Poor, poor Republicans... by Niki2

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 20, 2009 5:32 PM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
They are getting closer and closer to splintering into two parties: the ultra-conservative nutbags and the rest of the more intelligent Republicans, if there are any left. Personally, I think it was dumb to jump on the Tea Bagger bandwagon, to so enthusiastically embrace every word out of Michelle Malkin's mouth, to encourage Faux Noise in every outlandish statement they made, to embrace all the idiotic claims against healthcare, and to become so staunchly the Party of No. Now they're stuck with their "base" and little else, and their base is turning on them like rabid dogs.

As much as they'd like to lay this at Obama's feet, it's really more the end result of the "Bush doctrine". He courted those ultra-conservative nutbags and dismissed every single intelligent conservative, deriding them as "intellectual elites" who couldn't be trusted, and the ultra-right nutbags were only too happy to go along with him when he was the only game in town, but now, in the wake of his plunging popularity during his last years in office, and the widespread acknowledgment that he may well be the worst American president in living memory, even the most rabid of right-wingers are running away from him, as fast and as far as they can.

And now, having laid low any conservative of any real intelligence or substance, and having alienated even the most ardent of their base of ignorance, they've all whipped around on themselves, until what we're left with is a good old-fashioned rat-fight. All the smart rats already abandoned the stinking ship, leaving only the stupid ones to tear each other's guts out in a vain effort to remain alive and relevant for one more day.

At long last, here is what the modern conservative is left with. Here is Queen Rat:

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 20, 2009 6:50 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Niki, Sig, frem, kwicko.
lotsa discussion forthwith, right.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 20, 2009 7:14 PM

GINOBIFFARONI

Wow,

a while back I tried to sell the idea of the best possible thing happening was the formation of a more " centre " party built up from the dis satisfied elements of both the Repubs and the Dems.

We were all fighting over Bush policies at the time, and the election was still going on so we had alot of " Obama " hope still going on,

And almost everyone who commented on the idea either said I was nuts, or a wishfull thinker.....

Maybe I should get into political commentary

I really do think, if such a party formed, bridged the issues right and left by common sense rather that ideology...

that party can rally enough support to win

and maybe even change the rules so things can actually get done.....

Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists

Lets party like its 1939

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 20, 2009 7:58 PM

Discussion, huh ?

I thought I had made it abundantly clear I was quite done "discussing" anything with you and your ilk, Rappy - especially given that I'd like to see you and the rest of the enablers swingin from a rope.

I gave you your chance, you blew it off, and now you wanna pule and whine about it ?

Please.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
...they're having quite a time of it, aren't they? Don't give me the old "one side disses the other, I'm so bored" bullshit; the Republican party and its members have been acting like such complete idjits...As I said elsewhere, only 20% of Americans now call themselves "Republicans"....Backing the Tea Baggers and the stunts they pulled is creating a schism;

So I almost pity them, but more than that I'm disgusted with them, and I wish they'd start acting like intellgent adults, rather than a bunch of obstructionist nutbags who belong in some institution or other.

Somebody is watching too much MSNBC.

Its a great time to be a Republican and even greater time to be a conservative (and not just in the US).

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/10/20/rnc-beats-dnc-in-september-mo
ney-race/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091015/wl_canada_nm/canada_us_politics_po
ll_20

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/10/21/worldupdates/200
9-10-21T130703Z_01_NOOTR_RTRMDNC_0_-433189-1&sec=Worldupdates

We're seeing the resumption of the trend that started following Obama's Berlin speech in 2008 and was halted by the economic crisis. The trend is people sick and tired of President Obama and the Democrats in Congress all over their TV. They get mad, take a good look at the actual policies and suddenly its "now hold on here".

This is a center/right country that is being led by Obama/Reid/Pelosi's far left agenda. The backlash is just going to get worse.

Add to this Obama's complete inability to provide leadership or make decisions and they are screwed. For example, its 3am, the phone rings, over two months later its still ringing and the President says...I'll answer it in another few weeks.

But he has lots of time for date nights, parties, and trips with Oprah. http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/arts/stories/2009/10/21/2_WHITE_H
OUSE_MUSIC.ART_ART_10-21-09_D4_MIFE4R2.html?type=rss&cat=&sid=101

In fact, he's spent more time on parties and fundraisers then he has talking with the commander of our soldiers in harm's way.

They've put more time and effort into attacking the critics and this dangerous and failed attempt to marginalize FOX then they have into supporting our troops.

Watch, at some point they'll be on FOX explaining how it was all a misunderstanding and they only meant the commentators like O'Reilly, Beck, and Hannity were not news, they never meant the whole network. I note for the record that while Beck is commentery...he plays their own words praising Mao, advocating Chavez-like revolution (including media control), and supporting tax fraud, human trafficking, and child prostitution (which, coincidently was about the time they decided to go to war with FOX).

