With today’s elections in New Jersey, Virginia and NY-23, the discussion concerning the GOP and whether or not it will become a true alternative to a statist Democrat Party or remain just an echo will rachet up even more a few degrees.
Smitty at The Other McCain does an excellent job of fisking a whiney Rick Moran who is still pushing the “echo” paradigm. M. Simon presents a balanced view of a national strategy
National Party will likely be around 50% libertarian even if their percent of the party is only 30 to 40%.I’m against big spending RINOs. I favor libertarian Republicans (fiscally conservative, socially liberal, strong on national defence) where only they can win. You know – California, Illinois, Wisconsin, Oregon, Washington, New York, New Jersey, etc. Of course it will vary for Congressmen according to the district they represent. For Statewide offices (Senators, Governors, etc.) it is more important than for some Congressional Districts.
The party national platform should reflect that even if social conservatives are the majority of the party.
I agree to the sentiment even if I disagree with the percentages.
The Republican party can be the conservative alternative to the illiberal Democrats and gather libertarians, social liberals and social conservatives under one “tent” ONLY by not allowing the Left to define conservative principles as a call for conservative law. This is where the Echo Party lost its clout and what the Tea Parties underlined — the alternative to Big Centralized Government is not Big Centralized Government but with a “Conservative” Flavor. The alternative is returning power to localities and the people and allowing them to make their own decisions.
If both parties have the same policies and ideological orientation, there’s no need for two parties. People who want to vote for Big Government, for “compassion” (meaning redistribution, envy, and jealousy of the more fortunate), for a society of dependents who can’t wipe their butts without aid from the Department of Personal Hygiene, are going to vote for Democrats. No amount of “me too!” is going to attract them to Republicans, because Democrats have made those things their emblem and standard. A Republican campaigning on “compassionate conservatism” is behind the curve right from engine start, because the Democrat will always be ahead on that issue.
A GOP platform can still reflect conservative principles while specifically designating social suasion for some and policies on others.
ObamaCare, cap-n-trade, CPSIA and other illiberal Democrat policies spell the final gutting of the Tenth Amendment. In a culture where people can, at a moment’s notice and at their fingertips, choose among a variety of choices in their daily lives (food, music, entertainment, etc) further Democrat rule is one-size-fits-all from everything from what you drive to how you light your home to what toys you’ll be allowed to give your children to what doctor you use (and how that doctor will be allowed to treat you). That is the tent under which the GOP can gather a successful national party.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 9:25 am #
awww. Someone stoled Mr. Moran’s lunch monies and they won’t give it back.
Comment by Joe on 11/3 @ 9:27 am #
Tick Tock
Comment by Joe on 11/3 @ 9:29 am #
I like libertarians (small “l”) who leave me, my wallet, and my guns alone. More of that please.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 9:32 am #
Tents. I’m truly sick of tent talk. Tent talk is what Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski. What, are we going camping? Creating a circus? Holding a revival? I’m reminded of something Michael Yon wrote a few days ago:
Comment by BJTexs on 11/3 @ 9:37 am #
Doug Hoffman said it loud, often and to anybody who would listen:
“Principles before party.”
As I have argued before: The idea that Republicans have to be more like moderates is entirely backward. Republicans need to convince moderates as to the political and national advantages of being more conservative. This is not a very complicated concept as long as the principles being espoused are fiscal sanity, lower taxes, limited government, strong national defense and individual liberty. The social issues don’t have to be front and center and ought not to be a litmus test.
This on-going hand wringing about “scaring moderates” is the problem with Republican elites, not the “scary right wing.” Within the “scary right wing” contain the principles that have universal appeal: Take less of my money, stop spending so much of the money you take, be grownups about budgeting and monetary policy, protect me and, other than that, leave me the hell alone.
As a religious social con I have as much derision for those who would make abortion and gay marriage the be-all and end-all of support as for those on the left who demand pro-choice and peace at all costs in their candidates.
See a pissed of Joe Lieberman.
Comment by SarahW on 11/3 @ 9:44 am #
“This is not a very complicated concept as long as the principles being espoused are fiscal sanity, lower taxes, limited government, strong national defense and individual liberty. The social issues don’t have to be front and center and ought not to be a litmus test.”
If only.
Comment by BJTexs on 11/3 @ 9:52 am #
I hear you Sarah and I know the abortion issue is important to you, as well.
You and I not going to agree on abortion. That having been said I’m willing to put it aside for the sake of saving our country from sliding into soft Euro-socialism. We’ll have plenty of time to wrassel about abortion later, preferably on the state level.
Principle before party, a mantra that moderates, Social Cons, Neo Cons and libertarians need to chant … and believe.
Comment by Joe on 11/3 @ 10:04 am #
BJTexs is spot on with that quote. I agree social issues are best handled at the state level until there is sufficient national consensus to take them on.
Comment by The Original on 11/3 @ 10:10 am #
I cannot get behind any liberatarian candidate. Too many push no limits. There has to be some limits.
Comment by Snowcone on 11/3 @ 10:50 am #
The alternative is returning power to localities and the people and allowing them to make their own decisions.
Does that mean the Republicans are willing to let abortion be a personal matter rather than a government matter?
Comment by d.k. allen on 11/3 @ 10:55 am #
I was just thinking about this last evening. In a moment of clarity, I asked myself, “Why does the country need a Big-Government Republican Party?” Neither I, nor the spiders in my garage, had an answer.
Comment by Synova on 11/3 @ 10:57 am #
In my view the essential “libertarian” element necessary is that LAW does not and should not define right and wrong. (Avoid the phrase “can’t legislate morality.”)
There really is an assumption that anything bad must be forbidden and anything good must be compelled. “…by not allowing the Left to define conservative principles as a call for conservative law.” This is very right, I think. Absolutely spot on. If I’d add something it’s just that as much as the left takes this for granted, most of the right does as well.
I say don’t use the phrase “can’t legislate morality” because it’s got baggage firmly tied to moral license and is understood, not as *shouldn’t*, but *can’t* and all those impossible to legislate thoughts really aren’t immoral anyway, but just what those moral busy-bodies are all hot over. I’m talking about something different.
