Levin, reacting to Richard Baehr’s American Thinker piece that argues, eg., OUTLAWism is “Stalinist” — the analogy being that idealism-based voting is a call to “purge” the party of “moderates”:
I oppose Mark Kirk, the only Republican I oppose in the general election, because he was 1 of 8 Republicans in the House who voted for cap-and-trade (Baehr’s favorite Mike Castle was another). It was a hugely imprudent act based solely on political expediency. This is not some minor pork project or spending bill. It would significantly “transform” our entire economic system, drive up energy costs, create energy dislocation, and most importantly, empower the federal bureaucracy in incalculable ways. In other words, it would fundamentally change the nature of this society. During the Republican primary in Illinois, only when challenged by conservatives, did Kirk suggest perhaps he made a mistake. But he has lurched leftward again. And according to Baehr, it is Stalinist to comprehend what a menace Kirk is and oppose him for that could mean the liberal Democrat might win the seat. Did Baehr make effective efforts to support a better nominee in the Republican primary? Not that I can tell. But given his superficiality, I suppose he’d say — “I don’t believe in party purity, why would I?” Or maybe he’d say — “Yes, I did.” In which case I’d ask, “Why, do you believe in party purity?” Or was he always a Kirk supporter, invoking the Buckley rule to support an extremely liberal Republican, the sort of Republican Buckley founded a movement to defeat?
[…] I have said repeatedly that there is no such thing as conservative purity. Conservatives do, in fact, have certain fundamental principles, as did the Founders, but that is not to say there is complete agreement on all matters. The Founders didn’t agree on all matters. For example, my interpretation of the Fourth Amendment might differ from that of another conservative, but if we are both attempting to actually discern the original intent of the Framers (that is, if we approach interpretation from an originalist perspective) and do so with reason and logic, that’s good enough. […]
Urging Americans to vote Republican, no matter what, because Republicans are better than Democrats, will ensure that the GOP will be a minority party, and will deserve to be. It simply is not enough to attract and motivate citizens to a party if the party does not have a cause. “Mike Castle can win, Mark Kirk can win” is not enough. And healthy contests in primary races, and even opposition to a particularly offensive Republican in a general election (not based on personal hostility but real and substantive differences that are truly significant in form and kind), is not Stalinist, Mr. Baehr. It’s as American as apple pie. You may want to bone up on your American and Russian history.
To others who may be reading this, my friend Craig Shirley, who wrote a terrific book — “Rendezvous with Destiny: Ronald Reagan and the Campaign that Changed America” — points me to pages 21-22 of his book, in which he quotes from a 1977 Reagan speech to CPAC. Reagan told the young conservatives, in part:
“Our task is not to sell a philosophy, but to make the majority of Americans, who already share that philosophy, see that modern conservatism offers them a political home. We are not a cult; we are members of a majority. Let’s act and talk like it. The job is ours and the job must be done If not by us, who? If not now, when? Our party must be the party of the individual. It must not sell out the individual to cater to the group. No greater challenge faces our society today than ensuring that each one of us can maintain his dignity and his identity in an increasingly complex, centralized society.”
“Extreme taxation, excessive controls, oppressive government competition with business, galloping inflation, frustrated minorities, and forgotten Americans are not the products of free enterprise. They are the residue of centralized bureaucracy, of government by a self-anointed elite.”
“Our party must be based on the kind of leadership that grows and takes its strength from the people. Any organization is in actuality only the lengthened shadow of its members. A political party is a mechanical structure created to further a cause. The cause, not the mechanism, brings and holds the members together. And our cause must be to rediscover, reassert, and reapply America’s spiritual heritage to our national affairs. Then with God’s help we shall indeed be as a city upon a hill, with the eyes of all people upon us.”
I suppose in Baehr’s eyes, Reagan was a Stalinist as well. But in truth, he was the original Tea Party activist.
The ironic suggestion by some of our establishment GOP “pragmatists” / “realists” that the Tea Party movement is really a call to PURITY by the wacky fringe of conservatism is simply a rhetorical gambit to shame principled conservatives/classical liberals into falling in line behind our party betters. It plays on an idea of compromise that is entirely one-sided — and it uses for its power the suggestion that to vote your conscience is to do harm to the “moderates,” who really do wish to vote Republican, but hold back because Republicans inexplicably refuse to govern as Democrats.
In truth, though, it is they who demand purity — a purity that takes its shape in the insistence that we, as members of their party, shut up and get behind the candidates they tell us to, because they have a sophisticated plan to which we aren’t privy, and all of this rogue individualism is getting in the way of their grand strategies for taking back the power that they seem to feel they deserve.
Vote your principles. Doing so doesn’t make you a Stalinist, nor does it make you complicit in some sort of nefarious “purge.” Elections results aren’t gulags. Those who try to argue otherwise are likely not your friends in the first place.
I wouldn’t vote for Kirk either
““Extreme taxation, excessive controls, oppressive government competition with business, galloping inflation, frustrated minorities, and forgotten Americans are not the products of free enterprise. They are the residue of centralized bureaucracy, of government by a self-anointed elite.”
– That factual statement should be framed and hung over the door of every governmental office, school house, and college dorm in America.
But, but, but….WE WON!
So shut the hell up.
[i]Vote your principles. Doing so doesn’t make you a Stalinist, nor does it make you complicit in some sort of nefarious “purge.” Elections results are gulags. [b]Those who try to argue otherwise are likely not your friends in the first place.[/b][/i]
They are just a different set of people that want to manipulate us. They really do see themselves as our betters. If you are unsure, pay attention to the people they defend and the company they keep. That will usually tell you a lot about somebody’s true allegiances.
How can we “purge” these people when they get up and leave? Case in point: the DE GOP establishment.
Do the “Establishment” GOP ever consider that it might be they, and their (old-school-Democrat-like) tradition of back-room deals, that the “moderates” and “independents” don’t trust?
Ronnie’s words still ring true more than 30 years later; especially the part that’s quoted here.
While I still don’t completely buy into the idea that the entire GOP apparatus is an elitist cabal bent only on self-serving power, I definitely think that they need to be listening to Ronnie’s speeches more, and their pollsters and conventional wisdom punditry less.
Ronnie beat back the Rockefeller Republicans. But, unfortunately, the one he took as veep, for unity’s sake, managed to move things back in that direction.
In truth, though, it is they who demand purity — a purity that takes its shape in the insistence that we, as members of their party, shut up and get behind the candidates they tell us to, because they have a sophisticated plan to which we aren’t privy, and all of this rogue individualism is getting in the way of their grand strategies for taking back the power that they seem to feel they deserve.
What you’re saying, Jeff, is that we need to be pure in our subservience, To our moral and intellectual betters is it not?
They! Who in the hell is “they”!?
Let’s just say posts like this don’t endear me to some of the most respected right-side blogs.
– Well Ernst, that’s really the point now isn’t it. Those candidates that see their idea’s and actions are clearly being rejected by the voters man up and take it gracefully in stride. They don’t require “purging”.
– Then you have the Murkowskis, the ruling class elites, who could care less what their lessors want, and who refuse to give up the reins of power to the bitter end.
– The beauty of our form of government gives us the tool to manage that sort of behavior by politicians, the vote.
– The problem starts when you get to many Americans sitting it out. Then you get things like Obama and the runaway bureaucratic mess we find ourselves in now.
–
I sent my Congressman (Reichart) an email telling him that he would no longer receive a vote from me and my wife. I got a nice canned response which told me not to respond to his canned response. Fuck him.
Bob, doesn’t it seem to you as though rhetorical extravagances like “apparatus” and “elitist cabal” tend to cloud the picture as opposed to clarifying it?
If, on the other hand we would point to members of the party delivering a sturdy, well reasoned account of the nation’s current primary difficulties, with thorough coherent prescriptions to accompany their diagnoses, who would they be (I have my own ideas of them)? Wouldn’t we then look from these exemplars back to the run of the mill pols, such as Boehner I’d suggest, to see whether the predominant voices in the party are communicating the same messages as those we find most excellent? And if, as it happens, they are not, what are we to think?
