Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“McCain owes GOP a second concession speech”

At least, so argues J. Parisi at the Washington Times, who helpfully writes said concession speech for the “Maverick” Senator from AZ:

“My Friends,

Regrettably, I belatedly realize now that “me-too,” half-a-loaf Republicanism is not the recipe for presidential success I long thought it would be, because the voters and special-interest groups that favor big-government programs aren’t going to settle for half a loaf when they can have the whole loaf. That formulation never had any chance of winning over the votes of the Democrats and independents I so long played to, while it only served to turn off the Republican base; so it was truly a “lose-lose” proposition.

For the last eight years, we’ve tried being Democrat-lite, massively growing the federal government — just not as massively as the Democrats would have — and what did it get us November 4th? An electoral “whooping” and diminished minorities in both the House and Senate, that’s what.

Likewise, I now realize, sadly, that I reached across the aisle on issue after issue to liberal Democrats — with Ted Kennedy on immigration reform; with Russ Feingold on campaign-finance reform (which ironically proved to be my own undoing in the campaign); with Joe Lieberman on cap-and-trade climate legislation (which by Obama’s own admission would bankrupt the coal industry); the Gang of 14 on judicial nominees; and more — and what do I have to show for it? As I said repeatedly during the campaign, I have the scars to prove it. I meant it at the time as a badge of honor; but in 20/20 hindsight, that good will was never requited.

Need more proof? President Bush, with his big-government “compassionate conservatism” — No Child Left Behind education legislation and the Medicare prescription-drug program, to cite just two examples — further hurt the Republican brand by further blurring the differences between the parties and dispiriting the GOP base. The Democrats never make this mistake. Sure, they talk a centrist game to get elected — take Obama’s flim-flam on “tax cuts for 95 percent of Americans,” for example — but I guarantee you they will be lock-step liberals when they take the reins of power in January, especially if they get a filibuster-proof Senate.

President Bush, bless his heart, genuinely sought to “change the tone” in Washington when he arrived here in 2001; but it became clear early on there would be no reciprocity on the part of the other party. For at least a half-dozen years, after a brief respite in the wake of 9/11, the Democrats in Congress and their Daily Kos/MoveOn extremist allies have absolutely vilified the man — one bumper sticker says it all: “Impeach Bush, Torture Cheney.” Yet he never fired back, never wanting to get down in the gutter with them, even in the face of being likened to Adolf Hitler. Silence equals assent, and his job-approval numbers prove it. The lesson here is clear: When you’re in a fight with street brawlers, you can’t unilaterally abide by the Marquis of Queensbury rules.

My friends, let me also say we also can no longer afford to nominate for president the person whose supposed “turn” it is to be the nominee, as if by the divine right of kings, which we did in 1996 and — ahem — 2008. We can also no longer run a 20th-century campaign in the era of Obama and expect to win. Ridicule “community organizing” if you will, but the fact remains he ran a masterful campaign. The 2008 campaign was tortoise-and-hare, but this time the tortoise didn’t win.

First and foremost, it should go without saying that our nominee in 2012 must be telegenic and articulate — “articulate and bright and clean” in Joe Biden’s formulation — and capable of speaking cogently and coherently. We have not had such a candidate since Ronald Reagan. We have won three times since the Great Communicator in spite of that, but chiefly because of the shortcomings of the other party’s nominees. We didn’t have that good fortune this time around. Like it or not, in the TV age, that is a sine qua non for a presidential candidacy, a test I concede I failed profoundly.

We can likewise no longer engage in unilateral disarmament on campaign finances; Obama relegated McCain-Feingold and public financing of presidential campaigns to the ash heap of political history. Speaking of which, where was my friend Russ when Obama was making a mockery of our legislation? He was strangely silent, as were Common Cause and the rest of self-styled good-government groups and editorialists.

But I digress. Our nominee in 2012 must be prepared to raise and spend whatever it takes to match the Democrats, dollar for dollar, and must have the technological infrastructure to do so. We have four years to replicate the Obama fundraising juggernaut, and it is not too early to start now. I’m as serious as a heart attack on this, my friends. Any would-be presidential candidate who is not prepared to do so should not get a second look in the primaries.

(And speaking of primaries, in states where our party allows open primaries and caucuses, they need to close them, so that whomever is nominated in 2012 is nominated by Republicans, and Republicans alone, and not by crossovers who wish our party no good.)

It’s important to remember, too, that despite raising and spending a staggering $650 million — or perhaps close to $1 billion if you add in the liberal 527s and Obama’s Big Labor allies and the in-kind contributions of his tingling-leg sycophants in the media — Obama won only 52.7 percent of the vote. So despite his Electoral College landslide (which was exaggerated by red states he won narrowly; notably, Florida with 50.9 percent, North Carolina with 49.9 percent and Ohio with 51.2 percent), Obama has no mandate for his far-left wish list, and we should fight it every step of the way.

And how many of those states we lost so narrowly were a result of our failure to make our highest priority voter registration the way the Democrats did — or a result of voter-registration fraud perpetrated by ACORN, which is now under investigation by the FBI in at least a dozen states? I urge you to join me in calling on Attorney General Michael Mukasey or U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald to bring a Racketeer-Influenced Corrupt Organization prosecution against ACORN and for cutting off all of ACORN’s federal funding.

I also now belatedly realize it was a fatal mistake to engage in another form of unilateral disarmament; namely, to leave some of the best weapons we had against Obama out of the arsenal. For starters, my campaign should have made the Rev. Jeremiah Wright literally Obama’s running mate. From the day after the Republican Convention ended until Election Day, I should have run commercials tying Obama to that anti-American, hatemonger preacher in whose pews he sat for 20 years. Had the situation been reversed, do any of you doubt the Democrats would never have let voters forget it?