People substitute law for morality and substitute law for virtue and are convinced in so many different ways that what is “legal” is also “right” and if something is possible to do it must be okay, since no one is preventing them from doing it. Not only is government our mommy, but government takes the place of our own self, our own distinctiveness as a thinking and moral creature.
It’s wrong, and weakens us, to use government as a moral crutch. It also makes necessary those political “wins” to maintain that crutch.
This is not a call to *license*. It’s a call to greater and stronger personal moral codes. Be responsible for yourself.
Some things that are wrong are simply not the business of government. It doesn’t make those things less wrong or mean that people should not advocate against them strongly. Some things that are *right* are simply not the business of government. It doesn’t mean those things are less right and shouldn’t be advocated for as strongly as possible. It just means that they shouldn’t be LAW.
Comment by Synova on 11/3 @ 11:00 am #
“Does that mean the Republicans are willing to let abortion be a personal matter rather than a government matter?”
You’re assuming that it’s obvious and apparent that in an abortion no one is killed.
Comment by geoffb on 11/3 @ 11:03 am #
It is always a governmental matter. One of the basic ones. What you call a “personal matter” is still a thing that government decided on. That the way it did so was antithetical to our system is the problem.
The expiration of Troll-hammer today means it will have to be renewed.
Comment by Andrew the Noisy on 11/3 @ 11:04 am #
Does that mean the Republicans are willing to let abortion be a personal matter rather than a government matter?
Yep. Just as soon as its official policy is no longer tacked onto our constitution with spit and sealing wax. Just as soon as the people can actually decide what the law regarding this should be in their own communities.
Somehow I’m guessing that’s not good enough for you.
Comment by Snowcone on 11/3 @ 11:05 am #
You’re assuming that it’s obvious and apparent that in an abortion no one is killed.
No, I’m assuming when a wingnut talks about the 10th Amendment:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
They want the people to control the things they favor and the states to regulate the things they’re against.
In other words, they’re still big government “conservatives,” just at a different level.
Comment by ice cream cone on 11/3 @ 11:05 am #
“Does that mean the Republicans are willing to let abortion be a personal matter rather than a government matter?”
Do you even know what the Tenth Amendment is you stupid ass?
Comment by Andrew the Noisy on 11/3 @ 11:07 am #
If the Tenth Amendment had been followed, Snowboy, Roe vs. Wade would never have made it to the Supremes, as it involved a state law banning abortion.
Roe vs. Wade made abortion a federal matter.
Now I’ll watch you pretend you didn’t read this.
Comment by Abe Froman on 11/3 @ 11:07 am #
I’ll bet the moron is googling now.
Comment by TheGeezer on 11/3 @ 11:08 am #
Please explain, unless you can’t.
Comment by Squid on 11/3 @ 11:30 am #
The idea that government gets worse as it gets bigger, and worse still as it gets more distant, seems lost on it. The corollary, that smaller, closer governments are less bad, completely goes over its head.
A shame, really, as they are very simple concepts, and fundamental to the meaning of our nation.
Comment by Matt on 11/3 @ 11:40 am #
I consider myself a social conservative (for the most part) as I’m generally pro-life and anti-gay marriage. However, my advice to people who are much more sociallly conservative than I am is “its time to pick your battles.” You don’t have to give up your stances on abortion, etc but for better or worse, there are tough battles that need to be fought against this administration and this Congress that have nothing to do with social conservatism. Lets fix what we can right now.
Comment by Andrew the Noisy on 11/3 @ 11:46 am #
I concur, Matt. I also think the social conservative agendas are better fought at the state and local rather than the national level, for reasons both tactical and philosophical.
Comment by Matt on 11/3 @ 11:47 am #
snowy, if you’re asking us if many of us would rather leave the laws regarding abortion up to the states, I think the resounding answer will be yes. It shouldn’t be a federal issue. Unfortunately, as andrew points out, Roe v. Wade made it a federal issue. When people say they believe Roe was wrongly decided, this is one of the things they mean. This has always been my stance on gay marriage as well – if my state passes a law allowing gays to marry, if its that big of a deal to me, I’ll have the chance to move to a state where its not legal. In the same vein, if a state maintains it will not sanction gay marriage, then gays can move to a state where it is legal Its a simple solution to a simple problem but unfortunately, to gays, its not about marriage, its about complete and utter acceptance (as opposed to tolerance, which most of us exercise now).
Comment by Snowcone on 11/3 @ 11:49 am #
they are very simple concepts
They are also totally faith-based concepts, Squid.
There are plenty of corrupt, incompetent local government bodies.
Comment by Starcaller Nishi on 11/3 @ 11:49 am #
National Party will likely be around 50% libertarian even if their percent of the party is only 30 to 40%.
??….like that makes any sense.
but….your party is the Party of WEC….the libertarians have left the building.
Here feets, have some fireflies.
<3
Comment by Andrew the Noisy on 11/3 @ 11:55 am #
There are plenty of corrupt, incompetent local government bodies.
Because federal government bodies are the souls of incorruptibility.
So much for the Tenth Amendment.
Comment by TheGeezer on 11/3 @ 12:10 pm #
Are you addressing Squid’s concepts, or something else?
Comment by meyacone on 11/3 @ 12:13 pm #
Hogcaller, what the fuck do you know about the Libertarian Party? Probably as much as Barrett “empty ballsack” Brown! BTW, I just got an email from Arthur DiBianca, Staff Assistant of the Libertarian National Committee, saying they’ve had trouble delivering emails to Yahoo addresses! I haven’t received an email since Christine Smith left in a huff after not getting the Presidential nomination. They’re not a serious part of the voting population.
Comment by Andrew the Noisy on 11/3 @ 12:13 pm #
Snowboy doesn’t address things. He stomps madly around them, kicking up dust and frightening the rabbits.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 12:14 pm #
Huckabee is pro-life and anti-gay marriage and he sucks balls and makes ugly babies.
