First time visitor? Learn more.

The Mechanics Of Winning Back The Culture: Part Four

by Flyovercountry ( 167 Comments › )
Filed under Conservatism, Elections 2016, Politics at November 28th, 2012 - 12:00 pm

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

This one is going to be a bit complicated, as I am having trouble explaining it to myself. So, I have two requests of you. One is to bear with my while I make this journey, and the other is that you help me refine my message through comment. My point is this, beware of the purity tests. They don’t help, and more often than not lead to disastrous results.

We need well rounded leaders who are intelligent and articulate on a wide range of issues, and who mostly represent what we stand for. Unfortunately and fortunately, we are not an homogeneous group. Conservatism has many forms, and many different schools of thought. We have among our numbers, social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, libertarians, neoconservatives, hawks, free marketeers, and sorry to any of the other constituent groups that I may have missed. Each of us has our very own and personal reasons for supporting candidates who reside on the right side of the aisle. Each of us feels his or her very own sense of passion as to why we support what we do. Through our own prisms, we tend to see the world, and have precious little tolerance for the others in our coalition. This, lack of tolerance for others on our own side played as much of a role in our electoral shellackings recently as any other cause.

I am not advocating for capitulation on our principles, just some common sense when applying those principles. At some point in time, getting more right than wrong will have to become ample reason to support a candidate who is running against someone who is more wrong than right. Every time a purity test is applied on a particular candidate, we run the risk of shooting ourselves in the foot, and I say this being just as angry as the rest of you with watching the likes of Olympia Snow, Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins stab us in the back politically every chance that pops up. (Let’s not forget that Olympia Snowe’s lone vote made it possible for the Obamacare abomination to be passed. Her stated reason for stabbing us all in the back was that the time was right for her to be a part of history.) But, for every Olympia Snowe, I can also point to a Todd Aiken, a politician who is conservative on one issue only, and has no clue on any ground away from that one issue.

Purity tests to determine support on one issue, or to eliminate a candidate on the basis of one issue have never produced positive results. No one of us will see the perfect candidate who matches everything we believe individually come along. The odds are even worse that a magic candidate will come along who will satisfy the requirements of all of us collectively. Such a person does not exist, and what’s more, if they did exist, we probably should not trust them anyhow. That would mean that there’d be a whole lot of pandering going on. Staying home because a particular candidate did not have the exact position on one particular issue that you may use as your litmus test will insure that we never rid ourselves of the ever expanding federal behemoth inflicted upon us by the Leftists, who are more than willing to prostitute their values in order to form their coalition.

Elections have consequences. Even during the years in which we have seen the most successful third party candidates, our President has been from one of the two prevailing major parties of the time. The same can be said of control of the Senate and the House. With all of our talk about being angry with the Republican Party, the plain and simple fact is that if the GOP does not take back the Senate, Keep the House, and win the Presidency over the next four years, the Democrats will have control of those various organs of government. If your goal is to lodge a protest and allow the disaster to happen, because America needs to continue learning this lesson, I can not get on that bandwagon. I refuse to root for continued damage to our national fabric and more hardship for my fellow citizen in order to prove a point, or even in order to help win future elections.

The primaries are designed for infighting, afterwards is better served with unity. Let’s be respectful of the other voices we hear though, we are going to need them all later on down the road. What the Democrats have become really adept at is to create small issues that would help them secure 3% to 5% of the voters, delivered in blocks of people who are really passionate about those things. With 5 to 6 of those added to their base, they can reach their coalition of 51% and claim that they have a mandate to push their entire agenda forward. The danger of course is the backlash of what happens when they do misread their mandate, as happened in 2010. What the Republicans are really good at is to take the center right coalition that they have naturally, and to anger groups of 3% to 5% of their coalition with these incredibly arbitrary litmus tests. All it takes is a subtraction of 6% of voters from the 55% of people who self identify as conservative, and you have reduced yourself to the losing end of a 51% to 49%, “landslide.”

Pulling defeat from the jaws of victory is the ever enduring hall mark of the Republican Party.

Special Note: I am not considering the Paulbats to be victims of any litmus testing that went on. The shenanigans that they pulled at various caucuses during the primaries and what they attempted to pull off during the convention was plainly wrong. While many claim that by not listening to them, we caused them to not feel welcome in our coalition, this misses the mark of reality completely. The fact is, these people were never part of our coalition to begin with. They were never voters from the right, and are never going to be. They were there to vote for Ron Paul, or no one. This has always been the case, and further, it always will be the case. What they attempted to do at the convention was to hold up Romney’s nomination, and instill their own man instead, even though he was clearly not the choice of well over 90% of the people who bothered to vote in the primaries. When their attempts to subvert the will of the voters failed, they stomped their feet and declared that they would never support anyone but Ron Paul. The dirty little secret is that they would have done this, no matter who the nominee turned out to be. What’s worse, is that they were bragging about their attempts to subvert the will of the Republican voters in on line forums before the convention took place. They were very vocal about how they were going to take over the convention no matter who won the majority of delegates and secure the nomination for their man. This essay was about the dangers of telling the Right to Life crowd to settle down and be silent, telling the Second Amendment crowd to just accept the infringements upon their right to carry guns, or telling the free marketeers to be silent when a Presidential candidate supposedly on our side proposes an indexed minimum wage scale. It is also about people from the aforementioned groups using their singular issues as a litmus test before pulling the lever or not pulling the lever without considering the alternative, for example a second Barack Obama term in office. After all, how do you believe Barack Obama will affect right to life, our Second Amendment Rights, or how will he impact our free market system?

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

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!

167 Responses to “The Mechanics Of Winning Back The Culture: Part Four”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | November 28, 2012 12:04 pm

    I am not advocating for capitulation on our principles, just some common sense when applying those principles. At some point in time, getting more right than wrong will have to become ample reason to support a candidate who is running against someone who is more wrong than right. Every time a purity test is applied on a particular candidate, we run the risk of shooting ourselves in the foot, and I say this being just as angry as the rest of you with watching the likes of Olympia Snow, Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins stab us in the back politically every chance that pops up. (Let’s not forget that Olympia Snowe’s lone vote made it possible for the Obamacare abomination to be passed. Her stated reason for stabbing us all in the back was that the time was right for her to be a part of history.) But, for every Olympia Snowe, I can also point to a Todd Aiken, a politician who is conservative on one issue only, and has no clue on any ground away from that one issue.

    Well written!


  2. 2 | November 28, 2012 12:08 pm

    Pulling defeat from the jaws of victory is the ever enduring hall mark of the Republican Party.

    The GOP lacks Discipline!


  3. heysoos
    3 | November 28, 2012 12:15 pm

    pretty much my own sentiments, which were not popular before the election…I’m a conservative, not a republican and have no problem criticising either party…well written too


  4. waldensianspirit
    4 | November 28, 2012 12:22 pm

    Mitt Romney: A good man. The right fight.


  5. RIX
    5 | November 28, 2012 12:30 pm

    @ waldensianspirit:
    Romney was not the problem. As I see it the problems
    were the Obama & MSM smear machine and the gullibility
    of the public.
    “Romney is a vulture capitalist, he is a felon, he killed
    a woman, Ann Romney never worked a day in her life (Even
    though she got through cancer, MS & raised five boys)”
    The voters should have been sickened by the smears, but
    instead the reelected Obama.


  6. waldensianspirit
    6 | November 28, 2012 12:37 pm

    @ RIX:
    Exactly.

    Some around here aren’t accepting that America is full of those wanting a government handout and government to take care of them now outnumber us


  7. RIX
    7 | November 28, 2012 12:40 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Exactly.
    Some around here aren’t accepting that America is full of those wanting a government handout and government to take care of them now outnumber us

    That is really the issue isn’t it?
    I thought from the jump that this was
    a watershed election & I still do.
    It says more about the people who elected the
    incompetent fraud than it does about him.


