April 29, 2009

What on Earth is JPod Talking About?
— Ace

I like John Podhoertz. He's a Guiliani type of blue state conservative, by which I mean he often disagrees with social-cons but is usually not insulting or disrespectful about it, and, when he is on the orthodox conservative side of things, he's tenacious and with us all the way. (For disclosure: He's also friendly to me in our very sporadic email exchanges, though I've never met him.)

But I don't know what the hell he's talking about here. Or, to be more precise: I know exactly what he's talking about. I just have no idea how this applies to the Specter situation.

The Purity Brigade Strikes Again, and Strikes Out

JOHN PODHORETZ - 04.28.2009 - 6:00 PM

There has been, on the Right, a terrible confusion these past two decades–a confusion between the precepts of conservatism and the role of the Republican party. In all its iterations, American conservatism is about matters of conviction on all manner of subjects from the role of the United States in the world to the role of government in our lives to the role of moral questions in political life. The Republican party is not about these things. It is a political vehicle, and as such it represents not a worldview but a tendency. That tendency can be summed up very simply–smaller rather than larger government; a stronger rather than a weaker America; and traditional rather than evolutionary values.

The Republican party fared well from, say, 1968 to 2008 because, for the most part, Americans tended to side with the general sense that smaller rather than larger government was best; that it was better to project strength; and that it was better to hue to established ways. It is not clear that the American people still have this general sense, or they are more willing to try on a different outfit right now. What they did not sign up for, what they never signed up for, was specific ideological combat in these categories....

The defection of Arlen Specter from the GOP, following the effort by the Club of Growth to target him for defeat in the Republican primary, is an example of how confused conservative ideologues can get about the nature of the Republican party....

Politics is not about casting the easy vote for the person you admire. It’s really about choosing the least bad alternative. The foes of Specter in Pennsylvania thought their least bad alternative was challenging him in a primary he would lose. Now they will really discover what the least bad alternative might have been. And so will we all.

Podhoretz is making the basic point -- which I not only endorse, but enthusiastically so -- that conservatives need to be savvy about picking their fights and also picking their champions. It is far better to have an ideologically squishy Senator who votes with us 75% of the time, and more often on the big stuff, than an ideologically pure Senate candidate who nobly loses, while keeping all his conservative principles intact -- and entirely unused and therefore useless.

I agree.

But how on earth does that apply to Arlen Specter? We are not talking, Mr. Podhoretz, about a man who votes with us 75% of the time. I am guessing that number is sub-60, and I know, for a fact, that on the biggest issues, he votes against us.

The Spendulous was the final insult. Incidentally, for all of those who claim it's the crazy social-con monsters in the party who drive us towards these insanely self-destructive impulses of ideologically rigidity, note the social con monsters were very dissatisfied with Specter for years and years, and it's only when Specter crossed the fiscal conservatives -- the "good" conservatives, in the eyes of blue-state social moderates -- that he finally got booted by the party. (Well, the booting didn't happen yet, but all polls said it would.)

So the social cons complained, but it was the fiscal cons who finally decided to throw Specter to sharks.

At any rate.

Because I respect John Podhoretz, I'd like to ask him, genuinely and not rhetorically, to explain precisely how far a heretic may hereticize before the Church may honorably excommunicate him. And I hope Podhoretz addresses the full measure of Specter's betrayal -- had Specter not wished to arrogate personal, idiosyncratic power to himself to decide the Spendulus' side, he could have voted to sustain the filibuster, and thereby forced a compromise. Specter would have been a critical party to that negotiation -- he still would have had lots of power to shape it.

And yet he instead chose to vote for a bill which he himself admitted was bad. Why? I suspect he thought it would increase his political stature, and make him The Man -- instead of merely A Very Important Man -- in negotiations over it.

He didn't want to share power with six or seven other Republican Senators in negotiations, even though he'd have been first among equals in that process. Instead, he choose to strike his own deal -- and cut out very savvy and smart Republicans out of the process, just so he could play Siegfried at Ragnarok, with Snowe and Collins as his Valkyries of the Tax and Spend Liberal Valhalla.

He cut Thune out of the process, for example. A very capable and savvy guy, and one who could have gotten us a much better deal. Not to mention Coburn or Sessions.

This is not a small breach, John. This is a rather large one. Specter's defense of his decision was that it was "the best deal we could get," but he didn't exactly afford us the opportunity to test that claim and see if we could get a better deal, now did he?

And note that senators you would normally consider sensible, flexible, and moderate -- McCain and Graham, to name two -- were horrified by Specter's deal. Angered, even.

When a Republican is so bipartisan liberal he manages to provoke Graham and McCain into physical anger, well, that's not small-beer, now is it?

The impulse is to blame the Club for Growth and Pat Toomey. And yet, they are not the drivers of Republican anger at Specter. They are merely tapping into it.

Specter knew damn well that this was the Rubicon. For weeks the phone banks and internet melted down over this vote. He crossed the Rubicon anyway, defiantly.

And we were to... what? Reward him further for this? After the party squashed Toomey and poured money into Specter's coffers in 2004?

I am also perplexed by Podhoretz's suggestion that the party has gone too far to the right. Has it? Let's review. Podhoretz mentions the Terri Schiavo case and Iraq War as being conservative over-steps. But he fails to note how the party, as a whole, has been every bit as ideologically flexible on a host of other critical issues as he seems to urge:

First, let’s deal with the canard that the GOP has moved “far to the right”. When exactly did that happen? When a Republican-controlled Congress, yoked to a Republican White House, grew federal spending by 50% in six years? Would that be the GOP that created a new entitlement program for prescription medication? The same Republicans that expanded spending above inflation on discretionary areas like education (58%), health research and regulation (55%), community and regional development (94%) and on entitlement programs like Medicare (51%)?

That's quite a bit of "moderate" flexibility, Mr. Podhoretz. Too much, if you ask me -- and despite my firebreathing tone, on actual issues, I'm often kind of a squish.

I'm really not sure at what Podhoretz means here. Does he actually urge the party to tack even further in the direction of a socialistic European welfare state? Haven't we done quite a bit of that already over the past eight years? How much more is necessary?

And does he really imagine that going further to the left economically will turn out to be successful, in the middle- to long- term, for Obama? If he really believes this, he doesn't seem to be much of a fiscal conservative, as he's implicitly predicting that more-socialistic policies will lead to success. If that's the case, why fight such policies at all? Why not wholeheartedly embrace them?

I don't think Podhoretz believes that -- but perhaps I'm wrong.

I think maybe this is just a lazy sort of piece (no offense intended -- I write lots of lazy pieces myself; lazy pieces are the stock in trade of those who write every single day) in which he found himself expressing general bromides which don't quite apply to a specific situation.

For those who call upon the party to "be more moderate," as a general impulse, I really wish they'd be more specific about what they mean. Are they speaking of cap-and-tax? EFCA? Raising taxes? Further raising ruinous spending levels? What, exactly?

I know that many moderate blue-state Republicans want us to abandon the life position and traditional marriage. But surely they know the numbers -- the life position is not terribly unpopular (55-45 against, or thereabouts) and further the life position mints more votes than the choice position. (That would change if general access to abortion were actually restricted, but that's not likely to happen... well, ever, it looks like.) And the conservative position on gay marriage is something like a 55-45 winner. And probably also mints more votes than it loses.

So really, fellas -- what the hell are you talking about, specifically? Are you really suggesting the party spend oodles of money to keep Specter in office, despite the fact that his voting record puts him comfortably in the center-left Democratic mainstream?

I agree that the perfect is the enemy of the good. I say it all the time. But while I will personally argue in favor of the obtainable good over the unobtainable perfect every damn time the question is posed to me, what I won't fight for is the bad over either.

And Specter was bad. The perfect is the enemy of the good, but the bad is the enemy of both, and I, for one, am not going to fight for a bad Senator.

What, exactly, have we lost? A vote we couldn't count on -- and which went against us close to half the time -- and the privilege of spending time and political capital to keep that vote safely ensconced in the Senate.

I'm not looking for a general purge. But this one? Oh yes. Oh very yes.


Posted by: Ace at 11:02 AM | Comments (406)
Post contains 1774 words, total size 11 kb.

1 BOOMER!!!

Posted by: Billy Sims at April 29, 2009 11:06 AM (ngD76)

2 I believe that half the nation still thought Republicans were in charge of congress in 2007 and 2008.  For me, its way to easy for the media to blame republicans on everything and anything EVEN if it is a democrat idea that doesnt work out.  Guys like Spector... they get used not only for their vote, but as a scapegoat.  I guarentee people think the stimulus and attach it to republicans simply because those 3 idiots got up there and voted for it.

glad he's gone.

Posted by: Reality Man at April 29, 2009 11:07 AM (l0WG5)

3
Like I said in the other thread, the Democrats ditched Lieberman, a liberal 95% of the time, for Ned Lamont, a moonbat 100% of the time.

Not only did the base in Connecticut cast out Lieberman, but so did the DNC and his colleagues in the Senate, including his own counterpart, Chris Dodd!

So why can't we ditch Specter, who voted with the Democrats 50% of the time?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 11:08 AM (ick02)

4

I'm with you Ace, why in the hell is Jpod carrying water for Arlen Sphincter?

(Damn, I love that name).  Is somebody taking commentators and replacing them with clones?

In the end, there will be only... ah, fuck it.

Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at April 29, 2009 11:08 AM (9hSKh)

5
OT but funny:

I just heard a radio caller say: "H1N1...wasn't that the name of one of the robots in Star Wars?"

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 11:10 AM (ick02)

6 It's not just spending the tons of cash on a guy who can't be counted on. It's spending the cash on a not-so-trustworthy guy who may not have won in the general election if the Dems ran a serious candidate against him. And then there's the whole health/cancer issue. Even if he bucked the odds and won as a Republican in 2010, could he guarantee he'll stick it out for 6 years? At some point, you have to look to someone else. Yes, it's costly, but the guy was toast as a Republican. There was no message modification or strategy or whatever that was ever going to bring enough new support into the party to save him from Toomey.

Posted by: bunny boy at April 29, 2009 11:13 AM (YsSn7)

7 The confusion is all J-Pod's.  Having started by reminding us (unnecessarily) of the distinction between conservatism and the Republican Party, you'd expect him to finish with something a bit more sensible than "You stoopid conservatives!  Don't you know this is bad for the Republican Party?"

Posted by: Cerebral Paul Z. at April 29, 2009 11:13 AM (iGDA4)

8
Oh, and to suggest Arlen Specter was rejected because he was un-pure is silly. I mean, it's an understatement, but it's still an immature tack to take for an argument to rebuke the conservatives in the party who want their politicians to represent their interests, oh I don't know, at least 3/4's of the time.

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 11:14 AM (ick02)

9 You know, the whole idea of a political "center" depends on where the two extremes are. The Democrats have lurched far to the left in recent years; this has had the effect of displacing average conservatives to the "far right". I'm comfortable with where I am ideologically, and I see no reason to cast away core ideological beliefs just to become more politically palatable.

Politics is compromise, sure enough, but there is a line between compromise and selling out. It may be a fine line, but it's not an invisible line, and it's usually pretty clear when you've crossed it.

Posted by: Monty at April 29, 2009 11:14 AM (/0a60)

10 "And yet he instead chose to vote for a bill which he himself admitted was bad. Why? I suspect he thought it would increase his political stature, and make him The Man -- instead of merely A Very Important Man -- in negotiations over it." Isn't this the crux of the problem, EGO. A 79 year old man, past his prime, past his time, refuses to let go. It just means too much to him personally. I believe that is what is so hard for the rest of us to get, we expect them to do what's right for the country, they do what's best for themselves. This applies to almost every politician I've been aware of. Doing the right thing always costs you something.

Posted by: mare at April 29, 2009 11:14 AM (X1fsj)

11 What's the point of having a guy wear one of your shirts if when the big games on he's going to go and bat for the other team? Specter's the difference between switching sides and never being on your side at all.

Posted by: Jollyroger at April 29, 2009 11:14 AM (+tHhv)

12 You know, it's almost like neo-cons (the original kind, not the newer catchall phrase for 'mean people we in the media don't like) are actually liberal Democrats who are in favor of a strong US foreign policy.

Who knew?

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2009 11:15 AM (hlYel)

13 Alea Jacta Est, Arlen - Alea Jacta Est - and not one of those dumbass "Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt!" D20 aleas either, a regular ol' alea.

As a Pennsylvania Republican, Southeastern Suburb-Brigade - You just jacta'd yourself right in the ass, Senator. 

-

Posted by: BumperStickerist at April 29, 2009 11:16 AM (ruzrP)

14
You know what's really funny?

The Democrats, if they think Toomey has even the slightest chancing of winning, will run a Democrat opponent against Specter in the primary.

If Specter says anything, they'll laugh at him. All they need Specter for is the next 12 months while Reid rams through Obama's radical leftwing agenda.

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 11:17 AM (ick02)

15 Remember, you can't spell RINO without NRO.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2009 11:17 AM (MGu62)

16 If Jpod's throwin' in with David Frum, then all I can say is it's a shame.

Posted by: Dave at April 29, 2009 11:17 AM (Xm1aB)

17 Um, JPod also TOTALLY MISSES the local politics driving this event.

Jay Cost's piece (and its included insults at the inevitable misunderstandings of the NE punditocracy) seems to have been aimed at his exact silliness.

Posted by: someone at April 29, 2009 11:18 AM (1wXl7)

18 Now you know how us knuckledraggers felt while you and Allah and Patterico were criticizing El Rushbo for the "I hope he fails" comment.  How does it feel to be lumped in with the extremists, Ace? 

Posted by: trfogey at April 29, 2009 11:18 AM (9zyH6)

19 It's really hard to argue that Specter was forced out of the GOP by social Cons. Bill Pascoe of cqpolitics.com shows that his American Conservative Union rating have actually doubled over his career. His ratings were in the low 30s back in the 1980s which would make him clearly left of center. During the Bush administration his average rating has only been 54 which would make him a moderate at best. He's been trending more conservative in the last decade so there's really no basis to claim the party left him.

The bottom line was that he was going to lose in the GOP primary so he switched parties. So it was Arlen that left the GOP - not the other way around.

Posted by: Mtenloch at April 29, 2009 11:19 AM (z1Jlf)

20 As for Tom Ridge running against Pat Toomey -

I defy you to think of Tom Ridge without thinking "Blue Polyester Suit" - and I say that as a person who's voted for Tom Ridge.

Posted by: BumperStickerist at April 29, 2009 11:20 AM (ruzrP)

21 When it comes to fiscal and national security issues, I demand ideological purity. If you can't be for cutting crappy government programs, keeping taxes and spending low, and be Pro-terrorist killing, why the hell do you call yourself a Republican?

Posted by: Brenden at April 29, 2009 11:20 AM (54lqZ)

22 If you are neither a social con nor a fiscal con, you're not exactly a con, are you?

I just sent money Toomey.  Fuck Specter.

Posted by: Harry Callahan at April 29, 2009 11:23 AM (fagDq)

23 Podhoretz should stick to reviewing movies in The Weekly Standard.  I'm embarrassed for him revealing his shallow lack of understanding of real world events.

Posted by: Captain Hate at April 29, 2009 11:24 AM (dYNX5)

24

i'm glad ace devotes space here to a point i've been trying to make for years... better now is better than perfect never, but bad is always bad.

and yeah, specter was bad.

skimming through his votesmart.org record, we see that.

Posted by: jdub at April 29, 2009 11:24 AM (t9pKb)

25 Spector was going to be thrown out because he IS and always has been a LIBERAL.  Who cares about the less worse candidate.  Screw them all.  It's like calling him bi-sexual.  In my book, if you are a cockholster, then you are a cockholster.  There's no "bi" about it.

Posted by: Sgt. Rock at April 29, 2009 11:24 AM (cWg6W)

26 Look for Specter to change back to Republican in about 2 years.

Posted by: Boeing at April 29, 2009 11:25 AM (YaBmG)

27 Specter enraged Republicans by voting for the stimulus package. But he is also standing in opposition to the effort by labor unions to end the secret ballot.

That from JPod is just crazy. Specter only came out against EFCA to get some conservative cred. He thinks it's a swell idea but that the economy can't afford it right now (let that slide for the moment).

Does anyone really think that he's going to hold to that in the PA Democratic party?  Especially if Sestak primaries him?

I think Arlen is going to discover his stimulus bill helped the economy long before anyone else claims it and announces he's back on board with EFCA.

Then will JPod admit this is just crazy shit?

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2009 11:25 AM (hlYel)

28 Well, Brenden pretty much said it all.

Posted by: iowavette at April 29, 2009 11:26 AM (0JTac)

29

here's the results of a questionnaire-type thing at votesmart.org re: specter:

Maintain Status a) Agriculture Slightly Increase b) Arts Slightly Increase c) Defense Greatly Increase d) Education Slightly Increase e) Environment Greatly Increase f) Homeland security Maintain Status g) International aid Slightly Increase h) Law enforcement Greatly Increase i) Medical research Maintain Status j) National parks Slightly Increase k) Public health services Slightly Increase l) Scientific research Slightly Decrease m) Space exploration programs Slightly Increase n) Transportation and highway infrastructure Slightly Increase o) Welfare

p) Other or expanded categories

 

 

so, yeah, basically a centre-left dem.

when you look at his TAX priorities, of course, he wants to cut all of em, except for the very rich.

but then, that's what democrats always say. the proof is in the pudding... he wants to increase spending, + cut taxes. one of these things happens more often than the other.

ah, go look through it yourselves.

