m in good company.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:44 pm

How long before Mitt Romney comes out with his rap album?

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:44 pm

Polls are but a snapshot view, what matters is what happens in the IA caucus, and when real voters start casting real votes (NH?).

Then we’ll all find out whether or not Mr. Perry is “hat”, or “cattle”; along with all of the others.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:46 pm

And, on a lighter note, from the TMI File:

“…Midler declared ‘sex with Geraldo was nothing to write home about!’…”

-H/T Hot Air

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 5:52 pm

Then we’ll all find out whether or not Mr. Perry is “hat”, or “cattle”; along with all of the others.

Indeed we will.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 6:00 pm

“…Midler declared ‘sex with Geraldo was nothing to write home about!’…”

That poor guy… sex with Bette Midler. Why didn’t he just get with Ethel Merman, the genuine article?

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 6:02 pm

Belly up, boys… Colonel’s buyin’…

http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2011/10/new-polls-show-1.php

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 6:14 pm

Who would want to have sex with Geraldo who looks like the lovechild of Morgan Freeman and Kanye West.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 6:20 pm

Col: CNN/TIME?
When have those guys been right about anything?

Let’s see what Ras has to say.

And then, how Michael Barone breaks down the internals.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 6:26 pm

‘goggles they do nothin’

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/26/2011 @ 6:33 pm

And no baseball tonight!
If The Comish’ had expended half the effort on “anti-rain dancers” as he has in his pissing contest with Frank McCourt, it wouldn’t be raining in St.Louis.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (30e753) — 10/26/2011 @ 6:43 pm

This is all interesting.

Why don’t we just say another four years of Obama is a great idea and be done with it?

Ag80 (ec45d6) — 10/26/2011 @ 7:27 pm

74. “if the only way the GOP can win a Presidential election is by nominating one of the least conservative Republicans in the field..”

Indeed, it is the only way Republicans, those that pay to play, can achieve their ends. Now, Hai and daley, to name just a couple, may have ends that mean little to the players, yet ends that are also met, but a significant number do not.

Some 57% will not be voting Urkel come hell or high water. Unfortunately for the Beltway GOP, 30%, more than half, hold them in similar ill regard, likewise considering them the enemy.

23 Senate Democrat seats are up this term. The turnout for the GOP nominee will depend greatly on primary results and October polling in those contests.

64. Colonel, you’ve put up sound and fury but precious little beyond agitprop. I say Dead Meat, if he were to live and win, would meet impeachment, trial, investigation and gridlock without ceasing, a budget he can neither veto nor accept, yada, yada. Kennedy has promised not to die or retire until he’s gone so who needs a moderate Democrat as POTUS?

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 7:46 pm

It’s amusing when someone who happily links truthers with ‘Perry is a bilderberger’ nonsense theories then moans that Perry did not sufficiently dispose of birther crap (especially when Perry did dispose of it on the most honest grounds available).

Romney fans continue to show a lack of character, which makes perfect sense when you figure they don’t find Romney’s lack of character to be problematic.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/26/2011 @ 7:49 pm

106. As PeeWee pointed out threads ago(could’ve given Cost a hat tip, but let it go) polls are not terribly meaningful re: the final outcome. We might allow they indicate the zeitgeist of the moment.

No one likes their ride and we’ve 5 or 6 gelded ponies who are regressing to the mean.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 7:59 pm

Dustin,

I know you care deeply, there are discussions going on, the senate and the house will be ours, if Romney is nominated the dems have a 100% chance of having an obstructionist liberal in the presidency so acommidations are being planned 4 years is a long time to wait but Romney wont win reelection or Obama will be term limited

EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:05 pm

ColonelHaiku, please, share with us what wonderful state you live in. I, for one, would like to compare your state’s success rate in seeing an increase in jobs to that of Texas.

Or is your state of residence a national security secret?

What a pathetic person you are that you did not understand that Perry was pulling the Parade reporter’s chain. You must be a real bundle of fun when you get together with both your friends.

retire05 (a9f846) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:14 pm

Gary,

Perry and Romney support is pretty solid. My reasoning is that Romney’s run, lost,lost badly, flipped flopped, been slammed – so anyone voting for him – got to have been solidly in his camp – and after being pummeled by the press, and the Rinos anyone thinking of voting for Perry isnt sitting on yhe fence either.

Bachmann’s support is like this too but its small

Cain however, and the rest, Paul Gingrich – weak

EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:16 pm

And thank you Canada for enacting gun control laws which still haven’t stopped people killing each other for no reason.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:30 pm

doh,

living in qatar – there are alot of canadians there, having to listen to their liberal bs

EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:43 pm

114. “Or is your state of residence a national security secret?”

Oh, noes. Hai scrounges up other’s resume’s off the net and posts their last known address so if it were possible that someone in that general locale hated haters in the manner to which he’s accustomed they’d mess the miscreant up.

Meanwhile the big brave man hides behind fractured verse and nondescript alias. Take him at his word, he has principles.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:44 pm

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/10/send-in-the-clowns-2.php

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:46 pm

“At this rate TPaw, my ex-guv, will make of himself a tempting VP pick for a conservative-if he can win a state or two.”

– the Great Carnac on June 7, 2011

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:49 pm

gary, retire05

look Col is a good guy, we strongly disagree, he feels a need to get his digs in, but outing people doesnt work – dont go all IMDW

Texas has a record and if Romney does lose this race which still can and could happen, after all the polls tighten considerably just a fe weeks before and I think also the arrogance of thee Iowans, Floridians, and whatever they call those pot smoking craies in HH – the rest of the states have nominating processes that go FAR BEYOND the presidency and are tired of the low life states demanding firsties and picking our presidential candidates

The other 47 states of rights too.

EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:50 pm

“Bastardi says the next 10 days will be the coldest of the season, particularly in the South.”

– the Great Carnac on January 10, 2011

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:52 pm

“whether that will have any impact on the climate is debatable”

Whether Puce is a pink or a beige is also open to debate. We are about to get answers re: Dave’s predictions, about 2 years awaitin’.

The Tambora eruption and another, unidentified eruption, about 1812, spiked atmospheric CO2 50% to 450ppm. It is being recognized of late that volcanism and electromagnahelic minima are positively correlated.

If you have a prediction for global ave. temps in 2015(lets just go with satellites, please), better make a pitch soon. We’ll debate the facts later.”

– the Great Carnac on October 14th, 2008

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:53 pm

“Now, Hai and daley, to name just a couple, may have ends that mean little to the players”

Gary – Fiat Money! BOOOOO!!!!!!!!

daleyrocks (9896ff) — 10/26/2011 @ 8:57 pm

I wonder if zionists have a problems with christians living with them?

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:00 pm

Ooooooooooooooooooooooooh I’m Mitt Romney and I’m coming to getcha.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:02 pm

“I, for one, would like to compare your state’s success rate in seeing an increase in jobs to that of Texas.”

retire05 – Did you ever explain what was going on in the Massachusetts economy during Romney’s tenure as governor to explain changes in employment figures or are you just content to throw out meaningless numbers lacking context, sort of like the comparisons Dustin plucked out of the Texas Fact Book or whatever publication the State Comptroller publishes every year.

Do you have any mirrors where you live?

daleyrocks (9896ff) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:03 pm

DohBiden – Wanna see me shoot a coyote or gary shoot a hunk of cheese or a dead Northern?

daleyrocks (9896ff) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:05 pm

120. Pawlenty was running, ostensibly, for President, and I told Ace when his corpulence was pimping Tim, that ‘he kinda blows’ and again he ‘is a waste of breath’, etc. Ace, thence not long removed, banned me with a few other Palinistas in a snit.

122. And sure enough in central MN we hit -25 the next evening, the coldest night of the season throughout.

Ace is backing Perry now, at least this week.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:05 pm

Naaaaaaaaaaah I want to see Romney dress as the boogeyman.

Israel allows anyone in.

Romney is a pathetic fool.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:10 pm

“I thought I made clear by the comparison to Tobin that if Rubin was doing her thing at Commentary, it would not elicit the same type of ire from people like Erickson (who, afaik, hasn’t jumped on Tobin the same way).”

Karl – You claimed that Rubin’s former colleagues at Commentary, specifically Tobin because you believe he as pro-Romney as Rubin, are not subjected to the same level of criticism or scrutiny. You did not, however, dismiss Tobin as a lazy groupie whose writing should be dismissed, unless I missed it somewhere.

daleyrocks (9896ff) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:15 pm

124. Tonight the EU has a deal to pay Greece 50 cents on the dollar for the remaining $16 Billion they owe Europe’s banks(and Morgan Stanley) for the year.

Morgan Stanley is into Europe for $39 Billion, a lot of it in France. AIG insures all these bets on sovereigns welching.

Greece is totally hosed, they put out bids a week or two back and were asked to pay 168% for a year note. Now nobody will lend at any price.

Moody’s has already put France on notice, this is the trigger for a downgrade. Contagion everywhere. Mark the tape FIB.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:16 pm

“Israel allows anyone in.”

DohBiden – When was the last time David Duke was in Israel?

daleyrocks (9896ff) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:17 pm

🙄 Is this conspiracy against Romney also extending to wall street.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:17 pm

Oh I meant christians not Herr Davey.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:19 pm

131. Non sequitir, Karl did not imply he even reads Tobin or gives a rip about him. You’re a trifler.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:22 pm

“131. Non sequitir, Karl did not imply he even reads Tobin or gives a rip about him. You’re a trifler.”

gary – BS. Karl specifically introduced his name twice. Try again dunce.

daleyrocks (9896ff) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:26 pm

We should except all christian refugees screw what the left say.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:38 pm

137. Sticks and stones.., effete one. He used Tobin as an example of a Commentary holdover whose work would not merit the scrutiny given a WaPo wonk. His or her merits were irrelevant to the point, only the employer.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 9:48 pm

Did you ever explain what was going on in the Massachusetts economy during Romney’s tenure as governor to explain changes in employment figures or are you just content to throw out meaningless numbers lacking context,

LOL

Those were boom years. 2003 to 2007.