Comment by Andrew the Noisy on 11/3 @ 12:15 pm #
Feets, I’m no fan of Huckabee, but that was just beneath you.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 12:16 pm #
Hi nishi! thank you!! I need new songs really bad I keep listening to this over and over and over…
Libertarianism is very, very respectable I think. I want the libertarians to sit at our table at lunch.
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 12:17 pm #
Yes, and there are plenty of honest, competent local governments.
There is only one corrupt, incompetent Federal Government. That should be simple enough for even you to understand.
Comment by Abe Froman on 11/3 @ 12:18 pm #
There are plenty of corrupt, incompetent local government bodies.
Local government is directly accountable to the people who either choose to rectify matters or get the government they deserve. Plus, people are free to vote with their feet, something that’s a whole lot easier than moving to another country. You think it is a coincidence that Detroit has been thoroughly depopulated? That states like California and New Jersey are experiencing massive out-migration?
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 12:19 pm #
My God have you not seen the pictures of his grisly spawn?
Comment by Snowcone on 11/3 @ 12:20 pm #
Are you addressing Squid’s concepts, or something else?
Squid’s “concept” that the further a government is from him, the worse it gets is just silly and pig ignorant, geezer.
Maybe Glenn Beck will bring it up today!
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 12:20 pm #
merciful God… which one was it what murdered the dog?
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 12:24 pm #
here’s the dog killer one… there’s backwoods and then there’s what lurks behind the backwoods I think
Comment by Andrew the Noisy on 11/3 @ 12:25 pm #
Squid’s “concept” that the further a government is from him, the worse it gets is just silly and pig ignorant, geezer.
Based on what, exactly? Let’s see you trot out an actual argument.
C’mon, Cochise, let’s see what you can do…
Comment by Matt on 11/3 @ 12:26 pm #
*Huckabee is pro-life and anti-gay marriage and he sucks balls and makes ugly babies.*
Well, I don’t know about the babies part but I think Huckabee is one of those candidates that may possibly be too socially conservative to compete on the big stage. My folks, who are extremely socially conservative, are my litmus test. They will not vote for any social moderate, not matter the candidates stance on the economy. They like Huckabee for 2012 and we debate the issue all the time. They essentially want a extremely “Christian” candidate. I’d personally like a Christian candidate too but I’m open to pretty much any candidate with the same values I have – I don’t think christians have a monopoly on virtue and I know a couple of very respectable moral atheists- but my parents, who are from another generation, see the world differently. My point, which as usual is not particularly well described, is I’m afraid die hard social conservatives will rally around Huckabee in 2012 and we’ll be looking at another 4 years of a democratic president. Romney’s socially conservative enough for me and the man knows how economies work. I’m not sold on him as THE candidate yet but my hope is social cons and economic cons can find some way to meet in the middle as a candidate- to me, that’s what a republican moderate is- a republican is not- as our inside the beltway pundits claim- someone with an R in front of their name who supports many liberal positions (NY 23 is a perfect example).
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 12:27 pm #
You are supposed to quote Jefferson and tell us what a Patriot you are now.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 12:31 pm #
I think we’ll all rally around not-Obama, but I think the dirty socialist media will enthusiastically do all they can again to deliver the nod to an easily-caricatured weak horse like Palin or Huckabee or Jindal.
Comment by Neo on 11/3 @ 12:32 pm #
Frankly, from the 70’s through to George W Bush, the old refrain .. “There isn’t a dime’s worth of difference” was pretty much true.
But this time around, the Democrats have lost their collective minds.
Comment by Snowcone on 11/3 @ 12:33 pm #
Let’s see you trot out an actual argument.
How about, The quality of a government body is dependent on the character and talent of the people elected to it?
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 12:33 pm #
Huckabee is the exact opposite of what this post is about and what most of us want: socially conservative, pro nannystate.
Do. Not. Want.
Comment by Abe Froman on 11/3 @ 12:34 pm #
That isn’t an argument dumbass.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 12:42 pm #
I want a minimalist president that sort of isn’t that big a deal. I don’t want a wingerfabulous president to stick in the face of the people that elected the fascist dipshit superstar president what has done so much to shackle our little country in bonds of poverty and dependence. I just want a president what is unassuming and frugal and doesn’t want to rock my world. The American presidency as an institution needs a good hard kick in the nads. This festooning of the office with all these sick and twisted trappings of idolatry is really a very sad thing for America and wingnuts are just as susceptible to this as the dirty socialists, especially the Palin wingnuts I think.
Comment by LTC John on 11/3 @ 12:43 pm #
Detroit. Chicago. Philadelphia. New Orleans. Oakland.
Sing to me the joys of “local” Democratic party governance… It may be just a bit more than what level is populated by scoundrels – just happens to be that the worst ones the last few decades are run by “D” folks.
Nationally, we have been cursed by @#$% with R and D behind their miserable names.
Comment by LTC John on 11/3 @ 12:46 pm #
#48 – hf, I think you misjudge Palin afficianados. They like her becuase she promises to do so much the opposite of the current POTUS. Not, like I suspect Huckabee would, replace the officeholder, but not the governing concept of state control of …..anything that can be reached. And the slavishness and plate-licking.
Comment by ghost707 on 11/3 @ 12:48 pm #
CNN poll via Hot Air:
Six week change. Approve/Disapprove
* Economy – 46%/54%, was 54%/45%
* Foreign affairs – 51%/47%, was 58%/38%
* Health care – 42%/57%, was 51%/47%
* Afghanistan – 42%/56%, was 49%/46%
* Taxes – 49%/50%, was 52%/42%
* Helping the middle class – 50%/49%, was 67%/32% (six months ago, last time question asked)
CNN poll via Hot Air
Comment by Matt on 11/3 @ 12:53 pm #
I agree with John on Palin though I question whether she’ll be viable after the left spends the next 3 years demonizing her. The vicious attacks worked on Bush, who in no way was “hitler” or anything similar to what he was accused of being by the left but when enough people buy into the lie, it becomes truth given the media’s general failure to debunk any accusations towards a conservative pol.
and happy, I’d agree to some extent but my fear about an unassuming candidate is it simply takes too much money to get elected president and that money takes star power. There always seems to be a couple of unassuming candidates who drop out early in the primaries because they just don’t have the money to run the whole race. In terms of candidates that fit your criteria hf, do you have any in mind ?
