First time visitor? Learn more.

New Republican Website Aims to — oh screw it.

by The Kraken ( 163 Comments › )
Filed under Tea Parties at January 4th, 2014 - 8:34 am

So there’s a fairly new website, which explains itself in part with “We simply want to win first so we can legislate effectively.”  Then they quote Joe Scarborough’s critique of the 2010 Senate race by blaming the Tea Party for not winning more seats than we did in the historic victory that year.  Not mentioned is the fact that GOP RINOism had gotten the Senate down by ten so that even heroic victories were not enough to recover a bare majority.

If I thought that their facts were correct, I might agree with their conclusions.  But their facts are wrong, and the odds are they know it,  so here it is.  The GOP has proven which side it is on in the fight between limited government and unlimited government.  Until that party remembers what it is for, it is the most effective threat to the liberty of the citizenry.  Yes, even worse than the Democrats, for they can only win, but cannot destroy the right.  The power to destroy the right exists only in the hands of the GOP, and it is the only fight they have any stomach for.

The GOP has once again “come out” as being at war against the Tea Party.  But they do this about every six months.  Here’s Eric Cantor urging Democrats to vote for a RINO in a Republican primary. Years ago.  It’s part of the rinse-spin-repeat cycle they use in attempting to marginalize us.  The truth is that the GOP has been at war against the Tea Party since the 2011 appointment by Speaker John Boehner of 16-term Representative Hal “Prince of Pork” Rogers as the House Appropriation Committee Chair.  At the time, Paul Ryan seemed like a far better man for that job.  But that too was not true, as “recent” developments have made clear.  Senator Rand Paul (love him or hate him) pointed out at the time that the much-celebrated Ryan Budget of 2011 was also too little, too late:  ”Freezing domestic spending at 2010 levels does not significantly delay the coming debt crisis and is at best a diversion from the real budgetary cuts that are necessary.”   I remember being excited about the Ryan budget, and that critique of it brought me up short.

In fact, Ryan’s sustained slide down the pole of respectability is just one more facet of the horror now dawning on the Tea Party: that the GOP does not mean what they say, that they never meant what they said, and that they will kill the Tea Party before they let us move them from their comfy position.  The GOP enjoys a highly profitable permanent minority status, skimming their cut  of power and privilege from the massive government largesse.

What does this have to do with some RINO website?  I like the people who write there.  They aren’t bad, but they are wrong.  They want to win first and fight later.  But winning is not an acceptable substitute for victory, because we have seen that winning costs us just as much as losing, with the added injury of delay.   Skeptical?  When the Tea Party “wins”, we do so by empowering GOP wins.  The GOP has a majority, the Tea Party does not.  The GOP has candidates, the Tea Party does not.  The Tea Party is not an actual party, and should never be.  Third parties lose, that’s just a fact.  And if we were a party with leaders, we would be taken apart.  SO we exist only to influence the GOP.  And we have been going backwards.  So “winning” is not the same as victory.  We are going to have to break some GOP bones.

ObamaCare has still been funded at 100%, despite a front-side veto in the House.  What on earth did we accomplish by winning in 2010?  And don’t get too comfortable with the fact that it’s broken.  The GOP outside of the Tea Party has limited its attacks to the website itself, not the whole principle of the thing.  And that plays right in to the Alinskyite trap.  When eventually the website works and the healthcare industry itself has collapsed, who will get the blame?  The moron GOP for being so disagreeable.  The left will say. “We fixed the website, and if the not for the GOP, the rest of this would be working as well”.  You have to kill some ideas with direct fire, not artful plans.

There was never an acceptable time for excuses, and my patience has run out as well.  People say that those like me who throw around words like RINO, Establishment, and Quisling will only hurt the GOP.  That is true.  The GOP has responded to years of positive reinforcement with treachery.  Negative reinforcement, then.  I aim to kick the GOP until it either dies or repents.  It has defended Marxism while combating conservatism.  They see us clearly, and it is we who have been mistaken about our relationship.

The Tea Party is an army being led on a forced march by our GOP generals, always being told that the real fight is in the next valley, and we just have to make it over one more hill.  But we are simply being marched to death by our captors.

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!

163 Responses to “New Republican Website Aims to — oh screw it.”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | January 4, 2014 8:47 am

    I like the being led analogy. More like Karl Rove leading the GOP off the cliff of defeat.


  2. coldwarrior
    2 | January 4, 2014 9:03 am

    no lecture this morning, had to take dad to hospital, he had a pretty good run of atrial fibrillation/flutter.

    a little cardizem IV and some normal saline, he fib/flutter broke and got sent home. so all is well.


  3. 3 | January 4, 2014 9:10 am

    This is correct. We saw that in the last Presidential Election. Romney never went at Obama half as hard as he went after Rick Perry or Newt Gingrich. That is one reason we lose. The Establishment Republicans are content to beat the Republican base. They are less concerned about beating the Democrats. We have made some inroads over the last few years, but we still have a ways to go. I am afraid that America doesn’t have the time left for us to clean up the GOP and defeat the Democrats.


  4. 4 | January 4, 2014 9:11 am

    @ coldwarrior:
    Good to hear that he is better.


  5. coldwarrior
    5 | January 4, 2014 9:18 am

    i think that the ryan deal is the best we were going to get. it is a freeze, it is a budget. so those are two wins, albeit small. blowing up the joint to end up with another CR would have been two loses for the gop.

    it took us a long time to get into this situation. its going to take a long time to get out.

    that said, the gop runs a non-fiscon establishment dolt, i wont vote for him.


  6. coldwarrior
    6 | January 4, 2014 9:19 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    Good to hear that he is better.

    earned a trip to his cardiologist on monday…


  7. 7 | January 4, 2014 9:22 am

    I fully expect the Grumpy Old Party to join the Whig Party in oblivion.

    What are the RINO’s actually protecting?

    Glenn Beck has something to say about this.


  8. RIX
    8 | January 4, 2014 9:23 am

    @ coldwarrior:
    Good morning. Glad that your dad vis doing well.


  9. 9 | January 4, 2014 9:23 am

    @ coldwarrior:
    The only GOP candidate that I definitely wouldn’t vote for is Christie. He is too radically Left on two of the most important questions out there: gun control and Islam. I am not a fan of Jeb Bush, either, but I’d vote for him over a Democrat. There is a long time until the next Presidential election, though. We’ll have to see what happens this fall first. That may give us an indication of how strong the Tea Party faction will be going into it.


  10. 10 | January 4, 2014 9:28 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    Sorry to hear that and glad he is better.


  11. 11 | January 4, 2014 9:28 am

    Hmmm…Kraken eh?


  12. 12 | January 4, 2014 9:30 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    i think that the ryan deal is the best we were going to get.

    Yup, they only control 1/3 of the Government, so Ryan dealt with reality.


  13. RIX
    13 | January 4, 2014 9:32 am

    It’s pure dishonesty to claim that the GOP would have won more House seats in 2010 if it weren’t for the Tea Party. The Tea Party is why they captured the House.
    Establishment types like McCain smear & ridicule Tea Party Republicans & then expect loyalty.
    If you abuse a dog, you should not be shocked if it defends itself & bites you.


  14. 14 | January 4, 2014 9:33 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Jeb Bush would be a one termer, if he even got the nomination. Jeb would get us into another nation building exercise and his crappy economic policies would lead to another recession.

    I will tell you the GOP’s problem, the Corrupt Consulting Class. Get rid of them and replace them with younger, more in tune and aggressive consultants committed to victory and you will see a difference.