Context to you is to ignore all evidence and create bizarre comparisons, transparently ad hoc.

If you really think MA is governed better or as well as Texas, then you are not conservative.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:03 pm

123. Defaming Solar and Climate ‘science’ are hobbies that I’ve ignored since the antiChrist ascended.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:05 pm

btw, my source was the Department of Commerce, The Texas Fact Book did not modify their data at all. I already explained this to Daleyrocks, and I know he’s 100% aware of it when he pretends the data was somehow cheating MA.

MA’s huge government got bigger under Romney. It is the reason MA showed no growth under Romney. Government got in the way of prosperity.

There is no illusion to Texas’s success relative to other states. Shilling for Romney doesn’t justify pretending Taxachusetts was governed as well as Texas is.

Romneycare alone has lost many billions. Perry’s 12 years of budgets haven’t brought Texas even a penny of annual debt.

Daleyrocks has weird questions like ‘tell me what’s going on in MA!’ He’s unable to offer the excuse, so he’s insinuated there is one, and if you don’t volunteer his argument for him, that’s proof you’re a liar. But no… MA’s government sucked under Romney, and Romney’s performance sucked in all categories I’m aware of.

I don’t support politicians who ban guns, ramp up the gun tax wildly, impose health care mandates, increase spending levels, and lie to my face about their core principles, which flip flop as the winds change. I don’t care about talking the talk. I want a leader who doesn’t have to promise he will show some spine on reforms… I want a leader who actually has shown spine on reforms.

Does Romney need an excuse for his job creation record, dead last among all GOP governors? Yes. That’s what Daleyrocks is essentially telling you. Does Perry? Obviously not, with by far the best record on job creation because Texas practices conservatism instead of merely talking about it and sneering at reality.

The RINOs want to con conservatives into rejecting Perry. They might even succeed, but given how hard they are working, my guess is they lack confidence in their efforts.

I want all governors emulating Perry’s policies on budgeting, and all GOP legislators practicing appropriations like Perry did as a fiscal hawk legislator. Let’s cut to the chase: rewarding Romney with the nomination will directly send a message to every would-be RINO in congress that Romneycare and lying about abortion views and gun grabbing and spending hikes and gun taxes and employing illegals and whining about being victimized like the lamest democrats to are each totally acceptable to the GOP.

The GOP has sent that message with George HW Bush, Bob Dole, and John Mccain. I say we stop sending that message as soon as possible by rallying behind the guy with the hard earned results the RINOs are so desperate to explain away.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:14 pm

Dustin, well said.

The cure for Carter v2.0 is not George H. W. Bush v2.0.

Even if we accept the “Romney is more electable” canard at face value, this should apply to 2016 as well as 2012.

beer 'n pretzels (2f4b27) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:25 pm

121. IMDW? In my dying words; imadickwad? What?

Too little, too late.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:27 pm

143. Second. Hope its not over by March 6th.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 10:37 pm

We need to beat Obama in 2012 honestly he and his social justice minions need to be sent packing.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/26/2011 @ 11:08 pm

Dustin

Romney is a Republican by religious tradition only, but he is a democrat – there will not be any difference between Obama and Romney if elected.

Trying to “prove” the case to someone who is NEVER going to acknowledge the case is why Perry is thinking that going to the debates now was a bad idea –

In other words – dont let them define the argument by trying to give them facts it never works

EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 10/27/2011 @ 1:27 am

Like me, Ms. Rubin is a very big fan of Paul Ryan. Her enthusiastic writing in the WaPo about him, and in particular about the possibility that he might run for the GOP presidential nomination for 2012, was mostly focused on the legislation with which Rep. Ryan has been most closely associated as the ranking member and, since January 2011, chair of the hugely important House Budget Committee. Chairman Ryan’s positions on non-fiscal matters — including foreign policy and domestic issues of importance to “social conservatives/family values voters” — are stoutly right-of-center, especially from someone from a “purple” state; but she didn’t write much about those positions, and I don’t know if that was a deliberate omission or not.

Since Chairman Ryan announced his decision not to run, however, Ms. Rubin has roughly split her prodigious output between criticism of Obama and the Dems, boosterism for Gov. Romney, and attacks on the other remaining GOP candidates, with most of those attacks focused on Rick Perry. She’s taken some of the Romney campaign’s most over-the-top collaboration with Democratic general election themes — e.g., the meme that Rick Perry is somehow a racist because the property owner of his remote private-property deer lease hadn’t painted over a racially offensive traditional place-name painted on a rock — and she’s embellished on them, giving new meaning to the phrase “over the top.” Some of her criticism of Gov. Perry drips with east coast elitism and anti-Texas bigotry, and while her target may have been Gov. Perry, she’s managed to offend quite a few other Texans in the process, me included. She has been promiscuous in her disregard of Ronald Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment. So I’ve been very disappointed with her blogging lately, and I’d fear she’s on her way to becoming the WaPo’s David Brooks but for the fact that George Will already fills that slot.

Given the importance of our goal — defeating Obama, holding onto or expanding the GOP’s control of the House, and capturing a solid working majority (possibly a mostly filibuster-proof one) in the Senate — the GOP primary has now become, for me, an exercise in choosing the least-worst alternative. That sounds grim, and it’s unromantic, and it’s the exact opposite of the boisterous and pathological exuberance that Barack Obama’s cult-members, er, voters displayed in 2008. But, for example, the most plausible miracle that could save Barack Obama’s presidential career would be for Ron Paul, Barbara Bachmann, or Jon Huntsman to capture the GOP nomination. Mind you, I think the chances of any of those three, or of Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich, suddenly racing from way behind to capture the nomination are quite remote. But they each have a better chance of pulling that kind of upset than Obama has of fixing the economy by November 2012; the odds of that are so infinitesimally small that they are, for all real-world purposes, zero.

By the time I can cast a primary vote in Texas, the GOP nomination will almost certainly be sewn up by either Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, or Rick Perry. I’m sick to death of the idea that the preferences of a tiny number of GOP voters in Iowa and New Hampshire will once again count for more in the nomination process than all of the rest of the GOP voters in the country combined. I’m not especially happy about the prospects of Nevada (where the GOP couldn’t even defeat Harry Reid in 2010) or Florida (which went for Obama in 2008 by quite a large margin) then effectively deciding the nomination. I’ve some hope that the folks of South Carolina will do a better job of representing the “average composite American GOP voter.” But regardless of who wins the nomination, after 2012 I’m going to get seriously involved in efforts to radically revamp this pathetic kindergarten playground squabble that our presidential primary elections have turned into.

I have substantial reservations about Gov. Romney, Mr. Cain, and Gov. Perry — and none of the others are serious candidates anymore. But there are also many things I like about each of those three; whichever of them becomes the nominee, my vote in November 2012 will be a vote for them and not just against Obama. (In my mind, my vote in 2008 was against Obama and for Gov. Palin; I just had to mark John McCain’s name to accomplish those goals.) And any of the three could quite conceivably demonstrate political skills and wisdom over the course of a campaign that would cause me to revise my current opinions of them substantially upward. That’s actually my fondest hope at the moment.

Ms. Rubin, though, does the GOP no favors in the big picture by becoming her newspaper’s attack dog for all but “GOP establishment” politicians. I think she ought to keep her job blogging for the WaPo, but it would be good for her to relocate to somewhere in Redstate America — say, Tulsa or Cheyenne, or maybe even (gasp!) Fort Worth. She can cultivate her Beltway contacts (which are apparently quite good) from anywhere, but she needs to learn about what life is like in some town where government is not the local industry.

Beldar (510d54) — 10/27/2011 @ 2:24 am

@ Dustin (#142): I’m going to quibble with you. If either Romney, Cain, or Perry could manage to campaign and govern as conservatively as Bush-41 did after Ronald Reagan had rubbed off on him for eight years, that might not be the best of all possible worlds, and we might all be somewhat disappointed. But it would still be an enormous relief — and probably enough to keep the country from piling upon on the reefs of permanent disaster.

Bush père was much less conservative by nature — and indeed, more pragmatic, often at the expense of principles — than Bush fils, and even Dubya ended up making more compromises of his conservative principles than any of us are happy about in hindsight, including him and Dick Cheney.

But holy cow, it’s not hard for me to say whether I preferred America under Bush-41 or Bush-43 to America under Carter, Clinton, and Obama. I’ve just finished reading, within a few weeks of each other, Rumsfeld’s and Cheney’s memoirs, and I’ll turn to Dubya’s shortly. Compared to the Lilliputians of the Obama Administration, from its haughty organizer- and egghead-in-chief on down, all those men from our team were Titans.

Beldar (510d54) — 10/27/2011 @ 2:56 am

Let me point out one more thing that I think is becoming increasingly impossible to miss when comparing George W. Bush’s presidency to Barack Obama’s:

George W. Bush husbanded his political capital. He came to the table in 2000 with the shortest stack of chips since Abe Lincoln, having lost the national popular vote and having only managed the narrowest of electoral college wins after the month-long recount circus in Florida was undone by a 7/2 vote of the SCOTUS. He parlayed some modest early successes into a somewhat better position by the time that 9/11 changed everything and everyone. And his handling of that challenge won him a cache of political capital sufficient to beat John Kerry by five million votes after a record-breaking national turn-out — even though there were no WMDs in Iraq, something on which he’d gambled massive amounts of political capital and, arguably, had spent with only questionable returns.

