Attacking Tea Partiers: Not Good for Republicans Generally
So you’re not persuaded by my arguments that Ted Cruz style truth-telling is a good thing and damn the consequences? OK, then here’s Instapundit on the possible political fallout from going after Tea Partiers:
MILT WOLF PHOTOS OF GUNSHOT VICTIMS’ X-RAYS: Scandal, or tempest in a teacup? I note that on twitter the NRSC is clearly hoping it’s enough to knock Wolf out of the race and save incumbent Pat Roberts.
UPDATE: Okay, by NRSC, I really mean the NRSC’s Brad Dayspring. I follow him, and I like his tweets. But he’s been hammering this all day and it’s a dreadful, dreadful mistake. I accept his claim that he’s just interested in making sure the seat goes GOP. But when the NRSC gets out and attacks a Tea Party challenger — and that, make no mistake, is what’s going on — it poisons the well. There’s basically no trust for the GOP establishment among the base. If they stay home in 2014 like they did in 2012 because they feel betrayed by the establishment, what should be a wave election won’t be. Given the importance, in particular, of a GOP Senate in the event of a Supreme Court vacancy, doing anything to foster such a state of events is criminal incompetence.
The blogger you’re reading used to be one of those people, like you still are, who worried about Republican electoral prospects. Now, the blogger you’re reading just wants people like Ted Cruz standing tall. But I might still vote for Republicans in particular races — might, I said — if I think they will promote the principles of limited government, the free market, putting people back to work, and reining in spending to minimize the immediate damage of the coming fiscal collapse.
My vote is no longer automatic. I used to describe myself as an independent who almost always votes Republican — which, let’s face it, is really a Republican. Now, I am an independent, period. I am no longer a Republican.
If the GOP attacks Tea Party candidates, that does not make me more excited about voting for a Republican party that I have already departed.
I am not alone, I guarantee you that. There are a lot more people like me, boys. Keep that in mind.
Ding.
Patterico (9c670f) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:54 amMust Protect RINOS!
they’re going to blow this election even bigger than they lost 2012.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:09 amWake up and smell teh cat food, NRSC!
Colonel Haiku (5a3e75) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:12 amI love this echo chamber! I have a hard time carrying a tune.
gary gulrud (384f70) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:30 amOT and at the moment outside my budget:
http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/epa-wood-stove-ban/2014/02/23/id/554234?promo_code=FF89-1&utm_source=WeaselZippers&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1
I plenty of wood but no stove or fireplace. And a notion a stove might pay for itself in a few year’s use.
gary gulrud (384f70) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:39 amOnly leadership can stop the fratricide. The establishment only fights for conservative principles if it’s the most likely path to power and the protections and privileges power provides. Those who would challenge the establishment and incumbents would do well to remember it is way easier to rent them than it is to topple them.
crazy (d60cb0) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:41 amThis is probably really part of President Obama’s campaign against carbon dioxide emissions. It may be the CO2 that interests him – where the Administration is keeping score – not the soot.
Sammy Finkelman (2b1acb) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:45 amWhere does this idea that here is an immediate danger of a fiscal collapse, and that it’s coming come from?
Radio advertisements by people selling gold and silver??
The national debt is only around the level reached at the end of World War II.
Right now we have Hagel proposing to cut the military down to the level of 1940. Now that’s no good.
Sammy Finkelman (2b1acb) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:49 amAnother Sammy rabbit trail…
Colonel Haiku (6cb82a) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:49 amThe GOP continues to attack its base. That’s stupid but it appears they can’t help it. In fact, Republican leaders seem to agree with Obama: That most Republicans are distasteful bitter, clingers who can’t be trusted to make decisions.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:51 amwell, he’s certainly depositing nuggets… 😉
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:53 amSpeaking of Michigan, Dingell is retiring. It appears that the left also is trying to rid itself of it’s dead and decaying wood. But it’ll be interesting (and prolly awful) to see who the heir apparent is.
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:01 amI sympathize with GOP leaders and establishment Republicans who feel the base let them down in 2012, but they aren’t entitled to votes. They have to earn them.
Some of the 2012 voters who stayed home may have been disenchanted with Romney’s moderate history, including RomneyCare, but I think it goes deeper than that. I think many Republican voters were upset about is the way Republican leaders abandoned Palin to the media wolves in 2008, and the way GOP insiders attacked her in newspapers, books and interviews after the election was over. The GOP establishment clearly doesn’t believe loyalty runs both ways, but it does.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:05 amTotally agree with this post, my vote is up for grabs, no more party line bull. If GOP wants my vote, they must earn it.
Wyguy (659742) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:07 amThere’s something very Soviet about the attitude that the base let the establishment down by not quietly and obediently following orders.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:08 amSpeaking of Michigan, Dingell is retiring. It appears that the left also is trying to rid itself of it’s dead and decaying wood. But it’ll be interesting (and prolly awful) to see who the heir apparent is.
Comment by elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:01 am
Is John Conyers’s wife out of jail yet?
Colonel Haiku (6cb82a) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:20 amGood point, Steve57. As Peggy Noonan recently pointed out, there is great danger in societies that do not share a common morality or a commitment to morality. Unfortunately, one very negative consequence is that the moral leader becomes an alien in his own land (via the Hannah Arendt Center):
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:25 amIt makes me wonder if both establishment Democrats and Republicans were afraid of Romney’s morality, because it threatened their way of doing business.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:26 amRomney’s morality is the one thing about him that appealed to me. If it bothered the people in Beltway, it’s another example of how out-of-touch they are with conservative Americans.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:27 amI agree re Romney’s morality being the appeal of him, however, I would suggest that if it bothered the beltway insiders, it was because they feared being exposed for their corruption and habitual dishonesty. The dishonest and / or cockroaches do not like a light shined on them.
Dana (32105d) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:41 amRomney’s morality is the one thing about him that appealed to me.
Me too. I want my leaders to be better than me. And I expect that he would have been a good administrator too.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:43 amhttp://legalinsurrection.com/2014/02/katrina-pierson-and-tea-party-primaries/
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:49 amPosts 18 thru 21… exactly! Thanks for getting it.
Colonel Haiku (6cb82a) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:49 amR.I.P. Harold Ramis
Icy (1c7eb1) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:55 amFor the longest time, the GOP elite and their followers have argued that conservatives must put aside their principles and vote for electable moderates to prevent a liberal majority on the Court. Why shouldn’t it run the other way? Moderate Republican voters should put aside their principles (if they have any) and vote for conservatives to prevent a liberal majority on the Court. Since I trust a conservative Republican President with a Supreme Court nomination far more than a moderate Republican, I think the latter approach makes more sense.
In the Kentucky senate race, if McConnell is the GOP nominee (and with all the help he’ll get from Karl Rove, he probably will be), I think it is incumbent on conservatives not to stay home, but to vote for McConnell’s Democratic challenger. In races that pit a Democrat who forthrightly opposes what I believe in against a Republican who opposes what I believe in but lies about it, I’d vote for the honest man every time. To borrow Chief Justice Robert’s logic, the way to stop electing deceitful Republican candidates it to stop voting for deceitful Republican candidates.
ThOR (130453) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:14 amLong term effects of “crossing the streams”, Icy.
Colonel Haiku (6cb82a) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:15 amWow. Ramis’ Groundhog Day is one of my favorite movies. Funny, sweet, and a good message. He made, wrote and contributed to lots of good films that were very much “of their time’.
A native Chicagoan, he moved, with his family, back permanently from Los Angeles to a Chicago suburb in the ’90s because he wanted to live like normal people.
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:18 amhttp://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-harold-ramis-dead-20140224,0,2259309.story
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:21 amNot to mention Animal House, Caddyshack, Stripes, and Ghostbusters. He is a legend for that generation.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:23 amThOR, and that makes sense to you? ** facepalm **
SPQR (2939bb) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:26 amSorry, ThOR. Getting rid of McConnell (espcially in his leadership role) is a priority for most of us here. Consciously voting to replace him with a Democrat for a term of 6 years is not the way to do it.
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:29 amAnd not all good for Demoncraps.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/02/24/Pat-Caddell-Kiev-Could-Happen-Here-Americas-Under-Soft-Oppression-Of-Complacency-And-Corruption
27. And the only big screen work I’ve seen Andie McDowell do.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:32 amMcConnell doesn’t add value to anything plus he looks like the last surviving member of a lost tribe of pasty turtle men
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_fydvn82dy8s/SVhkZkmp4tI/AAAAAAAAA-M/rJ80gJjvOXs/s320/Tippy.jpg
happyfeet (c60db2) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:33 amChief Justice Robert is a notorious pervert what likes to take the constitution up into the attic room and play toy trains
happyfeet (c60db2) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:35 amThOR,
The Instapundit has a follow-up post that addresses your point. I hope you will consider it:
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:39 am23. Hey, if you really have to have an East Coast high-morality pumpkin there’s Jedidiah Bila.
Show us something, anything to back up this conservative flag in which you folks wrap yourselves.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:41 amThe establishment Republicans owe their House majority to the TEA Party. Despite a number of false starts (e.g. Sharron Angle), the GOP will owe their upcoming Senate majority to them (to some extent) as well.
The TEAs, however, would be nothing without mainline GOP voters, voting for their candidates. If that were not true, they would have formed their own party already. Ted Cruz would not be in the Senate if he had had a GOP and a Dem opponent. See Senator Miller (T-AK), never mind how ugly that was.
Can’t we all get along?
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:41 amIn my last comment, the Instapundit links an Andrew Klavan post that states Tea Party candidates do better when they start in local legislative and Congressional races. I think his point is that political newcomers need experience and seasoning in order to be ready for a state-wide or national race. (Perhaps Ted Cruz is the exception that proves the rule.) I get Klavan’s point but that seasoning is also what co-opts many politicians into the establishment gravy train. I know Klavan makes his suggestion in good faith, but I think I’ll pass.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:42 amKevin M:
I think your basic point is valid but your example isn’t. Cruz had both an establishment opponent in the GOP primary — the sitting Republican Lt Gov David Dewhurst — and a Democratic opponent. He beat them both.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:44 am37. “The TEAs, however, would be nothing without mainline GOP voters, voting for their candidates.”
That’s what I love about the GOP faithful: Toss out unsubstantiated moot points as conventional wisdom. Rinse and repeat.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:46 amGetting rid of McConnell (espcially in his leadership role) is a priority for most of us here. Consciously voting to replace him with a Democrat for a term of 6 years is not the way to do it
If the Senate is won by the GOP, with all the new blood that would entail, I think it unlikely that McConnell stays as Leader. As the Minority Leader, there is only so much you can do, but you really don’t want a steady-as-she-goes type as Majority Leader. He had his run at that anyway.
It won’t be Ted Cruz, either. But it will be someone Ted is OK with.
And, given that, why would any sane Republican think that replacing a GOP senator with a Dem one is a good idea?
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:51 amI don’t have a problem with no mercy, knock-down, drag-out GOP primary races — whether they involve all establishment candidates, all Tea Party candidates, or a mixture of both. But once there is a nominee, I don’t think it helps to be a sore loser. Vote for who you want but base your vote on who is the best candidate in that race.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:52 amThOR,
You realize this makes you a Republican In Name Only, if you prefer electing Ds instead of Rs.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:53 am25. ” I think it is incumbent on conservatives not to stay home, but to vote for McConnell’s Democratic challenger.”
Not necessary. If there is no third party candidate we can write in.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:54 amMajority leaders need political savvy to lead effectively, and I don’t know who that would be in the current Senate. But Senator Mike Lee seems like a political innovator and idea man. I’d like to see him get a chance to lead. I’d hate to see them give the job to Cornyn.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:54 amCruz had both an establishment opponent in the GOP primary — the sitting Republican Lt Gov David Dewhurst — and a Democratic opponent. He beat them both.
Not at the same time. Did he have more votes in the GOP primary than the Dem had in the general? If so, I accept your point.
And Rubio makes a better counter-example
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:55 amYou realize this makes you a Democrat, if you prefer electing Ds instead of Rs.
Needed to fix that.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:57 amRe #36… gulrud, I think you’re a bomb thrower… more an anarchist than conservative.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:58 amThe fundamental issue here is whether Republicans are capable of cleaning their own house.
“Can’t we just get along,” doesn’t cut it because the truth of the matter is that we never did get along. “Commity” was just a ruse; we’ve been pwned.
I’m not ready to give up on the Republican Party, though cleaning up the corruption will involve unpleasant choices. Maybe that’s why Patterico is so negative – he understands what we are up against.
They’ve stolen our marbles. Don’t go home! Let’s get them back.
ThOR (130453) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:06 amKevin M:
Here are the numbers from those races:
2012 General election
Cruz (R) 4,456,599 (57%)
Sadler (D) 3,183,314 (40%)
2012 GOP primary:
Cruz 631,812 (57%)
Dewhurst 480,126 (43%)
I guess I don’t get your point, so help me out. Are you saying that Cruz’s victory over both a GOP opponent in a primary election and a Democrat in the general election tells us less about his appeal than a California-style election, where the top 2 vote-getters get to the general election?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:11 am40. Gary, you may not have noticed but the majority of commenters on this thread have been (and I believe very consciously so) trying to find all the common ground and identify the myriad places where we agree even though we know in the background there is going to remain some tactical tension. After Kevin M. made very valid observations and pointedly and properly credited the energy of the tea movement for the house majority, you surprisingly still found the need to attack him for having the audacity of saying it’s a two way street.
Regardless of what we choose to call ourselves—we, (the anti-Obama lawlessness, the anti liberal fascism, and the anti government oppression caucus) –need all teh votes we can muster. Is that controversial to you?
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:11 am48. “Re #36… gulrud, I
thinkfeel you’re a bomb thrower… more an anarchist than conservative.”Come on, Colonel, let’s not slip in self-congratulatory compliments with our aspersions, mmmK?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:11 amDRJ,
No, I’m saying that trying to run as a third party, in opposition to the Republicans, is a tough road. That even Cruz would have had a hard time beating both Sadler and Dewhurst in a three-way general election.
Sometimes when you have that it works (Rubio) (Reagan 1980) and sometimes it gets you the establishment candidate (Murkowski), but mostly it gets you the Democrat.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:18 amSo now majority rules at this blog? I thought this blog welcomed debate, but calling people names when they don’t agree with the majority view doesn’t strike me as helpful either.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:18 amAnd yes, I know that Reagan was the official GOP candidate in 1980, but Anderson represented what would now be called the center-right establishment.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:20 amKevin M:
Thanks for clarifying this for me. I agree with you regarding most states. I guess there could be exceptions in states that are very red or very blue, where the candidate is not of the prevailing political party. But, in general, this is true.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:21 ammeanwhile, Susan Rice of the RNC dropped me a line this morning:
call me cynical if you wish, but i’m thinking she’d rather hear from me hitting the “contribute” button than she would be telling her what they’re doing wrong.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:22 amThankfully, Texas doesn’t have elections like the one you posit. (I say “thankfully” because it would split the GOP vote and allow Democrats a shot at winning.) We’ll never know how he would have done but I still like to think Cruz would have had a shot.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:23 ampeople are just so desperate for even just a teensy tiny sign of hope that our flailing drowning declining little country might someday become a respectable nation once again
bless their hearts
happyfeet (c60db2) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:23 amNot another penny to establishment Republican organizations or incumbents, redc1c4. I can’t tell you how much I’ve enjoyed having more of my money to spend.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:24 am51. Actually, there are no CA Senate seats being contested and Dick Durbin will not be challenged.
Correct me if I’m wrong but neither you no or KevM will cast a meaningful vote for Representative.
What exactly is this ‘we’ of which you speak.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:26 amno $$ from our house to the NRA-ILA either, since those pragmatists think you shouldn’t take a stand against people like Hairy “Searchlight Strangler” Reid, because they feel they can w*rk with him…
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:27 amMy vote will go to the most electable official that ticks the most boxes in my list of priorities. Smaller government, lower taxes, more freedom. One day, there might be a political party that does this, but probably not in my lifetime.
carlitos (29e19c) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:27 amfreedom is the best thing ever Mr. carlitos
but don’t it always seem to go
happyfeet (c60db2) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:29 am“…My vote is no longer automatic. I used to describe myself as an independent who almost always votes Republican — which, let’s face it, is really a Republican. Now, I am an independent, period. I am no longer a Republican…”
The growth of Independent/Non-Partisan/Decline-To-State categories in the voter registration stats is almost exclusively from the ranks of the GOP.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:31 amThe Establishment has poisoned the well for many.
By the way, Patterico, do you actually think that there is room in the DEMOCRAT party for principled small government types? Can you name one?
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:35 amI think there are Libertarian Democrats who believe in limited government. They aren’t very happy now, either.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:42 amCorrect me if I’m wrong but neither you no or KevM will cast a meaningful vote for Representative.
And yet, I will vote for the Republican who opposes Ms. Waters, and I will walk through snow to do it (although, living in Southern Cal where the temperature is in the mid-70s today, I don’t expect that to happen).
Note that here in CA, there is a governor and state officer slate to decide, and I dealy hope that someone can remove either the governor, or failing that the SecState or the AG, the odious Kamala Harris.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:42 amC’mon, gary, truth be told, there aren’t many things you wouldn’t want to see – if not destroyed – stripped down to the bones.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:44 amPatterico, otoh, WILL for the first time in a while, have a meaningful vote to cast for Representative as the district covering PV is open this year. And it’s a jungle primary.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:44 amThe antidote for what ails the GOP:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/23/Dr-Ben-Carsons-Prescription-for-America
Self-aggrandizing Timidity is not a substitute for Aggression when the main feature of each is lining one’s own pockets.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:46 amelissa, the heir apparent for John Dingell appears to be his wife Debbie (a descendent of the Fisher family of Fisher Body Works fame – GM), who was born one year prior to his swearing-in by Speaker Sam Rayburn in 1955. The other possibility is his son who is a MI judge.
42- Don’t be a Murkowski/Lugar.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:47 amIs it better to be a realistic conservative, i.e., one who works towards possibilities in phases/stages, or a utopian, i.e., one who believes he or she has a clear vision of the desired end-state and believes it to be immediately obtainable?
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:53 amKevin M,
If things are that dire for Republicans in your area, I guess walking through snow to vote isn’t enough. I don’t know what the answer is — move? try to change the culture? encourage more candidates to run? — but it sounds like what’s happening now isn’t enough to make a difference politically.
I’m conflicted when I think about blue states. On the one hand, conservatives need blue state votes to win national elections. I think that’s why blue state residents argue the GOP needs moderate nominees. They think Republicans need to emphasize moderation in order to win blue states, and they assume the red state residents will go along.
On the other hand, conservatives also need red state financial and GOTV support to win elections. This is the GOP’s base, and it can’t take the base for granted forever. In addition, it’s not clear to me that all blue states are reliable Democratic/liberal votes in presidential elections. Most of the blue state commenters here are conservative. Aren’t there others like you who might respond to a conservative message? If not, my sympathies for you truly are marooned in the wasteland.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:55 am61. gg–not sure the point you were trying to make but–Sen. Durbin has a very fine R opponent. A West Point Grad, Army vet, and businessman, Doug Truax, whom I’ll be voting for.
http://www.dougtruax.com/tag/dick-durbin/
http://www.battlegroundpolling.com/?p=1244
My congressional vote will in fact be very meaningful. My congressional district went D in 2012 for the first time in decades (after redistricting). The D has been a snoozer and a cypher and I’m very optimistic that lessons were learned and that Bob Dold (R.) will retake the seat he won in 2010 and only verrrry narrowly lost in 2012.
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:55 amColonel:
You need both but if I had to choose, I’d choose idealism because it motivates people to turn out, work and care. Hope and Change worked for a reason.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:57 amaskeptic @72–o good lord.
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 11:58 amaskeptic:
Exactly. There’s nothing more irritating then someone on your side who goes with the opposition.
I think it’s why our debates here have grown so contentious. It feels like being stabbed in the back by a family member and, as I recall, Colonel Haiku has even used that analogy in one of his comments. But IMO debate, disagreement, and primary competition isn’t being stabbed in the back. Whether you consider yourself a Republican or a conservative, we can disagree without being disloyal until a nominee is selected. Then each voter has a choice, and I hope we all choose to vote for the most conservative nominee.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:05 pmI go away for a while and come back to see Patterico has moved much closer to my position than he had previously been. This is a very good thing.
(I had to doublecheck the author to find out if DRJ had returned as author or not.)
John Hitchcock (4b929e) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:08 pmHi, John!
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:09 pm68, 73, 75. What, indeed, is my point?
Giving money to a national umbrella outfit like the RNC is asinine in trying to influence a local election.
Even if they happen to chose to support the candidate who can win they are still subtracting from the pot.
My telling you who can win in your district would be absurd. OTOH asking whether there is any point to your opinion at all regarding a national contest is pertinent.
So you would like to carry IL and CA. So what? Can you help with your choice to carry LA, or MS or GA?
You see, you are not for one second willing to consider the shoe on the other foot. And at this late juncture, I don’t feel you merit another chance.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:11 pmThanks, DRJ, I don’t know for sure, but I’d always thought that H&C had worked on the left because they tend to need to view themselves as heroic in everything they do and also thought that by casting their votes for BHO, they, too, would be enshrined in the historical significance, never mind the candidate’s lack ofsubstance, accomplishments or practical experience.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:11 pmDRJ, I assume that Kevin M live in the “South Bay” not for from our host, and there aren’t that many GOP’s in that area. There’s a good possibility that in those beach communities, you would find more Libertine/Libertarians than Republicans – the Republicans are easy to identify as they walk around with cameras that they wish to install in your bedroom.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:13 pmHi, DRJ! I’m up here in bitter cold Montana on my way to Spokane. Catching up on stuff while my student drives. And I love seeing “pragmatists” become “principled pragmatists”. They’re that much closer to becoming the ideologue that I am today. 😉
John Hitchcock (7e6b5b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:15 pmI can’t speak for liberals, but don’t conservatives want to feel they stand for something that makes a difference? We need the dream of the shining city on the hill, too.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:15 pmaskeptic:
Heh. We call those Dallas Republicans in Texas.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:16 pmIt’s good to see you here, John. Stay safe and warm in your travels.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:17 pmIf that “shining city” is a description of DC, no thanks. I’d rather it be a little more localized… tends to be more effective.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:19 pmHow long before I can stop calling P a California Conservative and can start calling him a Conservative?
John Hitchcock (7e6b5b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:21 pm89. If there’s any daylight I’m not standing in a place to see it just now.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:23 pmI definitely don’t think it’s the current DC, Colonel! Neither America nor DC are what I wish they would be or what I think they could be. We need better leaders who will try to reverse our current greedy, power-hungry politicians and policies.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:25 pmThanks for clarifying this for me. I agree with you regarding most states.
DRJ,
I should then be more clear in what I mean. Every TEA Party member in the US House or Senate has won, running as a Republican. Pretty sure that’s true. They got a lot of votes from non-TEA Republicans, because they were running as Republicans and that’s what Republicans do. So, Cruz and all the young Turks in the House cannot separate themselves from the GOP unless they think that they can win 3-way races.
Similarly, the establishment GOP has to come to terms with the TEAs. I have no doubt they will do this, just as they came to terms with the conservative Christians who entered the GOP in the 80’s and 90’s (and who referred to themselves as “the base” as well). But that does not mean that they will roll over on their separate issues, nor that the movement Christians are going to drop theirs, as much as I wish they might … everyone has to come to the table and find the direction for the whole party.
We hang together or we hang separately.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:25 pmGuess what, Kevin M. The Conservative Christian base is very much TEA Party aligned. The union of the two sets consists of the majority of both sets.
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:30 pmBTW,
I consider myself a tea party Republican, just as I consider myself a libertarian Republican. That is not to diminish the TEAs or the Libertarians, but in recognition that only a major party can be effective.
I spent some time in the LP and was amazed that so many people would rather be intellectually pure than have any actual effect.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:31 pmKevin M:
I’ve misunderstood you before so I want to make sure I understand this point.
Are you saying Cruz is trying to separate himself from the GOP when he stands up to its leaders? I see him as trying to represent his constituents, while also pushing Republican Party leaders to be more responsive to his constituents’ desires. Being a Republican isn’t like joining a fraternity, where you agree to abide by its rules, regulations and secret handshakes. To me, Cruz’s brand of Republicanism should be just as welcome as anyone else’s.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:31 pm92. “We hang together or we hang separately.”
Then its time for you loyalists to yield your fealty to a higher cause than Party.
Winning CA’s electoral votes in 2016 is unicorn wings and fairy dust, vote accordingly or lose.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:31 pmKevin M:
It doesn’t amaze me. We all reach our partisan breaking point at different times. What you call being “intellectually pure” is what I call taking a stand. It’s drawing a line in the sand when you’ve reached your breaking point, and we all have that point.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:33 pmGuess what, Kevin M. The Conservative Christian base is very much TEA Party aligned. The union of the two sets consists of the majority of both sets.
Then why are the two main leaders of that faction, Santorum and Huckabee such big-government types?
The difference is that the TP wants small government, balanced budgets, constitutional rule, and SOME OF THEM want the social stuff, while the Christians want, first, a return to moral principles and SOME OF THEM want small government, balanced budgets and constitutional rule. There are any number of folks, like Santorum, who have utterly no problem with a large controlling government; they just want it control from the right instead of the left.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:35 pmGarbage! They want candidates that had nothing to do with ∅care. The Narrative™ will be that the existing health care system we had was broken, something had to be done, and they’re going to fix it.
If this $h!t works, I’ll probably never vote again—period! We could’ve handled the issue without creating a huge bureaucratic nightmare that we’ll only get rid of after our collapse.
Amalgamated Cliff Divers, Local 157 (f7d5ba) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:37 pmSantorum and Huckabee are not leaders of any “faction.” Your point is moot.
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:41 pmKevin M:
I’m no expert on social conservatives but IMO the social conservative movement is older. During the past 20+ years, it’s found ways to use government to accomplish its socially conservative goals. It’s like the Republicans in Dallas, Texas, who discovered big government can be their best friend — as long as they use it to impose their conservative agenda. (BTW, it doesn’t work for them, either. President George W. Bush is a classic Dallas Republican, and we all saw what happened to his domestic agenda. He was just as happy to spend taxpayer money as any big government Democrat, although I do give him credit for being a good war-time President.)
Over time, some of the Tea Party movement will be co-opted by the big government, big-spender people, too. But the less they owe the Republican Party, the Chamber of Commerce, and the lobbyists for their election, the better.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:41 pmWinning CA’s electoral votes in 2016 is unicorn wings and fairy dust, vote accordingly or lose.
Well, there’s an initiative to pro rate those, so we’ll see. There’s another one to break the sate into 6(!) states (3 of which would be larger than all but NY and Texas), and which would break 3-3 red/blue.
But really, most people outside of California see a monolithic blue state. If there is ANYWHERE the tea party can make inroads, it is here because a lot of the movement over the last 20 decades has been in aversion to some heavy-handed Socon control in the Republican party, which seems to have run its course. There are a lot of libertarians in Silicon Valley who would be overjoyed to vote for Rand Paul, who might well win CA.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:42 pmTo be socially Liberal and fiscally Conservative is to be a walking oxymoron: your social Liberalism will bankrupt your fiscal Conservatism (if it was real to begin with).
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:43 pmI spent some time in the LP and was amazed that so many people would rather be intellectually pure than have any actual effect.
Comment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:31 pm
That was my reaction also Kevin, back in the 90’s.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:44 pmSantorum and Huckabee are not leaders of any “faction.” Your point is moot.
Well you need to define then either:
1) who are the leaders of this faction, or
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:44 pm2) why you don’t think a wing of a party IS a faction, or
3) what you think “moot” means.
To be socially Liberal and fiscally Conservative is to be a walking oxymoron: your social Liberalism will bankrupt your fiscal Conservatism (if it was real to begin with).
Um, why?
