First time visitor? Learn more.

The curse of the G.O.P. retreads

by Speranza ( 145 Comments › )
Filed under Election 2008, Elections 2009, Elections 2010, Elections 2012, Mitt Romney at March 21st, 2012 - 2:00 pm

As I have said many times, we are seeing the fruit of the disasters of  the anti Bush/Republican backlash  of 2006 and 2008 with the pathetic crop of candidates we have now.  We have a phony (Romney), a whiny, religious nut (Santorum) , and a has-been, back stabbing over the hill hack (Newtie).

by Noemie Emery

There are many flaws among the current Republican candidates and they are all too well known. Romney is too close to the center and all of the others are much too eccentric.

They can’t reach the base, or they can’t reach beyond it. Romney’s too bland and Santorum and Gingrich are all too exciting — in fact, they seem borderline nuts.

No one addresses the big, urgent problems. Romney has problems closing the deal, but his rivals can’t close their cases against him. This is a field out of phase with the party around it, caught on the wrong side of time.

The Republican Party as it exists in the moment is the product of three different things: the fiscal implosion of 2008, Obama’s wide and expensive expansion of government, and the sudden collapse of the welfare state culture of Europe.

[.....]

In 2009, the Tea Party movement began the resistance, flowed into and through the Republican Party, and pulled off a series of stunning electoral triumphs, starting early with Chris Christie, Bob McDonnell and Scott Brown, and cresting in 2010 with a bumper crop of insurgents dedicated to cutting entitlements, curbing unions and helping small businesses thrive.

These are outsiders who are now the establishment, who appeal to the base and to independents, and have been winning the battle against Obama whenever they take to the field.

These are the people who ought to be running, but time is against them: the first class, like McDonnell and Christie, have little more than two years now as national figures; and the second wave — Marco Rubio, Kelly Ayotte and Susana Martinez — have even a year less than that.

They are too new to run, and their esprit is not found in our current contenders, who have nothing to do with our more recent battles, and quite clearly are blasts from the past.

Gingrich scored his big coup in the 1994 midterms, lost power in 1998, and since then has passed time having Breakfast at Tiffany’s while churning out mountains of books.

Rick Santorum came to the Senate in 1994, lost by 18 points a dozen years later, and since then has concerned himself with Satan’s grip on the country, and JFK’s failure to spend his tenure as president spreading the creed of his church far and wide.

Romney, who lost his first race in 1994, and left the one office he has held six years ago, has been endorsed by McDonnell, Christie and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, whose campaign he backed in its earliest stages and has secondhand Tea Party cred.

But he is running the campaign he ran four years earlier, largely stressing his business experience, with no sign of additional urgency and few indications that too much has changed.

Still, he’s more in touch than Santorum or Gingrich, who are pushing a rigid and retro conservative vision that appeals to only a slice of the country, and disdains independents who swung back from Obama, and elected impure reformers like Christie and Brown.

There is a chasm between the GOP of 2012, revved up by the wins of the 2009-2010 cycles, and its candidates of the 1994-2006 vintage, who don’t understand and can’t harness its energies.

You call can it the Retreads’ Revenge.

Read the rest – The curse of the Republican retreads

Tags: , ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

145 Responses to “The curse of the G.O.P. retreads”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | March 21, 2012 2:18 pm

    Republicans vs. Democrats. It’s a Leftist pissing match to me.


  2. Speranza
    2 | March 21, 2012 2:18 pm

    The problem is that we have some good up and coming potential candidates who do not yet have the experience to run for POTUS.


  3. Speranza
    3 | March 21, 2012 2:19 pm

    I now wish that Tim Pawlenty were still in it, however any one who let’s a Michele Bachmann push him around is a weakling.


  4. Speranza
    4 | March 21, 2012 2:20 pm

    I do not necessarily buy into the notion that being a successful business man would translate into a successful political executive, if that were the case then Michael Bloomberg would be a great president.


  5. 5 | March 21, 2012 2:21 pm

    The GOP has the worst Presidential field against the most formidable campaigner the Democrats have fielded. We are asking a NCAA team to play against a top seeded NFL team.


  6. 6 | March 21, 2012 2:22 pm

    @ Speranza:

    That’s why Romney is a horrible campaigner. The only reason he’s winning is because many Republicans hate Santorum.


  7. Speranza
    7 | March 21, 2012 2:22 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    The GOP has the worst Presidential field against the most formidable campaigner the Democrats have fielded. We are asking a NCAA team to play against a top seeded NFL team.

    Thank the Establishment for that.
    Can you imagine a lot of folks were enthusiastic about a pizza guy named Herman Cain???


  8. Speranza
    8 | March 21, 2012 2:22 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    That’s why Romney is a horrible campaigner. The only reason he’s winning is because many Republicans hate Santorum.

    Father Santorum would be God awful (pun intended).


  9. 9 | March 21, 2012 2:23 pm

    Must-listen interview with Bettina Viviano, Executive Producer of Adam Sandler’s ‘Jack and Jill’ Movie: Bill Clinton Directly Told Me Obama Not Eligible to be President; 2008 and 2012 Election Fraud; Bill Ayers; Gloria Allred; Black Panthers; Acorn


  10. 10 | March 21, 2012 2:24 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Romney at best is a South Eastern Conference NCAA football team. Obama is the NFC #1 seed.


  11. 11 | March 21, 2012 2:24 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Can you imagine a lot of folks were enthusiastic about a pizza guy named Herman Cain???

    Oh boy, expect incoming for that!


  12. 12 | March 21, 2012 2:27 pm

    @ Speranza:

    What Romney is either too inept to understand or too ignorant to fathom is that enthusiasm matters. He “won” Illinois yesterday to a record low turnout. This does not bode well for him in the general election. He has tried to do absolutely nothing to generate any enthusiasm, agin either because he is inept or ignorant. Neither trait is encouraging. Possibly he just thinks he is so grand that he shouldn’t have to do anything to generate enthusiasm, but you’d think th fact that he is having to outspend Santorum 7-1 to win in a solid Blue State like Illinois would clue him into the fact that he, too, is a regional not a national candidate. One that has to have deep pockets in order to win even in his region. He won’t be able to outspend Obama, though hopefully he’ll have sense enough to decline public financing and the straight-jacket that comes with it. I don’t have much hope for the fall. Maybe we’ll get the Senate, but if Romney suppresses the vote we may not even get that.