  8. 8 | November 28, 2012 12:41 pm

    RIX wrote:

    The voters should have been sickened by the smears, but
    instead the reelected Obama.

    Dirty politics works. Obama ran one of the dirtiest campaigns in American history, and without doubt the dirtiest one in modern history. And he won. Part of that was because he was buying votes with the public treasury. How many women does Sandra Fluke really represent? We thought it would be a tiny minority, but it appears rather that it is a substantial majority of women that she resonated with. I don’t know how we defeat that. I am not sure that we can, but I do know that it can only run on for so long. At some point our creditors are going to get tired of loaning us money for effectively 0% interest. When that happens, the party is over.


  9. RIX
    9 | November 28, 2012 12:41 pm

    Later gators.


  10. Storagemanager
    10 | November 28, 2012 12:44 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    @ RIX:
    Exactly.
    Some around here aren’t accepting that America is full of those wanting a government handout and government to take care of them now outnumber us

    That is why….everything obama does kills jobs and wealth and is a direct attack on the middle class…kill the middle class…in the end …lower class and elites….no other class


  11. ferb123
    11 | November 28, 2012 12:46 pm

    By the way, who is the leader of your party at the moment?

    And who are the persons you called establishment?
    XDDDD


  12. buzzsawmonkey
    12 | November 28, 2012 12:46 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    everything obama does kills jobs and wealth and is a direct attack on the middle class…

    He is true to the teachings of his pastor of twenty years, who advocated “the disavowal of middleclassness.” He was paying attention when he was sitting in the pews.


  13. Tanker
    13 | November 28, 2012 12:51 pm

    Well written post! With 50%+ of the country voting for the free hand out from the treasury, we could give up all of our principles and we will still lose.

    This country needs a reset and only total collapse will get us there. Too far gone at this point for anything else to work!

    Let the dems have what they want and be done with it, just make them own it. This slow decline will only make it harder in the end to fix it.


  14. 14 | November 28, 2012 12:52 pm

    YOu all will like this. Personally, I don’t think Obama is bluffing, and I don’t think he wants a deal. I think he wants a recession he can blame on the Republicans.


  15. CynicalConservative
    15 | November 28, 2012 12:53 pm

    @ Tanker:
    Agree. Let it burn.

    /galt


  16. buzzsawmonkey
    16 | November 28, 2012 12:57 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Personally, I don’t think Obama is bluffing

    He’s a lousy bluffer; remember his telegraphing “don’t call my bluff?” He wants the crash; it’s his “mandate.”


  17. Storagemanager
    17 | November 28, 2012 12:57 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    YOu all will like this. Personally, I don’t think Obama is bluffing, and I don’t think he wants a deal. I think he wants a recession he can blame on the Republicans.

    He wants America to fail…to be a third world country…then America will be to busy at home to be a threat to anyone…


  18. Speranza
    18 | November 28, 2012 12:58 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    Pulling defeat from the jaws of victory is the ever enduring hall mark of the Republican Party.

    The GOP lacks Discipline!

    The GOP allowed itself to be held hostage by a minority but loud group and we are paying the price.


  19. Storagemanager
    19 | November 28, 2012 12:58 pm

    Obama is killing America from the inside…just like cancer does.


  20. bluliner10
    20 | November 28, 2012 12:58 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    @ RIX:
    Exactly.
    Some around here aren’t accepting that America is full of those wanting a government handout and government to take care of them now outnumber us

    Romney let this fight get away from him. Allowing the demoncraps to use veterans as a part of the 47% was a garbage but effective move. Romney needed to separate earned from entitled.


  21. ferb123
    21 | November 28, 2012 12:59 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    YOu all will like this. Personally, I don’t think Obama is bluffing, and I don’t think he wants a deal. I think he wants a recession he can blame on the Republicans.

    no no, Obama is a narcissi. He wants 100% of America love him. :)


  22. buzzsawmonkey
    22 | November 28, 2012 1:00 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    Obama is killing America from the inside…just like cancer does.

    “Yes, we can, sir!”


  23. Speranza
    23 | November 28, 2012 1:00 pm

    ferb123 wrote:

    By the way, who is the leader of your party at the moment?
    And who are the persons you called establishment?
    XDDDD

    Who is the leader of your party -- Gerhard Shroeder?
    XDDDDD


  24. Tanker
    24 | November 28, 2012 1:01 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    Rodan wrote:
    Pulling defeat from the jaws of victory is the ever enduring hall mark of the Republican Party.
    The GOP lacks Discipline!

    The GOP allowed itself to be held hostage by a minority but loud group and we are paying the price.

    What group was that?


  25. ferb123
    25 | November 28, 2012 1:03 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    ferb123 wrote:
    By the way, who is the leader of your party at the moment?
    And who are the persons you called establishment?
    XDDDD

    Who is the leader of your party — Gerhard Shroeder?
    XDDDDD

    Last election I voted for Angie Merkel
    XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD


  26. 26 | November 28, 2012 1:05 pm

    @ Tanker:

    I can’t think of anything that can stop it. The Democrats intend to spend to the last dime that they can borrow. And they will keep on borrowing or printing money until the economy collapses. Assuming that the Republicans want to stop it, it is really too late, and they simply do not have the power. I’d advise them to vote “Present” to tax hikes, and make sure that they are know far and wide as the Obama Tax Increases.


  27. heysoos
    27 | November 28, 2012 1:11 pm

    Tanker wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    Rodan wrote:
    Pulling defeat from the jaws of victory is the ever enduring hall mark of the Republican Party.
    The GOP lacks Discipline!
    The GOP allowed itself to be held hostage by a minority but loud group and we are paying the price.

    What group was that?

    the lousy 2000 people in DC and NYC that run this whole criminal enterprise


  28. RIX
    28 | November 28, 2012 1:13 pm

    @ Storagemanager
    Obama holds the Class in contempt.


  29. 29 | November 28, 2012 1:13 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    RIX wrote:
    The voters should have been sickened by the smears, but
    instead the reelected Obama.
    Dirty politics works. Obama ran one of the dirtiest campaigns in American history, and without doubt the dirtiest one in modern history. And he won. Part of that was because he was buying votes with the public treasury. How many women does Sandra Fluke really represent? We thought it would be a tiny minority, but it appears rather that it is a substantial majority of women that she resonated with. I don’t know how we defeat that. I am not sure that we can, but I do know that it can only run on for so long. At some point our creditors are going to get tired of loaning us money for effectively 0% interest. When that happens, the party is over.

    Or hinting that he would raid the public treasury in the future to buy their votes -- and then leave them high and dry (or awash in mud, as many people in New Jersey could tell you).

    What about all of those students who voted for Obama this time around, under the misapprehension that he would forgive their student loan debt?


  30. 30 | November 28, 2012 1:14 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    Mitt Romney: A good man. The right fight.

    Not so much -- especially when the Washing Post says it.

    Most of us didn’t trust him because he’s been such a flip-flopper in the past. We voted for him solely because he wasn’t Obama.


  31. Storagemanager
    31 | November 28, 2012 1:21 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    waldensianspirit wrote:
    Mitt Romney: A good man. The right fight.

    Not so much — especially when the Washing Post says it.
    Most of us didn’t trust him because he’s been such a flip-flopper in the past. We voted for him solely because he wasn’t Obama.

    Mitt is having lunch with Obama…nuff said.


  32. 32 | November 28, 2012 1:21 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    I was well pleased by the selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate. That showed that he took the Debt seriously, which at best Obama does not. That was the thing that convinced me that flip-flopper or not I could support Romney, and not just hold my nose and vote for him because he wasn’t an obvious enemy of this country.