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:45 pmKevin M:
Really? I’m not disagreeing with what you say but I am extremely leery. I fear California politicians and the pervasive Democratic influence throughout California will tilt some of these new states into even more Democratic votes.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:46 pmand that ain’t happening.
between the Left LA crowd, all our illegal alien voters, the FSA throughout the state, and the rest of the idiots in the Bay Area, they’re all getting re-elected.
meanwhile the RNC is pushing a RINO carpetbagger named “Cash n’ Carry”, and Tim Donnelly, the real GOP candidate, will be slandered as a would be tyrant by the MFM, if they talk about him at all.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:46 pmComment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:33 pm
The purists of the LP have made a science out of elevating the Perfect to the detriment of the Good.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:47 pmThey are very well-traveled as their motto seems to be “My way or the highway”!
What is the lead blade of grass, when grass expands the way it does? Answer that question and you’ll answer the question of who the TEA Party leader is and the question of who the Christian Conservative leader is.
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:47 pmKevin M:
Sometimes I think he could be the best GOP nominee, but I fear Republicans inside the Beltway could never accept him.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:48 pmThen its time for you loyalists to yield your fealty to a higher cause than Party.
There is no higher cause than party in a two-0party system. Unless “losing elections” is a higher cause. As I have said, I have done that experiment and I can show you the wounds. It doesn’t work.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:49 pmThe fiscal ruin that social Liberalism causes will ruin any opportunity to be fiscally Conservative. The sheer financial cost inherent in social Liberalism.
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:49 pmno way CA breaks into 3-3 red/blue if it divides…
it’ll wind up sending moar idiots like Boxershorts & Fineswine to the Senate, as the break will be at least 4-2, and you might still lose one or both of the seats in the putative 2 read states as well.
there’s a lot of stupid people scattered all over this state.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:50 pmWhat is the lead blade of grass, when grass expands the way it does?
You can’t get Jesus on the ballot.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:51 pmaskeptic:
First, LP means Libertarian Party, right? Second, I’ll accept your point but so what? What about all the people who don’t even vote because they don’t like what they see? We get to make our own decisions about where we draw the line. The art of politics is knowing what motivates people to change their lines.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:51 pmYou forgot to light teh fuse on that one, gary…
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:51 pmUm, why?
Because the size of a socially liberal government cannot be sustained within the constraints of fiscal conservatism, and will therefore increase taxes to the point that they reasonably support the funding for liberal causes that you advocate.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:53 pmThe gap between “reasonably” and actual expenditures will be the increasing deficit added to the National Debt each and every year.
OMG, I just described the U.S. Government since 1933.
Ok, I’ll bite. How does “live and let live” lead to fiscal ruin?
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:53 pmAnd I didn’t even go there but thank you for publicizing your fear of the mythological Dominionism movement throughout the Christian Conservative movement.
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:55 pmaskeptic–
We must have different ideas of what social liberalism means. I DO NOT mean a government that makes everyone like everyone else at gunpoint. I don’t mean a government that passes laws to make everyone be polite. Sure, there are Democrats that want that, and more, but the argument on this side of the table is social control or not, not what flavor of control.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:56 pmSocial Liberalism –> generational Welfare families.
Social Liberalism –> generational Medicaid families.
Social Liberalism –> high cost of treating GRID patients.
etc, and so on, ad infinitum
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:57 pmComment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:51 pm
This is why many talk about Big-L Libertarians v. Small-l libertarians.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:57 pmMy line about perfect/good and the LP was of the Big-L types.
The GOP/TEA amalgam has a very good chance of drawing in small-l libertarians as many of the TEA Party are of that persuasion anyway.
No, John changed from empty assertion and went all mystic Chauncy Gardiner on me.
Done with guessing games. What do you mean and what arguments do you actually have to back it up.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:58 pmComment by Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:53 pm
It doesn’t as long as it’s not classified as an “entitlement”.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:58 pmEntitlements require government expenditures, and the cycle continues unabated.
I’m not persuaded by your argument that Cruz’s truth-telling is a good thing because your argument lacks foundation, Patrick. In other words, Cruz has a hard time with truth-telling. I’d rather not wait for the one time in five that he says something truthful.
Bird Dog (130699) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:59 pmBut said, I agree with you, Patrick, that the NSRC made a mistake. As for the story itself, this is just the kind of vetting that needs to happen now instead of in the general, if Wolf gets that far. And Wolf did exercise poor judgment in putting those photos and those comments on Facebook, whether he was running for office or not.
I also don’t believe that one side should disarm while the other side is firing bullets and RPGs. Tea Partiers attack “establishment” wing of the GOP seven days a week and twice on Sundays, and more often than that in this comment thread, and often those criticisms are justified. But criticism isn’t a one-way street, and if Tea Partiers use loser tactics and make missteps, then they should take the heat.
FTR, I was a Republican for a quarter century and am now an independent, and I proudly say that I’ve been bam-sticked from DKos, LGF and Redstate.
no, John you changed
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:59 pmYou just have to say you don’t mind “awful” winning over “bad” over and over again. And you have to not mind the fallout from those victories, say, with SCOTUS nominees. Some folks are in the “let it burn” mode, and that is fine. I don’t agree, because I have children who will have to suffer, and I don’t have the bunker, ammo, MREs, and money to soften the blow. But that’s me.
That point of view, common here, is fine. It is one I do not share. My parents detested GHW Bush for “breaking his word” on taxes and voted for Ross Perot to “send a message.” I guess the answer to the message they sent was 8 years of the Clintons, and probably another 8 coming up since folks are repeating that strategy.
Seriously, what would the world be like if WJC had not been elected President? Of course, you could be like the people who kept insisting that Romney was “no different” from Obama, which, gently put, is an arguable perception on their part…but such a sentiment did in fact fuel still more polarization. And polarization, historically, has led to more Statist wins. You don’t have to agree with me. You can read history books as well as I can, and if you don’t have time, SF will be happy to cut and paste a lot of text for you.
Name calling is rife. RINO. Squish. I won’t even get started on the elegant and productive language of personal insults dealt by other posters here, directed toward those with whom they disagree yet have never met.
All of it benefits the people we say we oppose, and very little of it supports the things we claim to believe in.
Sorry, but that’s the truth. In 2008, I had a simple guide: if it made Axelrod smile, it was not a good thing.
Me? I like Ted Cruz fine. I do think he is a politician, and I distrust all of them. I do think that states should experiment with all kinds of approaches. The behemoth before us has been a long time growing, and cannot be dispatched by a brave man or woman or three, no matter what one wishes. It took us a long time to get into this mess, and it will take us a long time to get out. But it will be quicker and easier to continue our present course, and it will go to far darker places that McCain or Romney would have ever taken us. Period.
I also think Tom Sowell has been fighting for things we say we believe in for literally decades, with more erudition and perspective than most of us have, and it was interesting to see how quickly the insults and invective began when he insulted the One True Faith.
It’s the mirror image of the progressives. He left the plantation, to reflect back how Justice Thomas is treated by the Left.
I don’t think that people who disagree with me are stupid, but I don’t think that “pure” people in their politics do good. They can, but there is a fine distinction between “standing by your principles” and “allowing truly awful people to win.” Repeatedly.
I will say this. If people do opt out or vote Third Party, they don’t get to complain about how awful HRC is…because they will have helped make it happen, no matter how they play intellectual Twister. People in that position simply have to own it.
A person in that position just has to say, “My purity is more important than fighting progressives, even a little bit.” I also think that many folks don’t want to make small changes; they want big changes…and I invite everyone to consider that was precisely what BHO brought upon us. So maybe a “true conservative” would make everyone fall all over themselves to vote for him or her.
But I don’t think so. And I don’t think the people who want “true conservatives” think so either. They simply want polarized purity, very much like the Left in a different direction. Given the choice, I prefer their way to the current occupants of the WH. But I look back to similar movements. If the Right acted in lockstep, maybe. But. We. Do. Not.
Personally, I think that is a good thing. But it allows the Left to win, again and again.
By the way, I would be delighted to be wrong. I fear that some of the folks here do not even consider that possibility.
I know my point of view is not respected on this topic, and unlike the vast majority of people on this subject, I am not name-calling people and insulting their intelligence. I do think that such people have to own their choices, and the fallout of their choices.
I have held my nose every single time I have voted.
And so endeth my silly sermon. Selah. I’m nobody important, but I weep for our future.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 2/24/2014 @ 12:59 pm81. gg, first of all I donate locally. I have said this repeatedly. I do not give money to any of the national umbrellas (rnc or nrsc, etc). I never have and I never will. Furthermore, have no idea why you even think that I do, or why you write as if I do, or why you feel the need to lecture me about the idiocy of such contributions. I also have no idea why you think I have no right to have opinions on national politics or why you think any opinions I have are never pertinent–if that is indeed what you’re saying.
I am absolutely certain that the comment you wrote here makes total sense to you and that you believe you nailed a point that is important to you, and that you are imparting wisdom that is missing and critical to my political knowledge and experience. But I’ll be darned, gary, if I can make heads or tails of those seemingly disjointed 5 sentences. What shoe and what foot are you talking about, anyway?
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:00 pmBird Dog, if Cruz is batting .200 on truthfulness, that puts him in Hall of Fame territory compared to what we have in the White House today.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:02 pmSocial liberal = wants entitlements?
No.
Social liberal = wants people to feel free in their personal lives.
Social libertarian is a social liberal who does not think this freedom is helped by government enforcement and control.
As you have it, though, I would have to agree that social liberal would be incompatible with fiscal conservatism, in much the same way that A is incompatible with not-A.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:04 pmAll Social Liberalism has devolved eventually into a system of handouts to the “disadvantaged”; i.e., income redistribution.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:11 pmWith a $17T National Debt, we cannot afford to be this generous any longer, whether it is a homeless man (or woman) on Main Street, or a Corporate Banker/Ag Executive on Wall Street.
It has to end, or it will end us!
DC and Shining Cities on a Hill…..
Hard to apply the Shining City appellation on what grew out of a swamp, and in many ways still is.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:13 pmKevin M,
While I agree that Tea Party candidates need to run under the Republican umbrella now, I don’t think it will always be that way. Several Tea Party groups are already and have been working to promote candidates for local offices — that’s certainly true in my area — and it’s just a matter of time before they win elections. Some have a good change of winning in my community in 2014.
Ultimately those groups and politicians may work their way up to state and Congressional elections, just as the Libertarian Party hoped to do. And, like Libertarian Party candidates, some will fizzle out along the way. I always viewed that as a plus of our political system, because it means people can find an outlet to get involved if the major parties don’t fit them.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:17 pmDRJ, I was a Libertarian for a few years, but they ended up running Bob Barr over Christine Smith, and then Gary Johnson. Why have a Libertarian Party if you’re going to run Republican retreads?
Amalgamated Cliff Divers, Local 157 (f7d5ba) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:22 pmThis is an enduring but probably inaccurate myth:
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:29 pmBecause you can not spend conservatively on a liberal social agenda. It’s a logical contradiction. Which is why you never hear of liberals separating the two, if you’re a liberal, you’re a freakin’ liberal. The program and the spending go hand-in-hand.
The social liberal says the government should be in the business of providing people with food, shelter, clothing, and health care. The fiscal conservative puts a price tag on it and decides on a level of spending that means all those provisions will be inadequate? It just doesn’t fly.
Fiscal conservatism never survives social leftism. Never.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:32 pmI admire Sowell and I don’t think I insulted him, but if his ideas are wrong then he should be challenged. As an economist who values accuracy, I’m sure he expects nothing less of his readers.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:33 pm136. In the end, most of the people who would have voted for Bush came back.
Sammy Finkelman (1df645) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:33 pmStopped describing myself as a GOPer years ago. I am a conservative whose worldview coincides with GOP rhetoric more often than not. But the differential between that party’s rhetoric and its practice is vast. Note to GWBush: you cannot save capitalism by undermining its principles…
NeoCon_1 (062f23) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:35 pmIf you agree liberals have the right priorities, you can’t refuse them the means to achieve those priorities.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:35 pmExactly. One can only convince oneself of that if they never had any free market principles to begin with.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:37 pmThis.
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 1:51 pmPeople ask me they say happy, what’s it like to be a walking oxymoron?
“It’s neato mosquito!” I always say. “For example tonight I’m a have some other oxymorons over and we’re gonna make cosmos with the cheaper triple sec and with cointreau and see if we can tell the difference you wanna come?”
“I dunno,” they say. “Will there be tasty hummus?”
And usually I just say yes whether or not I actually have any hummus yet cause it’s pretty easy to score hummus here where I live.
happyfeet (c60db2) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:01 pmI’ve been a reliable Republican vote for nearly 50 years, but the GOP establishment’s war against the TEA party is more than I’m willing to stomach. I’ll vote for Conservatives, and let the Republican Party’s candidates fend for themselves.
ropelight (a34b01) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:02 pmTea-baggers will get the blame when team republican aborts conservatism from the republican platform. Burn the infested tent.
mg (31009b) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:07 pma question: must teh Poligrip fail before we put an end to this cannibalization?
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:19 pmI never watched Cannibalization but I did watch Cannonball Run. I loved that movie! Even had 44 ounce Big Gulp commemorative cups!
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:22 pmTrue, but the sequel, didn’t have the same impact,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:25 pmGiven the responses, I have my answer… thank yew!
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:28 pmI said-a nah nah-nah-nah-nah nah-nah-nah-nah n-n-nah-n-n-nah-n-n-n-nah
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:32 pmYou gotta know howta pony…
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:32 pmCol. – When team republican apologizes, and votes Cruz, the healing will begin.
mg (31009b) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:33 pmNot counting on it, in fact I expect team republican to vote obama into a third term.
All Social Liberalism has devolved eventually into a system of handouts to the “disadvantaged”; i.e., income redistribution.
And again, “Hunh?!”
In the parlance I was brought up in “social liberal” is simply one who wishes to relax the social rules that the state/culture has imposed and leave moral choices to the conscience of the individual.
A social conservative is one who believes that the culture and/or the state should command social rules and moral choices. This attitude comes most commonly in the US from a Christian perspective, but not always.
I understand that in Europe, the term means what we here call “Liberal” or “Progressive” but that is not the sense in which I (or any US libertarian) would use it. I must admit that I did not know that the SoCons were using it that way, and if they are doing so, it seems (oh, let me find a nice word) inappropriate.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:36 pmthey will stand behind you, 1,000%
http://www.newsmax.com/US/Charles-Gasporino-Chris-Christie-Wall-Street-Bridge-gate/2014/02/24/id/554349
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:36 pmActually, no, a social conservative wants the autonomy to be able to exercise his own beliefs,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:37 pmbut the government interferes in a thousand possible way.
As long as the Republicans keep throwing RINOs like John McCain and Mitt Romney in my face, I will keep sitting out election after election. I haven’t voted since 2001. America can go to hell.
CrustyB (5a646c) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:37 pmColonel,
Some GOP voters stayed home in 2012, so I don’t think the way to win them back is by attacking them. You’ll probably have better luck persuading disaffected Republicans to vote GOP by acknowledging the valid points they make and trying to address them. So … do you think the Tea Party supporters have any valid points?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:38 pmhummus, and everything else you could want, here Mr feets:
http://www.haigskabobhouse.com/
they bring the NOM!
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:38 pmGetting to this late. I gave a friend a ride home today and our conversation sounded very much like the post. No more straight republican, now voting for the most conservative I can find. The GOP is chasing us away. Cruz is correct and we need to let the GOP know that.
Labcatcher (61737c) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:41 pmKevin M,
Social liberalism as you define it is textbook libertarianism, which is what its adherents were in the past. However, IMO today’s social liberalism is more about government regulation than moral freedom, and that easily lends itself to Obama’s income redistribution.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:44 pmA call for an American Spring….
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:46 pmAnd, like Libertarian Party candidates, some will fizzle out along the way.
There are some Libertarians who didn’t fizzle?
But more to the point, I can see running a TP candidate in some Texas district that can’t elect a Democrat ever. Always thought that should be the LP strategy, but they preferred to be spoilers “to make the Republicans move our way”. A very long game, it seems.
But why, if you can do that, not just run in the Republican primary and win that? That’s what Ron Paul eventually did. He could not win in that same district as a Libertarian, but he won over and over as a Republican.
Not sure I get the strategy. Let’s even say that, in 20 years, the TP replaces the GOP. How is this different that simply co-opting it? That’s what the Reagan conservatives did when they took over the me-too Keynesian Republican party of Rockefeller, Nixon and Ford. The LP started up at the same time, but they didn’t want wishy-washy Reagan, so they chose obscurity.
And besides, to supplant a major party you have to destroy it first, and to do that, you have to give the other major party a period of supremacy. Please don’t.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:46 pmI’m a Big Fan of The Possible, not so much of windmills…
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:49 pmDRJ, it is also how its called in Europe, because they cannot use the word “Liberal”. But by redefining “social liberal” to mean “free-spending US Liberal who cares about social issues” you make the term meaningless. And engage in a pretty awful display of redundancy.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:50 pmKevin M,
I think the reason for the Tea Party to stay separate is that it is basically a grassroots movement, so it will have problems trying to develop a national strategy and platform. (I know some here want it to be solely a party of fiscal conservatism, and I think most of them do believe that, but that isn’t what all of them believe. Many in the South, especially, believe there is also an argument for socially conservative values.) I’m terrible at prognosticating but, in the long run, I think the Tea Party movement may have more success as local and regional public interest groups that influence local and regional issues. In other words, I think of them as PACs more than Parties.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:53 pmI’m not “attacking” anybody, DRJ. Yes, TPers have a great many valid points.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:53 pmIs it sexist of me to say I believe DRJ is still the most gracious commenter here?
Oh, and I’ve been trying a little to mellow my harsh, too.
John Hitchcock (99e795) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:57 pmKevin M,
It’s like debating the differences between classical liberalism, libertarianism and American social liberalism. Is it really possible to define any of them in a way we could all agree on, outside a philosophy class or textbook?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:57 pmLimited scope of government, fiscal restraint, need for serious tax reform, I am totally supportive. I just don’t want an ice pick in my head, as placed by a “true believer” looking to purify the party.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 2:58 pmOr a bomb attached to my car by a crazed Minnesota.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:00 pmI keed, I keed…
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:01 pmThe “Social Liberal/Fiscal Conservative” meme was advanced by the center-left to give themselves cover from the Far Left Wing of the Democrat Party; but in practical politics, it just meant that they were coat-holders for the unions and community organizers of the Whacko-Left.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:01 pmAs best as I can recall, and I’ve been observing and writing about his since the Ike years, no so-called SLFC has ever proposed any policy of fiscal restraint that did not involve very significant tax increases. As example I give you Bob Dole, that great Fiscal Hawk, aka The Tax Collector for the Welfare State.
Colonel,
Attack was a poor word choice on my part, but I was responding to your use of the term cannibalization because it seemed like an attack. However, I think we should all be able to challenge ideas we disagree with and I’d like to hear what Tea Party ideas you don’t like. My impression is that what you don’t like is people who say the GOP can’t count on their votes in the future.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:02 pmi bookmarked Haig’s i might go check it out with my sister when she comes in a couple weeks
maybe just pick up some kebabs to freeze
happyfeet (c60db2) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:03 pmWho is trying to purify anything? There is more call for purity in devotion to Team R here than principles.
JD (0c14a5) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:04 pmThanks, Colonel #170. My comment 174 was posted before I read your comment 170, and I appreciate your replay. We can certainly agree on the principles of limited scope of government, fiscal restraint, and the need for serious tax reform.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:04 pmI used to be a reliable, automatic vote for the GOP as I had seen the destruction wrought by FDR’s Democrat Party.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:05 pmBut, today, you want me to vote for you, better be able to explain why I should.
“Because” is not an explanation.
DRJ,
I think my discomfort with dividing the two, and particularly with folks who make it an either-or choice, is that the ONLY way to end the slide is for a early change, and the only way for that to happen is for something called the Republican Party to return to dominance.
Now, for me, I’m not picky. I would even take a party of Santorum and Huckabee & co if I had to (although I doubt that they’d ever get enough votes). I would like it to be as libertarian as possible domestically (not so much internationally), and as pragmatic and principled as possible overall. The Tea Party brings a lot to the table. Certainly most of the new ideas. That does not mean that all the old GOP ideas are wrong however, nor that most of the current GOP cannot get on program.
So, getting back to the topic today: yes establishment attacking the Teas is a bad idea, but so is the reverse and I’ve seen no end of that even here, today. And saying “they did it first”, as some do, isn’t really a lot of help.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:06 pm178- …more….
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:08 pmI used to be a reliable, automatic vote for the GOP as I had seen the destruction wrought by FDR’s Democrat Party…and I was very impressed with the vision and energy of one Senator from AZ who against all odds, mounted an attack against what used to be known as The Country-Club Republicans, eventually giving us the 40th President.
But, today, you want me to vote for you, better be able to explain why I should.
I would rather vote FOR than AGAINST. But the Obama Democrats offer up such a compelling set of reasons to vote AGAINST that I really don’t understand why someone would opt out.
A better attitude would be find a local campaign that meets your goals and work on it, then support whoever wins the primary. That’s conservative as in that the way it’s always been done.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:08 pmKevin,
We’re back to that line in the sand. I’m socially conservative but I would almost certainly sit out any election in which Huckabee was the GOP nominee. I view him as a big government Republican who would be glad to use his power to impose big government solutions, as long as he viewed them as conservative. I don’t feel that way about Santorum because, while I believe he is a social conservative, I don’t think he views it as an excuse to expand government.
I may be wrong about both Huckabee and Santorum, and I don’t expect people to agree with me or vote (or not vote) because of what I say. But I do believe people should have the right to decide where they draw the line when it comes to their vote. It doesn’t bother me at all that some people want to stay home. In fact, this may be heresy but I like it when people stay home if they aren’t sure about their vote. Let the ones who really care decide the elections.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:10 pmGoldwater would have been a better candidate and a better example if he hadn’t been so dead set against the civil rights movement, which, unlike a lot of liberalism at least had the 14th Amendment and 100 years of Republican agitation behind it.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:11 pmKevin, I have never, ever, opted out.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:12 pmI may have voted Libertarian once or twice, but in those situations – here in CA – it made no difference because the GOP had no chance to carry this state anyway. I have only once voted for a Democrat, who was a family friend, running for a down-ballot office.
I like it when people stay home if they aren’t sure about their vote
I am not in favor of making it as easy as possible to vote. It should take some effort. And if you have to consult your horoscope to vote, you probably shouldn’t. Yet so many seem to.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:14 pmKevin M:
This is where we part company, then, because the Tea Party isn’t in power, and it is every citizen’s right to criticize its leaders. GOP leaders are the ones criticizing the Tea Party movement, and that isn’t right. Party leaders are supposed to look for common ground with their supporters and to treat their supporters with respect. We’re not talking about whether Karl Rove trying to undermine the Tea Party movement. We’re talking about Speaker of the House John Boehner doing it, and alienating a good part of his base in the process.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:15 pmaskeptic–
I understand completely. I voted for Perot in ’92 and the LP in ’96. The vote for Perot had effect and furthered fiscal conservatism, so I do not regret it. In ’96 I only regret Dole was the candidate. Gingrich would have been far more fun.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:16 pmWe have that in common, Kevin M. I also don’t regret voting for Perot, and I wish I had voted for Gingrich.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:18 pmKevin, you do not know of which you type:
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:20 pmGoldwater’s vote against the Civil Rights Bill in ’64 was straight Libertarian.
Read the Congressional Record, he spoke long and eloquently about his vote on that matter.
He fought for civil rights when only Republicans were, but he believed that the Bill was an assault against Main Street and individual rights.
If you want to hear his position, listen to Larry Elder speak about how he believes that store-owners do have the right to pick which customers they wish to serve, and also the right to suffer the consequences of those decisions.
the RNC Victory Plan
1.Favor RINO candidates & alienate the conservative party base.
2.???
3.Take back the Senate & build the House majority in November 2014.
/let me know how that w*rks out for all of you pragmatists.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 3:59 pmAnd it turns out he was right, Hubert Humphrey’s hat notwithstanding,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 4:21 pmAnybody have any thoughts on how you think the true non- partisan non- ideologue indies, and the temporarily disgruntled nominal Dems who are fed up with Obama and Obamacare will fit into this whole scenario? Prolly not gazillions, but there are definitely some out there. What, if any role will they play in the coming elections? Are they worth pursuing vigorously and if so, how? By whom? With what message?
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 4:22 pmWho: Someone novel.
Message: Hope and change.
What? It’s already worked twice. If that fails, free Ugg boots, yoga pants, Northface fleeces, and Starbucks.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2014 @ 4:36 pmPeople who have had their “substandard” policies cancelled are going to be a group of very angry voters who will want to take a strip of skin off of any incumbent who voted for BarryCare, and could be unhappy with a current Dem incumbent who wasn’t around in ’09-’10 too….which sort of gives the GOP the edge as no GOP votes were recorded in the affirmative.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 4:36 pmAnd then there is the very real possibility of mass cancellations of big-employer policies, and the tax to be levied on Union policies.
The beat just keeps going on…..
Actually, no, a social conservative wants the autonomy to be able to exercise his own beliefs,
but the government interferes in a thousand possible way.
So, a social conservative would have no problem with gay marriage, as this would be an exercise of their own beliefs, and would have a problem if the government interfered in that?
I don’t mean to twist your words, really!, but I’m having problems parsing this.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 4:40 pmThe “Social Liberal/Fiscal Conservative” meme was advanced by the center-left
Well, but to them “Fiscal Conservative” means “wants higher taxes”, so I’m really not prepared to accept their definitions.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 4:42 pmIn so far, as same sex marriage interferes with the proper functioning of an institution yes, that is the point of the exercise,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 4:42 pmThis is a link to an ad for Bert Miller, one of 5 Republican candidates running to unseat an incumbent Dem in a winnable (for the right) congressional election. The incumbent is a Dem and the district (not mine) is one that flips back and forth every few years from D to R and back. I think this is an excellent ad and he looks like a person who would have broad appeal. The message has urgency but is positive, informative, inclusive and he actually asks for your vote which unbelievably so many political ads fail to do. He doesn’t even bother to mention his opponents.
http://player.vimeo.com/video/87297212
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 4:44 pmKevin, you do not know of which you type:
I do understand why he voted that way, I just find the reasoning short-sighted, if “principled.” And I do not think it was all that principled as it was only libertarian if you ignored certain facts.
Goldwater asserted that individuals had the right to decide whom to serve, whom to rent to, and with whom to associate. He considered this an absolute right under the Constitution. And, as individuals to individuals, I have no problem with this. I don’t chose to associate with certain folks today.
BUT.
He asserted this in a context, and that context was a SYSTEM of compulsory discrimination on the basis of skin color, enforced sometimes by the state and sometimes by the community or culture. White folk who violated the rule were themselves treated poorly. The KKK did not just attack blacks.
Goldwater opposed the Public Accommodations Act as if we were living in some color-blind voluntary, freely-decided libertarian system, but it wasn’t and Goldwater KNEW it wasn’t.
Worse, since he became the presidential candidate his position became conflated with the party position and the Republican party’s 100-year attraction to blacks ended overnight. Nixon’s later embrace of Strom Thurmond nailed the door shut.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 4:56 pmInteresting elissa, that was a Republican district for 14 years,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:13 pmelissa,
Good ad. I would guess that jobs are a big thing in his district. He’s a bit quiet on budgets, the TEAs, and social issues, although he opposes Obamacare.
The district may be winnable, but went for Obama by about the same margin California went for Obama, so I dunno. He probably has tape of the incumbent say that he was proud of his vote for Obamacare, and would happily do it again.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:13 pmInteresting elissa, that was a Republican district for 14 years,
It was reapportioned in 2011 to something far more comfortable for Dems. Went 58-41 Obama in 2012. The Dem challenger beat the (reapportioned) Republican incumbent by the same margin.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:16 pmHe lost in another district in 2010, so I think chances are good,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:19 pmPerhaps, although I doubt you will hear a lot of hardline Tea Party rhetoric from any Republican who hopes to win. You win elections by addressing the concerns of your constituents, not be toeing a party line.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:22 pmelissa:
By relentless campaigning that shows people being hurt by ObamaCare — something the media should be doing but isn’t — along with ads showing all the lies told by all the Democrats, from the President on down. It should be a drumbeat of “Look what the lying liars have done to health care,” ending with “Here’s how the Republicans either (1) tried to stop it (in places like Texas) or (2) have a plan to replace/fix it (in blue and purple states). The GOP especially needs to do (2), quickly and relentlessly, since that’s what the Democrats plan to do.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:30 pmWell, remember this is just the primary. But yes, Bill Foster the incumbent did vote for O-care. And he got booted in 2010. Then came redistricting and he won in the new reconfigured district in 2012, when you could still keep your doctor and your healthcare plan of you liked it..