Posted by: jdub at April 29, 2009 11:28 AM (t9pKb)

30 When moderates talk about compromise they have no limit as to what that means. Just compromise. Compromise with anything and anyone is what they mean.

Posted by: Travis at April 29, 2009 11:28 AM (v5uf9)

31 I think the incessant DNC propaganda that gushes forth from nearly every media outlet is starting to addle some otherwise sensible minds.  The Dems keep giving us free advice on how we could beat them, and so many of us keep wanting to take it?!  Go read Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby again, folks.

Posted by: sherlock at April 29, 2009 11:28 AM (cq3pU)

32 Look for Specter to change back to Republican in about 2 years.

Nah.

As Churchill said, "anyone can rat, but it takes a certain ingenuity to re-rat". Specter is neither ingenious nor Churchill.

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2009 11:28 AM (hlYel)

33
What happens to senators that turns their brains to mush?

Do they all feel like little presidents and that inflates their egos?

But what makes them stupid and out-of-touch?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 11:29 AM (ick02)

34

Robert.

Bork.

I can't see any reason why we should forget that.

 

Posted by: GrayFlannelDwarf at April 29, 2009 11:29 AM (liGil)

35

Snappy essay, Ace.

This is not unlike the overthrow of Sen. Lowell Weicker way back in 1988, plotted by William F. Buckley, Jr., himself. His reasoning was similar. What good is an erratic and unreliable GOP senate vote? Better to start fresh with an arguably less poisonous Democrat (which he saw in Lieberman).

In this case, Specter's replacement is unclear. But it can't be much worse than Specter himself, as far as getting conservative ideals into policy goes.

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at April 29, 2009 11:30 AM (2QFX4)

36

I defy you to think of Tom Ridge without thinking "Blue Polyester Suit" - and I say that as a person who's voted for Tom Ridge.

Can't be done.

I brought (almost) this exact point up when ppl were discussing him as a veep candidate.

Posted by: jdub at April 29, 2009 11:30 AM (t9pKb)

37 "I like John Podhoertz. He's a Guiliani type of blue state conservative"

Sure he is.  I'm Adriana Lima, pleased to meet you, great blog you have here.

Conservatism isn't a hat you wear, or a balaclava you hide behind.  It's a badge you earn, and it is not an easy one in this age.  A quick and dirty test:

Does this person have a byline in a MSM publication?
YES - not a conservative.
NO - potential conservative.

A real conservative would be wholly unemployable in the MSM.  Just because the NYT introduced their new columnist Bill Krystol as a "conservative" doesn't mean you have to buy it, nor the rest of the "conservatives" the MSM present.  No wonder conservatives are getting such a bad name:  half of them - the ones who get pub, at any rate - aren't even conservatives at all and never were, they're outright Trotskyists.

I'd go one further and say those who defended Bush for 8 straight years while turning a blind eye to illegal immigration, massive expansion of gub'mint, NCLB (straight Trotskyism\Lysenkoism), the Free Houses For Minorities initiative which caused this fiscal crisis, and the rest of the crap he did aren't conservatives, and shouldn't welcome in conservative circles.  I'm thinking of smart (shurely brilliant! -ed) military blogs, for example.

Another quick and dirty test:  if you're not getting called a racist/sexist/homophobicist at least once a week you are no conservative.  You have to get in the trenches and fight, and it gets messy.  Being a conservative means not going to lunch with your co-workers because you know it will turn into an hour long bitchfest about how men are sexist, white people are racist, and "breeders" are homophobicismists.  It means dramatically narrowing your social circle and pool of potential mates.  It means getting in the face of atheists when they shit talk Christians - I'm not religious but my family is and you have to get past me first.  It means criticizing black politicians, and not in a lighthearted way but in a cruel way.  Women and gay politicians too.  It means choosing a career and profession where you can stay true to your beliefs, ruling out a lot of lucrative and rewarding fields.  It means keeping your yap shut sometimes even when you have the highest IQ in the room but are outnumbered 20 to 1.  It means being unable to watch TV or movies, or read a newspaper, so poisoned with PC they are.  It means telling your girlfriend that Gray's Anatomy is verboten in your home and taking the consequences.  It means Tea Parties and telling your friends and family who think you are a nutso redneck for attending them to go to hell.

Conservative people do conservative things.  When they cease to do conservative things, they cease being conservatives, it's not like a lifetime membership thingie.  A koan:  butterfly shits on your window, do you blame larvae?

I for one am going to be a little more vigorous in engaging people who are confused about conservatism and/or using the current situation to smear conservatism, this is getting out of hand.

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 11:31 AM (y+fiP)

38 J Pod might be your friend, but he's still part of the Political Class in DC which Rasmussen now polls separately. The Political Class NEVER says that the Dems have to become more centrist, NEVER tells them to calm the rhetoric, NEVER tells them to moderate their far left positions. Bush enacted many programs the so-called moderates and liberals wanted, and look what that got him.

I've heard over and over that a third party is a pie in the sky and not viable. I would call them FINANCIALLY unviable right now, not politically unviable. If a third party was to get the massive campaign funding of the insiders of the Dem & GOP parties, there would be massive shock in the Political Class.

To me, a "moderate" is just a liberal who doesn't foam at the mouth.

Posted by: kbdabear at April 29, 2009 11:32 AM (miw86)

39

A media hell-bent on protecting the left's flank, a bunch of establishment pundits desperate to escape impending irrelevance, and a busload of elected republicans terrified about getting kicked to the curb by a fed-up base, all joined together in the adorably vain hope that they can convince us that they know best. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

As to how to solve this eternal social con/moderate struggle, I can't understand why we can't stop the fucking bickering and just go with a platform that emphasizes the three things we all agree on: responsible spending, lower taxes, and smaller government. Not an original sentiment, but one worth repeating again and again and again.

Posted by: Tiredwench at April 29, 2009 11:33 AM (ulSJI)

40 WHO upgrades it's pandemic scale to a 5 out of 6 spreading panic after only about 160 deaths, in what is basically a third world country.

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 11:34 AM (uU+Ss)

41 Ace, you're absolutely right about Specter and his actions.  On the other hand, you're completely wrong about Podhoretz in the personal sense.  I've exchanged emails with him as well, and have found him to be a nasty little bastard, not interested in answering questions (very civil questions) on his writing.  He jumps immediately to snarky sarcasm while ignoring the original question.  A self-satisfied, self-sanctified, bitch, in other words.

Posted by: rickinstl at April 29, 2009 11:35 AM (0AEWQ)

42 "Does this person have a byline in a MSM publication?
YES - not a conservative.
NO - potential conservative."

So, Mark Steyn -- not a conservative?

Yeah, OK.

Posted by: someone at April 29, 2009 11:37 AM (1wXl7)

43
Specter and JPod would have a valid point if the Democrats were genuinely willing to compromise in true bipartisanship. But the Democrats have no intention whatsoever to even entertain bipartisanship.

The Democrats and Obama (they won!) have a policy of 'you're either with us or you're against us,' and Specter is okay with that because he's always been with them.

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 11:38 AM (ick02)

44 31 I think the incessant DNC propaganda that gushes forth from nearly every media outlet is starting to addle some otherwise sensible minds.  The Dems keep giving us free advice on how we could beat them, and so many of us keep wanting to take it?!  Go read Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby again, folks.

They're taking the advice because as part of the Political Class, they rub elbows with them, their kids go to the same schools, they eat at the same restaurants and belong to the same caste.

J Pod's friends in the Political Class don't so much fear loss of GOP influence as they fear the strange new people who would invade their inner circle.

Posted by: kbdabear at April 29, 2009 11:38 AM (miw86)

45

Republicans have moved too far to the right? Seriously??

If anything, the Republican Party has moved to the left at a slower pace than the country at large, so from an average perspective it just looks like the GOP is moving right -- kind of like how the car you're passing on the Interstate looks like it's going backwards, even though it's going in the same direction you are, and probably also going above the speed limit.

Posted by: FireHorse at April 29, 2009 11:39 AM (w9FHT)

46 Don't worry, Specter is just a mole inside the Democratic Party.

Posted by: PsychOut at April 29, 2009 11:41 AM (+sBB4)

47
Today, John F. Kennedy would be booted out of the Democrat party, and he'd be considered a Conservative in the Republican party,  that's how far leftward America has gone.

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 11:42 AM (ick02)

48 Excellent post

Posted by: SanIam at April 29, 2009 11:45 AM (uwn4a)

49 I've exchanged emails with him as well, and have found him to be a nasty little bastard, not interested in answering questions (very civil questions) on his writing.  He jumps immediately to snarky sarcasm while ignoring the original question.  A self-satisfied, self-sanctified, bitch, in other words.

That's because he knows that AoSHQ has a large following and that Ace must be treated with respect since his email will become public knowledge. Trashing Ace will cut his readership and therefore his pull in DC.

You however are the common rabble, and he feels he owes you no respect. That's assuming you are correct that your tone was civil.

Posted by: kbdabear at April 29, 2009 11:45 AM (miw86)

50 Arlen Specter is all about Arlen Specter, just like most politicians.

Getting $180K /year to put on a suit every morning and having a staff do all the paperwork to implement your plans of raping taxpayers is a tough gig to give up.

What other job could you find to commit fraud and never have to worry about prosecution?

I mean besides working for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve.....
wait, this list is getting long.

Posted by: Boeing at April 29, 2009 11:51 AM (YaBmG)

51

You know, it's almost like neo-cons (the original kind, not the newer catchall phrase for 'mean people we in the media don't like) are actually liberal Democrats who are in favor of a strong US foreign policy.

Who knew?

Threadwinner.

Posted by: jaleach at April 29, 2009 11:51 AM (gHrZU)

52 So, Mark Steyn -- not a conservative?

He's a perfect example:  flamboyant Broadway aficionado, former deejay, effete, feminist, mildly anti-Christian.  Thinks we should invade Asian countries to impose the west's radical gay/feminist/race hustling agenda.  If he doesn't send your gaydar haywire, you probably thought Liberace was straight too, he couldn't be more obvious if he were handing out free passes to his ass at the bus station.  His narrative is inherently Trotskyist: brown people blow stuff up because of religion (nurture), not their DNA (nature). 

Steyn would have you believe that if you replaced Canada's Muslim immigrants (who are stastisically off the charts on any indicator you can name, wealth, education, etc.) with Jamaican rastas, Tamil Hindus, and Nigerian animists everything will be tickety boo, they'll automagically turn into crime free non-CO2 emitting gay feminist PhDs upon arrival in Canada.  Textbook tabula rasa, that.

A quick and dirty test:

-Has this person wrote the words:

Clang clang clang goes the trolley!

In ANY CONTEXT WHATSOEVER, even an actual Broadway review of the musical it comes from, in their column, ever?

YES:  not a conservative
NO:  potential conservative.

He actually did that, probably to piss off the few remaining guys like me who might read him.  He also refers to Christmas pageants in his columns as "Holiday pageants" - that's anti-Christian  and anti-western civilization.  Mark my words:  he'll be running a gay B&B in New Hampshire with his gay lover within 5 years.


Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 11:51 AM (y+fiP)

53

Ace:

Great analysis and comment.  Unfortunately JP appears to have joined the Beltway Dinner Party Conservatives, those who value access to those Beltway dinners above principle.  Specter is not a conservative nor a Republican.  He is a whore who stains the GOP.  Collins, Snowe and Graham, McCain are in the same league because its not what the voters want, its about what they want and their ability to enjoy the life of a Washington Lord.

 

Make no mistake about it, while I hate the Dhimmirats they exercise an iron control over their party.  Where are their moderates?  Their Blue dogs are a farce, voting in lock step with Pelosi and Reid.  If the GOP is to gain its former stature its must return to those social, fiscal, and economic policies that Reagan endorsed.  Above all limited government, expanded personnal choice and responsibilities.

 

Till then the GOP will have the brand appeal that people like Steele and Specter represent.  Self serving whores.

Posted by: Vladmir Putin at April 29, 2009 11:51 AM (0Qynq)

54 Well, even Huntsman is taking shots at the GOP today.  Traitorous biatch...i dont see any "obama is a hard left tax and spend douche" but plenty of "the gop sucks"



"I would give the party high marks for unified opposition, getting everybody in line, keeping everybody contained, in opposition to some of the initiatives of the Obama administration," Huntsman said. "That now needs to be supplemented by real ideas and solutions."

So far, Huntsman says, Republican leaders have failed to do that.

"When you are devoid of the ideas, or the content that would allow you to articulate or paint a better future, you have no choice other than to fall back on 'no, we are not going support it, it cannot be done,'" Huntsman said.

Huntsman isn't entirely negative on the Republican performance so far. He says party leaders are beginning to recognize the political danger of being perceived as a "party of no." "The next step," he said, "is to find concrete substantive solutions that not only make you loyal opposition but also put you at the negotiating table."


Posted by: Anti-Harkonnen Freedom Fighter at April 29, 2009 11:52 AM (5r0Tz)

55 Whoa!

Check out the big brain on ace.

Posted by: Jules Winnfield - Conservative Earth-Troddin' Bad Mutha Fucka Wallet-Havin Man at April 29, 2009 11:52 AM (ruzrP)

56

You however are the common rabble, and he feels he owes you no respect. That's assuming you are correct that your tone was civil.

My tone was very mild.  I asked him a question about some point he was trying to make.  He never did answer the question.  Just threw demeaning crap around.

I will admit that I finally ended up calling him a dick, but that was after I tried twice to get a civil response out of him.

Yours,

rickinstl

Common Rabble, roused

Posted by: rickinstl at April 29, 2009 11:54 AM (0AEWQ)

57 Does he actually urge the party to tack even further in the direction of a socialistic European welfare state? Haven't we done quite a bit of that already over the past eight years? How much more is necessary?

Seriously. I haven't seen one good argument for this position. Abortion? Still strong feelings about it, but politically, it's been mostly on the sidelines. Gay marriage? It's not just a small minority on the far right that are against it. Economic issues? Obviously that "small gov't" idea got lost. What right-ist economic issues should the Republicans stop pushing? The war? Seems like there was support in the middle and even some on the left, at least inside the Beltway. And now, what exactly could the Republicans do on that issue??


Posted by: MamaAJ at April 29, 2009 11:54 AM (X6Zdh)

58  The GOP has the deep South. That's the base. If we could get the Southerners to secede, then the GOP will have a country to run.

Posted by: Deputy Dawg at April 29, 2009 11:54 AM (2CFkQ)

59
Adriana is not a girl's name?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 11:56 AM (ick02)

60

Unfortunately JP appears to have joined the Beltway Dinner Party Conservatives, those who value access to those Beltway dinners above principle. 

He's always been a member of the squish faction. Sure, he's a big talker when comes to foreign policy, but he's a shitheel on everything else. What dumbasses like this dude don't think about is that you're not going to have an effective foreign policy at all if you let everything else go to hell in a handbasket. America ain't going to save the world if it can't or won't save itself.

Posted by: jaleach at April 29, 2009 11:56 AM (gHrZU)

61 Specter is the very definition of a politician.

That is not a compliment.

Which is the very reason he should be purged regardless of how many steps beyond acceptable he became for conservatives who might glom on to the GOP bandwagon when inspired.

The Right shouldn't want him. The Left shouldn't want him. He has no compass. He votes on legislation that he has not read, has not permitted others to read, has been crafted disingenuously, and all for the sake of employment and bennies and employment and bennies alone.

His type are anathema to public service. His existence is one of the reasons for the Tea Parties in general and the Right's antagonism in particular.

I thought Jpod would understand that.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at April 29, 2009 11:57 AM (swuwV)

62

And Adriana Lima, do you trim your toenails?

Reading your posts brought that question to mind for some reason.

Posted by: rickinstl at April 29, 2009 11:57 AM (0AEWQ)

63 "It's the economy, stupid!"

This is the phrase that will bring down Obama, for the simple fact that Obama has no idea WHAT an economy is or HOW an economy works.

Arlen Specter is switching sides right before the Titanic hits the iceberg.

Posted by: Boeing at April 29, 2009 12:01 PM (YaBmG)

64 Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 04:51 PM (y+fiP)

How's life in your personal party of one?

But I'll play...Charles Krauthammer.

Posted by: DrewM. at April 29, 2009 12:01 PM (hlYel)

65 Ace, Ace, Ace....

If you consider both Democrats and Republicans to be rival social clubs who live inside the beltway chanting the mantra of "screw the little people," then OF COURSE you think that it's crazy to let ideology into political calculation.

Sad to say, JPod might also be right.

It's beyond "nation of laws instead of a nation of men" -- it's "nation of men instead of any Frakkin' principles at all."

Posted by: cthulhu at April 29, 2009 12:02 PM (d5gc6)

66 "And Adriana Lima, do you trim your toenails?
Reading your posts brought that question to mind for some reason."

Cryptos often find my narrative intimidating at first, your reaction (non-sequitur) is a typical one, no shame in it.