  33. buzzsawmonkey
    33 | November 28, 2012 1:22 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    What about all of those students who voted for Obama this time around, under the misapprehension that he would forgive their student loan debt?

    He’s the silver-tongued Loan Arranger, followed about by a flock of tontos. And very much a masked man.


  34. buzzsawmonkey
    34 | November 28, 2012 1:22 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    Mitt is having lunch with Obama…nuff said.

    If they have grapefruit for an appetizer, he should pull a Cagney move.


  35. RIX
    35 | November 28, 2012 1:26 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    Not so much — especially when the Washing Post says it.

    Most of us didn’t trust him because he’s been such a flip-flopper in the past. We voted for him solely because he wasn’t Obama

    .

    “I am not Obama” should have been enough to get elected.


  36. 36 | November 28, 2012 1:29 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ 1389AD:
    I was well pleased by the selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate. That showed that he took the Debt seriously, which at best Obama does not. That was the thing that convinced me that flip-flopper or not I could support Romney, and not just hold my nose and vote for him because he wasn’t an obvious enemy of this country.

    You have a point there.

    Storagemanager wrote:

    Mitt is having lunch with Obama…nuff said.

    That isn’t news…that’s nause.


  37. 37 | November 28, 2012 1:29 pm

    @ RIX:

    I am not FDR should have been enough to beat FDR during the Depression, and FDR wasn’t the FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT. I was never under any illusion that Obama would be hard to beat, but I thought we had more enthusiasm on our side than we did. I mistook the local mood (we went for Romeny 59-39) for the National Mood.


  38. waldensianspirit
    38 | November 28, 2012 1:33 pm

    @ Iron Fist:
    I also mistook all those liberal papers endorsing Romney. Now nothing is said about them


  39. 39 | November 28, 2012 1:39 pm

    RIX wrote:

    @ 1389AD:
    Not so much — especially when the Washing Post says it.
    Most of us didn’t trust him because he’s been such a flip-flopper in the past. We voted for him solely because he wasn’t Obama
    .
    “I am not Obama” should have been enough to get elected.

    Election fraud played a major role.

    As did Romney’s refusal to make a big issue of Benghazi.


  40. 40 | November 28, 2012 1:46 pm

    Fantastic post! The threatening to stay home or go third party is not only destructive, it’s essentially ignoring that, mathematically, it’s a vote for the Democrats. I’ve always envied the Democrats’ ability to completely eviscerate each other during the primaries then coalesce, almost magically, as the closing gavel comes down. Democrats have the politics down pat while Republicans, despite being an actual political party, seem to operate as a never-ending debating society populated by people with seemingly only one common philosophical thread -- they’re not, and never will be Democrats. We should share basic tenets like smaller government, lower taxes, economic freedom, free markets and a muscular national defense, but even those are oft subject to debate.

    Personally, I think our future lies with the (small L) libertarian faction that has taken root in the Republican Party of late… .and I DON’T mean the PaulBots. Democrats have lived down to their Leftist roots and, predictably, become so damned authoritarian that people will be looking toward relief. We also need to lighten up and stop the moralizing, developed civilizations tend to become more socially liberal with time, that doesn’t mean that the civilization is necessarily collapsing (and even if it is, going all Santorum or Huckabee and giving a series of sermons about the evils of pop culture is not going to save us). The best favor Republicans can do for themselves in the short term is to understand pop culture so that they can speak intelligently about it, then understand that they’re not going to change it. We’re all about free markets, right? Pop culture is the purest example of free markets that you can find!

    As for appealing to all of the various genders, ethnicities and ever-expanding interest groups, divisions, and sub-divisions into which we have fractured ourselves, over-riding “Republican” ethos is remarkably tailored to span these divisions. It has the capability to unite us, while the Democrat ethos is tailored to divide us. Smaller government, lower taxes, economic freedom, free markets and a muscular national defense are ideas that have universal appeal, or at least they should.

    Our message is sound, our messengers have been lacking.


  41. waldensianspirit
    41 | November 28, 2012 1:49 pm

    @ MacDuff:
    Get the RINOs out and there would be a better chance of coalescing


  42. 42 | November 28, 2012 1:50 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    Mitt is having lunch with Obama…nuff said.

    Really? What would you have Romney do with an invitation for lunch, tell Obama to fuck himself or otherwise decline? Sorry, I don’t know who or what would be served by that.


  43. 43 | November 28, 2012 1:52 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    Get the RINOs out and there would be a better chance of coalescing

    That’s why we have primaries.


  44. waldensianspirit
    44 | November 28, 2012 1:52 pm

    Obama is supporting the current Egyptian protesters as much as he supported the Iranian protesters. … … … What changed?


  45. 45 | November 28, 2012 1:53 pm

    n@ 1389AD:

    I agree. We have the same problem over and over again -- the nominees are all about the optics and not about the realities. Romney got gun shy after the Cairo kerfuffle and the way the press reacted. But that was not Benghazi and it was not lies. Romney could have shown himself as a tougher leader on the foreign policy front.

    Instead he looked like a jerk who agreed with the disastrous foreign policy of Obama.


  46. waldensianspirit
    46 | November 28, 2012 1:56 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    That’s why we have primaries.

    ? What candidates to the left of Romney got weeded out?

    /depends on what the word weeded means I guess


  47. waldensianspirit
    47 | November 28, 2012 1:57 pm

    @ Carolina Girl:
    We have the problem noone in their right mind wants to run for POTUS


  48. 48 | November 28, 2012 2:00 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    n@ 1389AD:

    I agree. We have the same problem over and over again — the nominees are all about the optics and not about the realities. Romney got gun shy after the Cairo kerfuffle and the way the press reacted. But that was not Benghazi and it was not lies. Romney could have shown himself as a tougher leader on the foreign policy front.

    Instead he looked like a jerk who agreed with the disastrous foreign policy of Obama.

    Given the media’s clear loyalties, the Republican candidate has to get it right the first time, every time, there’s no room for error of any kind. One slip-up, one ill-chosen word or phrase and it’s a meme until election day. There’s always been media bias, but it’s never been this focused or this acute.


  49. taxfreekiller
    49 | November 28, 2012 2:07 pm

    OK,

    Kerry for SOS, so’s he has to do Obama crazy shit for 4 years.
    Kerry has to give up his Mass. Senate seat.
    Brown or some other R might get the seat.

    Kerry ends his political life as Obama’s gofer’

    all good seems to me


  50. buzzsawmonkey
    50 | November 28, 2012 2:07 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    Obama is supporting the current Egyptian protesters as much as he supported the Iranian protesters. … … … What changed?

    Morsi is his morsel.


  51. 51 | November 28, 2012 2:07 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    ? What candidates to the left of Romney got weeded out?

    /depends on what the word weeded means I guess

    …and I guess it depends upon the meaning of “left”.


  52. taxfreekiller
    52 | November 28, 2012 2:11 pm

    Now if Romney goes to the meet up tomorrow.

    Pours the beer out on the table, “Just dropped by to tell you that you a no good liar and a clear and present danger to yourself and the constitution.”

    Turns walks out,hands the film of the meeting to Rachetface Madcow,,,”show it bitch, make my day.”


  53. taxfreekiller
    53 | November 28, 2012 2:12 pm

    Kerry for SOS would make him a second handed liar.


  54. Storagemanager
    54 | November 28, 2012 2:12 pm

    @ MacDuff:
    Right…one should never take a stand..it might hurt someones feelings….maybe Obama should play the song feelings for lunch..


  55. Moe Katz
    55 | November 28, 2012 2:14 pm

    Animal welfare: Germany moves to ban bestiality. [snip]

    But Michael Kiok, the chairman of the pressure group Zoophile Engagement for Tolerance and Information (Zeta), said he was going to take legal action to fight the proposed changes.