Lastly, I regret I also took off the table the very issues on which Obama was potentially most vulnerable; namely, the social issues — partial-birth abortion, gay marriage (bans on which have now passed in every state they’ve been on the ballot), gun control, judges legislating from the bench, affirmative action, border security, and more. Sure, the media elite would have excoriated me had I used what they derisive refer to as “wedge issues,” but so what? They characterized my campaign as “dishonorable” regardless, so why not use them? Doing so could have kept those swing states in our column.

In conclusion, the election was always going to be an uphill climb, particularly in the face of the current economic headwinds — headwinds unlike any we have faced before — but there is reason to believe we still might have prevailed, had I not made all these mistakes.

But that’s all “what-ifs” and “what-might-have-beens” now, my friends. We need to learn from my mistakes and start preparing now for the 2010 midterms and beyond. If we do, and if Obama and the Democrats attempt to steer the ship of state sharply left as is likely, we could see a repeat of 1994 in 2010, and a repeat of 1980 in 2012.”

Anything you’d add? Remove?

Me, I’d ask this fictionalized version of McCain to drive home Democrat complicity in the credit and mortgage crisis, as well as address the shoddy treatment his running mate has received since the election loss — and the shame he feels for remaining all but silent during attempts by his own staffers to scapegoat her for a loss that was very clearly his own. I’d have him admit, too, that his outsized ego was wounded by the very evident fact that actual conservatives — as opposed to the Beltway debate society that wants nothing more than to remain collegial with their ideological “rivals,” passing the perfunctory and good-natured cocktail party barbs that define one as a member in good standing of the established pundit clique — wanted her far more than him.

Of course, the real McCain, Maverick that he is, is likely to take the completely opposite lessons from his election loss, and immediately begin extending his hand across the aisle yet again — all so he can regain the good graces of the media he relies upon for his entire self image.

Delusional as it is.

109 Replies to ““McCain owes GOP a second concession speech””

  1. Sdferr says:

    Yeah, he’d sooner eat his own .45 as give this address (and eating his own bullet ain’t in the cards).

  2. sylvie_oshima says:

    Tolja so.
    ;)

  3. dicentra says:

    That is too long for a cross-stitch sampler, so I’ll have it tattooed on my left thigh. Yes, there’s plenty of room there.

  4. Sticky B says:

    Republicans create the best fantasy scenarios. And this one was really good. Meanwhile back in the real world Republican reps and senators are trying to figure out how to keep their job and keep the money flowing back to their district. Let the next schmuck worry about paying for it. I don’t gather that we’ve felt enough pain collectively to overturn Republican = DemoLight yet.

  5. Jeff G. says:

    Anybody have any idea what nishi is talking about?

    Or is she just getting a contact buzz off McCain’s delusions?

  6. TheGeezer says:

    That is too long for a cross-stitch sampler, so I’ll have it tattooed on my left thigh. Yes, there’s plenty of room there.

    Fat bottomed girls, you make the rockin world go round…

  7. sylvie_oshima says:

    btw, Jeff, I like Sarah Palin just fine now.
    The risk assessment matrix I was maintaining for her went to zero when the Palin ReIntroduction Tour bombed.

  8. happyfeet says:

    McCain and Lindsey are the Pooh and Piglet of modern politics I think.

  9. happyfeet says:

    If Piglet were like a rampant cockhound I mean.

  10. Rob Crawford says:

    Anybody have any idea what nishi is talking about?

    A more critical question: does anyone care?

  11. Brainster says:

    I’d have him admit that Fred Thompson would have crushed Obama.

  12. Ric Locke says:

    I still think my version is shorter and easier:

    Me too, but I’m cheaper is not a winning slogan.

    Regards,
    Ric

  13. Patrick says:

    I’m with Brainster on this one. I can’t stop shaking my head in wonderment of how effective the Democrat party / MSM combo was in shaping OUR portion of this election. Fred and Mitt were dead from the start – it’s was all Huck vs Maverick. Two limpwristed populists. No chance against the uberpopulist, Baracky.

    What I can’t understand is the apparent agreement on the right that the MSM is dead. Oh, they’re very much alive. Reinvigorated, even. They were totally validated in this process. Over half of Americans, and 90% of the rest of the world, can’t be bothered by minutia like facts and objectivity.

  14. sylvie_oshima says:

    Jeff….I told you McCain would lose.
    Because the big thing about him was wanting to be president.
    He was a sack of ambition and narcissism.
    He should have let someone else run, someone younger would have been better for the country and for the party.
    Plus he burned Palin up before she was ready, she’s done now.

  15. Roland THTG says:

    Shorter fake McCain: “I You got rolled!”

  16. rrpjr says:

    As you say, delusional. I put my dislike of McCain on hold during the campaign but now find myself detesting the man. Maybe it was the “I’m sleeping like a baby” remark and his revived bonhomie with the media that turned my stomach. Good enough. I’ll leave it at that. He’s not worth the effort anymore.

  17. Rob Crawford says:

    Question: should Republicans allow McCain to caucus with them?

  18. John Cheshire says:

    “Because the big thing about him was wanting to be president.
    He was a sack of ambition and narcissism.”

    Riiiiiiight. You are talking about the Obamessiah right?