But political capital must be spent; hoarded too tightly it becomes worthless, moot. No one can dispute that by the day he left office, George W. Bush had spent damned near every dime of political capital that had passed through his fingers over the previous decade and a half (going back to his election as governor of Texas). But even after the 2006 midterms gave us Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid, he managed to continue to use the constitutional, institutional reins of government effectively through and including that final day.

Do you know what George W. Bush did for his nation on his last day of office? He didn’t vomit forth a great stinking mass of presidential pardons like Clinton and Carter did, and like Obama almost assuredly will. How much credit did he get with his conservative base for that? Hell, his own Veep, Cheney, was (and still is) pissed that he wouldn’t grant an outright pardon to Scooter Libby, and the other 99.999% of the public didn’t notice one way or another. But with each passing month of additional distance and the associated clarity in hindsight, and with the benefit of sharp comparison from the clown college that infested 1600 Pennsylvania after Dubya and Laura came home to Texas, George W. Bush is looking more and more shrewd — more and more an improbable, unappreciated master of long-term political strategery.

Again, I know lots of people are stiff chuffed about what they perceive to be Dubya’s failings; there are more than a few, and some of them were serious — and indeed hindsight has proved some of them more serious than we appreciated then.

Even in Texas, and even with respect to the most successful dynastic family since the Adams, no one ever confused the Bush-41 and -43 presidencies for JFK’s Camelot. Adults can easily remember the 2000 presidential debates — grand arguments about how we should spend the peace dividend from the end of the Cold War, and who could deliver the biggest bribe to (non-means-tested) seniors in the form of a Medicare prescription drug plan, and whether Social Security did or didn’t have, or ought to get, a lockbox.

By September 12, 2001, most of that stuff had been rendered silly and meaningless. Now we’re older and sadder; are we wiser? I don’t know. But man, if we could merely turn back the clock to, say, 2007, wouldn’t that be like getting a new lease on life for everyone in America?

Write down this prediction, and hold me to it:

Whoever wins the GOP nomination, the most sustained and emotional applause at the GOP convention this year will be for Bush-41, Bush-43, and their respective brides.

Beldar (510d54) — 10/27/2011 @ 3:21 am

And Beldar hits it out of the park with a triple-comment whammy. Well said Sir.

Stashiu3 (601b7d) — 10/27/2011 @ 4:12 am

Very comprehensive overview, Beldar, nowe for all of
Rubin’s shortcomings in analysis, this was uncalled for;

http://theothermccain.com/2011/10/27/ericksons-anti-semitic-screed/

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:30 am

“If you really think MA is governed better or as well as Texas, then you are not conservative.”

Dustin – If you can point out where I said that, please do, otherwise you are just fantasizing again about what you believe people are saying.

Boom years my butt. You Perrykrishnas have no understanding of the Massachusetts economy and you keep proving it with every ignorant comment. Sorry, but it’s true.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 6:20 am

The days when RT 128, was the driver behind it, are long past, daley, from what my contacts over there
tell me, most of whom are in the Tea Party.

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 6:24 am

“The Texas Fact Book did not modify their data at all. I already explained this to Daleyrocks, and I know he’s 100% aware of it when he pretends the data was somehow cheating MA.”

Dustin – Another straw man among many from you. I did not claim Texas modified the data. I claimed the comparisons they presented, for the reasons I explained, were meaningless, yet those were the comparisons you trumpeted to tout Rick Perry’s greatness. Weak.

The standard by which Perrytards insist on measuring Rick Perry’s spending, growth in discretionary real per capita which looks great, rather than actual discretionary spending which doubled or total spending including federal government reimbursements, when applied to Romney’s tenure you dismiss as sophistry because it makes his spending record look good. Weak again.

There is plenty to criticize Romney on, but you just can’t do it on a consistent, intellectually honest basis. The jobs comparison is just another example of an out of context number plucked from thin air.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 6:34 am

“The days when RT 128, was the driver behind it, are long past, daley, from what my contacts over there tell me, most of whom are in the Tea Party.”

ian – Maybe now ian, but certainly not in 2002 when Romney was elected after the tech bubble burst and those companies were going through massive restructurings that depressed the area for years. Add in layoffs in the financial services sector, not exclusive to Massachusetts and the numbers explain themselves. Heck, you can even look them up.

Perrytards, however, would rather sound like parrots and just keep repeating numbers without trying to understand them. Why?

It doesn’t help there cause if there are rational explanations for numbers that make Perry’s opponents look bad.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 6:41 am

their cause not there cause

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 6:41 am

ian – I can pick apart the surface level talking points of Dustin and retire05 all day long, because that’s all they are. They have demonstrated no intellectually curiosity or honesty in making valid arguments. It’s tedious and boring, but it exposes lazy thinking.

I would much rather spend whole threads talking about the non-issue of Romney’s lawn care service provider hiring illegal immigrant employees.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 6:49 am

daleyrocks,

I have mocked Tobin in prior comment threads when debating Commentary’s pro-Romney slant with the Col. I haven’t done a separate post on him because, well, he’s writing for Commentary, not the WaPo… which, again, is my point.

Karl (37b303) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:03 am

Well Tobin hasn’t been particularly prescient either;

he GOP Race is Going to be a Snore
Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary
09.07.2011 – 10:38 PM

The big story at the Republican debate at the Reagan Library was Rick Perry’s debut on the presidential stage. The question for the GOP was whether the Texas governor who vaulted to a huge lead after entering the race last month could sustain that margin in the heat of the battle. The answer was that by the end of the evening nothing had changed. Despite constant attacks from his opponents, Perry is still way ahead and set up to win the nomination easily

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:12 am

#127, daleyrocks, any stats I provide here are not taken from the Texas Fact Book or the State Comptroller’s office. I use facts from the BLS, and have used the U.S. Debt Clock state facts.

What was going on in Massachussets between Jan. 2003/2007? I would assume, had Romney been the good governor you seem to think he was, that his state was at that time, doing as well as the rest of the nation, including Texas. If you can show some reason why Massachussets was not doing as well as the rest of the lower 48, then by all means, provide your sources.

Not all the effects of Romney’s four short years would have been felt immediately and during his term as governor. But there is no doubt that his governance and policies had an affect when he was gone. Compare the Debt to GDP of Massachussets to even the cash strapped, and deeply in debt, New Jersey, and you will see that New Jersey is in better shape and has less public debt per citizen than Massachussets. Same with New York and California. And I don’t think you will find one person who makes the claim that California is solvent.

Romney touts his success in bringing down the unemployment rate in Massachussets but has to do that by truely comparing apples and oranges. He compares his UE rate when he left office in Jan. 2007 to the Texas UE rate now. That is quite convenient for Romney since he was not governor when the crash of Sept/Oct., 2007 happened. He cannot compare the time frame between him and Perry for the simple reason that even while he was governor, Texas did better in lowering the UE rate. According to the BLS, the UE rate when Romney took office was 6.1% and 5.4% when he left for a reduction of 7/10th of a percent. Compare that to Texas in Jan. 2003 at 7.% and Jan., 2007 (when Romney left office) at 4.8%. for a reduction of 2.2%. That is why Romney has to [dishonestly] compare MA in Jan. 2007 to Texas in Sept. 2011.

I could go on and on. Massachussetts is deeply in debt (Debt to GDP almost 25.5%) compared to Texas at 18.%), public debt per citizen is $15,000+ to half of that in Texas.

Now, you may dislike Perry for any number of reasons. But you cannot dimiss the success he has had in directing the State Legislature to achieve policies that have allowed Texas to maintain a business friendly environment that has allowed for job growth and low taxes. Year after year, financial groups like Forbes and Bloomberg continue to rate Texas as the best place to conduct business. People vote with their feet and they leave states where opportunity is low and migrate to states where opportunity is high. No one is clammoring to go to Massachussets.

retire05 (a9f846) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:18 am

In other news, the American economy grows by 2.5 percent over the last 3 months.. Now about that economy argument…..

The Emperor (cd85f3) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:24 am

I also am in wholehearted agreement with Beldar’s three comments above.

I further join ian in calling some of Erickson’s comments about Rubin out of line (which is why I didn’t quote them). I didn’t like the Left calling neocons the Likud, and it’s equally out of line coming from the Right. On the other hand, NRO’s Jim Geraghty, while defending Rubin, also wrote that Erickson is not anti-Semitic, so I wouldn’t want to go that far about someone I don’t know. And I’m really uninterested in relitigating the Pollard case, which seems to be the nub of Erickson’s attack on that score.

What was interesting to me in the exchange was Rubin dismissively referring to Erickson as a mere blogger while calling herself a Washington Post journalist. Pretty sure people on the news side of the WaPo might debate that one. But more significant to me is how that sort of condescension plays into why she bothers others on the Right.

Karl (37b303) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:26 am

retire05 – Let’s take your straw men one at a time:

“daleyrocks, any stats I provide here are not taken from the Texas Fact Book or the State Comptroller’s office. I use facts from the BLS, and have used the U.S. Debt Clock state facts.”

I said Dustin gets his data from that Texas book not you. Most of the time you don’t provide a source for your stats.

“What was going on in Massachussets between Jan. 2003/2007? I would assume, had Romney been the good governor you seem to think he was, that his state was at that time, doing as well as the rest of the nation, including Texas.”