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 12:02 PM (y+fiP)

67 OK, go to the American Conservative Union website and you will see the rating of Sen. Benedict Arlen. A rip-roaring 44% lifetime. Sen. Ben Nelson, a DEMOCRAT has a 47% rating. Sen. Benedict Arlen goes into the same hellish hall of shame as Jim Jeffords and Lincoln Chaffee. And, when Pat Toomey beats this guy, Benedict Arlen, like a drum, where will the Dinosaur, Drive-By, Mainstream, Obama-Worshiping Media be then? Will they say that a CONSERVATIVE won a senate seat fair and square?

Posted by: Mark J. Goluskin at April 29, 2009 12:03 PM (pjNFO)

68
I like the cut of Adriana Lima's jib.

Did that sound gay?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 12:03 PM (ick02)

69 "But I'll play...Charles Krauthammer."

He's Canadian for heaven's sake, and an ethnic.  Which tradition exactly is he interested in conserving? 

Ditto Frum, ditto Steyn.  Are there any non-Canadian non-Jewish "conservatives" in the media?  I know, I know, the "anti-semetism" smear is coming, it's just that I've rarely if ever seen anyone from any ethnic group show me anything that can be construed as conservative.  I suppose some of those Wahabbi Saudis are pretty conservative, and this is the point:  what they want to conserve is very different from what I and my people want to conserve.

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 12:07 PM (y+fiP)

70 2nd best AoSHQ post ever (the best post related to Anne Hathaway ...)

Posted by: thirteen28 at April 29, 2009 12:09 PM (s8N54)

71 The idea that Mark Steyn is "mildly anti-Christian" is so stupid it's kinda fascinating.

The additional idea that Mark Steyn wrote the words "holiday pageant" in anything other than a totally ironic way, almost certainly in a column mercilessly mocking the phrase is on such a higher level of stupid that it makes the "anti-Christian" line seem smart by comparison.

Qwinn

Posted by: Qwinn at April 29, 2009 12:10 PM (/y1J0)

72

And Adriana Lima, do you trim your toenails?

Mobys don't trim their toenails?

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2009 12:10 PM (MGu62)

73 OT   Just when I was looking favorably on Ford:  Ford chairman calls for petrol tax to drive change

Posted by: toby928 at April 29, 2009 12:12 PM (PD1tk)

74 I know, I know, the "anti-semetism" smear is coming

No, it seems like you hate a lot more than one group.

it's just that I've rarely if ever seen anyone from any ethnic group show me anything that can be construed as conservative.

Well, then your eyes are shut so tight it's not worth my time to say anything like "Michelle Malkin" to you. Or Thomas S...nah, you just aren't someone I want to talk to.


Posted by: MamaAJ at April 29, 2009 12:13 PM (X6Zdh)

75 If he doesn't send your gaydar haywire, you probably thought Liberace was straight too, he couldn't be more obvious if he were handing out free passes to his ass at the bus station.

Wow, for an 'obvious' gay man, Steyn seems to have enjoyed finer trim than most straight guys (with the obvious exception of Arthur Kade). But then I hear Teh Gheys are sneaky and dating hot chicks would be the perfect cover.

Posted by: Mtenloch at April 29, 2009 12:13 PM (z1Jlf)

76 Adriana Lima

I think you have a mild point but you take it to extremes without considering that not everyone will agree with you. That does not mean they should take the 'Walk of Shame'. It just means they disagree with you.

Of course I am just dirty, filthy Snowback, so what do I know!

Posted by: Travis at April 29, 2009 12:13 PM (v5uf9)

77

BTW, Steyn's not a Joooooooooooo, moby isolationist. Or is he lying about that? You know how untrustworthy those Joooooos are.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2009 12:14 PM (MGu62)

78
I guess Ford doesn't care if they sell the trucks and SUVs they build.


Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 12:14 PM (ick02)

79 Well, then your eyes are shut so tight it's not worth my time to say anything like "Michelle Malkin" to you. Or Thomas S...nah, you just aren't someone I want to talk to.

Or how about a good 60% of the Cuban immigrant population?  Used to be higher, until good old American public school system corrupted 'em.  To us, -you- are the liberal ethnic group.

Qwinn

Posted by: Qwinn at April 29, 2009 12:16 PM (/y1J0)

80 OK, here's what I find strange:

J Pod thinks the GOP's all effed up because they lost Specter?  If that's the case, the GOP has been effed up for a very long time since Specter has made a career kicking the GOP in the balls, kind of like maverick.  They lost him a long time ago, just kept paying for the privilege of getting kicked in the balls. 

Also, the MSM makes this out to be a major accomplishment for Obama.  Not sure how that works.  For any particular legislation, Dems would need 1 Rep Senator to cross the aisle.  Everyone knows who the 5 or 10 Senators were that would be targeted, and Specter was always at the top of that list, because, you know, he could be bought, and he was cheap for the Dems.  Seems that the republicans always had to come up with more to keep this dirt bag on the reservation.  There is also the added benefit of making all those "blue dogs" show their conservative bonafides (I crack myself up.)  How many of those Northeast Dem Senators want to go on record doubling people's utility bills?  How many southern and western dem senators want to vote for card check?  Guess we're going to find out.

Posted by: sears poncho at April 29, 2009 12:16 PM (uj/0b)

81 On behalf of my girlfriend, Victoria Secret Angel Adriana Lima, I am going to have to ask the imposter on this thread to choose another user name.

Posted by: Jack M. at April 29, 2009 12:17 PM (eOEgY)

82 Adriana Lima isn't an anti-semite; he is a moron, and I don't mean that in the good AOSHQ sense, either. Lew Rockwell's got nothing better to do than spam Ace's blog?

Posted by: Attila (Pillage Idiot) at April 29, 2009 12:17 PM (wwy6Z)

83 Where is he getting the The Republican party fared well from, say, 1968 to 2008 from?  We pretty much got wiped out in '76, got the executive back in 80 but lost it in 92.  And we lost both the House and the Senate in 2006.

Its not like we've been dominate or anything, or we wouldn't be in this bad a shape.

Odd.

Posted by: toby928 at April 29, 2009 12:18 PM (PD1tk)

84 Nice post, Ace.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 12:18 PM (ajXGd)

85

What would be nice is, for the next 2 years, all 40 GOP Senators vote 'present'.

 

House Pubs too.

Just cuz.

Posted by: Jones at April 29, 2009 12:19 PM (KOkrW)

86

Hey, Billy Sims!  SOONER!

Okay, satisfied?

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 12:19 PM (ajXGd)

87 I'm telling you, when the bill comes due on Barackalapalozza, the great squishy middle is going to lurch hard to the right and then the same "experts" will be telling us that Republicans have become more moderate. I've seen this movie before.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 12:19 PM (VW9/y)

88 I agree with Ace's post, but crap I'm just a newbie here.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at April 29, 2009 12:20 PM (/bqyT)

89 I live in PA. I've never been very politically involved in terms of money contributions or volunteering, but that's going to change now. I am going to contribute the maximum allowed amount to that cocksucker Specter's opponent, and knock on doors, work phone banks, or do whatever the fuck it takes to see that motherfucker go down in defeat. He may think he'll have an easier time running as a Dem in the general election, but if there more out there like me (and I suspect there are) he's in for a big surprise.

Posted by: a b at April 29, 2009 12:20 PM (RCifb)

90 I for one don't understand all this rancor about Specter; he's done a fine and noble thing.  After years of cheating on the GOP and bedding down with the other side, the Democrats have finally made an honest man of him and put a ring on his finger.  I think we should wish the happy couple well and give them our congratulations:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/ccuzjc

On the upside, we probably just saved ourselves the costs of an expensive primary fight between Toomey and Specter, which oughtta help in the primary. 

Posted by: Keith Arnold at April 29, 2009 12:21 PM (Jdtsu)

91

Rich Galen (mullings.com) a very experienced Republican strategist just came out with a similar piece saying that republicans screwed-up. He even drank the third-party kool-aid and said that we need a thirt party to occupy the middle because Dems are too far to the left and Repubs are too far to the right.

What the hell is wrong with these people? Is there some sort of depression epidemic in Washington DC? Loose control of the WH and Congress and they are throwing in the towel!

Posted by: Max Entropy at April 29, 2009 12:21 PM (7FgWm)

92 "When you are devoid of the ideas, or the content that would allow you to articulate or paint a better future, you have no choice other than to fall back on 'no, we are not going support it, it cannot be done,'" Huntsman said.

The Dems ideas and chants for the last 8 years were, "Bush sucks, we're not Bush". They had no plan in Iraq but to nip at Bush's heels and wail that we have lost. They screamed about "tax cuts for the rich are bad" as their economic policy. Now their big idea is "we won"

That didn't work out too badly for them, did it

When you're playing by the house rules, the house always wins


Posted by: kbdabear at April 29, 2009 12:21 PM (miw86)

93 >> If he doesn't send your gaydar haywire, you probably thought Liberace was straight too, he couldn't be more obvious if he were handing out free passes to his ass at the bus station.  His narrative is inherently Trotskyist: brown people blow stuff up because of religion (nurture), not their DNA (nature).

Wow, I did not realize that "Real Conservatives" were deterministic.  Or that the cause of terrorism can only be attributed to one of a couple types of deterministic thought.  Thanks for the enlightenment!!!!1

ps: you are an idiot

Posted by: dan-O at April 29, 2009 12:22 PM (teb/C)

94 JackStraw @ 87

I'd love to believe that, but the 800 pound gorilla in the room is the burgeoning entitlement programs that are coming due.  $2 trillion deficits are nothing at all compared to what's coming.   I am still unconvinced that boomers are going to vote their entitlements away. 

Posted by: sears poncho at April 29, 2009 12:24 PM (uj/0b)

95 From Steyn's bio on his own website:

" His holiday single with Jessica Martin reached Number Seven on Amazon's easy listening chart."

And which "holiday" single would that be?

"
Mark joins his old pal Jessica Martin for a swingin' seasonal take on a Christmas classic."

Adriana Lima does her homework; don't question her, do not backtalk her.

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 12:24 PM (y+fiP)

96 JPod is a fool.

Today's poll found that only 20% identified themselves as Republican. This became a source of great joy for progressives.

Unfortunately for them, the same poll found that 35% identified themselves as Conservatives.

In the November election, millions of self-identified Conservatives chose to sit on their hands rather than pull the lever for McCain.

Now with Obama's socialist agenda, with a plurality of Americans against major swaths of his policy proposals, the nation on the whole will tilt right. Away from Specter and JPod's conclusion.

Posted by: Barry da man Obamacan at April 29, 2009 12:25 PM (NLtVk)

97 JPod is afraid. Afraid of losing status and access. Specter is afraid, too. You are hearing JPod shout in anger at the victim who got shot by the criminal. JPod knows the Left has seized power, not earned it. He knows they take no prisoners. He knows the MSM is the Democrat Party on camera and in print. He knows the temptations of power and fame and money have filled Washington with weak, self-centered thieves. He is afraid. And he is crying. Won't someone give this little girl a cookie and a glass of milk?

Posted by: eman at April 29, 2009 12:25 PM (yBSws)

98 89 a b,

That's what I was talking about down thread, Americans are waking up to politics and what the danger is with these left dorkbat communists trying to destroy our Country, do all you can to get your beliefs out in the open and don't bow down to anyone, I for one am proud of you.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at April 29, 2009 12:25 PM (/bqyT)

99 I'm sorry, guys - that should be:

http://tinyurl.com/ccuzjc

Hope it works this time.  But remember, I'm a moron.

Posted by: Keith Arnold at April 29, 2009 12:28 PM (Jdtsu)

100 Great post Ace.  I think you've really posed the core question: what is a moderate?  This spectre is only raised in reference to Republicans.  Democrats never seem to do anything that endangers the 'moderate vote' or tacks them too far left that they are leaving the moderates behind.  This is because 'moderate' is media-speak for liberal.

Posted by: Bald Ninja at April 29, 2009 12:29 PM (4pdbX)

101 And here's Obama's douchebaggery to come tonight:

EXCERPTS OF THE PRESIDENT’S OPENING REMARKS AT TONIGHT’S NEWS CONFERENCE

As Prepared for Delivery

We are continuing to closely monitor the emerging cases of the H1N1 flu virus throughout the United States. As I said this morning, this is obviously a very serious situation, and every American should know that their entire government is taking the utmost precautions and preparations.

…

This budget builds on the steps we’ve taken over the last one hundred days to move this economy from recession to recovery and ultimately to prosperity. We began by passing a Recovery Act that has already saved or created over 150,000 jobs and provided a tax cut to 95% of all working families. We passed a law to provide and protect health insurance for eleven million American children whose parents work full-time. And we launched a housing plan that has already contributed to a spike in the number of homeowners who are refinancing their mortgages, which is the equivalent of another tax cut.

But even as we clear away the wreckage of this recession, I have also said that we cannot go back to an economy that is built on a pile of sand – on inflated home prices and maxed-out credit cards; on overleveraged banks and outdated regulations that allowed the recklessness of a few to threaten the prosperity of us all.

We must lay a New Foundation for growth – a foundation that will strengthen our economy and help us compete in the 21st century. And that’s exactly what this budget begins to do. It contains new investments in education that will equip our workers with the right skills and training; new investments in renewable energy that will create millions of jobs and new industries; new investments in health care that will cut costs for families and businesses; and new savings that will bring down our deficit.

…

So we are off to a good start. But it is just a start. I am proud of what we have achieved, but I am not content. I am pleased with our progress, but I am not satisfied. Millions of Americans are still without jobs and homes, and more will be lost before this recession is over. Credit is still not flowing nearly as freely as it should. Countless families and communities touched by our auto industry still face tough times ahead. Our projected long-term deficits are still too high. Government is still not as efficient as it should be. We still confront threats ranging from terrorism to nuclear proliferation to pandemic flu. And all of this means you can expect an unrelenting, unyielding effort from this administration to strengthen our prosperity and our security – in the second hundred days, and the third hundred days, and all the days after.

…

So we have plenty of work left to do. It is work that will take time. It will take effort. But the United States of America will see a better day. We will rebuild a stronger nation. And we will endure as a beacon for all those weary travelers beyond our shores who still dream that this is a place where all is possible.

Posted by: Anti-Harkonnen Freedom Fighter at April 29, 2009 12:30 PM (5r0Tz)

Posted by: bill at April 29, 2009 12:31 PM (zplc6)

103 sears poncho- The future of this party is in the young, not the boomers. I agree, the boomers are largely a lost cause but under 30 folks are in for a very, very rude awakening when they start to realize in about a year when the honeymoon is over that their future and the future of their kids is kaput unless some really big changes are made, really fast. If this party gets its shit together, no small feat, I grant you, they will realize that the people they need to recruit are the people who pay the bills, not the people who nurse at the gov't teat. It won't be easy but the environment will be right.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 12:31 PM (VW9/y)

104 "Wow, I did not realize that "Real Conservatives" were deterministic. "

Probably because you read National Review, as viciously an anti-deterministic publication in existence.  Did you know that belief in the science of genetic determinism is negatively correlated with education?  That's not a good thing.  At the PhD level only 2% believe in a concept that Lothar of the Hill People had down pat thousands of years ago - breeding. 

If you want to see what happens when a conservative and a NRO columnist debate genetic determinism, read this epic thread.

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 12:31 PM (y+fiP)

105

I'm not looking for purity. I just don't want something irreversably contaminated.  Kinda like valu rite is acceptable instead of absolute but poisonous moonshine ain't going to hack it.

Posted by: polynikes at April 29, 2009 12:33 PM (m2CN7)

106 Also, I don't believe for a minute that Specter is going to be unopposed in the Dem primary.  Dems think they can win the state with a liberal (I can't say one way or another whether they can win)  When they're done with Specter, he's going to feel like a used condom on a cross town bus. 

Posted by: sears poncho at April 29, 2009 12:34 PM (uj/0b)

107 Not to mention that Specter did not even READ the Porkulus spending bill that he voted for.  I, too, am glad he is back to being a democrat.  He should have stayed there in the first place.

Posted by: SaRAb at April 29, 2009 12:34 PM (RtEP9)

108 Or we could fight for term limits. Congress is full of aging featherbedded bastards who need to go home and fucking die already.

Posted by: Jones at April 29, 2009 12:34 PM (KOkrW)

109 Adriana Lima does her homework

I'm chuckling.

Posted by: toby928 at April 29, 2009 12:35 PM (PD1tk)

110

I'm kind of unhappy we supported him a while back.  I knew we shouldn't have.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 12:36 PM (ajXGd)

111 What is this Moby you speak of?  Is it like Rudy in songs by The Specials, or an actual person?

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 12:36 PM (y+fiP)

112 Keith, you have to be a moron to work this blog. You have to give up all hope of it being a smart military blog that works normally.

The only thing I think that's missing from your post is the fact that all the neighbors are laughing because this is a 79 yr old we're talking about. A grumpy 79 year old. You want to start taking care of him for the next 8 years? Go right ahead.

/quick, somebody call me age-ist

Posted by: MamaAJ at April 29, 2009 12:37 PM (X6Zdh)

113 91   Wow, disturbing.  Why would a Republican strategist say there's a need for a third party?  Maybe he knows Obama gets tired campaigning, even though he loves it so, and doesn't want to burden him with too much of the hard stuff. 