    Jeff,

    Mav should have put the Financial crisis, and the Democrates complicity in said crisis, on the center stage. He should have been naming names and and taking no prisoners(no pun intended). He should have pointed out the long history that ACORN has had with pushing for “affordable loans” and Obama’s ties to that group. He should have called senators out on the floor of congress for their complicity for this mess, namely Dodd anf Frank.

    Doing this, in addition to the other strategies above, would have very likely changed the tone of this race and put Obama on the defensive. It may have even impacted some of the very close senate races. Instead all voters heard was “Four More Years of Bush” followed by a pathetic whimper from John.

    I get the sense from John that he is relieved that he doesn’t have to fake being conservative anymore.

  19. John Cheshire says:

    “Question: should Republicans allow McCain to caucus with them?”

    Only to avoid the dreaded nuke proof congress.

  20. Mossberg500 says:

    Anybody have any idea what nishi is talking about?

    Yeah, where do you go from here? Lather, rinse and repeat. IOW, “Look at me, look at me, delete my inane comments.”
    She seems to believe you’re a Republican, which, I believe, you’ve consistantly stated you’re not, rendering her comments…wait for it…useless(NTTATWWT, except for the waste of bandwidth). Shall I type “lol”, because I find my own comments soooooooo amuzing. Why yes, yes I can(sounds like a campaign slogan).

  21. mojo says:

    Suddenly, Maverick whips out a pump 12-gauge, blasts a big hole in the ceiling and yells “AWRIGHT, NOBODY MOVE!… Siddown, Jenkins, where do ya think you’re going?…”

    Five hours later, after a tense standoff with police SWAT units, he finally releases the last of the GOP bigwigs in return for PIE!

    OUTLAW!!

  22. McGehee says:

    Anything you’d add? Remove?

    The last two years.

  23. Continuum says:

    Yet, more evidence of the GOP eating their own. Any bets that the Republicans will even be around in another 4 years.

  24. Rachel says:

    Sorry McCain…you just weren’t listening (Palin talking too much I guess) but Obama did mention issues like abortion,gays,gun control, etc.I heard all of it. You were too busy shooting him down with associations he was supposidly engaged with. Get over the ACORN thing. The people were worried over the economy and you didn’t even recognize that until later. You were there to talk about the war and your experiences. Then you chose Palin. What a disaster that turned out to be. Please debrief her and tell her to get over the Ayers thing! You see how that really bothered alot of people.And about the Rev. Wright…you didn’t have to run ads about him..your ads were degrading enough. You ran a campaign of hate all yourself and a dirty one it was. So now lick your wounds and believe me as long as I live I’ll not forget what a hateful campaign you and Palin ran. Now you want all forgiven? Obama has obviously. Guess who the bigger man is???

  25. BJTexs says:

    I just had an epiphany.

    We’ve been going round and round with the idea of the intellectual/RINO wing of the party setting their own feet on fire to defeat even the notion of someone with Palin’s conservative populist creds having a piece of the reins of power. All of this running in lockstep with the “Obama is a good guy” kerfuffle and Jeff’s declaration of OUTLAW when it comes to discourse between competing political philosophies.

    It still comes down to style over substance but with a troubling foundation. Those who continue to advocate for “bi-partisanship” and “reaching across the aisle” and “Demo-lite; we just do it cheaper” (h/t ric) think they are operating from the William F. Buckley playbook. They see themselves has the flame carriers for Buckley’s love of discourse and debate, spirited but collegial, that challenges conventional thought but maintains friendly associations.

    The problem with this mindset is that Buckley never budged from his conservative principles until someone clearly demonstrated their untenability (see: Segregation.) I suspect Buckley would be appalled at the notion of compromising core ideals as a consequence of maintaining collegial discourse. Buckley always had style but he never understood style as an overriding concern when it came to policy. The “intellectual wing” which is so concerned with marginalizing the “social, religious conservatives” would have faced his wrath (Buckley, after all, was a fierce practicing Catholic.)

    We are being berated by those who would have us believe that we are all better people if we act in diplomatic tones rather than proclaim and hold fast to the conservative/classical liberal/libertarian principles that were really responsible for shaping this country’s founding and growth.

    I seem to recall that there were many founding fathers who were perfectly willing to unmannerly trumpet those principles that the faux Buckley brigade would have us whitewash while they share a bottle of fabulous wine with those who would destroy them as a political entity.

  26. snuffles says:

    Palin’s “conservative populist” creds, BJ?

    Jumbo shrimp?

  27. Mossberg500 says:

    …Obama did mention issues like abortion,gays,gun control, etc.I heard all of it.

    The obiously you heard him take both sides of each of these issues. Which side did you hear?

  28. Mossberg500 says:

    Comment by Mossberg500 on 11/18 @ 2:42 pm #

    …Obama did mention issues like abortion,gays,gun control, etc.I heard all of it.

    Then obviously you heard him take both sides of each of these issues. Which side did you hear?

    Damn!

  29. kelly says:

    Take your meds, Rachel. Barry doesn’t like you like that.

  30. The gay marriage thing should definitely go. Sure, the antis have won a lot of referendums, but by a smaller and smaller margin with each one. Proposition 8 had white Californians voting 51% against.

    The Republicans managed to get out in front of the civil rights movement in the sixties. In spite of polls and successful racialist politicians, they managed to see the writing on the wall. It would be great if they managed to do that again.

    The whole Democrat Lite phenomenon is all about the dynamics of moralism vs. social justice vs. freedom. The moralist Republicans think less of social justice than the Democrats and and the social justice Democrats think less of moralism than the Republicans, but neither gives a rat’s ass about freedom, and thus they have a basis for compromise.

    yours/
    peter.