    “It is unthinkable that any sexual act with an animal is punished without proof that the animal has come to any harm,” he said, adding that animals are capable of showing what they do, or do not, want to do.

    “We see animals as partners and not as a means of gratification. We don’t force them to do anything. Animals are much easier to understand than women,” Mr Kiok claimed.


  56. 56 | November 28, 2012 2:16 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    Right…one should never take a stand..it might hurt someones feelings….maybe Obama should play the song feelings for lunch..

    Taking a stand is only valuable if it accomplishes something. So, what do you think Romney dissing Obama would accomplish?


  57. Storagemanager
    57 | November 28, 2012 2:18 pm

    According to diplomatic officials, the United States, China, Russia, France, Germany, and Britain have offered to renew negotiations with Iran this coming December regarding its nuclear plan. Iran has not yet responded to this diplomatic offer. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/256208

    Tehran signals defiance ahead of possible talks with world powers; head of Iraninan atom agency says country plans to continue uranium refinement ‘with intensity’ http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4313018,00.html


  58. Storagemanager
    58 | November 28, 2012 2:19 pm

    @ MacDuff:
    A polite…I am busy…would make the base feel better…having lunch with Obama…pisses me off.


  59. 59 | November 28, 2012 2:20 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    Yep -- but notice the guy in the debates that got the most press -- Newt Gingrich -- for telling off the media and deriding them for their ridiculous questions.

    I remember the debate in 2008 when they did the same thing and Fred Thompson -- in the voice that drips with acid and authority -- told them to, essentially, knock off the high-school crap.

    The media is like any other bully at times — sometimes you just look the Gorgon in the face and swing the sword — and they run and whine (at least until they can regroup).


  60. Da_Beerfreak
    60 | November 28, 2012 2:21 pm

    The D’Rats want to destroy the Republicans and will use any and all means possible to advance their goal of a one party state.

    The Republicans want to reach across the aisle and work with the D’Rats.

    What’s wrong with this picture???


  61. 61 | November 28, 2012 2:22 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    pretty much my own sentiments, which were not popular before the election…I’m a conservative, not a republican and have no problem criticising either party…well written too

    I held my opinions due to the election. Now I will say what I feel.


  62. Storagemanager
    62 | November 28, 2012 2:22 pm

    Mitt having lunch with Obama leads to

    John McCain and Hillary Clinton’s bipartisan bond http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84297.html


  63. 63 | November 28, 2012 2:23 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    YOu all will like this. Personally, I don’t think Obama is bluffing, and I don’t think he wants a deal. I think he wants a recession he can blame on the Republicans.

    I agree.


  64. Da_Beerfreak
    64 | November 28, 2012 2:24 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    Get the RINOs out and there would be a better chance of coalescing

    That’s why we have primaries.

    Open primaries are a worthless waste of time and money.


  65. 65 | November 28, 2012 2:25 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    A polite…I am busy…would make the base feel better…having lunch with Obama…pisses me off.

    While I can see your point, I think it would reek of pettiness. Romney’s a lot of things, and he’s not a lot of things, but he IS a class act. Personally, I can’t imagine anyone turning down an offer from the President, it’s just not done -- it’s about the office, not the man.


  66. 66 | November 28, 2012 2:28 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    Personally, I think our future lies with the (small L) libertarian faction that has taken root in the Republican Party of late… .and I DON’T mean the PaulBots. Democrats have lived down to their Leftist roots and, predictably, become so damned authoritarian that people will be looking toward relief. We also need to lighten up and stop the moralizing, developed civilizations tend to become more socially liberal with time, that doesn’t mean that the civilization is necessarily collapsing (and even if it is, going all Santorum or Huckabee and giving a series of sermons about the evils of pop culture is not going to save us). The best favor Republicans can do for themselves in the short term is to understand pop culture so that they can speak intelligently about it, then understand that they’re not going to change it. We’re all about free markets, right? Pop culture is the purest example of free markets that you can find!

    You express my feelings on things!


  67. buzzsawmonkey
    67 | November 28, 2012 2:28 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    John McCain and Hillary Clinton’s bipartisan bond

    Now imagine them naked together.


  68. 68 | November 28, 2012 2:28 pm

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    Open primaries are a worthless waste of time and money.

    We definitely need to review the selection process, at all levels.


  69. Storagemanager
    69 | November 28, 2012 2:29 pm

    Extremely Scary Ghost Elevator Prank in Brazil
    The television show is reportedly being sued over this prank.
    You’ll see why. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/best-prank-ever-brazilian-tvs-scary-ghost-elevator-video/


  70. Storagemanager
    70 | November 28, 2012 2:30 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Storagemanager wrote:
    John McCain and Hillary Clinton’s bipartisan bond
    Now imagine them naked together.

    My wife is calling 911..the thought gave me a heart attack..


  71. Speranza
    71 | November 28, 2012 2:31 pm

    @ MacDuff:
    I agree with everything you wrote.


  72. 72 | November 28, 2012 2:32 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    Certainly no harm in listening to what the man has to say. He is after all still the POTUS.


  73. 73 | November 28, 2012 2:32 pm

    buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Now imagine them naked together.

    I’d prefer not to……oh damn, I couldn’t stop it! Ewwww!!


  74. 74 | November 28, 2012 2:33 pm

    The Republicans need to change their foreign policy as well. They are too Interventionist/Nation Building for many Americans. After Iraq, no one cares about spreading Democracy. What we need a economic interest only foreign policy based on a sphere of influence. If it means supporting dictatorships who are in our interest so be it. We need to be more nationalistic and less Internationalist.


  75. 75 | November 28, 2012 2:33 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    I agree with everything you wrote.

    Thanks, but flyovercountry is the one that got the juices flowing.


  76. Storagemanager
    76 | November 28, 2012 2:34 pm

    If Mitt pulls a Chris Christie….better not come around my house for a vote for anything ever again.


  77. 77 | November 28, 2012 2:35 pm

    @ Speranza:
    @ MacDuff:

    Us 3 really see eye to eye on many things!


  78. Da_Beerfreak
    78 | November 28, 2012 2:35 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    Open primaries are a worthless waste of time and money.

    We definitely need to review the selection process, at all levels.

    Until we do I see little chance of anything changing for the better.

    More Folks are not voting each election cycle because they believe the system is rigged and voting as a waste of time. Without true election reforms we will never get those Folks back.


  79. Storagemanager
    79 | November 28, 2012 2:36 pm

    I got 12 powerball tickets…gotta dream.


  80. 80 | November 28, 2012 2:36 pm

    Flyovercountry wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    Certainly no harm in listening to what the man has to say. He is after all still the POTUS.

    Great post by the way! A home run!


  81. 81 | November 28, 2012 2:38 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Storagemanager wrote:
    Mitt is having lunch with Obama…nuff said.
    Really? What would you have Romney do with an invitation for lunch, tell Obama to fuck himself or otherwise decline? Sorry, I don’t know who or what would be served by that.

    He certainly should. Meeting with him gives the impression of impropriety, and given Romney’s history of being a flipflopper and Obama’s history of being a Chicago machine politician, that impression is an exceedingly strong one.

    I suspect that Obama is giving him some sort of a covert payoff for not pressing him on the Benghazi issue, among other things.

    MacDuff wrote:

    waldensianspirit wrote:
    Get the RINOs out and there would be a better chance of coalescing
    That’s why we have primaries.

    The primaries are RIGGED (and in my opinion, hacked) to weed out everyone EXCEPT RINOs.


  82. Da_Beerfreak
    82 | November 28, 2012 2:39 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    The Republicans need to change their foreign policy as well. They are too Interventionist/Nation Building for many Americans. After Iraq, no one cares about spreading Democracy. What we need a economic interest only foreign policy based on a sphere of influence. If it means supporting dictatorships who are in our interest so be it. We need to be more nationalistic and less Internationalist.