Number wise this is Hastert’s old district but geographically it is pretty different.
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:30 pmObama is like Clinton in one regard: He’s very good at co-opting Republican strategies and neutralizing them.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:31 pmUnlike Clinton, Obama has a GOP that is easily co-opted.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:32 pm207, 208: yes. this.
The DC Republicans do appear feckless in the face of Obama the Masterful. Most of that is more the national press’ doing than the Democrats since Obama, Reid and Pelosi would be dogmeat if the Bill Clinton of ’97 was ever let loose.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:37 pm==The Dem challenger beat the (reapportioned) Republican incumbent by the same margin.==
She (R) was long past her freshness date and frankly was not a huge loss.
Sorry, we seem to be doing a lot of cross-posting here.
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:39 pmKevin, what the Public Accommodations Act did was to replace one form of De Jure discrimination with another. It was Jim Crow Law that forbid shopkeepers from accommodating Blacks, even if they had wanted to do so. All Goldwater was saying IMO was that the Gov’t would best be served by telling the States/Counties/Cities/Towns that they could no longer impose Jim Crow on anyone, and let the market work. And it would have, as Jim Crow was imposed to keep the market from working.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:39 pmJim Crow wasn’t law as much as culture. Some things were mandated by law, some by covenant (my subdivison here in California had a racial covenant in the CC&Rs), some by culture and custom. And some by open threat. As in “If you serve blacks, you won’t serve anyone else (and you may have a fire).”
It was intolerable, and wishing it away had not worked. Four Republicans voted for it in the Senate, and the other 3 would have voted for it if Goldwater did.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:45 pmFour Republicans voted
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:46 pmforAGAINST it in the SenateFairness would dictate that you mention how many Democrats voted against also.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:48 pmNo, IMO Jim Crow was an imposed culture – a culture imposed by a small “elite” that was not all that concerned about the welfare of anyone but themselves, and imposing their bigotries upon others.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:50 pmCRA-64 vote by party – House & Senate
The original House version:[19]
Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)
The Senate version:[19]
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:54 pmDemocratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)
Where does this idea come from that you are accurately characterizing what I said?
I didn’t say the collapse would be immediate. I have no idea when it will happen. I said the collapse, when it happens, will have immediate effects.
If we rein in spending, we will not avoid the collapse, because it is inevitable. But if we rein in spending, we might minimize those immediate effects — effects that occur immediately after the collapse.
Reading is fundamental, Sammy. In your case, re-reading is fundamental.
As for my certainty that the collapse is coming? It’s as certain as the popping of the stock market bubble was in the 1990s, or the popping of the housing bubble in the 2000s. We have a government debt bubble, measuring over $110 trillion when factoring in the promises we have made to future generations. No amount of taxation or “austerity” or economic recovery will create a scenario where we meet those obligations. And there is zero political will to change those obligations in the draconian fashion required to avoid the collapse. So we’re left with the predictable potential responses: tax increases, deflation, and ultimately default — in whatever form it takes.
This is happening.
Patterico (9c670f) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:56 pmFairness would dictate that you mention how many Democrats voted against also.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/88-1964/s409
My memory is faulty. Six Republicans voted against, and 21 Democrats. One Democrat (Strom Thurmond) switched parties several months after the vote and govtrack has him listed wrong.
But according to Goldwater’s memoirs, which I read, Hugh Scott lobbied Goldwater hard on this, and said he had unanimity if Goldwater went along.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:57 pmWell don’t interfere with the narrative, we’re not through whipping one self like Paul Bettany’s albino in the Da Vinci Code,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:57 pma winning message
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:57 pmI’m way cool yer just a mook
now get out teh vote!
I would like to see more of this attitude.
Patterico (9c670f) — 2/24/2014 @ 5:59 pmhis intentions pure
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:00 pmhe strove to drive that point home
his scat did not stink
is there room in tent
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:02 pmwith clowns and all circus folk
only time will tell
CRA-64 more (fm Wiki)
“…Although majorities in both parties voted for the bill, there were notable exceptions. Though he opposed forced segregation,[36] Republican Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona voted against the bill, remarking, “You can’t legislate morality.” Goldwater had supported previous attempts to pass civil rights legislation in 1957 and 1960 as well as the 24th Amendment outlawing the poll tax. He stated that the reason for his opposition to the 1964 bill was Title II, which in his opinion violated individual liberty and states’ rights. Most Democrats from the Southern states opposed the bill and led an unsuccessful 83-day filibuster, including Senators Albert Gore, Sr. (D-TN) and J. William Fulbright (D-AR), as well as Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who personally filibustered for 14 hours straight…”
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:04 pmit’s not right and left
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:05 pmbut right and wrong don’t loiter
there is much work ahead
a winning message
I’m way cool yer just a mook
now get out teh vote!
his intentions pure
he strove to drive that point home
his scat did not stink
is there room in tent
with clowns and all circus folk
only time will tell
Who is this directed at?
JD (a39fb5) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:05 pmtime ain’t on our side
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:07 pmnow’s no time to suffer fools
gladly or sadly
Burma Shave
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:07 pmI’m not sure what specific comments you are referring to, but hopefully you have observed that I have, in my posts, been careful to be respectful to Sowell and to acknowledge his great contrubutions — while disagreeing with, and poking holes in, his current arguments.
Simon, you know I am not a “purity of essence” type for the sake of “purity of essence.” I get quickly annoyed by the people who make a career out of ignoring reality. But here’s the reality I am beginning to see: electing Republicans increasingly does not translate into a solution, while the problem has gotten so great as to now be, in my judgment, insurmountable. As I indicated recently, the only optimism I can contemplate now lies not in finding ways to avoid the collapse, but in hoping that its aftermath might be an improvement on our current situation.
But I don’t think I would choose to go through the hell I know we face unless I were certain that my children would get a far better country out of the deal. I’m not certain of that; I worry more about world war and a nuclear holocaust after the economy destabilizes.
And it’s not going to be particularly satisfying to say “I told ya so!” in such a situation.
I have concluded our situation is so desperate, I can no longer abide the half-measures (to be extraordinarily kind) that the establishment consistently settles for. And I’m having a great time watching Ted Cruz tell the truth. Seeing a politician do that is so rare that it’s just plain entertaining.
Patterico (9c670f) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:08 pmThe only Republican from the Confederacy to vote No was Tower of Texas – who was the only Republican Senator in the Old Confederacy.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:09 pmSo it’s curious how the then chairman of the foreign relations committee, the father of a future vice president, the future Senate pro temp all supposed the ’64 act, but that doesn’t attack to the party’s reputation, narrative is funny that way, just like Hollings first raised the stars and bars over Columbia, but no one asked him about that either,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:09 pmain’t no money tree
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:10 pmno Obama bucks and he sucks
hey where’s my wallet?!?!
Albert Gore, Sr. made li’l Al the man he is today. Ponder that, if you will.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:12 pm“Imagine there’s no austerity… it’s easy if you try”
Barack OhNoes Obama
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:13 pmWell he’s a billionaire with entree into every classroom, and most people, have to keep scraping global warming north of Tampa,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:14 pmand those other four GOP votes were from Senators representing hot-beds of discrimination and Jim Crow:
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:14 pmHickenlooper of Iowa;
Norris of New Hampshire;
Mechim of New Mexico;
Simpson of Wyoming.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 repealed the “involuntary servitude” clause of the 13th Amendment by using the amendment’s own enabling clause. You can, now, make someone work for you that does not want to work for you. Cook your meal and serve it to you, make you a bed to sleep in, carry your luggage, bake you a cake. It turned the Amendment on its head in the cause of eliminating the badges and incidents of slavery. Doublethink that Ingsoc could only dream of. Slavery erases the badges and incidents of slavery.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:18 pmif you can keep head
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:19 pmwhen all around losing theirs
thank yer lucky stars
Well he’s a billionaire with entree into every classroom, and most people, have to keep scraping global warming north of Tampa,
Comment by narciso (3fec35)
he has no friends, family can’t stand him, but a lot of money.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:21 pmand a terrible listhp…
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:28 pmJANE FONDA: ‘I have so little time left!’
I was just thinking about her the other day, wondering what evil she was up to. Teh Colonel’s Curse strikes again! Evil Eye got her in its sway.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:32 pmJD–How are you and your family doing? I assume the services have been held and some of the initial shock is muted a bit. But I’m sure it’s very difficult for you all right now and that it must still seem unbelievable.
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:33 pmall kidding aside
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:35 pmso much has changed for the worse
Life is so precious
Mr. Cruz has said nothing that he needs to apologize for.
mg (31009b) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:39 pmNor has the people that back him.
team r and it’s sect is another story.
peace and love brothers and sisters.
DRJ, a few posts of yours I missed.
#74: The California Republicans took it in the shorts in redistricting when the (former) leadership let the Dems rig the apportionment committee and game them with bogus “concerned citizens groups.” The election 0f 2012 was horrible for us.
However, we gained a seat in a recent state senate by-election, where in a 60%+ Hispanic district, a Croatian Republican beat the hand-picked Hispanic lady the Dems put up. Why? She toed the state party line, which was deeply unpopular, particularly regarding the state diverting water from the farming areas to save some smelt, and the pointless bullet-train boondoggle the state was driving through everyone’s farms. Andy Vidak was allied instead with the community, not Sacramento.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:41 pmThe only Republican from the Confederacy to vote No was Tower of Texas – who was the only Republican Senator in the Old Confederacy.
And the Dems, in their hypocrisy, never forgave him for it. Yet they elected Robert Byrd both Majority Leader and President Pro Tem.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:45 pmain’t it about time that Preezy Obama went on Dem operative Jimmy Fallon’s show to slow jam his lies?
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:47 pmSuper-size dem lies…
nk, askeptic:
Do either of you think it would be OK for a hotel to refuse to rent a room to someone because they are, say, Muslim?
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:49 pmOr, how do you feel about the AZ bill that legalizes discrimination against gays, as gays? Not just refusing to serve unpleasant gays, but refusing to serve gays at all.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:51 pmAll “egalitarian” social, political, and economic systems are failures and, in truth, illusory. No matter how they start, they culminate (soon) into a handful of people accumulating the bulk of wealth and power at the expense of the rest. I learned that too late — I thought I was ok being an idiotes — but perhaps I can teach my daughter that “democracy”, “free market”, “fascism”, “communism”, and every other -ic, -acy, and -ism are empty words and money and power are all that are real and she can do better with her future.
nk (dbc370) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:52 pmThe thing is, the GOP might well be saved after being taught a lesson about votes on the right.
That’s what happened, for a brief time, after Ross Perot’s 1992 campaign.
A GOP that actually tries, instead of makes a show of talking about trying, seems like the tougher sell when you look on those political graphs in Sophomore Poli Sci, but the real world operates on gut impression of people, and no one likes a wimp.
Dustin (d1db4e) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:53 pmThe conservatives who stayed home in 2012 were idiots, busily cutting off their noses to spite their faces.
Sorry, I’m not at all sympathetic to that. They should have known better, and did know better, and we’re all paying the price for their stubbornness until January 2017 as a consequence.
Beldar (8ff56a) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:53 pmIt’s not apparent to me that the base stayed home in 2012 to any significant extent or at least any more than they did in 2008. What are the numbers that support that?
Gerald A (bfbd30) — 2/24/2014 @ 6:55 pmDamn straight, Beldar!
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:00 pmBeldar, Dustin,
To answer you both, it sure would help if the current House leadership could think outside the box.
There are things the House can do. They can censure the President, which they have done fewer times than they have impeached one. About what? That would seem a target-rich environment, but how about the IRS for one?
Making an A #1 Stink about the IRS, complete with Big Deal hearings from a special committee — and making the Dems vote on it before the election — would go a long way to getting the Tea Party on board. They might even feel defended.
It also might be interesting to go after Obama on the NSA spying, since Dems who defended him on that would be taking big risks, but maybe there are too many Republicans who think the NSA is doing good.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:05 pmWith all the blatant lies he tells the American people, perhaps this prez’s nickname ought to be Armslength Pinocchio.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:06 pmGerald A,
Here’s what Sean Trende wrote about the missing voters.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:07 pmThat’s seems an urban legend, much like that crack
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:08 pmdata mining operation, which they attributed to his success, the IRS’s nudge against the Tea Party, was more likely responsible,
Beldar,
It is also annoying that the same people who stayed home and empowered Obama and crippled the opposition are the same people who are now some of the folks loudly complaining the Republicans aren’t DOING SOMETHING!
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:09 pmBut I think Trende may have been wrong, as Kimberly Strassel at the WSJ wrote here
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:09 pmHere’s my take after reading Trende and Strassel: The GOP needs to energize voters the way Obama did. In that regard, the GOP doesn’t need to be trying to run off people who oppose amnesty or who support the Tea Party — but that’s exactly what its leaders are doing now.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:11 pmDRJ,
The WSJ article suggests that the GOP really needs to make inroads into the socially conservative Hispanic communities. I can tell you for a fact (having been to the traveling CA GOP “we’re gonna fix it” roadshow) that in California, the GOP is going strong for Hispanics this year. And that the likely Gubernatorial candidate is going to take it to Brown.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:16 pmIn fairness to Sean Trende, he revisited his initial analysis here. He concluded that the missing voters were blue collar voters that he called Ross Perot voters. Ironic, isn’t it? People think Ross Perot cost George H.W. Bush the 1992 election, and now we learn he really cost Mitt Romney the 2012 election.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:17 pmHe turns longtime friends into enemies and sucks up to our enemies. He has little respect among leaders of other nations, who neither trust or have confidence in him. He’s a lightweight to all but his slow-witted supporters. His re-election will haunt this nation and de-stabilize the world for decades.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:17 pmAnd that the likely Gubernatorial candidate is going to take it to Brown on jobs and the economy.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:17 pmI absolutely, positively am finished voting for any GOP. There is a very good chance that unless I can identify a serious TEA party candidate in my voting booth, I won’t vote at all. Because I have had too many elections of being offered ‘bad’, or ‘worse’. And if anyone wants to argue this post, just ask yourself how we got to this point with a government like this in power and things this bad nationwide.
UncleDan (efea20) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:18 pmDRJ, that’s wrong. Perot got people who abhorred Bush Srs tax hikes and inability to trim spending. Blue-collar workers don’t usually focus on deficits. What Perot got was disgruntled Republicans and the elderly.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:19 pmjust ask yourself how we got to this point with a government like this in power and things this bad nationwide.
It’s simple. People said just what you are saying now, and stayed home.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:21 pmthe McConnellwhoreBoehnerpoofterRomneytrash Golden Age of failmerican decline may never have actually happened
but that doesn’t mean we can’t stage a musical version starring Carrie Underwood and that still-living kid from Glee with the thousand-watt smile and maybe also see if we can get Anna Kendrick involved
happyfeet (8ce051) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:21 pmKevin M,
Texans are more likely to be conservative and/or Republican, including Hispanic Texans. I think Hispanics are attracted to Texas’ fiscal conservatism and jobs as much, or maybe more, than our social conservatism.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:21 pm*love* her
happyfeet (8ce051) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:22 pmThose weren’t the final numbers, which people never seem to be able to figure out.
In 2012 the final popular vote totals were 65,915,796 for Obama-Biden (51.1%) and 60,933,500 (47.2%) for Romney-Ryan.
In 2008: Obama 69,498,516 and McCain got 59,948,323.
Romney got about a million more votes than McCain. The dropoff was on Obama’s side. Total white votes did decline I believe but it’s not apparent that those were Republican type voters that stayed home. They were probably whites who voted for Obama in 2008. He got about 3 and a half million less votes in 2012.
This idea that Romney got less than McCain is one of those erroneous “facts” that never catches up with reality. Plus the Republican vote in California dropped drastically as they threw in the towel so in the other 49 he did even better than the total numbers suggest relative to McCain.
Gerald A (bfbd30) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:23 pmI’m not sure the statistics bear that out, Kevin 267 and 268.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:23 pmBut I might still vote for Republicans in particular races
I’m not sure there’s a point.
Except for some statewide offices (and then just maybe), any ballot I cast is irrelevant.
Heck, in November 2012 I was not able to cast a legal vote for a non-Democrat for the House of Representatives.
malclave (1db6c5) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:23 pmOh, Anna, I agree and I haven’t seem pitch perfect,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:24 pmSowell’s up on Hannity next to “explain why he’s turned on Cruz”
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:24 pmExtra! Extra!
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:24 pmGerald A 272,
I know. That’s why I added comments 260 and 263. It probably would have been better if I had combined them into one comment. Sorry for the confusion.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:25 pmThanks for pushing back on the narrative, Gerald. The R party also needs to modernize its entire operation.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:27 pmThe Dr. Is really starting to show his age
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:28 pmI don’t question your sincerity Uncle Dan, but can you explain to us how in your mind not voting fixes anything or serves to help give our children a chance at a future? It just seems so passive somehow–like giving up and curling up somewhere to die.
elissa (ae220b) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:29 pmDRJ,
Then we agree the base didn’t stay home in 2012 – at least relative to 2008.
Gerald A (bfbd30) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:30 pmSowell says Rs need to speak up, give specifics and fight battles they can win… not posture and set themselves up for blame, whether deserved or not.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:33 pmPretty much as he’s written.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:34 pm#279
Yes Colonel this idea that some huge cohort of conservatives stayed home in 2012 is this myth that is constantly repeated by Rush Limbaugh and others. I’m sure there were some – but the final vote totals suggest conservatives that stayed home in 2012 must have also mostly stayed home in 2008.
Gerald A (bfbd30) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:39 pmTaking action based on how it may be distorted and lied about by the Dems and the MFM is a fools errand.
JD (a39fb5) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:40 pmGerald, there is and always will be way too much at stake not to make the smart play and to strike and strike hard when there is the most to gain. The media will never be honest in their reporting, so work smart, push back hard, don’t accept mischaracterization and get in the faces of those who lie and intimidate.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:51 pmAt a certain point, you have to figure out the game is rigged, the people in Kiev figured it out, so did the people in Venezuela going through yet another fixed election, with a nice mannikin like Capriles,
did not the encounter at Monument Gulch teach you a valuable lesson,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:52 pmElissa – thank you. I am still wounded. I can’t get the playing of Taps out of my ears.
JD (a39fb5) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:55 pmBe energized and walk the walk. Reach out and engage your neighbors. Exemplify and live your principles to the best of your ability. Speak out against real racism and injustice.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:55 pmMost conservatives and independents have been convinced they have no voice and their votes do not matter.
When you are certain your cause has no point, you just give up and wait for someone who matters to articulate your point. I see this all the time. Heck, I don’t see it. I live it.
Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:55 pmWhere in the SLC area was your brother laid to rest, JD? We buried my father in late 2012 at the foot of the Wasatch range near Springville.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:58 pmThe older I get, the more important having a clear conscience, a clean heart and bearing no ill will toward others becomes to me. I really struggle with that last part.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:01 pmCol- he was laid to rest at the Air Force Academy
JD (a39fb5) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:03 pmi hear it all the time… it never leaves you.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:04 pmWhat can be said of a leadership foolish enough to sell out the footsoldiers, for a bunch of magic beans, and that’s not merely a metaphor as today’s news reminds us,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:04 pmMay you find comfort knowing that your brother is in the arms of a loving and just Lord, JD.
Colonel Haiku (035faa) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:08 pmMay you find comfort knowing that your brother is in the arms of a loving and just Lord.
This. Love and prayers, JD.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:21 pmThey still think we haven’t noticed that the Republicans and the Democrats are just the two faces of the Abusive Parents Party.
htom (412a17) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:22 pmI’m not sure the statistics bear that out, Kevin 267 and 268.
Well, I was active in the Perot movement in ’92 and that’s what I saw. An amazing amount of grey hair.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/24/2014 @ 8:41 pm129. First I apologize for my elliptic pattern of expression. You have a more straightforward manner of expression that I wish I could emulate.
The matter of contributions to the RNC was not directed to you specifically, ‘lissa, but to those intent on winning.
The shoe on the other foot, refers to Blue staters choosing invariably to vote their preference for POTUS and to a lesser extent for the candidate that might appeal to friends and neighbors.
Conservatism, the desire to win, tactic–are all given lip service but voting for the candidate that might appeal in states likely to vote for your side, the Whigs in this case, is out of the question.
Like KevM Blue staters are occupied with all manner of presupposed xenophobias regarding So-Cons, Southern Baptists, NASCAR fans, yada yada.
Fire in the belly, conviction, ideology is just a foreign language in Cyrillic script. KevM, again, thinks Huckster and Santorum are TEA leaders. A total maroon.
Integrity, courage, fearlessness, conviction, honesty are qualities TEAs, in general, will crawl over hot coals to support.
Vote for someone like that if you want to win, otherwise don’t bother, you have no chance.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/24/2014 @ 9:15 pmJD, you’re in my prayers.
Dustin (d1db4e) — 2/24/2014 @ 10:07 pmgary, I try to be civil, even though with some people it is difficult. I try VERY hard to not misrepresent other people. I truly wish you would do the same. But no.
I never said that Huckabee and Santorum were tea party members. Someone else said that most SoCons were teas, and I suggested that those two, clearly SoCon leaders, were not Teas. Sorry you couldn’t understand that.
I’m not going to hold my breath for an apology, though.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:37 amAlso, I very much doubt you will find a post of mine with the words “Southern Baptist” or “NASCAR” in it. Do not put words in my mouth again.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:41 am303. Oh, alright, you didn’t slander the TEAs just the Christians. I am sorry for not studying your comments more closely.
304. Sophistry. The point of my commentary, that you have no interest in ‘winning’ stands.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 1:08 am304. Please do not feel like the Lone Ranger, your fellow Blue Staters have taken their share of abuse from me as well or better.
Its my job.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 1:28 amcry baby progs
mg (31009b) — 2/25/2014 @ 2:24 amblame , blame, blame
so perfect
Gerald appears to be arguing that John Mccain was a acceptably conservative candidate. Why else choose 2008? Personally, I think if you look at 2008 and 2012 and compare the performance of outright progressive candidates to a moderate candidate like Bush (who had 62 million votes in 2004) it’s clear a very large group of voters are not supporting these more liberal candidates.
But the issue is more complicated. In order to effectively engage a progressive candidate, with the MSM’s backing, it is necessary to have a conservative record. As that record is lost, the Republican candidate must avoid hypocritical arguments, which is why Romney lost that mojo as soon as we wasn’t engaging Republicans.
I think the easiest way to see this is Bush 41’s absolutely stunning loss of popularity.
We need to get beyond assuming people are voting strictly on politics and recognize that, on a gut level, liberal republicans simply look watered down from both sides.
Dustin (d1db4e) — 2/25/2014 @ 4:17 amWell one considers 2008. because that was when the party went at war with itself, and chose to attack the candidate that was actually fighting, to save the one who had thrown the match,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:02 amOT This time they may not be called back before a bank, not to say this one, goes to the Elephant graveyard.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-25/jpm-lay-17000-mortgage-bankers-2013-and-2014-because-housing-recovery
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:32 amwhere is our favorite bird fetcher
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisconover/2014/02/24/obamacare-will-cost-2-9-million-or-more-jobs-a-year/
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:34 amthe news just gets better and better;
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2014/02/25/report-two-thirds-of-small-businesses-to-see-premiums-spike-under-obamacare/
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:37 am“Progressive” R candidates. sheesh.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:44 amWe have Fallon, Turkey makes do with Erdogan:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/25/us-turkey-erdogan-idUSBREA1N1ZX20140225
Yeah, Fallon is a fresher face.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:44 amOver simplification is a progressive disease.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:45 am311. Analysis? In English? I didn’t know anyone was doing that.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:50 amWhy don’t you look at the actual text of the bill, instead of what you’re told to think about the bill, and tell us what you find objectionable.
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/51leg/2r/bills/sb1062p.pdf
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:02 amNot me, I swear:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-24/conspiracy-theory-true-agents-infiltrate-websites-intending-manipulate-deceive-and-d
Narciso? Clock in yet?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:02 amThey probably got the idea, from Greenwald, the irony is thick, like Bosco,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:03 amNot to mention Kimberlin’s crew, foul wind and co,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:13 amFWIW, the Arizona bill is a false flag operation. Its only purpose is to create controversy. There is no common law right to service from anyone. Unless there is an anti-discrimination law that says you may not discriminate on the basis of sexual preference, you may discriminate to your heart’s content. They can’t sue you and you don’t need to come up with pretexts. If there is no law against calling someone a “fag” and punching him out, you can call him a “fag” and punch him out. If there is no law against eating your hot dog sideways like an ear of corn, you can eat your hot dog sideways like an ear of corn. You don’t need a law explicitly stating that you are allowed to do it.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:17 amUmm, knowing that Greenwald does not have a reputation as being completely trustworthy, do we believe the info at gary’s link anyway? Because we already thought it to be the case or because it seems to be true on its own merit?
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:17 amseparate thought, an example of what the mainstream repubs haven’t been doing all along that helped get us here:
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:18 amhttp://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/02/cleta-chronicles-irs-scandals-part-3.php
Number 9, number 9, #9,..
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-24/another-successful-banker-found-dead
Its probably nothing.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:20 amnk, I believe a judge in Colorado has ordered a bakery to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/12/Christian-Baker-Willing-to-Go-to-Jail-for-Declining-Gay-Wedding-Cake
I have not done adequate research to know what is information and disinformation about the Colorado case, nor read the proposed law myself and commentary on the legal reasoning behind it to know the details and specifics,
but what I have said is what information I know exists.
My goodness, how many people realize that just to decipher the info that comes to one’s attention each day you need to have an advanced degree from spy school in propaganda/anti-propaganda warfare.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:27 amUnfortunately, it is much easier to devote one’s time to the X-Box and Netflicks and say to heck with it all.
And I guess that is their aim.
if it goes along with the ‘narrative’ it’s probably wrong, re Gitmo, Zimmerman, Tea Party et al
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:30 amOn private religious dsicrimination, and since the question started as Goldwater’s vote on the CRA … The states have general police power that the federal government does not, although it has given itself some through the Commerce Clause. The states can ban any kind of discrimination. The federal government can only ban what an enumerated power gives it the authority to. And I don’t think the Thirteenth Amendment does, in the way the CRA and the Courts interpreting the CRA say it does. It’s not nice to discriminate on religious grounds but the goto authority is your state or municipality not the federal government. At least in 1964 it was. And there were hotels and apartment houses back then that would not rent to Jews.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:37 am323. That is the best clip I’ve seen in like forever.
What say you Colonel?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:37 amwell, narciso, I guess it depends on which narrative by who.
My take on Greenwald’s story is that governments and people in power positions pay money to people to cause havoc on line.
I saw this myself at least once in my cyber-charter school experience. Somebody infiltrated the parent chat room and worked to undermine people who were exposing bad things, claiming access to privileged information in defense of the wrongdoers, etc.
I don’t think the average John Doe or Jane Smith has any idea that they might be in the midst of planned deception by what seems like just another average person on line.
It would be interesting to somehow get data on the amount of money that goes into such stuff by which interest group. Of course, that would be subject to intense effort of manipulation itself.