In short, Republicans and Conservatives on the march (at least its peaceful and we clean up our trash).

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:28 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello Hero,

I feel that some of your critiques of Obama are things that past Republican presidents have also been guilty of. In which case, they offer no current advantage.

When doing a comparative strength analysis of the Republicans and Democrats, it is important not to criticize the opponent for things that your party is also not known to do well.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:50 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"This is a center/right country..."

Its called being a Libertarian.

:)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 3:55 AM

RIVERLOVE

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Somebody is watching too much MSNBC.

Its a great time to be a Republican and even greater time to be a conservative (and not just in the US).

We're seeing the resumption of the trend that started following Obama's Berlin speech in 2008 and was halted by the economic crisis. The trend is people sick and tired of President Obama and the Democrats in Congress all over their TV. They get mad, take a good look at the actual policies and suddenly its "now hold on here".

This is a center/right country that is being led by Obama/Reid/Pelosi's far left agenda. The backlash is just going to get worse.

Add to this Obama's complete inability to provide leadership or make decisions and they are screwed. For example, its 3am, the phone rings, over two months later its still ringing and the President says...I'll answer it in another few weeks.

But he has lots of time for date nights, parties, and trips with Oprah. In fact, he's spent more time on parties and fundraisers then he has talking with the commander of our soldiers in harm's way.

They've put more time and effort into attacking the critics and this dangerous and failed attempt to marginalize FOX then they have into supporting our troops.

Watch, at some point they'll be on FOX explaining how it was all a misunderstanding and they only meant the commentators like O'Reilly, Beck, and Hannity were not news, they never meant the whole network. I note for the record that while Beck is commentery...he plays their own words praising Mao, advocating Chavez-like revolution (including media control), and supporting tax fraud, human trafficking, and child prostitution (which, coincidently was about the time they decided to go to war with FOX).

In short, Republicans and Conservatives on the march (at least its peaceful and we clean up our trash).

H

Republicans & Conservatives on the march?? Really!?? Like who?
Beck, Hannity, et al, are just commentators. I do not see how they have any political muscle, especially when many Republicans themsleves are not thrilled with Fox either. Where's the Republican Leadership that is supposedly leading this march? Who are the potential future Republican candidates that will defeat all these Dems? I don't see too many of them out there. From my perspective, the Republican Party was left in total shambles after the McCain debacle, and Bush's departure leaving the country in financial ruin. Liberal and moderate Republicans do not toe the line with the Conservatives of the party, so in effect the Republicans are just as divided as the Dems. Fox may be on a roll now, but this wheel never stops turning.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 4:19 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...

Well said Niki - I'd prefer to have too many good choices than to have to pick the best of the worst.
Ultimately, I take this not as a failure of a Party, but rather a failure of people/humans. We seem to never get past pettiness, can't even get along for the benefit of each other. The Science of Basic Human Relations seems to have to rediscover the same fundamental principles over and over and over...

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 4:26 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Its called being a Libertarian

Not really. I know how to hate to frame yourself as being right-wing or conservative, but calling yourself a Libertarian doesn't make it so.

Basically, you're a violence-prone anti-gubmint gun-owning corporatist, with a couple of dollops of racism and fascism thrown in. Doesn't exactly make you a Libertarian, as far as I can tell.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 4:56 AM

RIVERLOVE

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
"This is a center/right country..."

You left out two important words : "no longer".

All the power is in the hands of Democrats & Liberals. They didn't just pop up one day and say here we are. No, it's been a slow, but steady, cultural and political shift to the Left. Everything has changed from where it was just a mere 10 years ago. That's just how it is. Better find a way to deal with it, because there is no "reverse" button on these things.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 5:19 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"Basically, you're a violence-prone anti-gubmint gun-owning corporatist, with a couple of dollops of racism and fascism thrown in. Doesn't exactly make you a Libertarian, as far as I can tell."

Not a corporatist...or a fascist..

Notice also, that I didn't make any personal attacks/remarks like you just did.

But hey, everyone is entitled to their opinions and to shoot from the hip now and again.

So, good job, Sig.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 5:45 AM

CHRISISALL

I weep for Republicans as I would a brother. As I was when I came aboard, so are Republicans now, empty incomplete and searching , logic and knowledge are not enough, but it would help if they possessed these.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 6:42 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Divide and conquer.

You know, if I had the power, I would make it law that there HAD to be at least 6 different parties represented in Congress, and at least that running for POTUS.

The one who won would be President, the second closest would be V.P.

Then, truly, we could say that most views were represented.