  13. 13 | March 21, 2012 2:30 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    Both Romney and Santorum depress turnout on the Right. We are screwed and I fully don’t expect to win in November. I hope we get the Senate and hold the House.


  14. Speranza
    14 | March 21, 2012 2:30 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Can you imagine a lot of folks were enthusiastic about a pizza guy named Herman Cain???

    Oh boy, expect incoming for that!

    I don’t give a shit. That poseur of a guy sucked the air out of the room for 6 weeks.


  15. Speranza
    15 | March 21, 2012 2:31 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    Both Romney and Santorum depress turnout on the Right. We are screwed and I fully don’t expect to win in November. I hope we get the Senate and hold the House.

    People better get out and vote for Romney in November other wise they should STFU about Obama from Jan. 2013 onwards.


  16. Speranza
    16 | March 21, 2012 2:34 pm

    @ Speranza:
    Ah that’s ok, we will have Jeb in 2016 to set it all right.


  17. spinmore
    17 | March 21, 2012 2:34 pm

    @ Speranza:

    i fell for the Cain thing for a minute -- i think we were all looking for something to hang or hats on. He looked good from a distance -- so much for that. He failed to pan-out much like Bachman and Perry. I’m sorry Gingrich lost traction.


  18. buzzsawmonkey
    18 | March 21, 2012 2:35 pm

    There is—was—nothing innately wrong with any of the surviving crop.

    Romney was, at least, a governor of a state. That is something. If he had roundly repudiated Obamacare and were running on its repeal—not “waivers,” repeal, completely, utterly, and immediately—were willing to embrace even some few elements of the Tea Party, etc., he could be a strong candidate.

    Instead, he stammers his way apologetically around the country and ends up sounding like Robert Benchley doing his ineffectual “Treasurer’s Report” monologue every time he tries to sound tough. If he ditched the fucking checked shirts that are supposed to give him the “common touch”, but which are just as phony and unconvincing as Rick Perry looked buckled into his Sunday suit, and instead ran as a plutocrat at ease with being a plutocrat, he’d be a powerhouse. But he doesn’t have the balls—and he has the mirror-image advisor of the same jackass who told Rick Perry to run trying to out-Romney Romney.

    Rick Santorum, if he could keep morality to about 1/8 of his utterance instead of 7/8ths, would be a powerhouse in his own right. People do want to hear some nod to traditional morality from their candidate—even Democrats are getting a little uneasy at their second graders having to celebrate Transgender Week. But Little Ricky has gone way, way overboard in the moralilty department, to the point where if he (God forbid) gets the nomination, he will make the election a referendum on his own views of morality instead of on Obama’s miserable record.

    Newt Gingrich may be a “has-been,” but hey—that means he has “been.” He knows Washington, he knows conservatism, and he does love the country. He could make Obama cry during a debate—which would itself be a warm memory to take to the gulag after the graveyard vote returns Obama to office. OK, Gingrichard the Loin-Heated has a pretty checkered love life, but I’m not voting on the basis of any candidate’s marital bliss. Of the current three, he’s the most articulate and the most able to face down the charges of the cranky poseur in the White House. It would be like watching a particularly elegant, if zaftig, bullfighter. Yes, Newt worries me on some scores—he does like those intellectual fads—but at least he has dreams beyond the next office he wants to hold.

    Again, however—as I have said in other threads—one thing I grant all of these folks. They put themselves on the line. They stepped up. I don’t give a damn for the supposed “A” team that is busy sucking its thumbs on the sidelines. Any so-called “A” team that can see what the current gang is doing to the country and has nonetheless decided to sit it out for a maybe-more-auspicious 2016 can kiss my shiny metal ass.


  19. MikeA
    19 | March 21, 2012 2:39 pm

    We are DOOMED!!!!!

    ( someone had to say it )


  20. Bumr50
    20 | March 21, 2012 2:40 pm

    @ Speranza:

    I’ll vote for him, but I can already hear how it’s going to be all my fault if he loses because I didn’t cheer lead enough for his pathetic a**.

    Screw the GOP.

    I hope they implode and something can be built from the rubble, because they sure as hell aren’t going to change their stripes.

    If they were going to right the ship it would have been done already. Some say they didn’t get the message in 2010. They got it alright. And promptly gave it the finger.


  21. The Osprey
    21 | March 21, 2012 2:40 pm

    Always with the negative waves, Moriarty. Always with the negative waves.


  22. 22 | March 21, 2012 2:41 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Romney’s big problem is the Hispanic vote. Obama is clobbering him there 70-14%. If he doesn’t fix that, Obama will be re-elected. How he can fix that without pissing off elements of the GOP is a mystery. Maybe they have just given up on the Hispanic vote and hope to get 70% of the White vote.

    This is a horrible election.


  23. 23 | March 21, 2012 2:42 pm

    Unless we are at war with Iran we will win in November regardless of the nominee, Paul excepted. On top of everything Obama has done or not done people vote their pocketbook. It was a lot easier to convince people who were doing well that their neighbors were not, (it’s the economy stupid), than it will be to convince people who are not doing well that they are in the midst of a recovery. On top of that they will be looking at higher prices, especially food and gas, that will stare them in the face everyday from now to election day. Rightfully or wrongfully, (I believe rightly), they will blame the President for that.


  24. 24 | March 21, 2012 2:42 pm

    @ Bumr50:

    I hope they implode and something can be built from the rubble, because they sure as hell aren’t going to change their stripes.

    I’m done with the GOP after November.


  25. 25 | March 21, 2012 2:44 pm

    @ Rancher:

    That’s too optimistic. Obama is polling in the upper 40′s right now. He should be in the 30′s. He has a hold on people.


  26. spinmore
    26 | March 21, 2012 2:45 pm

    @ The Osprey:

    “have a little faith baby”


  27. 27 | March 21, 2012 2:47 pm

    @ spinmore:

    The only faith I have is with God. I have no faith in a political party.


  28. Bumr50
    28 | March 21, 2012 2:51 pm

    Romney’s problem is Romney.

    When it comes to policy, Romney is not and never has been someone driven by a big vision. RomneyCare is the closest he’s ever come to a bold policy initiative, but even that was conceived mostly as a narrow technical fix to the insurance market. As far as I can tell, the only big vision Romney’s ever had is of himself, sitting in the Oval Office. Which seems to be more or less what his campaign is running on.