Comment by Pablo on 11/3 @ 12:53 pm #
I think that’s right and she does have a record of Non-Baracky (et al) behavior. But she does have that rockstar thing going on that can make people gooney. I don’t think she’s running, though.
Comment by Andrew the Noisy on 11/3 @ 1:00 pm #
The quality of a government body is dependent on the character and talent of the people elected to it?
Behold, a proposition! And a viable one, too! It can think!
Now, let’s follow this argument: The character and talent of the people elected to it, these depend on what?
Comment by Eben on 11/3 @ 1:00 pm #
How about, The quality of a government body is dependent on the character and talent of the people elected to it?
That’s an argument? lolcat
Comment by Old Texas Turkey on 11/3 @ 1:07 pm #
Rixk Moran should stick to writing lengthy and detailed synopses on the latest episode of 24 or CSI “Whatever city” … He should also change the title of his blog site from “Rightwing Nut house” to “My brother has a job on TV Nuthouse”. Thats about all the use he has, really, to current political discourse. Not a very relevant person, he is. Kinda like snowcone, except with a mistitled blog (that no one reads).
Oh and Man up Rick and don;t delete posts that call you out for the pussy you are.
Comment by McGehee on 11/3 @ 1:08 pm #
He’s a nanny-stater who claims to be so-con so he can get so-con support.
If you want to undermine him don’t just blindly attack him for being so-con, because he isn’t and you’ll only piss off a rather large segment of the electorate whose support any good, Reagan-style conservative will need to win — attack him for lying about being so-con. And show your work.
</talking to the wall>
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 1:15 pm #
I think you misjudge Palin afficianados.
I love her politics, but I think she’s a tribal totem. It’s not her fault. But I agree agree agree about the oppositeness. For every action there’s a … I don’t know. We elected a fascist black person and I think my point is that she’s almost quintessentially anti-fascist black person. Support for Palin amounts to a coherent and emphatic rejection of the current loser. We’ll see, but I think that’s a definite part of Palin’s appeal. Part of it might also be vengeance.
In terms of candidates that fit your criteria hf, do you have any in mind?
Pawlenty is mostly unobjectionable but if he picked Jim DeMint as his running mate I’d be very enthusiastic I think. Mr. DeMint is a market research person. I think he brings a lot to the table.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 1:16 pm #
sorry. almost quintessentially *the* anti-fascist black person is what that should have been
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 1:18 pm #
Mrs. Palin is not a market research person at all, right? Seems to me you’ve expressed that before hf, or am I mistaken?
Comment by motionview on 11/3 @ 1:18 pm #
As proud members of the The Tea Party Movement, we have been working on a specific electoral goal, taking control of the House away from the Democrats. We are focused on 80-90 suburban/rural seats in the North and East. Our position is that the Republican Party has not been able to win in these districts, so we advocate recruiting conservatives to run and win as Independents. We need to take 40 seats from Nancy, the Republicans may pick up 10-20 from Blue Dog Democrats. We are targeting Democrats (& 8 RINOs) to the left of the Blue Dogs in districts that are more conservative than their current representative. http://www.firefifty.com/phpwiki/index.php
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 1:19 pm #
I also really doubt that she’d run. I think they should give her Huck’s Fox News show when he has to quit to run. I think that would be neat.
Comment by Pablo on 11/3 @ 1:20 pm #
Yeah. That would be entertaining.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 1:22 pm #
Palin I think is proving to be a quick study of savvy marketing. The test will be if she knows better than to run for president. She probably won’t say she’s not running until her book sales run their course, so we’ll have to wait and see.
Comment by Snowcone on 11/3 @ 1:23 pm #
these depend on what
Fate, chance, randomness, genetics?
We’ve never gotten close to the character and talent of the Founding Fathers in 200+ years of trying.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 1:28 pm #
But no Mr. DeMint I mean was an actual market researcher before he became the senator from South Carolina that actually likes girls.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 1:29 pm #
So how does David Axlerod stand in that regard, that is, as a savvy marketer? He’s pretty good at it isn’t he?
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 1:30 pm #
David Axlerod is far more the evil genius than Karl Rove ever thought of being I think.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 1:31 pm #
The current president is a 100% product of marketing.
100%.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 1:31 pm #
Rove just didn’t dream big enough to match Axlerod. It never would have occurred to Rove that he could sell someone perfectly unfit for the office.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 1:37 pm #
But now that we’re talking about marketing I think Tim and Jim sounds very cheesy now that I think about it and DeMint’s homophobia probably makes him unfit for higher office. That’s so weird how he’s like that and Lindsey might as well be wearing a dress. South Carolina is a very, very schizophrenic state.
Comment by ghost707 on 11/3 @ 1:46 pm #
I think Obama will be the last black candidate the dems run for president, this century at least, because not even the head-pat media can contain the utter failure that is occurring now. They could have chosen an actual moderate black candidate and things may have turned out much differently.
But, they wanted an all-out Marxist and that’s who they ran and elected. The train wreck is happening right before their eyes and they are still asking “what happened?”
The race card has been played way way way past it’s useful expiration date.
Comment by SDN on 11/3 @ 1:46 pm #
hf, Palin has an actual track record: she may believe as a social conservative, but she has been very careful NOT to set policy that way. You have to dig past the BS smokescreen thrown up by people (R AND D) who see her as a threat to their sinecures.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 1:46 pm #
Pawlenty was on the stupid Morning Joe this morning submitting to the attempted whaling administered by Joe, Mika, Ariana, Barnacle and Chuck Todd. Fools errand, I think.
Comment by SDN on 11/3 @ 1:48 pm #
Oh, and there’s a good argument that Christianity is perfectly compatible with leftist economics. I’ve put up my essay on that here several times. Huckabee is a prime example: he’s perfectly happy to have the state run the economy, just not for all of the same goals as the Left.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 1:49 pm #
Here ya go.