It’s possible that those who flinch at this message have forgotten the last time the GOP held Congress, in which they promised the moon in terms of reigning in spending and delivered only a couple tax cuts and massive increases to spending. I recall being promised border control along with my immigration reform and social security reform that would allow me to have more control over my economic future, and those turned out to be empty promises as well.
I’m hearing a call to purge the party of its idiots.
Purge party !!!
(trunks optional)
You are a cad, sir!
OT: Van Gogh and tilt shift photography.
Let’s just say posts like this don’t endear me to some of the most respected right-side blogs.
Yeah. Well, about that, I think the problem isn’t so much your opinions as it is that you lack the proper credentials to opine in the first place. After all, we can’t have the village atheist thinking he can preach from the pulpit now, can we? What would that do to the fragile, unformed minds of the peasants?
HETERODOXY!
– Ole Harry (My pet Coons) Reid just jumped the shark again on the Senate floor, referring to one of his female Senate colleges as “Hawt”.
– Of course the Feminazi’a are going wild.
– I think he already knows he’s not coming back.
You keep using that word, purge. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Richard Baehr. When that guy’s at the DMV and his name is called, it sounds like some poor lady is calling out for “Bear Dick.”
Perhaps. But, assuming the ‘purging’ continues, and continues to threaten not just RINOs, but ‘conservative’ democrats then perhaps Coons’ vote will become immaterial, as others acting in fear for their own jobs, will vote for repeal.
We are trying to drive the center, worrying about a single opponent on the fringe is shortsighted at the very least.
But, more broadly and maybe it’s just my cynicism, I’m having a hard time ascribing these arguments to mere lack of insight or forethought. These are supposed to be expert minds, doing what they do best, yet they persist in weak arguments that utterly fail to see any potential for greater things. Maybe they are just that inept. Either way their arguments are enlightening.
I wouldn’t be surprised to find a vote or two from Team dirty socialist in both houses for to repeal the health care boondoggle.
Let’s just say posts like this don’t endear me to some of the most respected right-side blogs.
Well, they can kiss my ass. There ain’t no (R) after your name, or mine. (CL) looks much better, anyway.
Coincidentally Van Gogh showed up at APOD today.
Jeff…you need to be a machiavellian pragmatist if you are going to beat a machiavellian pragmatist.
You ALREADY HAVE all the voters there are in the Big-hair Dimbo with mall bangs demographic.
You need voters from OTHER DEMOGRAPHICS.
tick…..tick….tick….
Yes. Well the progressives will have their sacrifice and their martyrs too.
but this year it’s the dimbos what are fired up fired up ready to go ready to go
– We already have them, in spades, and they have (NAO) after all their names….
NON_AFFILIATED OUTLAW!
You ALREADY HAVE all the voters there are in the Big-hair Dimbo with mall bangs demographic.
You need voters from OTHER DEMOGRAPHICS.
Isn’t that cute? Nishi thinks she knows conservatives.
Mall-bangs? Who even GOES to malls anymore?
Let’s just say posts like this don’t endear me to some of the most respected right-side blogs.
Huh? I doubt Glenn has a beef with it.
– Oh, and tick, tick, tick, right back attcha!
Because only Big-Hair Dimbos are suffering in the SOCIALIST UTOPIA that is Obama’s America. Everything’s hunkey-dorey for other demographics.
The establishment leadership failed and did so dramatically, 2006 and 2008 being the prime examples. while they did pretty good in their opposition to ObamaCare (not actually having a large enough minority to do serious blockage hurt), they have not given any reason why they should be retained as leaders. at least no reasons beyond that of ‘I want it’.
That failure makes them vulnerable to being replaced within the establishment and it also makes them vulnerable to being replaced by an outside group. This is what the tea party and certain other outsiders (such as Sarah Palin) noted, and what they started doing, infiltrating the Republican party and removing the established leadership through the primary process.
For any change in the direction of a political party to outlast the great leader (which Reagan was one) the establishment has to be changed, like what happened to the Democrats as regular Tip O’Neill types were replaced by the Henry Waxman/Nancy Pelosi types until Tip wouldn’t recognize the party at all. Yes, this will not happen quickly, it is going to take at least a decade as the election cycles to nominate and elect new people to replace the establishment will prevent any greater speed. Because of that people are going to have to stay persistent and stay active and force the change through. Yes, kooks and nuts will get in with their own private agendas and take up the anti-establishment mantle to cloak their intentions. Those people will have to be ushered out slowly.
I don’t know if it will succeed, but it is a start – (and it is what I advised earlier so I feel kind of good to see it happening!)
“Everything’s hunkey-dorey for other demographics.”
– That’s what the Left is repeating under their breath to themselves over and over in their usual collectivist chant, and why the tsunami is going to hit them like a Mac truck the size of Texas.
“…2006 and 2008 being the prime examples.”
Seems more like the temporal locus was 2003 – 2005, but yeah, the gist is right.
For years, we’ve been forced to choose between a party that wants to rob us of our liberty, and a party that wants to rob us of our liberty a little slower. One group spends our children’s money, and the other spends our grandchildren’s on top of it. That’s not a real choice, nor has it ever been.
Faced with an insurgency that wants to take away their power, both parties in government are reacting with an alarming mix of anger and panic. We need to seize the momentum, and assure that over the next couple of elections, we install people who represent those of us who just want to be left the hell alone. In my mind’s eye, I can see campaign managers telling incumbents, “The only way to keep your job is to repudiate the party leadership and insist that you never enjoyed or wanted to trade favors, implement bullshit programs, or build useless monuments to yourself.”
I don’t need to purge the go-along-to-get-along weathervane Congresscritters; I just need them to be crystal clear that the wind is blowing in a new direction, and they’d better go along and get along with *my* preferred policies, even if it means giving up the toys and the power that they’ve grown accustomed to.
– And I think the problem stems from the word capitulation, not compromise. In far too many cases non quid pro quo capitulation for political expediency was the rule of the day.
– There’s nothing inherently wrong with well devised compromise, when it really is a compromise, something gained for something given, and as long as it doesn’t completely gut your basic goals.
– The former, and not the latter, has been the case for far too long.
Jeff G., I’m quite sure there are those on the right who don’t like your uncanny ability to spot bullshit, call it bullshit and be right in the process.
You’re sort of a rhetorical Alexander cleaving the Gordian Knot of textual rubbish.
I mean, nothing cuts through verbal nonsense quite as well as hollering “bullshit.”
You ALREADY HAVE all the tax revenue there is in the fatcat banker and entrepreneurial demographics. You need tax revenue from OTHER DEMOGRAPHICS.
Silly bitch thinks this is about votes. Silly bitch doesn’t realize that her gravy train is running out, and we’re just arguing over whether the transition is ugly and deeply painful, or whether it will be violent and destructive.
Silly bitch also doesn’t realize that her well-being depends on the grownup managing the transition successfully, lest she come face-to-face and gain an actual, real-life understanding of the OTHER DEMOGRAPHICS she’s treated as vote cattle for fifty years.
#40 Squid;
Add “Silly cow thinks that anyone here but happyfeet gives one good pudding-dip about her opinion on anything.”
– All the silly bitches on the Left are gonna learn.
Mikey she was very correct about what happened in 2008 she was
What I wonder is what will happen to a not particularly inclusive Team R in the absence of the unifying force of Obama
– The answer to that question is why we’re going to elect people, regardless of the letter after their names, that are willing to listen to the will of the people feets.
– The day of candidates being elected and then just disappearing into the star chamber maw of DC, and doing whatever the fuck they please is over.
Is nishi suffering from some sort of psychological disorder where she regresses to the mental capacity of a 3-year-old?
#43 happyfeet:
When I go to the nihilist for an opinion it will be the day I need to be fitted with a wrap-around blazer. Take Mengele-girl and take a hike already.
Reading quellist Kate is like a progressive Babelfish translation from English to Spanish to French
and back again, that line from Billy Madison, is a proper epitaph
you just don’t like her cause you disagree with a lot of what she thinks about stuff
“you just don’t like her cause you disagree with a lot of what she thinks about stuff”
– She thinks about stuff? When did that happen?