    Message matters.


  29. 29 | March 21, 2012 2:55 pm

    @ Bumr50:

    That’s true. Romney wants to be President because his daddy wasn’t.


  30. buzzsawmonkey
    30 | March 21, 2012 2:59 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    Romney wants to be President because his daddy wasn’t.

    Which makes Obama a greater visionary than Romney. Obama dreams of destroying the United States, and striding, chin raised, through the smoking ruin. Romney merely dreams of adding to his resume.


  31. Speranza
    31 | March 21, 2012 3:01 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ spinmore:
    The only faith I have is with God. I have no faith in a political party.

    Do not put your trust in princes, in mortal men, who cannot save.


  32. 32 | March 21, 2012 3:02 pm

    @ Rodan:

    “I want it” isn’t a reason to vote for the man. The only reason I will vote for him is because Barack Hussein Obama is so freaking bad. That is the only reason. I don’t think that enough of the population feels that way for Romney to win it, though. If you don’t feel that Obama is the worst President we’ve ever had, then there really is no reason to vote for Romney. None whatsoever.


  33. Speranza
    33 | March 21, 2012 3:03 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Romney’s big problem is the Hispanic vote. Obama is clobbering him there 70-14%. If he doesn’t fix that, Obama will be re-elected. How he can fix that without pissing off elements of the GOP is a mystery. Maybe they have just given up on the Hispanic vote and hope to get 70% of the White vote.
    This is a horrible election.

    His nativist bashing of Perry is coming back to haunt him. What a fucking asshole for doing that! It almost serves him right.


  34. 34 | March 21, 2012 3:04 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Rancher:
    That’s too optimistic. Obama is polling in the upper 40′s right now. He should be in the 30′s. He has a hold on people.

    People still like him, his policies poll much lower. I believe they will not vote like over results. Nevertheless I will do everything I can to see he looses, I wont take anything for granted.


  35. Speranza
    35 | March 21, 2012 3:06 pm

    Rick Santorum, if he could keep morality to about 1/8 of his utterance instead of 7/8ths, would be a powerhouse in his own right. …………………

    Newt Gingrich may be a “has-been,” but hey—that means he has “been.”

    Father Santorum got clobbered by 18% and is a nothing, Gingrich is a fellow afflicted by a terminal need to say stupid things and self destruct.
    “The Democratic Party’s values are the values that Susan Smith displayed when she drowned her two children”. What a freaking a-hole!


  36. 36 | March 21, 2012 3:06 pm

    @ Rancher:

    The way to defeat him is to personally destroy him. Make him lose his cool and then he will appear as normal human. Right now, too many Americans view him as some god-king. If you make him appear human, then his policy failures will catch up to him.


  37. 37 | March 21, 2012 3:08 pm

    @ Speranza:

    I have relatives who normally vote Republican that probably are going to sit it out or vote for Gary Johnson as a fuck you to the GOP.


  38. yenta-fada
    38 | March 21, 2012 3:08 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    A Robert Benchly reference. :-) I’ll always remember the telegram he sent from Venice: “Streets full of water, please advise.” I read James Thurber too.


  39. 39 | March 21, 2012 3:09 pm

    @ Iron Fist:

    The problem is there’s this emotional affection for Obama. Even people who don’t like his polices like him personally. That’s why I keep saying the only way to beat him is through the politics of personal destruction. The Pharaoh must be made human.


  40. yenta-fada
    40 | March 21, 2012 3:11 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Rancher:
    The way to defeat him is to personally destroy him. Make him lose his cool and then he will appear as normal human. Right now, too many Americans view him as some god-king. If you make him appear human, then his policy failures will catch up to him.

    It is not a given that they can keep propping up the West & the stock market with funny money until November. There are a lot of factors that even the fatcats cannot control.


  41. 41 | March 21, 2012 3:13 pm

    @ Rodan:

    People want to see the FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT succeed. That is what it is more than anything else. That Obama has been a dismal failure isn’t something many Americans are comfortable with. Obama fully understands this, and intends to capitalize on it. I think he could be beaten by the right candidate, but I don’t think we have the right candidate running.


  42. yenta-fada
    42 | March 21, 2012 3:15 pm

    @ yenta-fada:

    This is what has happened since 2007:

    (…)

    ■The central bank, in turn, simply created money out of nothing, charging it to the entire euro zone as an outstanding claim within the TARGET2 system. “These countries simply pull money off the printing press,” Sinn complains.

    ■The central bank, in turn, simply created money out of nothing, charging it to the entire euro zone as an outstanding claim within the TARGET2 system. “These countries simply pull money off the printing press,” Sinn complains.

    That statement only seems reassuring on first glance. In plain language, what it means is that commercial banks in crisis-stricken European countries are forced to rely on funds from their central banks because they can no longer get money anywhere else.

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,818966,00.html

    “Each person knew a little bit,” Sinn explains, “and I had to fit the pieces of the puzzle together. It was real detective work.”

    “As long as the monetary union continues to exist, this isn’t a catastrophe. The money is virtual, created by central banks,”


  43. 43 | March 21, 2012 3:15 pm

    Someone here mentioned that the Hispanic vote is less than 9% of the electorate. I couldn’t believe that and had to fact check it but it’s true. We will lose California but that’s a state we wont get for years to come if ever. Also there is the fact that that the net worth of Hispanic households decreased 66% in the last few years.


  44. Bumr50
    44 | March 21, 2012 3:16 pm

    Holy BS flood!!

    Bring your hip waders!!

    White House Propaganda Minister Carney: Paul Ryan “Aggressively And Deliberately Ignorant”…
    ———————-
    “You have to be aggressively and deliberately ignorant of the world economy not to know and understand that clean energy technologies are going to play a huge role in the 21st century,” Carney said after decrying the clean energy spending cuts in Ryan’s plan. “You have to have severely diminished capacity to understand what drives economic growth in industrialized countries in this century if you do not understand that education is the key that unlocks the door to prosperity,” he added.


  45. yenta-fada
    45 | March 21, 2012 3:16 pm

    @ yenta-fada:

    A little PIMF in that last one. Please ignore.


  46. 46 | March 21, 2012 3:16 pm

    @ yenta-fada:

    Even if the economy collapses Obama can still get re-elected.The GOP is that pathetic.