Comment by Joe on 11/3 @ 1:55 pm #
Ditto Darleen Ditto.
Comment by ghost707 on 11/3 @ 2:01 pm #
It’s almost starting to sound like Hillary will be President in 2012.
Debating on whether that constitutes a full shudder or 3/4 shudder.
Comment by Mark A. Flacy on 11/3 @ 2:05 pm #
I hope that you are talking about something different, because what I’ve quoted is fucking stupid.
If you wish to state “you can’t legislate moral thinking”, then I would agree. If you wish to state “you can’t legislate moral actions”, then I would disagree to the extend that you can certainly punish actions that aren’t considered moral.
Like murder.
Comment by Mark A. Flacy on 11/3 @ 2:08 pm #
You don’t understand federalism at all, do you?
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 2:20 pm #
Palin has a lot to contribute I think. Fred Thompson needs to stop emailing me though. It’s clingy and weird.
Comment by Synova on 11/3 @ 2:24 pm #
Sweet of you, Mark, to comment on my comment. Did you actually read it?
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 2:35 pm #
Republicans!!!
Comment by Synova on 11/3 @ 2:37 pm #
“How about, The quality of a government body is dependent on the character and talent of the people elected to it?”
If there were perfect people communism would deliver a people’s paradise as promised. Peace, happiness, prosperity.
In any case, the question ends up being… how far do you go to keep the wrong people from getting elected? Do you leave it up to the people? History and current events would say, no, you don’t leave it up to the people and you don’t risk losing power or risk some dummy getting elected. Everything becomes very important and very fragile with centralized control.
The choice isn’t between a perfect centralized government vs. corrupt local governments, it’s between centralized corruption and local corruption. The local corruption is limited by definition. Residents are more likely to be effective at fighting corruption or if policies destroy the local economy they can move.
Diversity is a very good thing, too. Diversity and choices.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 2:38 pm #
Did you see “Advertise with Flies” happyfeet?
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 2:44 pm #
that’s neat – I’m messaging that around but I’ll have to wait to see the vid til I get home
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 2:51 pm #
Collaboration or how the party’s parts ought to work together. h/t Fausta
Comment by Squid on 11/3 @ 3:00 pm #
Squid’s “concept” that the further a government is from him, the worse it gets is just silly and pig ignorant, geezer.
Let’s see. On one side, I have an ignorant child telling me that small, limited, and local governments are a bad idea. On the other side, I have this:
“Our country is too large to have all its affairs directed by a single government. Public servants at such a distance, and from under the eye of their constituents, must, from the circumstance of distance, be unable to administer and overlook all the details necessary for the good government of the citizens; and the same circumstance, by rendering detection impossible to their constituents, will invite public agents to corruption, plunder and waste.” –Thomas Jefferson to Gideon Granger, 1800. ME 10:167
Given that Jefferson’s America consisted of 5.2 million citizens in 16 states, one could argue that such advice is even more relevant today.
Snowy, if you can send me a list of your publications, and how they compare to Mr. Jefferson’s body of work, I’ll be happy to give your ideas further consideration. Until such time, you may wish to cite authorities more respected than yourself when making rhetorical points.
Comment by BJTexs on 11/3 @ 3:02 pm #
That was fun, sdferr.
Comment by Squid on 11/3 @ 3:08 pm #
Oh, look. More blithe nonsense from some old stupid dead white guy:
“We should thus marshal our government into, 1. the general federal republic, for all concerns foreign and federal; 2. that of the State, for what relates to our own citizens exclusively; 3. the county republics, for the duties and concerns of the county; and 4. the ward republics, for the small and yet numerous and interesting concerns of the neighborhood; and in government, as well as in every other business of life, it is by division and subdivision of duties alone, that all matters, great and small, can be managed to perfection. And the whole is cemented by giving to every citizen, personally, a part in the administration of the public affairs.” –Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:38
Comment by Squid on 11/3 @ 3:12 pm #
Oh, look, more crap:
“When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.” –Thomas Jefferson to Charles Hammond, 1821. ME 15:332
Does this remind you of anything, Snowcone? Does it give you the slightest inkling of why some of us aren’t crazy about having so much power concentrated in Washington?
Comment by alphie's anus on 11/3 @ 3:14 pm #
Uuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh … nope? [giggle]
Comment by Andrew the Noisy on 11/3 @ 3:24 pm #
Fate, chance, randomness, genetics?
We’ve never gotten close to the character and talent of the Founding Fathers in 200+ years of trying.
Golly goshers, that does sound bad. Maybe we ought to limit what these failures are permitted to do, yeah?
Why, you might even posit that different folks, beholden to different constituencies, should be given the reins for those particular constituencies. That way the assclowns only damage particular areas.
Or am I being silly and pig-ignorant again?
Comment by dicentra on 11/3 @ 3:30 pm #
OT:
Funny ting.
My brief encounter with the Christian Left.
Jonah Goldberg totally rocks:
Here.
Here.
And here.
They let him post this at The Corner. They LET him.
Comment by Snowcone on 11/3 @ 3:45 pm #
Maybe we ought to limit what these failures are permitted to do, yeah?
I remember back when the Republicans ran on term limits…not many of them left office when they said they would.
Comment by geoffb on 11/3 @ 3:49 pm #
#50 LTC John,
Well said. I cannot agree more.
Comment by geoffb on 11/3 @ 3:55 pm #
I’ve linked them before, but if you wish to see the Christian Left then rummage around this and all their links. It is Obama’s other community organizer group. The religious left one.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 3:57 pm #
The Morning Joe gang seems to have achieved what it was aiming at. Like I said, fool’s errand on Pawlenty’s part, unless this is what he had in mind as well (and if it is, he sure hid it well).
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 4:19 pm #
MSNBC is about to get sold and homosocialist welfare queen Jeffy Immelt won’t have any say over it no more. There’s got to be a more profitable use for a channel what has MSNBC’s coverage and you wouldn’t have to employ those MSNBC losers to do it I wouldn’t think. But it’s nice to know change is on the way.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 4:28 pm #
I cannot wait for Countdown with Olbergasm and whatever they call MadCow’s show tonight. The BDS and teabagging slurs should be flying all over the place.