  31. BJTexs says:

    Rachel: I have gay relatives who would vociferously argue the contention that Obama talked about anything to do with gay rights. At least, not in a meaningful way. Try to remember that 96& of blacks voted for Obama but about 70% voted against Gay marraige as a right. Tie that into Obama’s relative silence on gay issues and see where that falls out.

  32. Cave Bear says:

    BJT, methinks you are asking too much of a moronic twat like Rachel (and every other dweeb who voted for that Marxist sockpuppet). What passes for a brain in her and her ilk would likely explode if they actually faced the truth about their boy Obambi…

  33. happyfeet says:

    I don’t think opposing gay marriage is a core tenet. That ship has sailed anyway. I suspect it will be a fad for awhile and then become a not very popular thing for gay people to do and they’ll start advocating for civil uniony things as an alternative. It’s basically just a dumb patronizey idea for retarded gay people who want to pretend they’re straight people for a little while cause they saw this romantic comedy once they really liked or whatever. It’s not cause they’ve been saving themselves for marriage. That’s my suspicion anyway and maybe it’s uncharitable. No one asked me though. Ok they ask me sometimes cause of the prop 8 thing but I’m only telling y’all cause it’s too tedious to discuss for real, that ship having sailed and all.

  34. BJTexs says:

    hf: In your own, unique style, you get it. I sometimes get flack from my fundamentalist comrades when I express my support for civil unions. I point out that my religious beliefs have nothing to do with the constitutional principle of equal justice under the law. Celebrate diversity with civil unions, glory in your legal protections and leave the term “marriage” to us breeders.

  35. Old Texas Turkey says:

    oh good – thor hasn’t been by to threadjack … yet.

    Seriously now. I am thinking about making a run for the 18th congressional district in Texas in 2010 or perhaps 2012, depending. Current incumbent is Sheila Jackson Lee. It is a heavily gerrymandered black district with growing hispanic pockets and some inner city whites by way of gentrification. To date, the local Republicans have offered a sacrificial lamb to the Goddess of Black Hurricane Names as a token of “resistance”.

    I want to run on a Classical Liberal platform as a Repub candidate.

    I would like anyone in Texas who has connections into the local party structure to contact me about how to go about with the right introductions.

    email to pacific_trident at yahoo

    What do I have going for me?

    Yute. 39

    Not a lawyer.

    Not White either. Not black. Immigrant. From Africa. US Citizen.

    Outlaw tendencies. Need some finishing school.

    Absolute belief that the core principles of classical liberalism will sell itself if properly presented. Even if its a heavily black district.

    Feel free to email me. I would like honest assessments about chances.

    Thanks.

  36. Cave Bear says:

    And another thing I’d love to know is where do some of you keep getting these red herrings like “gay marriage”. Even the eee-vil ChimpyMcBushitlerHALLIBURTON said he had no problem with “civil unions”, and that was several years ago. I’d love to hear what well-known Republican pol has been out throwing his/her body in the road to obstruct it.

    Besides, this is not a Federal issue, but rather a state issue, to be decided by the individual states as their respective populaces choose.

    It’s rather like abortion; the President, let alone the Congress, has very little power over deciding this one way or the other. The Supremes have that one pretty much all to themselves. Making it an issue is yet another brain-dead-leftie-generated specious argument.

    Red herrings; it’s what’s for dinner…

  37. snuffles says:

    OTT,

    You might want to start with this article about William F. Buckley’s run for the mayor of New York City back in 1965:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/02/magazine/02buckley.html?pagewanted=print

    Looks like you face a similar challenge.

    Buckley read aloud a nine-page statement in his resonant baritone. “I am a Republican,” he began, but “I seek the honorable designation of the Conservative Party because the Republican designation is not, in New York, available nowadays to anyone in the mainstream of Republican opinion.” He went on, “Mr. Lindsay’s Republican Party is a rump affair, captive in his and others’ hands, no more representative of the body of Republican thought than the Democratic Party in Mississippi” – which was segregationist – “is representative of the Democratic Party nationally.”

  38. I don’t have a problem with civil unions.

    Gay marriage pisses me off.

  39. Sticky B says:

    You were too busy shooting him down with associations he was supposidly engaged with. Get over the ACORN thing.

    Voter fraud is like the new Medicare premiums. It’s kind of an annoyance that you just learn to overlook as if it’s not even there.

    Please debrief her and tell her to get over the Ayers thing! You see how that really bothered alot of people.

    Domestic terrorism and bombing public buildings is the new Kelo. I mean, yeah it’s probably wrong, but it’s somebody else’s problem. So fuck it.

    as long as I live I’ll not forget what a hateful campaign you and Palin ran.

    Hateful? Fucking hateful? A guy who never even swings at a fastball over the middle of the plate is hateful?

    That whole piece was eat up with dumbfuck.

  40. dre says:

    “I would like anyone in Texas who has connections into the local party structure to contact me about how to go about with the right introductions.”

    You might want to contact the chairman of the county GOP directly. I’m sure they would be interested.

  41. Slartibartfast says:

    A more critical question: does anyone care?

    An even more to-the-point quesiton: why does anyone care enough to ask?

  42. JHOward says:

    Any bets that the Republicans will even be around in another 4 years.

    Any bets on the Dem’s chance in 2012 to survive both their own parasitic philosophy that long and half the country going even a little John Galt? I know which action I’d take. Obama’s already pedaling backwards as fast as he can, antihopeward, assuming he has the competence to sit erect in the big chair post-Jan 20th, which I doubt.