So right now we have:
1. Republican.
2. Democrat.
3. Anarchist.
4. Libertarian.
5. Green.
6. Independent.

Each has a different view than the others, but all should be represented.

But, all we get are 2.

*sigh

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 6:50 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Not a corporatist

If given the choice between government-run health care and monopolistic private insurance, which would you choose?

Quote:
...or a fascist

Seem to recall several times when you expresed a desire to remake society at the point of a gun.

Quote:
Good job

Why, thank you!

But indeed, you have grown. Just a few months ago, this would have sent you over the edge. So- good job back atcha!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 7:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Somebody is watching too much MSNBC.

Its a great time to be a Republican and even greater time to be a conservative (and not just in the US).

Sounds to me like somebody is watching way too much FauxNews. And what's worse, you actually BELIEVE the shit they're shoveling down your throat!

Quote:

We're seeing the resumption of the trend that started following Obama's Berlin speech in 2008 and was halted by the economic crisis. The trend is people sick and tired of President Obama and the Democrats in Congress all over their TV. They get mad, take a good look at the actual policies and suddenly its "now hold on here".

Which is why 82% of those same people want healthcare reform, and more than 57% want the public option. Because they're sick of it all, right?

Quote:

This is a center/right country that is being led by Obama/Reid/Pelosi's far left agenda. The backlash is just going to get worse.

The election results of 2008 are yelling, in Addison "Joe" (not his real name) Wilson's words, "YOU LIE!"

Quote:

Add to this Obama's complete inability to provide leadership or make decisions and they are screwed. For example, its 3am, the phone rings, over two months later its still ringing and the President says...I'll answer it in another few weeks.

Yeah, he should probably just go ahead and hoist up the "Mission Accomplished!" banner over Afghanistan, right?

Quote:

But he has lots of time for date nights, parties, and trips with Oprah.

I supppose you'd look at it COMPLETELY differently if he were, say, "clearing brush" at his ranch, eh? Or taking the time to fly over New Orleans in Air Force One, slowing down just long enough to ask, "Pardon me - do you have any Grey Poupon?"

Quote:

In fact, he's spent more time on parties and fundraisers then he has talking with the commander of our soldiers in harm's way.

In that order? You just said, he did this, and THEN he did that. Is that what you meant to say? And do you have anything in the way of figures to back your outrageous claim, or did you just pull that out of your ass? I hope you're a little more careful with the "facts" when you're in court.

Quote:

They've put more time and effort into attacking the critics and this dangerous and failed attempt to marginalize FOX then they have into supporting our troops.

Again, cites would be nice. Anything factual to support this line of "logic" you're using. If you don't have any, I completely understand. I wouldn't want to hold you to a higher standard than FauxNews holds their "reporters"...

By the way, when you say "supporting our troops", do you mean doubling the number of troops in Afghanistan, or supporting our troops by getting them out of Iraq? Or did you mean supporting our troops by giving multi-billion-dollar contracts to companies like Halliburton, KBR, DynCorp, Wackenhut, and Blackwater, all of which corporations were close personal friends of George W Bush, and all of which are either under investigation or have 'fessed up and paid fines, for such things as child prostitution, forced prostitution, fraud, negligent homicide, and even murder. In your expert legal opinion, do any of those in any way compare to something like the fake prostitution alleged ACORN scandal, involving two actors PLAYING a hooker and pimp?

Quote:

Watch, at some point they'll be on FOX explaining how it was all a misunderstanding and they only meant the commentators like O'Reilly, Beck, and Hannity were not news, they never meant the whole network.

Watch, at some point O'Reillly, Beck, and Hannity will be on Faux explaining how they aren't REALLY racists, they just don't trust black people.

Quote:

I note for the record that while Beck is commentery...he plays their own words praising Mao, advocating Chavez-like revolution (including media control), and supporting tax fraud, human trafficking, and child prostitution (which, coincidently was about the time they decided to go to war with FOX).

And I note for the record that while Beck SAYS he's "independent", he also steadfastly refuses to play Newt Gingrich's quotes regarding Mao. I guess he doesn't want to admit that Mao is one of Newt's favorite philosophers...

Quote:

In short, Republicans and Conservatives on the march (at least its peaceful and we clean up our trash).

Peaceful? Really? That's what you call the Town Hall shouting matches, huh? I guess you have different ideas of "peaceful"... The G20 riots were more peaceful than any of your tea-bagging circle jerks. As for "clean", I call BS. And I note for the record that at least you didn't try to claim conservatives are "classy"...

http://radioactiveliberty.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/best-9-12-march-
sign.JPG

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:44 AM

STORYMARK

Wait... someone is replying to Hero rationally? Is this worth the effort? I thought he had given up and was just a simple comedy act for the last year at least.