    Uncle Sugar has got to stop being the World’s Social Worker.


  83. Storagemanager
    83 | November 28, 2012 2:39 pm

    Over the Thanksgiving holiday, the White House released a big fat policy turkey: its final critical habitat rule for the endangered northern spotted owl. The Obama plan will lock up 9.6 million acres of land (mostly, but not all, federal) in Oregon, Washington and northern California. This is nearly double the acreage set aside by the Bush administration. Thousands of timber workers (along with untold thousands of related support jobs) will be threatened in the name of sparing a few thousand spotted owls from extinction.

    As House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash., pointed out earlier this year, timber-dependent counties hit hard by the federal land grab and unending environmental litigation remain racked by high unemployment. “The loss in economic activity caused by the original spotted owl plan caused an astounding decrease in federal tax receipts of nearly $700 million per year — all from rural Northwest communities.”
    http://michellemalkin.com/


  84. Storagemanager
    84 | November 28, 2012 2:41 pm

    The R’s have no balls….that is why they lose….


  85. 85 | November 28, 2012 2:42 pm

    @ Da_Beerfreak:

    Uncle Sugar has got to stop being the World’s Social Worker.

    I agree with that 100%. There is nothing Conservative about having nations leech off us. It’s global welfare.


  86. lobo91
    86 | November 28, 2012 2:42 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    Personally, I can’t imagine anyone turning down an offer from the President, it’s just not done — it’s about the office, not the man.

    Exactly. I despise Obama, but if I were invited to the White House for a function, I would go.


  87. 87 | November 28, 2012 2:46 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    The R’s have no balls….that is why they lose….

    That probably sums it up very simply.


  88. Storagemanager
    88 | November 28, 2012 2:46 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    Personally, I can’t imagine anyone turning down an offer from the President, it’s just not done — it’s about the office, not the man.
    Exactly. I despise Obama, but if I were invited to the White House for a function, I would go.

    I would not….I would like to keep my soul.


  89. 89 | November 28, 2012 2:46 pm

    @ lobo91:

    Exactly. I despise Obama, but if I were invited to the White House for a function, I would go.

    Exactly, why turn down a good meal?


  90. 90 | November 28, 2012 2:47 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    He certainly should. Meeting with him gives the impression of impropriety, and given Romney’s history of being a flipflopper and Obama’s history of being a Chicago machine politician, that impression is an exceedingly strong one.

    Again, when the President asks for a meeting, you take the meeting. Anyone who wouldn’t afford that much respect to the office doesn’t deserve to have even been considered for it.

    1389AD wrote:

    I suspect that Obama is giving him some sort of a covert payoff for not pressing him on the Benghazi issue, among other things.

    With all due respect, I think that’s bullshit.


  91. Storagemanager
    91 | November 28, 2012 2:48 pm

    Companies Shelling Out Billions to Beat the ‘Fiscal Cliff’ http://www.cnbc.com/id/49993082


  92. 92 | November 28, 2012 2:49 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    Again, when the President asks for a meeting, you take the meeting.

    Hey. why not get a mean out of it?


  93. Storagemanager
    94 | November 28, 2012 2:53 pm

    wrong link in 93 http://weaselzippers.us/


  94. heysoos
    95 | November 28, 2012 2:54 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    Again, when the President asks for a meeting, you take the meeting.
    Hey. why not get a mean out of it?

    I’d give my one last leg for an opportunity to insult BO…he’s bending over backwards to wreck my childrens lives and my country….he’s a liar, a thief, and and asshole and I’d tell him so…he’s only a man and he does not deserve my respect…he’s beneath me and should kiss my ass


  95. 96 | November 28, 2012 2:55 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    Hey. why not get a mean out of it?

    Exactly! :) Obama ate Romney’s lunch, now Romney gets a chance to eat Obama’s! :D


  96. 97 | November 28, 2012 2:55 pm

    @ Storagemanager:

    The Media has his back, so of course he’s not worried.


  97. 98 | November 28, 2012 2:56 pm

    @ Storagemanager:

    Shopping for a nice toy, I see. ;)


  98. Storagemanager
    99 | November 28, 2012 2:58 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    @ Storagemanager:
    Shopping for a nice toy, I see.

    I double clicked and it took me there..lol


  99. 100 | November 28, 2012 2:59 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    :lol:

    Romney will get the laugh meal!


  100. 101 | November 28, 2012 2:59 pm

    @ heysoos:

    I would pay to see you do that!


  101. heysoos
    102 | November 28, 2012 3:00 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Storagemanager:
    The Media has his back, so of course he’s not worried.

    the MSM…the source of my bottomless wrath…you can’t beat those guys, have to let them beat themselves and that will not happen soon…I am very pessimistic


  102. 103 | November 28, 2012 3:00 pm

    @ heysoos:

    Same here. The Media-Entertainment Industrial Complex runs the country.


  103. bluliner10
    104 | November 28, 2012 3:04 pm

    @ Storagemanager:
    This also has been a brilliant play, I don’t really care what Dr Rice said or did either. The true failure at Benghazi was to make a decision. But now the kerfluffle over what Rice said and when or how many times she said it dominates the news coverage.


  104. 105 | November 28, 2012 3:06 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:
    @ MacDuff:
    Personally, I can’t imagine anyone turning down an offer from the President, it’s just not done — it’s about the office, not the man.
    Exactly. I despise Obama, but if I were invited to the White House for a function, I would go.

    I would not….I would like to keep my soul.

    Indeed.

    MacDuff wrote:

    With all due respect, I think that’s bullshit.

    Wait and see, and watch very carefully. Romney, or one of his companies, will end up getting some type of advantage very soon. Maybe it’ll be regulatory leniency; maybe it’ll be funding for a pet project. But there WILL be a payoff.


  105. Storagemanager
    106 | November 28, 2012 3:07 pm

    McCain is all in for NATO being pulled into war.

    McCain supports Patriots for Syria no-fly zone http://www.todayszaman.com/news-299572-.html


  106. 107 | November 28, 2012 3:08 pm

    bluliner10 wrote:

    @ Storagemanager:
    This also has been a brilliant play, I don’t really care what Dr Rice said or did either. The true failure at Benghazi was to make a decision. But now the kerfluffle over what Rice said and when or how many times she said it dominates the news coverage.

    I think the Obama administration, including the CIA and the State Department, DID make a decision: to hang our people out to dry, rather than to send in forces, which would have been tantamount to admitting that our involvement on behalf of AQ and the MB in Libya was wrong.


  107. bluliner10
    108 | November 28, 2012 3:09 pm

    @ Storagemanager:
    Another shiny object is the Petraeus mess. But nobody will have the guts to recall him to active duty, courts-martial his ass for General Order Number 1 violations, and adultry, and 134 conduct unbecoming…then see how long he is willing to twist in the wind when his huge pension is reduced significantly.


  108. 109 | November 28, 2012 3:09 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    McCain is all in for NATO being pulled into war.
    McCain supports Patriots for Syria no-fly zone http://www.todayszaman.com/news-299572-.html

    Yup.

    Whenever he has a chance to support militant Islam, he takes it. Same as Obama.

    Had he won in 2008, would the world situation have turned out all that different?


  109. Storagemanager
    110 | November 28, 2012 3:10 pm

    Industry Minister Nihat Ergün has said that Turkey is continuing the production of its own missiles in an effort to reinforce its defense capabilities, while setting the new missiles apart from NATO Patriot missiles.

    “Production of the missiles is proceeding. However, it is incorrect to call them Patriots, as that name is specific to missiles produced by other countries. The missile we have begun preparations for is an SOM missile with a range of 250 kilometers,” Ergün said in response a reporter’s question during a ceremony hosted by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) in Ankara.