  43. lee bh says:

    I would like to see the whole “maverick” thing become one of the catch phrases describing failure.
    Republicans have to get over the “bi-partisanship is honorable” shit. The friggin Republican Party exists to oppose the Democrat Party.

    We all talk about the BM (Barry’s Media) being a propaganda machine as a well worn inside joke, but it isn’t just a joke. They have shaped the playing field in a way that presumes Dems are the natural face of America, and the Republicans are greedy trouble makers.

    Not allowing Bush to seat judges is the proper function of the opposition party, understandable, pragmatic. Bush standing in the way of Kyoto; wrong headed if not outright villainous. Both instances reversed if and when there is a Dem in charge.

    We need to get over the illusion we are merely the devils advocate to the left, unpopular, irrelevant, clinging. Our ideas enjoy great “popularity” when considered from the perspective of the individual, not so well when considered from the prospective of an identity group. Classic Liberals need to connect on the individual level, and mercilessly mock the concept that pandering to groups is what government should do.

    The GOP needs a leader, like Reagan, that is able to bring conservative ideals to the personal level, stress individual responsibilities and opportunities within your rights, in contrast to using inclusion in a particular identity group to claim rights that remove individual responsibility.

    Sneer at any and all attempts to paint Repubs as motivated by racism, greed or whatever, and fight the bastards tooth and nail. Not irrationally like the left has done to Bush, but if someone infers your position is motivated by racism, call them a lying race-baiter by name and in their face. Proggs value the collective and attack the individual (hi Joe), Republicans value the individual and attack the bureaucracy (hi John). Our side needs to appreciate the hostility of the press, and deal with them as opponents instead of partners. Only then will we be able to shape the playing field back to fair. Can anyone tell me why Palin gave an interview with Couric instead of Hume?

    Also, I’m fairly sure McCain didn’t hit the Fannie May thing like we wanted because there are too many dirty hands in the pie. Half of “his friends” on both sides of the isle are neck deep in it. He ain’t that mavericky.

  44. ducktrapper says:

    Obama ran a great campaign? Sure. If you can call having the press carrying you, running.

  45. snuffles says:

    The GOP needs a leader, like Reagan

    Isn’t Palin good enough for you, lee?

  46. Old Texas Turkey says:

    dre – yes on the list. I am looking for PW sponsorship in helping put out some position papers in the local rags too.

    Jeff, would you be interested in this attempt?

  47. lee bh says:

    I really like and respect Major John BTW.

  48. kelly says:

    Don’t you have some truckers to blow at the rest stop or something, snuffles?

  49. Cave Bear says:

    lee bh opines:

    “Not allowing Bush to seat judges is the proper function of the opposition party, understandable, pragmatic. Bush standing in the way of Kyoto; wrong headed if not outright villainous. Both instances reversed if and when there is a Dem in charge.”

    Excuse me???

    I’ll let the judge thing pass, as that is so over the top as to be unworthy of comment.

    But as for “Bush standing athwart” the Kyoto treaty, that is total bullshit. Bill Clinton, or rather some functionary he sent to do the deed for him, already signed the fucking thing.

    It never got sent to the Senate because before he could. the Senate sent to him (Clinton) a “sense of the Senate” resolution telling him that the Kyoto treaty would be DOA if submitted, and the Senate vote was 98-0.

    Only a brain-dead Democrat could possibly believe that the royal clusterfuck called the “Kyoto Treaty” could go from total crap when the President was a Dem to the neatest thing since sliced bread the minute the Prez became a Repub.

  50. Sdferr says:

    Cave Bear, I think lee bh meant your cited paragraph to be read as passing through the mind of a Democrat, just as you ended by doing, rather than as lee bh’s own thought.

  51. Bob Reed says:

    In addition to the sweeping apology and admition of error reccomended by Parisi and Jeff G, McCain need to also take an oath to not submarine the Republicans on Immigration reform and the cap-and-trade scheme motivated by the pseudo-science of global warming…

    After botching the election, it’s the least he can do-the very least…

  52. kelly says:

    Uh, CB? Facetious was the tone he was going for there, I believe.

  53. kelly says:

    McCain need to also take an oath to not submarine the Republicans on Immigration reform and the cap-and-trade scheme motivated by the pseudo-science of global warming…

    After botching the election, it’s the least he can do-the very least…

    Good luck with that one, Bob. The Maverick is just itching to get back in the warm gentle embrace of the NYT. It’s killing him.

  54. geoffb says:

    “I don’t gather that we’ve felt enough pain collectively to overturn Republican = DemoLight yet.”

    I’m always amazed that the lessons of the New Coke debacle never seem to penetrate the political marketing world.

    “Me too” isn’t a winning strategy.

  55. geoffb says:

    Sorry Ric I hadn’t seen your post yet.

  56. Merle says:

    You Liberals and the liberal media have gotten who you wanted in the White House now…what more!! Let it go…

  57. lee bh says:

    Sdferr , you are right.

    Sorry Cavebear, I must not have set it up well enough, my fault.

    Didn’t H Bush get shit for not signing Kyoto? I thought so anyway, making my point about the MSM reversing with a change of party even better.

  58. cranky-d says:

    Kyoto is just one more thing to beat the Republicans with. It is already being ignored elsewhere, and it is unconstitutional here.

  59. Bob Reed says:

    In the spirit of bi-partisanship, I just have one question…

    When do I get to start referring to O! as Chimperor ObamaHitlerSoros!..?