Thank you for finally admitting you do not know anything about the economy of Massachusetts. That goes a long way to explaining why a state more dependent on industries suffering during the time period Romney than Texas might experience some job losses. Since you were merely interested in squawking a number than understanding it, you can look into what I discussed with ian in #156.

“Not all the effects of Romney’s four short years would have been felt immediately and during his term as governor. But there is no doubt that his governance and policies had an affect when he was gone.”

Absolutely true, and it will also be true for Perry after he leaves office. On your New Jersey comparison, how much did Romney increase Massachusetts borrowings during his short term in office and what relevance does New Jersey have with this thread?

“Romney touts his success in bringing down the unemployment rate in Massachussets but has to do that by truely comparing apples and oranges.”

Comparing beginning and ending unemployment rates for his term as governor is not apples and oranges. Comparing Rick Perry’s beginning and ending unemployment rates as governor is comparing apples to apples. Mixing Romney and Perry is comparing apples to oranges, I agree, just like comparing the different states in that Texas Fact Book. Context is needed.

“That is quite convenient for Romney since he was not governor when the crash of Sept/Oct., 2007 happened.”

Did I sleep through that crash?

“Now, you may dislike Perry for any number of reasons.”

I dislike dishonest arguments that attempt to pump up his greatness at the expense of others. How many times do I have to repeat this?

“But you cannot dimiss the success he has had in directing the State Legislature to achieve policies that have allowed Texas to maintain a business friendly environment that has allowed for job growth and low taxes.”

retire05, were you not the one making the case that the governor had very little actual power in Texas? Please correct me if I am wrong.

“No one is clammoring to go to Massachussets.”

The state has some great places to vacation. Given a choice, though, I would not open a business in or invest in the bonds of any Northeastern state, Florida, Illinois or California

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:46 am

“What was interesting to me in the exchange was Rubin dismissively referring to Erickson as a mere blogger while calling herself a Washington Post journalist.”

Karl – A capital “J” journalist?

Erickson apologized for the Likud comment this morning.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:50 am

162.In other news, the American economy grows by 2.5 percent over the last 3 months.. Now about that economy argument…..

No, that’s an annualized rate of 2.5% in the last quarter. 2.5% is, in fact, pretty anemic growth. So, yes, let’s have that economy argument…something tells me you’re underarmed for it.

Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:53 am

Erickson really is finding new ways to aggravate people, I don’t know if that is contingent to being on CNN.

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:56 am

Romneytards tell me is Wall Street part of the anti-mormon conspiracy?

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:59 am

“Romneytards tell me is Wall Street part of the anti-mormon conspiracy?”

DohBiden – Do the Jooooos hate Mormons?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:10 am

“But you cannot dimiss the success he has had in directing the State Legislature to achieve policies that have allowed Texas to maintain a business friendly environment that has allowed for job growth and low taxes. Year after year, financial groups like Forbes and Bloomberg continue to rate Texas as the best place to conduct business.”

reire05 – You’ll notice I have not dismissed his success. What I dismiss is dishonest talking points.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:15 am

BTW, 3rd Qt-1979- 2.9%, so we’re doing worse than
the malaise days without the oil shock.

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:19 am

Chucky, you are correct that economic growth has been and remains anemic, during this post Bush recession period. Though things do seem to be slowly improving. But you are remiss in not acknowledging the fact that spectacular growth is unlikely as long as the current Republican Congress finds it politically convenient to restrain growth by blocking every effort by this Administration and Democrats in Congress to stimulate the economy.

Spartacvs (b12366) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:22 am

Write down this prediction, and hold me to it:
Whoever wins the GOP nomination, the most sustained and emotional applause at the GOP convention this year will be for Bush-41, Bush-43, and their respective brides.

At a convention which nominates Romney? Gee, no surprise there.

No better indication that the GOP has failed to learn the lessons of the Bush presidencies. And, no better way to give the middle finger salute to the Tea Party.

beer 'n pretzels (2f4b27) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:30 am

Big gun int getting in the way of innovation & the job creators yet again

Spartacvs (b12366) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:33 am

Spartacvs,

So, the “post Bush” recession would be the Obama recession–Correct?

Also, if you notice any set of charts–the economy/employment/etc. took a nose dive after the 2006 elections that gave Democrats control of both houses of congress.

Congress is the part of government that makes the laws (and taxes, regulations, etc.). The President just implements them (or has a chance to veto them–Which Bush should have done more of–both before and after the elections of 2006).

My problem with Bush II is that he governed domestically like a Democrat and ran foreign policy like a Republican.

That is why Obama looks like Bush II domestically.

And frankly, Obama tried to do foreign policy different than Bush, which failed, and now he is copying Bush’s foreign policies–And doing a poor job at that.

It has been 913 days since the Democrats in the senate have last passed a budget–They are driving the country down this road to ruin without any plan. The Democrats don’t want the country to see their plans.

And, the Federal budget in this “post Bush Recession” has increased 5% over last year–What recession?

BfC (2ebea6) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:36 am

@Chuck
However you choose to twist it, it’s still good news for the Obama campaign.. And the way it is going, seems like it will get better-unfortunately.

The Emperor (ab2326) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:39 am

________________________________________________

George W. Bush is looking more and more shrewd — more and more an improbable, unappreciated master of long-term political strategery.

But it also has to be said that almost every major blunder of Republican presidents since at least Herbert Hoover has been when they’ve allowed their liberal side to get the best of them.

So Bush never vetoed bloated budgets, his father was snagged by “read my lips, no new taxes” and placed a stealth jurist, ultra-liberal David Souter, onto the Supreme Court, Reagan secretly negotiated with hostage-taking Iran (ie, he pulled a Jimmy-Carter stunt), Nixon initiated a lot of the affirmative-action/political-correctness nonsense of today and was into price controls, and — this is a biggie — Hoover raised taxes on upper-income Americans during the Great Depression from around 25% all the way to a morale-crushing 70%.

Liberal bias — whether in a Republican or Democrat (natch), or independent — makes just about anyone rather foolish, two-faced and, well, “mentally challenged.”

Meanwhile, the “goddamn America” ultra-liberal currently occupies the White House.

Mark (411533) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:45 am

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/the_premature_coronation_of_romney.html

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:50 am

However you choose to twist it, it’s still good news for the Obama campaign.. And the way it is going, seems like it will get better-unfortunately

I’m not twisting it, you dim-witted ninny. The economy didn’t grow 2.5% in one quarter, it was an annualized rate of 2.5%. That’s how the GDP is reported.

And 2.5% at this stage after a recession is rather paltry.

But don’t believe me, check it for yourself. From 1947-2011, the average GDP growth was better than 3.2%.

172.Chucky, you are correct that economic growth has been and remains anemic, during this post Bush recession period. Though things do seem to be slowly improving. But you are remiss in not acknowledging the fact that spectacular growth is unlikely as long as the current Republican Congress finds it politically convenient to restrain growth by blocking every effort by this Administration and Democrats in Congress to stimulate the economy

Sparty, you are a fool. Back in 2009, when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, Obama passed his stimulus plan…a plan that failed spectacularly. If the Republicans had only stopped the Democrats then, this country wouldn’t have wasted almost $800 billion doing nothing. In fact, Obama had two full years of Democrat control of Congress, and couldn’t do a thing to improve the economy.

Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:59 am

BTW, Spartajoke, from January, 1995, to December, 2006, when the Republicans controlled one or both houses of Congress, average GDP growth was much higher than what we’ve seen under Obama and/or Democrats.

Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:04 am

_______________________________________________

her relentless attacks on Rick Perry (and parallel Romney boosterism)

Unless one is comfortable with squishy politics and/or tactical bone-headedness, I don’t see how such a person can be so firm in his or her convictions about (or confidence in) Romney, Cain or Perry.

I detect lots of do-gooder (ie, left-leaning) biases in certainly Romney, while Perry, with his “heartless” comment and recent clumsiness regarding Obama’s birth certificate, seems prone to undermining himself. Meanwhile, Cain appears to be equally susceptible to the type of tactical goofs that undercut Perry.

Of course, all these shortcomings pale next to those of President “Goddamn America.”

Mark (411533) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:08 am

What is Helen thomases opinion?

Will she tell Rick Perry supporters to go home to europe like she did to the jews?[No she did not say go home to israel you lying leftys].

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:18 am

No Chucky, calculated Republican obstructionism means it takes 60 votes in the Senate to ‘control’ Congress these days. Democrats do not currently have 60 votes in the Senate and they are a minority in the House. So if anyone is upset with Congess and current polling suggests that approval of Congress is at an all time low, then they are upset at Republicans in Congress, whether they realize it or not.

Also, care to volunteer any numbers on where economic growth and unemployment would be today sans even the inadequate stimulus Obama was able to push through Congress?

Also, what benefit did the economy gain from the $1 trillion and rising that Bush wasted on the Messinpotamia and the misadventure in Afghanistan? And the billions wasted on tax cuts for the wealthy? Neither of which were paid for.

Spartacvs (b12366) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:23 am

Romney gets a bum rap for his jackassery./Romneybot

Jimmeh gets a bad rap for shilling for jihadists communists and scoialists. /Carterbot

Honestly Romney worshippers and Jimmy carter worrshippers whine when you criticize their guy.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:24 am

183.No Chucky, calculated Republican obstructionism means it takes 60 votes in the Senate to ‘control’ Congress these days. Democrats do not currently have 60 votes in the Senate and they are a minority in the House

No, Sparty, the Dems had 60 votes in the Senate in 2009. Try again, you ignoramus.

Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:33 am

Worth your implicit admission that it now takes 60 votes in the Senate to control the current Republican Congress.