    Out of NATO allies, only Germany, the Netherlands and the United States possess Patriot surface-to-air missile systems.

    Asked to comment on the state of the Turkey-made missiles, and whether such a project was possible in the country, Ergün said that production had already begun.
    http://www.todayszaman.com/news-299588-turkey-nears-completion-of-its-own-som-missiles-not-part-of-patriots.html


  110. 111 | November 28, 2012 3:10 pm

    @ buzzsawmonkey:buzzsawmonkey wrote:

    Storagemanager wrote:
    John McCain and Hillary Clinton’s bipartisan bond
    Now imagine them naked together.

    Well, now I don’t have to worry about what to have for lunch…..


  111. Storagemanager
    112 | November 28, 2012 3:11 pm

    @ 1389AD:
    I agree


  112. 113 | November 28, 2012 3:11 pm

    Back in ’84, I drove White House officials in the Presidential motorcade during the debt here in Louisville. during one trip I had James Baker and on another, I had John Poindexter and a female aide who’s name I’ve forgotten. I asked her for her autograph and she said “I’m nobody, but let me give you some souvenirs. She gave me matchbooks from Air Force One and Marine One, as well as a stiff cardboard sleeve, adorned with an embossed Presidential Seal, that covers a pack of cigarettes -- I’ll bet they don’t have THOSE any more!

    Being in that environment, even for a short time as was I, is a heady experience. It wasn’t about Reagan, it was about The Presidency.

    Again, I would have no respect for anyone who would refuse a President’s invitation. It’s not about Obama, or his motives, it’s about one’s personal sense of duty and responsibility.


  113. heysoos
    114 | November 28, 2012 3:12 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    McCain is all in for NATO being pulled into war.
    McCain supports Patriots for Syria no-fly zone http://www.todayszaman.com/news-299572-.html

    McCain is an idiot…maybe even a dangerous idiot….Syria can blow itself apart for all I care….why get between the Bloods and Crips?


  114. heysoos
    115 | November 28, 2012 3:14 pm

    @ MacDuff:
    @ heysoos:
    sorry Mac, that’s me…he’s the one insulting the office


  115. 116 | November 28, 2012 3:15 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ buzzsawmonkey:buzzsawmonkey wrote:
    Storagemanager wrote:
    John McCain and Hillary Clinton’s bipartisan bond
    Now imagine them naked together.

    Well, now I don’t have to worry about what to have for lunch…..

    Hillary doesn’t play for that team.

    MacDuff wrote:

    Again, I would have no respect for anyone who would refuse a President’s invitation. It’s not about Obama, or his motives, it’s about one’s personal sense of duty and responsibility.

    The presidency has become a tyranny. Too much power has been usurped by presidents over the years that far exceeds anything allowed in the US Constitution.

    I have a duty NOT to ratify Obama or his evil deeds via my physical presence, if I have any way to avoid it.


  116. 117 | November 28, 2012 3:16 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    Besides that, what if the man really wants a lesson on economics, such as has been reported for the purpose behind this get together? For the love of God, allow this man to have that lesson, before he does even more damage.


  117. Tanker
    118 | November 28, 2012 3:17 pm

    bluliner10 wrote:

    @ Storagemanager:
    Another shiny object is the Petraeus mess. But nobody will have the guts to recall him to active duty, courts-martial his ass for General Order Number 1 violations, and adultry, and 134 conduct unbecoming…then see how long he is willing to twist in the wind when his huge pension is reduced significantly.

    Them not doing that is his pay off for eventually taking the hit on the matter. CIA has already walked back their not making the changes!


  118. 119 | November 28, 2012 3:17 pm

    @ Storagemanager:

    Okay -- if that were me, I’d be needing a change of clothes.
    And a mop.


  119. Storagemanager
    120 | November 28, 2012 3:18 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Hillary doesn’t play for that team.

    hahahahahahahaha…that’s right…hahahahahahahaha


  120. 121 | November 28, 2012 3:22 pm

    @ bluliner10:

    Nobody really wants to get to the bottom of the issue. Nobody. I don’t think McCain and his girlfriend really care. They are grandstanding. It isn’t what Rice said that matters. It is what the Obama Administration did and did not do.


  121. Storagemanager
    122 | November 28, 2012 3:24 pm

    I can’t stand to look at Obama…sitting across the table from him…I would hurl on the floor.


  122. 123 | November 28, 2012 3:25 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    McCain is an idiot…maybe even a dangerous idiot….Syria can blow itself apart for all I care….why get between the Bloods and Crips?

    McCain was a bad candidate on many levels. I always got the impression that he was more than a bit nuts and totally unreliable toward his political friends and foes. I don’t think you can go through five years of torture and abuse at the Hanoi Hilton without more than a few emotional scars. In ’08, we had the choice between a nutcase and an inexperienced racist socialist. When those are your choices for POTUS, something’s badly broken.


  123. Lily
    124 | November 28, 2012 3:25 pm

    RIX wrote:

    @ waldensianspirit:
    Romney was not the problem. As I see it the problems
    were the Obama & MSM smear machine and the gullibility
    of the public.
    “Romney is a vulture capitalist, he is a felon, he killed
    a woman, Ann Romney never worked a day in her life (Even
    though she got through cancer, MS & raised five boys)”
    The voters should have been sickened by the smears, but
    instead the reelected Obama.

    I couldn’t agree more..it wasn’t Romney that was the problem it was the people who believed every stupid thing and MSM making sure they believed the stupid. I don’t have much sympathy for anyone who voted for obama because they refused to actually look at the truth and believed the lies that were pouring out of obama’s mouth and MSM.


  124. Lily
    125 | November 28, 2012 3:28 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    @ RIX:
    Exactly.

    Some around here aren’t accepting that America is full of those wanting a government handout and government to take care of them now outnumber us

    It wasn’t all about hand-outs sure a segment of obama voters were in that column…but others voted for obama because they thought obama cared more and because they think obamacare is a good thing. Uhmmm no on both counts. They refused to even look at Benghazi or Fast and Furious and all the other things obama has done wrong or lied about…Romney was the radical …obama was truly the centrist in these peoples eyes. Idiots.


  125. Storagemanager
    126 | November 28, 2012 3:29 pm

    eBay Yanks Beck’s ‘Obama in Pee Pee’ Art Project Meant to Raise Money for Charity http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ebay-yanks-becks-obama-in-pee-pee-art-project-meant-to-raise-money-for-charity/


  126. Storagemanager
    127 | November 28, 2012 3:30 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    eBay Yanks Beck’s ‘Obama in Pee Pee’ Art Project Meant to Raise Money for Charity http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ebay-yanks-becks-obama-in-pee-pee-art-project-meant-to-raise-money-for-charity/

    was 11,300 when pulled.


  127. Lily
    128 | November 28, 2012 3:31 pm

    RIX wrote:

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Exactly.
    Some around here aren’t accepting that America is full of those wanting a government handout and government to take care of them now outnumber us

    That is really the issue isn’t it?
    I thought from the jump that this was
    a watershed election & I still do.
    It says more about the people who elected the
    incompetent fraud than it does about him.

    I couldn’t agree more. Just listen to someone who voted for obama and it will make your blood boil…they are clueless and have been brain-washed about obama and are totally ignorant on the true issues. We as a country have really fallen when a fake *war on women* and *Big Bird* are more important issues than the really important issues.


  128. 129 | November 28, 2012 3:31 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    heysoos wrote:
    McCain is an idiot…maybe even a dangerous idiot….Syria can blow itself apart for all I care….why get between the Bloods and Crips?
    McCain was a bad candidate on many levels. I always got the impression that he was more than a bit nuts and totally unreliable toward his political friends and foes. I don’t think you can go through five years of torture and abuse at the Hanoi Hilton without more than a few emotional scars. In ’08, we had the choice between a nutcase and an inexperienced racist socialist. When those are your choices for POTUS, something’s badly broken.