    I mean is it still in bad form to use this handle for such a goodman..?

  60. Mikey NTH says:

    Clearly, the Republicans have to articulate where they stand and why. It is never sufficient to leave that to the opposition – for obvious reasons. That means not reacting, but taking action. Taking the initiative. It is never enough to just stand and say “Stop!”, there has to be a reason to take another road. And saying what that road is and the reasons for it requires work.

    The leaders will be those who undertake that work, no matter what elected office they occupy – or do not occupy. Worrying about the personalities of the pundits and politicians is very secondary to that first task. And to tell the truth, I do not think elected officials are much up to that as they do have a lot on their schedules, every day, and are happy just to be able to keep up. The nature of the job entails dealing with a lot of trees, so much that the concept of the forest gets lost.

    Perhaps do a parallel to PJMedia/think tanks from the people here and on other realted sites as to the issues they think are important/will be important now and over the next four years, and which road should be taken and why? Certainly we can do no worse than others could, and likely we can identify those things and how to deal with them proactively rather than reactively. For instance: Health Care. What road should be taken? We can’t sit where we are, which way should we go and not go, why one way and not another?

  61. dre says:

    Comment by Old Texas Turkey on 11/18 @ 3:51 pm #

    Contact Jeff G. by emailing jeff @ proteinwisdom . com

  62. dre says:

    Chimperor ObamaHitlerSoros!.

    Racist

  63. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    Anybody else read this.

    http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/791jsebl.asp

    Wow. Sure as hell one way to look at it.

    *Apologies, can’t make linky w/ Explorer.

  64. bmeuppls says:

    PJ, Mark Steyn, JeffG, and a few others would be the foundations upon which conservatism should be rebuilt. Now we just need to go on a cruise (yeah a rub at NR) and refine the architecture and name all the subcontractors for the jobs at hand. Do you think we could get Joe the Plumber to be point man? We do need someone to reach into the bowels of Washington and shovel the shit out of the way…

  65. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    “Do you think we could get Joe the Plumber to be point man? We do need someone to reach into the bowels of Washington and shovel the shit out of the way…”

    Bowels? Well, then you need a different kind of plumber my friend. For what you want you need the world’s greatest Gastroenterologist with a nuclear powered Enema/Colonoscope. A plutonium driven pressure washer for America’s economic colon.

    In the mean time, Joe can contract out to clear Fannie, Freddie, Schumer, Frank, and Dodd out of the national septic tank.

  66. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    BTW, has Obama bought the new dog yet? I heard some nonsense about a hypo-alergenic dog…

    It’s one thing that he got elected…but, if the First Dog is a hairless cat or a goddamn Labradoodle, I’m moving to Australia.

  67. Timstigator says:

    OTT: get yourself a website after a positioning paper is done. Get your face out there. Get your positions out there. Start early. Good luck.

  68. JBean says:

    BTW, has Obama bought the new dog yet? I heard some nonsense about a hypo-alergenic dog…

    No, they’re going to wait until they “settle in” or whatever — then they’ll get some peta-approved, hypo-allergenic, non-offensive, free-range canine.

    Or maybe a robot, to match the parenting style.

    Getting back to McCain. My fondest hope is to see him humiliated on the floor of his beloved Senate — the same Senate, with associated beltway hacks,  he refused to finger in the Fannie/Freddy-inspired collapse. He lost it right there, with his so-righteous bellicosity about the greed on Wall Street  instead.

    Dear John: Wall Street does greed. They’re not elected. They don’t take any oaths. They’re job is make money. You and the other thieves in Congress are supposed to represent the interests of the public by not sinking to the level of unbridled greed. You didn’t. You fail.  Think about it, you jerk.

  69. B Moe says:

    …never wanting to get down in the gutter with them…

    This mindset has to end. When the media is as compliant as we have now, what is happening is they are knocking you in the mud and your decision is to drag them down with you and fight back or just sit there with a stupid grin on your muddy face.

  70. Mikey NTH says:

    #69 BMoe:

    I think something fun to do would be to repeat the names of any critics with a tag like ‘not that this man/woman would have any crass political reason for his/her criticism’ and the same with anonymous sources ‘not that this anonymous person does not actually exist or would have any reason to say this other than the most correct and patriotic’, etc.

    Sort of like Marc Antony’s “I come to bury Ceasar, not praise him” speech from Shakespeare.

    There is a reason why Shakespeare is timeless.

  71. snuffles says:

    No, they’re going to wait until they “settle in” or whatever

    Speaking of which, has Bristol Palin married what’s-his-name yet?

    Seems like that timer is about to buzz.

  72. Ken Wiebe says:

    RE #13 Patrick – I agree about MSM. The only group they’re “dead to” — is conservatives. To the sheeple, who will now be tended to by the Shepherd in Chief, they’re just what the Dr. ordered: pablem by the truckload. The only way conservatives can regain status will be to kill the MSM for real, and I mean make sure of it…a wooden stake may be necessary and I’d throw in a silver bullet, to boot.

  73. Mikey NTH says:

    Just musing now, and reflecting on what I read from Rupert Murdoch’s little talk the other day. When one broadcasts what an anonymous source says, one is giving to this anonymous source his own honor and reputation. One is saying to his audience that if they trust one, then they must trust his source. That is something that should not be lightly given, should it? And if it is lightly given from the named person to the anonymous person, then something very precious and hard to acquire is given. And if the anonymous source is less than honorable, then the dishonor travels up to the named person. And if once proven the fool or dishonorable, why should that one expect that he or she would be taken otherwise?