Along Specter lines, can we also stop calling someone a Republican strategist if his ideas mean that no matter how large or small a backlash there was against the Dems they would have a guaranteed win?

Posted by: sis at April 29, 2009 12:40 PM (hm0CN)

114 Ok, so, ok, so a liberal dem just told me that they were wary of specter cause, well cause they think that he wanted to remain in his seat in order to influence eveything and he knew his own party would boot him so, instead of stepping down, he decided to clear the way for another republican to be elected by becomming a democrat where he will continue to do what he has always done, only he changed the letter.  ok, ok they were not happy about this and they whispered it to me.

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 12:40 PM (zplc6)

115

Good post Ace.

I'm also confused by the whole "moved too far right" thing.  On what, exactly?

To answer my own question, I think it has nothing to do with the direction the Republican party has moved, but rather the Democrats- they've moved pretty far to the left under Pelosi / Reid / Obama so by contrast Republicans look more conservative.

What's baffling is that the Democrats (with help from the MSM) still manage to portray themselves as mainstream and centrist despite the stark move leftward.  Why aren't they being called on it?

Posted by: Barack Obama at April 29, 2009 12:40 PM (rf03a)

116 A link to The American Scene? This American Scene?

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2009 12:40 PM (MGu62)

117 Damn sockpuppet Barack Obama was me.

Posted by: Barack Obama at April 29, 2009 12:41 PM (rf03a)

118 Fucking hell I'm retarded.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 29, 2009 12:41 PM (rf03a)

119

Apparently behind closed doors the Democrats aren't too happy with the deal Reid cut where Sphincter gets to keep his 28 years seniority, allowing him to jump ahead of other Democrats for committee assignments, got this info. off Hot Air. 

I think this was a splashy play that will not end well for all involved.

Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at April 29, 2009 12:41 PM (AJ4xq)

120 OT (duh)  I do believe this is the first entire thread without h.clod.
I'm with whoever said they were sick and tired of this clod hijacking thread after thread.  I also agree with whoever said that keeping him around keeps us on our toes and shows us how the moonbats think. 

I guess that makes me a moderate, but one leaning towards begging for the banhammer. 

Posted by: Derak at April 29, 2009 12:42 PM (QIsMa)

121 Nice analysis, Ace, despite the lack of swear words. ;-)

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 12:43 PM (KQBGs)

122 wow, a lot of people are not planning to watch the speech.  Wonder what the ratings will be?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 12:44 PM (zplc6)

123 Derak @120

HC is way too fucking stupid to keep anyone on their toes.  He's got some talking points down and that's about it. 

Posted by: sears poncho at April 29, 2009 12:44 PM (uj/0b)

124 What speech?

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 12:45 PM (ajXGd)

125

??? @122, If not a lot of people watch, then I expect the ratings will be manipulated to prove otherwise.

But I've aged considerably and gotten downright bitter and cynical in the last 100 days.

Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at April 29, 2009 12:46 PM (AJ4xq)

126 I still want Ace to live blog whatever Fox is showing.

Posted by: MamaAJ at April 29, 2009 12:47 PM (X6Zdh)

127 "Or we could fight for term limits. Congress is full of aging featherbedded bastards who need to go home and fucking die already."

You missed a golden opportunity here to use the lovely crypto phrase "cancer farms", second only to "crotch fruit" on the list of phrases signaling an imminent apocalypse!  

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 12:48 PM (y+fiP)

128 >>Fucking hell I'm retarded. A hanging curve like this is left sitting over the plate and not a flame thread in sight. I blame Obama.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 12:48 PM (VW9/y)

129 Oh, O'Bamba is conducting another reading?  Got it.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 12:49 PM (ajXGd)

130 ParanoidGirl, I think the Benedict Arlen thing benefits PA politicians and the business people who buy them. Murtha, Rendell and Spector working together to take our money...Ouch.

 Of course, I'm sure they've worked together plenty before...


Posted by: MamaAJ at April 29, 2009 12:49 PM (X6Zdh)

131 You know, it's unsettling when you know you can give a better speech than the president.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 12:49 PM (ajXGd)

132

tl;dr

And that's saying something, if it comes from me.  I loves me readin'.

Posted by: reason at April 29, 2009 12:51 PM (V40IZ)

133 I really believe that obullshit is a muslim plant and I don't believe in warped theories or am an avid fan of coast to coast am!

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at April 29, 2009 12:52 PM (/bqyT)

134

I admit, I'm in a rush and didn't read all of the comments, so my points may have been addressed.

1] The percentage, with or against, is a canard.  Most of these creatures vote in unison for most votes, such as the namings of Post Offices.  It is only the tough votes that count and you cannot count Specter as amongst the conservatives on even half of the tougher votes.

2] The whole Schiavo thing was poorly handled, but most people don't understand that folks in my town had been dealing with that for 15 freaking years.  To truly understand why some people, many people, were against Michael Schiavo, you need to understand that it was a very reasonable possibility that he beat his wife, nearly to death.  Many people in my area suspected his hurry to pull the plug was inspired by his desire to wipe out any last chance at critical evidence that might have led to his indictment for murder.

Schiavos parents were willing to take care of her and bear the cost burden.  The real issue was whether he, as the husband, could pull the plug.  He fought viciously and won.

Sorry to Dine and Dash, but gotta run.

Posted by: CJrun at April 29, 2009 12:52 PM (H9ert)

135 All republicans need to take back Washington is more 'swagga'.

Posted by: ricky at April 29, 2009 12:55 PM (5Z2BX)

136 There seem to be quite a few mobies on this thread.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 12:57 PM (KQBGs)

137 Arlen Specter is a wolf in John Kerry's clothing.

Posted by: Joe Kidd at April 29, 2009 01:00 PM (ZZeZm)

138

In the words of my dear deceased grandmother, Adriana Lima is "high on dope", but damn this is funny: "... he couldn't be more obvious if he were handing out free passes to his ass at the bus station."

Posted by: Bill Carson at April 29, 2009 01:02 PM (hoGdU)

139

Pubs can win if they drop social issues from platform, take more libertarian, 'hands off' position

(did I say that out loud?)

Posted by: Jones at April 29, 2009 01:02 PM (KOkrW)

140 Speaking of Moby...

"here we are now going to the south side
i pick up my friends and we hope we won't die
ride at night, ride through heaven and hell
come back and feel so well."

In the end, there will be only... terrible songs.

/I think the song (South Side) sucks, but whenever I see "moby", I always think of this song.

Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at April 29, 2009 01:04 PM (otlXg)

141

By this time next year, 9.7 out of 4 of you will have been killed by pig flu.

Now is the time to purge RINOs. It doesn't matter either way since we're all dead anyhow.

Posted by: Entropy at April 29, 2009 01:04 PM (cok/k)

142 You know, the frustrating thing about all of this is that we not only have to fight a corrupt political party(Dims) but we have to fight a hostile media wall that's almost impossible to break through, plus the Dims have a Bond-villain/Sugar Daddy in Soros to fund disinformation campaigns(see above moby) and who pay for organized harrassment of any potential break-through leader we might have(see Palin). And then we have the Remora Republicans, who are happy with whatever little bits fall out of the Dims' mouths. That's why participation in the tea parties is so important. If you can do it, you need to go. We also need to back conservative campaigns directly when possible. If we can scare the politicians with a big conservative backlash, then we may see some sanity. That's why Spector's defection should be viewed as a sign of hope. The same with BO's dismissal of the tea parties today. We're in their heads and need to stay there. We can win and we can reverse any and all pernicious crap ladeled onto the country by BO and the Dims. It'll take time but it can be done.

Posted by: rinseandspit at April 29, 2009 01:06 PM (oEAm5)

143 And then we have the Remora Republicans, who are happy with whatever little bits fall out of the Dims' mouths. You mean "butts," I think, but carry on.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 01:07 PM (KQBGs)

144 Heh, this post has brought out teh Krazee.

Posted by: someone at April 29, 2009 01:08 PM (1wXl7)

145 Lima - Bean,

A Moby says what?

Posted by: Chimney Sweep #8 at April 29, 2009 01:08 PM (kIjlp)

146 Lew Rockwell's got nothing better to do than spam Ace's blog? Maybe it's a lizard. Yesterday on Protein Wisdom one of them was spreading some bullshit about Ace changing his/her post to make it anti-Semitic.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 01:10 PM (KQBGs)

147

Lew Rockwell's got nothing better to do than spam Ace's blog?

I looked away for a few minutes and crazytown came to play. I'm curious, Adriana, how you found the HQ. Linked from some forums or websearch or what?

 

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at April 29, 2009 01:11 PM (ztNrs)

148 146 Y-not,

Nah, the bike rider and perez are enjoying their honeymoon laying by a mud puddle in filth!

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at April 29, 2009 01:12 PM (/bqyT)

149 By this time next year, 9.7 out of 4 of you will have been killed by pig flu.

I'm on the border with Mexico and there's a tornado warning tonight, so I totally believe those odds.

I think we should start a campaign to send tea bags to every "moderate Republican" writer. Maybe if they got some from 20,000 people they might have to accept the fact that they are the ones out of touch.

Posted by: MamaAJ at April 29, 2009 01:13 PM (X6Zdh)

150

Pubs can win if they drop social issues from platform, take more libertarian, 'hands off' position

(did I say that out loud?)

Posted by: Jones at April 29, 2009 06:02 PM (KOkrW)

Yeah -- losing the culture war made America such a better place.

Posted by: Tinian at April 29, 2009 01:13 PM (70sTG)

151 Bike rider - blow me.
perez - no you blow me and infinity.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at April 29, 2009 01:14 PM (/bqyT)

152 The Republican Party didn't leave Arlen Specter, Arlen Specter left the Republican Party.

Posted by: Joe Kidd at April 29, 2009 01:17 PM (ZZeZm)

153 "Be more moderate," means change convictions to ideas, change ideals to wispy thoughts of butterflies and unicorns, change laws to guidelines, change equality to 'they who need us to look out for them while they delude themselves with fairy of equality' and change independence to dependent and we can be big tent.  We can be just like them. 

Nah - I'd prefer to actually stand for something and lose than stand for nothing and win. 

There are worse things than losing.

I know a lot of people will disagree - don't really care.

Posted by: Kae Gregory at April 29, 2009 01:18 PM (E+9ug)

154 One foot on a banana peel and one foot in the grave = arlen, he won't be around another year, he really looks bad, course he never looked good!

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at April 29, 2009 01:19 PM (/bqyT)

155 C'mon, there's no mystery about why he thinks Republicans have moved too far Right. Lots of faux-Right columnists are writing that these days. Basically, they think the Social and Religious Cons are driving the Party and don't like the feeling of being marginalised to the extent that they're becoming so. They believe all too readily the slurs during the 08 campaign about stuff shouted during rallies and are increasingly imagining neo-nazis as signing up as n00b Republicans. That, and SSM opposition is a dealbreaker for many of them. I don't think the majority are going to make the switch, not yet anyway, b/c they think they're trying to save us from ourselves and 'restoring lost roots' and that. I think we'll see another 'begone foul wretches' article in NRO soon enough, maybe a reprint of WFB's seminal essay/rant - but I dunno if it'll have the same kind of impact.

Posted by: Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight at April 29, 2009 01:20 PM (taJZA)

156 153 Kae Gregory,

'ZACTLY!

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at April 29, 2009 01:21 PM (/bqyT)

157 If we can scare the politicians with a big conservative backlash, then we may see some sanity.

The moderates are completely in denial about all the support for Palin. We put up with McCain, supported Sarah and they fucking won't see it. Throw 'em to the side, support individuals like Toomey and see what happens.

Posted by: MamaAJ at April 29, 2009 01:21 PM (X6Zdh)

158 Correction: the lizard yesterday said his post was rewritten to make it homophobic, not anti-Semitic. Gotta' migraine so I'm kind of out of it. --- Anyway, I'm with Ace. Until we know what it means to be "moderate" any attempt to "market" the party to these folks is an exercise in futility. Since more people identify themselves as conservative than liberal (34 vs 22 percent), it seems to me it would be easier to persuade moderates to lean right than to tilt the party left.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 01:21 PM (KQBGs)

159 Also, when we're talking about supporting really out-there RINOs like Specter instead of actual conservatives, we hear the argument that in this election the GOP candidate needs to move further left. That overlooks what often happens - the voters when faced with a choice between real Democrat and a fake Democrat will choose the real one every time. That's what happened in Minnisota when Real Democrat Franken beat Fake Democrat Coleman Who Had Been Drifting Leftward even since he first got elected to the Senate. My point is, if you're at risk of losing anyway when you run the Fake Democrat then why not run a Real Republican? You'll win as many elections as you deserve to win and, in those you lose, you lose to a Democrat that ran closer to the center instead of losing to a Far Left Dem like Franken.

Posted by: Comrade Arthur at April 29, 2009 01:23 PM (Xr3G0)

160 Have you ever noticed how he talks about himself in third person? 

"Did you notice he always refer to himself in the third person.

Jimmy can dunk. Jimmy's new in town. Jimmy will see you later."


Posted by: Joe Kidd at April 29, 2009 01:23 PM (ZZeZm)

161 "I'm curious, Adriana, how you found the HQ. Linked from some forums or websearch or what?"

I bookmarked it a couple months ago, been aware of it peripherally for years but warbloggin' never was my cup of tea.  The Best Conservative blog contest is what made me take another look.  Smart as hell, funny, profane, fairly conservative even, but the Danegold you pay for pub - warbloggin' - is too dear for me.  You sold out your country for page hits and that won't easily be forgiven or forgotten.

Bitter?  Fucking right I am, it's more or less illegal for me to do what I love most in this life - reading and writing about politics, honestly, so I pop off here and there.  I should mention I am Canadian; I know what Obama's endgame is because I'm living it, his platform is remarkable in its similarity to our Liberal party's platform of the 1990s.  It's bad up here.  So if I seem a touch radical in my conservatism and combative with "soft" conservatives, I hope you understand. 

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 01:25 PM (y+fiP)

162 Arlen Spector calls himself "Jimmy"?  I feel like Donny in The Big Lebowski:  Yeah, what is going on, Walter?  Shut the fuck up, Donny.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 01:27 PM (ajXGd)

163

I should mention I am Canadian

Should've started with that.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at April 29, 2009 01:28 PM (ztNrs)

164 So, Dr. Walter Massey, President of Morrehouse College is now the new Chairman of the Board of BOFA.  Yesterday Larry Kudlow said that Vik's ace in the hole was that he was once again voted to the board and is still the CEO.  Does this mean that Ken could end up as another Wagonner?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 01:29 PM (zplc6)

165 I think I have a good allegory. I was with 80 or so Midshipmen, and we found ourselves running out into 35 degree weather. Why? We were cold. Still perplexed? We had just landed in a C-130 after 4 hours of flight, which had, horrible cargo compartment heating, 35 degrees was warm. Moral of the story, warm or cool is only relative to where you are at now.
So it is with political spectrum. Since the days of Clinton, the Ds have made a steady march to the west with the media following close in tow. In the interim, the Rs in total have also moved to the left, but not nearly as far. So where we are left at is a problem of relative dimension in respect to Republican differences with the MSM and the Democrats. Like Einstein would say, there is no frame of reference inherently more important than any other. We may have ALL moved to the left some in terms of abolute position. But from the frame of reference of the Ds and the MSM the Republicans moved to the right. In this case the 2/3rds majority rules American opinion, and now we have "become" too conservative to be taken seriously, by failing to become sufficiently liberal.
As far as Spector; I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I don't mind big tent theory for the purpose of political expediency. I don't like Rs throwing the rest of their party or conservatism under the bus to gain sweet sweet MSM lovin'. And any so called Republican who thought the stimulus was acceptable enough to vote for, is either
A Not sufficiently conservative to be a Republican. or
B A political hack who puts their own career before the future of America.

One deserves to be drummed out of the party, the other, Dante wrote about the only acceptable punishment for such traitors.

Posted by: Michael C Keehn at April 29, 2009 01:30 PM (0q2P7)

166

Smart as hell, funny, profane, fairly conservative even, but the Danegold you pay for pub - warbloggin' - is too dear for me. 

Danegeld?  Here?  I think not.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 01:31 PM (ajXGd)

167 "Should've started with that."

Pithy, you can do better.  Besides, you have no problem with twenty million illegal latinos, so it logically follows you're cool with Canadians too...unless you're some kinda leukophobic.

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 01:33 PM (y+fiP)

168 Hey, I thought this was just some stupid blog.  I didn't realize we were talking about real, serious issues.  I may have to go back and re-read all my posts.  OMG, I may have screwed up the whole space-time continuum thingy.

Posted by: KidRock at April 29, 2009 01:34 PM (+sBB4)

169 This new Moby is fuckin' gold.

Posted by: Waterhouse at April 29, 2009 01:34 PM (9Dw9r)

170 Two excellent posts in a row Ace. You are having a very good day.


Posted by: Rocks at April 29, 2009 01:36 PM (3RHzM)

171 "168 Hey, I thought this was just some stupid blog.  I didn't realize we were talking about real, serious issues.  I may have to go back and re-read all my posts.  OMG, I may have screwed up the whole space-time continuum thingy.