Spartacvs (b12366) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:35 am

Chucky just hates the fact that the current economic situation was brought on by a Republican administration and now being fixed by a Democrat. Facts just keep getting in the way of his reasoning and that gets him mad. Hence the unprovoked name-calling.

The Emperor (c66744) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:40 am

“Chucky just hates the fact that the current economic situation was brought on by a Republican administration and now being fixed by a Democrat.”

Lovey – Can you point me to the fixing part that you mention?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:57 am

“Also, care to volunteer any numbers on where economic growth and unemployment would be today sans even the inadequate stimulus Obama was able to push through Congress?”

Spurty – I’ll trade you. Where would the numbers be without the passage of ObamaCare, President Oblameless’s war on domestic fossil fuels, and his strangling regulatory burdens?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:00 am

186.Worth your implicit admission that it now takes 60 votes in the Senate to control the current Republican Congress

I’ve never denied that. And let’s not forget it was Robert Byrd who created the 60-vote requirement. What party was he in again?

Chucky just hates the fact that the current economic situation was brought on by a Republican administration and now being fixed by a Democrat

If you think anything Obama has done has actually fixed the economic situation, rather than made it worse, then you are the biggest fool ever to walk the planet.

Here’s what happened: in 2007, a cyclical recession started that was exacerbated by the banking crisis. The banking crisis was created by(a) people borrowing money they couldn’t afford to pay back and using that money frivolously, (b) government backing mortgages and insisting that lending institutions increase loans to unqualified borrowers, and (c) lenders seeing the government assume the risk and acting accordingly.

It was Democrats, not Republicans that blocked efforts to rein in and regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:00 am

socialists*

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:09 am

B-but your cramping my style

/SpartacBS AKA kilgore trout

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:10 am

Sorry Chucky. But the correct answer to what precipitated the banking crisis has little or nothing to do with Fannie or Freddie and everything to do with our inadequately regulated PRIVATE financial industry led by the Masters of the Universe centered on Wall St. I suggest you bone up on such things as toxic assets, AAA ratings and CDS contracts before your next amateur hour attempt to rewrite history.

As an exercise in basic math, you might try taking Fannie & Freddies direct losses out of the equation, to see if it makes any significant difference to Wall Streets self imposed ‘liquidity’ problem.

Spartacvs (b12366) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:30 am

daleyrocks, if you have any information that Massachussets was NOT doing better in 2003-2007 than it is now, please provide that information.

“Thank you for finally admitting you do not know anythinbg about the economy of Massachussets, That goes a long way explainign why a state more dependent on industries suffering during the time period Romney than Texas might experience some job losses.”

The problem with that comment is that you seem to assume there were job losses under Romney. There were not. There was a gain of slightly over 59,000 jobs under Romney, but nothing like the job gains under Perry during the same time frame. Those job gains represented a less than 1% decrease in unemployment in Massachusset, hardly a record to run on, and the reason Romney is not running on his record as governor.

Now, you can continue to spin like a Chinese top, but it doesn’t eliminate the fact that when it comes to job growth and maintaining a low tax structure, Perry has been more successful than Romney was or that Perry has had to go through a decline in the market, a raise in umployment rates all across the nation and a huge influx of population. Texas, in ten years, added 5 million new residents. Massachussets in the last ten years added 198,000.

“Comparing beginning and ending unemployment rates for his term as governor is not apples and oranges. Comparing Rick Perry’s beginning and ending umeployment rates as governor is comparing apples and apples.”

No, it’s not for two simple reasons: Perry is STILL governor, and Perry has had to deal with the economic downturn, which did not affect Romney’s tenure. To compare job creation/loss you have to use the same time frame, not distort the results by using one time frame for one candidate and other time frame for another candidate. Apples to apples.
And I don’t use the Texas Fact Book, so why throw that out there?

“Did I sleep through the crash?”

Although I did say Sept/Oct., 2007 it was 2008. And if you slept through that crash, it was because you were not an investor that watched as 40% of your portfolio disappeared or risked losing your job.

“I dislike dishonest arguments that attempt to pump up his greatness at the expense of others.”

I never said Perry possessed “greatness.” I said he has been, and continues to be, a successful governor who has lead his state in the right direction. What you should dislike are dishonest people who have to use different time frames to defend a candidate and who tries to spin what others have said. But if you did, that would leave you mute.

“retire05, were you not the one making the case that the governor had very little actual power in Texas?”

Nope, wasn’t me. And the only people who make that claim are those who are illiterate about Texas politics. While it is true that the Texas legislature rewrote the Texas Constitution after the Civil War and during Reconstruction to remove a good deal of power to governors, it was because the yankees were stacking the deck in gubernatorial elections back then thinking the legislature would have to go along. So the legislature took a lot of the power from the governor and gave it to the Lt.governor to thwart the northern occupiers.

All that held true until the election of Ma Ferguson. Ma Ferguson lobbied the legislature to give the Governor even more power. Which it did. What those arguing that the Lt. Governor has more power never mention is that Perry was Lt. Governor under Bush. So, ask them if they think Perry was more powerful than Bush was when Bush was governor.

It would also be interesting to compare state debt during the 2003-2007 time frame, adjusted for inflaction. How do you think Romney would fare on that level?

retire05 (a9f846) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:44 am

162. “GDP growing at 2.5%”

Mindless idiocy. Q1, comprising the 2 best months of the year to date, Jan and Feb, was first touted as 2.7%. After three revisions it finished 0.4%.

The CPI is weighted 40% by home values–as an index of plebe investment!–4.0%, core CPI was up 0.8% for the month of August.

The euro has been rising for a month as EU banks sell assets in dollars to scape liquidity together. The yen is at a WWII high and BoJ is printing 5.5 Trillion as we speak.

Q2 is already revised under 1.0%, Q3 was worse and may end in negative territory. The Ministry of Truth knows Friday news three months on is ignored.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:46 am

So the legislature took a lot of the power from the governor and gave it to the Lt.governor to thwart the northern occupiers.

And Perry was successful in both roles, as well as in the legislature.

It’s true that it takes conservatives in multiple roles for Texas’s government to operate the way it does, but Perry has made conservative decisions in each of the necessary roles. His fingerprints are all over the Texas economy.

Romney’s fans hope to find excuses for Romney’s poor performance. Then they turn around and find excuses why Perry doesn’t deserve credit for his excellent performance.

Oh well.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:49 am

‘The chocolate ration, will be increased by three grams, or two, or none’

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:50 am

183. “calculated Republican obstructionism means it takes 60 votes in the Senate to ‘control’ Congress”

Honestly, fellows and ladies, you all need to step it up a few. Look at the fourth-rate ‘minders’ the Collective warrants you are worth.

There are middle school government classes with better talent deployed.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:52 am

You have discovered, albeit belatedly, Dustin, that facts tend to get in the way of these discussions.

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:53 am

It would also be interesting to compare state debt during the 2003-2007 time frame, adjusted for inflaction. How do you think Romney would fare on that level?

Comment by retire05 — 10/27/2011 @ 10:44 am

Consistently one of the worst ten states for debt per capita.

And when Texas faced hard times, Perry had the spine to make cuts to every agency, multiple times, to balance the books despite screams to raise taxes or raid savings. Romney heard the screams for more spending and he responded by increasing spending, taxes, fees while seeing slow growth. Of course, Romney didn’t even attempt to run for reelection because he was very unpopular due to his poor performance and reputation as a weakling. Scott Walker he sure isn’t.

It’s not like Texas didn’t also see many difficult problems too. We just handled them better than MA’s liberal politics would permit. Romney made MA MORE liberal, and now the excuse he offers us is that it’s not his fault. This is not the kind of guy who is going to succeed in DC today, when we need a fighter with honesty. Romney doesn’t even have any honest fanboys, as best as I can tell.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:53 am

You have discovered, albeit belatedly, Dustin, that facts tend to get in the way of these discussions.

Comment by ian cormac — 10/27/2011 @ 10:53 am

Yes sir, that is right.

I need to remember that, though.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:54 am

________________________________________________

I suggest you bone up on such things as toxic assets, AAA ratings and CDS contracts before your next amateur hour attempt to rewrite history.

And keep in mind the idiocy of liberals like our current Attorney General, who — out of compassion, generosity and love (xoxox) — fosters this type of irresponsibility…

freerepublic.com, July 2011:

The Department of Justice is executing a “Witch Hunt” against banks. Through the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, Attorney General Eric Holder is forcing banks to “relax their mortgage underwriting standards and approve loans for minorities with poor credit as part of a new crackdown on alleged discrimination,” according to a published report by Investor’s Business Daily after reviewing court documents.

The DOJ has already extorted $20 million for weak and poor credit loans from banks that “settled out of court rather than battle the federal government and risk being branded racist.” The DOJ admits another 60 banks are already under “investigation.” Holder’s demanding the banks sign “non-disclosure” settlement agreements barring them from talking while allowing the DOJ to operate behind a curtain of secrecy.

The settlements already extracted from banks force them to make “prime-rate mortgages to low income blacks and Hispanics” with credit problems, even if they are living on welfare. According to IBD, the DOJ has ordered banks to advertise that minorities cannot be turned down for a loan “because they receive public aid, such as unemployment benefits, welfare payments or food stamps.” No job; no problem!

Mark (411533) — 10/27/2011 @ 10:57 am

It was Democrats, not Republicans that blocked efforts to rein in and regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Comment by Chuck Bartowski —
Great. It was the Democrats that coerced and forced Bush to make the wrong choices he made that led to the economic failures of his administration. Right. So you agree that it is the Republicans in congress, not Obama that should be blamed should Obama’s economic policies fail. Noted.