I don’t like her because she has the most facile “understanding” of the issues she talks about, and because she maintains a condescending tone that is completely at odds with her standing in this community. I don’t like her because she has only six arguments, and she repeats them knowing full well that we don’t concur, and knowing full well all the reasons why we don’t concur. I don’t like her because she forces us to take valuable time and energy away from whatever discussion is at hand to clean up the little messes she leaves in our threads. I don’t like her because she treats her voting cattle demographics even worse than she treats us.
So no, mere disagreement with her conclusions is really the least of the reasons why I don’t like her.
you just don’t like her cause you disagree with a lot of what she thinks about stuff
OBJECTION! happyfeet is arguing facts not in evidence. Where’s the evidence that she can think?
nah…i just miss the old Jeff.
the smarter, non-ideologue one.
he was awesomesauce.
you just don’t like her cause you disagree with a lot of what she thinks about stuff
You just like her because you’re both weirdos at the weirdo lunch table in a John Hughes movie.
I kinda liked Vic Morrow, maybe from the Combat series way back when.
#48 happyfeet:
Her principles are in opposition to mine. Why on earth would I like her? Didn’t you even read this post that Jeff G. put up, or are you going all emotional/zero rational again?
Why on earth would like the ideas and principles espoused by a nihilist eugenecist who has no problem with all of the socialism she can get? What would I have in common with her?
Which is a dirty shame, for words not yours:
…paint the Republican establishment accurately, as largely indistinguishable from the Democrat establishment. From there,
…is pure incontrovertible logic.
What’s left? That the establishment right-o-sphere is increasingly indistinguishable from its host.
The lesson is that power simply corrupts.
plus also she’s crepuscular now
Credit where credit’s due, Squid. You have to admit that it takes a certain aplomb to be both superficial and condescending at the same time.
So are vampires happyfeet. You should know better than to invite one to cross your threshold.
i just miss the old Jeff.
the smarter, non-ideologue one.
You’ve mistaken ideology for partisanship, I think.
Ernst, you were talking about the “President,” right?
Superficial:Check
Condescending:Check
Aplomb:
Okay, maybe not.
This one, is definitely Volturi, everybody back on your heads:
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/09/please-ignore-history-and-give-up-on.html
#60 Ernst:
even more than that, when she first showed up here under – matoko, I think – she got the same drubbing she’s received everytime. The Jeff G. she is missing is one that only exists in her head.
Actually, if anyone has changed, she has. She was a guest-poster here at one time, before she drank the kool-aid. I forget if she was as much of a nutter back then, but I’m pretty sure she wasn’t.
It doesn’t matter, really, since we are who we are, not who we were.
Not new either. In 1976, Sen Charles “Mac” Mathias, referring to the campaign of Ronald Reagan for the party’s nomination said that teh push to the right was isolating the Republican leadership, “…in an extreme-almost fringe-position.” Those who agree point to Ford’s decision to drop liberal Republican Nelson Rockefeller from the ticket in favor of Bob Dole. Of course they ignore that Reagan nodded to the liberal wing by promising Richard Schweiker as his running mate.
he was awsomesauce
And you were prokchop.
The Germans wore grey…
You have to admit that it takes a certain aplomb to be both superficial and condescending at the same time.
It’s simply the Pointy-Headed Boss Syndrome. Not only does she lack the awareness to comprehend the arguments, the policies, and the consequences — she lacks the awareness to comprehend her lack of awareness. She is the pixelated embodiment of the Emperor in his new clothes.
Is nishi suffering from some sort of psychological disorder where she regresses to the mental capacity of a 3-year-old?
Very few 3-year-olds want to commit genocide.
In my case, trust is enough of an issue that a D would have a significantly tougher row to hoe. All pols claim to listen to the will of the people when it suits them to do so; some even manage to fake it reasonably well (e.g., Clinton) — but it’s been a long damn time since I met a D that actually qualified for my vote.
An R has an uphill battle to be sure, but a D is just shit out of luck.
I don’t like her because she openly takes pleasure is stirring up shit just to get a reaction.
And yes, that’s the kind of thing I tend to disagree with, regardless of who does it.
that’s like openly disdainful of the nishi to minimize her like that Mr. McGehee I think she’s a right groovy nemesis as far as the nemeses go
Getting back to the original topic:
It plays on an idea of compromise that is entirely one-sided — and it uses for its power the suggestion that to vote your conscience is to do harm to the “moderates,” who really do wish to vote Republican, but hold back because Republicans inexplicably refuse to govern as Democrats.
It’s ironic to me that they fear alienating the squishy middle, yet hold no such fears when it comes to their base. One would think that the last couple of elections, when the base stayed home, would have awakened them to the idea that taking their base for granted is an unsustainable policy.
Honestly, I can’t understand how a platform that consists of “the government should get out of your business” and “the government shouldn’t sell your grandchildren into indentured servitude” can be characterized as extremism. Just goes to show what happens when you let bad-faith actors redefine the terms of debate.
noogie is openly disdainful of everything not noogie, feets. Get a grip, man.
Honestly, I can’t understand how a platform that consists of “the government should get out of your business” and “the government shouldn’t sell your grandchildren into indentured servitude” can be characterized as extremism. Just goes to show what happens when you let bad-faith actors redefine the terms of debate.
A couple of days ago, insty linked to a Chicago law professor explaining that, despite his family’s large income, their expenses (primarily taxes and school loans) were so high that the lapse of the Bush tax credits would mean the elimination of the small margin above zero they currently “enjoyed”.
The response from the left was overwhelmingly “screw you”, with a mix of “oh, pity the rich bastard” and “how dare you want to send your kid to a private school”. Some big-name lefty bloggers chimed in along the same message, and even the former Enron consultant economist (whatever his name is; writes Democrat talking points for the NYT) got his boot in.
A frighteningly large number of people in this country believe they have first call on your labor, and they’re perfectly willing to use the government to take possession.
nah…i just miss the old Jeff.
the smarter, non-ideologue one.
he was awesomesauce.
This really gives off a severed-human-head-in-the-fridge vibe.
It isn’t the envy, jealousy, and covetousness that amazes me. It’s the shortsightedness.
Rob the rich / and feed the poor / until there are no rich no more. Fine. So what will the poor eat after you succeed?
Regards,
Ric
I’m just gonna throw this out there… I think Jeff, likewise me and many who’ve been around here for a while , has always been an ideologue. Y’all just have the wrong ideology. Kind of like when some hippy jam band Freshman starts hanging out with the Libertarians because, well, they like the weed, dude. It doesn’t last.
Nishi isn’t my nemesis in either the old or new sense. Positing her as such requires an implicit insult though.
Cheers.
Do you not understand that to pretend she’s a valid or worthy opponent is to insult everyone here, ‘feets?
She’s not. When you say this stuff, you’re insulting us. I assume it’s not intentional but there it is.
Rob the rich / and feed the poor / until there are no rich no more. Fine. So what will the poor eat after you succeed?
The rich. Duh.
bh — ‘feets is as worthy arguing with as mengele jr.
I’m thinking purging politicians is somewhat different than purging crawdads, yes. OTOH, purging them like a bunch of crawdads would amuse me considerably, although if you ever got the BS out of them I’m afraid there’d be little left….
But if you mean purge as in “the removal of people who are considered undesirable by those in power from a government”, and assuming we the people are the “those in power”, then yes, I think the term is being used accurately.
Rob the rich / and feed the poor / until there are no rich no more. Fine. So what will the poor eat after you succeed?
I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout. A Modest Proposal, J. Swift.
He doesn’t understand, bh. I don’t have the generosity of spirit to talk happyfeet off the ledge anymore. I’m sure I’d like him in real life, but here he’s just a bizarre little creature who serves no function at this point but to irritate people.
Hmph. I am beginning to see why it is that, as we look at history, prehistory, archaeology, anthropology, and paleontology, we see that the universal pattern of humanity is male dominance.