  47. Bumr50
    47 | March 21, 2012 3:16 pm

    @ Bumr50:

    The missing link.


  48. buzzsawmonkey
    48 | March 21, 2012 3:16 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    Gingrich is a fellow afflicted by a terminal need to say stupid things and self destruct.

    I disagree. I think that much of that is a matter of a media that is playing “gotcha!” regardless of whether or not there is a gotcha! moment. And I include a number of soi-disant “conservatives” in that assessment.

    “The Democratic Party’s values are the values that Susan Smith displayed when she drowned her two children”. What a freaking a-hole!

    Sorry, but Newt was absolutely correct here. He was, perhaps, foolish to say so because it is the sort of thing that can provide a gotcha! moment—but what was it Susan Smith did? She felt trapped, so she killed her children and lied about it. The Democrats do indeed do the same thing; they find themselves in a policy blind alley of their own making, and immediately “kill their children” and lie about it.


  49. yenta-fada
    49 | March 21, 2012 3:18 pm

    Bumr50 wrote:

    Holy BS flood!!
    Bring your hip waders!!
    White House Propaganda Minister Carney: Paul Ryan “Aggressively And Deliberately Ignorant”…
    ———————-
    “You have to be aggressively and deliberately ignorant of the world economy not to know and understand that clean energy technologies are going to play a huge role in the 21st century,” Carney said after decrying the clean energy spending cuts in Ryan’s plan. “You have to have severely diminished capacity to understand what drives economic growth in industrialized countries in this century if you do not understand that education is the key that unlocks the door to prosperity,” he added.

    As long as their lips are moving, they are lying about everything. People are in massive denial, that is, they believe the lies instead of their eyes. It is more comforting.


  50. yenta-fada
    50 | March 21, 2012 3:20 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ yenta-fada:
    Even if the economy collapses Obama can still get re-elected.The GOP is that pathetic.

    I do not believe that. They will be pissed off. This is a house of cards that will fall when the wind blows in the right direction. imo.


  51. 51 | March 21, 2012 3:21 pm

    @ Rancher:

    Someone here mentioned that the Hispanic vote is less than 9% of the electorate.

    That 9% is concentrated in California, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Texas and Florida.Texas and California negate each other. But Florida, New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado are tossups that both parties must win.


  52. Speranza
    52 | March 21, 2012 3:23 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    I have relatives who normally vote Republican that probably are going to sit it out or vote for Gary Johnson as a fuck you to the GOP.

    Not a good idea.


  53. 53 | March 21, 2012 3:24 pm

    @ yenta-fada:

    This is the GOP we are talking about. They are not offering a better alternative. I am just with them through this election and them I will turn my guns on the GOP.


  54. Speranza
    54 | March 21, 2012 3:25 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Sorry, but Newt was absolutely correct here. He was, perhaps, foolish to say so because it is the sort of thing that can provide a gotcha! moment—but what was it Susan Smith did? She felt trapped, so she killed her children and lied about it. The Democrats do indeed do the same thing; they find themselves in a policy blind alley of their own making, and immediately “kill their children” and lie about it.

    Anyone trying to make political hay out of that tragedy is a jerk.


  55. 55 | March 21, 2012 3:27 pm

    @ Speranza:

    You demonize a people, don’t expect their vote.


  56. 56 | March 21, 2012 3:28 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Anyone trying to make political hay out of that tragedy is a jerk.

    Hey Charles Johnson hasn’t mentioned the story of that Jihadi in France. If it was a Nazi, he would do 50 posts in 24 hours!


  57. buzzsawmonkey
    57 | March 21, 2012 3:32 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    Anyone trying to make political hay out of that tragedy is a jerk.

    I’m not sure what your “jerk” standards are, so I can’t argue with you there, but Newt was hardly making, or trying to make, “political hay” out of that tragedy. He was engaging in metaphor, something which people are unfamiliar with these days because monosyllabic grunts do for so much of communication, by pointing out that the same selfishness, mendacity, and self-aggrandizement that Smith displayed is equally on display by one of our major political parties as a matter of policy.

    In short, he was attempting to make the reflexive Democrat behavior comprehensive by analogizing it to a more comprehensible and fully reprehensible act.


  58. 58 | March 21, 2012 3:34 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:

    Romney at best is a South Eastern Conference NCAA football team. Obama is the NFC #1 seed.

    And ISTR that the NFC #1 Seed lost….


  59. buzzsawmonkey
    59 | March 21, 2012 3:34 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    You demonize a people, don’t expect their vote.

    In other words, “Piss on me and you’ll piss me off.”


  60. 61 | March 21, 2012 3:35 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:

    Yup, exactly! Something Charles Johnson is an expert at doing!


  61. darkwords
    62 | March 21, 2012 3:38 pm

    When rodans Romney gets the nomination he has to make a place at the table for the other candidates including Ron Paul. One of them should be the VP, Give Ron Paul a foreign position or make him drug czar


  62. yenta-fada
  63. Lily
    64 | March 21, 2012 3:41 pm

    darkwords wrote:

    When rodans Romney gets the nomination he has to make a place at the table for the other candidates including Ron Paul. One of them should be the VP, Give Ron Paul a foreign position or make him drug czar

    That is full-tilt crazy. Ron Paul you can’t be serious. Ron Paul is nuts. Sure the first few sentences out of his mouth seem to make sense but it downhill from there to nutterville.


  64. buzzsawmonkey
    65 | March 21, 2012 3:43 pm

    darkwords wrote:

    Give Ron Paul a foreign position or make him drug czar

    No, put RonPaulStiltskin in charge of spinning straw into gold.


  65. Lily
    66 | March 21, 2012 3:44 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ yenta-fada:

    Even if the economy collapses Obama can still get re-elected.The GOP is that pathetic.

    You really over estimate the love for obama. I don’t believe this for one minute. Sorry Rodan I just have to disagree with you here.


  66. Speranza
    67 | March 21, 2012 3:47 pm

    Comments such as the one Gingrich made over the Susan Smith tragedy is one of the reasons why we no longer win national elections (and if we do, it is usually a squeaker).


  67. Lily
    68 | March 21, 2012 3:48 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:

    You demonize a people, don’t expect their vote.

