Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

March 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Archives

On the primary elections

Karl Rove offers this takeaway:

Democrats are increasingly likely to distance themselves from Mr. Obama, either ignoring him or running against him. Which brings us to Pennsylvania’s 12th District. Democrats are right to crow about keeping that seat, left vacant by the death of Jack Murtha. Murtha’s longtime aide, Mark Critz, won with a message that he was pro-life, pro-gun and anti-ObamaCare, while benefiting from a sympathy vote for Murtha’s legacy.

In a district where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by 137,000 voters, 62% to 29%, Mr. Critz also benefited from Gov. Ed Rendell’s clever decision to schedule the special election on the same day as party primaries.

[…]

Conventional wisdom holds that incumbents are in trouble this year. There’s some truth to that. But the vast majority of those incumbents are likely to be Democrats. And the only bright moment for Democrats Tuesday came from a candidate who explicitly disavowed Mr. Obama’s most significant policy victory and expressed views on social issues that are detested by most national Democrats.

The wave that started last year is continuing to gain velocity, size and force. This week’s elections confirmed what the evidence has shown since last summer: Mr. Obama’s agenda is a political killer and his endorsement is of little help.

None of which will keep Obama from pressing forward with that agenda, of course.

But then, we would expect nothing less from a good man who we shant hope to fail — even if his policy failures meant we’d get to keep the foundations of a classical liberal republic. After all, a few sops to expansive federal power and client state capitalism is a small price to pay for appearing magnanimous and collegial to your political rivals.

(h/t TerryH)

0 Replies to “On the primary elections”

  1. Bob Reed says:

    Sorry, I still hope he fails, and am sure that he’s not a good man; rather one who has ill intent for his opponents and the nation as a whole. Unless of course, good intent is now measured by one’s zeal to see America put in it’s place.

    I know…I know…I denounce myself for my horrid h8ting racists views.

  2. Carin says:

    Of course not. And, I don’t think we’ll see democrats who ran/run on more conservative ideas holding that line.

    Fuck the voters. What do they know anyway? They fell for the Moderate Obama bullshit.

  3. Joe says:

    Jeff, I agree with your assessemnt about PA-12 and Dems running from Obama.

    Unfortunately, Critz is not going to vote to repeal Obamacare once he gets in, and as we saw with Senator Nelson, when push comes to shove the Dems manage to get even their most wayward members to tow the line (a skill that the GOP does not seem to be able to engage in). Chances are Critz will be less vocal but will be voting similar to his former boss if only to bring home pork projects for depressed Johnstown.

  4. Slartibartfast says:

    How come all that Critzmemtum was lost on Robert Stacy McCain?

    That’s a question you might want to put to RSM. He has open comments; wander on over and ask.

  5. sdferr says:

    There’s was another element at play in Pa-12, namely that at the same time as a special election to fill Murtha’s seat was being held, a primary election was also being held, pitting the last Republican to oppose Murtha, Bill Russell, in a contest against Tim Burns, thus dividing the Republicans on scene simultaneously with their explicit need to be unified against Critz. This couldn’t have helped in the latter effort.

  6. Let’s hope that at some point they get scared enough for their jobs that they quit voting for the crazy bullshit that the Unions drop on their plate. They won’t, but…

    My prediction is that the TV newsers go batshit insane over illegal aliens during the next couple of months. Arizona did its job, the stories out now and it’s not good. All the Dems get to look like tough guy heros for not voting for whatever piece of crap amnesty bill the administration downloads from the internet. But… the bill will cause every Republican campaign to go whole hog batshit insane anti-illegal, the Tea Partiers will do the same thing, the media will turn it into RACISM! and the the Dems will look calm, cool and collected in comparison. Happyfeet gets a cupcake, no immigration reform bill ever passes, and Dems retain the majority (barely).

    It’s a sacrifice fly.

  7. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Primary here is in a couple of weeks. We’ve got multiple Republicans in the running, all hoping to be the one to unseat our blue-dog congress critter. Of the three serious contenders, I plan on voting for the guy who’s promising that he won’t “talk conservative here and vote liberal there” partly because of that, but mostly because he’s the only one to talk about getting Nancy Polosi out of the Speaker’s Chair. I think running against Nancy Pelosi is a good idea.

  8. sdferr says:

    Jen Rubin notes “More Obama!“. I’m for paying out rope to the Democrats as fast as is humanly possible, so indeed, more Obama! Critz proves it! Go Barack, be visible, hug ’em, embrace ’em close, go and campaign because you’ll help ’em win!

  9. Carin says:

    From the Corner:

    Pelosi Predicts House Win ‘For Sure’ [Daniel Foster]
    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) told The Hill that the Republicans’s “anti-Obama, anti-Pelosi” message did not work in PA-12, and will not work in November.