An army of cyber-Columbos is what we need.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:39 am329. Following your caution on our minder birddog, I have to say you were correct. Only the government could produce mindless stupidity of that homogeneity.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:47 amThe basic principle is “non crimen sin legen”. No law, no crime. There would need to be a law that forbids discrimination on the basis of sexual preference, before defenses such as the First and Thirteenth Amendments come into play. Absolutely “need” if it is a penal law that imposes fines or incarceration.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:51 amHFT CEO of Virtu, which does 5% of the volume on NYSE day in day out has just sold his 7 bedroom NYC townhouse:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-23/hft-pays-ceo-firm-accounts-5-us-equity-volume-selling-his-ny-mansion-114-million
Now launching an IPO. “We’re in the big time, yippee”.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:56 amThe latin types never met our jurists, who see laws birthed by emanations from penumbras.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:02 amYou forgot the wonderful world of crimethink, the point is conformity, not liberty,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:02 amnk, I assume you are having a discussion at least in part with me, but I think you are assuming it is easy for my non-lawyer mind to follow your lawyer-mind’s reasoning, and it isn’t always that easy.
I think the idea is that in Colorado a baker thought he was free to exercise his religious beliefs by refraining from what he thought was an implicit act of approval of something he didn’t approve of.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:04 amBut a judge said no.
So people in AZ saw this and said let’s try to prevent some judge from doing the same thing here.
At lest that is what the situation appears like to me, minus the dedicated in-depth research and messaging decoding that is truly needed.
Like Athena from Zeus’s skull.
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:04 amI forget who I heard this from recently, that the European mindset is more of, “It is not allowed until a law says it is”, as opposed to the US mindset of, “It’s allowed unless a law says it isn’t”.
And there are too many officials pining for a European flair.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:08 amI could pine for a quaint European village moving at a quaint European pace,
but with more “American”=”freedom loving” values.
You folk keep forgetting that some of us had all public education (including college) based in sciences and such.
Whish is ok, if you don’t us not understanding your references.
Like talking about Athena and Zeus, which is all “Greek to me”.
I have other things to do now. I am not (yet) getting paid to do counter-counter-messaging on the internet.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:11 amMD… that is a powerful video, we need thousands of Cleta Mitchells! The IRS is a rogue agency that apparently has both Ds and Rs by the short n’curlies. They ALL need to be held accountable and I think I’ve also read that she says Obama’s fingerprints are all over the recent abuses that have targeted conservatives and the TP folks. Again, more evidence of lawlessness and feckless lying to the People.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:13 amFrom a few days ago.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-22/heres-what-happened-last-time-unemployment-taxes-inequality-were-so-correlated
The GOP are equivalent to the Tories or King’s Men. They collect his taxes and snap up the crumbs that fall from his table.
While the King’s Green Shoot courtiers abscond with the serf’s tens of $Billions$, Boehner must be content with a $900K dacha.
Prolly has to be content with potatoes and borscht.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:14 amliberty=freedom is just another word for nuthin’ left to lose,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:17 amand President Obama wants us all to be free.
Romney: “My views are progressive”
Somehow I’m being so unfair!
Dustin (303dca) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:18 amAnd here I was thinking it was just my puritanical demand for purity of essence causing me to think that.
The video does illustrate that it’s a myth that the solution to government over reach is to vote for more Republicans. Any Republicans.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:19 amYes, Colonel, PowerLine has several posts about the IRS and Ms. Mitchells, who does say all trails of malfeasance lead to Obama.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:19 am338. Re: 336
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:21 amGoogleYahoo is your friend.And remember how Romney’s most adoring fans handled it when I said I would vote for him if nominated, but I didn’t think he could win.
They got racist and nasty.
I have knocked on thousands of doors and made thousands of phone bank calls for the GOP, but the GOP’s most partisan loyalists treat me as subhuman merely for not showing sufficient respect for a RINO who calls himself progressive.
I disagree with Beldar. I am not an “idiot” now that I’ve cast my last vote for a liberal republican. I don’t owe the party my vote. I’ll show them the same loyalty they’ve shown me. Anything less would be pathetic.
Dustin (303dca) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:21 amDustin, I don’t progressive means what Romney thought it means,
or perhaps it is that what Romney means when he says progressive is not what Obama and Hillary mean when they say progressive.
But I don’t understand why bring it up. We all know that Romney is/wasn’t as conservative as some others.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:24 am343. “And here I was thinking..”
LOL.
The ‘purity’ meme so pisses me off with its mendacity, the lazy product of lazy minds, that I feel justified with almost any injustice in return.
I’m weak.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:24 amgary, yahoo is not my friend. it is populated by people controlled by who knows what powers that set up their algorithms.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:26 amI know this by seeing the stories they headline on yahoo news.
MD, apparently Colorado has an Anti-Discrimination Act which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The complaints in Colorado, also apparently, are heard by the Civil Rights Commission, and the “judge” is an “administrative judge”, an employee of the Commission, but that’s besides the point. There is a law.
In Arizona, why flee? Who pursues? More to the point, if there is no state action why create one that can be challenged under the Fourteenth Amendment the way Colorado’s Amendment was in Roper v. Evans?
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:27 am346. “made thousands of phone bank calls”
Sorry if I swore while banging the phone down.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:30 amSo, you are saying that the state anti-discrimination law trumps the federal first amendment freedom of religious expression? or are you saying that such is the argument, whether you agree with it or not?
Should I hold my breath for the Holder DOJ to make a civil rights case against the state on the behalf of the baker?? (turning, very…very…blue….)
Speaking of turning blue, I can’t think of anything that would more quickly entrench a divide between states and de-facto nation-splitting than letting states decide just what is and is not allowed under freedom of religion.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:34 amI am sure NY and Cali would be just fine and dandy with it, until the price of wheat and corn went through the roof on them.
I really am going now.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:35 amhttp://www.greekmythology.com/Myths/The_Myths/Birth_of_Athena/birth_of_athena.html
I guess one of the advantages of my Catholic school education is that I know more of the ancient pagan religions than you unschooled heathens.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:37 ammake that “ex-heathen”, please…
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:39 amDone, doc.
Also, I take no responsibility for the spelling errors of any of my sources.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:42 amIn the old days goddesses seemed to have a habit of being born as fully-formed adults.
http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/08/09/venus_custom-8b58e0a05d6e06de1bddab19d1d7f2f10f5d6e3e-s6-c30.jpg
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:47 amTHAT WAS YOU!!!
LOL, just kidding. You don’t have that many phone numbers.
—
MD, I love ya man. Romney was trying to coddle the voters in one of the bluest states, and Romney always says whatever he thinks the voters want to hear. Among his claims was that he didn’t want to return to the Reagan Bush way, and that he supports “strong gun control”.
There is a reason he lost his effectiveness as a politician the second after he was nominated. What he could get away with as a candidate was no more, as anything he complained about with Obama, from tax hikes to gun control to the individual mandate to deficit spending would all lead to this basic point that he did it too.
At the end of the day, if you don’t mind a progressive, why but the diet version when you can get the real deal with Obama? And if you want a conservative, well, the GOP thinks you’re an idiot or the spawn of arab loins (or whatever precisely your heritage may be).
The contempt many in the GOP has shown me means all that volunteerism is now gone. Thousands fewer doors knocked upon and phones called, which frankly probably doesn’t amount to a hill of beans at this point anyway.
That’s the real sting. For all the bitterness of actually voting for a progressive gun control zealot for president, Obama still wins. The moderates don’t really mind… you can tell.
Dustin (303dca) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:04 amnk, I believe a judge in Colorado has ordered a bakery to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple:
A description from Mr Rainbow Coalition (aka Jesse Jackson) of how he’d treat customers in his earlier years:
When even well-run food operations may cut corners or do things that, were I to see what’s going on in a kitchen, would make me queasy, I’d certainly avoid eating food prepared by a business judicially forced to cater to my whims.
Buyer beware.
Mark (572cf9) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:14 amYes, MD, that’s all I’m saying. Freedom of religion has been raised as a defense to the anti-discrimination statute.
But to be personally honest. I’d struggle with the baker (a wedding cake is a luxury not a necessity) but, personally, I would sooner outlaw a religion that considered giving food, drink or shelter to anyone a sin, before I would outlaw homosexuality.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:26 amHardball, high and tight.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-25/welcome-currency-wars-china-yuan-devalues-most-20-years
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:39 amA red flag and picadores:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/02/one-year-ago-hagel-nominated-to-supervise-generation-long-process-of-defense-cutbacks/
Well, that means fewer shooting at us, I suppose.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:48 amIt’s a two-party system in the United States. You don’t have to like that, but you have to acknowledge that that’s what exists, and that the last time a third party won a presidential election was 1860, with the immediate result that the country was plunged into civil war. Since then, the only thing third parties have done has been to spoil and distort the political process, typically disastrously. See generally presidencies of Wilson, Woodrow (thanks to TR vs Taft); Clinton, Bill (thanks to Perot vs Bush-41).
In a two-party system, voting against the greater of two perceived evils doesn’t mean you’re becoming the lesser of two evils. It doesn’t even mean that you’re embracing the lesser of two evils. It means you’re rejecting the greater of the two evils.
If one feels that liberal/RINO Republicans, however you want to define that, are letting down the country, then by all means challenge them in primaries. Ted Cruz’ present seat in the United States Senate is a very, very conspicuous example of that being done successfully.
But staying home is stupid. It’s pretending that the two-party system doesn’t exist. You don’t “owe your vote” to either political party, but you do have to acknowledge reality to avoid being stupid.
Beldar (8ff56a) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:00 amWhat I’m sorta curious about is why the rock-ribbed conservatives like Cruz, Hensnarling, Perry, etc. haven’t gone after the IRS in a more aggressive fashion? Whoever takes it on would be a true hero.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:03 am#363… no, Beldar, it’s better for the peacock to travel thru the wasteland wearing a technicolored coat of pure principles than to get a grip on reality.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:12 amJaysus, teh Texan’s going full malaka again!
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:15 amThe New York Times lead story today is about Obama’s indecision.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/25/world/middleeast/obama-worried-about-effects-of-waging-cyberwar-in-syria.html?
It seems like a new weapon or tactic has been developed: Cyber warfare.
In 2011 Obama was presented with a plan to disable Syria’s ability to launch airstrikes and produce missiles but he turned it all down.
He is indecisive about offensive cyberwarfare, which could also be used against Syria’s electric grid, or its leadership, even though billions have been spent developing it.
Not very Trumanesque, is it?
There’s a whole secret debate:
Would Russia, Iran or Syria itself retaliate?
Is cyberwarfare like ordinary warfare, is it a covert tool that maybe should be used rarely, or should it be reserved for extradordinary circumstances against the most sophisticated, hard-to-reach targets?
Operationally, this would be done by the NSA.
They are still debating: is this better than airstrikes because it is more humanitarian, or would it encourage other countries to do the same against the United States? That is, would the U.S. be breaking some taboo?
Sammy Finkelman (20d02d) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:39 amColonel Haiku,
Cruz and other Senate Republicans can’t do much more than use their bully pulpits regarding the IRS because the GOP is in the minority, so they don’t have subpoena power. Perry is a state Governor with no authority over a federal entity like the IRS.
Of course, the Republicans in the House are the majority party so they do have subpoena power and could do something meaningful to investigate the IRS. However, Hensarling is chairman of the Financial Service Committee that has jurisdiction over banks, securities, etc. — not the IRS. Rep Dave Camp is Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee that has jurisdiction over the IRS. So far, he has delivered 6 letters requesting information from the IRS. He only threatened to use his subpoena power in the last letter sent this month, but to my knowledge he has never issued a subpoena. The IRS has refused to comply with all but one letter.
In other words, if you have a problem with lack of action, Colonel, I suggest you target the Republicans in the Midwest instead of Republicans in Texas.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:46 amI hope Patterico or JD do a post today on the cuts to the army which were just announced and would bring it down to pre WWII levels.
I think this will prove to be an interesting and important national discussion. We conservatives are generally very national security focused and many of us are horrified by the dangers to the world created by the weakening of U.S. prestige and influence under the Obama administration.
Fewer soldiers in uniform will likely mean even more unemployed Americans.
Still, the sure knowledge that we absolutely must cut spending to the bone and that the military is a huge unwieldy drain on the nation’s resources, means that some unpleasant choices will need to be made and some scary medicine swallowed. I think the reactions of all our leaders and would-be leaders will be highly instructive. What is the “truth” that the American people need to hear? It is certain that the true influence of the military industrial complex will be laid bare. Will conservatives stand by pure economic principles when the rubber meets the road? The recent threat to lessen military pensions as one source of reduced spending did not go well, as I recall.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:47 amnk,
The nation was founded on the principle that people could follow the dictates of their conscience before God on how they should live. Not just what they should do in a building on Sunday (or Saturday), but how they should live their lives.
I can only imagine it would be right to make laws against the practice of religious belief only in the most extreme of cases; such as human sacrifice (at least not the sacrifice of post-born, non-handicapped humans).
No one is suggesting that it is a good thing to refuse food to a starving person, or shelter to someone who will die of exposure,
but do you really want to say one must sell a wedding cake under penalty of law for any reason???
If I was a baker, I do not know if I would follow the same action or not. I would certainly not want my willingness to sell the cake to be taken as an affirmation of SSM. I certainly provided medical care to the best of my ability to lots of people who lived their lives in ways I disagreed with.
What is religious belief but an affirmation of what one worships, what one sees as ultimately important? Whatever a society puts as more important than a person’s “sincerely held religious belief” the society is in essence telling what it worships and what it demands that the individual person worships too.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:47 amShort of society preventing the “direct significant harm” of people at the hands of a religious belief, whatever other way it wants to limit religion not only is of questionable legitimacy of a legitimate government, but opens wide the “Neimullerian” Pandora’s box (first they came for the bakers who wouldn’t make wedding cakes for SS couples….)
As far as the little I know of the case, it’s not like the baker even refused to sell them cupcakes as they came into the shop hand in hand wanting some cupcakes. All he wanted to say was, “When I make a wedding cake, I see it as affirming the importance of marriage. If I make a wedding cake for a SS marriage, I can’t help but think of it as affirming SS marriage, and I don’t want to do it.”
FWIW, if a gay baker didn’t want to make a wedding cake for a politician who was opposed to SSM, I would think that should be fine, too.
Beldar,
I can’t believe a litigator is calling people stupid, especially one such as you who has so many years dealing with juries. My litigation experience is vastly less than yours, but it was enough for me to realize that jurors sometimes make mistakes but they aren’t stupid.
I’m curious: Do you feel about jurors the way you feel about voters?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:50 amelissa, I agree it is an important issue.
But I think history has shown that when there is a power vacuum, an evil power will fill it, and then the good will have the choice to abdicate to evil or pay a much bigger price in lives and resources.
Of course, if one thinks that a powerful US only instigates the growth of rival powers, then cutting the defense makes sense even if there is not a financial crunch.
One thing to remember, one argument the Dems had about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars was that it was taxing our too small military.
So wanting an even smaller military shows they just don’t want the US to have a credible military power at all.
The cynic could say they just want to make it a betting contest as to whether the US will fall from the outside or inside after all.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:55 amAlso, most of the times I thought jurors had made a mistake? As the years went on and I learned more, I decided maybe I was the one who had made a mistake — not the jurors.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:56 amThe Colorado baker is difficult. We have discussed it before. He could be said to be an accomplice to, and enabler of, sin. A wedding cake is a celebration.
The Arizona law …? The Devil’s always in the details. I haven’t researched it, but I think it started out like Colorado. Arizona wanted to attract gays to Sonoma and it passed an anti-discrimination law that protects gays. Now, it wants to limit it with a religious exception. Betcha a brioche and Perrier.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:56 amIn addition re the military. I have heard from multiple sources that the military folk say they could make the same total cash amount of cuts in a way that would do much less harm to our military readiness if they were allowed to, whether than just a sequester like across the board cut.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:58 amBut that was before the additional cuts were brought up.
But this should be no surprise as decisions to limit the F-22 and land based interceptor missiles in Europe were scrapped.
But staying home is stupid.
I agree with Beldar. In Chicago, the Machine gets its people in with maybe 18% of the votes of registered voters if that much. People stay home, total turnout is 35%, the Machine buses its faithful in, Obama’s your State Senator (and the rest is histor
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:06 amyic.)I have not read any of the other comments, yet. I just wanted to say that some of my independent friends and all of the Democrat people (catch the subtle diff?) I know warned me that my views would be tainted and I would run the risk of being “turned” into a Republican if I did not limit my time on this and other conservative sites. I would never have thought I would read the following on this site:
“My vote is no longer automatic. I used to describe myself as an independent who almost always votes Republican — which, let’s face it, is really a Republican. Now, I am an independent, period. I am no longer a Republican”.
I will hazard a guess that the opinions of high-information voters (such as DRJ) may have been a bell-weather. To me it is confirmation that even a LIV such as myself can understand something intuitively, if not explicitly, and that being an independent is not a symptom of ignorance.
I cannot, nor should anyone, cheer Pat’s “independency” because it is the sad state of the Republican party that has enlarged the ranks of the independents. I wonder how many former Democrats ( I know, a mythical creature)are now “independent” instead of Republican because of the Republican “image”?
felipe (6100bc) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:06 amDRJ–I took Haiku’s question about exposing the IRS to be more related to messaging and the bully pulpit than actual congressional subpoenas/hearings etc. I think the bully pulpit is where this needs to explode and probably the only way it can explode as long as Obama is in the WH. There’ve been a lot of subpoenas and interesting hearings, but when the administration denies, refuses to cooperate, and sends witnesses to lie through their teeth or take the fifth, there’s only so much more congress can do.
An ambitious politician or group taking on an aggressive “de-tooth the IRS” campaign akin to “repeal Obamacare” would seem to have great promise to resonate with a large number of Americans. Do you disagree?
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:12 amI have the campaign poster: A snaggle-toothed bulldog with a spiked collar, IRS written on its side, peeing on the Constitution, with the caption: Curb The IRS!
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:16 am“a Democrat who forthrightly”
Ahahahahahahahaaha! Wait, you are being serious?
felipe (6100bc) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:18 amThat’s the spirit, nk!
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:22 am#378… Yes, elissa, that’s what I was trying to say. The Dems are useless, but there should be no excuses given by ANY Republican, ESPECIALLY conservative Republicans for not taking this on. Are they all just weak in the knees? What a golden opportunity to resonate with the people!
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:30 am==I’m curious: Do you feel about jurors the way you feel about voters?==
Technically, people who stay home on election day are not “voters”. 🙂 I agree with every word Beldar said @363.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:34 amGood for you, elissa. It’s virtually always a good idea to agree with Beldar because he’s very smart. But, technically, just because they didn’t vote in a particular election doesn’t mean a person isn’t a voter. I doubt anyone here can claim they’ve voted in every election but that doesn’t mean we aren’t all voters.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:37 amCruz on the IRS scandal:
February 20, 2014 — Cruz addresses Hollywood conservative group Friends of Abe, telling them they rightly refused a request from the IRS to reveal the names of its members: “FOA should respond to the IRS as it would to any McCarthyite request for information.”
January 22, 2014 — Letter from Sen. Cruz to AG Eric Holder regarding misuse of the IRS to target conservative groups.
January 29, 2014 — Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, challenged Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint an independent prosecutor to handle reports that the IRS targeted conservative groups for heightened scrutiny.
Also, Ted Cruz’s Senate home page currently has one message: “Don’t let the IRS silence you. Stop the IRS’s abuse of power.”
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:49 amI know you can do a Google search for Rick Perry, Jeb Hensarling, and the IRS scandal so I won’t bother. Suffice it to say they have had a lot to say about the topic.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:56 amThat’s a good start, DRJ, and he’s better than most…. but this is cherry-picking. I’d really like to see some Reps and Senators stand up in Congress, go on the record with a full condemnation of the lawlessness, abuse of the American people perpetrated by this president, his AG, the IRS and several other agencies, followed by a news conference where these charges are also made. Do it on a weekly basis, until it gains traction that can’t be denied.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:02 amPitch Perfect is empty calories but in a fun way
happyfeet (c60db2) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:04 amelissa:
I agree with one exception: I do not want “ambitious” politicians taking on the IRS scandal. I want responsible, competent, and concerned politicians taking this on because it offends their view of how the government and the Constitution should work. I think Cruz and Hensarling are that kind of politicians, and they have done their best to address the IRS scandal. But they aren’t media favorites so they don’t often have mainstream media forum to address it. However, C-Span archives show that both Cruz and Hensarling have frequently addressed the IRS scandal on the Senate floor and on the House floor or in committee hearings.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:06 amColonel Haiku,
I wish Cruz and Hensarling would talk daily on TV about the IRS abuses. Other than Fox News, I don’t think anyone will give them a forum to do that. So they are left with talking about it in their meetings with constituents and on C-Span. I’ve linked how they do that on C-Span and I assure you they are doing it with their constituents. I wish MSNBC, CNN, CBS, ABC, and other media would have them on to talk to Americans, but they don’t.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:10 amnk @ 0637….
And there were hotels and apartment houses back then that would not rent to Jews.
“No Irish – No Dogs – No Actors”
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:16 amPermit me to read your mind, elissa: Yes, Cruz is am ambitious politician. Most of them are, including politicians like Cruz who I think want to be President. But there is a difference between a politician who decides what to support because of his ambitions and a politician who decides what to support because of his principles. I don’t know for sure about Hensarling but Cruz has shown me he will act based on principle. I think Perry is an opportunist and a classic ambitious politician. As a result, I trust him far less than the other two.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:22 amComment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:56 am
A juror can only make a “mistake” if he was afforded the opportunity a) to be on the jury by the inaction’s of the attorney’s, and b) by being presented a more compelling argument by one side or the other.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:26 amSo, it would seem, that any “mistake” rests on mistakes of the attorney’s involved.
Governor Perry should maybe focus on opportunities to speak in complete coherent sentences.
That’s the sort of thing he could have leveraged in 2012 to his benefit.
happyfeet (c60db2) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:27 amCan’t be hammered enough and should have started many months ago, DRJ… whether limited to “friendly” media, or not.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:28 amWe’ve known about these abuses for a long time now.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:29 amJust my opinion.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:29 amThat’s true, hf, but I think Perry is a fairly consistent conservative. In addition, it’s often hard to write in complete, coherent sentences. Imagine how hard it is to speak that way in public and off-the-cuff.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:30 amLiteral transcripts of media interviews are illuminating in pointing out how we sometimes change horses – or at least step off momentarily – in mid-stream.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:33 amColonel Haiku:
Okay, Colonel. I provided recent Cruz links on the IRS and I admit I didn’t bother to link the old stuff because it’s so time-consuming to format links at this website. But the links are there, if you want to look.
Nevertheless, it’s clear you’ve made up your mind that nothing Texas Republicans do is enough. I can live with that and you may actually be right. Maybe Texas and Texans are the only thing that can save this nation.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:34 amyou can speak in complete & coherent sentences all you want, but if you’re a conservative, the MFM will mangle your words for you, then report them as if unedited.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:34 am“Mr. Secretary, tear down that wall” is taken. Maybe Perry can say, “Wendy, comb out that perm”.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:37 am104- Look what they did to Mike Rowe Re: Walmart
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:38 am403- That was supposed to reference # 401.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:39 amnk,
Perry should tell Wendy to get some boots. It would help her chances a lot more than anything she’s done so far in this election.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:41 amhey, Conservatives!
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:41 amPlease tear down the IRS
cuz resist we much
I don’t want to seem to imply that it’s somehow exclusively Cruz’ job to go after the IRS abuses if he has presidential ambitions. Clearly, it’s not. It’s all Conservatives and various and sundry other Republicans –and it should also be democrats, too, at least a few of whom must see what’s happened and how dangerous to freedom and the Constitution it is.
Frankly, I think the problem is that almost all politicians and media are afraid of the combo of the IRS and NSA. I’m not sure I blame them. But it’s very bad for our country that they feel unable to freely speak out.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:41 amWell said, elissa 407. It is frightening, and with good reason.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:44 amBut I think it’s even more frightening for everyday Americans than for politicians and the media. We’re powerless to protect ourselves from government.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:45 am“Frankly, I think the problem is that almost all politicians and media are afraid of the combo of the IRS and NSA. I’m not sure I blame them. But it’s very bad for our country that they feel unable to freely speak out.”
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. It would probably curl our hair to be made aware of the blackmail that goes on.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:46 am==Maybe Texas and Texans are the only thing that can save this nation.==
Hey! I just looked at a map and Texas is a big state. But y’all have got a large job ahead of you because there are 49 more states in the union you have to whip into shape.
That is meant as a a joke DRJ. I think you have enough sense of humor left to see why I said it.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:52 amComment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:30 am
it’s often hard to write in complete, coherent sentences. Imagine how hard it is to speak that way in public and off-the-cuff
There are certain people, notably law professor and United States Justice Felix Frankfurter, and physicist Richard Feynman, who are reported to have had the ability to speak in extreely complex sentences, with many clauses, without making a grammatical error.
Of course, they had the advantage of expressing their own thoughts.
Sammy Finkelman (20d02d) — 2/25/2014 @ 11:53 amWhipping 49 states into shape isn’t our only option, Colonel.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:13 pmI meant elissa, not Colonel. My apologies. I read the name off the previous comment.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:14 pmThanks for giving me credit for having a little sense of humor left.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:15 pmI’m curious: Do you feel about jurors the way you feel about voters?
I’m sure Beldar can answer that, but the way I read what he wrote, he thinks NON-voters are stupid.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:34 pmexpecially since there are 56 other states…
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:48 pm261. Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/24/2014 @ 7:11 pm
Here’s my take after reading Trende and Strassel:
I think one factor was voter ID laws.
1) They probably kept more Republicans away from the polls than Democrats. (I think that’s teh drty little secret here, because a lot of the people without ID are elderly, and because where it mattered, the Democrats may have tried to male make sure their voters had it. Republicans voters without ID were widely scattered.)
And,
2) More important, the Democrats used the “they’re trying to stop you from voting” argument to mobilize people to go to the polls.
Sammy Finkelman (20d02d) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:55 pmIn that regard, the GOP doesn’t need to be trying to run off people who oppose amnesty
No, they don’t have to run them off, but they have got to stop trying to appease them.
In general, Boehner has got to drop the idea of only passing legislation that gets a majority of Republican votes, although he should try to do better than passing a bill with just a little more than two dozen Republican votes in the House.
That’s a way of assuring that nothing will actually pass into law at all.
Sammy Finkelman (20d02d) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:56 pmThat is a dirty little secret, Sammy. So dirty that it’s tantamount to bull excrement.
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:58 pmComment by redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/25/2014 @ 12:48 pm
expecially since there are 56 other states…
49 states,
1 District of Columbia,
5 territories counted only at national political conventions and by non-voting delegates in the House of represenatives, and, for the Democrats,
1 delegation at the national convention representing “Democrats Abroad.”
Sammy Finkelman (20d02d) — 2/25/2014 @ 1:00 pmSF excels at not having any situational awareness.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/25/2014 @ 1:12 pmWell Done, Sammy.
Do you think they’ll be able to help you with that long-term memory loss?
this is for all you bed wetters who still think our best course is to be “Demonrat Lite”
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/25/2014 @ 1:36 pmYou’re either with us, or against us!
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/25/2014 @ 2:21 pmredc1c4 #423,
Friend, who among us has ever said they want the GOP to be “Democrat Lite” ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:08 pmBrother John was the mellower one in the family,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:27 pmJohn and Sam were cousins, not brothers.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:30 pmMN Primary August 12, filing deadline June 3rd.
Vying for outgoing Rep. Bachmann’s seat is a crowded GOP field versus DFL Catholic college Poli Sci professor.
Prozac, Governor, and Fool, Senator are up.
I see only one TEA running, statewide, verus John Kline, one of Boehner’s yar spears.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:31 pm422. I think Sammy is a regular in Americorpse.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:34 pmWhy don’t you consider running, gg? You have passion and lots of ideas.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:36 pm430. Cannot speak. I can read but that is nowhere good enough.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:39 pm410-Col, could not agree more.
mg (31009b) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:39 pmToo bad are National Security isn’t as intimidating as the nsa and irs.
No, it never does.
Thanks again, DRJ, for the contacts at Bugles Across America. They put out the word, and some retired Air Force dude rogered up. An absolutely wonderful man. I wish he had stayed for the reception.