The Emperor (75120b) — 10/27/2011 @ 11:06 am

193. “I suggest you bone up on such things as toxic assets, AAA ratings and CDS contracts before your next amateur hour”

Now that I’ve wiped up the coffee spittle, one year ago:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304023804575566100668143676.html

Buffoon, these are just the realized losses. There are 3 million homes awaiting foreclosure overhanging the market. Phoenix is leading the nation into a Prime crash of ARM failures, the PrimeX index is off like 50% in the last month plus.

Fannie and Freddie are underwater $Trillions$. The Fed is talking purchase of more MBS for QE3 as Operation Twist is a failure. They have $2 Trillion on the books already worth pennies on the dollar and the money they paid is sitting in bank reserves collecting 0.25%.

The EU had banned CDS on sovereign debt until last night when their banks are now forced to take 50 cents on the dollar for 16 Billion euros in Greek junk.

Government has failed the world over.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/27/2011 @ 11:13 am

Also, what benefit did the economy gain from the $1 trillion and rising that Bush wasted on the Messinpotamia and the misadventure in Afghanistan? And the billions wasted on tax cuts for the wealthy?

Who has claimed the economy benefited from the wars?

The wealthy paid more taxes after the Bush tax cuts. The tax cuts led to a much better economy as well.

Gerald A (7d960d) — 10/27/2011 @ 11:21 am

Gotta love the unhinged romneyphiles trying to portray an allegiance between Patterico and Van Jones.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 11:38 am

205. Following the Gulf of Tonkin the published increase in economic activity of government purchase of munitions, weapons and wartime infrastructure was $1.30 for every dollar spent.

Today its $0.45 for every tax dollar.

The cost of financing $15 Trillion is part of the reason for collapse, but we’re spending 24% of GDP versus 18%, and borrowing 40% of that.

This has led to a collapse in credit for all borrowers, destined to worsen following last night’s Greek default.

Greece is spending just 150% of revenues and look where its gotten them.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/27/2011 @ 11:43 am

Rubin is just getting silly, now:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/what-if-cain-or-gingrich-had-to-govern/2011/10/27/gIQAoJZNMM_blog.html#pagebreak

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 11:44 am

Comment by Chuck Bartowski — 10/27/2011 @ 10:00 am

Just a reminder to our friends on the Left, as Chuck has done Re Robert Byrd and 60-votes, that it was Veep Hubert Humphrey IIRC who cast the deciding vote to change the Senate Rules in 1965 to decrease the required vote for ending a filibuster from 67 to 60.

The tragedy of the Left is that they are so unaware of History, and completely unprepared to learn from it.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (1e1c13) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:01 pm

Comment by gary gulrud — 10/27/2011 @ 11:43 am

So much of what the govt spends in the private sector today is soaked up by govt-imposed regulatory requirements.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (1e1c13) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:03 pm

Gotta love the idiots who never liked Cain insisting they used to like him.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:05 pm

So you agree that it is the Republicans in congress, not Obama that should be blamed should Obama’s economic policies fail. Noted.

Republicans control 1 house of Congress, and only since January, 2011. Anything that happend from January, 2009, until then rests squarely on the shoulders of Obama and the Democrats.

And while we’re at it, let’s remember that the economy in 2006 was doing just fine. But then the Democrats took control of both houses of Congress in 2007….and the econmy started to tank. So, are you going to blame Congressional Democrats for that?

Chuck Bartowski (4c6c0c) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:17 pm

203. While it is true that Shrub attempted three times to raise in Congress an address of the seeds of the subprime disaster, Queen Frank blocked the effort.

Yes, I hold the inefficacy of his administration against W. His State Dept., CIA and others were in open subterfuge. Appointments of Powell, Bernanke, Paulson, Ridge, etc., a disservice to Amerikkka.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:30 pm

The buck stops at the President’s table, Chucky… Whether Bush or Obama. They are the ultimate deciders in chief. They take the blame or the credit.

The Emperor (7d1808) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:32 pm

“Romney heard the screams for more spending and he responded by increasing spending, taxes, fees while seeing slow growth. Of course, Romney didn’t even attempt to run for reelection because he was very unpopular due to his poor performance and reputation as a weakling.”

Dustin – So many distortions in so few sentences.

Remember your own link pointing out that Romney’s spending rose slower than inflation and population growth. That means it shrank on a per capita constant dollar basis. The “gold standard” by which you measure Perry. Pure sophistry when you apply it to Romney, I know.

Increasing “taxes” and fees – Hey, Perry did the same thing, but you never acknowledge it. Big raspberry there.

Romney not running for reelection? Please explain why it is a measure of his lack of success in a liberal state. You never seem to get around to connecting the dots. If he was as liberal as you describe him, would not he have been incredibly popular? Big disconnect there, buddy.

Perry “balanced” the budget. Wait, so did Romney. SHOCKA!

Next.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:34 pm

215. Peter Fonda is dead on target, Urkel is an ‘effin traitor, and Perry is apt, printing more trillions makes Bernanke a traitor as well.

No last meal, no blindfold, no cigs.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:36 pm

This is what it looks like when supposed conservatives try to explain that liberalism (Romney’s policies in Massachusetts) is equal to conservatism (Perry’s policies in Texas)

But I know better.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:41 pm

Let’s examine something for a minute:

Spartacvs claims that Republicans in the Senate are to blame for Obama’s policies not being enacted. Bush never had 60 Republicans in the Senate, and yet he was able to enact policies. I guess Bush was just more competent at passing legislature than Obama is.

The buck stops at the President’s table, Chucky… Whether Bush or Obama. They are the ultimate deciders in chief. They take the blame or the credit.

You’re the one who is trying to blame Obama’s failures on Congressional Republicans. Now that you’ve learned there are two edges on that sword, you change your tune. One of the many reasons I have absolutely no respect for you, doofus.

Just in case you claim that you weren’t trying to blame Republicans, here were your exact words:

So you agree that it is the Republicans in congress, not Obama that should be blamed should Obama’s economic policies fail.

Chuck Bartowski (e84e27) — 10/27/2011 @ 12:57 pm

As an exercise in basic math…

Comment by Spartacvs — 10/27/2011 @ 10:30am

Spartacvs,

I have asked you many times, using a spread sheet, to show me how the US Economy can grow at 0-2.5% and the US Federal spending can grow at 5-8% (5% last year) and the country would survive?

At some point, the lines cross and the US government will be spending 100% of the economy.

This is unsutainable.

I really don’t care about all the talk about taxes, tax rates, collecting more or not… It is not relevant when the country is borrowing >40% of every dollar spent.

The only sustainable option right now is to cut Federal Spending by ~50%.

It does not matter–If you take 100% of all income and property from “the Rich” (TM Obama/Marx/etc.)–That will fund the Federal budget for one year… Next year, there will be zero rich to soak.

“You don’t make the poor richer by making the rich poorer.”
― Winston S. Churchill

BfC (2ebea6) — 10/27/2011 @ 1:05 pm

Game, set, and match:

http://minx.cc/?post=323105

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/27/2011 @ 1:17 pm

The OWS are accopnlishing 2 things.

1.Making sure Wall Street backed Obama becomes president for life.

2.Defecating on cop cars,trampling on flags.

3-Getting the capitialism out of crony capitialism.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 1:33 pm

Worth your implicit admission that it now takes 60 votes in the Senate to control the current Republican Congress.

This is the new Democrat lie. That Congress is “Republican” – as though the Democrats do not control the Senate.

It is a pretty pathetic attempt to deflect blame from their own incompetence. When was it that the Democratic Congress last passed a budget again?

SPQR (26be8b) — 10/27/2011 @ 1:34 pm

accomplishing*

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 1:57 pm

😆

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 2:28 pm

Lovey – Can you point me to the fixing part that you mention?
Comment by daleyrocks — 10/27/2011 @ 9:57 am

— What the Chimperor meant is that the fix is in.

Icy (0cd2f4) — 10/27/2011 @ 2:49 pm

Rubin is just getting silly, now:
Comment by ian cormac — 10/27/2011 @ 11:44 am

— She wasn’t silly before?

Icy (0cd2f4) — 10/27/2011 @ 2:53 pm

Jennifer Rubin is a butthurt romney fanatic who never liked anyone but Romney.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 2:54 pm

Sparticles needs to start occupying his brain pan.

Icy (0cd2f4) — 10/27/2011 @ 2:55 pm

Lovey needs to study up on parliamentary procedure.

Icy (0cd2f4) — 10/27/2011 @ 2:57 pm

This is the new Democrat lie. That Congress is “Republican” – as though the Democrats do not control the Senate.

Yup. Pathetic, too, since Obama promised he could handle the job, and had plenty of support in the legislature… enough even to pass Obamacare.

The GOP should have actively obstructed and fought. It’s annoying they raised the debt ceiling. The left thinks they are refusing any ground, the low info undecideds are hearing that all the time from the MSM, and the right actually wants the GOP to fight anyway.

The GOP should have simply said ‘no, the debt is already too high… present a balanced budget.’ every single day. This would have led to a short term crisis in DC, and most Americans wouldn’t notice, because we don’t really need this federal government as much as they think we do.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/27/2011 @ 3:03 pm

It was Democrats, not Republicans that blocked efforts to rein in and regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Comment by Chuck Bartowski —

Great. It was the Democrats that coerced and forced Bush to make the wrong choices he made that led to the economic failures of his administration. Right. So you agree that it is the Republicans in congress, not Obama that should be blamed should Obama’s economic policies fail. Noted.