Comment by The Left on 11/3 @ 4:38 pm #
Does that mean the Republicans are willing to let abortion be a personal matter rather than a government matter?
How about compromising, Snowy, at letting it be a state matter as the Constitution calls for?
Comment by dicentra on 11/3 @ 4:48 pm #
but if you wish to see the Christian Left…
…where they micromanage your life FOR JAY-SUS!
</gratuitous snark>
Comment by Snowcone on 11/3 @ 4:54 pm #
…at letting it be a state matter as the Constitution calls for
I suppose this is my point.
Real Libertarians would lean more towards “the people,” not “the states” part of the 10th amendment in every single case.
Comment by Squid on 11/3 @ 4:54 pm #
I remember back when the Republicans ran on term limits…not many of them left office when they said they would.
You keep referencing the Republicans, the past, and the general corruptness of politicians in general. This discussion is about a political party that would cleave to the limited-powers ideas of the Founders as exhibited in the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. You’re not going to sway people away from such a political organization by reminding them of how much the Republican party sucks. That’s kinda the point, you see — to break away from the status quo.
Honestly, I think you need to consider your arguments a little more deeply before you post. I’ve noticed a pattern with you, where you make a shallow attempt to refute the original poster’s point, but wind up reinforcing it. If that’s your purpose, you should be more up-front about it, because you’ve pretty much ruined any chance of the regulars here extending you the benefit of the doubt. On the other hand, if (as I suspect) you don’t realize that you’re making the very point you want to refute, I just feel sad for you, and angry at the grownups who should have taught you better.
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 4:59 pm #
You are confusing libertarians with anarchists, snowcone. And continuing to ignore the second life involved in an abortion.
Comment by Squid on 11/3 @ 5:01 pm #
Real Libertarians would lean more towards “the people,” not “the states” part of the 10th amendment in every single case.
Who gives a crap about the ideological purity of potential Tenth Amendment supporters? So long as they’re willing to pull power away from Washington, they’re pulling in the right direction. The balance of power between the State and the Individual can be fought over once Congress and the Executive are brought into check.
Comment by McGehee on 11/3 @ 5:05 pm #
…in state-level elections and political debate — where it belongs.
Where so damn much of what Congress and the national media pontificate about, belongs.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 5:07 pm #
Real Libertarians? Squid, you aren’t seriously going to credit ontological distinctions offered by that moron are you?
Comment by The Left on 11/3 @ 5:08 pm #
Collaboration or how the party’s parts ought to work together. h/t Fausta
Better collaboration
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 5:10 pm #
How does something like this happen?
I wonder.
Comment by Spiny Norman on 11/3 @ 5:15 pm #
B Moe,
On the Left, massive conflicts of interest are a feature, not a bug.
Comment by The Left on 11/3 @ 5:19 pm #
I suppose this is my point.
Real Libertarians would lean more towards “the people,” not “the states” part of the 10th amendment in every single case.
You gotta start somewhere. Federalizing the issue was not only certain to cause the upheaval we’ve seen over the past 36 years, but it’s openly unconstitutional to boot.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 5:30 pm #
Oops
Comment by newrouter on 11/3 @ 5:47 pm #
algore ambassador from enron. paulkrugman is also an ambassador from enron.
evil enron is the new ge.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 5:52 pm #
OT: Jihadis pick the wrong cave.
Comment by Snowcone on 11/3 @ 5:59 pm #
This discussion is about a political party that would cleave to the limited-powers ideas of the Founders as exhibited in the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution.
That would be the Libertarian Party, wouldn’t it?
So long as they’re willing to pull power away from Washington, they’re pulling in the right direction.
No, giving power to “the people” is the complete opposite of giving power to “the states.”
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 6:00 pm #
Thick as a fucking brick.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 6:01 pm #
It really is a gibbering idiot, folks. But I admire your faith in humanity while trying to engage the mendoucheous twatwaffle.
Comment by newrouter on 11/3 @ 6:07 pm #
“No, giving power to “the people” is the complete opposite of giving power to “the states.””
People’s Republic of Kampuchea
link
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 6:49 pm #
And as far as third parties go, I am still keeping a close eye on these guys,
http://www.modernwhig.org/
hope to go to one of their events soon.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 11/3 @ 7:05 pm #
Just turned on Fox news after 8:00 Eastern, the Repubs look to have swept all 3 major offices in VA.
Not swept so much as murdered the Dims.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 7:09 pm #
N.O’Brain – It means nothing. No reflection on Barcky. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 7:10 pm #
A little more on the Pawlenty business and the so called civil war being touted by the MSM, while in fact Moveon.org is targeting moderate Democrats like Landrieu and Lincoln with pressure ads.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 7:12 pm #
No, giving power to “the people” is the complete opposite of giving power to “the states.”
Power isn’t “given” to the people, the people are the source of all power in America. The people decide, via their states’ and the federal constitution, how much of that power to cede, how much to share and how much to retain with each heirarch of government.
The LP is generally in favor of the 10th Amendment (though I’ve had run-ins with libertarians that are not respectful of it at all), but that’s just a starting point. Once A10 is fully enforced, there is still a lot of power at each level of government that can be abused constitutionally. The LP has definite ideas about restraining that power well within the scope permitted by the Constitution.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 7:12 pm #
They are immune to cognitive dissonance, sdferr, otherwise their heads would have assploded a long long time ago.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 11/3 @ 7:14 pm #
Slaughter it is, ranging approx 65% Repub, 35% Dim.
Obama had no readction.
Comment by Bob Reed on 11/3 @ 7:14 pm #
Well it looks like the Dems are out in the Old Dominion, by 2 to 1 with 45% reporting…Lt. Governor and AG races are 3 to 2 margin in favor of RethugliKKKanz…
Oh my…I think I’m gettin’ the vapors!