I might have mentioned the Coasties did a great job what with the honor guard and all. The only thing missing was the flyover. But Coastie helos are in short supply and normally have other things to attend to rather than serve ceremonial purposes.
Which leads us to:
The fact that Obama has always been a lying sack of excrement.
I recall, if no one else does, that Obama observed back in his 2008 candidacy that no nation ever preserved its military preeminence without preserving its economic preeminence.
Which prepared people like me to expect Obama would cripple the US economy. This is, yall, why he got the Nobel Piss Prize.
Then this.
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/01/05/9977091-obama-vows-us-will-stay-worlds-top-military-power
I hope nobody busted a gut laughing.
Obama isn’t simply hamstringing future presidents by limiting their options. Air and sea supremacy were once ours without question. Nobody contested it, we didn’t need to fight for it. I can say without a doubt that when the US Navy rolled into the Indian Ocean or wherever we were the 800 lb gorilla in the room.
I didn’t do much in my 20 years in the Navy because I didn’t have to. Now Americans will have to pay in blood for what we once got for practically free.
I am not happy about this.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:49 pmGary Gulrud,
You should run.
Speak truth to power. And stuff.
Conduct a Jefferson Smith campaign. (Jimmy Stewart in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.”)
Besides, one needn’t be a great public speaker to win. After all, it’s Minnesota, where Garrison Keillor became an icon by barely speaking above a whisper.
And look at President O’bumbles—all he can do is read from a teleprompter. Otherwise, it’s all “uhh, umm, well, uh,…”
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:59 pmWhen he goes off script, he ends up telling people that they didn’t build the road in front of their office building.
Speaking of attacking…
send in your gun registration, but it doesn’t get there in time, so now the govt. has a list of people with “illegal” guns…
http://bearingarms.com/botched-registration-leads-to-confiscation-in-connecticut/
they will never come for your guns, that’s a foil hat thing…
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 3:59 pmgary- I have experience as a campaign manager, or something or other, I forget exactly what it was that Ag80 gave me before he took it away…
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 4:01 pmHey Californians! Your drought has created a new gold rush. You can grow a beard and go prospectin’.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/02/24/prospectors-say-drought-has-created-californias-2nd-gold-rush/
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 4:04 pmHere ya go:
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/02/25/coalition-of-black-pastors-call-for-holder-impeachment-over-same-sex-marriage/
Conflict of the interest groups.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 4:09 pmHave I mentioned that vaseline-impregnated bandages are just the thing if you need to warm up quickly whilst evading?
http://www.woundsource.com/product/vaseline-petrolatum-gauze
I probably have since I’m getting forgetful in my old age. Just tear a slit in the middle of the foil wrapper, warm up, and when the hounds start closing in fold it up and put it in your pocket. Then start running. Again.
News you can use.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/25/2014 @ 4:12 pmI forgot to mention that you’ll need a match or a lighter or something. The vaseline won’t start burning on its own.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/25/2014 @ 4:15 pmEric Holder is telling Governors and Attorneys General of the states that they should entertain the idea of not enforcing laws they don’t like.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/25/2014 @ 4:30 pmExcuse me, but wasn’t that train of thought the whole problem with the southern states choosing to not enforce the protection of Constitutional rights of blacks back in the old days ?
Conflict of the interest groups.
Their chickens are coming home to roost?
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 4:33 pmAnd here’s Arizona’s existing anti-discrimination state law. http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/41/01442.htm (It has to be accurate, they’re not allowed to put it on the internet if it’s not.) It forbids discrimination based on “sex” but not sexual orientation. So the bill in controversy, now, is either aimed at some local ordinance(s) (Sonoma!) or is entirely chimerical.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 4:55 pm“Wendy… Wendy left me alone”
– any child of Wendy Davis
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:09 pmhey Colonel Sanders
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:12 pmkeep on plucking that chicken
don’t be choking it
that gun-rights ruining, progressive wolf-in-sheep’s clothing Romney!
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:14 pmnk, I don’t know what the exact origin of the bill is either,
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:20 pmbut I think the situation in Colorado is quite alarming, and unless it is resolved in favor of the baker sometime very soon, I would be for a “religious freedom guarantee act” of some sort everywhere, unless it was judged that the effort was a poor tactical move with something else being better.
Once you start mandating that a person must ignore their religious convictions in order to otherwise participate in society, you have in effect mandated a secular religion.
Should an Orthodox Jewish or a Muslim caterer be forced to serve pork ribs at a barbecue? I don’t think so.
Besides, if the gay couple and all of their friends think the Christian baker is such an outcast of society, why don’t they spend some of their lawyer money (and keep the rest of it) on a couple of ads telling everyone what a jerk he is and to go somewhere else for their wedding cake?
Should a Muslim be forced to cater a Bar Mitzvah celebration?
Should a pro-choice business be forced to host a pro-life gathering?
This is exactly the question that the Supremes must settle in Hobby Lobby.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:30 pmCan the State compel you to violate your religious beliefs to accomplish what the State considers a greater good?
We conservatives are generally very national security focused and many of us are horrified by the dangers to the world created by the weakening of U.S. prestige and influence under the Obama administration.
I have mixed emotions about federal budgets that, among many things, have been padded for years by expenditures of the military and, in turn, an effort to reel that in. In particular, I’m thinking of costly programs that been been kept alive not because military brass wanted them, but because they were a make-work program for the district of a Congressman A, B or C, Democrats included.
Generally, I’m more worried about a coddle-Nidal-Hasan mentality (and its corollary of “force everyone to kiss up to the GLBT crowd”), which has spread throughout this society, than I am about cutbacks in spending on the US military.
Mark (08f7ce) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:37 pmShould an Orthodox Jewish or a Muslim caterer be forced to serve pork ribs at a barbecue?
It would be fascinating to see how the judge in question, or the political-correct brigade in general, would have dealt with — or would deal with — the baker in Colorado if he/she/they were devout Muslims.
To be honest, if a bunch of Islamo-fascists were put into a “Thunderdome” type of setting with a bunch of elitist-leftists from the West, I wouldn’t know who to root for, who to root against.
Mark (08f7ce) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:42 pmfor a change of pace, maybe for the weekend;
http://rateyourmusic.com/list/schmidtt/rolling_stones_500_worst_reviews_of_all_time__work_in_progress_/1/
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:43 pmThis whole conversation on this thread started with Goldwater’s vote against the CRA of 1964. My view is that the 13th Amendment prohibits involuntary servitude, and it is binding on the federal government, the states, and private individuals. Nobody can force someone to work for him. The language is pretty darn clear. You should not need a defense other than “I don’t want your money, I don’t want to work for you”. Liberals see it differently. The Warren Court saw it differently. They thought that private racial discrimination was a propagation of the badges and incidents of slavery that the Thirteenth Amendment intended to abolish. It’s not entirely insane for racial discrimination, but its expansion to sexual orientation would be. And when it comes to personal services, First Amendment religious freedom should not be necessary as a defense. The Thirteenth Amendment should be enough. FWIW. Nobody’s going to put me on the Supreme Court. 😉
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:46 pmWhat a relief/s.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:52 pmCan the State compel you to violate your religious beliefs to accomplish what the State considers a greater good?
Oh, yes, it can. Ask the Amish and the Quakers. Ask the conscientious objectors to the draft. They had a stronger case than Hobby Lobby, even in non-combatant roles, even as medics, they were part of a war machine and they still had to serve.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:53 pm447–It seems to me that caterers have their own standard menu of offerings–their specialties, with prices attached. Some specialize in Italian fare, some offer American football game spread` noshes, and others produce varieties of two foot long sub sandwiches, or pastry trays. If someone wants to purchase the standard offering why the hell not sell it? The idea (for instance) that a Muslim restaurateur would be “forced” by a prospective client to serve pork ribs if they were not even on his menu seems like a preposterous what if.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 5:58 pmnk, When I become president, I will nominate you.
OT and a reprise of the past, as I first stumbled onto PP trying to understand the legal stuff around Terri Schiavo, anybody very familiar with the case of Justina Pellitier in Boston?
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:06 pmBoth The Blaze and The Huffington Post seem to agree that the girl and her family are getting the shaft by Boston Children’s/Harvard and the MA Dept of SS.
Getting those two to agree on something, that’s pretty impressive.
I first heard about it on the Blaze, a month or two ago,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:11 pmwell elissa, I think it is preposterous that a baker is being forced to bake a wedding cake for any reason.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:11 pmYou don’t think some caterer might advertise, “Special requests are welcome” or some such?
The more preposterous part is indeed thinking that some evil Christian would go out of their way to entrap a Muslim or Jewish caterer and sue them.
I admit I don’t know all the cake details, MD. Maybe you do. If the baker is being asked to top their standard cake with something highly unusual or controversial or god forbid to creatively use frosting to create something vulgar, then they certainly should be able to object. But sometimes maybe a cake is just a cake. This baker was obviously specifically singled out to try to prove a point and to get a rise out of them and to get publicity for a rainbow wedding. My guess is that if they’d just quietly provided the cake and taken their usual profit and prayed, they’d not ever again have have been asked to bake a cake for a gay wedding because the drama/cause had failed. There would have been no lawyers and no potential fines/damages. But what do I know.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:25 pmJustified in T-minus 17 mins
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:43 pmhey you bake that cake!
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:48 pmthat’s the icing on teh cake
walk down dirty road
the Crowe’s go to Mexico, what could go wrong?
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:49 pmBut what do I know.
Sorry, but that’s a lame rationalization, Elissa.
Mark (08f7ce) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:51 pmShaved legs he was she
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:51 pmHey Bruce take walk on wild side
And colored girls go
Entonces, narciso…
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:53 pmHere’s a more trustworthy version of the story than Breitmart’s. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2013/1207/Colo.-judge-orders-Christian-baker-to-bake-gay-wedding-cake.-Will-he-say-no-video It was as I thought. A toothless decision. No fine. I don’t think that an administrative judge could have done more than impose a maximum $500.00 fine to begin with. I very much doubt that an administrative judge can impose mandatory injunctions either. One employee of an administrative agency told the bakers “That’s not nice, I’ll let you slide this time, but don’t do it again or you could be in trouble”. For real. I have done this stuff in Illinois, not Colorado, but I can’t imagine that Colorado’s judicial system is all that different. If I were the bakers, I’d drop it. Not appeal. Don’t go looking for more trouble. You know what you get when you sow the seeds of discord. Or maybe Matthew 5:25-26?
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 6:58 pmThat’s OK Mark. As I said, it’s just my opinion. Sometimes I think your logic’s a little sketchy too.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:03 pmSorry, but that’s a lame rationalization, Elissa.
Well, we have not all had your Epiphany and the Holy Spirit did not endow us with Wisdom and Knowledge of All Things as It did with you, Mark.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:03 pmHaving Natalie Zea, have a less high profile role, loses something no, then again, the gal who played the LAtvian doctor,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:05 pmBut sometimes maybe a cake is just a cake. This baker was obviously specifically singled out to try to prove a point and to get a rise out of them and to get publicity for a rainbow wedding. My guess is that if they’d just quietly provided the cake and taken their usual profit and prayed, they’d not ever again have have been asked to bake a cake for a gay wedding because the drama/cause had failed. There would have been no lawyers and no potential fines/damages. But what do I know.
elissa (and MD),
While I agree it is preposterous that a baker is being forced to bake a wedding cake for any reason, I find it more troubling that a baker of faith would refuse. Consider this: What if the bride of the wedding the baker was catering that weekend (the one where he would make a bundle of dough)had recently had an abortion. Shouldn’t the baker make sure that that client had not violated his principles? What if the couple had been shacking up before they were wed? And so forth. The point being, if they were going to be consistent and true to their beliefs, they would have a very limited clientele and likely go out of business. If it’s knowledge of their clients’ sins is the defining line, then I suppose you could say they were don’t ask, don’t tell Christians, no?
The question is, which sins can be ignored and/or not ignored while attempting to make a profit?
Dana (9f8700) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:14 pmSince health (not to mention environmentalism) is a new form of religion to liberals (ban electronic cigarettes!! ban Happy Meals! ban Big Gulps!), it makes sense for them to treat the GLBT crowd like it’s a Typhoid Mary. But will they? If not, why not?!
Bakeries harangued by pesky leftwing-GLBT customers should frame and post the following on their wall:
Mark (08f7ce) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:17 pmSomebody do me a favor and tell me if you see my long 6:58 pm comment or my short 7:03 pm comment. Only one of them made it and I don’t know which.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:17 pmthe second one didn’t.
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:20 pmThanks, narciso. Mark, it was an insult to you for your comment to elissa. It (your comment) was uncalled for.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:22 pmConsider this: What if the bride of the wedding the baker was catering that weekend (the one where he would make a bundle of dough)had recently had an abortion.
That analogy would be applicable only if the baker in question had been asked to make a cake decorated with frosting that proclaimed “Happy Abortion!” or with little figurines molded to look like they were having sex.
Mark (08f7ce) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:25 pmQue, here is the bill, where do the crazier claims originate.
http://legiscan.com/AZ/text/HB2153/id/921247
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:27 pmIt (your comment) was uncalled for.
Why? The post in question was a rationalization, and it was a lame (okay, I’ll instead use the word “ineffective”) one at that.
Mark (08f7ce) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:29 pmMark @ 469,
To be consistent, they (bakers) would then need to post this:
Obesity means having excess body fat. For adults 35 and older, having a BMI greater than 30 is considered obese.
Obesity is not just a cosmetic consideration. It is a chronic medical disease that can lead to diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, gallstones, and other chronic illnesses.
Obesity is difficult to treat and has a high relapse rate. Greater than 95% of those who lose weight regain the weight within five years. Cakes, cookies, pies and other baked goods may be delicious, but with obesity becoming a growing epidemic, people are starting to look for healthier alternatives.
Will they? Of course not.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:31 pmWell, consider yourself insulted, anyway. Patterico’s decency filter did us both a favor in blocking my comment.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:33 pmTo be consistent, they (bakers) would then need to post this:
It really wouldn’t be too consistent since such a physical condition or ailment isn’t transmitted from one person to the other. All jokes aside, an obese human isn’t a contagious disease.
Mark (08f7ce) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:41 pmFrom your link, nk:
“At first blush, it may seem reasonable that a private business should be able to refuse service to anyone it chooses,” Judge Spencer wrote on Friday. “This view, however, fails to take into account the cost to society and the hurt caused to persons who are denied service simply because of who they are.”
The Breitbart article may have had this same quote, along with statements by the judge that he found that the person in question had long held sincere religious beliefs and believed that providing a/the wedding cake (not just “a cake”) implied his approval of the ceremony, which he did not.
Now, you can argue as you did that it is a non-judgment as far as any significant consequences are concerned, so let it slide.
Now, it is a very different setting, but I think you and others have said that some copyrighted image/etc., needs to be scrupulously protected or it is easily lost.
I think the argument by the baker and others would be, “Yes, I haven’t been punished in any way, but should I find it OK to ignore my conscience because I wasn’t punished?” From the beginning, even faithful Jews before Christianity, risked consequences and even death to be obedient to God rather than compromise.
Of course, sometimes the choice between obedience or not is more clearly explicit than others.
The rock group Heart (as I understand it) refused to allow the use of their song “Barracuda” by Palin (“Sarahcuda”). If a rock group can refuse the use of a song which has already been recorded and doesn’t even require their participation because it offends their political view, why should a person be forced to actively participate in something that is in conflict with their religious beliefs?
This is one example (relatively trivial, IMO) where the logical conflict inherent in the gay rights movement is obvious. It is not enough to “agree to disagree”, or respectfully “let them do what they want”, but it is demanded that the gay agenda be affirmed. If people really want the gay identity to be affirmed as normal and that those who disagree are punished/persecuted for their views, then let them stand up and say so.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:43 pmBut as with so many things, those views typically aligned with the left are never honestly and directly explained. Everything is, “They just want to be left alone.”, “Who will it hurt?”
Well, they want it to hurt a baker who disagrees with them.
“Don’t ask, don’t tell Christians” is a very potent turn of phrase to acknowledge the possibility of inconsistency, if not outright hypocrisy with respect to the outward practice of our faith. I don’t know whether that was original, Dana, or if you heard it somewhere, but it will become part of my vocabulary from here on out.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:50 pmIt’s Alinsky I forget which rule, make them live up to their principles to an impossible degree,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:51 pmnk–I considered the source, so…. Nonetheless I appreciate your most chivalrous support and defense.
elissa (a115bb) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:59 pmDana, I think it is perfectly reasonable even for people of Christian faith who disagree with SSM to disagree how the baker should have handled the situation.
The baker saw the situation (perhaps even in part because of provocative language when the request was placed) as calling for his endorsement/approval of the marriage. Now, one can say that one’s own conscience is not so bothered by something, but that doesn’t give one place to tell someone else what their conscience should say.
When Jesus was confronted by religious leaders and a woman caught in adultery, he did not condemn her, but He also did not at all suggest that what she did was OK. Perhaps if Jesus had been a baker and not a carpenter, He would have agreed to bake “a cake”, but would have told them they were free to do with it what they wanted, I don’t know. We have nothing that tells us that the baker “condemned” them, that he said they were going to hell or yelled at them, but that he refused to “endorse” their behavior.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 7:59 pmJesus was a really good carpenter but IKEA uses, according to Mr. Instapundit, like 1% of all cellulose to make its furnishings
and after you buy the furnishings you can have tasty meatballs what may or may not have run for the roses as fast as you can your fate is delivered your moment’s at hand
individual meatballs are notorious for traveling at their own pace
Jesus be damned
happyfeet (8ce051) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:04 pmi can drink to that all night
happyfeet (8ce051) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:05 pmIt is not enough to “agree to disagree”, or respectfully “let them do what they want”, but it is demanded that the gay agenda be affirmed.
The militant gay agenda raises my hackles too, and brings out the reactionary in me. At the best of times I consider homosexuality a paraphilia — a mental disorder characterized by aberrant sexual feelings and behaviors. I don’t accept that it’s normal. Anymore than I accept that schizophrenia is normal. Or bipolar disorder. Or autism. And there’s a wide gap between tolerating it and endorsing it. And somewhere in between there’s a standard which should be applied to all people, the healthy and the mentally ill, when it comes to how I behave towards them and how I think society should behave towards them, where I try to stay. But, yes, it really does anger me too when they try to paint the relief of their unbearable urges as a moral imperative on my part. And when I calm down, I think that we are all giving the subject more consideration than it’s worth.
nk (dbc370) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:05 pmelissa,
It is indeed an original thought. I would have italicized if not. The self-righteous hypocrisy of self-proclaimed Christians, of which churches all over America are filled with, is amusing… It further amuses me at how Clintonesque these people are.
(and yeah, I’m ending sentences with prepositions…)
Dana (9f8700) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:10 pmoh strike that, I cleaned up the preps.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:12 pmIn one way I agree nk that the subject has gotten more consideration than it should, but its prominence in public discussion was not the result of our efforts.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:16 pm“Anger is not an agenda. And outrage, as a habit, is not even conservative. Outrage, resentment, and intolerance are gargoyles of the Left. For us, optimism is not just a message – it’s a principle. American conservatism, at its core, is about gratitude, and cooperation, and trust, and above all hope.
It is also about inclusion. Successful political movements are about identifying converts, not heretics. This, too, is part of the challenge before us.”
– Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:23 pmThe real problem with sin, be it homosexual behavior or heterosexual promiscuity or being cruel to a spouse, or whatever, is that it is falling (woefully) short of what God’s intent is for us. That is why the Bible says that the one engaged in sin is not as blameworthy as those who approve of and encourage sin.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:27 pmTell it like it is, Mike Lee!!!
Colonel Haiku (fe7cbb) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:30 pmOur freedoms as individuals are leaking slowly away but since it does not effect us we ignore it.
We need outrage and anger to fuel change. Simple appeal to good stuff while nice Hallmark Card thinking is not realistic fuel to fight back.
So to those who think that Conservatism is all about happy thoughts and positive solutions — that negative does not work — guess what, Progressivism has been on the slow march for 100 years sell envy and division with great success.
Anyway …
Rodney King's Spirit (ca9e04) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:36 pmRight tell me again how anger doesn’t work;
narciso (3fec35) — 2/25/2014 @ 8:55 pmhttp://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2014/02/25/7-famous-supporters-of-the-chavez-regime/?singlepage=true
I’d be willing to work on a campaign, doing research, proofing, making coffee, answering the phone, writing emails, etc.
The downside is I sometimes forget appointments. I set alarms on my phone, but I forget those too.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:39 pm494. Morally and factually challenged:
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:52 pm487. “self-righteous hypocrisy” is the human condition, it’s just especially ironic in “self-proclaimed Christians”.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/25/2014 @ 9:59 pmSo to those who think that Conservatism is all about happy thoughts and positive solutions — that negative does not work — guess what, Progressivism has been on the slow march for 100 years sell envy and division with great success.
The stereotype is that rightist sentiment is innately unkind, uncaring, non-compassionate and non-generous. Or that a respect for upholding standards which have kept the moorings of society somewhat stable is a boring, heartless, non-creative, unsophisticated reaction.
This particular assumption or impression that far too many people have out there is a major reason that — yes, once again — even the US military (and NOT the ACLU, not the NAACP, not the Sierra Club, not Move On, not devotees of the Huffington Post, not Emily’s List, etc) is ginned up with truly dumb left-leaning sentiment. So ridiculous that even an anti-US-spewing enlistee of the Muslim faith was tolerated until it was too late.
In that regard, and by contrast, I guess private businesses being forced to kowtow to the GLBT brigade is not quite as insane. But only by a few degrees.
Mark (08f7ce) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:10 pmIt further amuses me at how Clintonesque these people are.
“Limousine liberalism” — and one doesn’t have to be wealthy to be guilty of that form of two-faced, phony-baloney behavior — is the epitome of hypocrisy and cheap self-righteousness in this day and age (“oh, my heart bleeds far more purely and beautifully than anyone else’s, bar none!”)
Mark (08f7ce) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:16 pmJackson said, speaking from Caracas, Venezuela. “My point is that our first 15 presidents owned slaves and called it democracy for [about 200] years.
Only 10 of the first 15, actually. Neither Adams, JQ Adams, Fillmore, Pierce nor Buchanan owned slaves during their lifetimes.
Kevin M (dbcba4) — 2/25/2014 @ 10:59 pmThis excellent website definitely has all of the information
google (335741) — 2/26/2014 @ 4:50 amand facts I wanted about this subject and didn’t
know who to ask.
Here is a discussion of the AZ bill:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/02/no-this-is-not-jim-crow-for-gays-understanding-arizona-s-b-1062.php
And more from Ms. Mitchell, which some people liked:
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/26/2014 @ 5:31 amhttp://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/02/cleta-chronicles-irs-scandals-part-4.php
Thank you, MD. Not a word about gays in it. Unless, “if you’re religious, you’re ipso facto anti-gay”. It’s a media-manufactured tempest in a herbal infusion.
My fault for going off half-cocked, basing my half-assed understanding on media reports. I should have known better, and if I had been more cautious I would not now be, rightfully, the butt of derision for being aroused to extreme argument by straw-men.
nk (dbc370) — 2/26/2014 @ 5:55 amA guest (from Witherspoon Institute) on Bennett’s show this morning says that the genesis (heh) of the AZ law was a case in NM that in spite of a freedom of religion act like in AZ, a photographer in NM lost a suit for refusing to photograph a lesbian wedding. The NM Supreme Court ruled that the photographer was protected by NM law as an individual person, but their business was not protected (what you do on Sunday-or Sat or Fri is religion, what you do the rest of the week your religion doesn’t count). Legislators in AZ wanted to clarify their law so a similar event could not happen in AZ.
Reportedly even some legal scholars who support SSM have written that they are in favor of the proposed AZ law change, as they see a dangerous precedent in making a person violate their sincerely held religious beliefs when their is no compelling reason for the government to try to make the person do so.
It’s not a matter of denying public accommodation in buying something from a bakery or having a photographer take your picture (the photographer had happily served gays/lesbians previously, but as the baker, did not want to tacitly endorse gay marriage).
One cannot be tolerant of everything unless there is actually no meaning in anything.
And what is requested is not tolerance, but endorsement. The baker was happy to tolerate gays by selling them baked goods, happy to let other bakers bake a wedding cake for gays without trying to stop them.
Today there will be many people around the world who will have to make life and death decisions on what they can and can’t do while being faithful to God. In one way a slap on the wrist of a baker in CO is not such a big thing.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:19 amBut, it is not freedom of religious expression, and people would be wise to realize that setting precedents on how easily one’s convictions can be stomped on by the govt. is dangerous.
First they came for those who didn’t agree with gay marriage, but I thought it was no big deal, so I did nothing,
then they came for _______…
nk, absolutely no offense taken by me and no need of derision in my view. Your discussion was quite amiable in my view, even if it was made with less than adequate facts. I know I have done the same or worse at times. In fact, there is very little any of us would ever comment on if we first sought out a full understanding of first sources on every matter.
In one way though the media treatment and your arguments were somewhat valid, if the idea is that the law was to make it possible for people like the baker in CO and the photographer in NM to make the choices they did without fear of legal jeopardy. The arguments that it was to allow an “anti-gay Jim Crow, ‘your kind is not served here'” atmosphere were indeed not true, but I didn’t see you take that position anyway.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:28 amA commenter wrote me an email with a very, very long comment that he did not want to put in the comment section because of its length. He opens by quoting some people talking about Romney’s morality and then begins:
The rest is on its own page. I decided to make it a separate page because of its length. The fact that I made it a page of its own does not indicate in any way my agreement with it: I simply wanted to give this individual a chance to express views that he clearly took a long time to write up. I appreciate the fact that he did not want to clutter the comment section with a giant wall of text and I think this is the best way to give him his say without having him take up half of this comment section with one comment. If you want to read the rest of this thoughts you may do so here.
I’m also going to leave comments open at that page so that anyone who wants to carry on a separate discussion of his points can do so there.
Patterico (9c670f) — 2/26/2014 @ 7:19 am311. If “bird fetcher” = Bird Dog, I really don’t know why you’re calling me out on this, narciso, since I didn’t bring up Obamacare. On your Forbes link, Conover makes a decent argument (I read The Apothecary regularly). However, the jury may be out as to whether Obamacare “has become a job killer”. You might say that Kessler’s money is no good here, but maybe you should direct that argument to Patterico, who wrote a post that relied on Kessler. FTR, I’m well aware of the Obama administration’s deceptions.
Bird Dog (130699) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:26 amI don’t disagree with your link two-thirds of the premiums will rise for small businesses. CMS released that information last Friday in a document dump.
DRJ, my friend (and I can say that to you, at least, without fear of being fussed at for being presumptuous), thank you for prompting me to reexamine my language and usage. I was indeed being overbroad.
The context for my comment was this part of our host’s original post here:
But I don’t directly quibble with that, and I emphatically did not mean to label our host, nor anyone who shares his viewpoint as stated there, nor any other commenter here, as being a categorically stupid person. I don’t even think this is a stupid statement; to the contrary, it’s a reasonable and rational one. And it doesn’t even disappoint or disturb me, because it leaves room for the possibility — in our host’s case, I’d say the very substantial probability — that despite such a person’s decision not to self-identify as a member or adherent of the Republican Party, that person is still likely to vote, and more specifically to vote for a relatively (even if insufficiently) conservative Republican candidate over a Democratic alternative.
So what I meant to say, and still say, is that conservatives who oppose Democratic candidates like President Obama, but who nevertheless withhold their votes from the GOP nominees opposing those Democrats in a general election — either by staying home, or by throwing their votes away on third-party candidates who have effectively no chance of winning — are behaving stupidly. Those who continue to argue in favor of that course are promoting a stupid argument.
The great disadvantage of a two-party system is that it offers only two alternatives if one wishes to vote and to have one’s vote matter. But that disadvantage is substantially relieved — in a manner that has now been proved historically stable in America since 1860 — by virtue of the fact that dissatisfied partisans can and do effect change within their parties.