Posted by: KidRock at April 29, 2009 06:34 PM (+sBB4)"

you are so LOST

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 01:36 PM (zplc6)

172 I love Canadians who tell us we sold out our country.

Posted by: Attila (Pillage Idiot) at April 29, 2009 01:37 PM (wwy6Z)

173 Besides, you have no problem with twenty million illegal latinos, so it logically follows you're cool with Canadians too...unless you're some kinda leukophobic.

Canadians are just ethnics, y'see.  Filthy plaid-wearing, hockey playing, baby eaters.

Posted by: nickless at April 29, 2009 01:37 PM (MMC8r)

174

Besides, you have no problem with twenty million illegal latinos...

Say what, now?

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at April 29, 2009 01:38 PM (ztNrs)

175 Dr. Walter Massey, President of Morehouse College, now Chairman of BofA

Member of The Bilderberg Group?

Phyllis Schlafly's A Choice, Not an Echo which suggested a conspiracy theory in which secret control by elitist intellectuals dominated by members of the Bilderberger group, whose policies would pave the way for global communist conquest

Posted by: ConspiracyMan at April 29, 2009 01:40 PM (+sBB4)

176 Republicans have moved too far to the right? Seriously

You need some perspective.  Most of today's Republicans would have been Democrats 40 years ago.

Posted by: trainer at April 29, 2009 01:41 PM (yCWYQ)

177 142

I just love a good positive post like that.   About how tough it is, but what can be done.

Posted by: sis at April 29, 2009 01:41 PM (hm0CN)

178 Obama just got his $3.7 Trillion dollar budget. Think on that for a moment. $3.7 Trillion. It is mathematically impossible to pay for that just by raising taxes on the rich whatever that means. Taxes are going up across the board. In the middle of a recession. Anybody notice the report on the first quarter economy today? Worst 2 quarters in a row in decades. Carville may be a snarly fuck but he's nobodies fool. It's always the economy, stupid. Let's not forget, before the financial meltdown, McCain was actually winning the race. We are going to be printing money like it's going out of style soon, because it will be going out of style. 3 things are now certain in life, death, taxes and surging inflation. Everyone accept those who live off the government will be hurting worse thanks to Obama's policies and that is assured. There are more of us than there are of them. We are still in the prolonged tongue bath honeymoon period. All Obama is doing is photo ops, speechifying and handing out treats to special interest groups. Soon, the bills will be coming due. Taxes, inflation to say nothing of what will happen with the banks and the automotive industry Obama seems determined to run as part of his personal domain. Iraq is in better shape today, no thanks to Obama, but he is still capable of fucking it up. And Pakistan is going to make Iraq look like a cakewalk. And there is a black swan out there, there always is, waiting to take a dump right on Obama's head. Patience. The party doesn't need to change it's principles. Just the opposite. It needs to stand on those principles now more than ever. If you really have the courage of your convictions, if you really believe that liberalism is a failed philosophy, hell, if you can do basic math, you will know that Obama is going to come crashing back to earth faster than he blasted into orbit.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 01:42 PM (VW9/y)

179

Getting $180K /year to put on a suit every morning and having a staff do all the paperwork to implement your plans of raping taxpayers is a tough gig to give up.

What other job could you find to commit fraud and never have to worry about prosecution?

I mean besides working for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, the Treasury, the Federal Reserve.....
wait, this list is getting long.

Yes.  Specter could have been a partner at a law firm (5 hours of work, tops) and been on a couple of corporate boards taking down more than Senator salary.

Look, JPod had a thesis: "The GOP is going the wrong way."  This was an event on which he could try to hang it, despite the fact that it doesn't support the thesis.

Posted by: AmishDude at April 29, 2009 01:42 PM (T0NGe)

180 I agree that we can't make the perfect the enemy of the good, but there's got to be a good out there first before we can start making that argument. And right now? That good isn't out there in the GOP leadership. I'm for more of a purge than Ace - let the heads roll.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at April 29, 2009 01:43 PM (PQY7w)

181 OT: The Dems just rammed through Obama's budget without a single Republican in either house of congress and it includes reconciliation to enable socialized medicine to pass with 51 Senate votes. Folks, we are done. It's no joke. After the next couple years it is going to take extreme measures to bring back America in any sense of what she once was, if it can be done at all. I'll leave it at that. I feel incredible sadness for our children.

Posted by: SanIam at April 29, 2009 01:45 PM (uwn4a)

182 I say we hold him fast and pour molten gold down his traitorous throat.

Posted by: torabora at April 29, 2009 01:46 PM (yPznK)

183

Arlen Spector calls himself "Jimmy"? 

Someone call 911. I just seriously injured myself laughing.

Posted by: jaleach at April 29, 2009 01:46 PM (gHrZU)

184

cool with Canadians ...

If Brodeur helps Canada to win another gold medal in men's hockey, after that pathetic performance in the last 100 seconds of yesterday's game, I will no longer be cool with ...

... leukophobic ...

(never mind.)

Posted by: FireHorse at April 29, 2009 01:46 PM (w9FHT)

185 The democrats won the presidency and greater majorities in congress by lurching hard left, away from the center.

Yet the advice for republicans is to go to the center. 

Bull!

Posted by: Village Idiot at April 29, 2009 01:47 PM (KuHTm)

186
Adriana Lima is cool with me. Soft Conservatives sicken me, too. Especially when they're so soft they bend to the left with just the slightest push.

Wait.

You're a chick, right?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 01:53 PM (ick02)

187 Adriana Lima:
Can you please link an example of a good conservative blog?

ps: if you really are adriana lima, i take back the "you are an idiot comment".  in that case, i am sure that you are an extremely bright and intelligent woman, and i'm wondering if we can go out for a drink sometime.

Posted by: dan-O at April 29, 2009 01:54 PM (teb/C)

188
Adriana Lima, is this you?

warning: profanity! (and other stuff)

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 01:55 PM (ick02)

189

Hey, Adriana! Is your name really Richard Warman?

Do me a favour any minders here, like Gabe, see if this moby tool's ISP (or some other means of identifying location) is coming from Ottawa.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2009 01:59 PM (MGu62)

190 This new Moby is fuckin' gold.

If by fuckin' gold, you mean batshit crazy...

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at April 29, 2009 01:59 PM (PMGbu)

191

"JS on April 29, 2009 at 4:33 PM On the other hand…And I’ve been gaming this for the past 24…Trying to explain to myself the secrecy, the lack of anyone in the White House with specific information, the confusion after the event took place, Obama’s alleged being furious, and the complete lack of detail following the event…things that make you go Hmmmm? What if this flight over Manhattan was a ferret flight? What if they had specific chatter to indicate AQ or other group was going to set up in Manhattan and start pinging on commercial air traffic in or out of the major three airports? I mean, information that was solid…except for the last few elements…size, location, time…that sort of operational detail?Rather than allow one or two commercial aircraft to plummet into the Hudson with all souls on board, let’s give them a large, recognizable, slow moving target instead…one that had onboard counter-missile systems, and had an F-16 escort to wing in and hit any attackers as they prepared to get a shot off or had actually fired, giving the F-16’s a clear vector back to the firing position?Ok…speculation….pure speculation…just being a cow…ruminating here…nothing more.But, the implications of that…and the need for the utmost secrecy…yet informing local law enforcement and the FAA…law enforcement to react on the ground should the horrible take place…and the FAA to subtly steer commercial and private aircraft out of the zone?So…how ’bout them Mets, this year?coldwarrior on April 29, 2009 "  (from the comments at HOT AIR)  Is this even plausible?  Isn't the airspace over NYC highly restricted like in DC?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 01:59 PM (zplc6)

192

After the next couple years it is going to take extreme measures to bring back America in any sense of what she once was, if it can be done at all.

Right! But when you say "extreme measures" you seem like you're implying "impossible." We've had worse than this. (James Buchanan?)

When things are bleak, America perseveres. We're a resilient lot, able to endure and adapt and triumph. When things work, we improve them. When things break, we replace them with better things. That's what we do. That's who we are. I don't want the America that she once was; I want an America that's better than she's ever been.

So with respect, 181, channel that sadness you're feeling into something useful.

Posted by: FireHorse at April 29, 2009 02:00 PM (w9FHT)

Posted by: Saluki at April 29, 2009 02:02 PM (24nQJ)

194 WTF! Now FOX is airing the TOTUS speech!?!?! So much for the regular Lie to Me. Now they are showing Lie to Me: White House Live.

eff that.

Posted by: Saluki at April 29, 2009 02:03 PM (24nQJ)

195

See you all later. (And your youtube link doesn't work, D-ling.)

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2009 02:04 PM (MGu62)

196 Those lights are creepy

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:05 PM (zplc6)

197 When we're not being extremists, we're being hypocrites.

Posted by: JohnJ at April 29, 2009 02:05 PM (SWyxd)

198 190

Wow, if you're right, good investimigatin'.  If not, still a good start's a start.

Posted by: sis at April 29, 2009 02:05 PM (hm0CN)

199 So now the Donks have - a vote they can't count on. Welcome to it. Enjoy.

Republicans: Take a break for about a year, guys. It's gonna happen regardless of how much we scream in protest. So lay back, think of England, and prepare. We ARE going to have to try and fix this TARFU the Donks are cooking up.

Posted by: mojo at April 29, 2009 02:06 PM (g1cNf)

200 It bears pointing out that today's NRO's editorial disagrees with J. Pod, much to the dismay of some Mobys I'm sure.

"Those who attribute [Spector's] defection to the rise of social conservatism are deluding themselves. It is not as though he has been a reliable vote for any other type of conservatism. He has stood apart from the mainstream of his party on welfare reform, trade, taxes, affirmative action, judicial appointments, tort reform, and national-security law. The issue that finally caused an irreparable breach with Republicans was the stimulus bill."

Posted by: Chimney Sweep #8 at April 29, 2009 02:06 PM (kIjlp)

201
Remeber that other kooky kanadian CHRISTOPH?


Posted by: D-lingwing Plover at April 29, 2009 02:07 PM (ick02)

202 Am sad you guys aren't live blogging Obama's 100 lies about 100 days conferencepalooza. The snark would have been appreciated. There is just something about his voice that I find incredibly hard to listen to, ums aside, and would have loved the beer-goggle filter you guys provide. But I totally get you can't blog every primetime conf, I mean he has so many of them, and I presume you guys all have lives.

Posted by: Liz Lemon at April 29, 2009 02:08 PM (lSuMX)

203 "Can you please link an example of a good conservative blog?"

Well I had one, until the cops started hassling me (I'm not kidding, or on crack).  Steve Sailer is God IMHO.  Most blogs in the Steveosphere are worth a read.  The GNXP lads are good.  Rod Dreher gives me that rare "this guy's more conservative than I am" vibe sometimes.  Fred On Everything was good, he just retired his blog though.  Can't think of any others.  Oh, 4chan, not a blog but about the only place a guy like me can cut loose, it's heaven.

You need to understand a guy in my country just served 9 months in prison for criticizing multiculturalism on the internet (see R. vs. Winnicki), so I'm a little chuffed.  It's coming to your country too, I think, and soon.

You may now commence your accusations that I am a Nazi, just be original FFS, OK?

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 02:09 PM (y+fiP)

204 Dear Leader is speaking now.  He's talking about the pig flu.  If I hear one more government asshole tell me that I need to wash my hands, cover my nose and mouth when I sneeze, etc. like it's come down from Mt. Olympus,  I'm gonna scream.  We all had mothers, you tool.  They pretty much covered this one.

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:10 PM (fWF4Q)

205 Why did the chick from AP waste her question?  And why is she wearing her bathrobe?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:10 PM (zplc6)

206 "Remeber that other kooky kanadian CHRISTOPH?"

I might know that guy.  Whiny concern troll?  Yeah, he's not liked up here either.

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 02:10 PM (y+fiP)

207 Did he just give bush credit for something bush did right?

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:11 PM (uU+Ss)

208 Every single person saying "the GOP screwed up" or that we are "driving moderates from the party" is an IDIOT.

The NRSCC gave Specter more than his share of support in '04, and both Bush and Santorum campaigned actively for him.  There was no desertion of Specter by the DC party - witness Lindsey Graham's little hissy-fit at losing him.

ALL that happened is Specter pissed off the base to the point he was so vulnerable to a primary challenge it's already evident, over a year away, he could not win.

Now, to all the whiny weasels, I demand:  WHAT EXACTLY could the "party" do to have kept Specter in the fold?  Outlaw primary challenges?  Assassinate Toomey and any other conservative who DARES challenge an incumbent?

BE SPECIFIC in telling me what could have been done in this case, or admit you're a complete idiot.  Galen, J-Pod, Frum, whoever.

Fucking morons, every damned one of them.

Posted by: Adjoran at April 29, 2009 02:11 PM (AO39X)

209 "z208 Did he just give bush credit for something bush did right?

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 07:11 PM (uU+Ss)"

Yes he did but only cause he had to if he was going to pat himself and his fellow dems on the back for being on t he committee.

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:12 PM (zplc6)

210

The snark would have been appreciated.

Snark?? Our president is apparently holding a press conference to announce that he's been in office for 100 days. Does this need sarcasm?

Posted by: FireHorse at April 29, 2009 02:12 PM (w9FHT)

211 DAMMIT. He did it again!  I know I should wash my f-ing hands, moron!  Tell me how you're going to pay for your socialism...

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:12 PM (fWF4Q)

212
Rod Dreher and 4chan...

hmmm, okay

Posted by: D-lingwing Plover at April 29, 2009 02:13 PM (ick02)

213 Remeber that other kooky kanadian CHRISTOPH?

I actually kinda liked Christoph, except that he was unable to discuss christianity without getting obnoxious.

Posted by: Mtenloch at April 29, 2009 02:15 PM (z1Jlf)

214 This might not come as a revelation to some of you, but I don't think Dear Leader of the Teleprompter is all that bright.

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:15 PM (fWF4Q)

215

Well, I just caught the first few minutes of what's on Fox:  "Lie to Me" looks kind of interesting. 

At any rate, based on the first commercial break, here are the sponsors we should patronize:

Ford, Visa, McDonalds (mmm, McGriddles), & Wolverine. 

 

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at April 29, 2009 02:16 PM (n2eCn)

216

Republicans: Take a break for about a year, guys. It's gonna happen regardless of how much we scream in protest. So lay back, think of England, and prepare. We ARE going to have to try and fix this TARFU the Donks are cooking up.

That's what I'm thinking.  And I hate every minute of it.  It's scary.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:17 PM (ajXGd)

217 #140 Kratos; That better not be a Broadway tune. Was that a Broadway tune? Homo!

Posted by: the moby's moby at April 29, 2009 02:18 PM (O8wNF)

218 Ombudsman, he's an effing moron.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:18 PM (ajXGd)

219 Churchill?  This guy is referencing Churchill?

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:18 PM (uU+Ss)

220

Podhoretz is the quintessential Washington-focused Republican Party hack, he's everything that's wrong with the "Conservative" movement.

Fuck 100% agreement, but fuck him too.

Posted by: MlR at April 29, 2009 02:19 PM (0vdx6)

221 Fox affiliate in L.A. is showing Bami. Where are those of you who are getting real programming?

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:19 PM (KQBGs)

222 You may now commence your accusations that I am a Nazi, just be original FFS, OK?

Dude justs insist on himself.

Posted by: toby928 at April 29, 2009 02:19 PM (PD1tk)

223

I actually kinda liked Christoph, except that he was unable to discuss christianity without getting obnoxious.

And demand that we listen to him on how to vote in our country.  I've got a massive problem when the eurotrash tells us how we should vote.  I've got just as much of a problem when conservative foreigners do the same.

Posted by: buzzion at April 29, 2009 02:19 PM (lCm/E)

224
Christoph had his good points and he was more of a supporter of Sarah Palin than a lot of the douchebags in the GOP.

He was also a pain in the ass troll who liked to constantly throw shots at Christianity.

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:20 PM (ick02)

225 Ombudsman, he's an effing moron.

Actually, that was my feeble attempt sarcasm. He's indeed an effing moron, and it's becoming more abundantly clear every day.  Buyers' remorse, anyone?

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:21 PM (fWF4Q)

226 I like the moby's moby better than the original.   On some occasions, the sequel is superior.   (Proof of the first moby's eugenics theory though)

Another thread jacked.

GN

Posted by: sis at April 29, 2009 02:21 PM (hm0CN)

227 Did I miss anything? I was off frequenting those scintillating Peruvian blogs that I post at. Even though I'm American I really like to keep up on the latest in llama politics. Honestly, why any non-resident foreigner (aside from possibly a member of the armed services from an allied nation who serves side-by-side with Americans) would bother hanging out at a U.S. political blog is beyond me.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:21 PM (KQBGs)

228
Boston's FOX is airing Lie To Me.


Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:21 PM (ick02)

229 I know.  But!  He's a narcissistic moron!

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:22 PM (ajXGd)

230 What a fucking dishonest prick. We could have gotten the same information through other means even though we couldn't. This is the same bullshit he said when he was proved flat wrong about the surge, we could have accomplished the same thing in some other unnamed mysterious ways. Damn, I really despise him.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 02:23 PM (VW9/y)

231 Dude, really, did you read the memo's and did Enhanced Interogation save lives? 

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:23 PM (uU+Ss)

232

I've got a massive problem when the eurotrash tells us how we should vote.