Societies with female suffrage didn’t last long enough to get into the fossil record, because they always ate the seed corn.
Regards,
Ric
–the word “perhaps” should be inserted after the comma in the last full sentence.
Auntie Zeituni speaks: “I didn’t take any advantage of the system. The system took advantage of me”
I don’t think you could find a finer, more concise example of the ‘free money’ entitlement mentality that liberals encourage and help to propagate.
In other news, from the police blotter:
Thief breaks into family home, demands room of his own and a weekly allowance. “If I come as an uninvited guest, you have the obligation to make me a family member.”
Societies with female suffrage didn’t last long enough to get into the fossil record, because they always ate the seed corn.
And yet some of the foremost voices of the larger Tea-Party phenomenon are women –O’Donnell, Bachmann, She Who Must Not Be Mentioned. Why do suppose that is?
And is it just me, or does the accompanying photo of Aunt Zeituni look like Flip Wilson in a wig?
And yet some of the foremost voices of the larger Tea-Party phenomenon are women –O’Donnell, Bachmann, She Who Must Not Be Mentioned. Why do suppose that is?
And curiously, all owe at least a measure of their prominence to the venemous hatred directed at them by “feminists” are their toadies.
#86, exactly right, Dave in SoCal. Easy, easy, easy. They’re weak minded people. There will be no lifting by them, you see. Heavy or otherwise.
FTFY.
my sister flew in today so she took my car to go to yummy’s so guess what? the cupcake moratorium is over apparently I’m getting a chocolate salty caramel one I’m kind of excited cause it’s a new one to try
I didn’t mean to insult anybody.
Is nishi suffering from some sort of psychological disorder where she regresses to the mental capacity of a 3-year-old?
She seems be enjoying it, so “no”.
“So what will the poor eat after you succeed?”
– They don’t think that far ahead, and there’s no chapter in the Alinski little red book that tell’s them what to do after they win. The sum of their cult goal is to win.
– after that they’re lost. Bumbblefuck is the very embodiment of that limited. drad end skill set.
Judging from my frequent dealings with government officialdom, “arrogant” and “stupid” must be genetically linked personality traits, you hardly ever find one without the other and they’re closely covariant.
But you’re right, to give credit where it’s due, Squid was spot on @ #37. There’s a train coming. At this point I don’t care if the pols get on board or jump in front and try to stop it. I’m betting that come November 3rd there’s going to be blood on the tracks and a big rush at the ticket window.
Comment by happyfeet on 9/21 @ 2:58 pm #
I didn’t mean to insult anybody.
Well you did.
I am very vexed.
You can make up for it though.
Mail me 1/2 dozen of the aforementioned cupcakes and I’ll consider forgiving you.
hey you know sprinkles is all over now Mr. Mueller there’s one in Denver I wonder if Mr. Jeff knows
Kristol gets e-mail:
What? No love for Delaware? Elitist Prick!
Help End Barney.
link
#26 sdferr,
Do you just have to repeat what Nishi said, but more succinctly?
heh, I favor your interpretation geoffb, but actually that was an html failed attempt at a photo of a northern loon.
Not only is he an elitist prick, but his math is off. His count only gets us to 50. That puts Joe Biden in charge of the Senate unless we really think Lieberman is going to cross over.
The northern loon is a beautiful bird with a haunting call that in no way deserves to be associated with a batshit crazy banshee-harridan.
Our party must be the party of the individual. It must not sell out the individual to cater to the group.
And it was just today that Team R with Meghan’s simpering coward daddy in the lead a lot sold out the individual gay soldier.
Jobs:
Well, loons are actually quite nice to have around. Loonies not so much.
Ernst is quicker.
Another count for Ernst.
Mr. sdferr I think it’s a lot likely it would have been worse but that petrobras was told by the thugly U.S. government not to poach any rigs from the gulf.
Just a suspicion.
106.Comment by happyfeet on 9/21 @ 3:50 pm #
And it was just today that Team R with Meghan’s simpering coward daddy in the lead a lot sold out the individual gay soldier.
Yeah, because that demographic is so solidly Republican. Appeasing those that will probably hate you anyway is usually not the path to victory.
– Most of the loonies seem to be in DC, Cal, or Portland, but that’s not a scientific survey. Just based on a rough prison count.
Team R either affirms that people stand on their merits as individuals or it affirms that they don’t.
Today they chose not to.
I’m not sure I agree with half the horse race stuff I’ve been seeing. Look at this RCP House races map and see if you agree with their assessment from local races you’re knowledgeable about.
They have WI17 as leans GOP. Nope, that’s a clear pickup. Won’t need to spend much money there. They have WI18 as a toss up. Nope, that’s leans GOP. They have WI13 as leans Dem. Nope, that’s a toss up. That’s three for three wrong in my estimation. Obey didn’t just retire because he was tired. Feingold isn’t going done in flames for some local issue or egregious personal mistake.
If they allocate their resources accordingly while we play a more aggressive game, they’re going to waste a TON of advertising money.
Oh, sorry, look at your local races here. I really would like to know if other people find their calls to be overly optimistic for the Dems.
If you want to be an individual, happyfeet, don’t join the armed forces where your life is no longer your own. Or didn’t you know that?
Flip Wilson looked pretty darn good in a wig and miniskirt. Auntie Zeituni not so much.
I wonder how Lieberman will look at crossing over should Conn pick McMahon come Nov. Seems like it would be somewhat easier for him to rationalize in that event.
“I really would like to know if other people find their calls to be overly optimistic for the Dems.”
I don’t know about the calls bh, but I’m getting used to figuring on most polling overweighting Dems fairly significantly.
Isn’t it amazing how all the alleged “moderate” Republicans sound entirely like hardcorps leftist-progressives when the mask comes off?
– feets, the military should be allowed to conduct it’s own affair’s. The Fed has no fucking business involving itself anymore than it should be involved in civil/religious institutions. That says nothing about the pro’s and con’s, its just a basic fact.
– you bitch about light bulbs and shower heads and medical records/control, but you have no trouble supporting out of whack government interference when you think your idea’s can’t stand on their own merits.
– That’s not staunchy, nor consistent.
And it was just today that Team R with Meghan’s simpering coward daddy in the lead a lot sold out the individual gay soldier.
Don’t forget that cowardly Team R also sold out illegal alien “children” (i.e. up to age 35) who are entitled to get a college education on the taxpayer’s dime. And I’m surprised you’re not going with the “Team R hates them the troopz they do” attack as well.
You do know that this was a bundled package, don’t you? In a desperate attempt to pander to (and thereby retain) the Latino vote by passing the DREAM act, the Dems bundled it in with the DADT repeal and a defense appropriations bill.
Guess we should have eaten the casserole because there were some tasty Junior Mints mixed in with all the the dog crap, huh?
Link
Happy, maybe you should pack yourself a couple of cupcakes and crawl back up into Nishi’s alimentary canal.
Mr. Ernst the people in the armed forces lives are not their own…. precisely – so if they’re told to stop persecuting fags then they will have to do so or face dismissal. And nobody is under any onus to give a shit what they think about it.
But that’s wasn’t the point really. The point is that Team R really shouldn’t prance around bleating about its reverence for the individual when the evidence for such reverence is really rather slim.
Dave that’s a good point … do you think if there were to be an up or down vote just on DADT that Team R would support doing away with it?
mourning in america
Hmm, my HTML fu fails again. Geraldine
– feets I’m not going to say a passage like “I believe in individuality, but that doesn’t mean I support serial killers and child molesters”, but I won’t say that.
– As far as I know persecution of any stripe is severely dealt with already in the military.
Your characterization of DADT as “persecution” is only slightly less ridiculous than the notion that our indivuality can be reduced to how and with whom we achieve sexual gratification.
Personally, I’d advise you against taking SoCal Dave’s advice. Generally speaking, there’s only room in the village for one idiot.
I don’t know, Happy. But I personally would hold the “cowardly Team R hates fags” accusation until they had a chance to do so. But then again, I’m not looking for any and all opportunities to bag on Team R like you are.