We could both identify dozens and hundreds of individual and collective examples of that, I’m sure, but once again, the most conspicuous example I can point to is Ted Cruz’ “upset” primary victory over David Dewhurst in the 2012 Texas GOP primary.
I campaigned for and supported Cruz over Dewhurst. I wasn’t disgusted with, nor even very much disappointed in, Dewhurst, who’s been IMHO a fairly steady if not brilliant leader as Texas lieutenant governor, for whom I voted without regret several times. However, I thought, and think there is now very substantial evidence to confirm, that Cruz would make big waves in Washington that need to be made, that he would soon re-energize a segment of the conservative base nationally (not just in Texas), that his is a deeper, smarter, and more consistent conservatism that he’s capable of explaining and teaching, and that in most other respects he was a more appealing candidate than Dewhurst to succeed Kay Bailey Hutchison.
But if Dewhurst had instead won that primary, I would happily have voted for him in the 2012 general election — not because the GOP generally or David Dewhurst individually were in any sense “owed” my vote, but simply and crucially to prevent Texas from sending another pro-Obama Senator to Washington.
No Super Bowl has ever been won by the guy who takes his football and goes home. That guy doesn’t even score any points. That guy can’t even stop the other side from running up the score! That guy is behaving stupidly, whether he considers himself to have any “teammates” (or fellow partisans) whom he’s letting down or not.
Beldar (8ff56a) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:27 am507. Forgive my presumption but a comprehensive rebuttal from an interloper is brief.
Any solution to the Republican Parties’ loss of competitiveness nationally will be found thru cathartic wholesale purgation of its national leadership, not mere decimation.
How that is accomplished is a matter of indifference to us.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:36 amLinked on another thread, but illustrative.
http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2014/02/25/bauhaus-of-cards/?singlepage=true
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:41 amIf the GOP nominated Barack Obama, I wouldn’t vote for him just because he’s got the R this time. If it’s Barack Obama vs Hillary Clinton, I will leave the ballot blank.
Therefore, I disagree with any ‘always vote or you’re a stupid idiot’ notion, insofar as it’s asking me to absolutely always vote for the least bad candidate. I look back at the impact the Ross Perot campaign had on the reduced deficits and welfare reforms, and I also look at the destruction the GOP wrought on our country’s future in the 2000s, when they forgot their lesson so quickly.
That point where Tom Delay, Bill Frist, and Bush 43 chose the fiscal path from 2001-2006 set a lot of things in motion. The mess they created is why Obama was able to be elected in the first place, as fiscal restraint wasn’t even on the menu anymore. If only the GOP that lamented Bill Clinton’s spending had cut spending! If only they had balanced the budget from 2001-2006. That would have been tough, upset many lobbyists and closed agencies (that are now up to no good!), and probably lost seats and majority status sometimes, but long term, there would be two brands, and one of them fiscally responsible, and I would be delighted to be a die hard loyal Republican.
Real problems are inevitable at this point… We must experience a miraculous political reorganization to make real reform politically realistic. We have to think a heck of a lot bigger. And how is that supposed to happen with conservatives voting for Romney or Mccain? A vote for a Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, or John Mccain is a vote for the GOP staying as it is today.
I oppose this.
Of course I will also oppose this in the primaries, but Texas’s voice is muted in the presidential primaries. We do not order our primaries based on a state’s deficit or employment rate (which is how we should set the calendar), but instead use an archaic bunch of crap to set the order (the beltway benefits enormously from this).
Both parties point to the worst of the other and hope you always vote against the other, without paying attention to what you’re actually voting for. Then they shrug when the problems aren’t fixed. Cute.
They say ‘stopping Obama means you need to stomach a few RINOs’. Then those RINOs vote for Obama’s agenda on the debt ceiling, Obamacare, or whatever else, when that vote is needed. When the vote doesn’t matter, sure, they vote how the voters wanted. This is useless and it’s essentially lying. It’s not that I’m a foaming at the mouth purist to see this reality. I’m simply not, well, stupid, to use Beldar’s term.
I am glad to see Haiku taking a stand against racism, and glad to see him praising Mike Lee’s lamenting angry or insulting commentary about those we differ with. Why, I bet Haiku can remember when partisan loyalty demands led to incredibly aggressive and racist comments on this blog. Gosh. I even remember the most ridiculous Romney fan in the world saying essentially ‘so what if I’m a bigot? I’m not sorry.’ Sigh… RINOs. Ya know? Anyhow, I join Haiku in decrying bigotry and anger. A man who resorts to those types of comments doesn’t have to worry about me judging him, but he’ll be judged.
DRJ is right. Quite a few conservative leaders have stood tall defending the Tea Partiers from the IRS’s behavior, which badly kneecapped the Tea Party in the GOP primaries. Not sure what more they can do than they have, but I bet we see more work yet on this front. As DRJ noted, one could just search for this information instead of insinuating it didn’t happen in hopes of dispiriting the right. But liars gotta lie, ya know?
BTW, DRJ, I think you are quite witty. I hope you are doing well lately.
Dustin (303dca) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:46 amLOL. Now I feel guilty for cluttering Patterico’s comment section with my wall of text after his recent comment. Bad old habit creeping in.
My friend, what if conservatives oppose more than just Obama? What if they actually support reform. For example, the reforms the GOP accomplished in the mid to late 1990s. What if conservatives can clearly see how withholding their votes from poor GOP candidates imposed pressure on the GOP to create a “Contract with America”?
Why is this stupid?
We aren’t playing a game. We are living in a long term situation where both parties are increasingly unaccountable for their decisions, due in large part to our cultural interest in the news and a news media that is ridiculously bad at what it does. It is a deception to vote for a John Cornyn based on his campaign ad to, quote “stand up to Obama on spending and Obamacare”, both issues where Cornyn actually took action to permit these disasters.
The first reform I want is for politicians to know they pay a price for doing something they said was wrong when the cameras were rolling. I want the GOP to have that fear they did after 1992, that they actually have to earn the votes of the conservatives.
This is stupid if all you care about is beating democrats in elections, but why would that be the end all be all?
Dustin (303dca) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:54 am510. If’n I were Texican I’d be nominating that DRJ to the 2nd Constitutional Convention Steerin’ Committee. Just sayin’.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:54 amYou can call me “friend” anytime too, Beldar.
nk who is Beldar's friend (dbc370) — 2/26/2014 @ 9:00 amI’ve always enjoyed Beldar’s comments, and I enjoy disagreeing, in respect, with friends.
Dustin (303dca) — 2/26/2014 @ 9:15 amI think the only time I’ve truly disagreed with Beldar was when he thought the bald-headed mayor of some city in Texas had a chance to be elected governor against Perry. 😉 Sigh. Rest in peace, Ann Richards.
nk (dbc370) — 2/26/2014 @ 9:20 amBeldar,
We are absolutely friends and it is a great honor for me to say that. I agree with your last comment that conservatives should vote for the most conservative candidate in each race, but I also agree with Dustin’s point that we live in the political long-term as well as the short-term. Elections are about electing our leaders but they are also about sending messages, especially for voters who don’t have the money or connections to influence the policies that their political leaders support. Sometimes the only influence we have is to withhold our vote and hope enough voters feel the same way that it sends a message politicians can’t miss.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/26/2014 @ 9:21 amDustin… bleu me.
Colonel Haiku (3ed4e9) — 2/26/2014 @ 9:47 amDay 293 of teh IRS scandal…
Colonel Haiku (3ed4e9) — 2/26/2014 @ 9:49 amTime grows short:
As a next step in taper Chairman Yellen will be closing the Discount Window to EU banks. US Money Markets are already closed.
Looking ahead to 2016 might be a tad vain.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 9:54 am509. “Any solution to the Republican Parties’ loss of competitiveness nationally will be found thru cathartic wholesale purgation of its national leadership, not mere decimation.”
This makes no logical sense, gary. You are presuming that all it takes to win is to remove all existing leaders and replace them with Tea Partiers. I suggest that such an approach is doomed to fail and will make the GOP smaller.
Bird Dog (130699) — 2/26/2014 @ 10:07 amFor the Republicans to win elections, you need pretty much all Republicans in a candidate’s corner and enough independents to gain a majority. Right now, almost half of all independents view the Tea Party in an unfavorable light, and only 29% view it favorably (link). This is a result of the self-inflicted damage you wrought with the partial government shutdown. This probably won’t hurt the candidates in the safest Republican districts, but it will surely hurt in Senate races as it already did in Missouri, Delaware and Indiana.
520. “This makes no logical sense”.
It does not have to make sense. It’s all you’ve got.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 10:09 am520. As a matter of fact, if you screw it up, you’ll have to do it again.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 10:10 amCompare the numbers October 2010 with today.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/Party-Affiliation.aspx
Now, over at the right, click on Tea Party Support Dwindles.
Ask yourself, ‘Self, do I think those 22 percent of Republican leaners can be depended on to vote for a party at war with them or is that party twisting in the wind?’
Yeah, a full-frontal attack could peel a few more percentage points off but that still leaves your sorry azzes at about 30%.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 10:24 amOne more thing, Beldar: I candidly admit that it’s dangerous to withhold votes in the hope it will make a difference. One less vote probably won’t be noticed, but one more vote for a particular candidate in a particular race may make all the difference in the world. Thus, voters should think long and hard about protest voting and/or staying home. It’s a good way to waste whatever influence you may have.
But there are times when public sentiment suggests random protesters may be speaking for many others. I felt that way during the Perot years. I feel that way now, during the Tea Party years. Both the Perot candidacy and the Tea Party give disenchanted voters a way to make a more meaningful protest or statement. Is it a stupid way to vote? It is, right up until the moment it wins an election the way Cruz won. I hope we see a few more of those elections in Texas this year and the next.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/26/2014 @ 10:29 amI’d thank you for continuing to lead the way on the civility you piously urged all Tea Partiers to employ, citing Mike Lee, but I can’t hear you over the comment where that awesome JP guy explains how Romney has a provably socialist record. thus, I’m not sure what you’re saying. I’m sure it doesn’t show any ugliness at all, though, given you are a man of your word and promised.
Dustin (303dca) — 2/26/2014 @ 10:50 amI want to thank JP for an interesting discussion in the companion post regarding JP’s comment that Patterico linked in comment 506, above.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/26/2014 @ 10:56 amDRJ, that’s why we need better third party candidates.
The influence of one protest voter is little. When Ross Perot ran, the influence became tremendous, and enough to save the GOP for a short while.
We need a few conservatives to just give it a shot, run on a third party ticket. Basically the Palin types. Imagine you are staring at that ballot computer screen again. Instead of
BARACK OBAMA (D) :
MITT ROMNEY (R) :
SARAH PALIN (I) :
Gives you pause, right? Even though you would know it would probably mean Obama won (who won, anyway?) wouldn’t it feel good to say ‘this is my standard!’?
Dustin (303dca) — 2/26/2014 @ 10:57 am525. Ted: “What, I’m the bad cop? Again? How come you always get to be the good cop?”
Mike: “I just can’t sneer like you. They just don’t tremble.”
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 11:02 amYay! A plan!
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/372010/reining-irs-eliana-johnson
Colonel Haiku (bea7ac) — 2/26/2014 @ 11:07 amActually support from the Tea Party has remained stable since 2011, birdfetcher wouldn’t know that,
narciso (c0b82e) — 2/26/2014 @ 11:10 ambecause it would scramble his world view
If the guy isn’t brown-nosing, blowing smoke up others’ asses, mischaracterizing issues or positions, he’s licking wounds that should’ve healed a longtime ago.
Colonel Haiku (bea7ac) — 2/26/2014 @ 11:10 am531. That would be nice. Lots of things would be nice tho.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 11:14 amWell, I suppose I resemble senile as much as Luke resembles ‘young’.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/02/26/Texas-Young-Republican-Vice-Chair-Calls-Tea-Party-Senile
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 12:02 pmNot the smartest move, gg.
Colonel Haiku (bea7ac) — 2/26/2014 @ 12:06 pmHe’s an Aggie. They do that, sometimes.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/26/2014 @ 12:21 pmLOL, and again, LOL.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 12:29 pmI made mention earlier a claim that a group of legal scholars, including some that supported SSM, were in favor of the AZ law. Here are the details, if interested:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/02/no-this-is-not-jim-crow-for-gays-part-two.php
As I mentioned before, a main point of the law simply confirms/clarifies, that a person has a right to make a claim of religious objection in the course of conducting their business, rather than some dichotomy between a person practicing their religion as “an individual person” and their participation in society as involved in a business.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/26/2014 @ 12:39 pmWhether any individual claim is upheld will be judged on a case by case basis as has been done previously.
Sorry, I meant to applaud the intellectual honesty and desire for truth among those who sent the letter, especially for those who are pro-SSM and maintain that religious freedom and room for disagreement still remain.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/26/2014 @ 12:43 pmMD,
It’s like an admission against interest for people such as those scholars to speak in favor of a topic with which most of their academic/political peers disagree. Admissions against interest are especially convincing because the people have an incentive to keep quiet and no incentive to speak out.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/26/2014 @ 12:53 pmQuote:
LOL. I don’t get what he was trying to accomplish with a comment that was entirely negative and just a personal attack. How is that supposed to help the GOP? It sure sounds like an effort to purify public discourse of anyone who isn’t loyal to the party.
Ditto what I said above.
🙂
BTW I have no idea what really constitutes ‘brown nosing’, but if it’s loyalty to friends, then I wear that brown nose proudly.
It’s not my wounds I’m concerned about. When you troll like this you damage the community here, jackass.
Dustin (303dca) — 2/26/2014 @ 1:02 pmAhem, friends :)–Here’s where it gets dicey and why it is so bad that we continue to talk past each other:
We frequently tease Gary for being the non stop doomsayer but he is not at all incorrect that our country is headed for a big and dangerous economic fall in which many of us may loose everything we’ve ever saved for and hoped and planned for our kids. The question is not if, it is when. Patterico has written several excellent post about the inevitability of some very awful times ahead. He is not an exaggerator. Time may be shockingly short. I don’t know any regular poster here who has ever suggested that there is not PLENTY of corruption and blame to place upon both major parties. But based on world history if I had to place a bet today on whether Democrat/Marxist politicians and bureaucrats are the more likely suspects to start confiscating stuff or worse, that’s where I’d put my money.
Many who post here are eloquent about wanting to both send messages and to overtly punish those who have let us down, and to boldly change/fix the ravenous dirty culture in Washington. This is clearly a noble goal. But realistically, short of actual street warfare (which does present other problems) those changes at their most optimistic timetable will take several election cycles. In my view there currently are way too few candidates on “our” side who are up to the task of leading, while articulating the nation’s problems in a forthright way, yet in a way that voters across the country and across racial and economic lines will rally to and support in federal, state and local elections. They will need to be developed and vetted and tested. We may not have eight or twelve years to right the ship the way it needs to be. Is not trying to at least lessen the impacts of the coming catastrophe a decent reason to consider voting for the least worst candidate as Beldar suggests if that is all that is available?
elissa (8fee5e) — 2/26/2014 @ 1:05 pmI think he’s 100% correct and employing the gallows humor of the condemned, so to speak.
This is true, Elissa.
I think the GOP leaning left has been a necessary feature of the catastrophe you’re warning about. I think the lack of a responsible option at the polls has been the problem, and will continue to be the problem, as these problems manifest in their unpredictable ways. At some point, the public will yearn for a responsible choice, and not have one. Bipartisanship has led to a situation where we don’t really have two political parties so much as we have the clique in power vs the clique out of power.
I voted Romney on the idea he would at least be a much more competent and ethical nanny than Obama, so I certainly understand your point. But the long term hope of a responsible option is only possible if the bar is raised.
It’s a tough disagreement, I think, with no clear right or wrong, because we’re deciding whether to prioritize now over later, and the stakes either way are high but difficult to gauge.
Good comment, btw.
Dustin (303dca) — 2/26/2014 @ 1:15 pmWell said, elissa.
Colonel Haiku (bea7ac) — 2/26/2014 @ 1:46 pm“If the GOP nominated Barack Obama, I wouldn’t vote for him just because he’s got the R this time. If it’s Barack Obama vs Hillary Clinton, I will leave the ballot blank.”
– “Deep Thoughts”, Jack Handey
Colonel Haiku (bea7ac) — 2/26/2014 @ 2:18 pmRINO “civility” on display…
http://twitchy.com/2014/02/26/young-republican-official-tea-party-is-full-of-drooling-senile-angry-bullies-who-are-mad-at-everything/
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/26/2014 @ 2:31 pm“…if I had to place a bet today on whether Democrat/Marxist politicians and bureaucrats are the more likely suspects to start confiscating stuff or worse…”
elissa @ 1:05PM
The State of Connecticut is sending out letters to those who attempted to register their “assault weapons” and “high-capacity magazines”, but whose docs arrived after the deadline, telling these gun-owners that they have to either dispose of the items out-of-state (and be prepared to prove it) or turn them in to the State – without compensation.
Registration always leads to Confiscation!
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/26/2014 @ 2:39 pm546. Kinda like the VA telling the guys ‘you want benefits then you are declared incapacitated and yield up your 2nd Amendment rights’.
541. “They will need to be developed..least worst candidate”
Of course I agree with an example. Here in MN we have a fouled bilge-full of an excuse for a party possessing opposable thumbs in the MN GOP.
Perhaps top priority is assigned to replacing sub-tard Al Franken. So the field is crowded with four or five aspirants.
The GOP is backing McFadden, a finance executive now languishing in second place following a couple straw polls behind State Senator Julianne Ortmann.
I will vote in the open primary to advance Ortmann but if McFadden wins the GOP will have to do without my vote in November.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 3:07 pmComment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/26/2014 @ 12:53 pm
Agreed, which is why I wanted to put it in the public record somewhere that I admire and salute them. As with our president who was against gay marriage before he was for it (but was never really ever against it from long ago) I do not trust most of the left with anything they say, which is only slightly worse than with most Repubs.
So, I really expect the most vocal proponents of SSM and gay rights to really have not an ounce of
concern for the rights of those who disagree with them, and would be happy for Christians to be seen but not heard, or better yet, not even seen.
So it is heartening to actually see such people take a principled stand for the freedoms of our country at large as well as their interest group.
Comment by elissa (8fee5e) — 2/26/2014 @ 1:05 pm
Even when Pat was a little more of the pick the best of the bad camp, I believed most of us really are quite in agreement in general principle, it’s just that our “I’ve had enough” thresholds have been different. Miracles happen, and short of one (or more) it would appear the questions are only how soon, how hard, how terrible.
In the meantime, an article which I find to be a little short on information but it had a catchy title and will be of import to some of you folks if the end tarries:
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/26/2014 @ 3:19 pmhttp://www.techrepublic.com/pictures/photos-cool-3d-printed-products-destined-to-be-squashed-by-lawyers/1/
MD:
I agree, plus not everyone will ultimately “have enough” and that’s fine, too. We don’t all have to agree all the time.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/26/2014 @ 3:28 pm… but that won’t stop me from trying!
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/26/2014 @ 3:29 pm542. “the GOP leaning left has been a necessary feature of the catastrophe”
We’ve effectively doubled the size of the hill over the past 5 years that we plan on seizing. Worse, there is no.chance.at.all of bending the curve before January 2017.
Putting off the day of reckoning has only made that day of pain much, much worse and we are very poorly larded to emerge from the ashes.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 3:35 pmWe are the people we’ve been waiting for(visual aide):
http://www.cyniconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/fiscalbalanceexdefense23.png
I’d be willing to bet that after the Afghanistan draw down, the cost of housing, clothing, feeding and paying the Army troops is less than that of a useless F-35 program that is going nowhere, and is already obsolete.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 4:00 pmRemember that overhang to the retail housing market of homes in delayed foreclosure with homedwellers hanging out spending their payments elsewhere?
Its going away.
OTOH, the average length of time on the market for a foreclosure is 400 days but at least you won’t have to fight those dead beats for a parking spot.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 4:12 pm548- The Gay Rights Agenda, etc.
NFL looking for options for moving Super Bowl XLIX from AZ to ? if Brewer signs bill, a bill that religious/legal scholars have waved in on as something she should SIGN!
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/26/2014 @ 4:21 pmer….”waded in”
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/26/2014 @ 4:30 pmi love it when gay people get married and I love cake
not necessarily in that order
happyfeet (8ce051) — 2/26/2014 @ 5:11 pmaskeptic-
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/26/2014 @ 5:21 pmOfficially it has been determined that what the NFL and others are doing is NOT bullying.
They are just trying to be emotionally persuasive.
Rush said so.
I call 15-yds on that, as it is offensive as all Heck.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/26/2014 @ 5:54 pmBrewer veto’s SB1062
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/26/2014 @ 5:59 pmHey!… there’s room for tight ends AND wide receivers…
Colonel Haiku (bea7ac) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:03 pmSo she did, eh? No such thing as religious freedom while you are at work for your own business.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:10 pmAnd she was braver than most. Maybe she just got worn down.
it’s just a fleshwound:
http://twitchy.com/2014/02/26/despicable-harry-reid-claims-o-care-horror-stories-all-untrue-epic-refutation-ensues-videos/
narciso (3fec35) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:18 pmActually, over at Hotair there’s a comment that current AZ law does not make it illegal for a business to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, only some cities in AZ have such a law. What SB1062 did was to give a shop-owner a basis to defend themselves in court citing their religious beliefs.
From comments at Hotair:
“Heres(sic) what the Christian Post says:
2. Under current Arizona law, if a business wanted to discriminate against gays, they would not need this bill to be passed to do so. It is not currently illegal for a business to deny service to someone because they are gay. Some cities in Arizona have ordinances against it but there is no state law against it. If business owners in Arizona wanted to deny service to gays, they could do so in most of the state under current law.”
Very Interesting (as he falls off the tricycle).
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:19 pmIt makes no difference. She can’t veto the First Amendment.
nk (dbc370) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:27 pmActually, over at Hotair there’s a comment that current AZ law does not make it illegal for a business to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, only some cities in AZ have such a law.
There’s a comment or three up the thread saying that here, too. With a link to the Arizona anti-discrimination statute even.
nk (dbc370) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:31 pmI think thay One Republic song, comes to mind;
http://twitchy.com/2014/02/26/young-republican-official-tea-party-is-full-of-drooling-senile-angry-bullies-who-are-mad-at-everything/
narciso (3fec35) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:37 pmActually, I’ll go back to my original position. The bill was not a good idea, and it’s good that Brewer vetoed it. Don’t give the gay agenda a Fourteenth Amendment “state action” pretext like Colorado did with the constitutional amendment in Roper v. Evans. And then, just leave sexual orientation out of the anti-discrimination statute, like Arizona is doing now.
nk (dbc370) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:42 pmI’m not arguing anything about McCain’s degree of conservatism.
The decline from Bush to McCain was likely due primarily to the loss of middle of the road voters. McCain and Obama were basically tied in the polls until the financial crisis hit. Then Obama opened a lead. McCain taking the “stay the course” position on Iraq probably hurt with middle of the road types as well. There probably were some conservatives who sat out 2008 but I see no reason to think it was the main factor.
Gerald A (bfbd30) — 2/26/2014 @ 6:51 pm569. There is also a theory of promotion. McCain lost to W. so it was his turn next. Willard lost to Maverick so he gets the next shot.
Really, it seems of late, its the big donors that do the choosing.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 7:04 pmDon’t burst that bubble, Gerald! They think they ‘ve got it all sussed.
Colonel Haiku (ad6d0c) — 2/26/2014 @ 7:19 pmSeems like McCain was ahead i the polls before that economic calamity… perfect storm.
Colonel Haiku (ad6d0c) — 2/26/2014 @ 7:20 pmYeah, running around like a chicken with its head cut off trying to decide whether to oppose his own party’s President on TARP really made him look good. I never figured out what his final position was.
nk (dbc370) — 2/26/2014 @ 7:26 pmSchmidt gave the game away a year later, they took a dive after Lehman fell, his firm at last notice, was lobbying for Yanukovich,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/26/2014 @ 7:28 pmDRJ, you wrote:
There’s a huge difference casting a symbolic, protest, or message-sending vote in a party primary, on the one hand, and either staying home or voting for an opponent in a general election.
It’s not worth electing or reelecting a Barack Obama, or electing or reelecting a Bill Clinton, just to send a message to other GOP voters and/or party leaders that you don’t like Mitt Romney, John McCain, Bob Dole, or George H.W. Bush.
If Ross Perot or his supporters wanted to make an impact without electing the likes of Bill Clinton, they ought to have done it in GOP primaries. Instead we got blowjobs in the Oval Office and the most skillful and immoral liar ever to set foot therein.
Heck, G.H.W. Bush was Reagan’s primary opponent in 1980 before Reagan picked him as his Veep nominee, and he ended up having an influence on Reagan (albeit from the traditional Eastern old-school GOP side).
Indeed, take a look at this year’s race for Texas lieutenant governor. Obviously, the results of Ted Cruz’ “upset” primary victory in 2012 over sitting & multi-term Texas Lieutenant Gov. David Dewhurst for the open U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Kay Bailey Hutchison sent a pretty clear message to Dewhurst and all his potential reelection competitors for lieutenant governor. Dewhurst has tried to tend to his own conservative bona fides, yet he’s also drawn some fierce competitors, and he’s unlikely to win this time without a runoff (and may again poll first in the GOP primary but lose in a GOP runoff against a competitor, e.g., Dan Patrick, based on current polls and trends).
nk, I never thought Bill White was likely to beat Perry. But I thought, and still think, he was the most credible candidate the Texas Democratic Party has fielded for a statewide race since 1994. I happily voted for him repeatedly as mayor of Houston, but voted against him in his race against Perry. Bill White’s still someone I consider a friend, and he’s about 20x as smart as Perry, but he’s a liberal Democrat! And being smarter simply made him more dangerous as a potential state-wide officeholder (much like Clinton was more dangerous throughout his presidency than Obama has been since January 2011).
And I’m tickled to have respected friends here that include DRJ, Dustin, nk, Elissa, Col. H., and hopefully more than a few others who regularly comment here.
Beldar (8ff56a) — 2/26/2014 @ 7:32 pm#570
Under that theory Gingrich or Santorum would be next.
Gerald A (bfbd30) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:04 pmHey. All I know is that some pro-SSM law professor from Stanford thought the AZ law was a good idea.
It’s not often that I would expect to agree with a pro-SSM law professor from Stanford.
To those of you who think Christians are haters and anti-gay just because we thought “marriage” had already been defined for thousands of years and hope we get humiliated at every turn,
I really have no problem with you. You believe as you do, and it will likely take more than a discussion over the internet to help you see things a different way.
But to those who said, “But what harm will it do? Who could possibly be hurt if John and Bill want to get married?”
Answer, anybody who doesn’t cooperate. They are still free to say what they want to each other on Sunday, or whatever day, just don’t think it will be easy to get away with it the rest of the week.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:08 pm574. LOL, this is the number one weakness of the GOP, no insight into human nature and their own, whatever.
Soft-bodied crash dummies.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:32 pm575. I have an even better idea. Target the middle class with integrity and you don’t have to worry about manipulating the electorate into buying horsesh*t.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 8:38 pm579. Cont. Running on the pro-business contract with Amerikkka, tacit tho it be, can no longer work because business can no longer cash the check.
We have so buggered capitalism with regulation and red tape entrepreneurs are hamstrung at the outset, ground to dust.
404Care will be the final straw.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/26/2014 @ 9:12 pmBeldar, I always appreciated that you would give Bill White his due despite his party. I hope Texans by and large think that way.
Dustin (621e43) — 2/26/2014 @ 9:55 pmA last comment from me, unless something new comes up.
The main reason I am not content to let the attitude prevail that homosexuality is simply another form of normal is because I don’t think it is, and I am not alone.
Among friends and patients who have dealt with same sex attraction, all that I have come to know well enough had a major issue with their parent of the same sex. It might have been an active problem, or a problem of missing in action; it might have been abuse, or failure to protect from abuse; it might have been something quite dramatic, or it might have been quite underwhelming, like a parent resenting having another mouth to feed.