    ******
    Pelosi even offered a Namath-esque prediction: “One thing I know for sure is that Democrats will retain their majority in the House of Representatives.”

  10. sdferr says:

    And that effected the unity of the far outnumbered Republicans how?

  11. dicentra says:

    <pedantry>

    tow the line

    I see this all the time. It makes sense: you grab a rope (line) and tow (pull on) it.

    But the original locution, IIRC, is “toe the line,” wherein you’re required to place your toes on a line drawn on the ground, thus lining everyone up. And you DON’T step away from that line.

    It’s a “folk etymology,” wherein the original locution acquires a different form on account of it being heard all the time and not read, and on account of the fact that English has a truckload of homonyms.

    However, I don’t know which of these two is correct:

    “speak your peace”
    “speak your piece”

    Anyone know?

    </pedantry>

  12. sdferr says:

    I’ve always gone with “piece”, dicentra, but I’ve no particular reasoned justification for it, other than that questions of “war and peace” don’t seem to be necessarily relevant to the use of the locution.

  13. ak4mc says:

    I still hope he continues to fail

    FTFY.

  14. Slartibartfast says:

    effected

    affected
  15. Ernst Schreiber says:

    toe the line/speak your piece

    I think they’re both dead metaphors and try not to use ’em

  16. ak4mc says:

    I’ve always gone with “piece”

    Same here. If it was ever originally “peace,” that version had disappeared from conventional writing usage by about 1965 when I learned to read, because quite frankly dicentra’s question is the first I’ve ever seen of “speak your peace.”

  17. sdferr says:

    No, actually Slart, the question is how the dem’s primary helps answer the earlier question I’d raised, though I can see how the different question, how it acted on the unity could run up the pole too.

  18. ak4mc says:

    “effected/affected” depends on the object, I believe. One might effect a tool with which to affect the outcome. At least, so I was taught.

  19. SporkLift Driver says:

    Second one Dicentra, It’s like giving someone a piece of your mind.

    Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/20 @ 10:08 am #

    How come all that Critzmemtum was lost on Robert Stacy McCain?

    That’s a question you might want to put to RSM. He has open comments; wander on over and ask.

    Umm nope, you gotta register to comment over there. Fuck that noise. I like RSM but that’s a big deal breaker in my book.

  20. There’ll always be people who support Obama abd those who are against him. But from my point of view his policy is much wiser that the one Bush has ever had. For me this is enough already.

  21. DarthRove says:

    his policy

    Which one are you referring to?

  22. Ernst Schreiber says:

    The effect of Gov. Rendell’s decision to schedule the PA-12 special election on the same day as the primary election was to affect a split in the Republican Party vote.

  23. sdferr says:

    Of course you don’t, though I wouldn’t expect you would. But in an environment that begins with a two to one dem to repub differential, not to mention the boost Critz gets in the race from the beginning as Murtha’s longtime aide, which side in the race suffers the more from any division at all? But that’s not obvious?

  24. Squid says:

    Which policy are you referring to?

    It’s gotta be ObamaCare. His every other policy is the same as Bush’s, except in some matters of spending, where it’s “like Bush, except a lot moreso.”

  25. sdferr says:

    “His every other policy is the same as Bush’s…”

    Umm, like his policy vis a vis Israel? Not.

  26. sdferr says:

    One side, beginning with a numerical advantage, can afford some division. At a 2 to 1 advantage a division of perfect parity would still leave the numerically advantaged party still at near parity to an undivided opponent sitting on the short side of the 2 to 1. But do be more obtuse if you can manage it. It’s amusing.

  27. Silver Whistle says:

    There’ll always be people who support Obama abd those who are against him. But from my point of view his policy is much wiser that the one Bush has ever had. For me this is enough already.

    Thanks Sasha, I’ll bear that in mind next time Bush runs for president.

  28. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Could it be because there were two Republicans on the primary ballot, but only 1 of the two was on the special election ballot? Could it be because if you weren’t supporting Tim Burns’s campaign be the Republican challenger to Jack Murtha in November, it might be because you don’t want Tim Burn’s representing you any more than you wanted Murtha?, If this were so, might it then not be the case that you weren’t particularly motivated to put him into the old crook’s seat from now until next Jan.? And finally, might it also be that the Democrat enthusiasm to rid themselves of that rat sonofabitch Specter drove up Democrat turnout?

    No. Clearly its because PA-12 voters all want their free skittles-shitting unicorns.

  29. dicentra says:

    “or forever hold your peace” is where I got it from.

  30. dicentra says:

    And that effected the unity of the far outnumbered Republicans how?

    That’s correct if by “effected” he means “brought about.”

  31. Squid says:

    I dunno, sdferr. I have it on good authority* that Bush was an ignorant fool who alienated our allies.

    * The very best authority. Really, just ask them!