    What is reputation? More precious than any gem; and if once lost not so easy to recover. And so many sell it so cheaply.

  74. Mikey NTH says:

    #71:
    You are beneath contempt, but contempt will serve for now.

  75. Ric Locke says:

    The news organizations confidently predict a resurgence of their fortunes, because the model they’re working from assumes that the reason they’re down is (1) the President is a Republican and doesn’t like them, and (2) the Internet is sucking away advertisers. With a Democratic President, they expect subsidies and legal moves, both legislative and judicial, that will keep them in business.

    It would almost work if they weren’t so far in the tank they can’t see the lid. Properly covered, the antics of Democratic politicians would provide an endless source of tabloid-style scandal that would sell a lot of papers. They won’t do that — and that leads to the real source of their demise, which they aren’t doing anything about because they don’t recognize it: Nobody expects to pay for campaign literature, including (perhaps especially) the people who agree with it.

    Absent the introduction of Press licensing, which I don’t think even Kos would agree with (though I could be wrong), there is nothing on the horizon likely to stop the bleeding. The NYT is now junk, financially as well as ethically (and the two are connected). Others are not in much better shape. Perhaps worse, nobody who absorbs their output regards it as serious — they haven’t really lost much audience in raw numbers, but the quality is going to Hell. Write the bottom line in parentheses.

    A few years ago, I was over at a friend’s house. We found and killed a copperhead (poisonous snake, for those who don’t know.) The snake’s head was mostly severed from its body, hanging by a flap of skin, and Bob decided to pick it up and examine it more closely. It twitched and sank its fangs in his thumb, sending him to the hospital… even the corpse can be dangerous. Burn it and bury the ashes, then don’t walk on that spot for a week or so.

    Regards,
    Ric

  76. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    Ric,
    #1) Incredibly well said.
    #2) You’re a crappy friend. You could have sucked the poison out. It was just his thunb. It wasn’t like he got bit in the weenis.

  77. Mikey NTH says:

    Ric:

    That is the best advice for dealing with snakes, or other dangerous beasts. Once at the camp* I found a racoon in daylight, writhing on the ground. I called for a deputy (law enforcement was provided by the county, under contract, and this thing neaded animal control). The deputy came up, reported to his sergeant, and shot it dead (very animal-controlled). I shoveled the little beast into a plastic bag, with a lot of that dirt, and went to the burn-pile and disposed of the bag. Then I went to the camp garage and washed that shovel darn near new, as well as the back of that pick-up. The gloves I disposed of and then scrubbed my hands (good leather work gloves – not a waste to me). I poured some bleach-water on that site.

    Can’t be too careful with that stuff.

    *Camp Dearborn – owned and operated by the City of Dearborn. Municipal Imperialism.

  78. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    I bet suffles reads Andy everyday.

    snuffles likes it some PowerGlutes.

  79. happyfeet says:

    The only group they’re “dead to” — is conservatives.

    to advertisers that want to reach young people, they’re dead and getting deadier every second.

  80. Ric Locke says:

    Lamont, I plead Rolling Rock, and throw myself on the mercy of the Court.

    Regards,
    Ric

  81. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    Damn MikeyNTH… Ric I get. But…it was just a raccoon man! Your raccoon disposal protocol sounds like evil Nazi procedure at Auschwitz.

    If you were being sarcastic, ignore the above…but, all the same, don’t let the Iranians see your comment.

  82. snuffles says:

    What’s your problem, Mikey?

    I thought Bristol getting knocked up was a beautiful thing.

    Anyway, she’s supposed to give birth in less than a month now.

    For Sarah Palin’s career’s sake, let’s hope she gets married before then.

  83. guinsPen says:

    Burn it and bury the ashes, then don’t walk on that spot for a week or so.

    And salt the earth; it’s the only way to be sure.

  84. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    “Lamont, I plead Rolling Rock, and throw myself on the mercy of the Court.”

    Probation. That Rolling Rock is your problem. Buy yourself some various seasonal brews/ lagers/ ambers of Shiner Bock and all is forgiven my friend.

    Court adjourned.

  85. Mikey NTH says:

    LYBD:

    My anecdote wasn’t sarcastic, it was very much ‘see a problem, deal with it. Use what brains you were given.’

    Aushwitz was far from it. My racoon was dying and diseased – physically. It wasn’t a racoon doing racoon things and all racoons thus had to go*. Just this one.

    *Indeed, at the camp I dealt with racoon invasions of the Youth Camp kitchen by placing heavy gauge screen over the windows they used to enter from, over the usual light screen. I did not want to exterminate all racoons or skunks, or any other animal. Just keep them from causing me more work than I already had. They could live their lives, I could live mine. Trust me, the kids were enough to repair after – do you know the way kids open a screen door is by using the toe of a foot while on a run? It is a lot to reinforce/repair doors over the season.

    The Youth Camp part is gone to golf course, but I still remember the lessons.

  86. Mikey NTH says:

    #82:

    Contempt. Enjoy it until something more appropriate can be found.
    Oh wait – there is. Ignorage. That will be my gift to you.

  87. Terry Gain says:

    I’d only add this:

    “I thought we could win by shunning the base and appealing to moderates and independents. So far the only person to agree with me that that might be a winning strategy is an obscure, Canadian, former Bush speech writer”.

  88. Ric Locke says:

    Lamont, that was a while ago. I have since seen the light; it shines in a pale amber glow through the bubbles of Shiner Bock, when I can’t get Modelo Negro.