Comment by Bob Reed on 11/3 @ 7:17 pm #
So disagreement amongst Rethugs is a “Civil War!”, but when the nutroots threaten the blue dogs, it’s a disagreement-like amongst a bridge game or a charades game…
Same old double standard
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 7:19 pm #
Just like the guys in the black masks tossing bricks through the Starbucks windows are “activists,” Bob, while anyone peacefully protesting his government destroying its currency is a scrotum-sucking extremist.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 7:23 pm #
Yeah, it looks like the VA Donks are finding out how Ned Beatty felt in “Deliverance.”
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 7:31 pm #
No reflection on Barcky. None.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 7:32 pm #
Anyone see anything about NJ yet? NY? I heard that the independent vote in NJ was breaking sharply towards Christie, which would not be good for Corzine.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 7:37 pm #
Everything I’ve seen on NJ is a waffle for now. Here’s an 8:18 pm for instance.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 7:38 pm #
Drudge has Christie up 16,xxx to 13,xxx…but it’s obviously early.
Comment by Darleen on 11/3 @ 7:42 pm #
JD
so far too close to call…
Comment by SBP on 11/3 @ 7:43 pm #
Am I remembering correctly that Teleprompter Jesus personally campaigned for the Dem in Virginia?
If so, I guess the magic has worn off, eh?
Comment by SBP on 11/3 @ 7:44 pm #
Hmm… and I see a distinct shortage of trolls in this thread.
Comment by Bob Reed on 11/3 @ 7:46 pm #
That’s right SBP, ACE has a copy of a poster where Obama says how much he “needs” Deeds to implement his programs…
And with Corzine? Fuhgeddabowdit, Obama, Clinton, and a whole host of Liberal Glitterati pitched in…
But, you know, this election is in no way! a gauge of public sentiment for the won…
Comment by Bob Reed on 11/3 @ 7:49 pm #
SBP,
Would that be, “That old black magic”..?
http://tiny.cc/Prqxg
I know, I know…I/m a horrible RAAAAAACIST! and denounce myself…
Comment by Bob Reed on 11/3 @ 7:50 pm #
FOX poll, majority of Va. voters exit polled indicated preference for smaller government…
Comment by Pablo on 11/3 @ 7:52 pm #
Christie 55%, Corzine 33%, with 5% reporting, here. That’s going to tighten up, but it’s a good place to start.
Comment by Bob Reed on 11/3 @ 7:54 pm #
SBP,
Some ACE links http://ace.mu.nu/archives/294328.php Teleprompter Jesus campaigning in Va.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/294336.php Christie BIG! in exit polls in NJ.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/294339.php CNN spin “Nation of angry white men”, “National temer tantrum”…
Too good to check…
Comment by geoffb on 11/3 @ 7:57 pm #
OT: aside.
At Belmont Club they have a troll the cut of whose jib seems like one seen here. Or possibly he is just using the same dogeared 3 ring binder.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 7:59 pm #
SBP – I think Pablo or BMoe linked to some of the Barcky/Deeds campaign literature above, which were all about Barcky. Maybe it was in the other thread … brb
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 8:04 pm #
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjgyMDgwYmFmYTQyODE5M2E5OTQ5ZDZiODAxMzI3ZmI=
This was the link that Pablo put up about the Barcky/Deeds campaign materials.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 8:04 pm #
pezzydent fuckstick is gonna have trouble getting his calls returned tomorrow I think
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 8:05 pm #
At Belmont Club they have a troll the cut of whose jib seems like one seen here. Or possibly he is just using the same dogeared 3 ring binder.
Wait…the military is government funded?? Damn welfare queens. Cut ‘em off and get those funds to some transgressive performance artists, I say. And ACORN.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 8:08 pm #
Completely off-topic, but does anyone have AT&T U-Verse ?
Comment by Darleen on 11/3 @ 8:10 pm #
count so far Christie 49% Corzine 43% Dagget 5%
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 8:10 pm #
This was the link that Pablo put up about the Barcky/Deeds campaign materials.
So Barky needs Creigh and Jon to get his agenda rolling, and voters respond by buttfucking the former and, from the early returns, giving the latter a strong run in a deep blue state.
But that doesn’t reflect on Barky.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 8:11 pm #
Completely off-topic, but does anyone have AT&T U-Verse ?
Yes, I’m soaking in it.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 8:13 pm #
if y’all didn’t hear this from our nishi friend you should cause it’s very happy and there’s toys and it’s nice how he gets hugs from bugs, probably. You’d figure.
Comment by Bob Reed on 11/3 @ 8:14 pm #
The troll at Belmont club sounded like Data Dave to me; but what do I know…
Comment by Bob Reed on 11/3 @ 8:16 pm #
And for obvious reasons, I get particularly tired of hearing how I’m a welfare queen for collecting benefits that I earned by virtue of service…
Of course, it’s the absolute moral equivalent of redistributed wealth to archetypal welfare queens…
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 8:17 pm #
NG was asking that just the other day, about U-verse for her new house… but I think she went with DirecTV … it’s not a great price for what you get is what I think we decided but I think you had to get a bundle and it was hard to compare and we got distracted
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 8:17 pm #
Jeffersonian – Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
Comment by Pablo on 11/3 @ 8:18 pm #
Christie 51%, Corzine 42% with 35% reporting. The Dems better get on the stick if they’re gonna steal this one.
Comment by Pablo on 11/3 @ 8:19 pm #
Not at all. It’s just local politics, and Barky is Pezzydent of the World.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 8:19 pm #
I hope Corzine loses. New Jersey deserves better than him. He’s kind of a tool.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 8:22 pm #
“Christie 51%, Corzine 42% with 35% reporting. The Dems better get on the stick if they’re gonna steal this one.”
That is almost starting to look theft proof. Will in fact if it carries on like that into the 60’s% reporting.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 8:24 pm #
Jeffersonian – Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
All in all, it’s a good thing. I had Charter before, and it was more expensive and lower quality. By service, my comments:
* TV – I love their DVR, and the service has been up 100% of the time. Had to reboot the DVR a couple of times, but it was no big deal. Charter’s HD service pixellated on about 50% of their channels, but U-verse is clear as a bell
* Phone – They provided a UPS for the phone and gateway. I like that. Service has been perfect so far, with great fidelity and 100% uptime after a small startup glitch
* Internet – My only gripe is here. For some reason, the wireless constantly drops the connection to IE. My terminal services, email and VPN work flawlessly, however. If I had any initiative, I’d call AT&T tech support and get it ironed out.