Am I supposed to think he actually believes that bullshit? I don't understand.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Divide and conquer.

You know, if I had the power, I would make it law that there HAD to be at least 6 different parties represented in Congress, and at least that running for POTUS.

The one who won would be President, the second closest would be V.P.

You know Wulf...

That IS, in fact, how it originally, and used to work.

Only, it didn't. quite. work.

Fuckers spent too much time howling and throwing crap at each other to be of any real use, you see.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States

And Aaron Burr, that scheming Anti-Federalist who's motives and activities were so opaque as to even now be almost incomprehensible, getting in as Veep scared the ever living crap out of the Hamiltonian Federalists, since what he seemed to want most in all the world was them and their party crushed into the dirt.

He did do for Hamilton though, and every time someone asks what mighta happened if someone had bagged Hitler before he got elected, the image of Hamilton takin a dirt nap is the first thing I think of - we will never know how much misery he might have saved us with that well placed shot.

Anyhows, he scared them SO badly, they went and changed the rules to prevent such a recurrence.

Remember, Congress has also refused to seat legally elected candidates as well, when the "wrong" one won.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_Vallandigham
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_L._Berger

So it's prettymuch an established precedent that for our Government, the "rules" only apply when it benefits THEM, you see.

And when it don't, they ignore or change them.

But in our current political climate, that concept simply could NOT work, cause the one would be nonstop sandbagging the other, and either nothing would get done, or we'd get buried under petty fallout from their clawing at each other.

We gotta change who we are, evolve into a more sane and reasonable people and society, before we could even HOPE for that to work.

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:36 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

I think that WAS the point. To bog down the government so much that it was of NO REAL USE.

Then, we could all get to living our lives.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:43 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

But hey thats just me.

Libertarian, Independent, with a bit of the anarchist thrown in... without the stupid black nail polish.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 11:13 AM

HEY, wasn't my idea this time, I was humoring a friends kid, is all.

Better than hello kitty pink, innit ?

(and imma get stuck takin the whole passel trick or treating, oh joy wonder)

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 11:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Wait... someone is replying to Hero rationally? Is this worth the effort? I thought he had given up and was just a simple comedy act for the last year at least.

Am I supposed to think he actually believes that bullshit? I don't understand.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

I try to humor him a bit. I probably shouldn't.

I *do* like the part where he goes on about "leadership" and "decisiveness". Of course, it might bolster his case if he didn't still have the jizz dripping down his chin from the last eight years under "The Decider", who responded to an attack by a bunch of Saudis by invading Afghanistan and Iraq. Yuppers, that's some prime-grade-A "decisioning" ya got for yer money there, "Hero".

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 21, 2009 7:10 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yeah, I kind of wondered why anyone bothered to reply to Hero, since what he spouted was so amusing. But I can't resist, either:

Quote:
Watch, at some point they'll be on FOX explaining how it was all a misunderstanding and they only meant the commentators like O'Reilly, Beck, and Hannity were not news, they never meant the whole network.

...no, dear, it's only the Republican stooges like Michael Steele who go groveling back to the Mighty Limbaugh and apologize for speaking the truth about him. The rest of us live in the REAL world.

I do understand the temptation to respond somewhat, he's a kick in the head to read, and a good laugh never hurts.

Piz:

Quote:
Ultimately, I take this not as a failure of a Party, but rather a failure of people/humans. We seem to never get past pettiness, can't even get along for the benefit of each other. The Science of Basic Human Relations seems to have to rediscover the same fundamental principles over and over and over...

Nailed it. Unfortunately, when you gear up the "us v. them" mentality, which politics and religion do SO wonderfully, it gets a life of its own. My favorite saying: "Strange little species, we are..."

Quote:
I feel that some of your critiques of Obama are things that past Republican presidents have also been guilty of. In which case, they offer no current advantage.

When doing a comparative strength analysis of the Republicans and Democrats, it is important not to criticize the opponent for things that your party is also not known to do well.

Aw, Anthony, subtlety like that takes all the fun out of it!

Mike, dang you, I wanted to get the Mao/Gingrich dig in, but you beat me to it. No matter anyway, I suppose, he won't understand it, huh. Oh well:

Quote:
As much as they'd like to lay this at Obama's feet, it's really more the end result of the "Bush doctrine". He courted those ultra-conservative nutbags and dismissed every single intelligent conservative, deriding them as "intellectual elites" who couldn't be trusted

Word. But I disagree that

Quote:
even the most rabid of right-wingers are running away from him, as fast and as far as they can

Rather I think those are the ones hanging ON to the ultra-conservative beliefs of Dumbya & Co., and rejecting the concept of middle ground, reasonable conservatism. They've been egged on so damned well, I'm not sure they even realize they've become a powerless, tiny minority who can only holler and have "tea parties" while the country moves on. Remember, they're attacking the RNC for not being conservative ENOUGH. They haven't let go yet, or woken up.