Here goes the closet queen again…
Harry Reid to Gays: ‘I Really Want Your Votes. But First You Will Blow Me.’
The fact that Susan fucking Collins didn’t break ranks shows that the establishment is starting to wake up to the new mood.
Comment by Rob Crawford on 9/21 @ 2:03 pm
A frighteningly large number of people in this country believe they have first call on your labor, and they’re perfectly willing to use the government to take possession.
“… because we have been guided by a Republican administration who believes in the simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it and they have an antipathy towards means of redistributing wealth.”
Jim Moran D-VA
Just a bunch of dimbulb ideologues, that is all you are.
131.
Let’s not go there please
We know that Team R wouoldn’t support it, for various reasons. I think we all know those reasons.
But, I KNOW Team Dem won’t support it, because of the constituencies of theirs that are inconveniently not pro-gay, particularly People of Color. Thats why when the Dems control Congress, the DADT policy is NEVER brought up for a repeal by itself.
Please, please, please let that be the case.
Mr. Ernst I think if people were dismissed from the armed forces for professing their religious faith instead of professing that they were attracted to people of the same sex then the word “persecution”” would quickly be deemed a lot apt.
The point is that the military has a policy what dismisses people quite apart from their ability to perform as soldiers and quite apart from their record of having done so. It’s not a policy what is pro-individual. And Team R supports that policy.
There’s a fairly obvious syllogism to be made I think.
And, having served 22 of my 26 total service years in a line Company (the guys that do the fighting; tip of the spear and all that) most of us don’t care when we have any homo’s in the ranks as long as they do their job.
– This political atmosphere is building in toxicity all on its own.
– It’s like walking into a slum apartment building at night and suddenly flipping on the lights. All sorts of things go scurrying for cover.
‘Feets, team Dem supports DADT too. They just can’t come out and say it.
triage is getting busy
http://minx.cc/?post=305986
The military as a whole is not pro-individual, HF. That is the point. It is a different culture, communal and shared, for very good reasons, but that community and sharedness is by utter force of law; by dictatorship. It’s the same reason we don’t have women in Combat Arms units.
I was kind of confused by the whole DADT thing, but with noted military experts like happyfeet and Lady GaGa weighing in on it, it makes it much clearer.
Well hf, there’s also that First Amendment thing specifically referring to freedom of religion. So the analogy doesn’t quite work.
I agree that that’s probably the norm Mr. SGT and yes I know the dirty socialists are a lot supportive of the policy. What I’m saying is that full-throated support of this policy is not consistent with a political philosophy what privileges the individual over the group.
Let’s not go there please
Yes, DADT.
you are welcome Mr. Moe sometimes do you think these threads are the cupcakes and the enlightenment I bring is the sprinkles?
I think that sometimes.
What I’m saying is that full-throated support of this policy is not consistent with a political philosophy what privileges the individual over the group.
It isn’t a political issue, hf. It is a military decision. If you are trying to politicize it you are wrong, regardless of which side you are on.
A good read: Benjamin Franklin on American Happiness
People are dismissed from the armed forces for professing their faith –or rather were since we don’t draft people anymore. Some groups take that ‘thou shalt not kill” stuff rather literally. In the present environment, I imagine professing that one would not fight one’s coreligionists would carry similiar consequences to professing one’s sexual preferences.
More to the point. You know what’s expected of you when you go in, or you learn soon enough. If you want to stay in, just follow the rules. If you don’t like the rules, why are you there in the first place?
But Mr. SGT… Team R is not the military. All I’m saying is that Team R is markedly less pro-individual than poor dead Reagan would have them thought to be I think.
Well, its really the military’s policy, supported by both parties. And it is really akin to the combat exclusion for females, policy wise.
you’re not an individual in the service. you’re us property.
Well, its really the military’s policy, supported by both parties. And it is really akin to the combat exclusion for females, policy wise.
I have no doubt the social engineers will get around to expirementing with that after there done with the expirement under discussion.
you can rationalize the military’s codified bigotry six ways to sunday… that’s not really the issue. The issue is that in supporting that bigotry, Team R forgoes the privilege of proclaiming itself to be pro-individual. The DADT issue a lot succinctly reveals that Team R is quite happy for individuals to be judged solely by merit of a class to which they belong. Perhaps less so than the dirty socialists, but neither party in America champions the fucking individual anymore.
– I’m assuming feets has no military experience, and if that’s the case, he has no idea of the function, structure and goals of same. and there is no argument to be made. It is what it is because that’s what it has to be in order to function. Internal issues are adjudged and resolved with that singular purpose in mind, and while there are certainly aspects of politics in the service, they are of a very specific nature within the permissible goals of the command.
– When you’re asking men to put their lives on the line, all other personal preferences like sexual orientation, or any other “passtime”, simply do not deserve serious consideration.
happyfeet, if team armed forces says they like the policy just the way it is thankyouverymuch, is it reasonable to expect team R to defer to team AF?
What if DADT is a useful catalyst for creating more support for openly gay folks in the military? That if allowed to continue for awhile longer it will both diminish any controversy and smooth the transition?
It’s sort of how I feel about civil unions. If you do that state by state and people don’t see any negative consequences, then aren’t they more likely to support it for their own state and/or decide marriage is a doable option?
We can have our own thought and opinions on these matters but gay folk still have to live within society. If that society feels “the ghey agenda” is bullying them or engaging in hasty social engineering, they aren’t going to be pissed at me, they’re going to be pissed at gay folk.
The Army is bigoted, hf. That is pretty much a requirement if you are ordered to shoot and kill folks who disagree with you.
Prejudiced and discriminatory as all hell, too.
And once again, you are insisting on politicizing decisions that don’t need policizing. You sound like Meghan’s pinheaded brother or some such.
Team R is quite happy for individuals to be judged solely by merit of a class to which they belong.
What class are you talking about?
neither party in America champions the fucking individual anymore.
Feel free to join the Libertarians if you want.
I think we should have our representatives vote on it Ernst. But should they decide to defer to Team AF let’s not confuse that with a political philosophy in which the individual plays a role of any particular importance.
why do i have to know about your sex life at work?
What if DADT is a useful catalyst for creating more support for openly gay folks in the military?
The injustice of the policy still matters I think.
It speaks.
I will talk to you guys later we’re gonna go get the tasty shwarma
The injustice of the policy still matters I think.
Whatever you guys do, don’t let him find out about the dress code. He will really fucking shit about that!
And anyway happyfeet has it backward.
If you think the other members of any given soldier’s unit don’t know which way he (mostly it’s “he”) swings, you’re an idiot. DADT just means DMAIOOI (Don’t Make An Issue Out Of It). It’s like “hate crimes”. It isn’t necessary to tell people “don’t beat up on homosexuals” because “don’t beat up on anybody except when your CO tells you what’s downrange” is firmly and fully in place.
Under that regime, individual soldiers are free to excel (or not) as soldiers. Their sexual orientation is irrelevant — which is as it should be.
Ending DADT means creating a new victim group, which can then be pandered to as usual. That wouldn’t be so bad if the pandering wouldn’t inevitably result in damage to the military. What do you estimate as the elapsed time from officially ending DADT and the first lawsuit requiring the Army to alloy homosexual soldiers to wear the feminine version of the uniform? Personally I put the over/under as 3/24 — that’s hours.
Regards,
Ric
– Now you did it Moe. The shwarma just turned to glue.
I will talk to you guys later we’re gonna go get the tasty shwarma
They wouldn’t even have to ask if you talked like that in Iraq.
I think we should have our representatives vote on it Ernst. But should they decide to defer to Team AF let’s not confuse that with a political philosophy in which the individual plays a role of any particular importance.
At the risk of overstating your arguement (such as it is), what you’re telling me is that if the gays can’t fuck in public, the collectivists will have won.
Except the gays can fuck in public (Folsom Street Fair, anyone) and If I wanted to do that (which I don’t –no need to thank me) I need to go to Berlin.
Go figure.