  15. coldwarrior
    15 | January 4, 2014 9:35 am

    thanks all.


  16. 16 | January 4, 2014 9:39 am

    @ RIX:

    The Tea Party’s problem is that some Charlatans like Bachmann hijacked the movement with the assistance of the Leftist media. Their goal is to discredit the Tea Party, hence why the media supported loons like Angle or Murdoch so they can be set up for a loss. Tea Party type really need to research who they are voting for.

    Just becasue someone calls themselves Tea Party does not mean they believe in what the movement original stood for.


  17. 17 | January 4, 2014 9:40 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    Keep your head up.


  18. Bumr50
    18 | January 4, 2014 9:41 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    Prayers for your Dad.


  19. Bumr50
    19 | January 4, 2014 9:52 am

    @ Rodan:

    Rodan wrote:

    Just becasue someone calls themselves Tea Party does not mean they believe in what the movement original stood for.

    I don’t think a majority of TEA Partiers are fooled by the SoCons attempts to infiltrate.

    I don’t think it’s productive, useful, or wise to simply concede the name to the attempted “hijackers” and MSM characterizations.

    I put “hijack” in quotes because the term assumes that there was a successful takeover. There wasn’t.

    Since Angle and the masturbation witch who’s name eludes me right now, the TEA Party has been much more careful from the experience. Todd Akin was NOT a “Tea Party” candidate, he was a GOP establishment/media construct of one, and while we must be ever vigilant of that we should NEVER disregard something simply due to their pressure, lest we concede that we cannot overcome them by conventional means.

    Limited government fiscal conservatism is what the TEA Party was originally about, and will continue to be so long as I have anything to do with it.


  20. coldwarrior
    20 | January 4, 2014 9:52 am

    interesting map


  21. coldwarrior
    21 | January 4, 2014 9:54 am

    Bumr50 wrote:

    Limited government fiscal conservatism is what the TEA Party was originally about, and will continue to be so long as I have anything to do with it.

    TAXED

    ENOUGH

    ALREADY


  22. coldwarrior
    22 | January 4, 2014 9:55 am

    @ Rodan:

    i wonder if she has figured out that her husband is gay yet.


  23. 23 | January 4, 2014 9:57 am

    @ Bumr50:

    The majority of Tea party types and organizations are solid good people. But as we agree, the media is portraying the Charlatans as the Tea Party.

    This is a Charlatan.


  24. The Kraken
    24 | January 4, 2014 9:58 am

    How is it that the RINOcracy keeps meticulous score concerning Angle and O’Donnell, but loses count when it comes to Dole, McCain, & Romney? The Tea Party has nothing to apologize for from 2010, and the same goes for 2012. The GOP had already *literally surrendered* (cue McConnell in 2009 discussing the need for the GOP to become a regional subordinate of the national Democratic party) when the Tea Party kicked them off their asses and back into the fight.
    GOP is the cowardly crying soldier in the movie PATTON.


  25. RIX
    25 | January 4, 2014 9:58 am

    @ Rodan:
    A lot of people boot strapped onto the Tea party , because they saw them on the rise.
    They made mistakes withn Sharon Angle & others, but they’re learning.
    They are phiosophically sophisticated , but need more political acumen.
    It is amazing though to hear them called terrorists, racists & anarchists.
    It’s just ridiculous.


  26. 26 | January 4, 2014 9:59 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    i wonder if she has figured out that her husband is gay yet.

    :lol:

    She’s a space cadet so who knows. Her husband is flaming.

    I am convinced she’s a false flag operative for the Progressives.


  27. 27 | January 4, 2014 10:01 am

    @ RIX:

    They are phiosophically sophisticated , but need more political acumen.

    Yup.

    It is amazing though to hear them called terrorists, racists & anarchists.
    It’s just ridiculous.

    The Charlatans give a bad name to everyone else. The media plays up the Charlatans and smears the entire movement.


  28. coldwarrior
    28 | January 4, 2014 10:06 am

    byron york knows what is going to happen…so do i.


  29. The Kraken
    29 | January 4, 2014 10:06 am

    I have many disagreements with Bachmann, but I don’t think she’s a fake. She was one of the few who spoke up against the initial wave of the GOP onslaught against the Tea Party.
    I never thought she would make a good President, and I never thought she had a ghost of a chance to win it. But I won’t criticize her for firing early and boldly at the enemy from whom we now cannot escape. She may be crazy, but she’s no charlatan.


  30. 30 | January 4, 2014 10:06 am

    The Kraken wrote:

    How is it that the RINOcracy keeps meticulous score concerning Angle and O’Donnell, but loses count when it comes to Dole, McCain, & Romney?

    Exactly. When you get down to brass tacks, Sarah Pain has a much better track record of picking candidates than Karl Rove does. The Establishment Republicans hate her for that.


  31. RIX
    31 | January 4, 2014 10:08 am

    @ Rodan:
    The Charlatans give a bad name to everyone else. The media plays up the Charlatans and smears the entire movement.

    And the figure that if they say it long enough, it becomes true.


  32. Bumr50
    32 | January 4, 2014 10:09 am

    @ Rodan:

    I’ve never seen that site before, and I do a fair amount of surfing.

    But I agree that her position is tenuous at best. I’ve been following that issue closely and come to the conclusion that enough of the Right is either on the freedom side of it or is coming around.

    There’s a lot of misinformation on cannabis out there, and people have been conditioned to lump it in with hard “drugs” while excluding everyday drugs like alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, and others from the same scrutiny. It will take some time for attitudes to change.


  33. The Kraken
    33 | January 4, 2014 10:09 am

    @ coldwarrior:
    Yup. “The blame, they will argue, lies with the GOP. It’s an astonishingly brazen strategy. And it might work.”
    Sound familiar?


  34. coldwarrior
    34 | January 4, 2014 10:12 am

    The Kraken wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    Yup. “The blame, they will argue, lies with the GOP. It’s an astonishingly brazen strategy. And it might work.”
    Sound familiar?

    it does.


  35. 35 | January 4, 2014 10:13 am

    Bumr50 wrote:

    I don’t think a majority of TEA Partiers are fooled by the SoCons attempts to infiltrate.

    Infiltrate how? Social Conservatives are, and always have been, mostly fiscal conservatives as well. The reverse is often true as well in that fiscal conservatives tend to be social conservatives as well. The “Socially Liberal but Fiscally Conservative” mantra is mainly put out by Democrats who are liberals running in a conservative State/district. At the end of the day, somebody has to pay for the costs of a socially liberal State. Social liberalism leads to Big Governmentism if for no other reason than to guarantee the promises of Liberalism as a whole.


  36. 36 | January 4, 2014 10:15 am

    @ The Kraken:

    Hey welcome aboard. Good post! I think a huge part of the problem are people like Rove and the Corrupt Consultant Class. They are not committed to winning, just collecting a Check.

    Rove spent 300 Million and only had a 17% winning ratio. In any other industry, this man would never work again, or even worse if you get my drift. Instead he’s trotted out as some expert and he still has clients.


  37. 37 | January 4, 2014 10:16 am

    @ RIX:

    Bingo!


  38. RIX
    38 | January 4, 2014 10:19 am

    Amanda Marcotte of Slate.com put her finger on the spectacle of plaintiffs “trying to weasel out of nothing more onerous than signing a piece of paper.”

    This is Slates take on the Little Sisters of the Poor. They want no complicity in providing abortafacients and they are advised by counsel that signing would do just that.
    Obama is willing to got to war with them, but the Muslim Brotherhood? Not so much.