Hero, please, you go right on living in that little alternate universe of yours; if you all do, we're guaranteed a win in 2010 AND 2012--like I said elsewhere, PLEASE nominate Palin, and continue believing all the things you do. But maybe in eight or so years, you might like to come up for air and see the real world, 'cuz we DO need at least two parties, and right now, you guys ain't one. Sorry.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 5:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
Republicans & Conservatives on the march?? Really!?? Like who?
Where's the Republican Leadership that is supposedly leading this march? Who are the potential future Republican candidates that will defeat all these Dems?

Since this is an off year, there are no national races in contention. However, I live in Northeast Ohio.

Locally, mayors, judges etc, Republicans got trounced last year countywide. This year we are poised to sweep county and local elections in what is lining up to be record numbers.

At the State level dissatisfaction and scandal with the Strickland administration has caused John Kasich's campaign to kick off early to huge numbers. You might remember Kasich. While Clinton and Newt were fighting over all that personal crap he was sitting down and writing balanced budgets to bipartisan acclaim. He also had a pretty crappy show on FOX ('From the Heartland'...which is now called 'Huckabee'). I've seen the man talk...he's fired up.

You could look at New Jersey and Virginia, both poised to go Republican (which is kinda return to normal for Virginia, but if New Jersey goes R thats some real news).

In the fall of 1997 George Bush was just another governor sitting on a short list of potential candidates. Here we are in the fall of 2009...who knows who and whats going to come along in 2012. The folks I volunteer with for a city-wide door drop this Saturday (and to put up signs next week) are focused on Mayor, Council, School Board, and Judges (I also support the Casino initiative). Next year it will be Governor and Congress.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 5:51 AM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Rather I think those are the ones hanging ON to the ultra-conservative beliefs of Dumbya & Co., and rejecting the concept of middle ground, reasonable conservatism. They've been egged on so damned well, I'm not sure they even realize they've become a powerless, tiny minority who can only holler and have "tea parties" while the country moves on. Remember, they're attacking the RNC for not being conservative ENOUGH. They haven't let go yet, or woken up.

Uh... What? Bush wasn't ultra-conservative. He was a neo-con, and spending wise very big government-esque. His pandering to the religious right was a ruse, as it can be distinctly argued that he wasn't religious at all. The only reason he couldn't be considered liberal is that liberals actually mean well with their social programs, whereas Bush was just trying to prop up his cronies and certain big business.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 5:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Which is why 82% of those same people want healthcare reform, and more than 57% want the public option. Because they're sick of it all, right?

Not sick, just oversampled. Turns out if you include a higher number of Demorcats in the sample, the Presidents number improve.

Quote:

Again, cites would be nice...And I note for the record that while Beck SAYS he's "independent", he also steadfastly refuses to play Newt Gingrich's quotes regarding Mao.

Cites would be nice. Beck played the actual video...Democrats just look on wikiquotes.

Actually I know the quote. He's quoting Mao, not calling Mao an inspiration on par with Mother Teresa.

"Der Krieg ist eine bloße Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln"

Guess that makes me a von Clausewitz supporter.

Hitler loved art, that makes all artists Nazis in your book.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 6:13 AM

BYTEMITE

That's an argument that's always annoyed me: the belief that if you quote someone, you're automatically a supporter of all of their platforms, policies, and stances. Proponents and pundits from both wings do it, and all it does is obscure conversation about the real issues.

But, there is a point to be made here. Beck is about as independent from the Republican party as his 9-12 march was. Look at where the money came from for both the 9-12 march and the teaparties. It came from Republican PACs. And look who covered the march, and look who Beck associates with. He is not a Libertarian, he just plays one on TV.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 6:40 AM

STORYMARK

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Cites would be nice. Beck played the actual video...

A video edited to distort her words, sure.

Quote:
Actually I know the quote. He's quoting Mao, not calling Mao an inspiration on par with Mother Teresa.

If you think that's what she was doing, you are retarded. Which I don't think is the case, so I'll just have to assume you are being patently dishonest.

For a guy who used to be pretty well spoken, your tactics have become pretty desperate since your boys lost power.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 8:54 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
This year we are poised to sweep county and local elections in what is lining up to be record numbers.

Oh, my, what a giggle.

Everyone knows if a party sweeps into power, the off-year national elections show a decline. So you have to factor that in--taking that out, I hope you're ready to eat crow on the national side.