I respond by mentioning how easy our citizenship test is.

(If they say they don't intend to move here, my attitude turns to then shaddup.)

Posted by: FireHorse at April 29, 2009 02:23 PM (w9FHT)

233
The link didn't work? Shit.

link to Adriana Lima

no, not really

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:24 PM (ick02)

234 St. Louis is only airing TOTUS. fuck fuck fuck. i'm pissed at Fox now. i cant even capitalize i'm so pissed.

Posted by: Saluki at April 29, 2009 02:24 PM (24nQJ)

235 Damn, I really despise him. Time to take your dog for a walk by the WH lawn so you can leave another gift, JackStraw.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:25 PM (KQBGs)

236 p aaa kiss stan not Pa key ston

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:25 PM (zplc6)

237 Jimmy won't stand for this shit, even if he is a Democrat.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:26 PM (ajXGd)

238 Notice how multicultural the Dear Leader is?  Very careful to pronounce it PAKH-EE-STAN.  About 16 times in one answer.  

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:26 PM (fWF4Q)

239 >>Time to take your dog for a walk by the WH lawn so you can leave another gift, JackStraw Hell no. That one will be all me.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 02:26 PM (VW9/y)

240
Nobody in the press is even a little bit curious about how Obama calculates 'created or saved' jobs?


Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:26 PM (ick02)

241 I disagree about people from other countries having positions on US policy.  We are America, we should actually take pride in the fact that we are so influential in all things, and we are that influential, and decisions that we as a nation make can have effects on their policy decisions. 

But they should be respectful of the fact that it's OUR country, and while we thank you for the input, they should get back to sitting at the little kids table.

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:27 PM (uU+Ss)

242 Hell no. That one will be all me. Sweet. Let me know if you need my special Chile con Prunes recipe so you can be properly "prepared."

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:27 PM (KQBGs)

243 so he wouldn't "guarantee" that Pakistan's nukes were safe?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:27 PM (zplc6)

244 242 I disagree about people from other countries having positions on US policy. There was an Aussie either here or at Hot Air who was helpful/interesting, but he always led every comment with "from an Australian's perspective" and he brought a unique perspective from a geopolitical standpoint.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:29 PM (KQBGs)

245 "I think very highly of Arlen Specter"   In fact, his ass tastes yummy.  Keep him, TOTUS. He's all yours.

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:30 PM (fWF4Q)

246 the life position is not terribly unpopular (55-45 against, or thereabouts) and further the life position mints more votes than the choice position. (That would change if general access to abortion were actually restricted, but that's not likely to happen... well, ever, it looks like.)
-Ace

I sure am glad Abraham Lincoln's mind didn't work like this, calculating whether or not black people had a basic human right to freedom as a matter of poll numbers, whether or not they deserved to be free being dependent on what the majority of white people did or didn't want, how many votes it might "mint" him.

Abortion is murder--and murder of the worst kind:  The victim is not an enemy attacker but an innocent child; and not just any innocent child, but one's OWN child; and not even just one's own child, but one's own child when s/he is at a stage of life where s/he is TOTALLY dependent on his/her mother. It is not only murder but the worst imaginable BETRAYAL. A good case can be made that our lack of enthusiasm for summoning the will to abolish child-murder is both an effect and a cause of our nation's steady decline in moral will---so much so that we lack even the will to defend ourselves against Muslims who wish to do to ALL of us what we are so casually doing to our own children in the womb.

I think that deep down, we know that with one in three children being killed before birth, murder now lies at the very heart of our nation, as slavery once did. Deep down, we know that our nation is rotting from the inside, in its very heart and spirit, and that what we have now is not, in an objective sense, as WORTH defending as it once was.

 I am NOT saying we shouldn't defend ourselves; of course we should. Jihadism is demonic. I'm just saying that our national will is being sapped, with most people, such as yourself, not even being aware of the reason why.

Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at April 29, 2009 02:30 PM (Oh2SG)

247 Is he kidding.  He has a rubber stamp government.  If he doesn't get everything he wants now, then does it reflect badly on him?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:31 PM (zplc6)

248 "genuine?"

"I Won?"

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:31 PM (uU+Ss)

249 do we have to redefine everything?  Now, bi partisanship.

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:32 PM (zplc6)

250 Democratic Definition:  Bipartisanship (n)- Republicans throwing skirts over their heads, lying back, and thinking of England while the Dear Leader has his way.

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:33 PM (fWF4Q)

251

I sure am glad Abraham Lincoln's mind didn't work like this, calculating whether or not black people had a basic human right to freedom as a matter of poll numbers, whether or not they deserved to be free being dependent on what the majority of white people did or didn't want, how many...

I'm sure glad Honest Abe didn't get so runon long winded.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:34 PM (ajXGd)

252 Oh, God. Here comes the "safe, legal, and rare" bullshit.

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:36 PM (fWF4Q)

253 I see, women are in a better position to make a decision on abortion than government but government is in a better position to make decisions about our lives on everything else. What an intellect.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 02:36 PM (VW9/y)

254

I think that deep down, we know that with one in three children being killed before birth, murder now lies at the very heart of our nation, as slavery once did. Deep down, we know that our nation is rotting from the inside, in its very heart and spirit, and that what we have now is not, in an objective sense, as WORTH defending as it once was.

Kath, you're a good Moby.  Well.  Not so good.  I spotted you.  That sux for you.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:37 PM (ajXGd)

255 "From where I started in this race."

The race is over, you won, you reminded the republicans of that.

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:38 PM (uU+Ss)

256 The "typical president"?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:39 PM (zplc6)

257 You should get together with Jimmy.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:39 PM (ajXGd)

258 Now he's taking a Madlib's quiz.

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:39 PM (uU+Ss)

259 Kathy, Doing a calculation on whether or not an issue should be part of a national party platform based on how it effects the overall support for the party seems appropriate to me. We can't effect change if we have no power as a party. (Of course, Ace was saying that the life position is not hurting the GOP, so I don't think he's advocating dropping it.) I'm pro-life, but I would have had no problem voting for Rudy, who is pro-choice but not nearly as pro-abortion as the jerk we got stuck with, this past cycle. I can still work through the Natl Right to Life groups to effect change. As long as the GOP doesn't become pro-choice it is ok with me if they shift the emphasis in the platform towards fiscal responsibility and national security.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:39 PM (KQBGs)

260

There was an Aussie either here or at Hot Air who was helpful/interesting, but he always led every comment with "from an Australian's perspective" and he brought a unique perspective from a geopolitical standpoint.

Yeah perspective and input I don't mind.  That wasn't Christoph's method.  His was "do as I say or you're doomed" style politics.  Also there was his demanding and whining for Ace to put up a thread for the Canadian elections so he could talk about them.

Posted by: buzzion at April 29, 2009 02:40 PM (lCm/E)

261 I see, women are in a better position to make a decision on abortion than government but government is in a better position to make decisions about our lives on everything else.

Word.    Abortion:  the only healthcare decision you'll get to make.

Posted by: toby928 at April 29, 2009 02:40 PM (PD1tk)

262 troubled cause the kids won't behave, they keep wanting to play their political games.

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:40 PM (zplc6)

263

Pubs can win if they drop social issues from platform, take more libertarian, 'hands off' position

(did I say that out loud?)

Posted by: Jones at April 29, 2009 06:02 PM (KOkrW)

Yeah -- losing the culture war made America such a better place.

Posted by: Tinian at April 29, 2009 06:13 PM (70sTG)

 

 

...and fighting it has brought America to a Democrat supermajority. So that was the hill we died on.

Posted by: Jones at April 29, 2009 02:40 PM (KOkrW)

264 AndyCanuck sez:  "Hey, Adriana! Is your name really Richard Warman?

Do me a favour any minders here, like Gabe, see if this moby tool's ISP (or some other means of identifying location) is coming from Ottawa."

This is the country to which I am supposed to give my loyality, folks, and Andy is what passes for a conservative up here.  You can imagine what the Liberals are like up here if the conservatives want to cyberstalk guys like me.

Yes Andy.  I'm really Richard Warman, that's why I think Mark Steyn is a flaaaaaaming liberal and why Steve Sailer and Rod Dreher are good bloggers, you've got me pegged.


Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 02:40 PM (y+fiP)

265 Nobody in the press is even a little bit curious about how Obama calculates 'created or saved' jobs?

87% of government jobs are made up on the spot.  We're hiring!

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at April 29, 2009 02:42 PM (n2eCn)

266 >>You can imagine what the Liberals are like up here if the conservatives want to cyberstalk guys like me. Guys, Adrianna? Maybe it's an American thing but most American women don't refer to themselves as a guy.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 02:44 PM (VW9/y)

267

I'm really Richard Warman, that's why I think Mark Steyn is a flaaaaaaming liberal and why Steve Sailer and Rod Dreher are good bloggers, you've got me pegged.

Judging from the runon and comma splice, I'd say you, Kath, and Jimmy are all part of the same cadre.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:45 PM (ajXGd)

268 The New York Times, asking question at a 3rd grade level.

Posted by: ricky at April 29, 2009 02:45 PM (muUqs)

269 JackStraw, It was a typo. Substitute "u" with an "a."

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:45 PM (KQBGs)

270 It's not the immigration system that is broken Mr. President, it's the Borders that are broken.

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:45 PM (uU+Ss)

271 Geez, this thread is gettin' funny.  Unnecessarily so.  Which makes it even better.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:46 PM (ajXGd)

272 271 It's not the immigration system that is broken Mr. President, it's the Borders that are broken. True dat. The ones in my area don't even carry DVDs any longer. Nice books though.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:46 PM (KQBGs)

273
Kathy from Kansas is not a moby.

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:47 PM (ick02)

274

It's not the immigration system that is broken Mr. President, it's the Borders that are broken

They're not keeping Mark Levin's book in stock!

Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at April 29, 2009 02:47 PM (n2eCn)

275 I'm putting in a call to my Senator right now, Jimmy.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:47 PM (ajXGd)

276 and fighting it has brought America to a Democrat supermajority. So that was the hill we died on. Posted by: Jones at April 29, 2009 07:40 PM (KOkrW)

Really....how did Republicans manage to win the white house and a majority in congress then? If so con issues were such a deal breaker for the public why did Republicans start losing only in the past few years? And why did the public in virtually every poll taken place national security and the economy way above these issues in importance? We have a democratic supermajority because the Republicans spend so much time and money acting like Democrats. Why vote for pseudo democrats when there are plenty of real ones?

Posted by: Rocks at April 29, 2009 02:50 PM (3RHzM)

277 Stephen Green:

5:44PM I will buy a very strong drink for the first person who can point to just one question/answer tonight that was worthy of a primetime press conference.

Good point, and I got nothing.

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:50 PM (uU+Ss)

278

You know, it's almost like neo-cons (the original kind, not the newer catchall phrase for 'mean people we in the media don't like) are actually liberal Democrats who are in favor of a strong US foreign policy.

Who knew?

The new generation often fits that mold. The older generation was actually a bunch of original thinkers. William Kristol and "JPod" are products of nepotism and don't have half the brains of their fathers.

Posted by: MlR at April 29, 2009 02:50 PM (0vdx6)

279

Kathy from Kansas is not a moby.

Okay, but going on a tirade like that here and now makes me uncomfortable.  But I believe you.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:50 PM (ajXGd)

280 Question is:  Will Jimmy believe you?

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 02:51 PM (ajXGd)

281
bottom-up economic growth?

Since when do non-earners and poverty-level earners create jobs?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:51 PM (ick02)

282 Did he just say "spread the wealth around" again?

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:52 PM (fWF4Q)

283
Kathy is obviously a strong opponent to killing unborn babies. I don't have a problem with that.


Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:53 PM (ick02)

284 This guy is a socialist.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:53 PM (KQBGs)

285 Laughs at "I got two wars to run already."

Yeahp, your misery at having to actually work while feeding your ego is just hilarious.

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:54 PM (uU+Ss)

286
I love this: Obama: I don't want to run banks. I don't want to run car companies.

Yet he's doing everything he can to run the banks and GM and Chrysler.

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:55 PM (ick02)

287 Has any president, ever, criticized his predecessor more than this piece of shit does? What a gutless coward.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 02:55 PM (VW9/y)

288 Wow, is this guy a leader or what? “That wasn’t me,” President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One. Too bad for him he was in Senate when his party was writing these budgets the past 2 years. This clown is an embarrassment to our republic.

Posted by: Jay at April 29, 2009 02:55 PM (iy1Xt)

289
Obama: I didn't agree with TARP but I think it was necessary.

Wait. What?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:55 PM (ick02)

290 Adriana Lima, you're a guy?  WTF?  Why are you so against the ethnics and gays when you have the name of a Peurto Rican tranny?

Posted by: fozzy at April 29, 2009 02:56 PM (ccEuN)

291 Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 07:53 PM (ick02) I think the post was somewhat confusing as it appeared to be jumping all over Ace for criticizing the pro-life plank when he didn't actually do that. There've been some other odd posts on this thread, though. With CJ throwing down the gauntlet and saying how hateful AoSHQ has become I guess we're somewhat protective.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:56 PM (KQBGs)

292 Ford (the company that isn't socialized) has a rather popular hybrid.

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 02:56 PM (uU+Ss)

293 How come he is saying one thing and then doing another?  What am I mssing here?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 02:57 PM (zplc6)

294  
hahahaha: I don't think we should micro-manage.

Yet he's dictating to GM exactly what they should build and exactly how much the execs can be paid.

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:57 PM (ick02)

295 "We don't enjoy meddling in the Private Sector"  That's hysterical.  That's all he's done.  How can he say stuff like that with a straight face?.

Posted by: Ombudsman at April 29, 2009 02:58 PM (fWF4Q)

296 295 hahahaha: I don't think we should micro-manage. Based on the quality of his management skills as exemplified by 100 days of gaffes and blunders, I agree. Does he get a "reset" button on Day 101?

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:58 PM (KQBGs)

297 So, is there going to be a live thread for "Die Feier der vergeblich verrückt Dieb-König"?

Posted by: Inspector Asshole at April 29, 2009 02:59 PM (EnNiL)

298 >>Yet he's dictating to GM exactly what they should build and exactly how much the execs can be paid. Volkswagen. Socialist. Google.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 02:59 PM (VW9/y)

299
hahahaha, now he's laughing at the notion that he wants to grow government and meddle in the private sector.

Yet he's expanding government by leaps and bounds and meddling in the private sector!!!

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 02:59 PM (ick02)

300 How can he say stuff like that with a straight face? The same way Polly the Parrot can.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 02:59 PM (KQBGs)

301 Volkswagen. Socialist. Google. OK, I admit I bought a VW last year (EOS). Does that make me a Nazi or a Socialist?

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 03:01 PM (KQBGs)

302 How come he is saying one thing and then doing another?  What am I mssing here?

Every previous second of Obama's career. The sad thing is the sycophantic mouth-breathers in Odumbfuck's lapdog press corps are so intellectually bankrupt they can't even think to call this asshole on his repeated lies, strawmen, and airy bullshit rhetoric.

Posted by: Waterhouse at April 29, 2009 03:02 PM (9Dw9r)

303 Wait, he quoted churchhill.  Wasn't someone quoting churchill on here today?  was he on this blog today?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 03:02 PM (zplc6)

304 I tuned into CBS about a minute too early and caught Katie Couric fallating Ann Dunham's mistake along with Bob Schieffer fighting for a drop or two; since when did "Perky" translate into "Wide Load"?

Posted by: Captain Hate at April 29, 2009 03:02 PM (dYNX5)

305
it makes you a Farvenügen


Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 03:02 PM (ick02)

306 By the way, I'm wondering if Slick Willy is watching this stupefying performance and wishing he could lie with such brazen abandon and never be called on it like NOTUS.

Posted by: Jay at April 29, 2009 03:03 PM (iy1Xt)

307 Does he get a "reset" button on Day 101?

Nope, he gets an "overcharge" button. Americans get the bill.

Posted by: Waterhouse at April 29, 2009 03:03 PM (9Dw9r)

308 Messiah's voting "present" again.

In the end, there will be only... TOTUS.

Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at April 29, 2009 03:03 PM (otlXg)

309 He voted for a bill he couldn't be bothered to read.   That is 0% Duty under his Oath of Office.  They got a majority with 0% sense of Duty to their Oaths.   I will vote for people who actually want to DO their jobs.  They are volunteering for it, after all, would it be too much to expect that they actually do the thing they ASKED us to elect them to do?

Posted by: ajacksonian at April 29, 2009 03:03 PM (oy1lQ)

310 fallating == fellating

Posted by: Captain Hate at April 29, 2009 03:03 PM (dYNX5)

311 Specter was a Democrat, remained one while running as a Republican, then went back and rejoined his party. 

Let us be perfectly clear, it is our duty to oppose the majority party where they are wrong, and to remind everyone, continuously, that the majority owns this mess absolutely.

Posted by: MarkD at April 29, 2009 03:04 PM (VI20d)

312 that's interesting O'Reilly just pointed out that he always takes 13 questions?  Is that true?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 03:04 PM (zplc6)

313 311 fallating == fellating Cum on, this is AoSHQ, we all knew what you meant.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 03:05 PM (KQBGs)

314
he's going to sign a $3.4 TRILLION budget and he says he wants a "lean" government?



Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 03:06 PM (ick02)

315 315 he's going to sign a $3.4 TRILLION budget and he says he wants a "lean" government? As long as it leans left. Way left.

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 03:07 PM (KQBGs)

316 Cum on, this is AoSHQ, we all knew what you meant.

Twat are you talking about?

Posted by: toby928 at April 29, 2009 03:07 PM (PD1tk)

317 On a more important note, this is further proof that Obama hates Zach Braff, even though Braff is a typical Hollywood Obot.

Scrubs starts airing new episodes on Tuesdays. Obama schedules a bunch of nation addresses on Tuesdays. Scrubs switches to Wednesdays. Obama airs a pointless "Holy shit, I've held a job for 100 days" conference on a Wednesday.

Posted by: Waterhouse at April 29, 2009 03:07 PM (9Dw9r)

318 >>OK, I admit I bought a VW last year (EOS). Does that make me a Nazi or a Socialist? Neither. They make a great car. But it's a pretty interesting parallel, no?

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 03:07 PM (VW9/y)

319
I enjoyed Dick Morris' perspective in his piece, today.

But as a rule, Dick Morris' predictions are always wrong.


Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 03:08 PM (ick02)

320 Ever since Catty Couric did what she did to Sarah Palin, have made it a point to turn her off and never put her on again.   If they took a poll, they would find out that many women, dems reppubs and independents are doing the same thing.  Females don't like females who are traitors to their gender.

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 03:08 PM (zplc6)

321

Those complaining about Fox airing it instead of Lie to Me, have ya'll forgotten about that whole time zone thing? The Very Barry Variety Hour is airing during East Coast prime time.

p.s. 4chan? Eek. Isn't that the group that cyber attacks people for fun?

Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at April 29, 2009 03:08 PM (AJ4xq)

322
As long as it leans left. Way left.

hahaha, clever

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 03:09 PM (ick02)

323 I need some moron advice, please.

Senator Arlen Sphincter will be speaking near my place of employment next week (I think).  Should I get drunk the day before and heckle him (and expose my position to the liberal "intellegentsia") or just ask Senator Sphincter one question?

In the end...I hope there won't be only Senator Sphincters.

Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at April 29, 2009 03:09 PM (otlXg)

324 "Abortion is murder--and murder of the worst kind:  The victim is not an enemy attacker but an innocent child; and not just any innocent child, but one's OWN child; and not even just one's own child, but one's own child when s/he is at a stage of life where s/he is TOTALLY dependent on his/her mother. It is not only murder but the worst imaginable BETRAYAL."

Holy shit, I wish the stuff I say would come out that pointed and true.  Kathy may be a moby, but she's also right.

Posted by: Toad at April 29, 2009 03:10 PM (RZhpS)

325

Let us be perfectly clear, it is our duty to oppose the majority party where they are wrong, and to remind everyone, continuously, that the majority owns this mess absolutely.

Yeah, but would Jimmy come anywhere close to that?

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:10 PM (ajXGd)

326
Mr. Pez-i-dent,

Do you have any more gray hairs on your beautiful head?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 03:10 PM (ick02)

327 Neither. They make a great car. But it's a pretty interesting parallel, no? OMG, you don't think Michelle got such toned arms by raising her arm at an 45 degree angle to our Fearless Reader, do you?!?

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 03:10 PM (KQBGs)

328 Funny.  The socialist president is on the tube talking about lean budgets and a lack of interest in running the private sector.  And on the same day, we have hyperventilating beltway conservatives talking up the need for conservatives to move left and accept more government control and intervention.  Kinda sad that Obama is more cognizant of the American taxpayer's desire for limited government (even if he doesn't believe it himself) than our conservative commentators.

Posted by: bunny boy at April 29, 2009 03:11 PM (YsSn7)

329
Mr Pez-i-dent, how is the new puppy?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 03:11 PM (ick02)

330 I'm just comforted we have such an inquisitive press to dig on the hard questions. You could pick 5 morons from here at random and gotten better questions.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 03:12 PM (VW9/y)

331 You could pick 5 morons from here at random and gotten better questions.

Yeah, but our limbic brains are broken or something.

Posted by: Waterhouse at April 29, 2009 03:14 PM (9Dw9r)

332

D-ling, oh, no someone didn't just waste a prime time news conference question on the puppy, did they? (I'm not watching so not sure if this was a joke or not?)

Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at April 29, 2009 03:14 PM (AJ4xq)

333
And on the same day, we have hyperventilating beltway conservatives talking up the need for conservatives to move left and accept more government control and intervention.  Kinda sad that Obama is more cognizant of the American taxpayer's desire for limited government...

great fucking point, bunny boy!

I'll also add: why are 'conservatives' saying we need to support gay marriage in order to grow the muthafuckin tent when Obama himself won't touch gay marriage with a ten-foot pole?

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 03:15 PM (ick02)

334

Waterhouse?  I'm lovin' readin' you.

That doesn't mean I want sex.  Check with Dave on that.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:15 PM (ajXGd)

335 OK, I admit I bought a VW last year (EOS). Does that make me a Nazi or a Socialist?

Neither. They make a great car. But it's a pretty interesting parallel, no?

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 08:07 PM (VW9/y)


I've always had an irrational dislike for VWs, based on my opinion that most of their owners tend to be snotty cocksuckers (sample selected for that extrapolation being my lowlife neighbors).  Late last year I had one as a loaner and loved the hell out of it.  Opinion changed.

Posted by: Captain Hate at April 29, 2009 03:16 PM (dYNX5)

336  
I was just making up questions that the reporters wanted to ask, PGiS.

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 03:16 PM (ick02)

337 To be fair, Waterhouse, hating Zach Braff is something on which even the most partisan among us can agree.

Posted by: Jack M. at April 29, 2009 03:17 PM (eOEgY)

338 fallating == fellating == Franking, and not in a mailing sense.

Posted by: Fish at April 29, 2009 03:18 PM (CG+cG)

339 "p.s. 4chan? Eek. Isn't that the group that cyber attacks people for fun?"

Well, yeah, but it's not that simple, here's a flowchart explaining the process.


Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 03:18 PM (y+fiP)

340 I enjoyed Dick Morris' perspective in his piece, today.

But as a rule, Dick Morris' predictions are always wrong.

Morris is the Amazing Criswell of politics. His predictions are rarely right, but they're always entertaining.

Posted by: Mtenloch at April 29, 2009 03:19 PM (z1Jlf)

341 Kewell that we have Adriana here, with all these tidbits.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:20 PM (ajXGd)

342

rocks @ #277

You answered your 1st question yourself: that was then, this is now. I see the electorate changing. Changing from one that cares about core principles- The Declaration, The Constitution- to one that cares about 'what's in it for me?' An electorate that doesn't believe there is any 'wrong' social behavior. Abortion, gay marriage- those genies are out of the bottle, never to return. An electorate that asks not what we can do for country, but what country can do for me.

That electorate has installed a Democrat majority. They want a government that gives them stuff, and promises to punish the other guy for daring to have more stuff than they 'deserve'. Obama is riding that wave.

The era of personal responsibility is over. People now just WANT. Obama promises to GIVE. The trouble will come when the bill is due. By then it will be too late.

jesus I sound like Dr Evil: "Face it: freedom failed."

Posted by: Jones at April 29, 2009 03:21 PM (KOkrW)

343 new post up!

Posted by: D-ling at April 29, 2009 03:21 PM (ick02)

344 >>Late last year I had one as a loaner and loved the hell out of it. Opinion changed. What's really odd is that in Europe VW's are thought much more highly of than they are here. And what's really, really odd is seeing a guy named Darling talk to a guy named bunny boy... and these are names they chose.

Posted by: JackStraw at April 29, 2009 03:21 PM (VW9/y)

345

I wouldn't click on a link that someone who frequents 4chan puts up for all the money in Obama's budget. I'm waaaaay too paranoid for that.

Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at April 29, 2009 03:21 PM (AJ4xq)

346 Adriana?  How are you going to deal with Jimmy when he comes to you supporting big gubmint?

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:22 PM (ajXGd)

347 Why does it always seem as though he knows what the questions are going to be?  Is he psychic?

Posted by: ???????? at April 29, 2009 03:22 PM (zplc6)

348 JackStraw @178 
"Obama is going to come crashing back to earth faster than he blasted into orbit."

Gravity.
She is a bitch.

Posted by: monkeyfan at April 29, 2009 03:22 PM (cEE8N)

349 That coming from someone who's into scat and Bawany Fwank!

Posted by: sickinmass at April 29, 2009 03:24 PM (/i4dU)

350 Ace -excellent post! That kind stuff is why i started haning around here.

Posted by: UofC Conservative at April 29, 2009 03:26 PM (ivwt+)

351 new post up!

Look at D-ling going all hostage and shit.

Posted by: Douglas at April 29, 2009 03:26 PM (uU+Ss)

352 Adriana?  How are you going to deal with Jimmy when he comes to you supporting big gubmint?

Jimmy?  I'm still trying to figure out who Moby is, one archetype at a time, fella!

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 03:29 PM (y+fiP)

353

Look, this is the problem: These Senators get their cred from their seniority - that's it. No other qualifications required for prime time gigs. That has to change, but won't. What happened to conservative values of getting what you've earned instead of getting re-elected a dozen times by your idiot voters? That's the only reason Sphincter got his chairmanships. He's just been around the place forever like Byrd. See, the Republican Senators can change that if they want, but I don't see the will.....

Oh, and Lima's batshit crazy. Dammit, you just cost me an Ace Tip Jar IOU for cursing. But it was worth it.....

Posted by: Paulie in AZ at April 29, 2009 03:31 PM (WueVH)

354 I've always had an irrational dislike for VWs, based on my opinion that most of their owners tend to be snotty cocksuckers (sample selected for that extrapolation being my lowlife neighbors). Late last year I had one as a loaner and loved the hell out of it. Opinion changed. Yeah, I feel that way about Subarus. I really resisted the VW thing but we moved to SoCal a couple of years ago and I really wanted a hard top convertible but I'm not rich so it was between the Eos and the Pontiac G6 (which blew). It's a really sweet little car. Turns a lot of heads, oddly enough. I think the knock on VWs is reliability, but so far I've had no problems (1 year in).

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 03:31 PM (KQBGs)

355 Posted by: UofC Conservative Are you a fellow Maroon?

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 03:32 PM (KQBGs)

356 Okay, I think you can check with Jung, "Jimmy" is not an archetype.  I don't know agbout "Moby," but I suspect he isn't an archetype either.  In fact, I'll bet a quart of chili on that.  AoSPHQ chili.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:32 PM (ajXGd)

357 A whole fuckin' quart.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:33 PM (ajXGd)

358 If Specter is Jimmy, who's Joe Davola?

Posted by: Y-not at April 29, 2009 03:35 PM (KQBGs)

359

I fail to see how moderation offers any carrot for conservatives at this point. 

What can we gain by compromising and trying to work with the unhinged Left besides a few earmarks they'll later prosecute us for ?  The only thing Republicans can do in Washington right now is to provide a fig leaf of "bi-partisanship" for the failed (or soon to fail) policies of the Left.

Sometimes the best way to teach someone a lesson is to give them exactly what they wish for.  As the present administration says, we should never let a good crisis go to waste.

Every few elections the public puts the Dems in power in the name of Change, Hope, More Free $$$, etc...  Then they see what happens when Carter/Obama, Pelosi, Frank, Kennedy, et al attempt to govern without the benefit of adult supervision.  Give the public an unvarnished look at the results of Democrats Gone Wild - The 2012 Edition (Updated from 1980!) and they may not let another Democrat near the White House until 2032.

Democrats now run the federal government top to bottom.  Since they've convinced voters that government can fix all their problems, let's see them fix everything - now that those damned conservatives can no longer monkey-wrench their Great Society.

When they fail, the public knows where to find us.  Until then, with so little to gain, compromising in an attempt to work with the corrupt, unhinged and/or downright stupid Democratic leadership only cheapens our brand.

Posted by: societyis2blame at April 29, 2009 03:39 PM (Fs50j)

360

Adriene, where'd you go, honey?  You don't have a quart of chili?

 

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:44 PM (ajXGd)

361 Listen, we drink chili here almost as fast as we drink vodka.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:47 PM (ajXGd)

362

that's interesting O'Reilly just pointed out that he always takes 13 questions?  Is that true?
Yes, because taking 666 would be too much head to take from the MSM even for the One.

you don't think Michelle got such toned arms by raising her arm at an 45 degree angle to our Fearless Reader[?]

No, it's the Romulans who salute that way, not the Klingons.

Funny, Adriana, Kathy Shaidle manages to agree with Steve Sailer an awful lot and not think that Mark Steyn is a Joooo, liberal queer.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2009 03:55 PM (MGu62)

363 Shit.  That Moby was promising.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:55 PM (ajXGd)

364 We need to get that guy from LGF here.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 03:56 PM (ajXGd)

365 So, qestion.  Has any moby ever been slapped down with a quart of chili before,  around here?

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 04:01 PM (ajXGd)

366

I read the collum this morning, and this guy is considered a big brain in conservative circles?

Ace tore him a new one, thats great. But pragmatism, Squish or what I call half-assery comes down to Bullshit. If you are being pragmatic you are bullshitting someone.

Who is gonna beat the Democrats at BS? So, Republicans just tell the truth, take your media and interest group beatings ( preferably saying fuck you to them all the while) and purge these RINOS.

I don't see the problem with the economic Conservatives and the Social cons. They both just want to do their own thing and one doesn't preclude the other. I think that both sects are just sick and tired of the half-wit way the republicans have been behaving since 1997 or so.

Posted by: Awnree at April 29, 2009 04:04 PM (eH8Cv)

367

Shit.  I'ts too easy to run off Mobies these days.  Specially when you eat the chili a lot.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 04:05 PM (ajXGd)

368 341 I enjoyed Dick Morris' perspective in his piece, today. But as a rule, Dick Morris' predictions are always wrong. I know. That's why I cringe each time he predicts Obama's political demise.

Posted by: CoolCzech at April 29, 2009 04:06 PM (iafWn)

369

 collum

I'll give yout the benefit of the doubt, if you're eating chili.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 04:07 PM (ajXGd)

370 "Adriene, where'd you go, honey?  You don't have a quart of chili?"

Would a litre of pea soup suffice?  I've started a fresh troll in the torture thread, could be promising.

I really need to lurk moar, Jimmy and Moby and chili, all very confusing.

Posted by: Adriana Lima at April 29, 2009 04:13 PM (y+fiP)

371

We need to get that guy from LGF here.

Dr. Mooby Hoosier or Hoosier Hoops?

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2009 04:14 PM (MGu62)

372

Are you ready to be even more pissed off?  Then read the Hot Air article about the NRSC getting ready to kneecap Toomey, by, get this, supporting Tom Ridge against him in the primary.  Orrin Hatch, the fucking weasel, makes a comment about how Toomey "can't win" and basically says "fuck you" or the Mormon equivalent.  Cornyn is more equivocal, but the fact is that he shouldn't be.  Toomey beat Specter fair and square.

Furthermore, Hatch is lying through his teeth about their reasons.  Toomey obviously can, and most likely will win against a Specter already on the ropes after a primary loss.  I know that Lieberman did win against Lamont, but there's a difference:  Lieberman was an honest man, who got dumped by an unhinged Democrat primary electorate, whereas Specter is a chickenshit who got the fuck out of dodge when things got tough.  A young, vibrant Toomey will wipe the floor with a 79-year-old Specter.

The real reason that these pieces of dogshit are contemplating such an evil backstab is simple:  they realize it could happen to them too.  Hatch would be particularly vulnerable, since he's basically a RINO in a hard-right state.  A Republican challenging Hatch, if he won, would be almost certain to win a Senate seat.  The same basically goes for Cornyn, if not quite to the same degree.

Basically, they are trying to throw the election to the Democrats in order to keep any Republican from ever making a primary challenge, ever again.

By the way, this is not the first time this has happened.  In 2006, the NRSC actually urged Democrats to register as Republicans in the RI primary to vote for leftist RINO Lincoln Chafee against moderate conservative Lachey.  The Democrats then proceeded to vote for the Democrat candidate against a victorious Chafee, who went down to defeat in the general election (not that it mattered much).  What the NRSC was actuallly doing--and which they have never admitted--was making sure that plenty of Democrat voters became interested in the election, in order to punish Lachey (whom they expected--wrongly--to win) for challenging one of Their People.

What can you do?

First, call Cornyn at 202-224-2934 and Hatch at 202-224-5251 while you are still pissed.  Make them piss their pants.

Second, I propose the Got Toomey's Back Pledge Fund.  Every member of the GTBPF will make the following pledge:

I pledge to contribute a significant amount of money [the amount will vary according to the individual] to the primary challenger of any Republican Senator who supports anyone other than Toomey for the US Senate seat from Pennsylvania.

In my case, I'll start with $50 for each challenger.  I'm not a rich man.  However, I will try to make it more.

Let's make this one go viral.