  39. 39 | January 4, 2014 10:22 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Social Conservatives are, and always have been, mostly fiscal conservatives as well. The reverse is often true as well in that fiscal conservatives tend to be social conservatives as well.

    George HW Bush, George W. Bush, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee were Socons but economic Progressives. Many SoCons love big government, they just want to use it for their own ends.

    At the end of the day, somebody has to pay for the costs of a socially liberal State.

    That’s a canard and buying onto the Leftist mantra that government has to take care of people.


  40. 40 | January 4, 2014 10:24 am

    @ Bumr50:

    Sadly it looks like the Right is once again be left behind on this issue. The Dems will embrace legalization and end up looking like heroes.


  41. 41 | January 4, 2014 10:30 am

    @ Rodan:

    If you have a socially liberal society, you are going to buy into the notion that the government exists to take care of a everybody. Ho else can you view a movement that is trying to require everyone to pay for abortion insurance? Socially liberal idea, backed by fiscally liberal policies. You cannot point to one real example of someone who is socially liberal but really fiscally conservative. Rudy Giuliani would come the closest, but he was still a Big Government guy.


  42. Bumr50
    42 | January 4, 2014 10:33 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Honestly, I’m uncomfortable with the term “socially liberal.”

    That sounds a lot like individual freedom to me.

    The only overlap I see, and that keeps being shoved in my face on some sites other than this one is that “allowing one to do whatever one wants with their own bodies is dangerously close to allowing women to kill their babies in utero.”

    I actually faced that TWICE by two different people on freaking “legal weed” threads in the past week.

    The “conversations” ended there. If a person can’t see the difference, they’re not worthy of my attention, IMHO.

    You and I agree on almost everything, and I’ve noticed you get a bit defensive about the “SoCon” criticisms. I absolutely agree that our nation was founded on the concept of individual freedom on the basis of Judeo-Christian principles, and that our laws should reflect the general morality of those traditions.

    I’m also a Roman Catholic, and have been actively engaging criticisms of the church. There are sizable numbers of SoCons out there under the assumption that the USA is a Protestant nation and that the future of the GOP should be one of pols that not only believe in but seek to legislate according to a very literal translation of the NIV Bible.

    I’ve got no problem with, and in many cases AGREE with those tenets. But I simply cannot abide politicians who seek to govern or “shape society” through their religious beliefs alone.

    I am very socially conservative on many issues as an INDIVIDUAL. But my individualism and related concept of freedom trump my religious inclinations in the political arena every time, as I DO see a necessary and implied if not explicitly written separation between church and state. It’s something I hold dear, as I shudder to think what could happen if another, less compassionate religion were to ever be an elected majority.


  43. The Kraken
    43 | January 4, 2014 10:33 am

    @ Rodan:
    Thanks!


  44. RIX
    44 | January 4, 2014 10:34 am

    Charlie Daniels ✔ @CharlieDaniels
    Follow
    It’s a disgrace when the only people with the guts to face down Obama is a group of Catholic Nuns
    God bless you Sisters
    6:10 PM -- 3 Jan 2014

    Via Twitchy
    This is not smart. Bullying the Sisters of Charity is not a good PR move.


  45. Bumr50
    45 | January 4, 2014 10:37 am

    Rodan wrote:

    The Dems will embrace legalization and end up looking like heroes.

    I’m more optimistic.

    Progressives haven’t exactly been going “gaga over ganja.”

    Quite simply, it’s a lot harder to regulate due to the fact that it’a a lot easier to “manufacture” to the point of usability than pretty much any other substance I can think of off hand.

    I’ve actually seen many on the Right calling for people to get behind this issue.

    Then again, my bowl is always half-full…

    :)


  46. 46 | January 4, 2014 10:38 am

    @ Rodan:

    Marijuana legalization is simply not on most people’s radar. It isn’t the kiss of death for a candidate to come out for it, but it also isn’t going to win him elections. Personally, I support legalization, but the truth is that it is a niche demographic. They would do better to turn the debate towards socially conservative issues like gun control. Being against gun control doesn’t cost the Republicans a single vote, while it will motivate their core voters to actually get out to the polls. Coming out for gun control would cost the Republicans massively.


  47. Bumr50
    47 | January 4, 2014 10:38 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Hey welcome aboard. Good post!

    Yes indeedy!


  48. brookly red
    48 | January 4, 2014 10:42 am

    RIX wrote:

    Charlie Daniels ✔ @CharlieDaniels
    Follow
    It’s a disgrace when the only people with the guts to face down Obama is a group of Catholic Nuns
    God bless you Sisters
    6:10 PM — 3 Jan 2014

    Via Twitchy
    This is not smart. Bullying the Sisters of Charity is not a good PR move.

    I am not a Catholic myself but I do see them moving to the point position of the resistance…


  49. coldwarrior
    49 | January 4, 2014 10:42 am

    Taxed Enough Already is not a subset of focus on the family.

    TEA is and is only fiscon/smaller govt, period. anything else is not TEA.


  50. 50 | January 4, 2014 10:43 am

    Bumr50 wrote:

    as I shudder to think what could happen if another, less compassionate religion were to ever be an elected majority.

    We are headed that way. The people to fear aren’t the Evangelicals, though. It is the Evangelical Atheists who are the danger for establishing a State religion in the United States. They are trying to use the courts to effectively outlaw Christianity in public, if not quite in private. Look to Bloomberg’s New York, and you can see where the Liberals want to take us in terms of personal freedom. They want to dictate to you the very food that you eat. I don’t see how anyone can equate “liberalism” with “individual freedom” in the context of the United States (in Europe, it is another thing all together). They want everything that is not mandated by the state to be forbidden.


  51. 51 | January 4, 2014 10:45 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    How will Socons create their Utopian state and how would it look like?


  52. 52 | January 4, 2014 10:47 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    TEA is and is only fiscon/smaller govt, period. anything else is not TEA.

    That would be your purity test, but that doesn’t bind the groups of people who are considered (and consider themselves) part of the Tea Party. The thing that brought the protesters out (and the voters) in 2010 was ObamaCare. That is, in and of itself, as much a social issue as it is a fiscal issue. Indeed, if we are to succeed at the Supreme Court in restricting ObamaCare in any way, it will be the cases about religious liberty, which is a core Social Conservative position, that succeeds. We’re going to see this year if the Supreme Court is going to allow freedom of conscience, or if they will permit the State to mandate people pay for abortion coverage.


  53. 53 | January 4, 2014 10:49 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Marijuana legalization is simply not on most people’s radar. It isn’t the kiss of death for a candidate to come out for it, but it also isn’t going to win him elections. Personally, I support legalization, but the truth is that it is a niche demographic.

    The majority of Americans support legalization. This is an issue that if Republicans got in front of, they would look like the good guys for once. It would also expand the GOP as by supporting this, they would not look like hypocrites and this will allow others to be open to to the rest of the GOP’s message.

    They would do better to turn the debate towards socially conservative issues like gun control.

    Guns are a Constitutional Right, not a SoCon issue. I agree it’s a winner electorally. Why not support 2 winning ideas, Guns and Ganja.


  54. RIX
    54 | January 4, 2014 10:49 am

    brookly red wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    Charlie Daniels ✔ @CharlieDaniels
    Follow
    It’s a disgrace when the only people with the guts to face down Obama is a group of Catholic Nuns
    God bless you Sisters
    6:10 PM — 3 Jan 2014

    Via Twitchy
    This is not smart. Bullying the Sisters of Charity is not a good PR move.