    Indeed.


  129. 130 | November 28, 2012 3:33 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    I can’t stand to look at Obama…sitting across the table from him…I would hurl on the floor.

    That’s the other problem. I might hurl on him -- or collapse dead and end up somewhere where I would rather not be.


  130. Storagemanager
    131 | November 28, 2012 3:33 pm

    Obama in pee art…might be a good way to make extra money…


  131. bluliner10
    132 | November 28, 2012 3:33 pm

    @ Iron Fist:
    That is my issue. Rome is burning and the only complaint is the musical selection.


  132. Da_Beerfreak
    133 | November 28, 2012 3:35 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ heysoos:

    Same here. The Media-Entertainment Industrial Complex runs the country.

    If the Media-Entertainment Industrial Complex doesn’t report it, it didn’t happen. From the O’Bot’s point of view everything else is propaganda.


  133. waldensianspirit
    134 | November 28, 2012 3:35 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    …and I guess it depends upon the meaning of “left”.

    As pertaining RINOs, nope. Question still standing


  134. 135 | November 28, 2012 3:36 pm

    New Thread.


  135. Lily
    136 | November 28, 2012 3:37 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    Mitt Romney: A good man. The right fight.

    Not so much — especially when the Washing Post says it.

    Most of us didn’t trust him because he’s been such a flip-flopper in the past. We voted for him solely because he wasn’t Obama.

    And a lot of people on our side didn’t vote for him for the same excate reasons you did vote for him. He wasn’t *pure* enough for many so they didn’t vote and many who did vote like you did while holding your nose. Just like this post is about …we need to get away from this purity test because you know what? There is NEVER EVER going to be a candidate that is going to meet everyones *purity* tests.


  136. 137 | November 28, 2012 3:37 pm

    @ waldensianspirit:

    What candidates to the left of Romney got weeded out?

    Santorum was a Socialist. He is a man of the Left.


  137. Storagemanager
    138 | November 28, 2012 3:37 pm

    Harry Reid was against the filibuster rule change before coming out for it. In 2005, when Republicans threatened to change the rules to weaken Senate Democrats, Reid was a vocal opponent.

    “For people to suggest that you can break the rules to change the rules is un-American,” said Reid in 2005, in response to Republicans wanting to change the rules. “The only way you can change the rule in this body is through a rule that now says, to change a rule in the Senate rules to break a filibuster still requires 67 votes. You can’t do it with 60. You certainly cannot do it with 51. But now we are told the majority is going to do the so-called nuclear option. We will come in here, having the Vice President seated where my friend and colleague from Nevada is seated. The Parliamentarian would acknowledge it is illegal, it is wrong, you can’t do it, and they would overrule it. It would simply be: We are going to do it because we have more votes than you. You would be breaking the rules to change the rules. That is very un-American.”
    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/11/28/flashback-harry-reid-says-trying-to-change-filibusters-rules-illegal-and-very-un-american/


  138. Lily
    139 | November 28, 2012 3:37 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    1389AD wrote:

    waldensianspirit wrote:
    Mitt Romney: A good man. The right fight.

    Not so much — especially when the Washing Post says it.
    Most of us didn’t trust him because he’s been such a flip-flopper in the past. We voted for him solely because he wasn’t Obama.

    Mitt is having lunch with Obama…nuff said.

    Oh for heavens sake! Good grief.


  139. 140 | November 28, 2012 3:38 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Storagemanager wrote:
    lobo91 wrote:
    @ MacDuff:
    Personally, I can’t imagine anyone turning down an offer from the President, it’s just not done — it’s about the office, not the man.
    Exactly. I despise Obama, but if I were invited to the White House for a function, I would go.
    I would not….I would like to keep my soul.
    Indeed.
    MacDuff wrote:
    With all due respect, I think that’s bullshit.
    Wait and see, and watch very carefully. Romney, or one of his companies, will end up getting some type of advantage very soon. Maybe it’ll be regulatory leniency; maybe it’ll be funding for a pet project. But there WILL be a payoff.

    Romney has no companies. He does not need any persoanl largesse from Obama. If he accepted an invitation to lunch with OPbama it is purely out of love for his country, not respect for Obama or the hope of getting somethimng from the government. Romney gave up more $$ to serve his country than any other man in history. He gave up well over BILLION dollars. Do you really think he needs to polish Obama’s apples to get a little tax break?

    America rejected the last true, untarnished statesman that could’ve been president. Romney did not owe anything to anyone. Washington hates that.


  140. 141 | November 28, 2012 3:39 pm

    @ Storagemanager:

    The Liberals don’t like it when you attack their god…


  141. Lily
    142 | November 28, 2012 3:40 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ RIX:

    I am not FDR should have been enough to beat FDR during the Depression, and FDR wasn’t the FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT. I was never under any illusion that Obama would be hard to beat, but I thought we had more enthusiasm on our side than we did. I mistook the local mood (we went for Romeny 59-39) for the National Mood.

    You and many others…apparently there are a lot of people out there that simply don’t care to know what obama is doing to this country. Romney at least loves this country ..obama not so much.


  142. 143 | November 28, 2012 3:40 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    McCain is all in for NATO being pulled into war.
    McCain supports Patriots for Syria no-fly zone http://www.todayszaman.com/news-299572-.html

    McCain is a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood. Fuck him.


  143. 144 | November 28, 2012 3:40 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    As pertaining RINOs, nope. Question still standing

    I certainly don’t consider Santorum as being to the right of Romney, but maybe that’s just me. One of the points that this post was making concerned the variety of viewpoints represented by those to the right of the center and the varied interests of those viewpoints, no?


  144. buzzsawmonkey
    145 | November 28, 2012 3:41 pm

    “Old White Men.”

    Comments welcomed.


  145. Lily
    146 | November 28, 2012 3:41 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Storagemanager wrote:

    Mitt is having lunch with Obama…nuff said.

    Really? What would you have Romney do with an invitation for lunch, tell Obama to fuck himself or otherwise decline? Sorry, I don’t know who or what would be served by that.

    Exactly…good grief is what I say. Having lunch with someone doesn’t mean you are of the same thought of the person you are having lunch with.


  146. Lily
    147 | November 28, 2012 3:43 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    @ Carolina Girl:
    We have the problem noone in their right mind wants to run for POTUS

    Can you blame them when the media is clearing in the tank for someone like obama. Romney was trashed over and over again…obama not so much.


  147. Speranza
    148 | November 28, 2012 3:43 pm

    Tanker wrote:

    Speranza wrote:
    Rodan wrote:
    Pulling defeat from the jaws of victory is the ever enduring hall mark of the Republican Party.
    The GOP lacks Discipline!
    The GOP allowed itself to be held hostage by a minority but loud group and we are paying the price.

    What group was that?

    The hard core (and I mean really hard core) social cons. Think Todd Akin.


  148. 149 | November 28, 2012 3:43 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Wait and see, and watch very carefully. Romney, or one of his companies, will end up getting some type of advantage very soon. Maybe it’ll be regulatory leniency; maybe it’ll be funding for a pet project. But there WILL be a payoff.

    Sorry, that’s a bit “black helicopter-esque” for my blood.


  149. Speranza
    150 | November 28, 2012 3:44 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    1389AD wrote:
    Wait and see, and watch very carefully. Romney, or one of his companies, will end up getting some type of advantage very soon. Maybe it’ll be regulatory leniency; maybe it’ll be funding for a pet project. But there WILL be a payoff.

    Sorry, that’s a bit “black helicopter-esque” for my blood.

    I agree. I have some issues with Mitt Romney but I view him as a man of honor.