None of us like to experience more emotional pain than we have to, and rather deal with an issue in life, it is easier to ignore it. What better way to ignore an issue is to make it normal.
It is not my place to tell people what they need to face in life or when or how, but when society accepts the premise that SS attraction is just as normal as hetero, then all of a sudden it is the person who doesn’t want to follow through on SS desires who is labeled and considered to be “abnormal”, even to the point that those who wish such help are denied access to professional help.
It all hinges on the subtle but profound change from needing to treat people with SS attraction with respect and kindness, which should have always been the case, to all of a sudden needing to confer a blessing on their desires and expressing them.
To those who belittle “sliding-slope” arguments, facebook now offers 50 alternatives to Male/Female. I am sure this move represents the attempt to normalize very conceivable (and some not yet “conceived”) option that has been given a name (so far).
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/13/tech/social-media/facebook-gender-custom/
Obviously many people do not share my opinion (which is the opinion of many), and I expect this to be actually the most resented post on the topic that I’ve ever made in the eyes of some. I have never wanted to say something like this before in this public forum, because it will almost automatically be invasive to people’s privacy by implication. But I thought it would be helpful to at least some to understand why I think it is an issue not to surrender to the tide of political correctness, and it is not out of some desire to be a “gay-basher”.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:05 amIt’s a typically blanc mange poll;
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/02/27/cbsnyt-poll-59-disappointed-in-obama-presidency/
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:22 am577, 582. Oh, I absolutely agree with your So-Con, Christianist Apologia, Doc.
You’re a credit to the faith.
What I’d like to hear is a Republican defense of the McConnell, Cornyn capitulation on the Budget.
One would think if we are going to trust the GOP as far as we can throw Rep. Nadler, an explanation would be forthcoming.
This should be good.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:01 amBeldar is a wise man. Nutin’ from nutin’, but if Israel and Iran went to war today, and an NHL goalie came out as ghey the same day, would we even hear about the war?
Colonel Haiku (c1bfa3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:15 amWhat I’d like to hear is a Republican defense of the McConnell, Cornyn capitulation on the Budget.
I hope you’re not waiting to hear it from me…cause I will not provide it.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:34 amI believe I’ve stated before, that even if the Repubs thought/felt they could not accomplish anything by trying to stand in the way, they should have tried to find a way to communicate loud and clear what they though of the policy that the person the people elected as president was doing on the people’s behalf, and made it an appeal to throw the necessary folk out in 2014 so another course of action could be taken.
Beldar @ 575:
Some people don’t understand that.
At least he got tied up with a special prosecutor he didn’t select after the end of July, 1994 when Robert B. Fiske Jr was replaced.
His scheme to get all investigations into himself and his administration put into the hands of a lawyer he could trust, by having Janet Reno first make the appointment, failed. (I think he might not have implemented that plan, if he hadn’t have been worried that Vincent Foster had received news of a runaway grand jury in Little Rock.
Actually there wasn’t a runaway grand jury, but he didn’t know what had worried Vincent Foster.
He had schemed earlier to make Janet Reno look like a third, almost random, choice.
And he was tied up with impeachment after the beginning of 1998.
It was horrible seeing Rush Limbaugh encouraging people to vote for Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries in 2008 (even given his possible assumption that she had no more chance of prevaling.)
If there is a tinge of honesty remaining in Hillary Clinton, or caution, she won’t run for president in 2016. But we shall see.
Sammy Finkelman (7072ea) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:53 amBeldar,
I won’t argue with you about the Perot-Bush-Clinton 1992 election because people who lived through and have strong impressions about an event typically won’t change their minds. Suffice it to say that I don’t think it’s clear that Perot “cost” Bush the 1992 election.
But it is an interesting election to think about since there is an argument that today’s GOP’s problems relate back to that 1992 election. Specifically, Reagan became President because he was able to appeal to a group of traditionally Democratic voters — blue collar voters across a wide swath of the Midwest down to Oklahoma and Texas. Those are the voters who supported Perot, but they were not historically GOP voters so it’s hard to say they would have voted for Bush 41 — and, indeed, many of the election post-mortems suggest they favored Clinton, not Bush 41. I submit they are the same voters that Bush 43 was able to partially woo back, only to ultimately lose them with his handling of Iraq and the fiscal crisis. Nor surprisingly, they did not support McCain or Romney.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 9:05 amAnd being smarter simply made him more dangerous as a potential state-wide officeholder (much like Clinton was more dangerous throughout his presidency than Obama has been since January 2011).
Comment by Beldar (8ff56a) — 2/26/2014 @ 7:32 pm
Among friends, I’m not sure we can say that with confidence. I understand the point of a smarter and more skilled politician doing more damage than one more radical, but my goodness, Obama is going to leave our economy a mess, our military de-clawed, our public Cloward-Pivenized (clamoring for more food-stamps, unemployment compensation, and a single payer health system to replace the ObamaCare mess), bureaucracies filled with liberal ideologues, a Supreme court and federal judiciary with the most ideological-left judges ever, and who knows what else.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/27/2014 @ 9:09 amOf course, one could say that Clinton made it all possible by getting the public to back an immoral president who would have been fired from any other job and could no longer work as a lawyer because he had been disbarred.
Heck of a toss-up.
File this under “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, the EEOC went after a trucking company that fired 2 Muslims for refusing to truck a load of alcoholic beverages:
http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-29-13.cfm
H/T to El Rushbo
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/27/2014 @ 9:45 amExamples of gays asking Muslim baker for a wedding cake not yet identified.
Ted Cruz a help or hindrance in 2014 mid-terms?
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/184649p
Colonel Haiku (c1bfa3) — 2/27/2014 @ 10:32 am588. Voters acting stupidly.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 10:34 amBad link, this one should work…
http://pjmedia.com/blog/pjm-symposium-cruz/
Colonel Haiku (c1bfa3) — 2/27/2014 @ 10:34 amI think this is your Cruz link, Colonel.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 10:35 amAnd here’s a direct link to the PJ Media symposium that is talking about Cruz.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 10:36 amI see we cross-posted, Colonel.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 10:43 amSorry about the cross-posting but thanks for linking that symposium article.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 10:49 amDoc at 582-
What you’ve said is your considered opinion backed by your experience in your field, but it is an “inconvenient truth” and unacceptable to those who live in the world of PC and CW.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/27/2014 @ 10:58 amOf course, the science is settled on the matter.
MD.– During lunch I read your lengthy post, above. I’m sure no one “resents” your well written and obviously sincere post in which you shared some of your interesting professional observations and experiences. Upthread @487 nk outlined his views of normal and included homosexual urges along with a wider litany of syndromes and disorders that are definitely “not normal” but are present in some number in our society and cannot be ignored or wished away. He pretty well summed up my feelings about that, as well as our common contempt for how militant and lawless the gay agenda has become. So I’ll add nothing more to that.
That said, I have a huge problem, also, with the intellectual hypocrisy I see among too many of the religious and “faithful” with respect to their sure statements about sin or what “the bible says” or that “homosexuality is against God’s will and is an abomination”. With no offense intended, I have a particular problem with that when it’s Catholics and the Catholic church and Catholic hierarchy who are saying it. Here’s why: It’s undeniable history that for centuries in Europe and the Americas the allegedly celibate Catholic priesthood was a repository or safe harbor for the educated gay sons of the embarrassed but well-off “faithful”. In more modern times suspected gay or confused young men were often meticulously recruited to enter the priesthood by sinful older priests. Or, out of the blue a young Lutheran or Presbyterian man would “convert” to Catholicism to become a priest–but everybody in the community knew why. More recently, pious and otherwise dedicated heterosexual priest candidates got outa Dodge by the droves when they actually got an inside view of what was going on. Yes. Worst of all, unaware and trusting parents sent their innocent boys to be violated and molested on church property. I’ll also mention the closeted gay men who in a different era embarked into a “traditional one man one woman” sham marriage with virginal and clueless women and ruined their lives–or at least ruined any hope that the women might ever enjoy normal and loving sexual experiences–(that pesky no divorce thing, you know.)
Of course there are thousands of wonderful, decent and good priests around the globe who are righteous and sometimes under great peril tend their flocks with care and loyalty to God and adherence to their faith. But the priests and bishops and even cardinals who denied and lied and overlooked and failed to notice the obvious, and even in the cases of the abused children allowed their most “troubled” brethren to be moved around and transferred to different new parishes for years and years instead of being turned in and jailed, have in my opinion left a great stain on the church’s ability to credibly and reliably dictate what is right or wrong behavior in this world.
elissa (88bae8) — 2/27/2014 @ 11:19 amelissa, you are perfectly right in your indignation, I appreciate that you can still acknowledge that not everyone who claims to be “religious” is to be grouped among those who have been the problem.
Jesus said that the world would know who His disciples were by the way they loved one another. Abusing innocents is never love, be it a child or an unsuspecting woman.
As I made reference once before, one of the most famous and quoted passages about not being judgmental was the interaction between Jesus and “the woman caught in adultery”. Jesus did not condemn her (to be punished with stoning), but neither did he condone her behavior, “You are forgiven, go and don’t do it again”.
Actually I think some will and have resented my comment, those who are themselves committed to the idea that homosexuality is normal, those who try to make sense of their life by pursuing that lifestyle. That’s actually why I’ve always avoided this topic directly, because I expect it to be most “cruel” to those who I would really not like to offend. But in the interest of clarification and clear thinking, since the topic persists, I felt there was the need.
Likewise, many Jewish people can only think of “Christians” as those who persecuted them over the years, as the ten Booms and Trocmes of the world too often are too few and unnoticed.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/27/2014 @ 12:12 pm591-96. I have occasion to read the first page authors, and all of them seem to have put in noted effort, Adams to most effect but a quote from Steinberg:
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 12:43 pmAwesome, and fearfully considered.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 12:54 pm599 that is.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 12:54 pmBreitbart:
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 1:20 pmIf we lose more elections, it is good for the party. And the country.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:02 pmOr whatever. Or something !!!
Because principles.
605. Amerikkka without the Republican Party is like Uncle Sam with a colostomy, holding the bag.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:15 pmNP, DRJ, thanks!
Colonel Haiku (c1bfa3) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:16 pmSh*tty analogy, gg!
Colonel Haiku (c1bfa3) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:17 pm608. Not in a league with you and nk, but competing.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:19 pmWhen we nominated less vigorous candidates, like Dewey, Landon, Wilkie, we had weaker races, it’s been 50 years since Goldwater, so that’s too much of an outlier,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:24 pmif you can hold mud
Colonel Haiku (c1bfa3) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:24 pmwhen all around losing theirs
yer a man my son
Apple bounces and rolls toward the trunk.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/02/26/rand-paul-on-ukraine-some-people-on-our-side-want-to-tweak-russia-all-the-time/
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:27 pmwell were British colonies for less time, you see how that works,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:35 pmHere’s a towel.
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/the-tolerant-le-157.html#comments
Clean yourself up, you’re a mess.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:36 pmLosing future Presidential and Congressional elections will only ensure more conservative principles.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:42 pmStop denying the truth.
Discuss.
Or. Disgust !
Or whatever.
The poor Cossacks. They have no friends. The Poles hate them, the Germans invade them, the Russians exploit them, we abandon them. But Paul’s right. The more we try to do in the Black Sea, the more ineffectual we look. It’s Russia’s lake.
nk (dbc370) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:43 pmnk,
We can’t just allow them to be invaded by the Russkies.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:49 pmI realize that Obumbles will.
But we can’t.
Do you think this is another manifestation of that whispered “more flexibility” thingie?
elissa (88bae8) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:53 pmelissa,
Please stop politely insinuating that Obama has some sort of culpability. After all, he’s only the President.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 2:57 pmLet’s not underestimate how much of this is actually Mitt Romney’s fault.
Or whatever.
Well I recall they didn’t consider that about the Caribbean, being our backyard/
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:08 pmThe Thane has lost his fight, the fire in his belly:
If only those damn TEAs would come to heel and vote us 2/3 of Federal government.
http://moneytalks.net/peters-content/11987-grandich-observation.html
We coulda been contendas.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:19 pmUnfortunately, too many of the “TEAS” claim they won’t show up on election day.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:23 pmOr whatever.
Because they have so many more better things to do on Election Day than to fight the Left.
“I would gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.”
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:29 pmteam r’s bucket list.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:31 pmMaking the tea-baggers the scapegoats for the next election.
Blame everything and anything on those bagging pos.
or whatever.
I hate the Left.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:32 pmBut I won’t fight them.
Because I have principles !
See ??!!
Well he was just over his head, that was the deafening call to action,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:34 pmelissa,
Part of me wants to believe this is part of Obama’s new flexibility with Putin and Russia, not because that’s a good thing but at least it would show Obama isn’t completely incompetent at pursuing a foreign policy. But Obama’s statement on Ukraine confirms for the hundredth time that he is, in fact, completely incompetent:
After the debacle of his Syria “red line” strategy, the fact that Obama would even use the word “line” in any comment about the Ukraine shows that he is just stupidly winging it.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:34 pmYes. You’re saying John Boehner hates the left but won’t fight them because he hates the Tea Party more?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:35 pmExhibit “A”: An agreement on immigration that Boehner specifically discussed with Obama this week:
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:37 pmI think this fellow’s statement is forcefulm yet not bragadocious;
“The United States must not turn a blind eye to the struggle for freedom in a country where we have such a clear strategic interest. Putin’s proposed Eurasian Customs Union, of which Ukraine would be a cornerstone, is a thinly veiled attempt to re-assimilate the territory of “greater Russia” that made up the old Soviet Union. His offer of economic assistance is a first step in binding Ukraine to this new bloc. Given Ukraine’s economic and security significance to both the U.S. and our NATO allies in western Europe it would be a mistake to allow this expansion of Russia’s sphere of interest, especially given the tenacity with which Ukrainians have fought against it in recent months.
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:39 pm627. I think he’s angling to have Pooter take Guantanamo off his hands.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:41 pmDRJ,
Sorry, friend, but your attempt at #628 doesn’t really work because you’ve already stated that you don’t believe John Boehner has conservative principles. Thus, Boehner can’t be speaking in the first-person claiming to have conservative principles.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:45 pmAnd besides, he turns up on Election Day.
I don’t know about the other 364 days, but he certainly turns up on Election Day.
I could not vote for Obama if he had an “R” after his name. If teh election was between Obama and Hillary Clinton, I could not vote.
Colonel Haiku (5de7c8) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:48 pmWhere does the word “conservative” appear in your comment 625, Elephant Stone?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:48 pmJohn Boehner has principles. Immigration principles.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:51 pm629. I called one of my sisters in Ryan’s 1st a couple of nights ago. She thinks “we” have Ogabe on the defensive and we’re on an inexorable march to Berlin.
I didn’t have the heart to diminish her good humor.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:53 pmDRJ #634,
Oh, so you responded if I were mocking the pure conservatives, but now you want to play the card as if you didn’t realize I was inherently speaking about conservative principles ?
Jay Carney is on line 1 !
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:55 pmGood Allah.
By the way, Boehner votes more than just once a year. For instance, he jettisoned the Hastert Rule and voted with 193 Democrats and 28 Republicans to pass a clean debt ceiling bill and suspend the debt ceiling. Is this a political leader who “hates the Left”?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:57 pm632. Elections have consequences, see?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:58 pmWhen Barack is nominated by the GOP vs Hillary, I won’t be able to vote for either one.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 3:59 pmBecause as the Colonel recently pointed out, Jack Handey has deep thoughts.
Or something.
Elephant Stone,
I think you were mocking Tea Party voters who aren’t reliable Republican voters, because you think doing that is counter-productive. I was trying to show you that your point works both ways.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:01 pmObviously I failed to make my point with you. Perhaps other got it.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:02 pmTeam r has the copyright on drop dead anti-bounce back technology of presidential challengers. And the new extra wide voting ballots won’t help.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:07 pmI for one will sleep better tonight knowing that the President and the Speaker have a good working relationship.
I serve illegals most days and its good to know I’ll have work that undocumented Democrats won’t do.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:09 pmElephant Stone,
I thought your meaning was straightforward as I stated in my comment 641, but please correct me if my interpretation of your comment is wrong. It’s easy to misunderstand comments on the internet, and I have a real problem catching online sarcasm — if that’s what your comment was.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:11 pmOh Good Lord, are you people going to start pushing for another government shutdown ?
If we had the numbers in the Senate and the White House, we could stop the debt ceiling.
But we don’t have the numbers.
This is what happens in a representative democracy.
The people who actually show up to the polls on Election Day determine the course for the next two /four/six years.
That is why it is inadvisable to stay home on Election Day….if one reallllly cares.
Obama won. And a number of moonbat lefties defeated enough of our not quite ready for primetime Senate candidates during the 2012 and 2012 campaigns.
This notion that if we merely take to the streets, and stand at the corner of Sunset & Vine and yell, “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore !!!” and that will all of a sudden elicit springtime to emerge with blossoms, and fuzzy bunnies, and chirping birds—it’s just plain fantasyland.
We have to win future Elections in order to change the course.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:13 pmThere are some elections this November.
Get in the game, friends.
And we have to surrender as much ground, to win support later or something,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:16 pmElephant Stone,
No, this isn’t about the shutdown. This is a discussion about who we can trust to actually implement conservative principles.
In your words, this is about “hating the Left” although I would call it being willing to work against the Left. My point is that John Boehner seems willing to work with the Left on some issues. At this point, how many Republican leaders would even say they are willing to repeal ObamaCare?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:18 pmHere’s my answer: Today’s Republican leaders are poll-driven and seem to have real problems adhering to any principles. So when today’s polls say people want to repair ObamaCare but not repeal it, that’s what the GOP wants. Last year, when the polls said the opposite, that’s what the Republican leaders wanted. That’s very frustrating to me. I know they have to be flexible but these Republican leaders are as flexible as spaghetti.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:21 pmDRJ,
Elections have consequences.
And the Senate and House will look this way until around January 6, 2015.
All the welfare cases, the government employees, the government pensioners, and the global warming kooks, et al, are going to show up to the polls in November.
How many of us will counter them ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:25 pm646. “But we don’t have the numbers.”
Indeed, it takes two. Were you to maintain for a moment that Harry Reid would vote to pass a TEA budget you’re just a liar.
Playing hardball like a Democrap would have the Lamestream all over your stink and you can’t bear to go into an election with the base on your side.
So you whine and bawl, “Wipe our azz and flush, won’t you please?” We can’t bear to take your money and be despised.
You are pathetic.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:25 pmElephant Stone,
Romney won independent voters (aka the mushy middle) in almost every state but still lost the election. If the GOP wants to win, it needs to motivate the base. I’m not saying the Tea Party is the GOP’s base but it’s certainly a part of it.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:26 pmDRJ- If there’s one thing we all here can agree on without reservation it is that President Obama is dangerously incompetent on foreign policy. Thank goodness he has a first rate thinker and negotiator as Secretary of State and a respected truth teller representing us at the U.N. Oh wait.
elissa (88bae8) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:29 pmCorrection to my comment 652: That should say Romney won independent voters in almost every swing state, not every state. But the overall point is the same. The GOP needs to motivate, not alienate, its base. It can’t rely on the mushy middle to win elections.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:29 pmelissa:
You made me laugh. Sad, true and funny — all at the same time.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:30 pmSarcastically true, of course. Not literally true.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:31 pmTeam r has to put up a electable human not some elitist robot from the shores of political correctness.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:32 pmDRJ,
We. Currently. Don’t. Have. The. Votes. In. The. Senate. For. Repeal. NOR. TO. OVERRIDE. A. PRESIDENTIAL. VETO.
It is just basic math.
Filibusters do nothing.
The government shutdown did nothing.
We have to have the votes in the Senate to repeal, and then, enough to overcome an Obama veto.
We can win the Senate in November to thwart further damage by Obama, and to at least have a say in any Supreme Court nominees between Jan ’15 and Jan ’17, but otherwise we will need to win the White House and retain the House and Senate in order to repeal ObamaCare.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:33 pmElections matter.
651. Boehner is inadequate, Ryan is inadequate, you are inadequate. You have no plan except surrender.
Many of us will not vote for you and your vermin because we want no part of your diseased filth.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:34 pmElephant Stone,
I want Republicans to win, too. Do you really think my goal is to cost Republicans an election out of some kind of spite or ill-will over who they nominated in the past 2 Presidential elections? For heaven’s sake, I not only voted for them, I paid them a good sum of money. I simply disagree with you about what the GOP should do to win elections. Maybe you’re right and maybe I’m right, but the GOP has lost 2 elections in a row using your theories. I don’t think it would hurt to try something new.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:35 pmYes, we’re in the best of all possible hands,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:35 pmElections matter but so do the people we elect, Elephant Stone. Just because they have an R by their name doesn’t mean they will fix anything.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:37 pm661- narciso-Link please.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:38 pmBrennan, Hagel, Kerry, Donilon, like the four horsemen, really,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:42 pmMy own Texas Senator John Cornyn is running for re-election in 2014. His campaign says he opposes raising the debt ceiling. That may be true in theory or principle, but he played in integral part in making sure the debt ceiling was raised/suspended. That’s dishonest, even if it is based on good intentions. It means he doesn’t trust his constituents to understand politics or he doesn’t trust us to vote for him when he does stuff like that. I suspect it’s the latter, and with good reason.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:43 pmThose 4 deserve life in gitmo, narciso.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:49 pmthe villain want’s it’s idiot back,
http://www.shark-tank.com/2014/02/27/jorge-bonilla-slams-classless-alan-grayson-for-attacking-ted-cruz
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:51 pmDRJ,
Michael Medved has debunked this every week for the past year.
The “independent voters” demographic is generally made up of disaffected GOP voters such as you, Gary Anarchist, MG, JD, et al, so of course Romney ‘won‘ that demographic over Obama.
What we need to do is win the clueless, low information swing voter demographic who usually decides elections.
It’s a tough struggle to win that demo, because most of those people are not high-information voters such as those of us here, and so they are more susceptible to the lies and propaganda they hear from Letterman, Colbert, and the lamestream media. (And from Candy Crowley during debates.)
But that does not mean we have to nominate a squishy moderate. What it means is we should follow the Reagan blueprint of nominating a conservative who conveys his message in a sunny, optimistic, happy warrior style.
A conservative message, delivered in an upbeat style rather than a dry ‘this is how it is’ Barry Goldwater style.
That’s how Reagan won the “Reagan Democrats.”
They were Democrats who crossed the party line to vote for Reagan because they liked his message and his style. Some of them went back and voted for Dukakis in ’88, and then most of them went back to Clinton in ’92. (Hint: Clinton was actually pretty sunny and optimistic in ’92.)
I know, I know, you guys will continue to smear me with your lies that I (and others) want a moderate GOP nominee. But I’m a big boy, and I will gladly take on the lies.
I would actually nominate Calvin Coolidge if I could exhume him from his grave.
I would entitle the script, “
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 4:53 pmWeekendFour Years atBernie’sCalvin’s.”Or something.
Sure, Medved,
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704758904576188442276811076
why do we structure the campaign, exactly to prevent such an outcome, why does Crowley, Raddatz Schieffer, et al, end up as moderator,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:01 pmMichael Medved concluded his column by saying,
“The problem with Mr. Obama isn’t that he functions far outside the Democratic mainstream. The real problem is that mainstream itself, a toxic stew of dysfunctional and discredited notions that have flopped reliably whenever they’ve been employed.”
In other words, narciso, Medved is saying that the entire Democrat mainstream is nuts.
Nonetheless, I’m betting one of you will flippantly remark how Medved is a liberal.
Or something.
Good grief, Charlie Brown.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:13 pm669. As mg said above, the GOP is happy with its lot as the Potemkin dragonslayers.
We know that Boehner counts at least 80 as his loyal spear carriers but he had 193 votes from the anti-Americans so most of his lackeys got a free show vote.
The GOP has zero chance for a cloture proof 60 in the Senate. Majority leader McConnell will have zero, zip, nada, feathers in his cap November 2016.
The GOP will do absolutely nothing to engender the wrath of the Lamestream during the 114th Congress to damage their chances in 2016.
Stones’ empty posturing is a unalloyed lie.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:15 pm670. Medved is a second-rate movie critic.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:18 pmGary,
I don’t know if the Pony Express still delivers the news up there to you in Minne-so-cold, but you may receive a paper on your doorstep that informs you about how ObamaCare is named for the current occupant of the White House.
He aims to veto any Senate repeal of his signature legislation. We don’t yet have the numbers to override that repeal.
So, yes, short of winning, say, TWENTY ONE Senate seats in November, we’ll have to wait to win the White House in 2016 in order to successfully repeal ObamaCare.
But we can thwart the damage between now and then by winning as many Senate seats as possible this November.
It’s called ‘winning.’
Even a junkie like Charlie Sheen gets the meaning of that word.
(And yes, I’m well aware the Pony Express began in St Joseph, MO, and headed west. It never ran a route to Minnesota.)
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:26 pmTeam r needs to pick a winning topic and use it on the progressives on the left.
The 2nd Amendment
Use it to our advantage, scare the hell out of the people that the brownshirts are coming into your house for your guns.
ya fricken crazy, i know.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:26 pmPerhaps the TX GOP is salvageable.
Not so the MN GOP. It begs to be euthanized.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:27 pmSorry gary, Ma. has the lock on invisible republicans.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:33 pm674. Team r needs to just write the GOP off as a lost cause and proceed with that plan.
You can drag Uncle Bernie along with you only so long before the flies and the microbes threaten your own life. Propping him up in front of the ATM provides diminishing returns.
Let’s make this primary season the last with these losers in tow.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:35 pmWhen people like Charles Johnson of Little Green Fascists or Bill Maher or Hairy Reed or Chris Matthews of MSNBC says that commenters at right wing blogs talk about blowing stuff up or euthanizing people, I have no idea whose comments they might be reading, Gary #675 !
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:36 pmElephant Stone:
I agree with that. I know it’s early but who do you think might be that kind of candidate? The ones that come to my mind are Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.
PS — I’m an independent voter now but I wasn’t until John Boehner attacked the Tea Party earlier this year. He single-handedly lost three sure GOP votes and the financial support that went along with them.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:37 pmEver since Carlhs came back from the Underverse, he hasn’t been the same, as for Reid, or Maher, they are the arbiter of what exactly,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:39 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ
I especially enjoy the headline at the ten second mark about ardent socialist George Bernard Shaw praising dictators because “While parliaments get nowhere, he says, Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin do things.”
Remind you of, say, Preezy Mean Girl who’ll act if Congress won’t?
It’s important to keep in mind what the Thomas Friedmans of the world are proposing when the pine to be China for a day.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:41 pmMaybe Scott Walker. I don’t think Paul Ryan is a good communicator, even though he’s smart. I like Bobby Jindal and Rick Perry but I don’t think either would make an effective candidate. Chris Christie is a good communicator but he’s too poll-driven to be a Reagan-like candidate.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:43 pmDubois, Wells, Steffens,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:43 pmI saw an article about Kelly Ayotte for VP, which is an obvious move to show the GOP is woman-friendly and to counter Hillary on the top of the ticket. IMO Ayotte only works if the top of the ticket is more conservative and from the South or West. If someone like Christie or Walker is the nominee, I wish they’d pick New Mexico Governor Martinez instead. She’s as articulate and more conservative than Ayotte, plus the GOP might as well tick two diversity boxes instead of one.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:46 pmRead it and weep:
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/federal_budget_estimate_vs_actual_2013
No way with 92 million not in the labor force, with umpteen million on reduced hours, with business revenue pre-tax down 9% that we make the projected totals, just as we were under in 2013 by 4% it’ll be shy 10% this year.
And 2015 will be increasingly bad.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:50 pmI don’t know if he’s a democrat. But his call screeners are worth twice what he pays them because they keep people from embarassing him.
With one hell of an offensive line protecting a mediocre QB.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:50 pmDRJ #679,
As far as sunny disposition and extemporaneous speaking style goes, I don’t think anyone is better than Marco Rubio.