    I am not a Catholic myself but I do see them moving to the point position of the resistance…

    Our parish priest nailed it. This is not about contraception, it has more to do with abortion.
    But actually it is an attack on religion, going after the tax exemption and the Catholic Church is just the first target.


  55. The Kraken
    55 | January 4, 2014 10:50 am

    There’s a lot of bunkum argument out there. Don’t let a bad experience with a moron convince you that the thing he claims to explain is actually that way.
    I’m against legalization. It’s a slippery slope, and I see nothing wrong with the answer “Right here” to the question, “where will it ever end?” Not over there, but right here. “But but but why don’t you oppose alcohol”? Because that’s a non-starter, and at any rate, it helps me deal with stupid questions like yours (not you Bumr50).

    As far as SoCons vs FisCons, I think this is a symptom of a larger problem. The GOP in general is becoming a Christian Socialist party. These are folks who don’t mind central planning as long as there’s no gays in it. It’s not as though the SoCons don’t have priority seats in the Tea Party. They didn’t infiltrate as much as they’re just plain leaving and attempting to take the whole tent with them. “Screw your economics, we have our social and defense policy.” But even their defense policy is not so sound in some cases.

    As the military increasingly comes to resemble a jobs/housing program (ask around, it’s disturbing), even a “muscular defense policy” means little without a sense of what to do and why. Like kick Iran’s ass, fire Karzai, and shoot Kim Jong Un. I view defense spending as one of the very darned few things actually *required* in the Constitution, but we could certainly be doing better with that money.

    Which leads to the real infiltrators: the kook FisCons who are at war with conservatism on both defense and social policy. These are the PaulPods, whose selective libertarian views are often more in tune with the Occupy anarchists than the Tea Party Constitutionalists.

    So from my perspective, I see a collapse on the traditional right, and an onslaught from the amoral left. Those of us who feel mostly fiscally conservative, mostly socially conservative, and mostly defense conservative, feel mostly alone.

    Well, nobody said it would be easy.


  56. brookly red
    56 | January 4, 2014 10:51 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Guns are a Constitutional Right, not a SoCon issue. I agree it’s a winner electorally. Why not support 2 winning ideas, Guns and Ganja.

    cause stoners with guns is not a winning combo?

    Wow man… it that thing loaded?


  57. 57 | January 4, 2014 10:52 am

    @ Rodan:

    That is your first error. Social Conservatives don’t want to create a Utopian State. You have gotten that viewpoint by reading too much Leftist propaganda. So I can’t tell you “how they’ll do that”, because it isn’t the goal. There are things that the Social Conservatives want government to do. Restricting abortion would be the biggest of these. Quite frankly the resistance to common-sense abortion laws like infants born alive acts are not significant infringements on any rights that are protected by the Constitution. Wanting to do away with Roe v. Wade is not a utopian idea. We outlaw murder, and almost nobody argues that that should be so, even though the prohibition against murder comes from the Ten Commandments. It isn’t “Utopian” to outlaw murder. It is part of what a functioning society needs. How is it that abortion should be the most protected “right” that we have? There’s absolutely no Constitutional foundation for that.


  58. The Kraken
    58 | January 4, 2014 10:52 am

    @ Bumr50:
    Yup. A federal government should be powerful enough to jealously defend the religious freedom of any group, but impotent to either promote or destroy such a group.


  59. brookly red
    59 | January 4, 2014 10:53 am

    RIX wrote:

    brookly red wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    Charlie Daniels ✔ @CharlieDaniels
    Follow
    It’s a disgrace when the only people with the guts to face down Obama is a group of Catholic Nuns
    God bless you Sisters
    6:10 PM — 3 Jan 2014

    Via Twitchy
    This is not smart. Bullying the Sisters of Charity is not a good PR move.

    I am not a Catholic myself but I do see them moving to the point position of the resistance…

    Our parish priest nailed it. This is not about contraception, it has more to do with abortion.
    But actually it is an attack on religion, going after the tax exemption and the Catholic Church is just the first target.

    it’s about ever aspect of life, here is another.
    http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/03/wisconsin-catholic-schools-reject-common-core/


  60. 60 | January 4, 2014 10:56 am

    @ Rodan:

    Guns are considered one of the key differences between social conservatives and social liberals. You will note that almost universally when someone says they are “socially liberal” they are talking about three primary issues: abortion, guns, and gay marriage. To a lesser extent, they may also be talking about the position of the welfare state, but the welfare state is as much a fiscal issue as it is social.


  61. Bumr50
    61 | January 4, 2014 10:57 am

    @ brookly red:

    Religious schools are another high value target for the Progressive Left, on a par with homeschooling.


  62. RIX
    63 | January 4, 2014 10:57 am

    http://twitchy.com/2014/01/03/professor-al-sharpton-dons-lab-coat-pwns-climate-change-deniers/
    You have got to see this. This is not an SNL skit.


  63. 65 | January 4, 2014 10:59 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Guns are considered one of the key differences between social conservatives and social liberals.

    Libertarians like me who oppose both Socons and SoLibs support Gun Rights? I see your pint and there is validity to it, but support for Guns is broader than just SoCon vs SiLib.


  64. 66 | January 4, 2014 11:00 am

    @ doriangrey:

    Isn’t Liberal and Dishonesty the same?

    :lol:


  65. 67 | January 4, 2014 11:00 am

    brookly red wrote:

    cause stoners with guns is not a winning combo?

    Yeah, that isn’t going to sell well. It is what I’d like to see, in a way. As I’ve said, I am for legalizing all drugs, but having penalties for behavior that is committed when you are on drugs. That is really about the same way alcohol is regulated in this country. It isn’t perfect, but it is functional. But you are going to have to sell it to the population, and I don’t see anybody that is really doing that. At least not on a national level. Rand Paul is doing that to a small degree, but he isn’t really couching it in terms that will sell to the average voter.


  66. 68 | January 4, 2014 11:01 am

    @ RIX:

    That guy has issued.


  67. brookly red
    69 | January 4, 2014 11:01 am

    Bumr50 wrote:

    @ brookly red:

    Religious schools are another high value target for the Progressive Left, on a par with homeschooling.

    Religion period is a challenge to those who would play God… but eventually God puts them in their place. Be patient.


  68. 70 | January 4, 2014 11:02 am

    @ brookly red:

    Have you seen the polls, a majority of Americans support Pot Legalization. Stoners with Guns are less of a danger than Drunks with guns.


  69. RIX
    71 | January 4, 2014 11:03 am

    http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/01/03/obamacare-confusion-reigns-frustrated-patients-walk-out-hospitals-without-treatment
    The rationing begins , even before the real rationing begins.


  70. 72 | January 4, 2014 11:03 am

    @ Rodan:

    I am telling you how things are defined in our political culture. When a person says that they are Social Liberals, that is what they mean. Likewise Social conservatives. Libertarians don’t really fit in either the social liberal or social conservative camps. The ideas behind libertarianism are in some ways good, and I agree with some of them (not at all on foreign policy, though). But the average voter is barely aware that libertarianism even exists. At the end of the day, politics is a lot like mass-marketing. You have to hit the notes that resonate with the most people.


  71. Bumr50
    73 | January 4, 2014 11:04 am

    @ RIX:

    Someone needs to photoshop ‘Beaker’ in there getting chased by a muppet black pather…


  72. brookly red
    74 | January 4, 2014 11:04 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    brookly red wrote:

    cause stoners with guns is not a winning combo?