Aside from which, "county and local elections" don't exactly run the country...you really think the Repubs are going to sweep the next mid-terms? Should be fun...

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:31 AM

STORYMARK

Can a group that amounts to 20% sweep anything but a back alley?

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:37 AM

Quote:
Turns out if you include a higher number of Demorcats in the sample, the Presidents number improve.

Hey, turns out that if you only ask Republicans in northeast Ohio, it looks like Republicans are poised to take over the country in what look like record numbers!

So your point is that we should never pay any attention to any poll mentioned on FauxNews, since they only poll conservatives, so can't give us a REAL picture of what's going on in the country?

By the way, if Obama is "far left", then we're officially a far left country, since he took an overwhelming win last year. Sorry to break the bad news to you, but your kind have been replaced, and are no longer relevant - if you ever WERE relevant, that is.

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:38 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Byte's got it, by the way:

Quote:
That's an argument that's always annoyed me: the belief that if you quote someone, you're automatically a supporter of all of their platforms, policies, and stances. Proponents and pundits from both wings do it, and all it does is obscure conversation about the real issues.

But just 'cuz I get a kick out of poking holes in things, here's a response to your decrying the quoting of Mao:

Ron Bloom was deriding the “totally free market” concept and saying regulation wasn’t something we WANT to do, but HAVE to do: “Generally speaking, we get the joke, we get that the whole game is to beat the system, or at least get someone to pay you a lot of money ‘cuz they’re convinced that there is a free lunch, we know this is largely about power, that it’s an adult’s only, no-limit game, we kinda agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun, and we get it, that if you want a friend you should get a dog.” Do you UNDERSTAND what he's saying and how it relates SARCASTICALLY to Mao?

Anita Dunn was making a point in a speech to students, encouraging them to make their OWN choices: “You’re going to challenge. You’re going to say why not. You’re going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before. But here’s the deal — these are your choices. They are no one else’s. In 1947, when Mao Zedong was being challenged within his own party on his plan to basically take China over...people said, “How can you win? How can you do this? How can you do this, against all the odds against you?” And Mao Zedong said, “You know, you fight your war, and I’ll fight mine.” Do you get how what she said relates to Mao?

On the other hand, both Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove quoted Mao (ROVE stating that Bush told him to READ Mao)...and did so in a completely different context:

Newt Gingrich, a Fox News contributor, quoted Mao in a 1995 Roll Call profile. 'War is politics with blood; politics is war without blood,' Gingrich said, citing Mao.

Karl Rove, another Fox News contributor, wrote in a December 2008 Wall Street Journal op-ed that President Bush 'encouraged me to read a Mao biography.'

Can you get the difference, or not? Either way, it's a stupid attack--some of the worst famous people in history have had something valid to say with respect to something. Tempest in a teapot, and more idiocy.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:47 AM

Quote:

Guess that makes me a von Clausewitz supporter.

Hitler loved art, that makes all artists Nazis in your book.

Thanks for proving my point. She quoted Mao - that doesn't make her a communist.

That really didn't go the way you intended, did it?

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 12:29 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Sorry Byte, I missed this:

Quote:
Bush wasn't ultra-conservative. He was a neo-con, and spending wise very big government-esque. His pandering to the religious right was a ruse, as it can be distinctly argued that he wasn't religious at all. The only reason he couldn't be considered liberal is that liberals actually mean well with their social programs, whereas Bush was just trying to prop up his cronies and certain big business.

Conservative in common mentality equates to pro-capitalist, war hawk, strongly religious, anti-government-safety-nets, anti-homosexual, anti-poor, more strongly racist. Sounds like Bush to me.

And don't tell me the conservatives and ultra-conservatives didn't lick his boots for eight years, eh? His pandering to the religious right gave them POWER--not government power so much as societal power. His policies appealed to the ultr-right...maybe I should have used that term instead. The actual definition of "Conservative", you're right, doesn't apply as well. But they share a lot of values, and his actions encouraged the uber-right to speak out and act out with impunity. I think what's happening now is partly a result.

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 12:45 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
In fact, he's spent more time on parties and fundraisers then he has talking with the commander of our soldiers in harm's way.

1st year fundraisers:

Clinton (1993): 5

Bush (2001): 6 (none after 9/11)

Obama: 23 as of last night.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 12:50 PM

BYTEMITE

I've always thought of the ultra-right as libertarians and fiscal conservatives, and less so much the war hawks, racists, anti-poor, and anti-homosexual.

I thought that Bush was just a puppet for the industrial military complex and big oil.

However, I'll grant you that a large number of the above listed did support Bush, which might illustrate just what a bad president he was.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, October 22, 2009 2:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
In fact, he's spent more time on parties and fundraisers then he has talking with the commander of our soldiers in harm's way.