Posted by: Ken at April 29, 2009 04:15 PM (E77Hn)

373 HulaHoops.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 04:16 PM (ajXGd)

374

What is it with these long posts???

 

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 04:21 PM (ajXGd)

375 Brew, it's me from another dimension:  Immaginne something interesting here.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 04:23 PM (ajXGd)

376 Okay, I'm apprently freaking myself out.  Or hoan is fucking with me;  Either way, I need to get with her.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 04:25 PM (ajXGd)

377 rdbrewer:  I know it's long, but please do me the favor of reading it.  It is critically important. 

Posted by: Ken at April 29, 2009 04:26 PM (E77Hn)

378 Posted by: MamaAJ at April 29, 2009 06:21 PM (X6Zdh)

Speaking of Palin, she's going to be on OCC tomorrow. Paul Sr. went to AK to do research for a bike he's building for AK's 50th anniversary as a state and had a sit-down with her.

Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at April 29, 2009 04:34 PM (hC15v)

379 Dude, I read the length of my magic johnson every day.  I don't get it.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 04:34 PM (ajXGd)

380

Let me shorten it up then:  the National Republican Senate Campaign is talking about supporting a Republican other than Toomey in the primary.  This is a particularly vicious betrayal of a man clearly beloved by the Pennsylvania GOP, and furthermore they have evil reasons as well.  They are trying to ensure that Toomey will lose in the general election, and send a message to any future conservative primary challengers of RINO senators.

Because of this, I propose that we give campaign contributions to the primary challengers of every Republican senator who supports anyone other than Toomey for the PA Senate seat.

Is that clearer?

 

Posted by: Ken at April 29, 2009 04:44 PM (E77Hn)

381

Fine, I propose a serious solution to the problem and all you guys want to do is cry about how bad things are going to be under our Inevitable Communist Future.

Do you want to take our country back, or don't you?

Posted by: Ken at April 29, 2009 05:07 PM (E77Hn)

382

Threads around here die early, Ken. You'll see no one's posted here in some time. Go to the Dennis Miller thread or the upcoming overnight thread to make your fine appeal to unseat the RINO candidates.

Posted by: andycanuck at April 29, 2009 05:16 PM (MGu62)

383 Holy Crap! A post that long that's not about gay marriage?!

Posted by: Terry at April 29, 2009 05:16 PM (foKte)

384 Fag.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 05:20 PM (ajXGd)

385 Ahhhh! THIS http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/? q=ZDkwZGU5OTFkMmYzMDJiMjBkYzA3ODc4ZDQ0OWJiOTA= Is what I was talking about! ... moderate Democrats will soon realize that they are the only ones standing between President Obama and some monumental (and uber liberal) legislative accomplishment. ... Thus far, moderate Democrats from decidedly conservative states have happily signed on to the Obama/Reid/Pelosi agenda. But, now that even Keith Olbermann must admit that they represent the balance of power in Washington, will the moderates begin to feel that pressure? Will they feel confident enough to sign on to new energy taxes, government-run health care, and weakened defenses against plotting terrorists and rogue nuclear-armed nations if their undeniably conservative constituencies understand that it was their vote that, in the end, made the difference? Don’t count on it. It's not over! There's still a game to be played. Just a different phase, different rules.

Posted by: Comrade Arthur at April 29, 2009 05:35 PM (Xr3G0)

386 THIS is why I love this blog. Ace, you hit many of the things I've been thinking, right on the head, and expressed them better than I could. I guess I shouldn't gush too much because that is certainly not the tone of this blog, but very well said, thank you.

Posted by: RM at April 29, 2009 05:40 PM (1kwr2)

387 awesome.

Posted by: kate at April 29, 2009 06:04 PM (8rwgl)

388

I bit my tongue when the Republican party funded this guy in '04, and again when Bush made nicey-nice and backed him as chairman of Judiciary. But this asshole has shit on all of us a lot, and for me the Spendulus vote was the final straw.

Fuck him , fuck McCain, and fuck Meghan McCain.  Let 'em all go Dem. I, for one, am sick and fucking tired of hearing how accommodating the GOP must be, while Northeastern liberal bluebloods insist on throwing right-to-lifers out of the party. It seems pretty clear that these assholes want their own party, which is basically socialist lite.

Anybody see the Democrats being an acommodating party? Hell, no. They are getting ready to start seizing private property and life savings to pay for their insanity, and yet all we're hearing is what kind of fucking enchanting experiences President Pantywaist is having.

Posted by: trentk269 at April 29, 2009 06:17 PM (i6cFP)

389 On Specter in particular you're probably right Ace...the guy has been well known to be about Arlen Specter 1st, 2nd and 3rd.  That said crap like Huntsman jr. being disinvited by the Michigan GOP can't fly.  The guy is an articulate rising star in the party w/enough moderation that the media can't immediately brand him david duke's mormon cousin while also being a true conservative on most important issues.

We don't have to become the party of Susan Collins and John McCain.  However, at the end of the day to be a succesful party we at least initially have to create a tent that allows intelligent people like them (and voters) to flock to our party as opposed to the alternatives.  Even if you're pro choice or gay or believe the death penalty is wrong you can still believe that not saddling our nation with debt for the next half century is a more important reason and is an impetus to vote republican or for your local conservative.  You're one of the guys in the blogosphere who might have enough influence to make that point and I hope that along w/some of the other heavyweights there can be a push to debate ideas of complete 'purification' (which isn't the same as returning to important first principles) or this intellectual cannibalism of people who really should be republicans but may not be perfect conservatives.  I get the frustration on your part.  Moderation doesn't mean the pro life movement shouldn't still underpin the party, or that there shouldn't be reflexive bias against growing governemnt.  It means that we don't make larger enemies out of a Hunstman jr. or a McCain and others who at the end of the day will give votes to issues conservatives support.

It almost makes me puke to say this but we might need to adopt some of the strategies that kos and others advocated 8 years ago when we were celebrating the demise of the democrat party--we need to have senate candidates that can win in every state, a house candidate who at least competes in every district and willingness to support a spectrum of the moderate to conservative in the appropriate districts.  There needs to be some way for angry or frustrated ex-republican conservatives and disillusioned libertarians to donate to or support their local republican running for house rep who does embody the values they believe even while they might not see the same thing from steele, etc.

I was excited for mediavetting.com (which I wish was brought back) but would be even more than glad to scrounge in my savings account to donate to something that would pursue that idea.  There's a pretty easy tendency to align w/the 'we've lost our party' republican moderates or 'purify our party to first principles' republican conservatives right now - don't fall into that trap.

Posted by: republican at April 29, 2009 06:53 PM (EegTB)

390 "Politics is not about casting the easy vote for the person you admire. It’s really about choosing the least bad alternative."
<br>

Yeah, well, I'm done with voting for the lesser of two evils or the uninspiring next guy in line. I am a conservative and my only attachment to the Republican party is that it has been supposed to be the home of conservative thought & philosophy. It has abused that quaint notion for a good while now and they have trampled upon my naivete. I owe the party nothing. If the Republican party wants my vote then they will have to reaffirm first principles and put up candidates that hew (not hue, Jpod) to those principles.
Coming from the background that I did, I was born a Democrat. Like most in my family, reality & Ronald Reagan brought me to conservatism so I know party affiliation is not immutable.

Posted by: thegreatbeast at April 29, 2009 07:06 PM (uUJzA)

391

390

 

What a crock.  This is how we got a Specter, Graham, Snowe and Collins.  Winning doesn't mean you sacrifice your principles and if that isn't what you mean than how does one field a competitive candidate in San Francisco.  One that really isn't that flaming gay or isn't ready to brand every Christian a member of a hate group, just Catholics?

If you want to grow the government you don't belong.  If you think group rights are great but individual rights suck go elsewhere.  If you think the legalization of drugs is great but smoking sucks you belong elsewhere.  If you believe the founding fathers believed in a cosmic donut and the Constitution is living and growing please go elsewhere.  If you believe the 2nd Amendment isn't that important but no one should question the 1st you must be a mamber of the MSM.

 

There is a reason that some areas are useless to focus on.  No conservative will ever win in Amherst nor Harlem as long as our society pushes the values it has for the past 30 year years.  But focusing on those areas where people work long and hard for their bread and explaining to them how the government is a vast waste of talent, resources and ideas that would be better utilized by the private sector is a better way to win. 

 

Finally get rid of the Beltway Dinner Party Republicans and focus on the grass roots.  Thats the way Reagan won.

Posted by: Thomas Jackson at April 29, 2009 07:12 PM (0Qynq)

392

Personally, I'm glad to see Specter moving to the other side of the aisle. Not so much out of any personal animus toward him (although, truth be told, there is a little bit of that), but mainly because a halfway reasonable guy who's with us sometimes is really good to see in the opposing party.

I like Joe Lieberman, but that's in large part because he's a Democrat who's at least with us on the war. If he switched parties and became a Republican, I'd find myself frustrated with him most of the time.

I have to give Specter credit for getting Clarence Thomas onto the Supreme Court. That, in my mind, is his greatest accomplishment. He was the Senator who asked Anita Hill the tough questions that caused her story to fall apart.

I hope he's as big a thorn in the side of his new party as he's been in ours in recent years.

Posted by: Nate at April 29, 2009 07:25 PM (y7kWg)

393 @Thomas Jackson

Graham, Snowe and Collins are moderates to varying levels, but its foolish to suggest that they aren't valuable to the party.  Without them we literally could never filibuster, wouldn't even have the votes to block the absurd spendulus until specter screwed it up  and would already be seeing associate justice Reinhardt being confirmed. 

And its not like the democrats have taken the senate on the wings of far left liberal victories.  Look at some of the younger dem senators: Webb, Tester, Lincoln, Casey Jr., Udall, Pryor, Landreiu, Bayh, etc.  Every one of those senators is moderate to conservative on a number of issues.  I'm sure that there are a significant sector of kosacks and democrat underground crazies whose sphincter clenches every time they vote conservatively on issues their constituents care about.  Despite that the fact taht they all contribute important votes on a variety of issues for Democrats makes them invaluable.  If the dems had run olbermann/maddow clones running in those states they would have lost.  They made the correct strategic decision to take somebody who would vote with them 60% of the time over purity that would yield 0% votes after the general election.   I'm not saying we should take a Snowe clone and run them in Texas or something.  I'm saying that in a place like Maryland its well worth it to take a Snowe clone than a Mikulski. And yeah that Snowe clone may be shitty on everything but say spending and national defense, but at the end of the day that's a net +1 on issues relating to national defense and spending that are crucial and that we wouldn't have if we just said screw them all.

With respect to a place like Harlem and other more liberal districts, the point isnt to win the district or to have a true conservative there.  It's to have a viable candidate who can turn people who probably have tons of conservative beliefs towards the republican party adn then the conservative movement.  Harlem is a great example as is NYC.  We're talking about a huge number of Hispanics, Blacks and immingrants who tend to be church going, who live in veritable war zones and whose children are kept in dead end schools because politicians like Obama are willing to sacrifice important programs like vouchers to grease the palms of teachers unions.  So lets say we run a candidate who only agrees with us on vouchers, abortion, gay marriage and some crime issues.  Yeah, he/she might not win but even if they just pull in 30% of the vote as opposed to 10% that means that 20% of that district just recognized there is an alternative out there.  In districts where the in built advantage isn't absurd we can even take seats that were traditionally thought to be safe blue.  In those cases, even if we only gain votes on a couple issues its still much better than the nothing we recieved before. 

And in the end the entire process works towards this idea of purification.  As our reps shift to the right, even if they're not uniformly shifting on every issue, it also frames more of the issues to the right.  Look at us right now, we're all incensed about the spendulus when durign the same time we've also had an absurd omnibus bill increase, another bailout, and a ridiculous budget pushed on us.  'First Principles' and casting a wider tent isn't a dialectical proposition.

Posted by: republican at April 29, 2009 07:45 PM (EegTB)

394 > 391 >> "Politics is not about casting the easy vote for the person you admire. It’s really about choosing the least bad alternative."
>Yeah, well, I'm done with voting for the lesser of two evils or the uninspiring next guy in line. ...
Here's where I disagree. When you're looking at the ballot, you should always vote the best choice. That choice may well be the least evil one. HOWEVER, your participation in the political process does not have to be limited to voting. You're can help put the right people on the ballot so you don't have to grit your teeth and vote for a RINO instead of far-left Dem. But you don't always get your way. So when election day comes, you look at that ballot and make the choice that's best for the country and then keep working the political process so there are better choices next election. Just to be crystal clear, say there are 3 names on that ballot. A is a RINO, B is a far left Dem and C is Fred Thompson. If A is running a tight race with B and THE FRED is doing terrible in the polls you might feel good voting for THE FRED but the country might be better off with A in office instead of B. I can understand a vote for THE FRED in the above case but ... you know. Eh, where do you draw the line? That's a judgement call. I'd say that if THE FRED were polling in the 5-10% range, you're wasting your vote by picking him. 20%? Ok, now we're in fighting territory. That's a case where you can lose but put up a big enough number to make the THE FRED viable in the next election. Yeesh, politics is hard. I'd liked Lost tonight. Tough problem? Solution = "I'm going to detonate a Hydrogen Bomb". Damn Straight!

Posted by: Comrade Arthur at April 29, 2009 07:56 PM (msqZ2)

395 Now, to all the whiny weasels, I demand:  WHAT EXACTLY could the "party" do to have kept Specter in the fold?

Get rid of the existing base and replace it with a newer, better, more malleable one.

Duh!

Posted by: Whiny Weasel at April 29, 2009 08:11 PM (aVzyR)

396 Damn, I wish that troll would come back.

Posted by: rdbrewer at April 29, 2009 09:22 PM (DJjeC)

397

"a man clearly beloved by the Pennsylvania GOP"

All both of them?

 

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at April 29, 2009 10:17 PM (8MuSQ)

398 You missed a golden opportunity here to use the lovely crypto phrase "cancer farms", second only to "crotch fruit" on the list of phrases signaling an imminent apocalypse! 

Sounds like something a drunken chick would write. In which case, I'd hit that.

Posted by: Sock Puppet One at April 29, 2009 11:58 PM (7mk1l)

399 he's going to sign a $3.4 TRILLION budget and he says he wants a "lean" government?

In keeping with the theme - he's living in Bizarro World.

Posted by: Joe Kidd at April 30, 2009 02:05 AM (ZZeZm)

400 With all the foolishness that specter engaged in over the years as a senator, it is interesting that the vote for big debt, huge government is what finally nailed him, and these "republicans" claim it is religious conservatives that brought him down?  Just exactly what is THEIR definition of a republican?  I can't understand them, the republican party has never been as squishy as it has over the last 8 years, we ran a fake republican for president and they are still not satisfied?

Posted by: Judith at April 30, 2009 02:19 AM (D1n2x)

401

Get rid of the existing base and replace it with a newer, better, more malleable one.

We're working on it.

Posted by: GOP at April 30, 2009 02:30 AM (BNJPd)

402

Specter was a democrat until he couldn't win the dem primary for AG of PHiladelphia County (around '65).  At which point he switched to the republican party, where he could win the primary, b/c he had no opposition.  Really, he's just switching back (or going home) in his twilight years.

Personal opinion - what is getting lost in this whole Specter charade is that Specter doesn't give a rat's ass about sides or theories or principles.  Specter only gives a rat's ass about Specter.  Didn't you hear the audio?  He heaped scorn and derision on HIS BOSSES, the PA electorate, when he said he wasn't going to let those nasty evil VOTERS - the very people he's supposed to be working for and answering to -- end his career.  In other words, he doesn't care whether the voters want him or not.  He's working for HIM, not for THEM.

Posted by: The Other Coyote at April 30, 2009 05:14 AM (IDFhb)

403

OK, a question for the Purity Brigades:

If you can't get Arlen Spector to support the GOP, how are you going to ever get 50% plus 1 of the American electorate?

Posted by: ChipD at April 30, 2009 06:23 AM (nWYl8)

404 Graham, Snowe and Collins are moderates to varying levels, but its foolish to suggest that they aren't valuable to the party.  Without them we literally could never filibuster, wouldn't even have the votes to block the absurd spendulus until specter screwed it up  and would already be seeing associate justice Reinhardt being confirmed.

So what is the point of having a theoretical filibuster option when everyone on both sides of the aisle knows  the Dems can pick off one of these three if they need to?  We have had, since the election, the worst of all possible worlds.  The Democrats can pass whatever they want by funding the Olympia Snowe Bridge, but they can still blame Republicans for thwarting, say, repeal of DOMA when it's time to raise money.

Posted by: Ace's liver at April 30, 2009 06:46 AM (LtIsn)

405 I like this post and I'm sure people would do much more than just read, they act. Great stuff here. Please keep it up....Mercedes-Benz Mobil Mewah Terbaik Indonesia::Meriahkan pesta ulang tahun bersama GarudaFood::Mari Berkomunitas Di Faceblog

Posted by: Mercedes-Benz at June 02, 2011 09:36 PM (xJe3c)

406 Firma opplysninger

I don’t suppose I have read anything like this before. So nice to find somebody with some original thoughts on this subject

Posted by: rose at June 05, 2011 08:28 PM (fpdAL)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
299kb generated in CPU 0.5, elapsed 2.0061 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.6002 seconds, 642 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.