    Yeah, that isn’t going to sell well. It is what I’d like to see, in a way. As I’ve said, I am for legalizing all drugs, but having penalties for behavior that is committed when you are on drugs. That is really about the same way alcohol is regulated in this country. It isn’t perfect, but it is functional. But you are going to have to sell it to the population, and I don’t see anybody that is really doing that. At least not on a national level. Rand Paul is doing that to a small degree, but he isn’t really couching it in terms that will sell to the average voter.

    I agree… someone wants to get high it’s their business-till they get in the car, then it’s MY business.


  73. coldwarrior
    75 | January 4, 2014 11:05 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    its not a purity test it is the definition of TEA party. anything else is not TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY party, it might be affiliated or trying to muscle in on TEA, but is not, by definition, Taxed Enough Already.


  74. Bumr50
    76 | January 4, 2014 11:06 am

    Save your money and cancel the conventions and debates.


  75. coldwarrior
    77 | January 4, 2014 11:06 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ brookly red:
    Have you seen the polls, a majority of Americans support Pot Legalization. Stoners with Guns are less of a danger than Drunks with guns.

    AMEN!

    i would rather deal with someone stoned than someone who’s been hitting jack daniels all night.


  76. RIX
    78 | January 4, 2014 11:07 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:

    That guy has issued.

    Not smart, but a great hustler.


  77. brookly red
    79 | January 4, 2014 11:07 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ brookly red:

    Have you seen the polls, a majority of Americans support Pot Legalization. Stoners with Guns are less of a danger than Drunks with guns.

    maybe (assuming it’s one or the other but most smokers also drink) but stoners w/guns is just too easy to make fun of.


  78. 80 | January 4, 2014 11:07 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Look at this.

    Iraq’s Fallujah falls to ‘Qaeda-linked’ militants

    FALLUJAH: Iraq has lost Fallujah to Al-Qaeda-linked fighters, a senior security official said Saturday, putting militants back in control of a city where American forces repeatedly battled insurgents.

    Parts of Fallujah and Ramadi, west of Baghdad, have been held by militants for days, harkening back to the years after the 2003 US-led invasion when both cities were insurgent strongholds.

    Fighting erupted in the Ramadi area Monday, when security forces broke up an anti-government protest camp set up after demonstrations broke out in late 2012 against what Sunni Arabs say is the marginalisation and targeting of their community.

    The violence then spread to Fallujah, and a subsequent withdrawal of security forces from areas of both cities cleared the way for ISIL to move in.

    “Fallujah is under the control of ISIL,” a senior security official in Anbar province told AFP, referring to the Al-Qaeda-linked Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

    However, the city’s outskirts were in the hands of local police, the official added.

    An AFP journalist inside Fallujah also said ISIL seemed to be in control, with no security forces or Sahwa anti-Al-Qaeda militiamen visible on the streets.

    By going Sectarian Malaki has revived AQ in Iraq. Now that the FSA and Nusra are kicking ISIS out of SYria, it seems they are going all in against Iran’s puppets in Iraq.

    I will make more Popcorn for you. Just have my fruit punch ready so we can enjoy the Iran vs. al-Qaeda show! :lol:


  79. RIX
    81 | January 4, 2014 11:08 am

    Bumr50 wrote:

    @ RIX:

    Someone needs to photoshop ‘Beaker’ in there getting chased by a muppet black pather…

    THat would be funny. You could do a lot with this.


  80. 82 | January 4, 2014 11:08 am

    @ brookly red:

    but stoners w/guns is just too easy to make fun of.

    Mockery is fun!


  81. brookly red
    83 | January 4, 2014 11:09 am

    Bumr50 wrote:

    Save your money and cancel the conventions and debates.

    The souvenir shop at DC’s Reagan airport has decided the 2016 presidential candidates … pic.twitter.com/lpv7j03ydT

    — Emily Miller (@EmilyMiller) January 3, 2014

    ironically our next prez will actually be chosen by Chinese manufactures


  82. brookly red
    84 | January 4, 2014 11:11 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ brookly red:

    but stoners w/guns is just too easy to make fun of.

    Mockery is fun!

    Dude! let’s do shotguns with the shotgun… it will be awesome!

    No.


  83. 85 | January 4, 2014 11:12 am

    @ Rodan:

    We knew that Iraq was going to fall apart once Obama high-tailed it out without putting any kind of agreement in place to have US troops there to help quell something like this. We should have had bases in Iraq. That would benefit us strategically. Doing what we did just guaranteed that something like this would happen. Look for things to go South in Afghanistan later this year when we abandon that country. I expect that the Taliban will be back in power by 2016.


  84. 86 | January 4, 2014 11:12 am

    @ brookly red:

    Brain splatters!

    :lol:


  85. brookly red
    87 | January 4, 2014 11:12 am

    @ Rodan:

    we should just level it and be done.


  86. coldwarrior
    88 | January 4, 2014 11:13 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    How is it that abortion should be the most protected “right” that we have? There’s absolutely no Constitutional foundation for that.

    Some 22 states enacted 70 new provisions to target abortion last year, the second most ever, prompting an outcry from Planned Parenthood, which accused “out-of-touch Tea Party politicians” with using “every underhanded trick in the book to get these laws passed.”

    A new report from the Guttmacher Institute said that the 70 provisions were second in number to the nearly 90 approved in 2011. The group said that 205 abortion restrictions were approved over the past three years, more than the 189 enacted during the previous decade.

    The report also noted that many states increased access to abortion, such as California, but it was mostly critical of the more conservative states and efforts to reduce abortion.

    50 labratories, we dont need a push at the federal level. let each state decide. because the right gets smoked on this issue at a national level every 4 years,for what? to placate a minority of americans? do it at the state level. the gun laws work best that way and so does abortion.

    lets not fall for the bait AGAIN this cycle.

    notice what he did there…blamed this on the tea party..this aint TEA.


  87. 89 | January 4, 2014 11:14 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    The way I recall it, calling it the Tea Party was harkening back to the Boston Tea Party from the Revolutionary war. The acronym use of it came later. The initial impetus was against ObamaCare not taxes. It was ObamaCare that had the protestors in the streets.


  88. 90 | January 4, 2014 11:14 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    We should have never put Maliki and his Pro-Iranian lackeys in charge. That was the big mistake. We created an Iranian puppet state. If we had just installed a Pro-American dictator, we would not be having this problem.

    The Iran vs. al-Qaeda fight is the best thing to happen for us.


  89. 91 | January 4, 2014 11:16 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Actually it was the Paulians who manned the first Tea Parties as far back as 06 protesting the Progressive policies of Bush. Then Rick Santelli did his rant and that’s what got it going. Then others came on and with the help of the Left hijacked the Tea Party name.


  90. 92 | January 4, 2014 11:17 am

    @ coldwarrior:

    I’m with you.


  91. 93 | January 4, 2014 11:17 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    50 labratories, we dont need a push at the federal level. let each state decide.

    You have to get Roe v Wade overturned to do that. That is a perfectly acceptable result, but you aren’t likely to get it barring a change of heart from the Supreme Court. It was the Courts that made it a Federal issue. Do away with the Court’s interference, and you will see the issue pretty much disappear at the national level from the Right. The Left, of course, will become the ones pushing for preemption laws.


  92. brookly red
    94 | January 4, 2014 11:17 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:

    We should have never put Maliki and his Pro-Iranian lackeys in charge. That was the big mistake. We created an Iranian puppet state. If we had just installed a Pro-American dictator, we would not be having this problem.

    The Iran vs. al-Qaeda fight is the best thing to happen for us.

    so of the 3 billion in French arms the Saudis just bought for Lebanon how much you think will end up in Iraq?