(enjoy your treat)
– Ric, I’m still expecting any time now to see a case in the courts where an Uncle/niece “couple” sue for equal conjugal “rights” in an SS legal state.
Just to be clear, that was directed towards, “the political philosophy … particular importance part” of the ‘plaint.
Somehow the Staunchetti missed the fact that DREAM and a bunnchof other rubbish was tacked on to the defense bill, as is par for the course with Nancy and Harry’s Congress – instead it becomes TEAM R HATES HOMOZ!!11!!! I am imagining that had this passed it would have been curses for TEAM R PUSSIES LET AMNESTY IN!!1!1.
BTW – Prepare for a special pleader group in the DoD – based solely on behavior. As if the IG doesn’t get enough calls already for “you didn’t promote me/give me a plum assignment/looked at me funny just because I am X”….?
– When all this wrong headed recasting as every sort of hobby/preference/ and pasttime as a “civil right” finally comes to a head, you can bet your ass that sort of thing is going to be next. Once you let activist special interest groups and judges open that box it’s all down hill from there.
– And the irony will be that the pushback in the aftermath will hurt all of those cause’s more than anything else they could have done.
– Some of the leaders are smart enough to know that, but most drown them out and push as hard and fast as they can.
Ric has a very good point about unintended consequences … Those happen a lot it seems … We should think of ways to mitigate them
link
Maybe DADT?
I kid, I kid.
– That’s always going to happen feets when you base your issue/cause on false pretenses. People aren’t as stupid as they may seem to be.
Btw, take away the news peg (because it was a POS bill) and some of the over the top rhetoric (hey, I honestly don’t know how much of the GOP opposition to ending DADT would be based on actual anti-gay animus), and I really have no problem with ‘feets instincts on this at all.
– I do. Not because I’m anti-Ghey, but because I don’t see any benefit or need to aggrandize a sexual preference. It’s that simple.
– The fact it might make a specific group feel better about themselves is not the business the military is in.
I suppose that isn’t what I would consider to be the instinct, BBH.
“staunchetti”
Good one Colonel John.
Being it’s the military, why would a tribunal convene for a gay grievance? Seems to me if the military is the tacit dictatorship it must be in order to work, abolishing DADT should come with a clause, which is basically to shut the hell up after you’ve opened your mouth, so to put it, because nobody cares.
happyfeet,
I thought we weren’t supposed to be “obsessed” with social issues, like you tend to accuse the WEC, lifeydoodle, xtianist oppressors.
Swords generally have two edges, and cut both ways. Unless, you know, they’re simply old saws.
Above Ernst mentioned something like “join the libertarians”. I’d say that more accurately describes the instinct, not aggrandizing a sexual preference.
We can disagree about the details or how it would play out (conservatives vs libertarians, the never ending battle) but that instinct bothers me not at all.
John McCain’s against the ban’s lifting because he served in the military, knows full well the problems facing ‘integration’. For lack of a better term. I’ll warrant most of the activists who protest against DADT never served a day, nor would they have any intention of serving. Can you see Lady Gaga in a uniform? Or Meghan McCain? Full military acceptance is just another rung in the rope ladder leading out of a swamp that is a confused sort of existence to begin with. NTTAWWT…but, damn. There’s lines that just shouldn’t be crossed.
I’ll warrant most of the activists who protest against DADT never served a day, nor would they have any intention of serving.
That’s more of an argument against DADT than anything else though. It is worth remembering that the kind of gays who’d be inclined to serve are our kind of people, so to speak.
the dirty socialist/fag lobby bring up these issues to taunt the rest of us. such fun
And to think I was hoping to be picked for a 3 year assignment as an IG, here in the twilight of my career – now, I hope not…
#187 – but then they would serve and not feel the need to shout their sexual activities from the rooftops… and demand you like it.
And happy,
You know I like you, and we’re mostly sympatico. That’s why I have to ask, what part of, “combining these bills for a vote they know would fail was a cynical, desperate, election year ploy by Democrats who don’t dare! talk about any of the “accomplishments” they’ve rammed down the American people’s throat for the last 18 months of Obama’s administration and the 4 years they’ve essentially controlled Congress, don’t you understand?
[Whew, that was a mouthful!]
Look, alone just about any of these would have passed. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe would have he;ped roll back DADT. And, Lugar-and maybe princess Lindsey-would have helped them on the “DREAM” act. And it goes without saying that the defense appropriations bill would have gone through.
You know why it didn’t? Because Harry Reid himself couldn’t stand to go on record for the “DREAM” act. And the blue dog Dems like Nelson, Lincoln (especially her) and others could never roll back DADT. This was simply to give them a convenient distraction to pimp.
And they need to be called on it every time the hyperventilating starts.
Besides, by the Urkelbama gold standard, this effin’ bill is bi-partisan, since 2 Democrats voted for it.
Dude. What is it? Do you see the ploy? And, are social issues on, or off, the table.
– And that’s really the key. Nobody cares isn’t even strong enough a sentiment.
– The business you’re about 24/7/365 from the day you join to the day you retire is set in concrete with one specific goal. As Patton put it so concisely “….Not being a hero by dying for your country, but making the poor bastards on the other side a hero by dying for his country….”
– I wouldn’t ask my platoon buds how many times a week, and in what manner, they fucked their girlfriends/wives, and I sure as hell don’t care to know the personal lives of anyone, not just gheys.
-All I need to know is the guy next to me is well trained in his job and has my back. Beyond that I could give a shit less.
– Everyone knows the reasons why the Ghey community wants to try to use the military to win their issue. It’s cynical as well as impossible. That’s not a moral statement, just a basic fact.
happyfeet,
Ric gave a concise description of what life in the USS military is like under DADT.
And Colonel John accurately predicted the almost instantaneous appearance of a whole new “victim” class should it be repealed.
You should listen to both of them on this.
There’s lines that just shouldn’t be crossed.
That would be my instinct as well. To which I would add that my sentiment, is we’re runing out of those lines, having crossed so many of them already.
USS military, of course, s/b US military. Too many years, guys; seawater on the brain…
That’s an interesting question really. Let’s take Mitch Daniels’ “truce” suggestion as just that and not some preemptive surrender. I’d take that to mean DADT would stay.
General Peter Pace, causing a firestorm…
But he caught hell for that.
As a complete aside, I really do get a kick out of talking with Navy pilots and colonels. I have a pretty strong feeling that I wouldn’t have been allowed to fraternize with you guys if I had joined up.
I a lot disagree with what happyfeet thinks about certain stuff, but he has shown himself capable, when he tries, of not just stirring up shit.
I just wish he’d try more often, is all.
– I think what should stay, just my humble opinion, is an adult approach where you view personal things as personal, and treat them as such in an adult, responsible manner.
– I guess in this “new-age” edginess society we’ve evolved too, that’s a radical idea itself. Don’t know anymore.
she’s a right groovy
Which smells exactly like verve, to me.
I bring is the sprinkles?
You bring is the showers, golden.
nah the dirty socialist/fag lobby wants to make everything a federal case.
#187 – but then they would serve and not feel the need to shout their sexual activities from the rooftops… and demand you like it.
I agree. I’m just suggesting that the quality of person most inclined to serve would more often than not come from that segment of gheylandia which is sensitive to that and fairly normal – as opposed to the people who make this a cause celebre.
As a complete aside, I really do get a kick out of talking with Navy pilots and colonels. I have a pretty strong feeling that I wouldn’t have been allowed to fraternize with you guys if I had joined up.
I was thinking, with all this purported anti-gheyness, never brought up is how off-putting it would be to have Danger or Bob Reed show up at your house as an interior decorator.
#198 – fraternize? That is a crime – now, socialize? I see no reason why not… Bob would get you access to better food and nifty nautical things, I’d have better (non-flying) toys.
Heh.
#203 – Right – and those folks are already serving in many cases…
bh,
For what it’s worth, officially I’m no longer shit-hot. But Colonel John is :)
– I like feets also, but it’s hard to ignore the conflicted “staunchiness{” of all the pleas for focusing on the economy and “don’t get sidetracked” wall of sound he engages in when it suits, only to completely drop that approach the instant one of his pet social issues is up for vote.