  32. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Structurally both sides had a primary and if one side is going to be divisive about it, that’s a problem for that side.

    That’s certainly what Rendell thought when he scheduled the special election for the same day as the primary election.

  33. dicentra says:

    put up or shut up

    Oh swell: another idiomatic phrase for me to parse.

    I always thought “put up” meant “put up with it,” which is the same as “shut up,” so it’s a “heads I win, tails you lose” kinda thing.

    But now I see how it might be “put up [your dukes]”: IOW, “fight back.”

    Huh.

  34. dicentra says:

    I was in the other thread. How did my #37 get here?

  35. Silver Whistle says:

    Here’s one for you, dicentra: “Freeze the balls off a brass monkey”.

  36. sdferr says:

    Or rather than your dukes, your betting stake.

  37. sdferr says:

    Still funny meya, keep it up! Can you work your way into a recommendation that Obama make an appearance in the district and carry his ” clingy guns-god-hate of the other” message with him to help out in the campaign due this fall? That would be swell.

  38. Ernst Schreiber says:

    “I don’t see what this has to do with any division brought on by the primaries — both sides had them.”

    Obviously you don’t. Let me try one more time. Both sides had a primary, yes. In PA-12, only one side had a primary for the U.S. House Seat. Jack Murtha was the unopposed Democrat incumbent running for re-election. Tim Burns and the other guy (sorry I don’t remember his name & I don’t have the time to look it up) were both seeking to be the Republican candidate to challenge Murtha. When Murtha died a special election was called to elect someone to fill the remainder of Murtha’s term. That special election was scheduled to coincide with the primary election. Now, if you were a Republican voter, and you had no intention of supporting Tim Burns in the primary, why in the hell would you vote for him in the special election?

  39. ak4mc says:

    Or rather than your dukes, your betting stake.

    That’s how I always understood that one too — and I got in a lot more fights than bets in my younger days, so quite possibly I ought to have heard “put up or shut up” in a fighting context if it belonged there.

    And yet I’ll admit the “put up your dukes” connotation makes sense too.

  40. ak4mc says:

    Here’s one for you, dicentra: “Freeze the balls off a brass monkey”.

    Isn’t that why the monkey got fired and we got the armadillo instead?

  41. sdferr says:

    U.S. House – District 12 – Democrat Primary: Critz, Mark: 57,704 Bucchianeri, Ryan: 16,618 Mackell, Ronald: 6,414 Total Votes Cast: 80,736

    U.S. House – District 12 – Republican Primary: Burns , Tim GOP: 26,120 Russell , William GOP: 19,732 Total Votes Cast: 45,852

    U.S. House – District 12 – Special General: Critz, Mark: 70,662 Burns, Tim: 60,500 Agoris, Demo: 3142 Total Votes Cast: 134,304

  42. JD says:

    It is either willful obtusity, or it is dummerer than a sack of hammers. Or both.

  43. Wm T Sherman says:

    21. Comment by SporkLift Driver on 5/20 @ 11:42 am #

    That’s a question you might want to put to RSM. He has open comments; wander on over and ask.

    Umm nope, you gotta register to comment over there. Fuck that noise. I like RSM but that’s a big deal breaker in my book.

    ————————————————————

    Comments there are moderated. I’ve posted there more than once and every one of them showed up after a little while. I did not have to register.

  44. Slartibartfast says:

    Umm nope, you gotta register to comment over there.

    No, you don’t. I’ve commented over there many a time, and no registration was required.

  45. mojo says:

    America knew what it wanted, and is now getting it, good and hard.

    Somewhere, the Sage of Baltimore is chuckling.

  46. SporkLift Driver says:

    Little dialogue box that says Comment as:
    You either have to be registered with one of those services, TypePad for instance or comment as anon. Don’t like commenting as anon and the regulars treat you like a low down dirty rotten coward when you do regardless of what you say. As for the services such as TypePad. I’ve never had any luck with those I jump through all the hoops and still can’t comment as the nick I register.

  47. mojo says:

    (Pedant)
    A “brass monkey” was a fixture on British sailing warships, a brass plate with holes in it next to a gun, upon which cannon-balls were stacked in a pyramid. In very cold weather, the plate would shrink, and all the balls would go rolling around the deck. Hence, “cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey”.
    (/Pedant)

  48. Squid says:

    Hate to be a pedant against a fellow pedant, but that “brass monkey” explanation should have been killed decades ago. I blame AOL.

    The differential linear coefficient of linear expansion between iron and brass is 0.000008 inches per Celsius degree. It means the “brass monkey” shrinks about 0.01 inch in the worst of weather – hardly enough to topple the balls.