  93. coldwarrior
    95 | January 4, 2014 11:18 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ coldwarrior:
    The way I recall it, calling it the Tea Party was harkening back to the Boston Tea Party from the Revolutionary war. The acronym use of it came later. The initial impetus was against ObamaCare not taxes. It was ObamaCare that had the protestors in the streets.

    founded on the floor of the chicago merk exchange by cnbc floor reporter rick santelli over 0′s mortgage program and bush’s tarp.


  94. 96 | January 4, 2014 11:19 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    At the end of the day, politics is a lot like mass-marketing. You have to hit the notes that resonate with the most people.

    Yeah Marketing is a key.


  95. brookly red
    97 | January 4, 2014 11:19 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    It was ObamaCare that had the protestors in the streets.

    yes but living in the streets and marching in the streets are not the same :(


  96. Bumr50
    98 | January 4, 2014 11:19 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Rick Santelli coined the term.


  97. RIX
    99 | January 4, 2014 11:19 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:

    We should have never put Maliki and his Pro-Iranian lackeys in charge. That was the big mistake. We created an Iranian puppet state. If we had just installed a Pro-American dictator, we would not be having this problem.

    The Iran vs. al-Qaeda fight is the best thing to happen for us.

    this might be unpopular , but there was a dictator in place that we could have turned to our purposes, Saddam.
    He was a bad guy, but he was secular, anti Iranian & he would play ball.
    Once under our thumb, we could have controlled his excesses in Iraq,


  98. 100 | January 4, 2014 11:19 am

    brookly red wrote:

    Rodan wrote:
    @ brookly red:
    but stoners w/guns is just too easy to make fun of.
    Mockery is fun!

    Dude! let’s do shotguns with the shotgun… it will be awesome!
    No.

    Bah… Been there, done that… (old Vietnam era US Military/Marine corps trick, freaky as hell the first time you see or do it though) Yea, Navy brat during the 60′s and 70′s remember :evil:


  99. brookly red
    101 | January 4, 2014 11:20 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:

    At the end of the day, politics is a lot like mass-marketing. You have to hit the notes that resonate with the most people.

    Yeah Marketing is a key.

    Ahem…


  100. 102 | January 4, 2014 11:20 am

    @ brookly red:

    It will be used in Lebanon against Hezbollah. It seems the Saudis are going all in against Iran.


  101. brookly red
    103 | January 4, 2014 11:21 am

    doriangrey wrote:

    brookly red wrote:

    Rodan wrote:
    @ brookly red:
    but stoners w/guns is just too easy to make fun of.
    Mockery is fun!

    Dude! let’s do shotguns with the shotgun… it will be awesome!
    No.

    Bah… Been there, done that… (old Vietnam era US Military/Marine corps trick, freaky as hell the first time you see or do it though) Yea, Navy brat during the 60′s and 70′s remember

    yes as I recall “shotguns” actually got their name from shot guns…


  102. coldwarrior
    104 | January 4, 2014 11:22 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    abortion is never going to go away. thinking it will is dreaming. the best that can be done is restrict at the state level. and its an issue that hasnt been in the top most important list forever. its a niche issue anymore like legalization of marijuana. most people dont think about it or dont care.


  103. 105 | January 4, 2014 11:22 am

    brookly red wrote:

    doriangrey wrote:
    brookly red wrote:
    Rodan wrote:
    @ brookly red:
    but stoners w/guns is just too easy to make fun of.
    Mockery is fun!
    Dude! let’s do shotguns with the shotgun… it will be awesome!
    No.
    Bah… Been there, done that… (old Vietnam era US Military/Marine corps trick, freaky as hell the first time you see or do it though) Yea, Navy brat during the 60′s and 70′s remember

    yes as I recall “shotguns” actually got their name from shot guns…

    Yup.


  104. brookly red
    106 | January 4, 2014 11:23 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ brookly red:

    It will be used in Lebanon against Hezbollah. It seems the Saudis are going all in against Iran.

    yes 3 billion is just the start, they can make life pretty hard for Iran.


  105. 107 | January 4, 2014 11:23 am

    @ RIX:

    In retrospect, yes we should have flipped him like Qaddafi. But that is all water under the bridge. The Iran vs. al-Qaeda fight is a blessing!


  106. coldwarrior
    108 | January 4, 2014 11:24 am

    later yinz…

    good thread.


  107. 109 | January 4, 2014 11:24 am

    @ brookly red:

    Enjoy this.


  108. 110 | January 4, 2014 11:24 am

    @ Rodan:

    I don’t remember them from ’06. They certainly didn’t have the crowds then that they had in 2010. The Tea Party isn’t a monolithic entity. It has no formal leadership or structure. There are three or four national groups that are using the name, and even more people who are simply lumped into that group by virtue of their political beliefs. At the end off the day, this attempt to purge the socially conservatives out of the public square will cost us far more than it gains us.


  109. 111 | January 4, 2014 11:25 am

    coldwarrior wrote:

    most people dont think about it or dont care.

    I bet it’s way up at the top of God’s list though. If you really dare to ask why America is suffering financially/economically and why our political leadership is so corrupt, ask God what he thinks of us making it legal to murder children.


  110. brookly red
    112 | January 4, 2014 11:27 am

    @ doriangrey:

    Indeed.


  111. RIX
    113 | January 4, 2014 11:28 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:

    In retrospect, yes we should have flipped him like Qaddafi. But that is all water under the bridge. The Iran vs. al-Qaeda fight is a blessing!

    it is a good thing. But having Iraq in the Iranian sphere is not a good thing.
    The Sunnis opposing Al Qaeda in Iraq is a killer for AQ.


  112. 114 | January 4, 2014 11:28 am

    @ coldwarrior:
    @ Bumr50:
    Very well. I remember the name Rick Santelli. Fair enough. But it is still the case that these groups are not, and really never have been, Socially agnostic. There is a lot of crossover between social conservatives and fiscal conservatives. Demanding that the Social Conservatives be purged plays into the hands of the Liberals. It helps fragment the right, and makes us less formidable electorally.


  113. brookly red
    115 | January 4, 2014 11:29 am

    @ Rodan:

    I am betting on the Saudi’s


  114. RIX
    116 | January 4, 2014 11:32 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    Imo, the best result would be for the Tea Party to cause a Reformation in the Republican Party.
    The days of a John McCain being more friendly to his “Dear Friends” on the other side of the aisle more than he cares about his constituents needs to end.


  115. brookly red
    117 | January 4, 2014 11:33 am

    RIX wrote:

    Imo, the best result would be for the Tea Party to cause a Reformation in the Republican Party.

    also the most likely


  116. 118 | January 4, 2014 11:33 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    At the end off the day, this attempt to purge the socially conservatives out of the public square will cost us far more than it gains us.

    No one is trying to purge SoCons. It’s more of be part of a coalition instead of acting like the bosses. You have to understand that many Fiscons/Libertarians felt bullied by SoCons the last 20 years and grew resentful towards them. Now it’s just push-back.

    If SoCons realized they can’t impose their way on people and instead played the role of being the Right’s conscience no one would have beef with them.


  117. 119 | January 4, 2014 11:33 am

    @ Rodan:

    The time to have actually done that would have been when Hussein invaded Kuwait. If we’d taken the position that Kuwait was not an American ally (they weren’t), and we had no issue in the confrontation, then possibly Hussein could have been brought to our side of the aisle. Hussein wasn’t exactly a rational actor, though. Dealing with madmen is not usually a good idea. By the time we went back in to Iraq there was no possibility of doing anything else. People forget that Saddam Hussein was sponsoring anti-Israeli terrorism to the tune of $50K a pop paid to suicide-bomber’s families. That alone was enough reason to remove him from power when we did.