Huh? Now you’re just not making any sense at all. How did you see any such agreement in Chuck’s comment? Are you under the impression that Bush chose how FNMA and FDMC were run? On the contrary, as Chuck informed you, Bush tried to stop them messing up the mortgage market, and Frank and Dodd stopped him. That implies that they’re to blame, not Bush. Or does logic work differently in your universe? (Don’t forget that FNMA and FDMC were run into the ground by D political appointees, because Bush didn’t use his power to make political appointments to them.)

Milhouse (ea66e3) — 10/27/2011 @ 3:04 pm

Huh? Now you’re just not making any sense at all. How did you see any such agreement in Chuck’s comment?

It’s just another sleaze trying to avoid the real argument by playing stupid tricks. He wasn’t sincere, and we shouldn’t expect him to be.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/27/2011 @ 3:06 pm

Anyone who opposes Mitt Romney should be put on death row for treason.

/Sarcasm off

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 3:10 pm

“Anyone who opposes Mitt Romney should be put on death row for treason.”

DohBiden – The Zionist mind control experiments are clearly working on you. Next up, evul corporatist bastids impale you on cattle prods to scare children trick or treating in their neighborhoods.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 4:16 pm

This is the new Democrat lie. That Congress is “Republican” – as though the Democrats do not control the Senate.

And the sad truth is that one can’t rely on the MSM to do anything but parrot and spread the falsehood. And they wonder why NBC and others have become “Must Leave TV”…

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/27/2011 @ 4:16 pm

“Of course, Romney didn’t even attempt to run for reelection because he was very unpopular due to his poor performance and reputation as a weakling.”

Dustin – It occurs to me that I’ve never asked for any support for this statement. It smells like another of your asspulls.

Here are two links to stories about Romney’s decision not to seek reelection. The second is a longer rewritten version of the first.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 4:25 pm

Dustin – Did you know that in 2005, 169 out of 200 members of the Massachusetts legislature were Democrats? How blue is the Texas legislature? Can they override a Rick Perry veto?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 4:28 pm

“And when Texas faced hard times, Perry had the spine to make cuts to every agency, multiple times, to balance the books despite screams to raise taxes or raid savings.”

Dusty Springperry… a few questions for youse:
How big is the engagement ring?
Who’s your bridesmaid?
Will you be wearing white?

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/27/2011 @ 4:30 pm

Scratch question number two, as it will undoubtedly be retire05.

Jaysus, I can almost smell the cabbage from here…

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/27/2011 @ 4:35 pm

“Scratch question number two, as it will undoubtedly be retire05.”

Colonel – retire05 wants to talk about New Jersey and the Great Crash of 2007.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 4:48 pm

daleyrocks #236:

According to late 2005 polls, Romney faced a tough fight had he run for re-election in 2006 but he certainly might have won, especially since his universal health care plan passed in his last year — and I assume that would have helped his popularity in Massachusetts. However, from what I’ve read, the main reason Romney did not run for re-election as Governor in 2006 is that it would have made it harder for him to run in the GOP Presidential primary in 2008. Why? Because Romney would have to tone down his conservative views to win a second term as governor and that would have hurt in him the GOP primary.

It’s not easy being a red speck in a blue state.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:03 pm

He has to use his time accordingly, daley.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:04 pm

And I guess that when Rubin criticizes Perry’s skipping future debates, that will also be an example of the Post manufacturing consent because the Post won’t be giving similar space to a Perry supporter to argue that skipping debates is really a brilliant move on Perry’s part and that anybody who doesn’t agree is really a liberal.

steve (254463) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:05 pm

238. Dusty Springperry… a few questions for youse:
How big is the engagement ring?
Who’s your bridesmaid?
Will you be wearing white?

Comment by ColonelHaiku — 10/27/2011 @ 4:30 pm

239. Scratch question number two, as it will undoubtedly be retire05.

Jaysus, I can almost smell the cabbage from here…

Comment by ColonelHaiku — 10/27/2011 @ 4:35 pm

240. “Scratch question number two, as it will undoubtedly be retire05.”

Colonel – retire05 wants to talk about New Jersey and the Great Crash of 2007.

Comment by daleyrocks — 10/27/2011 @ 4:48 pm

I thought you two wanted to have an adult discussion. Obviously I was wrong.

I withdraw my comment 242.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:08 pm

steve… When I asked my co-workers (mostly conservative) about the wisdom of Perry choosing to do that, the comments I got back were “weak!”, “what is he afraid of?”, “unimpressed”, “speaking is definitely not Perry’s strong suit”, and “he’s done so poorly, who could blame him?”

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:09 pm

daleyrocks, is spin all you have? Yes, I did say “Sept/Oct., 2007, but I did correct that in a later post to you, and you just decided to ignore my correction. Ummm, could it be that you simply wanted to use your spin to try to make yourself look less foolish?

Also, I compared Massachusset’s debt to New Jersey for one reason you seem unable to comprehend: everyone in the nation knew that New Jersey was eye ball deep in debt, yet, it’s debt per capita is less than Massachussets.

But hey, you hand in there and keep up with your spin. Who knows, you might even get some Ron Paul supporter to believe you.

retire05 (a9f846) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:30 pm

The Glimmer Twins… the Brokeback Mountain Cowboys… where cabbage is king.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:41 pm

“According to late 2005 polls, Romney faced a tough fight had he run for re-election in 2006 but he certainly might have won, especially since his universal health care plan passed in his last year — and I assume that would have helped his popularity in Massachusetts. However, from what I’ve read, the main reason Romney did not run for re-election as Governor in 2006 is that it would have made it harder for him to run in the GOP Presidential primary in 2008.”

DRJ – I think your explanation is a lot more accurate than Dustin’s statement that Romney was so unpopular that he could not run for reelection. As I mentioned when I asked the question, I have seen no support offered for that contention. It very well could be out there.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:44 pm

“Yes, I did say “Sept/Oct., 2007, but I did correct that in a later post to you, and you just decided to ignore my correction.”

retire05 – I did not see your correction. I do not wait breathlessly for your comments to appear.

“Also, I compared Massachusset’s debt to New Jersey for one reason you seem unable to comprehend: everyone in the nation knew that New Jersey was eye ball deep in debt, yet, it’s debt per capita is less than Massachussets.”

Funny, I think more of New Jersey’s tax situation to fund their highest in the nation per pupil school spending, not their debt levels. They are not on my radar screen of overleveraged states, nor is Massachusetts.

Seems you are the spinner not me. What the leverage has to do with Romney’s candidacy for president remains a mystery. I hope you will eventually explain it.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:49 pm

daleyrocks, what do you consider “overleveraged?” What percent of debt to GDP? What percent of median annual income?

You just can’t bring yourself to admit that Texas, under Perry, has fared better than Massachussets did under Romney. I understand. Romney himself has the same problem.

retire05 (a9f846) — 10/27/2011 @ 5:57 pm

the State of Perry…

Rich Lowry writes: “But he’s [Perry] got big problems: 1) Even if he performs perfectly from now until the end of the primary season, there is always going to be a seed of doubt about him: Can he be trusted when the lights are brightest and the stakes their highest in the fall of 2012 not to throw it all away with some gaffe? 2) He has a lot of money for TV ads. But if he runs a barrage of negatives against Romney, it probably only drags down his own image further. If he runs mostly positive ads, I’m not sure whether they can cancel out his performance in the debates. What is someone likelier to believe–an ad or what they saw on live TV in the debates? 3) A flat tax sounds bold and catchy, but his optional flat tax isn’t quite a flat tax. Is it simple and clear enough to reignite enthusiasm for him? 4) All his focus is on beating up on Romney, but he’s presumably going to have a two-front war at some point. If at the end of the day Romney doesn’t go full-out in Iowa, the threat to Perry’s candidacy in the caucuses will be from Cain (leading most polls at the moment) or Newt (gaining) or someone else. At the beginning of the race, it looked like him and Romney; now he needs to crawl above other competitors just to get back into that two-man contest.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/281519/state-perry-rich-lowry

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/27/2011 @ 6:07 pm

Anyone who opposes Mitt Romney wants starving africans to eat salads made out of sludge and shriveled donkey testicles with a bed of 5000 year old arugula.

/Sarcasm off

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/27/2011 @ 6:20 pm

I hear this is a big hit down in Tejas…

http://youtu.be/h8YaKXrklCI

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/27/2011 @ 7:18 pm

My big knock against T-Paw was that given we’re expecting to take back the Senate and manage to hold a majority in the House why would we look to an executive that managed opposition majorities in the Statehouse, cajoling, wheedling, obstructing and vetoing but in the main compromising?

Don’t we need, on the contrary, a leader with vision to take apart 50 years of government largesse and regain America?

So help me out here: the payoff in selecting a candidate for their appeal to moderate Democrats seems insuperable.

We sue for peace, then declare victory and so disarm the opposition that Scott Brown edges Mrs. Butterworth.

Am I close?

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:14 pm

Remember, Mitt Romney praised Ted Kennedy for his leadership and collaboration on Mitt Romney’s signature accomplishment in life.

He is a fraud. Simple as that. Sure, it’s just pixels. I could say Texas doesn’t even exist, or is the fourth Reich. That’s about as realistic as those seriously attempting to explain that they are so much smarter than us that they see the Light, and are aware of how Texas is actually not doing better, and Romney’s policies were actually better, or at least indistinguishable, from Perry’s. That’s fraud, too.

Romney’s fan’s take illegal immigration so seriously that they ramble out excuses for his knowing use of illegal immigrant lawn care workers. We get it. NE politician with no character, not even willing to pay the wages necessary to employ legal American workers, with a business record of outsourcing to China.