  150. Lily
    151 | November 28, 2012 3:45 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Storagemanager wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    Right…one should never take a stand..it might hurt someones feelings….maybe Obama should play the song feelings for lunch..

    Taking a stand is only valuable if it accomplishes something. So, what do you think Romney dissing Obama would accomplish?

    Nothing except make Republicans look more evil. Oh the press would have had a field day if Romney snubbed his nose at this invitation.


  151. 152 | November 28, 2012 3:45 pm

    Lily wrote:

    Exactly…good grief is what I say.

    What you should say is “good night in Georgia!” :D


  152. Lily
    153 | November 28, 2012 3:47 pm

    Flyovercountry wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    Certainly no harm in listening to what the man has to say. He is after all still the POTUS.

    Indeed. Know thy enemy …and all that.


  153. Speranza
    154 | November 28, 2012 3:47 pm

    Lily wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:

    Storagemanager wrote:
    Mitt is having lunch with Obama…nuff said.

    Really? What would you have Romney do with an invitation for lunch, tell Obama to fuck himself or otherwise decline? Sorry, I don’t know who or what would be served by that.

    Exactly…good grief is what I say. Having lunch with someone doesn’t mean you are of the same thought of the person you are having lunch with.

    When the president of the United States is gracious enough to invite you to lunch, you take him up on it. I don’t care who the president is, you respect the office.


  154. Lily
    155 | November 28, 2012 3:49 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    Personally, I can’t imagine anyone turning down an offer from the President, it’s just not done — it’s about the office, not the man.

    Exactly. I despise Obama, but if I were invited to the White House for a function, I would go.

    Bingo! And petty to refuse just after the election.


  155. Da_Beerfreak
    156 | November 28, 2012 3:53 pm

    Storagemanager wrote:

    Storagemanager wrote:

    eBay Yanks Beck’s ‘Obama in Pee Pee’ Art Project Meant to Raise Money for Charity http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ebay-yanks-becks-obama-in-pee-pee-art-project-meant-to-raise-money-for-charity/

    was 11,300 when pulled.

    Fear of a tyrannical government will cause companies to do some really dumb shit to cover their own asses. :twisted:


  156. 157 | November 28, 2012 3:54 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    I agree. I have some issues with Mitt Romney but I view him as a man of honor.

    I never saw any reason that Romney’s presidential run other than actual altruism. We can argue about his politics or his positions, but I actually think he was in it to do something for his country rather than himself.

    I’ve never been anything close to a Romney fan, but I think we all genuinely lost something when he was defeated. Like I’ve said before, he may have been one of the most decent men to ever have run for president.


  157. Speranza
    158 | November 28, 2012 3:56 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    I have a duty NOT to ratify Obama or his evil deeds via my physical presence, if I have any way to avoid it.

    I guess it’s a good thing you were not invited then.


  158. Lily
    159 | November 28, 2012 3:56 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    1389AD wrote:

    He certainly should. Meeting with him gives the impression of impropriety, and given Romney’s history of being a flipflopper and Obama’s history of being a Chicago machine politician, that impression is an exceedingly strong one.

    Again, when the President asks for a meeting, you take the meeting. Anyone who wouldn’t afford that much respect to the office doesn’t deserve to have even been considered for it.

    1389AD wrote:

    I suspect that Obama is giving him some sort of a covert payoff for not pressing him on the Benghazi issue, among other things.

    With all due respect, I think that’s bullshit.

    Indeed it is baloney. Good heavens.


  159. Speranza
    160 | November 28, 2012 3:59 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    I never saw any reason that Romney’s presidential run other than actual altruism. We can argue about his politics or his positions, but I actually think he was in it to do something for his country rather than himself.

    I’ve never been anything close to a Romney fan, but I think we all genuinely lost something when he was defeated. Like I’ve said before, he may have been one of the most decent men to ever have run for president

    I feel that Romney was uniquely qualified to be president and could step into the job on Day 1 (inauguration day) and that ultimately the nation lost on November 6. The idea that Romney should turn down a lunch invite from Obama is just plain absurd and frankly borders on looneyville.


  160. Lily
    161 | November 28, 2012 3:59 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Speranza wrote:

    I agree. I have some issues with Mitt Romney but I view him as a man of honor.

    I never saw any reason that Romney’s presidential run other than actual altruism. We can argue about his politics or his positions, but I actually think he was in it to do something for his country rather than himself.

    I’ve never been anything close to a Romney fan, but I think we all genuinely lost something when he was defeated. Like I’ve said before, he may have been one of the most decent men to ever have run for president.

    I couldn’t agree more …you stated this very well. Apparently people wanted a liar, a thief and a thug for president instead of someone who is actually decent. I grew to like the man and I grew to think he could actually get things done.


  161. Speranza
    162 | November 28, 2012 4:00 pm

    Lily wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:

    1389AD wrote:
    He certainly should. Meeting with him gives the impression of impropriety, and given Romney’s history of being a flipflopper and Obama’s history of being a Chicago machine politician, that impression is an exceedingly strong one.
    Again, when the President asks for a meeting, you take the meeting. Anyone who wouldn’t afford that much respect to the office doesn’t deserve to have even been considered for it.
    1389AD wrote:
    I suspect that Obama is giving him some sort of a covert payoff for not pressing him on the Benghazi issue, among other things.
    With all due respect, I think that’s bullshit.

    Indeed it is baloney. Good heavens.

    Conspiracy nonsense worthy of PMSNBC and The Nation magazine.


  162. Lily
    163 | November 28, 2012 4:01 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:

    I never saw any reason that Romney’s presidential run other than actual altruism. We can argue about his politics or his positions, but I actually think he was in it to do something for his country rather than himself.

    I’ve never been anything close to a Romney fan, but I think we all genuinely lost something when he was defeated. Like I’ve said before, he may have been one of the most decent men to ever have run for president

    I feel that Romney was uniquely qualified to be president and could step into the job on Day 1 (inauguration day) and that ultimately the nation lost on November 6. The idea that Romney should turn down a lunch invite from Obama is just plain absurd and frankly borders on looneyville.

    Indeed it does border on that. Big time.


  163. Lily
    164 | November 28, 2012 4:03 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    Lily wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:

    1389AD wrote:
    He certainly should. Meeting with him gives the impression of impropriety, and given Romney’s history of being a flipflopper and Obama’s history of being a Chicago machine politician, that impression is an exceedingly strong one.
    Again, when the President asks for a meeting, you take the meeting. Anyone who wouldn’t afford that much respect to the office doesn’t deserve to have even been considered for it.
    1389AD wrote:
    I suspect that Obama is giving him some sort of a covert payoff for not pressing him on the Benghazi issue, among other things.
    With all due respect, I think that’s bullshit.

    Indeed it is baloney. Good heavens.

    Conspiracy nonsense worthy of PMSNBC and The Nation magazine.

    It certainly is. Sometimes you just have to back away from the trees to see the forest ….so you don’t get to this point of thinking. There is life outside of politics.


  164. 165 | November 28, 2012 4:06 pm

    Gotta run a quick errand, gonna succumb to “Powerball” fever and buy a ticket.

    Hey, if I win, the party’s on me, y’all are invited (except ferb) and I’ll throw in pizza and beer……….in Rome.


  165. Speranza
    166 | November 28, 2012 4:14 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Gotta run a quick errand, gonna succumb to “Powerball” fever and buy a ticket.
    Hey, if I win, the party’s on me, y’all are invited (except ferb) and I’ll throw in pizza and beer……….in Rome.

    Me too. I bought several tickets. Beer party in Prague!


  166. Speranza
    167 | November 28, 2012 4:15 pm

    Lily wrote:

    There is life outside of politics.

    Never forget that. Life goes on.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David