  118. 120 | January 4, 2014 11:35 am

    RIX wrote:

    The days of a John McCain being more friendly to his “Dear Friends” on the other side of the aisle more than he cares about his constituents needs to end.

    That is absolutely true. John McCain hurts us more by remaining nominally a “Republican” than he would by officially flipping over to the Democrats. ObamaCare is the only vote that he’s made that he stood against the Democrats and with the Republicans. He is, otherwise, a loyal foot soldier for the Democrats, making their acts “bi-partisan” when they are really Party-line actions.


  119. 121 | January 4, 2014 11:37 am

    @ doriangrey:

    Hey I put your post in Special report. Great write up.


  120. RIX
    122 | January 4, 2014 11:38 am

    brookly red wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    Imo, the best result would be for the Tea Party to cause a Reformation in the Republican Party.

    also the most likely

    Hope so.


  121. 123 | January 4, 2014 11:39 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Saddam was a puppy in the terror business compared to Saudi Arabia and Iran. If anything we should have attacked those 2. AT this point we are just discussing water that passed under the bridge already. Now sit back and enjoy our enemies killing each other!


  122. 124 | January 4, 2014 11:40 am

    brookly red wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    I am betting on the Saudi’s

    Sunnis heavily outnumber Shias.


  123. brookly red
    125 | January 4, 2014 11:41 am

    RIX wrote:

    brookly red wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    Imo, the best result would be for the Tea Party to cause a Reformation in the Republican Party.

    also the most likely

    Hope so.

    what they need to do is start pushing a platform and make both the GOP and the Dems respond


  124. brookly red
    126 | January 4, 2014 11:43 am

    Rodan wrote:

    brookly red wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    I am betting on the Saudi’s

    Sunnis heavily outnumber Shias.

    money talks and I would rather have 1 gunship that 1,000 pairs of boots if you get my drift.


  125. RIX
    127 | January 4, 2014 11:43 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    That is absolutely true. John McCain hurts us more by remaining nominally a “Republican” than he would by officially flipping over to the Democrats. ObamaCare is the only vote that he’s made that he stood against the Democrats and with the Republicans. He is, otherwise, a loyal foot soldier for the Democrats, making their acts “bi-partisan” when they are really Party-line actions.

    His constant sabotage of the Party & smearing Libertarians is getting old.


  126. RIX
    128 | January 4, 2014 11:45 am

    @ brookly red:
    what they need to do is start pushing a platform and make both the GOP and the Dems respond

    i would like to see the Tea Party take over the Republican Party.


  127. 129 | January 4, 2014 11:45 am

    @ RIX:
    @ Iron Fist:

    McCain is a senile freak. He’s a useful tool for the Left to use to give them cover. That said, Karl Rove is more of the problem. He still has too much influence.


  128. Bumr50
    130 | January 4, 2014 11:46 am

    @ RIX:

    Peter King is becoming increasingly similar.


  129. 131 | January 4, 2014 11:47 am

    @ RIX:

    The Tea Party has to get rid of the media enabled Charlatans first.


  130. brookly red
    132 | January 4, 2014 11:47 am

    RIX wrote:

    @ brookly red:
    what they need to do is start pushing a platform and make both the GOP and the Dems respond

    i would like to see the Tea Party take over the Republican Party.

    so would most Republicans


  131. 133 | January 4, 2014 11:48 am

    Bumr50 wrote:

    @ RIX:
    Peter King is becoming increasingly similar.

    I would love to put Peter King and Steve King in barbed wire steel cage and have them fight.


  132. 134 | January 4, 2014 11:50 am

    Honestly there is no point in getting worked up over the political situation. It’s all a scripted act.


  133. brookly red
    135 | January 4, 2014 11:55 am

    Rodan wrote:

    Honestly there is no point in getting worked up over the political situation. It’s all a scripted act.

    /I hear Hillary has already picked her inaugural gown pants suit


  134. Speranza
    136 | January 4, 2014 12:01 pm

    RIX wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    A lot of people boot strapped onto the Tea party , because they saw them on the rise.
    They made mistakes withn Sharon Angle & others, but they’re learning.
    They are philosophically sophisticated , but need more political acumen.
    It is amazing though to hear them called terrorists, racists & anarchists.
    It’s just ridiculous.

    And also to realize what is possible and what at the moment is not. We need to win elections.


  135. RIX
    137 | January 4, 2014 12:01 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:
    @ Iron Fist:

    McCain is a senile freak. He’s a useful tool for the Left to use to give them cover. That said, Karl Rove is more of the problem. He still has too much influence.

    It is time for McCain to retire, but he won’t.


  136. 138 | January 4, 2014 12:02 pm

    New Thread


  137. Speranza
    139 | January 4, 2014 12:02 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    That said, Karl Rove is more of the problem. He still has too much influence.

    It is Rove and the forces that he represents.


  138. 140 | January 4, 2014 12:03 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Like Vince Lombardi said, Winning aint everything, it’s the only thing!


  139. RIX
    141 | January 4, 2014 12:04 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    @ Rodan:
    A lot of people boot strapped onto the Tea party , because they saw them on the rise.
    They made mistakes withn Sharon Angle & others, but they’re learning.
    They are philosophically sophisticated , but need more political acumen.
    It is amazing though to hear them called terrorists, racists & anarchists.
    It’s just ridiculous.

    And also to realize what is possible and what at the moment is not. We need to win elections.

    Yes, hold the House & flip the Senate. Obama will still have the veto pen, but they an make him miserable.


  140. 142 | January 4, 2014 12:04 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Karl Rove is part of a very sinister cabal.


  141. RIX
    143 | January 4, 2014 12:05 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ RIX:

    The Tea Party has to get rid of the media enabled Charlatans first.

    It does need to be secular.


  142. Speranza
    144 | January 4, 2014 12:05 pm

    RIX wrote:

    Yes, hold the House & flip the Senate. Obama will still have the veto pen, but they Can make him miserable.

    Yes he can still do damage but we can frustrate and stymie him on so many fronts and turn him into a lame duck.


  143. Speranza
    145 | January 4, 2014 12:06 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Karl Rove is part of a very sinister cabal.

    He’s a creep and I’d like to tell him where to put his chalkboard.


  144. Speranza
    146 | January 4, 2014 12:08 pm

    RIX wrote:

    It is time for McCain to retire, but he won’t.

    He has been embittered since the Bush Mandarins trashed him in 2000 just like McCain’s people trashed Sarah Palin which made her increasingly embittered.


  145. 147 | January 4, 2014 12:09 pm

    @ Speranza:

    He’s a loser and would be a bum in the street if he was not connected.


  146. brookly red
    148 | January 4, 2014 12:14 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:

    Karl Rove is part of a very sinister cabal.

    wow only the 4th and we already have a nomination for understatement of the year :)


  147. Bumr50
    149 | January 4, 2014 12:16 pm

    I always like to remind people of this:

    In the fall of 1970, Rove used a false identity to enter the campaign office of Democrat Alan J. Dixon, who was running for Treasurer of Illinois. He stole 1000 sheets of paper with campaign letterhead, printed fake campaign rally fliers promising “free beer, free food, girls and a good time for nothing”, and distributed them at rock concerts and homeless shelters, with the effect of disrupting Dixon’s rally. (Dixon eventually won the election). Rove’s role would not become publicly known until August 1973 when Rove told the Dallas Morning News. In 1999 he said, “It was a youthful prank at the age of 19 and I regret it.”[14] In his memoir, Rove wrote that when he was later nominated to the Board for International Broadcasting by President George H.W. Bush, Senator Dixon did not kill his nomination. In Rove’s account, “Dixon displayed more grace than I had shown and kindly excused this youthful prank.”[15]

    Karl Rove, age 19.