All in all, head and shoulders above Charter, and cheaper, too. Recommended.
Comment by Darleen on 11/3 @ 8:25 pm #
The Dems better get on the stick if they’re gonna steal this one
Bite your tongue, Pablo … I’m sure there are blue-smoke filled rooms right now working on it… New Jersey for godsake!
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 8:26 pm #
Aaaahahaha
Fuck you, Mr. Prezzydint.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 8:29 pm #
“He’s not watching returns,” Gibbs said.
No, right, he’s insanely busy trying to figure out how in Christ’s name he can stall the Afghanistan decision for six or seven more weeks while his cronies in Congress try to jamb the Health Care disaster down our throats.
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 8:30 pm #
The Governor of New Jersey gets to live in a really cool place. Drumthwacket.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 8:31 pm #
He’s calculating his handicap, sdferr.
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 8:31 pm #
Well, really cool except that it is in New Jersey.
Comment by B Moe on 11/3 @ 8:32 pm #
His handicap is folks are starting to figure out he is a dunce.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 8:32 pm #
Meantime I’m thinking my apple turnovers are mighty tasty.
Comment by Pablo on 11/3 @ 8:35 pm #
Hoffman is trading at 85 on Intrade. Results are just beginning to trickle in. Owens way ahead with less than 1 reporting.
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 8:38 pm #
“His handicap is folks are starting to figure out he is a dunce.”
Much earlier today my mind wandered into speculating what it will be like to listen to the stooge when he leaves office and has to speak extemporaneously, without the aid of a speechwriter at his beck and call, without an army of PR flacks constantly calculating his next move. I concluded it will probably be a pretty hilarious spectacle to see, him stripped bare to his personal effects, stumbling over his own tongue. Maybe some people will even think it a sad thing but I’ll be goddamned if I will.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 8:43 pm #
Jeffersonian – Thank you. We have Comcast, the most craptacular provider EVAH, and are pretty much begging for them to expand U-verse coverage to where we are just so we can flip the bird to Comcast. It will be that much better to go to a superior product.
Any lawsuits in NY yet?
Comment by geoffb on 11/3 @ 8:43 pm #
Sorry for another OT but this might be a worthwhile read.
In comments on that same thread at BC there was a book linked to that seems of interest. At 300 pages I’ve obviously not read it yet but the one writing the forward makes it promising. It is a study of socialism, by a Russian mathematician.
The Socialist Phenomenon by Igor Shafarevich
TRANSLATED FROM THE RUSSIAN BY William Tjalsma
Foreword by Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 8:44 pm #
That Mr. Daggett one sorta whiffed, no? He’s gonna wake up tomorrow and seriously question his use of time and money this year probably. I’m gonna listen to my firefly song again.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 8:44 pm #
I would gladly take his money on the links, though I would not trust him or his minions to be honest about his handicap.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 8:49 pm #
sdferr – That had to be a rather amusing thought experiment.
Comment by geoffb on 11/3 @ 8:50 pm #
JD.
I have Comcast for internet and TV and use Vonage for telephone over my Comcast internet link and have no problems with them in the 3 years I have used them. The TV part is better than the Charter service I had in another town and the internet does everything I need and more. Hate their homepage and their webmail but I don’t have to use them. Perhaps Comcast varies from locality to locality? Of course I don’t watch much sports so I don’t know what they have there.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 8:50 pm #
I just checked the NJ vote from 2008. Roughly 3.9 million ballots were cast. I’d expect today’s total to be lower, maybe 2.5-3.0 million. Right now, with 1.3 million counted, Christie leads Corzine by about 5%. Not terrific, but better than it being the opposite.
Comment by newrouter on 11/3 @ 8:52 pm #
kp is hot for a lib
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 8:54 pm #
bookmarked the socialism thing
Comment by sdferr on 11/3 @ 8:55 pm #
“…a rather amusing thought experiment.”
Bitterly amusing, yes. He is the smallest man I can think of ever to hold the office, which, ain’t no subject of much mirth these days.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 9:03 pm #
Thanks, geoffb. Our Comcast is Teh SuxXor. We have BrightHouse as an option, but the people I know that have switched have not raved. ATT&T U-verse will prolly get our business by default.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 9:03 pm #
That was prolly racist, sdferr. Denounced.
Comment by Pablo on 11/3 @ 9:07 pm #
It’s not looking good for Hoffman. Owens leads, 51% to 43% with 20% reporting.
Comment by JD on 11/3 @ 9:08 pm #
Then we know what the story will be tomorrow, Pablo.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 9:13 pm #
Bloomberg is kind of struggling no?
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 9:14 pm #
from here whoever linked that one for me
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 9:20 pm #
I can tell when y’all are watching the tv cause y’all get real quiet.
Comment by happyfeet on 11/3 @ 9:21 pm #
oh. there’s a new thread but of course no one tells me anything.
Comment by Pablo on 11/3 @ 9:23 pm #
Wow, that is close for Mama Bloomie. And he spent a godawful amount of money to be the freaking mayor some more. I mean, that’s Ed Koch’s old job, right?
Comment by Jeffersonian on 11/3 @ 9:31 pm #
Wow, that is close for Mama Bloomie.
I have no idea who’s running against Bloomberg, but I’d vote for him/her/it.
Comment by Pablo on 11/3 @ 9:37 pm #
Bill Thompson, Democrat. There’s no one to vote for in that race.
NY-23 is tightening. Hoffman’s down 3 with 54% in.
Comment by rjvtx on 11/4 @ 6:45 am #
Thanks, Darleen.
Comment by James Bowery on 11/26 @ 7:55 pm #
We can take control of the House of Representatives to restore the 10th Amendment in the next election cycle. To see how, visit:
http://laboratoryofthestates.org/call_to_action_story