    I can understand that. But is Romney saying any of this?
    Like I said yesterday I don’t see it here in the deep south of Louisiana.
    Yeah I know we were occupied by Spain at one time. Hell Louisiana especially southern Louisiana is a mesh-mash type of people.
    Makes us rather unique in our ways I suppose.


  68. Speranza
    69 | March 21, 2012 3:49 pm

    darkwords wrote:

    When rodans Romney gets the nomination he has to make a place at the table for the other candidates including Ron Paul. One of them should be the VP, Give Ron Paul a foreign position or make him drug czar

    Luap Nor needs to be dumped in the river. He is a crazy old bat with followers who are even more whacked out then he is.
    Btw how about winning first before assigning cabinet positions?


  69. yenta-fada
    70 | March 21, 2012 3:49 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    darkwords wrote:
    Give Ron Paul a foreign position or make him drug czar
    No, put RonPaulStiltskin in charge of spinning straw into gold.

    One thing that is interesting about Paul is that he said he would make James Grant his Treasury Secretary. Jim Grant is a highly intelligent and well respected author of a newsletter “The Interest Rate Observer” He is very sophisticated in his understanding of how the largest market (bonds) really works. He is not a partisan hack. Paulians are nuts, but they understand fractional reserve banking and economic history better than most. sigh.


  70. buzzsawmonkey
    71 | March 21, 2012 3:50 pm

    @ Rodan:
    @ Lily:

    Lily: no, he accurately estimates the following:

    1) love for Obama (still strong in at least 40% of the population);
    2) weakness of the probable GOP candidate, whomever it is;
    3) more important, weakness of the campaign that GOP candidate will run;
    4) major MSM assistance to the Obama campaign to build up enthusiasm, or depress opposition, or both;
    5) vote fraud, and the unlikelihood of the GOP’s challenging any but a fraction of it;
    6) the likelihood of violence and/or intimidation at the polls, and the unlikelihood of it being addressed by the authorities


  71. Speranza
    72 | March 21, 2012 3:50 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    Hey Charles Johnson hasn’t mentioned the story of that Jihadi in France. If it was a Nazi, he would do 50 posts in 24 hours!

    Oh you damn well know he would. What is fatso writing about today?


  72. Speranza
    73 | March 21, 2012 3:51 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    I’m not sure what your “jerk” standards are, so I can’t argue with you there, but Newt was hardly making, or trying to make, “political hay” out of that tragedy. He was engaging in metaphor, something which people are unfamiliar with these days because monosyllabic grunts do for so much of communication, by pointing out that the same selfishness, mendacity, and self-aggrandizement that Smith displayed is equally on display by one of our major political parties as a matter of policy.

    Yeah and it worked out real well for the Republican Family Values Party in 1992 didn’t it? I loved his tongue kissing Pelosi on the couch too.


  73. yenta-fada
    74 | March 21, 2012 3:51 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Is it Paul’s bigotry and complete lack of ability to understand geopolitics that pisses you off? Or is it everything else? lol


  74. tunnelrat
    75 | March 21, 2012 3:53 pm

    We have a phony (Romney), a whiny, religious nut (Santorum) , and a has-been, back stabbing over the hill hack (Newtie).

    Why don’t you run for POTUS Speranza? Nobody else is worthy to you.


  75. Speranza
    76 | March 21, 2012 3:54 pm

    By the way Smith’s family were Republicans -- not that that should matter. Perverts and sickos come in all poltical shapes.


  76. Bumr50
    77 | March 21, 2012 3:54 pm

    @ Speranza:

    You need a hug.


  77. buzzsawmonkey
    78 | March 21, 2012 3:55 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    Yeah and it worked out real well for the Republican Family Values Party in 1992 didn’t it? I loved his tongue kissing Pelosi on the couch too.

    I love twenty-year-old grudges; they have such a rich patina.

    And—perhaps you missed it—he renounced/denounced his Pelosi moment. Do you believe him? Well, maybe not, Maybe you like Little Ricky better.


  78. Speranza
    79 | March 21, 2012 3:55 pm

    tunnelrat wrote:

    Why don’t you run for POTUS Speranza? Nobody else is worthy to you.

    Oh that is such a great come back line.
    Why don’t you post some threads or is DoD bitching about Johnson more your thing?


  79. Speranza
    80 | March 21, 2012 3:56 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    And—perhaps you missed it—he renounced/denounced his Pelosi moment.

    yeah like nobody with brains could ever see that making common cause with San Fran Nan would not be a good idea. His judgement was less then idiotic.


  80. yenta-fada
    81 | March 21, 2012 3:57 pm

    Bumr50 wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    You need a hug.

    {{Group hug}}


  81. Speranza
    82 | March 21, 2012 3:57 pm

    yenta-fada wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Is it Paul’s bigotry and complete lack of ability to understand geopolitics that pisses you off? Or is it everything else? lol

    The fact that he is a cantankerous old loon is a good start.


  82. yenta-fada
    83 | March 21, 2012 3:58 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    yenta-fada wrote:
    @ Speranza:
    Is it Paul’s bigotry and complete lack of ability to understand geopolitics that pisses you off? Or is it everything else? lol
    The fact that he is a cantankerous old loon is a good start.

    I’m a cantankerous old loon at this point. :-)


  83. buzzsawmonkey
    84 | March 21, 2012 3:59 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    yeah like nobody with brains could ever see that making common cause with San Fran Nan would not be a good idea. His judgement was less then idiotic.

    Yes; he was a fool in that instance. We all do foolish things at some point; the trick is to recognize that we’ve done them and then change course.


  84. Lily
    85 | March 21, 2012 4:00 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    @ Lily:

    Lily: no, he accurately estimates the following:

    1) love for Obama (still strong in at least 40% of the population);
    2) weakness of the probable GOP candidate, whomever it is;
    3) more important, weakness of the campaign that GOP candidate will run;
    4) major MSM assistance to the Obama campaign to build up enthusiasm, or depress opposition, or both;
    5) vote fraud, and the unlikelihood of the GOP’s challenging any but a fraction of it;
    6) the likelihood of violence and/or intimidation at the polls, and the unlikelihood of it being addressed by the authorities

    Maybe I am living in a rose-colored opinion on it. Voter fraud I agree will run rampant. Will the GOP run a squishy campaign more than likely.
    I just hope I am surprised. Right now I just have to have some hope instead of throwing in the towel just yet.
    I totally agree with Rodan that bho will be a tough sob to beat. I have no doubt on that.
    Not to mention my opinions are only that of a regular person on the street. My opinions are conveyed through this prism. I am by no means an expert at anything political. I have never been that deep into politics at all. Just a different point of view that I am giving. Could Rodan be right and I am wrong by all means. Very much so.