– Maybe he’s suffering from cupcake withdrawal.
Colonel John is right bh, the food situation was always there and plentiful, 24/7, and as easy as hittin’ a cafeteria line.
But he has access to really cool “toys” that most folks can readily wield :)
– I think what should stay, just my humble opinion, is an adult approach where you view personal things as personal, and treat them as such in an adult, responsible manner.
But BBH, the personal is political!
“….But he has access to really cool “toys”…”
(Shhhhh…..there’s barely enough to go around as it is)
link
dadt
An otter would never have done that.
link
#213 newrouter —
Back when they changed the fiscal year from June 30 to September 30 Congress had to do a “fill in” budget for the extra three months. They decided somehow that the “continuing resolution” wouldn’t do the job. (Actually, I don’t think anybody’d thought of that ploy then.) The news was full of it, including some details, because they started out by saying that it would be pretty much in proportion to the budget for the previous fiscal year.
One of the items was that the budget for (then) Health, Education, and Welfare, HEW, was $110 billion. Some time later, they started breaking it down a bit; it turned out that HEW had made $25 billion in “transfer payments”.
Now dammit, that’s what HEW (and now HHS + DOE) is for. It’s a channel for handing out money that doesn’t buy anything; “transfers” rather than purchases. I said then that I didn’t really begrudge giving $25 billion to the sick, the ignorant, and the unfortunate — but where the H*l did the other $85 billion go?
Bulls*t. If any private charity had the “overhead” of our wonderfully compassionate Government agencies, they’d be shut down in a heartbeat.
Regards,
Ric
barney fwank “seat”
http://minx.cc/?post=305994
My sister saw a picture of Christy O on my computer on Drudge and she said hey what do you think about those Tea Party people. I said I like the Tea Party they are a very good thing. She said but I don’t agree with a lot of their issues.
Like what?
I think women should have the right to choose whether or not they have an abortion.
I said but that’s not really a Tea Party issue.
And she said but that lady right there she’s not pro-choice.
I said no you’re right but that’s not the same as the Tea Party.
She didn’t look very convinced.
When folks say that to me, I mention how there isn’t going to be any movement on abortion for a very long time given the composition of the Supreme Court. Just isn’t going to happen forever and ever and ever.
Then I say, “This deficit, it’s going to break into your home at night and strangle you. And, oh yeah, did you hear that Obama hates jobs?”
Anyone who votes based on the abortion issue in an economy like this is all kinds of the problem.
I didn’t feel like I needed to say nuffin what’s she gonna do vote for a democrat?
do you suck their brains out at the beginning of their life?
Mr. newrouter I think we can do with a bit less of the over the top rhetoric
that wasn’t even an anecdote about abortion really anyway it was an anecdote about conflation
you know traditional proggs wait for 5 or 6 years to suck their brains out in ‘public’ schools
Yes, I’m a free advice giving SOB. But I supported the instinct dammit!
the baracky likes the suck sound. don’t do it to his daughters
213. Comment by newrouter on 9/21 @ 7:02 pm
And tragically for us, the Great Society and the out of control expansion of government didn’t really get going until after the ’64 election.
Mine was an anecdote about always talking about debt creeping into the window and raping you whenever people experience the conflations.
that is very hard-hitting Mr. bh I would have told my sister that if it were at hand
The time for protecting unborn life is over. Now, it’s our pocketbooks what come first~!
Yeah.
I suppose so.
Depressing, is all. Where’s Jonathan Swift when you need him ?
that wasn’t even an anecdote about abortion really anyway it was an anecdote about conflation
The whole issue is that, always. People who vote based on peoples’ stand on abortion are fundamentally unserious people. It is never going to be outlawed. Ever.
And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund[.]
That’s why I said we needed a lockbox.
#106 happyfeet:
And it was just today that Team R with Meghan’s simpering coward daddy in the lead a lot sold out the individual gay soldier.
So why the devil do you hang out with and defend the nihilist eugenecist (can’t do that legally without the state’s force) nishi?
Hint: In this post Jeff G. is talking about principles. Figure your’s out.
It is never going to be outlawed. Ever.
Nor should it. However, it shouldn’t be thought of as a “right”, which translates into “FREE” abortions and forcing doctors/nurses/pharmacists into participating.
nishi is our internet friend just cause people have different views than you doesn’t mean they’re icky to where they can’t sit at your table at lunch in this little John Hughes movie we call life
#157 BBH:
happyfeet argues from emotion; reason has no cupcakes at his table.
nishit is objectively a bad and vile human thingie, happyfeet.
Serr8d, walk me through the election victory that ends abortion. Seriously. Maybe this election is about abortion to you but you’re going to have to explain it to me.
You know, if we as a society weren’t so cavalier in our attitude towards who gets to be born into the world and who ends up medical waste, we might not be so cavalier about the debt we’re bequeathing them. The one’s who do get born that is.
Food for thought.
that’s the socialist/fag agenda for the queer vote
And it was just today that Team R with Meghan’s simpering coward daddy in the lead a lot sold out the individual gay soldier.
oh my, I missed that one, Mikey
As many problems I have with McCain, that’s not what he was doing, hf.
This is an issue that should be left to the military.
nishi is our internet friend
Kate Mengele is not in my “our” under any circumstance. She has a rotted soul.
no it is about freedom
No, she’s icky. I’ll reserve my lunch table tolerance for you, the borderline icky kid what I agree with 99% of the time even though you play with your dick a lot and alienate people who’d let you taste their cupcakes with your non dick hand if you weren’t so alienatey.
#239:
No – she is not our friend. I did not give you permission to make her my friend. I do not make friends with wanna-be genocidists.
Get it?
if you’re not only among and just invite who you wanna come
you’ll miss a million miles of fun
#250 happyfeet:
The million miles of fun that the statist eugenecist genocidists have pranced down over the past 100 years is a path I would prefer not go alongside of, than you very much.
You and what cupake?
I chose my friends more wisely than you, I guess. I have a billion miles of fun with them, but people who tag along just to stir up shit make for a gazillion miles of HOW FAR IS IT TO THE NEAREST PLACE WHERE PREMEDITATED MURDER ISN’T ILLEGAL?
#239 – If you persist in making such associations you and I are going to have a problem.
I hate piling on so add a few dozen emoticons here. Nishi doesn’t bother me because we have different views. Stop saying this. It’s not true.
For instance, could it not be more clear that Ernst and I have different social views? Yet, oddly enough, we’ve had no problems with one another. Why do you think that is?
here’s a song about the folly of capitalism-fueled consumption
kinda stupid, no?
but still it’s kind of a groovy song
“that was a metaphor,” happyfeet added helpfully
Is 259 in response to 257?
Whaddya mean we haint got no problemz you fricken CHEEZHEAD!!! [grin]
Heh, I’d return fire but pawning Favre off on you was about as terrible a thing we could have done.
no 259 was a response to 258
to number 257 I would just say
[…]
I a lot think no one understands her … she utters mysteries with her spirit.
#259 happyfeet:
Screw the metaphors and the songs.
What are your principles? Where do you stand?
From part of an e-mail I sent my brother recently:
What do you actually believe in?
Where do you anchor yourself?
Where do you draw your line?
Who are you?
Are you Horatius?
Then out spoke brave Horatius, the Captain of the Gate:
“To every man upon this earth, death cometh soon or late;
And how can man die better than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers, and the temples of his Gods,
And for the tender mother who dandled him to rest,
And for the wife who nurses his baby at her breast,
And for the holy maidens who feed the eternal flame,
To save them from false Sextus, that wrought the deed of shame?
Hew down the bridge, Sir Consul, with all the speed ye may!
I, with two more to help me, will hold the foe in play.
In yon strait path, a thousand may well be stopped by three:
Now, who will stand on either hand and keep the bridge with me?’
Back to this:
Where exactly do your principles lie that you take up with one who would repeat the ghastly horrors of the last century all in the name of science?