While Ted Cruz is outstanding as well, I think Rubio may be our best shot at getting the “Reagan Democrats” back into the fold.
I think he is the most Reaganesque of our current bench. His speeches and interviews are always peppered with talk about uplift, and upward mobility, and economic growth and expansion, and improving the lives of American families, et al.
I believe that type of language is appealing to the low information voters and those Democrats who are duped into believing that the Democrats actually want to help them improve their lot in life.
He’s also quite funny. At CPAC a couple of years ago, Rubio gave a speech where he talked about being sworn in as a Senator. He said that he saw this long-time Senator, and that long-time Senator, and that guy over there who ran for President (probably referring to John Kerry). And he said he asked himself sheepishly, “Gee, how did I get here ?”
And then he delivered the punchline…“after six months of getting to know all these people I found myself asking, ‘How did they get here ?!'”
In addition to Rubio, I also think Bobby Jindal is pretty much in the same vein, as well.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:56 pmAnd Scott Walker seems to be upbeat, too.
Indiana Governor Mike Pence used to be a radio talk show host back in the day, so he’s pretty nimble at talking.
That’s got to be an important requisite for us this time around—-someone who can articulate the conservative message and why it is best for individuals and society.
Rubio certainly is an uplifting speaker, plus he has a great way of explaining conservative concepts and making them seem relevant and meaningful. I’d like to see him as a candidate.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 5:58 pmI’ll support the candidate that can take the shot at >200 yards, field dress, haul out on a litter and butcher back in camp.
All I’m good for is hauling.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:00 pmYou don’t think Rubio soiled himself with his Gang of 8 push, ES?
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/04/17/if-rubios-amnesty-is-so-great-why-is-he-lying/
I do. And, no, this has nothing to do with purity of essence. It has to do with the fact Rubio seems to think I’m an idiot.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:01 pmDRJ- Great call on Susana Martinez.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:02 pmI remember her selling the states luxury jet for a couple mil.
Her approval rating has always been high.
If Christie’s the R candidate in 2016, I will reluctantly vote for him. I say reluctantly because I think he hanged himself by sabotaging both the 2012 convention and election.
Colonel Haiku (f1fe36) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:03 pmConcerns about Rubio and immigration? I admire Rubio unloading on Harkin after the Dem senator praised Cuba.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:03 pm691. I suppose NM isn’t much to work with but has she put together a resume?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:05 pmI see Steve57 beat me with the question.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:05 pmI think that was a mistake on Rubio’s part, Steve57, but I’m desperate enough to beat Hillary that I will accept a nominee who talks the talk, even if he doesn’t always walk the walk.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:06 pmI have no interest in Senators.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:07 pmWell he was new, as long as he doesn’t take another flier like that,
I do recall someone else who sold their state’s jet,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:07 pmshirley they would hold her in high esteem, shirley,
These days, too many of the GOP leaders don’t even bother to talk the talk.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:08 pmSteve57,
You’re not sure if Michael Medved is a Democrat or Republican ?
Shirley, surely you must be kidding.Sometimes I wonder if I’m reading comments at the Daily Kos.
Michael Medved actually used to be a Democrat—back in the days when he worked for Robert Kennedy. He was right outside the kitchen when Sirhan Sirhan murdered RFK.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:08 pmBut Medved is now very conservative, and one of the smartest people we have on the Right. He can speak on any topic off the top of his head, and will debate anybody anytime, unlike Rush, Levin, and Hannity, who rarely debate anyone anywhere. I admit Hannity will debate Democrats on the radio or tv for a few minutes—before it devolves into a shouting match—but Medved actually debates prominent lefties (rather than just “Joe from Philadelphia on line 1”) at public forums and debating societies.
698. It ain’t only NM that’s a rough hewed stone.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:10 pm691. Let’s keep Martinez for the short list.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:11 pmWalker makes the list too.
Preacher’s kid, indefatigable interview like Cruz. Has a solid executive record.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:12 pmgary 694,
You’re right that there isn’t much to get a politician attention in New Mexico, but I think Martinez is right on the issues. More important, she has limited her official actions to addressing basic state needs and taking a position on basic state government issues. She hasn’t tried to do a lot, only to do well what needs to be done. That, to me, is the essence of a small government conservative.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:12 pmDRJ– You have mentioned but not evaluated Rand Paul (that I saw). Ditto, Rubio. Do you think they are non players leading up to 2016 or that neither will play a policy role either good or bad? I’ve been fairly impressed with both of them with respect to thinking on their feet and articulating policy even when I don’t always agree with them. Immigration will hopefully be a long dead unacted on issue by late 2015. Might that “salvage” Rubes? The idea of him (or Cruz) out on the campaign trail effortlessly switching from English to Spanish and answering questions from journalists without an interpreter kinda appeals to me. I like Susannah, too, but don’t know enough about her yet to know how effective a campaigner she’d be or if she has any skeletons.
elissa (b78ce0) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:13 pmAny interest in Sandoval?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:14 pmFine, do so, but remember as soon as you’re picked, you become an unperson, in the left’s eyes, did not the ‘47% percent’ experience teach you a lesson,
Whereas the thesaurus runneth over, when dealing with these hopped frauds, mountebanks, knaves and conmen,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:15 pmSorry–once again forgot to refresh.
elissa (b78ce0) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:15 pmThe longest shot I ever took on game was 300 meters on a Cape Hartebeest in Namibia. I was surprised because it was my buddy’s turn. But the PH we were sharing didn’t have confidence in his .30-06 and I was shooting a .338 WinMag.
The wind was blowing really hard from right to left. I put the horizontal crosshair on his back, and the vertical crosshair on the front edge of his chest.
The PH was celebrating that heart shot for like two solid days. I was even getting sick of it. Yeah, it was a nice shot, but at a hundred dollars a day I don’t want to sit around and watch the Rugby World Cup.
No tracking was involved. I know the exact measurement because we were able to drive up to where I dropped him in the Land Rover.
Still, I’m more satisfied with the shots I take inside 10 yards since I flatter myself on my ability to turn myself into a tree or a log. I had a doe and her fawn step over my legs once, thinking they were roots. A family of otters run by and never know I was there.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:17 pm707. It is hard to name any one with a target on their back more prominently displayed than Walker.
And name recognition, nobody on the short list has that.
Martinez
Walker
Nope.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:19 pmSteve, I would not discount Rubio for the immigration push. It was a misjudgment on his part, I imagine he was being given encouragement by others to support it, but there’s no question he’s a Reagan-esque kind of guy. That sort of extemporaneous speaking style comes around once in a generation.
He doesn’t need a teleprompter because he has a brilliant ability to speak off the cuff. That’s how he originally began gaining traction a few years ago—on the radio. He first appeared on Levin, Hewitt, and Medved’s shows, and people were in awe, saying, “Who the hell is this dude ?! He’s going to be a rock star !”
He doesn’t say, “uh, um, well, uh, 57 states, you guys speak Austrian here in Austria…uh, well you didn’t pave the road in front of your business.”
Like the current greatest speaker of all time.
And as Dana mentioned earlier in the thread, he completely dismantled Tom Harkin on the floor of the Senate the other day, in response to Harkin’s useful idiotic praise of Castro’s paradise.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:19 pmAnd Rubio did it with a smile and civility.
Rand Paul is making Ted Cruz look better and better.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:20 pmJennifer Rubin in the WaPo notes that Paul’s comments on Putin/Ukraine are in conflict “…with virtually all members of the U.S. Senate.”
She then interviews a House GOP aide who confides that Paul has “got the perfect foreign policy for the Victorian era.”
After Hairy Reid stood up on the Senate floor and started bitching about the Koch Bros and calling Rs and Tea Party supporters lying renegades who are destroying the country, wouldn’t it have been refreshing to see a Republican – e.g. the worthless Mitch McConnell – stand up and dish it right back on that same floor. Reid is a lying, criminal asshole and he should’ve been sentenced to prison a long time ago.
Colonel Haiku (f1fe36) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:20 pmSometimes I have to wait until they get more then 10 yards away so they can cross behind a tree or something. Giving me a chance to raise the rifle or draw the bow without spooking them.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:20 pmelissa,
I like Rand Paul and his libertarian approach to many problems. I also think he’s an effective speaker, although not quite as good as Christie, Rubio and Cruz. I don’t know if his father’s shadow will help or hurt him, but I know the media will bait Rand with every negative about his father’s associations and positions. Hopefully Rand has been around long enough to know how to deal with that.
I offered my thoughts about Rubio above. I’d like to see Paul, Rubio, Cruz, and Walker throw their hats in the ring. I believe Christie will run, too. I don’t know much about Pence or whether he will run. I hope Perry, Jindal and Ryan sit this one out, but I suspect at least one or two of them will run. There are probably others — Huckabee, Santorum, ? — who could decide to run. It should be interesting.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:22 pmI left out Mike Lee but that’s because I don’t think he will run, although I like him. I think he’s more interested in making his mark in the Senate.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:22 pm709. You do get around 57, any grandchildren to regale? Hope its ok to ask.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:23 pmIt is hard to name any one with a target on their back more prominently displayed than Walker.
This might be, however, he has passed through the gauntlet of extraordinary hatred and attempted sabotage with grace and flying colors in Madison. I think he’s up to the task. Unfortunately, I don’t think he’s well known to many – yet.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:23 pmThe fact that Scott Walker has remained composed throughout all of the nutty recall and garbage being thrown at him in Wisconsin gives me confidence that he may do well in the heat of battle of a national campaign.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:24 pmComment by mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:02 pm
And if selected, that will be used to attack her, just as it was Sarah Palin, for grandstanding.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:24 pmIMO Rand Paul is a libertarian on foreign policy. I think that position will do well in the South, but it may not be as popular elsewhere. He will get pounded on it in the liberal media and the general election debates.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:25 pmIt’s interesting about Rand Paul: I believe his father’s loyal followers will follow his son, however, the problem will be the old guard GOP and social cons. The libertarian bent can be too off putting, which puts it at back at Point A: Can the R’s coalesce around one candidate, whether or not they are a pure R (so to speak)? Or will it be a broken and divided party that gives up another election?
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:26 pm720. Grandstanding, oh dear, how could we forget?
Nikki Haley, anyone?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:27 pmWalker has dealt with horrible Democratic attacks with grace and competence, but will voters respond to that? I’m not trying to be negative because I admire and like Walker, but he comes across as bland. Let’s face it, voters want a some charisma and excitement in their politicians.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:28 pmI realize Rand Paul’s foreign policy views are an improvement over his father’s, but that’s still a deep shadow to climb out from behind.
His recent comments on Ukraine are a little scary to me.
And I’ve never even been to Kiev !
When Romney said in the 2012 debate that Russia was angling to become a huge future threat, people laughed at him. The Ukranians aren’t laughing right now.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:28 pmUnivision went back 25 years to slime Rubio, with something his cousin did, ‘what difference does it make’ never applies to us, you notice,
Paul could make his point, at least acknowledging the values at stake, instead of considering the Ukraine one undifferentiated piece of fmr Russian realty,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:28 pm722. Coalesce, this is our quest.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:29 pmMy sense is (and it is only a sense, not based on empirical evidence) that Rand somehow resonates with younger generation voters. That is an important audience to reach.
elissa (b78ce0) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:30 pmDana,
I think Republicans are overreacting to the current strife in the GOP. The more Presidential elections the GOP has lost, the more desperate Republicans will be to come together around a nominee. The primary may be rough but I think most of the GOP base will come together provided they feel like they had a fair chance. If, on the other hand, the GOP establishment does something to rig the game for a particular group or candidate, all bets are off.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:31 pm724. I agree, bland, but qualified. Short list or no?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:32 pmInteresting attempt at re-branding conservatism here. It’s broad reaching, but will it make a difference? Me, I like it. It’s not cringe inducing as most conservative/Rep. attempts to reach the public tend to be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RH_QkPFBfQ
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:32 pmES, Rubio is going to have to work really hard to get my vote.
I get accused of demanding “Teh Puritah.” I don’t see it that way. I can vote for someone who isn’t as much a “pure” conservative as I am. I just want to know where they stand, and I hate pols who think they can play me.
It’s a bit rich, don’t you think, that Rubio dropped his advocacy for the Gang of 8 bill because it dawned on him that Obama couldn’t be trusted? I’m like, no $#ITT Sherlock. It’s like McCain just now figuring out that when it comes to Kerry’s foreign policy outlook, he’s naive.
http://thehill.com/video/senate/198687-mccain-asks-kerry-what-planet-are-you-on
I think I still have the scars from that face palm.
I’m not asking for purity. Just not an insult to my intelligence would, at this point, be nice.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:32 pmelissa,
I agree re young people and Rand Paul. He’s a hip, edgier version of his dad (without all the nuttiness…yet…). I think he will draw in younger voters far, far more than any other names mentioned as possible contenders. He seems more genuine and less polished, still young yet smart and gutsier. I haven’t seen him back off anything yet.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:34 pm728. I sense Rand has the necessary reach to make the list even without executive experience.
He has not hurt himself in any lasting way. Not a lawyer(no offense), happily married.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:34 pmHe should probably give his Harley more face time.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:35 pmDRJ,
Maybe. At this point, I think the real battle (as always) will be the media control of information reaching voters and that’s where i think the right just doesn’t have the same level of battle skills needed. Too many of these guys inevitably put foot in mouth, giving the left yet more openings to smear and attack. There should be a major workshop on interview skills, practicing answers repeatedly to the standard gotcha questions, etc.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:37 pmOk, Rand makes the list. I know this Secretary duty is self assigned. But I haven’t sprung for Rubio yet.
Martinez
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:39 pmWalker
R
u.PaulRand Paul’s libertarian and isolationist views resonate with young people, but I think that also may leave him more open to problems with world events during the last 3 years of Obama’s term. The more Obama screws up foreign affairs and the more things fall apart across the world, the more American voters will care about the candidates’ foreign policy positions. Isolationism is more appealing when the world is calm. If, as it appears may happen, Obama leaves us with a vastly more dangerous world, then Rand Paul’s isolationism may not be so appealing.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:40 pmWhere’s that dang daleyrocks been? I miss his clear thinking, concise, humorous posts.
Colonel Haiku (f1fe36) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:40 pmhttp://farm4.staticflickr.com/3129/2811338437_82b86b59bb_z.jpg
Of course, we all know how the MFM will spin this.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/dc/c2/2e/dcc22e3e3e7fe5d676eaa38ef7ef0e45.jpg
Scott Walker giving the Nazi salute from the back of his “War on Women” patriarchy mobile as he heads off toward the next Klan rally.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:41 pmDana:
It would help if the GOP would quit outsourcing their primary debates to the media. There should be a way to get more GOP control over the process, moderators, etc.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:42 pm739. Yeah, where’s your bosom pal?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:42 pmUnfortunately, charisma is a big part of the process and Walker is more than a bit lacking. I don’t know that he would resonate with all the particular groups that must be reached. Rand Paul, Rubio would be able to deliver that. However, what Walker does convey, far more than the others, is gravitas and maturity. There is a lot to be said for that.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:43 pmJohn Kerry tells Russians, ” You better not…!” Comedic Smart Diplomacy!
Colonel Haiku (f1fe36) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:43 pmMaybe Walker would make a better VP. It’s a shame the GOP has to put a woman on the ticket to counteract Hillary, but it probably does. I also think Walker would be a great Cabinet choice. His knowledge, experience, competence and maturity would be invaluable in actually running our government and finding ways to downsize or limit its scope.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:45 pmI’m telling all of you right now, the republicans have to frame the election around The 2nd Amendment.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:48 pm740. I think that’s a valid concern.
Negatives on Walker, bland, possible gang member, target of John Doe grand jury, Sconny, Packer Fan.
That’s getting to be a might ugly.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:49 pmOk strike Walker.
Martinez
WalkerPaul
A little unbalanced I have to say.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:50 pm746. Point of order. 2nd Ammendment.
Narciso, you seem like you have something to say.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:52 pmThis one throwing in, too??
http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/26/joe-scarborough-apparently-serious-about-2016-run-gives-speech-in-south-carolina/
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:56 pmOK, do we need to look over Rubio closer?
Great communicator, Hispanic sort of, Mormon sort of, 1st term Senator, wants it clearly.
Can dish it out.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:58 pmgary,
I don’t see Martinez as a Presidential candidate. She might be a VP candidate, at most, and frankly only because she’s a woman. Nothing against Martinez but normally I wouldn’t see her as experienced enough. Like Palin, she has the right qualities at the right time. Palin’s quality was being a maverick with a nominee who wanted to reinforce the idea he was a maverick. Martinez is a conservative woman in a race where Hillary will make sure the focus is on women.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:59 pmHowever, let me rush to say that Martinez is well-qualified by Democratic standards. It’s only the Republican Party that expects its nominees to have more time in the trenches.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:00 pmgary,
Rubio – immigration…
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:00 pm750. Another Lincoln. How many terms did he serve?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:00 pm754. I agree, I just think our list is, well, length challenged.
I’d prefer we agree together, despite Stones’ evident interest that Christie and Rubio are snakebit.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:02 pmThe more the merrier in the primary. Let it shake out there.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:03 pm752. There is that. But contrasting with Ayotte she’s not a McVain groupie.
I find that quality irresistible.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:04 pmLook let them run, even the Mandarin had a clue, every once in a while, well scratch that about Morning Joke, an answer to a question no one was asking,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:06 pmI always thought the whole point of joining the Navy was to get around.
And, no, I have to make do with nieces and nephews.
I hope I don’t come across as a braggart. I talk about that shot because my buddy who was the best man at my wedding was one of the two witnesses. Him and the PH. And it was, in all modesty, a nice shot.
I wouldn’t even talk about it except as a lesson as to why it’s important to learn math.
Hopefully I’ll do what my uncle did for me, and pass on the hunting bug. The last thing I want to do is to create the impression that success is the product of some sort of wizardry.
But no. No grandkids.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:06 pmjoe scab is a plant from the left to muddy the waters.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:08 pmHe should never be allowed inside the tent.
So we have one heavyweight, Doctor Paul.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:08 pm532. “Actually support from the Tea Party has remained stable since 2011, birdfetcher wouldn’t know that…”
Not according to Pew, narciso. The gap between favorable and unfavorable has widened since 2011, and that’s a problem for the Tea Party movement.
Bird Dog (130699) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:10 pmhe removes all doubt, some slippage,
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/09/opposition-to-tea-party-drops-to-near-record-low/
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:13 pmRubio would be the front runner if it were not for his screw up on immigration.
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:13 pm761. We still haven’t addressed mg’s point of order.
Anyone for Palin?
My very limited stable of crack shots narrows down to a blackbird swaying at the top of an aspen 60-70 feet up, 35-40 yards with a .22 LR in 10-15 mph breeze.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:15 pmI like Palin but I think her time has come and gone.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:17 pmGee gary, I’m picking up vibes here that you’re getting a little aroused. I mean like you might could possibly maybe sorta find somebody to vote for. Progress!!!!
elissa (dba240) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:17 pm763. There’s more than one way to cast that animosity. If you haven’t noticed a few of us have hardened a touch.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:18 pmThat’s a great shot gary, but how do you prepare blackbird?
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:19 pmPie?
768. You are nothing if not perceptive ‘lissa.
I’m also thinking that Paul, considered the frontrunner by the Left, will run strong in the NorthWest and West but I wonder about the South.
And we still haven’t addressed the 2nd Amendment. Do we need to reconsider Perry?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:23 pm770. It was before West Nile but I blushingly admit I did not eat my kill.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:24 pmAnyone for Palin?
NO.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:27 pmSo I have to say Rand is not at the top of my list, I can vote for him but he has no executive experience.
He’s great on liberties and small government but weak on foreign policy.
And the South, save FL, is our strength.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:31 pmYou forgot blindfolded and drunk to enhance the degree of difficulty.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:32 pmHe’s a fine communicator, e.g., his Cassius Clay speech.
And he’s strong with a nagging weakness, the Young.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:33 pm775. Ok, breeze, 5-10 mph.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:34 pmIf it’s anything like Haggus the preparation involves a couple of fifths of Scotch administered beginning right after lunch.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:35 pmWhat about the military? To me a better source than the Senate.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:36 pm778. At the time refer was a distinct likelihood.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:39 pmScuse me. Haggis.
http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/alton-brown/haggis-recipe.html
Mmm! I don’t know about the rest of you but I’m getting hungry just thinking about it.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:39 pmreefer
Rand Paul going once.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:41 pmRemember he was sucking up to McConnell just yesterday.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:42 pm709-steve57
mg (31009b) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:43 pmWhat’s PH?
That must have been rewarding making a shot of such distance with pin point accuracy.
Steve57,
My rule of thumb: ingest no organs.
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:46 pmNot according to Pew, narciso. The gap between favorable and unfavorable has widened since 2011, and that’s a problem for the Tea Party movement.
That — along with a majority of people in various polls still blaming George W Bush and not the current disgrace in the White House for current economic problems — speaks volumes about just how must nonsensical liberalism has infected a good portion of this nation’s populace. How serious that infection is, I’m not sure. Whether we’re one large or small step below a Venezuela, I’m not sure either. Whatever the case, it’s certainly a pathetic, grotesque disease.
When so much “progressive” lunacy lingers in the brainwaves of far too many people out there — from sea to shining sea — I’m forced to think not just ideologically but tactically too. I don’t like the contortionist routines that forces me into — eg, obese guy from New Jersey versus sleazy former First Lady? — but I don’t know if the USA in the 21st century provides any other reality or option.
Mark (c04b2c) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:46 pmPH = Professional Hunter. In most parts of Africa it’s illegal to hunt on your own; you have to hire a guide.
The Francophone areas like Cameroon have a system called Chasse Libre, or free hunting.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:49 pmAnother plus about Paul is that he pulls the Libertarians into your tent.
Good during the primaries except for the fights.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:51 pmI’m sure Paul would do well in IA, not so sure about NH or SC, good in NV.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:54 pmI just use them to predict the future, trained as I am in augury.
Reading the entrails beats the hell out of Punxsutawney Phil and his “six more weeks of winter” schtick.
Although I will grant you that a fat, grain-fed groundhog beats the hell out of Haggis.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:54 pmthe groundhog is getting as big as Spiny Norman,
narciso (3fec35) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:55 pmseriously enough already,
You are not alone.
Kalroy
Kalroy (3b3f69) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:58 pmCan we eat the groundhog already?
I have some squirrel and rabbit recipes that will do in a pinch.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:58 pmI’m thinking I can pull this off with a Crown Vic Police Interceptor for something like $80 grand less.
http://localmotors.com/rallyfighter/
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:03 pmSo now what does the right do about the NE, the useless stump of Yankee irascibility?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:04 pmThe North East is hopeless, gary.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:06 pmSo we’re back to where we started in the sense that the GOP is worse than useless, they’re an obstacle?
What’s the point of primaries if they’re just going to screw up?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:11 pmSeriously, here’s a candidate with Electoral possibilities given the South can live with him that is going to be rejected by DC and the NE.
It may not be fatal but it sure has a risk.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:16 pmI don’t know how you got from point A to point B, gary.
I like Rand Paul because as far as I know he hasn’t gone out of his way to lie to me.
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:25 pmHere’s an interesting look at how the media is taking notice of Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, and subsequently reporting on them differently. Both substance and style factor into it. This doesn’t surprise me.
And they are both being taken seriously as possible contenders:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/27/rand-paul-vs-ted-cruz-why-one-them-is-winning-over-press/
Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:36 pmComment by elissa (b78ce0) — 2/27/2014 @ 6:30 pm
His father did too.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:58 pmIt is hope and exuberance overcoming naivete.
Our youth, of all political persuasions, are too sheltered from the dark realities of life.
Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/27/2014 @ 7:17 pm
Perhaps, but she has a new TV series coming on The Outdoors Channel.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/27/2014 @ 9:06 pmComment by Dana (9f8700) — 2/27/2014 @ 8:36 pm
Who the media fear, they must destroy.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/27/2014 @ 9:10 pmPaul is just the current surrogate (remember the love affair the media had with Maverick in ’00?) but once he’s the default candidate, he will be destroyed by those that used to sing his accolades.
799. The DC K-Street will get organized early to lock out a fly-over choice.
Jeb Boosh, your next President.
The East Coast will buy that. Even tho only SC is in the bag for the Right.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 9:11 pm802-..Oops….The Sportsman Channel.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/27/2014 @ 9:18 pmIt turns out somebody already made the “Walker for Preezy” commercial.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23SVHUPrUJ4#t=180
Steve57 (a7ff60) — 2/27/2014 @ 9:26 pm803. I think we need someone with southern appeal to stop Bush at FL.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/27/2014 @ 9:26 pmI hope the GOP doesn’t nominate another Bush.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/28/2014 @ 5:02 amCharisma is an important quality, and maybe Walker lacks that, or maybe his handlers are telling him to be low key, I don’t know.
MD in Philly (f9371b) — 2/28/2014 @ 5:55 amBut an equally important quality is being able to weather the hell the candidate will be put through, and Walker has more experience at that than anyone.
806. I’m kinda thinking that’s a worst case scenario.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/28/2014 @ 6:08 am809. And there’s a whole lot of water to pass the bridge by 2016.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/28/2014 @ 6:13 amI hope the GOP doesn’t nominate another Bush.
Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/28/2014 @ 5:02 am
I agree with you on everything, lately. It doesn’t worry me, but maybe you should be a little concerned? ~_^
nk (dbc370) — 2/28/2014 @ 6:19 amPhoenix in late Summer? Columbus is nice, Cincinnati fine, but what’s Cleveland doing on a list of destinations?
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/27/The-Elite-8-RNC-Announces-Finalists-to-Host-2016-Convention
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/28/2014 @ 6:51 amDana @ 800. I think Rand Paul has a better press agent – and may be getting help from Democrats.
Cruz is too, except his portrayal is all negative. Rand Paul has so many negatives, they have to hold that in reserve for a future time.
Sammy Finkelman (7072ea) — 2/28/2014 @ 8:55 amnk:
It doesn’t worry me but I’m tickled pink. (Do you say that in Chicago or Greece?)
DRJ (a83b8b) — 2/28/2014 @ 9:15 amJes don’t get too comfortable, DRJ. nk delights in being some kind of a purposeful crapshoot–an enigma, I think. Sometimes I read nk’s stuff and think to myself, “that man is absolutely out of his gourd.” Then he’ll write something else and I think to myself, “that’s exactly how I think about it and what I’d say, but he said it so much better. You do keep us on our toes, nk.
elissa (06f6f8) — 2/28/2014 @ 9:26 amWe say it in Chicago, DRJ.
nk (dbc370) — 2/28/2014 @ 9:39 amComment by elissa (06f6f8) — 2/28/2014 @ 9:26 am
I am re-examining my value system. Until a few days ago, I thought arete, the Greek word for virtue, came from aren (male) just as virtue comes from vir (Latin for man). That virtue is the quality of being a man.
Then I found out that arete has the same root as harmony, aro, to conform, fit in, get along. Looking into it a little deeper, Biblical scholars give the same meaning to arete in the New Testament.
I’ve been doing it all wrong. It’s not virtuous to be a square peg in a world of round holes. Or the diva in the opera. It is virtuous to fit in; to sing with the chorus; to march in step.
-Come the revolution, everybody will eat strawberries.
-To tell you the truth, I don’t really like strawberries.
-Come the revolution, you will eat strawberries and like them.
And considering that the sin of the fallen angels was rebellion (Jude) … I may have been doing the Devil’s work more than I suspected. Sigh.
nk (dbc370) — 2/28/2014 @ 11:01 amnk, look what the Caine’s strawberry thief was saving you from.
askeptic (2bb434) — 2/28/2014 @ 11:17 amyup: the TEA Party is the problem with the GOP’s lack of electoral success…
http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/02/nytcbs-poll-tea-party-favorability-surges-since-government-shutdown/
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 2/28/2014 @ 11:30 amAnyone in the pool have Bush/Ayotte? Looks like you take home the kitty. Jackazz.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 2/28/2014 @ 8:25 pm