1st year fundraisers:

Clinton (1993): 5

Bush (2001): 6 (none after 9/11)

Obama: 23 as of last night.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.

So how many times has Obama spoken "with the commander of our soldiers in harm's way"?

Actually, that's kind of a trick question - since he IS the commander of our soldiers in harm's way, he's spent every single second of his presidency with him, hasn't he?

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, October 23, 2009 2:44 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Hey Hero, let's play "compare vacation time" too, shall we?

Lessee, I found an article http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/03/04/BL2008030
401392.html that says that on Monday, March 3, 2008, Bush "lodged his 879th day spent in whole or in part at Camp David or his sprawling estate in Crawford, Tex."

Reagan, about whose hands-off approach everyone joked, only took off 866 days at Camp David or his ranch in California during his entire eight years in office.

In another http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/001528.htm# I found a more complete total: "President Bush spent 1020 days - 35% of his presidency - getting away from the White House."

Obama? "Aug. 23 -- Seven months after taking the oath of office, President Obama on Sunday began his first vacation." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/23/AR2009
082302501.html I have no doubt this isn't the only one, but I can't find any other mention of how much time he's taken off his first 9 months; when I look on line, there's just pages and pages of articles on the amazing amount Bush took.

So? Wanna compare vacations? Seems as fair as counting fundraisers.

Clinton: 152 days on vacation
Bush: 1020 days
Reagan: 866 days
Obama: ?

By the way, Bush was on vacation running up to 9/11, and waved away information which might have kept us safe from it. Too bad we can't count "how much attention" each paid/is paying to vital matters, eh?

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, October 23, 2009 3:46 PM

Yup, Bush took more than one out of every three days off, and "Hero" has a problem with Obama having "date night" with the wife. Bush held fundraisers with the people he, in his own words, referred to as "the haves and the have-mores... you know - MY BASE!" Chances are, Obama has to have more fundraisers just to raise the same amount of cash.

Would you be okay with Obama having fundraisers if he only did them on vacation days?

Don't forget - Bush was on vacation during the Katrina disaster, too, and didn't see any reason to cut short his downtime.

And while we're comparing, "Hero" - how many days did Bush keep us safe before 9/11? Because Obama just blew by that record, too. In fact, he did it on 9/12. As of September 12, 2009, Obama has officially kept us safe from attack here at home for longer than did Bush in his first year. Also, he's gotten far fewer American soldiers killed than Bush did. So I guess there goes your "support the troops" line of bullshit. Or are you actually MAD at Obama for not getting more of our soldiers killed?

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, October 23, 2009 4:12 PM

Quote:

You could look at New Jersey and Virginia, both poised to go Republican (which is kinda return to normal for Virginia, but if New Jersey goes R thats some real news).

You want some REAL news? There's a special election in less than two weeks in the New York 23rd, a Congressional disctrict in which parts of it haven't been represented by a Democrat since 1854. You read that right - EIGHTEEN FIFTY-FOUR. And now the Democrat in the race is leading by a healthy margin.

Why? Simple: Because there's a Republican, and there's someone running for the "Conservative Party", and they're splitting the usual right-wing vote. Some of the right-wing bigwigs are supporting the Republican, and some are supporting the wingnut. I'm sorry - I mean THE OTHER wingnut, the "Conservative".

Quote:

In the fall of 1997 George Bush was just another governor sitting on a short list of potential candidates.

And just look at how THAT worked out for the nation! Under his "leadership", we suffered the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil in history, got bogged down in not one, but TWO unwinnable wars ("Take THAT, Daddy, and fuck YOU, LBJ!"), suffered through not one but TWO disputed and quite possibly rigged elections, watched an entire American city drown, and discovered that to at least SOME Americans, torture and murder really ARE "family values" that are shared by good christian folks.

Oh, and since you brought up his governorship, that's another little piece of "real" news for ya. The Texas governor's race? Yeah, it may well be ANOTHER split for the Republicans. Rick "Mr. Goodhair" Perry wants another shot at it (maybe third time's the charm, eh Rick-roll? Might finally get a chance to do it right!), but it seems Texas's OTHER favorite cheerleader - the female one - has her own sights set on the governor's mansion. Or the hotel where the governor's been living since the mansion burned. So smack dab in the middle of this kerfluffle drops the original "Texas Jewboy", Kinky Friedman, who says he's running as a Democrat this time around. And he may very well have the pull to split the right-wing vote. In fact, if Perry and Hutchison run against each other (one as a Republican, one as an independent or conservative), it's almost a certainty that the conservative vote WILL be split, giving the state to the Democrat.

Quote:

Here we are in the fall of 2009...who knows who and whats going to come along in 2012.