  85. tunnelrat
    86 | March 21, 2012 4:00 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Oh that is such a great come back line.
    Why don’t you post some threads or is DoD bitching about Johnson more your thing?

    I never see you post anything positive or constructive about the GOP candidates. You resort to labeling them (religious nut, has-been, etc.). Your hatred of Palin and Bachmann borders on being schizophrenic. If you are going to do nothing but parrot left wing talking points, then nothing of value is being added to the conversation.


  86. yenta-fada
    87 | March 21, 2012 4:04 pm

    @ tunnelrat:

    Speranza does a huge amount of unpaid labor for this blog. I ask you to respect that and stop your childish name calling. You don’t have the ability to do what he does!


  87. 88 | March 21, 2012 4:14 pm

    @ darkwords:

    My Romney? That was a joke?

    :lol:


  88. Lily
    89 | March 21, 2012 4:16 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ darkwords:

    My Romney? That was a joke?

    Yeah I was thinking the same thing. You are no lover of Romney. ;)


  89. 90 | March 21, 2012 4:17 pm

    @ Lily:

    You use the Napoleonic code. That does make you unique!


  90. buzzsawmonkey
    91 | March 21, 2012 4:17 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    yeah like nobody with brains could ever see that making common cause with San Fran Nan would not be a good idea.

    I would add here that Gingrich might well have believed—wrongly—that doing his across-the-aisle with Pelosi would be a useful bipartisan gesture at some point. Don’t ask me why Republicans seem so much more susceptible to the lures of the chimera of bipartisanship than Democrats; I have no clue. But I think that Gingrich learned, even before Pelosi’s threats, when Newt was riding high, to reveal something that would stop Newt from being President, that “bipartisanship” was a fraud.

    Now, you may say that he should have known this far earlier—and I might agree with you. But I’d suggest that even in the polarized atmosphere of the House when he was there, that he’d been able to occasionally find common cause across party lines; most really good politicians do this. I think that Newt did not quite realize the extent to which the crazy had seeped in—despite the backstabbing which was at the bottom of his “ethics charge.”

    I think he knows now, deep down. And I think it would make him a better President, had he any chance of getting the nomination, than either of the two running against him.


  91. 92 | March 21, 2012 4:18 pm

    @ Lily:

    I’m no lover of the GOP at this point. I am just waiting to vote against Obama and I am out!


  92. tunnelrat
    93 | March 21, 2012 4:18 pm

    @ yenta-fada:
    I didn’t call anybody names.


  93. 94 | March 21, 2012 4:19 pm

    @ yenta-fada:

    Who is Ron Paul bigoted towards?


  94. yenta-fada
    95 | March 21, 2012 4:19 pm

    tunnelrat wrote:

    Your hatred of Palin and Bachmann borders on being schizophrenic

    Close enough to name calling.


  95. 96 | March 21, 2012 4:20 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    @ Lily:
    Lily: no, he accurately estimates the following:
    1) love for Obama (still strong in at least 40% of the population);
    2) weakness of the probable GOP candidate, whomever it is;
    3) more important, weakness of the campaign that GOP candidate will run;
    4) major MSM assistance to the Obama campaign to build up enthusiasm, or depress opposition, or both;
    5) vote fraud, and the unlikelihood of the GOP’s challenging any but a fraction of it;
    6) the likelihood of violence and/or intimidation at the polls, and the unlikelihood of it being addressed by the authorities

    That’s exactly my point.


  96. Speranza
    97 | March 21, 2012 4:21 pm

    tunnelrat wrote:

    I never see you post anything positive or constructive about the GOP candidates. You resort to labeling them (religious nut, has-been, etc.). Your hatred of Palin and Bachmann borders on being schizophrenic. If you are going to do nothing but parrot left wing talking points, then nothing of value is being added to the conversatio

    I am being constructive when I say that Rick Santorum would get creamed in a general election (after all he lost by 18% in his own home state). I am not a cheerleader and wear blinkers over my eyes. As for the others, I also do not worship politicians, as they are mere mortals. The most liberal Democrat and the most conservative Republican have more in common with each other then they do with the voters who sent them to represent them.


  97. Lily
    98 | March 21, 2012 4:23 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:

    You use the Napoleonic code. That does make you unique!

    LOL! Not to mention I think we are the only state that has Parishes instead of Counties.
    That may be why I see no love for obama even our democratic representives aren’t exactly on board with him. I don’t think much of the south is on board with him.
    I take your opinions to heart though. I give them weight. Actually I am being rather taught more than anything else. But like I said I gotta have some hope to get through this election cycle.
    I pray I am very much surprised by someone who we think will run a squishy campaign. I know it is a pipe dream. ;)


  98. Speranza
    99 | March 21, 2012 4:24 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    I’m no lover of the GOP at this point. I am just waiting to vote against Obama and I am out!

    Moi aussi.


  99. yenta-fada
    100 | March 21, 2012 4:25 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ yenta-fada:
    Who is Ron Paul bigoted towards?

    He’s not too fussy about Jews. Seeing all the Paulian posts on gold chat boards for a decade leads me to think he’s not well disposed towards black Americans. His followers are certainly anti-semitic and easily made racial comments while Ozero was running. A decade of watching his followers gives me a lot of insight. A lot of times, it’s what they don’t say. They do point out all the negative stats on black Americans.


  100. buzzsawmonkey
    101 | March 21, 2012 4:25 pm

    Lily wrote:

    I pray I am very much surprised by someone who we think will run a squishy campaign.

    Romney will run a campaign that will make custard look diamond-hard.


  101. 102 | March 21, 2012 4:25 pm

    @ Lily:

    You are in the South, which is why you don’t see this love of Obama. Here in Florida, its split and I can tell you, the love of Obama is deeply rooted. We are dealing with a national cult.


  102. Lily
    103 | March 21, 2012 4:26 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:

    I’m no lover of the GOP at this point. I am just waiting to vote against Obama and I am out!

    Oh I know. Right now I am no lover of any politician. They are mere men. I answer to a higher Authority. I just want bho out of office.