“The liar’s punishment is not in the least that he is not believed, but that he cannot believe anyone else.” ~ George Bernard Shaw

This may explain why Romney’s fans assume Perry’s fans are actually supporting Perry for some reason other than his superior and conservative record on policies. But the fact is that if there was a better conservative running, I’d support that person instead.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/27/2011 @ 8:58 pm

“You just can’t bring yourself to admit that Texas, under Perry, has fared better than Massachussets did under Romney.”

retire05 – Why do you keep skipping over the part where I say Perry has done a fine job with Texas.

You just can’t admit that Romney did a very good fiscal job as governor of Massachusetts and that all the state’s problems are not a result of his tenure as governor – although I’m not a fan of how RomneyCare has turned out.

“it’s debt per capita is less than Massachussets.”

My source shows New Jersey debt per capita significantly above that of Massachusetts. The bigger problem than debt for New Jersey, which you failed to mention, is post retirement benefits for its public sector workers, pension and healthcare obligations. It’s the same for many other states.

Again, unless you are attributing the level of Massachusetts debt to Romney’s tenure as governor, why is it relevant to the discussion?

I fail to see why I should take your comments seriously if they have no bearing on the candidates or election. Maybe you can help me out there.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:01 pm

Dustin – That chicken needs a rest.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:03 pm

The MA State Treasurer says Romneycare is bankrupting the state and MA only survives by Federal aid:

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2011/10/27/state-treasurer-of-ma-absolutely-shreds-romneycare-which-has-nearly-bankrupted-the-state-and-is-surviving-solely-because-of-federal-aid/

Yeah the chicken is strangled.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:19 pm

Under Romneycare, the demand for healthcare has skyrocketed and the supply has gone down.

What does that do to price?

Under Perrycare (AKA Malpractice Tort reform) the supply of healthcare has gone up. The government makes no effort to control demand.

When Romneycare passed, rank liars pretending it would be a financial boon, ignoring the looming reality of baby boomers. Also, MA’s other looming crisis is unfunded pension liabilities, and it would take a Scott Walker or a Rick Perry to fight hard to deal with that. Of course, they actually GREW instead of shrank.

Of course, the Romneyfan is smart enough to see the truth that all this is just apples to oranges and unfair to poor Romney, whose record is not his fault.

The Massachusetts healthcare law that then-Gov. Mitt Romney signed in 2006 includes a program known as the Health Safety Net, which allows undocumented immigrants to get needed medical care along with others who lack insurance.

Uninsured, poor immigrants can walk into a health clinic or hospital in the state and get publicly subsidized care at virtually no cost to them, regardless of their immigration status.

That’s interesting. I thought Romney’s fans condemned even the slightest incentive to illegals. Romney is giving illegals jobs in mansion, and free healthcare from the taxpayers.

Odd. It’s almost as though Romney’s fans are insincere about their real views on things.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/27/2011 @ 9:35 pm

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/190241-romney-fundraiser-included-former-solyndra-lobbyist

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/28/2011 @ 6:04 am

Keep riding that pig, Dustin!

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/28/2011 @ 6:34 am

“Rick Perry has good reason to dislike the series of debates that have become the most important factor determining the course of the Republican presidential race up until now. It was his dismal showing in them that led to his transformation from a frontrunner with a double-digit lead into an also-ran stuck in the pack far behind Mitt Romney and the surprising Herman Cain. As Perry told Bill O’Reilly on Fox News on Tuesday, “These debates are set up for nothing more than to tear down the candidates. So, you know, if there was a mistake made, it was probably ever doing” them. But can Perry get away with skipping them altogether as his campaign has hinted this week?

In his defense, the proliferation of the debates during the next three months is a bit excessive. There are 12 planned in that time period, with three in one week in November and another three over a 10-day span in December. And there’s a Saturday night/Sunday morning combo set up for one weekend in January. But if there is one candidate who can’t afford to be seen as ducking them it is Rick Perry.”

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/28/perry-ducking-debates/

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/28/2011 @ 6:41 am

Key ‘graph… “Being a good debater isn’t necessarily a prerequisite for the presidency. But the debates have provided voters with insight into the candidates’ strengths and weaknesses. Being glib wouldn’t help a commander-in-chief understand a difficult foreign policy dilemma (yes, I mean you Herman Cain) but the deer-in-the-headlights look on Rick Perry’s face too much of the time while millions were watching the first four debates didn’t give voters much confidence in his ability to lead or make a decision.“

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/28/2011 @ 6:44 am

Says the man, I gave the link earlier, who said Perry would run away with the nomination.

ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/28/2011 @ 6:44 am

but…but…but you said he was in the tank for Romney.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/28/2011 @ 6:52 am

but…but…but you said he was a skank for romney.

FIFY and he is.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/28/2011 @ 6:53 am

“The MA State Treasurer says Romneycare is bankrupting the state and MA only survives by Federal aid:”

gary – I was surprised nobody linked that earlier. Awesome stuff.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/28/2011 @ 7:16 am

268. Oh Karl… Not that I comment at HotAir, but the Cap’n is flirting with quasi-Rubin skankiness.

First following the Obamaney pffft of Timmeny he provided the lone source of Pawlenty p0rn on teh innernets, now pimping Mitty furiously.

Intimates cowpoke “drowning”.

gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/28/2011 @ 8:20 am

“While it’s a good impulse to check one’s assumptions and carefully consider political strategy, Perry’s declaration on debates doesn’t pass the laugh test even on second thought. It’s equivalent to an admission that he’s simply not up to the task of engaging in an extemporaneous format, and that’s not a confidence builder regardless of what one thinks of the debates.”

– Ed Morrissey

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/28/2011 @ 9:49 am

Why does ColonelHaiku say that does he like riding bareback on pigs?

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/28/2011 @ 9:55 am

Why is it that every thread has become a pissing match between Romney supporters and Perry supporters? It’s getting tedious, and making this blog a chore to read.

Chuck Bartowski (e84e27) — 10/28/2011 @ 10:10 am

Comment by ColonelHaiku — 10/28/2011 @ 9:49 am

For another view:

“…Perry has a point when he suggests there are just too many debates scheduled in the rapidly dwindling number of days before voters go to the polls in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and other key primary states…”
– Byron York
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/perrys-right-republicans-drowning-debates?utm_source=Washington%20Examiner%20Political%20Digest%20-%2010/28/2011&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Washington%20Examiner:%20Political%20Digest

AD-RtR/OS! (ca8ec9) — 10/28/2011 @ 10:21 am

“It’s getting tedious, and making this blog a chore to read.”

Chuck – Absolutely agree. Many Perry supporters are just like Ron Paul fanatics. They want to stifle debate, dominate any discussion, spread half truths, misinformation and outright lies about Perry’s opponents, and questioning of the official Perry greatness narrative is the equivalent of treason.

Electing Perry is a moral and/or religious quest to save America. Undecided or questioning voters are unpatriotic scum who need mental help.

That is all.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/28/2011 @ 10:22 am

Electing Perry is a moral and/or religious quest to save America. Undecided or questioning voters are unpatriotic scum who need mental help.

and they need to build “character”.

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/28/2011 @ 10:26 am

and “sincerity”…

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/28/2011 @ 10:27 am

A “movie star” was once asked what was the secret to success on the “silver screen”.
He replied that viewers must perceive sincerity. Once you could fake that, you had it made.

Faking sincerity can build the perception of character, and lead to celebrity and success.

But, enough about President Millstone.

AD-RtR/OS! (ca8ec9) — 10/28/2011 @ 10:42 am

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/obama-has-declared-record-breaking-89-disasters-so-far-in-2011/

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/28/2011 @ 10:45 am

Obama voter:

http://www.spinner.com/2011/10/27/steven-tyler-broken-face-photo/

ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/28/2011 @ 10:47 am

PSA:

Romney signed into law legislation giving free health care to illegal aliens, then bashed Perry for the incredibly less radical TX Dream act, then he ordered his illegal alien crew to trim his japanese boxwood to exactly 11 inches.

Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/28/2011 @ 11:09 am

All right, can we agree on one thing. Matt Taibbi is a nasty nazgul.

khal drogo (0fc95f) — 10/28/2011 @ 11:11 am

The occupiers are protesting the wrong people for jobs.

DohBiden (d54602) — 10/28/2011 @ 1:06 pm

I used to read her all the time. Now, not at all.

Sherry (56270d) — 10/29/2011 @ 4:52 am

Absolutely agree. Many Perry supporters are just like Ron Paul fanatics. They want to stifle debate, dominate any discussion, spread half truths, misinformation and outright lies about Perry’s opponents, and questioning of the official Perry greatness narrative is the equivalent of treason.

Electing Perry is a moral and/or religious quest to save America. Undecided or questioning voters are unpatriotic scum who need mental help.

From what I’ve read on the George Will/Mitt Romney thread, this would apply equally to Romney supporters.

Chuck Bartowski (e84e27) — 10/29/2011 @ 8:48 pm

“(Smith reports the WaPo has been courting Marc Thiessen”

That is an amazing statement for a prominent blogger like yourself to make, considering that Marc Thiessen has been writing weekly columns for the WaPo since March 2010. Not only did you not know it yourself, you referred to someone else informing you of it as “reporting”. It’s been a year-and-a-half, folks!

Will (0d2ce2) — 11/6/2011 @ 9:10 pm

Sorry the texas dream act is wrong.

DohBiden (d54602) — 11/6/2011 @ 10:29 pm

10/26/2011

Jennifer Rubin and Manufacturing Consent

286 Responses to “Jennifer Rubin and Manufacturing Consent”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out