  49. Ric Locke says:

    U.S. House – District 12 – Special General:
    Critz, Mark: 70,662 (52.6%)
    Burns, Tim: 60,500 (45.0%)
    Agoris, Demo: 3142 (2.3%)
    Total Votes Cast: 134,304

    What the MSM and pundits aren’t telling you, for reasons only they can explicate: In a district with a two-to-one registration advantage for Democrats over Republicans, Critz, the Democrat, won the election by less than 8% of the total votes cast.

    I don’t think that’s well-calculated to give, say, Axelrod a warm fuzzy feeling.

    Regards,
    Ric

  50. Brett says:

    “Put up or shut up,” means “put your money (as in stakes) where your mouth is.”

  51. The Bewildered Lost Dog says:

    Call me racist if you want to, but I am actually a “Jerkist”.

    And Obama is a conceited and arrogant little jerk. I don’t care about his melanin(?), HE IS A FUCKING CLUELESS LITTLE JERK!

    Where do these people come from who think that my sweat translates to THEIR money?

    Hmmmm…Public schools, maybe?

    It’s going to take many years to undo the damage that this preening little “never had a real job” asshole has done to America.

    “Your money is actually MY money” – the motto of Obamalamadingdong and his toadies.

  52. Slartibartfast says:

    Ah, Sporky; I must be perpetually logged into typepad.

  53. Silver Whistle says:

    The differential linear coefficient of linear expansion between iron and brass is 0.000008 inches per Celsius degree. It means the “brass monkey” shrinks about 0.01 inch in the worst of weather – hardly enough to topple the balls.

    Squid is completely correct – the standard explanation of the expression is physically implausible. A brass monkey was also an early non-ferrous cannon, thus "Cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey" could in fact have substituted any inanimate object, e.g. "Cold enough to freeze the balls off a hatstand". If you think that is silly, then explain the expression "Mad as a fish".

  54. Spiny Norman says:

    Ric,

    What the MSM and pundits aren’t telling you, for reasons only they can explicate: In a district with a two-to-one registration advantage for Democrats over Republicans, Critz, the Democrat, won the election by less than 8% of the total votes cast.

    Well, the big blazing top-of-the-front-page headline on the LA Times called it a “huge day for Democrats”…

  55. Slartibartfast says:

    It is widely believed that a brass monkey is a brass tray used in naval ships during the Napoleonic Wars, for the storage of cannonballs, piled up in a pyramid.[citation needed] The theory goes that the tray would contract in cold weather, causing the balls to fall off.[5] This theory is discredited by the US. Department of the Navy[6] and the etymologist Michael Quinion and the OED’s AskOxford website[7] for five main reasons:

    The Oxford English Dictionary does not record the term “monkey” or “brass monkey” being used in this way.
    The purported method of storage of cannonballs (“round shot”) is simply false. Shot was not stored on deck continuously on the off-chance that the ship might go into battle. Indeed, decks were kept as clear as possible.
    Furthermore, such a method of storage would result in shot rolling around on deck and causing a hazard in high seas. Shot was stored on the gun or spar decks, in shot racks—longitudinal wooden planks with holes bored into them, known as shot garlands in the Royal Navy, into which round shot were inserted for ready use by the gun crew.
    Shot was not left exposed to the elements where it could rust. Such rust could lead to the ball not flying true or jamming in the barrel and exploding the gun. Indeed, gunners would attempt to remove as many imperfections as possible from the surfaces of balls.
    The physics do not stand up to scrutiny. All of the balls would contract equally, and the contraction of both balls and plate over the range of temperatures involved would not be particularly large. The effect claimed possibly could be reproduced under laboratory conditions with objects engineered to a high precision for this purpose, but it is unlikely it would ever have occurred in real life aboard a warship.

    From Wikipedia, which is Never, Ever Wrong.

  56. Slartibartfast says:

    “Mad as a fish”

    “Queer as folk”

    Maybe that was never an expression, but “mad as a fish” is kind of a new one on me, too. In America, our fish are very even-tempered.

  57. JD says:

    Is mad as fish anything like MadCow disease?

  58. ak4mc says:

    SporkLift, are you going to his current site, which is WordPress-powered? All I see for commenting there are boxes to put in name, e-mail and URL. I don’t see anything about logging in with any service.

  59. Silver Whistle says:

    I have always found the “mad as a mongoose” expression amusing and apt, but the “mad as a fish” one puzzling. Perhaps our fish are completely bonkers, when compared to New World fish. I don’t think there is a Piscine Spongiform Encephalopathy, but perhaps it could be engendered by feeding one’s goldfish on the ground-up brains of Rachel Maddow.

    “There’s nowt as queer as folk” just refers to the complete spectrum of behaviour found in people; I think it is quite old.

  60. B Moe says:

    I have always found the “mad as a mongoose” expression amusing and apt, but the “mad as a fish” one puzzling.

    I have found they get pretty fucking pissed when you set a hook in their mouth.