  103. buzzsawmonkey
    104 | March 21, 2012 4:27 pm

    Romney has a political tin ear big enough to provide roofs for half the favelas in Rio.


  104. Speranza
    105 | March 21, 2012 4:27 pm

    yenta-fada wrote:

    Your hatred of Palin and Bachmann borders on being schizophrenic

    Close enough to name calling.

    Baloney. Palin to me was a quitter and Bachmann was shall we say not the brightest person in the race (Gardasil causes mental retardation?). You can call that schizophrenic if you’d like.


  105. Lily
    106 | March 21, 2012 4:28 pm

    @ Rodan:

    I believe you. I do. I hope Florida doesn’t go to obama. What has he done good for you guys there? Doesn’t the people understand that there?


  106. yenta-fada
    107 | March 21, 2012 4:29 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    yenta-fada wrote:
    Your hatred of Palin and Bachmann borders on being schizophrenic
    Baloney. Palin to me was a quitter and Bachmann was shall we say not the brightest person in the race (Gardasil causes mental retardation?). You can call that schizophrenic if you’d like.

    mmmkay.


  107. buzzsawmonkey
    108 | March 21, 2012 4:30 pm

    Lily wrote:

    What has he done good for you guys there? Doesn’t the people understand that there?

    Remember this: You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.


  108. Alberta Oil Peon
    109 | March 21, 2012 4:31 pm

    @ yenta-fada:
    In other words, what they are doing is kiting checks. If you or I did that, we would go to jail.


  109. Lily
    110 | March 21, 2012 4:31 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Lily wrote:

    I pray I am very much surprised by someone who we think will run a squishy campaign.

    Romney will run a campaign that will make custard look diamond-hard.

    I honestly believe that. Because anything said about obama even if it is on his policies or the damage he is doing to the United States comes through the media as ‘racist’.


  110. Lily
    111 | March 21, 2012 4:33 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Lily wrote:

    What has he done good for you guys there? Doesn’t the people understand that there?

    Remember this: You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.

    True. I have seen this with my mother. But she has come to see she made a mistake in voting for him. Whether she will ever be able to vote for a Republican is up for grabs, I doubt it. What I see happening to her is she will simply not vote.


  111. 112 | March 21, 2012 4:33 pm

    @ yenta-fada:
    Most Republicans reject anti-semitism. Its not Jews they hate or are planning to target.


  112. 113 | March 21, 2012 4:34 pm

    @ Lily:

    Its a cult, so facts don’t matter. Obama is cleansing America of its sins. That’s how they view it.


  113. Alberta Oil Peon
    114 | March 21, 2012 4:37 pm

    Ron Paul is not a Republican, nor are most of his Paulbots. He’s a Libertarian who is using the Republican Party as a vehicle because the Libertarian Party is broke down in the ditch. (the ECM is fried, I think)


  114. Speranza
    115 | March 21, 2012 4:38 pm

    @ yenta-fada:
    That was directed to tunnelrat , not you.


  115. yenta-fada
    116 | March 21, 2012 4:38 pm

    Alberta Oil Peon wrote:

    @ yenta-fada:
    In other words, what they are doing is kiting checks. If you or I did that, we would go to jail.

    For sure. That’s a good way to describe the situation. There are others, all fraudulent. They left imprudent in the dust.


  116. yenta-fada
    117 | March 21, 2012 4:38 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    yenta-fada wrote:
    Your hatred of Palin and Bachmann borders on being schizophrenic
    Baloney. Palin to me was a quitter and Bachmann was shall we say not the brightest person in the race (Gardasil causes mental retardation?). You can call that schizophrenic if you’d like.

    That’s what tunnelrat said. I was defending you. I hate blockquotes.


  117. buzzsawmonkey
    118 | March 21, 2012 4:39 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    Comments such as the one Gingrich made over the Susan Smith tragedy is one of the reasons why we no longer win national elections (and if we do, it is usually a squeaker).

    No, the reason Republicans no longer win national elections is that they have ceded the playing field to the Democrats, and instead of talking honestly about American values, they promise to give the electorate not quite as much borrowed money as the Democrats promise, and to give it more grudgingly.

    That’s a losing message.


  118. Lily
    119 | March 21, 2012 4:40 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:

    Its a cult, so facts don’t matter. Obama is cleansing America of its sins. That’s how they view it.

    I honestly don’t see how they can wrap their head around this point of view. The people you come encounter too think like this?
    The people who voted for bho that I have encountered are just true blue straight down the line D voters. Doesn’t matter they view it as what letter is behind the name D or R and they could never bring themselves to vote for someone with an R behind their name, no matter what.


  119. yenta-fada
    120 | March 21, 2012 4:41 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ yenta-fada:
    Most Republicans reject anti-semitism. Its not Jews they hate or are planning to target.

    Paulians are a weird mix of left and right. They are extremists who call themselves strict Constitutionalists.(when it is convenient)


  120. Speranza
    121 | March 21, 2012 4:42 pm

    yenta-fada wrote:

    That’s what tunnelrat said. I was defending you. I hate blockquotes.

    So do I. If you point out that some people are weak/flawed candidates it does not make you a complainer, just a realist.


  121. yenta-fada
    122 | March 21, 2012 4:42 pm

    Lily wrote:

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:
    Lily wrote:
    What has he done good for you guys there? Doesn’t the people understand that there?
    Remember this: You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.
    True. I have seen this with my mother. But she has come to see she made a mistake in voting for him. Whether she will ever be able to vote for a Republican is up for grabs, I doubt it. What I see happening to her is she will simply not vote.

    Your mother has you to educate her. That’s not true for the leftists who live in a leftist bubble. There’s always a way to distort the facts.


  122. yenta-fada
    123 | March 21, 2012 4:43 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    @ yenta-fada:
    That was directed to tunnelrat , not you.

    Oh. :-)


  123. 124 | March 21, 2012 4:44 pm

    @ Alberta Oil Peon:

    I’ll be a Libertarian November 7th after the election. So I will see what they are about.


  124. 125 | March 21, 2012 4:45 pm

    @ Lily:

    The people you come encounter too think like this?

    Yes, they are hipsters who think Obama is a savior.