    And Mikey reacted correctly, though I, personally, might not have thrown the gloves away — I’m a great believer in leaving biologically-contaminated gloves on a fence post, to let the Sun bleach away the nasties. That option probably isn’t available in Dearborn.

    Raccoons are a nuisance, but live and let live until you get a sick one, in which case it is properly treated as HazMat, Class III (Biological), with one of those Great-Seal-of-the-Spider Union placards. An inflated poopy suit is not overkill, if you have one handy. Widespread overuse of antibiotics has spread some mighty nasty bugs around out there.

    Regards,
    Ric

  89. Mikey NTH says:

    True, Terry. But do not knock Canadians too far. My grandfather was Canadian and RFC. And the PPCLI have added additional laurels to their battle-honors over the past decade.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/PPCLI

    And they have Don Cherry and Hockey Night In Canada. Can’t ever knock that.

  90. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    MikeyNTH,
    I get what you meant now. Sorry. You just had to hammer it out for me a wee bit.

    “The Youth Camp part is gone to golf course, but I still remember the lessons.”

    Yeah but you can still drive by, point, and say, “I got laid on that 3rd green spot.”…

    …”and clubbed a rabid raccoon over there on the 17 tee-box when it was a bunk house.”

    Good times.

  91. Terry Gain says:

    The comment was by Terry Gain of Peterborough, Onatario. Having some fun with the pretentious Mr. Frum.

  92. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    MikeyNTH,
    You and Ric are starting to educate me. Ya’lls life experience with racoons is the same as mine with armadillos (sorry Jeff but they’re assholes in force) and deer (hooved rats).

  93. guinsPen says:

    I blame Canada.

  94. Ric Locke says:

    Lamont, you are entirely too kind to deer. Rats won’t smash your pickup, even at a hundred MPH.

    As for armadillos, the only thing that bothers me is evolution. If one of those critters ever survives its encounter with the Pride of Toluca, its progeny will be terrifying.

    Regards,
    Ric

  95. steph says:

    Once our nominees were determined to be a choice between two members of the Senate, the ending of republicanism and “free-choice”(TM pending but not approved) was never in doubt. The ruling class WANTS to rule. It MUST rule. It survives ONLY to rule. It does not know “govern”.

  96. ChrisP says:

    Deer = Rats on stilts. They Suck.

    Cheers!
    Chris

  97. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    “If one of those critters ever survives its encounter with the Pride of Toluca, its progeny will be terrifying.”

    Yeah…I don’t know what the Pride of Toluca is. I Googled it and got a lake, a Mexican PRIDE/GLBT support group, and a recipe for a pasta dish (does elbow pasta run in a pride?…I’ve never had to shoot mine…where do you live again?)

    Anywho, I agree for the most part. If an amrmadillo evolves it some thumbs at some point, we uprights are in a bad way I think.

  98. Ric Locke says:

    Dodge pickups are made in Toluca, a suburb of Mexico City, Lamont.

    A 3500 dually with Diesel engine is a wonderfully terrifying beast.

    Regards,
    Ric

  99. daleyrocks says:

    Speaking of Canadians, did Christoph get banned?

  100. lee bh says:

    daleyrocks , I’m not sure, but remember that guy always saying we need to get a camera and ask Obama a question? That guy is on the “Media Malpractice” thread, sounding just like christof.

  101. daleyrocks says:

    lee – That guy is 24ahead.com. He’s an obnoxious asshole who is on a lot of conservative blogs.

  102. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    “Dodge pickups are made in Toluca, a suburb of Mexico City, Lamont.”

    Well, I’m in Texas…which is apparently a 3.8 million acre suburb of Mexico City.

    I should have heard of that by now.

    I speak passible Spanish, but I’ll ask my maid the spanish word for “Mexico Dodge” tomorrrow.

    If she says “3500 dually,” I’m totally buying you a case of Shiner.

  103. Lamontyoubigdummy,

    I ain’t afraid to give you one across the lips.

    yours/
    peter.

  104. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    Shit. I’m sorry Ric, Peter just got your case of Shiner.

  105. AUH20 says:

    Forget the social issues. I don’t care about them since its personal. And, seeing that it is personal, conservatives should honor that by staying away from it.

  106. Lamontyoubigdummy,

    Go ahead and give it to Ric. You bring it around here and Julio’s goat will get it and drink it all, in one sitting. Nasty.

  107. Conservatives should realize that if they WOULD get out of the personal business business, they would be more credible in their support for issues of personal responsibility. For example, are you addicted to drugs? Well that’s not a sickness, it’s a choice, and if you want treatment you’ll have to pay for it yourself. And yo, queers? Now that you can marry and settle down, we’ll be expecting you to do just that. Welcome to the culture, leave your counter-culture at the door, no you can’t “parade” any more with your balls hanging out, now shut up and pay your taxes.

  108. Mikey NTH says:

    #91 Terry:

    Whoops! Sorry!

  109. Mikey NTH says:

    #88 Ric:

    Thanks, that is good advice, but it was in the Youth Camp part of Camp Dearborn*, kids were about, and just leaving the gloves somewhere to weather a bit really wasn’t an option. Can’t be too careful with that stuff. I prefered just buying another pair of workgloves and getting some latex gloves from the camp nurse and keeping them in the pick-up’s glove box, ‘just in case’.

    Ironically, there were actually gloves in the glove box then.

    *626 acre park and campground owned by the City of Dearborn located about 45 miles away from the city. Municipal Imperialism. The city also owns Dearborn Towers, a retirement complex in Clearwater, Florida. Civic Colonialism.

Comments are closed.