    I think it’s safe to say he wasn’t getting laid.


  148. RIX
    151 | January 4, 2014 12:50 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    Yes, hold the House & flip the Senate. Obama will still have the veto pen, but they Can make him miserable.

    Yes he can still do damage but we can frustrate and stymie him on so many fronts and turn him into a lame duck.

    Hr no longer looks like the hip young genius, he’s lost his mojo.
    War with the Sisters of Charity is catfish stupid.
    He is getting humiliated.


  149. RIX
    152 | January 4, 2014 12:51 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    It is time for McCain to retire, but he won’t.

    He has been embittered since the Bush Mandarins trashed him in 2000 just like McCain’s people trashed Sarah Palin which made her increasingly embittered.

    McCain is not a team player. Great as a young man, but not now.


  150. brookly red
    153 | January 4, 2014 12:55 pm

    RIX wrote:

    War with the Sisters of Charity is catfish stupid.
    He is getting humiliated.

    bullying old ladies especially nuns makes him look like the little commie thug he is…


  151. 154 | January 4, 2014 1:16 pm

    Iron Fist wrote:

    Bumr50 wrote:
    as I shudder to think what could happen if another, less compassionate religion were to ever be an elected majority.
    We are headed that way. The people to fear aren’t the Evangelicals, though. It is the Evangelical Atheists who are the danger for establishing a State religion in the United States. They are trying to use the courts to effectively outlaw Christianity in public, if not quite in private. Look to Bloomberg’s New York, and you can see where the Liberals want to take us in terms of personal freedom. They want to dictate to you the very food that you eat. I don’t see how anyone can equate “liberalism” with “individual freedom” in the context of the United States (in Europe, it is another thing all together). They want everything that is not mandated by the state to be forbidden.

    From a current literary project:

    The funeral service was held in the Central Dome of March City. There simply was no other place to hold all of the people in attendance. The ceremony was solemn and godless. Grandfather was specific about that. He was also very specific that no sign of the presence of the Atheist Foundation America of would be allowed.

    No sign of them at all. Nothing.

    Apparently Grandfather had a deep loathing of them that went back to his days in the United States Army during the Cold War. Apparently the leader of the group at the time had stated that the Soviet Union was a morally superior to the United States. Apparently the leader was not concerned about the labor camps and the body count run up by Soviet Communism.

    And apparently some people still don’t understand. The local Martian members of the AFA were loudly objecting that their symbols were not allowed to disfigure Grandfather’s internment site in any way.

    I heard several family members suggest in whispered voices that the local AFA should be introduced to an airlock.

    And I had to agree.

    I’m reffering to the America Atheists and their head lonnMadolyn Murray O’Hair.


  152. Speranza
    155 | January 4, 2014 2:21 pm

    brookly red wrote:

    RIX wrote:
    War with the Sisters of Charity is catfish stupid.
    He is getting humiliated.

    bullying old ladies especially nuns makes him look like the little commie thug he is…

    He has been tone deaf a great deal more then usual lately. First he skipped the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address, second he missed out on denouncing the “knock out game” thuggery, now picking a fight with nuns?


  153. 156 | January 4, 2014 2:33 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    He has been tone deaf a great deal more then usual lately. First he skipped the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address, second he missed out on denouncing the “knock out game” thuggery, now picking a fight with nuns?

    The Big Zero clearly belongs to the school of philosophy that identifies reality as being unreal.


  154. Speranza
    157 | January 4, 2014 2:54 pm

    The Big Zero clearly belongs to the school of philosophy that identifies reality as being unreal.

    His ego is the size of the state of California.


  155. Speranza
    158 | January 4, 2014 2:59 pm

    The Kraken wrote:

    GOP is the cowardly crying soldier in the movie PATTON.

    That soldier (and another soldier) was suffering from combat stress.They were not cowards.
    Patton was a fine general but he had some rather unlovable beliefs too.

    According to historian Antony Beevor in his 2012 book The Second World War, Patton was heard by medical staff members after the first incident angrily denying the reality of shell shock to junior officers in his presence, claiming that the condition was “an invention of the Jews.”


  156. Speranza
    159 | January 4, 2014 3:00 pm

    The Kraken wrote:

    The Tea Party has nothing to apologize for from 2010,

    Yes they do -- they cost us at least two out three seats.


  157. RIX
    160 | January 4, 2014 3:40 pm

    brookly red wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    War with the Sisters of Charity is catfish stupid.
    He is getting humiliated.

    bullying old ladies especially nuns makes him look like the little commie thug he is…

    Indeed it does.


  158. The Kraken
    161 | January 4, 2014 9:02 pm

    Speranza wrote:

    The Kraken wrote:

    The Tea Party has nothing to apologize for from 2010,

    Yes they do — they cost us at least two out three seats.

    That’s pretty weak tea. If seats matter, look at how many times the GOP has spiked a race that the Tea Party candidate wound up nominated for *by the party*. Most recently, the Cuccinelli race in Virginia. Thrown away just to hurt the Tea Party. Easily winnable; lost on purpose.
    And please recall that the facts of the 2010 Senate election were this:
    - Going in, GOP down to record low of 39 without help from any Tea Party.
    - Coming out, Tea Party wave recovers most but not all of the difference.

    It’s very easy to fixate on a few facts that fit a narrative, and to curse the names of Angle and O’Donnell. But that doesn’t make the Tea Party a negative force on the right. That’s simply unsupportable. And recall that Angle and O’Donnell, unlike their GOP counterparts, actually did receive the nominations. If the Tea Party is so powerful as that, to take that sort of blame, then shouldn’t the GOP pay more attention to what Tea Party voters want, instead of lashing out at us?

    Do you seriously think that the Senate turnout would have been better if there had been no Tea Party that year? Do you think that the fact that the GOP had gotten itself down to a ridiculous superminority should not be included in this math?

    The GOP has accused the Tea Party of bad faith and has been at war with us for years. But the Tea Party has remained faithful to GOP candidates *who win nominations*, while the GOP has actively sabotaged Tea Party candidates, intentionally throwing races or actually running as a third party when they don’t get the nomination.

    In 2014, the GOP will find out what it is to live without the Tea Party, because they find themselves unable to live with it.


  159. Speranza
    162 | January 5, 2014 8:51 am

    @ The Kraken:
    You just made a stream of consciousness speech ignoring the fact that we probably would have won two (maybe three) Senate seats had we had better candidates then the trio of Angle, O’Donnell and Buck.


  160. The Kraken
    163 | January 6, 2014 9:07 am

    Speranza wrote:

    @ The Kraken:
    You just made a stream of consciousness speech ignoring the fact that we probably would have won two (maybe three) Senate seats had we had better candidates then the trio of Angle, O’Donnell and Buck.

    No, I thought I made a pretty good argument that you won’t find perfect results in anything, and that the GOP is using your cheap argument to kill the Tea Party, which is the only thing keeping the GOP alive. If you are unwilling to accept a couple of losses in the midst of a crushing victory, I don’t know what to tell you. I guess we’re done here. You’ve ignored what I said three times in a row. Fair enough.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David