  125. buzzsawmonkey
    126 | March 21, 2012 4:45 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    I’ll be a Libertarian

    Not to be confused with a Liebermantarian…


  126. Alberta Oil Peon
    127 | March 21, 2012 4:45 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:
    In other words, the GOP has ceased to be a conservative party at all. If the Dems are nanny-state socialists racing down the road to perdition in a Corvette with their foot mashed down on the loud pedal, the GOP are the ones tooling down that same road in a Crown Vic, fedora pushed back on their head, cruise set at 54, and the right blinker on.

    Time to bury the GOP, say the last rites, and develop a real conservative party. Maybe you could call it the Constitutional Party.


  127. 128 | March 21, 2012 4:45 pm

    @ yenta-fada:

    The Republican Party is strange mix of some Right and mostly Left. Paulians are no different it seems.


  128. yenta-fada
    129 | March 21, 2012 4:46 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:
    Its a cult, so facts don’t matter. Obama is cleansing America of its sins. That’s how they view it.

    Obama is cleansing them of their money and rights. You have a point about the “redemptive” aspect of Ozero’s appeal.


  129. buzzsawmonkey
    130 | March 21, 2012 4:46 pm

    Did you guys catch Keith Ellison’s Blutarsky Moment?


  130. 131 | March 21, 2012 4:46 pm

    @ Alberta Oil Peon:

    The Republicans are no where near being Conservative. They just use Social issues to trick Conservatives.


  131. 132 | March 21, 2012 4:47 pm

    @ yenta-fada:

    They don’t care. They love this man.


  132. Lily
    133 | March 21, 2012 4:47 pm

    yenta-fada wrote:

    Lily wrote:

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:
    Lily wrote:
    What has he done good for you guys there? Doesn’t the people understand that there?
    Remember this: You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.
    True. I have seen this with my mother. But she has come to see she made a mistake in voting for him. Whether she will ever be able to vote for a Republican is up for grabs, I doubt it. What I see happening to her is she will simply not vote.

    Your mother has you to educate her. That’s not true for the leftists who live in a leftist bubble. There’s always a way to distort the facts.

    {yenta} my mother doesn’t listen to me. What got through to her was her grandson. My son has been just about jumping out of his skin with obama trashing the Constitution. It was him backing me up. Then he showed her facts.
    She did listen to me about the OWS protests. When it first came out she said they are speaking for me. What? I told hell no they aren’t.
    Showed her a few videos of those nuts and she said wow.


  133. tunnelrat
    134 | March 21, 2012 4:49 pm

    Palin to me was a quitter and Bachmann was shall we say not the brightest person in the race

    @ Speranza:

    Again, you resort to labeling people based on a single event or on the left wing narrative. Are you aware that Michelle Bachmann has been a tax attorney for two decades? She may not be the best public speaker, but she is not dumb. Sarah Palin did resign as Governor, but she did not leave the national stage. She does a lot of fundraising duties for other candidates and appears often on media to blunt left wing talking points.

    By your logic, Rush Limbaugh is a hater, Rick Perry is a racist, Herman Cain is a sexual predator, and Ronald Reagan was a senile old man. You are pigeon-holing our people into caricatures- much like any left wing blogger would do.


  134. Lily
    135 | March 21, 2012 4:50 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Lily:

    The people you come encounter too think like this?

    Yes, they are hipsters who think Obama is a savior.

    Wow. Apparently they have foresaken a belief in the true God and have put their faith into a wanna be man-savior. Nothing good can come from this type of thinking.


  135. yenta-fada
    136 | March 21, 2012 4:50 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ yenta-fada:
    The Republican Party is strange mix of some Right and mostly Left. Paulians are no different it seems.

    Except for the Paul part. lol He’s a nutbar. He has engaged a lot of people who are seriously angry at government over reach in every aspect of life. It’s easier to see from outside the U.S. imo.


  136. yenta-fada
    137 | March 21, 2012 4:53 pm

    @ Lily:

    Wow. Now it takes a village to make a Republican?/


  137. yenta-fada
    138 | March 21, 2012 4:57 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Did you guys catch Keith Ellison’s Blutarsky Moment?

    Muslim talking points + ignorance. argh.


  138. Lily
    139 | March 21, 2012 4:59 pm

    yenta-fada wrote:

    @ Lily:

    Wow. Now it takes a village to make a Republican?/

    It’s like a rubber-band effect to be honest. These type of people who vote D straight down the line no matter who is the candidate are a sight to behold. Once you give them the facts and they agree because they can’t refute it because it’s the facts. In two to three days time they snap back into their old way of thinking. From my view it isn’t so much about obama worship it is anti-Republican no matter what.
    They simply could never pull the lever for someone with an R behind thier name. Never, ever.
    But it seems this is just a sub-set of voters who voted obama in.
    Apparently from what Rodan says there is another sub-set who worship him and I have no doubt this is true.


  139. waldensianspirit
    140 | March 21, 2012 5:34 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    People better get out and vote for Romney in November other wise they should STFU about Obama from Jan. 2013 onwards.

    Be ready for the mantle’s weight defending Romney Jan. 2013 onwards.


  140. 141 | March 21, 2012 5:35 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    Rancher

    Hispanics in New Mexico are anti-illegal immigration. At least the ones who can legally vote are.


  141. Da_Beerfreak
    142 | March 21, 2012 6:24 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Lily wrote:
    I pray I am very much surprised by someone who we think will run a squishy campaign.
    Romney will run a campaign that will make custard look diamond-hard.

    Custard stood a much better chance of victory at the Little Big Horn than Mitt McRomney will have in the General Election… :roll:


  142. Speranza
    143 | March 21, 2012 8:21 pm

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    Custard stood a much better chance of victory at the Little Big Horn than Mitt McRomney will have in the General Election… :roll:

    Custer maybe but not Custard which would have melted in the June heat.


  143. Speranza
    144 | March 21, 2012 8:23 pm

    tunnelrat wrote:

    Again, you resort to labeling people based on a single event or on the left wing narrative. Are you aware that Michelle Bachmann has been a tax attorney for two decades?

    So that qualifies her to be POTUS?


  144. Speranza
    145 | March 21, 2012 8:24 pm

    tunnelrat wrote:

    By your logic, Rush Limbaugh is a hater, Rick Perry is a racist, Herman Cain is a sexual predator, and Ronald Reagan was a senile old man.

    Now that is utterly absurd -- I am done with this nonsense.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David