I thought your heart belonged to Sarah...

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, October 23, 2009 5:55 PM

*cleaning coffee off yet another keyboard and cussin mikey through the laughter*

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, October 23, 2009 7:02 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

*cleaning coffee off yet another keyboard and cussin mikey through the laughter*

One of these days I'm just going to have to send you a waterproof keyboard...

Palin's that rare combination that happens when you mix crazy, stupid, backwoods, ambition, and kinda-cute into one package. She was destined to either run for office or super-glue someone's dick to his leg and boil his rabbit. Heck, the rate she's going, she might still be able to hit for the cycle and pull of all of those things. Run, Todd! Run!!

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, October 23, 2009 9:18 PM

Hell, Palin is just (to me) The Harper Valley PTA, really - your stereotypical backbiting, backstabbing, ambitious little small town bimbo with delusions of grandeur who was queen of her little goldfish bowl till the real sharks came calling.

And then seeing it smashed when she tried to run crying back to it by all the folks she stomped on to climb higher, along with all those who saw her true colors exposed once she got in over her head - cause as usual she didn't think it through, had no exit plan, no plan B - kinda like Iraq, yes ?

And now is hiding under a rock somewhere hoping no one steps on it, hoping desperately against hope that people might forget, that some day she might be relevant again...

Dude, I never took her seriously cause I never COULD take her seriously.
It was the REST that set me off... and here's why.

See, the religio-wackos around here tried to double up their chances and run as "Constitution Party" and "US Taypayers Party" despite being the SAME party, and the Sec of State...

(always, always elected by EXACTLY 18,181 votes, always always a Republican despite massive opposition and HUGE poll numbers in the opposite direction - and can you GUESS who's in charge of the voting machinery in Michigan, eh ?)

... chose to allow this rather blatant piece of fakery, allowing two candidates from the same party to run - which MIGHT have been useful in an IRV system, but with the bullshit one we've got, well what do you expect from religious wackos, coherent thought ?

And so the already swiftly dwindling number of people stupid enough to vote Republican around here, mostly corpies who directly benefit from their bullshit - wound up getting split THREE ways, reducing the numbers below even "fringe party" candidates and making the Republican party squeal in mortal terror when they got ABSOLUTELY FUCKING CRUSHED in the voting booths.

I'd lay good odds this so-called "Conservative" party is yet ANOTHER front of this bunch of Religo-whackos with a thousand faces (we already knew they were two-faced - but damn) which is in essence the political equivalent of a sock puppet for the GOP panderers to the religo-wackos.

And if so, these assholes are gonna get hammered down just as badly that way as they did in Michigan, the bloody fools - and THAT is what set me to laughing.

Oh, and just a small, token, unimportant question that matters not at all.
Do you wanna see Goodhair get pounded into the floor ?

Just curious.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 24, 2009 4:38 AM

Oh, I see - I thought it was Palin riding the dinosaur. Which, when you think about it, is funny on more than one level. I mean, yeah, there's the obvious, that she actually believes dinosaurs walked the Earth beside man 6000 years ago, but there's also the visual of her actually riding and running the dinosaur that is the Republican party.

As for Goodhair Perry, I *expect* him to get pounded down, but I'd actually rather not have Hutchison in any kind of control here, either - although you must realize that as far as ACTUAL power in Texas, the governor has none; it's purely a figurehead position. Seriously - when it comes to real power, things they can actually DO, Texas's governor ties for last place in the nation with the governor of South Dakota.

Which is why I think it'd be rather hilarious to have Kinky Friedman in the office. I mean, it's not like he could do a WORSE job than Perry.

By the way, if you have contacts down here, have them look into Perry's Alcoholic Beverage Commissioner, who's been canvassing the bars his agency is supposed to regulate, taking "campaign contributions" for Ricky's reelection committee. It's not blowing up here - yet - but I have a feeling it just might, if the right people start talking about it. This is, in simplest terms, a shakedown, a bribery and protection racket, with the money going straight into Perry's slush fund.

And I *know* you have no love for that prick Perry, especially after the Gardasil debacle and the Texas-run hellcamps he partook in. Any info and dirt I come across, I'll be sure to send your way, and if it finds its way into the hands of people who can use it to derail his career, you'll have my deep appreciation.

Mike

Let the wild rumpus start!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 24, 2009 11:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
you have no love for that prick Perry

Well, yeah - but there's lettin his career die of natural causes, slippin a knife in from behind...

And then there's public execution, a'la Romney.

I'd be a liar if I said I wasn't already thinkin it.

Problem is you ain't got much to replace him with, and I remain a bit unsure about someone like Freidman in public office - but if it's a figurehead position though...

Heh heh heh.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 24, 2009 2:50 PM