I prefer to stand with brave Horatius (whose name I share). I prefer the flawed people who are willing to fight for the ashes of our Fathers and for our Temple of Parchment. I do not prefer those who would cast every ally over the side who does not strike true on the New! Improved! Cause of the Day.
Yeah, I’m not hip. And when the hipsters turn out an honest day’s work at anything, then I’ll perhaps consider thinking about caring what the hipster opinion is.
And if that opinion includes defeatism, nihilism, eugenicism, and genocide than the hipster has my permission to become Satan’s own loofah.
You misspelled “fiend”.
she utters mysteries with her spirit.
And cupcake siren song with her cooz.
Seriously, you need to consider how you might view her if she had alternate junk.
What is mysterious about repeating the same 5 memes over and over again?
Okay, I was confused. I figured the John Hughes lunch table was a metaphor so another level of metaphor was very meta and this made me dizzy.
Towards nishi, meh. Sorta feel like I understand her. She’s not really bringing a bunch of new arguments to the table each time. This has given me lots and lots of time to think about Avatar and demographic determinism.
She’s the basket case, played by Ally Sheedy in the film
first of all defeatism is very old and busted while Team R triumphalism is the new hotness
second of all nishi is well within the realm of reason to find the status quo a bit wanting, even if her prescriptions are not what yours or mine might be
What are your principles? Where do you stand?
Service, really. I try a lot to be of Service. It’s distressing when my little country threatens to become a thing twisted and wretched what is unworthy of a little pikachu’s service. In which case I shall have to improvise I suppose.
she utters mysteries with her spirit.
I forget – is it holy water or garlic that gets to her?
Pork.
I a lot think no one understands her … she utters mysteries with her spirit.
I don’t understand Matthew Lesko, the free money from the government guy who looks like Michael Kinsley and dresses like a gay cocktail lounge performer. Nishi’s easy to understand. And easier still to want nothing to do with.
that’s from Corinthians Mr. Mikey the one in the Bible
For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.*
Nishi utters inanities with her piehole.
#270 happy feet:
first of all defeatism is very old and busted while Team R triumphalism is the new hotness
second of all nishi is well within the realm of reason to find the status quo a bit wanting, even if her prescriptions are not what yours or mine might be
What are your principles? Where do you stand?
Service, really. I try a lot to be of Service. It’s distressing when my little country threatens to become a thing twisted and wretched what is unworthy of a little pikachu’s service. In which case I shall have to improvise I suppose.
(1) Defeatism is your near-constant call if everything doesn’t immediately go your way. I think it was you Thomas Paine was referring to with ‘summer soldiers and sunshine patroits’.
(2) nishi is in a realm that has as little to do with reason as Hummel figurines have to do with anti-tank weapons. The color of the sky in her world is plaid.
(3) You wouldn’t know service if it rose out of a cupcake and latched onto your nose. And if you weren’t such an egotist you would understand it is when your country is hurting the most is when you owe the most service. Your patriotism is what Ace has called ‘Ike Turner Patriotism’ – the bitch has it coming.
See: Satan, loofah, you.
the “other” side stones fags and woman
Fantasize about her tongue all you want, she ain’t gonna dance with your snake.
allan will smite the faggot
#275 happyfeet:
Fine one you are to quote the Bible when any Christian who dares speak up in the public is castigated.
Since you have done so I guess I can call you ‘hoochie whore cumslut failshit’.
See also: Sow, Reap.
Newrouter, I, for one, appreciate your efforts to steer us away from the happyfeet massage session.
Man, that Khrushchev guy was a drama queen, weren’t he?
fuck cupcake loser
I said I would improvise.
#285: cumslut
I know, I know bh. Just seems some things are not as seriously taken as they might should be. Or maybe that’s just me. My over-arching theories aren’t well enough grounded. Ethereal or something…
Oh, before I forget…
See? I forgot already.
baracky has got a job you can’t do
That’s in the Bible too. The Gospel of Matthew, to be precise.
evil trees? what the fuck is he on about?
I’m not the praying type happyfeet, I’m really not. But I think I’ll say a prayer for you tonight.
I think the trees might could need it more
In case I was unclear up above, Serr8d, I wasn’t knocking your views on abortion, how seriously you take it, or anything like that.
Let’s put it like this, when I’m knocking on doors next weekend, I’d feel like I was lying if I said to people that their local congressional race was going to effect abortion access in this country. But, I wouldn’t be lying if I said that taking the House could stop the crazy spending spree.
affect
evil cupcakes
fuck the queer guy
you’ll miss a million miles of fun
– I suppose, if a dump truck load of euthanized fetuses is your idea of fun.
– The really creepy aspect is the way she so glibly talks about it, almost like she’s wearing a little smile.
It’s very important to take the House, bh. To survive as a nation, we’ve got to stop the fiscal bleeding. Because this nation has a purpose, it should survive.
At one time, that purpose was to grow trees that bore good fruits, and so carry on. It’s still there, that purpose, just covered up under layers of rotten fruit.
“evil trees? ”
1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.
That bears repeating newrouter.
You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we are not bound by that same limitation?
We must act today in order to preserve tomorrow. And let there be no misunderstanding–we are going to begin to act, beginning today.
I’m pretty sure everyone here knows the Bible better than me. Which is odd because I went to church six days a week for twelve years of parochial school.
I pass the ball a lot when I play hoops though, eat everything on my plate and still think plaid skirts are very attractive.
Vic Morrow was one of the good guys.
– All this talk of evil trees and fruits is going to have some troll screaming homophobia…..
“I pass the ball a lot when I play hoops though, eat everything on my plate and still think plaid skirts are very attractive.”
I used to eat everything on my plate, then I met an Asian person that told me that was rude, the host loses face because it shows you didn’t get enough to eat.
And all those years I was worried about starving children in China.
Being good is hard!
Uh oh, Lee. I must owe a few thousand apologies.
Not in Chisum he wasn’t
He was in the Combat series though.
– I didn’t have a problem with Krauthammer’s initial reaction and analysis the day it happened. It’s that he won’t shut up about it, which isn’t helpful and sort of negates the very thing hes going on about, active support once the die is cast.
– She was down about the same against Castle when she started just three days before the primary election. she’s still got more than a month to campaign and she has some class people on her team, and a very vulnerable opponent. Maybe if the good Doctor would stop being so helpful…..
oh.
well yeah you gotta keep an eye out for those
Vic Morrow shot Billy the Kid who once was his friend.
But then Billy shot him back, so everything was okay again.
Except for Vic, because he was dead.
Combat’s before my time sdferr, but my Dad loved it.
I used to watch Rat Patrol reruns on Saturdays on WGN. I always thought that was the penultimate guys show: cars and machine guns. Only the girls were lacking.
Christopher George was a bad guy in Chisum too.
– Do I want to date myself this badly – Oh what the hell…..
– For me it was the speghetti serials at the local movie house on Saturdays……the original black and white “Rocket Man”. And of course dozens of radio serials, from Sky King and Sargent Preston of the royal mounties, to inner sanctum and the Shadow.
– Early TV was an evening affair starting with the 9pm news followed by all star wrestling from the LA Coliseum til midnight. Later it was the first variety shows like Uncle Milties 4 star theater and the hit parade, all on a 12 inch black and white Muntz.
There are evil trees out there feets. Jesus was only talking about gardening so relax.
Ernst- I watched Rat Patrol on WGN with my Dad. It does seem silly now, as nobody would take on a tank with a jeep. COMBAT still holds up most of the time. I also seem to remember watching Rollerderby on WGN. That 747 was a lot of woman!!!
<a href=http://www.militaryinfo.com/news_story.cfm?textnewsid=516.Why soldiers fight
“American soldiers in Iraq responded similarly to their ancestors about wanting to return home, but the most frequent response given for combat motivation was “fighting for my buddies,” Wong’s report said.
The report uncovered two roles for social cohesion in combat.
One role is that each soldier is responsible for group success and protecting the unit from harm. As one soldier put it, “That person means more to you than anybody. You will die if he dies. That is why I think that we protect each other in any situation. I know that if he dies, and it was my fault, it would be worse than death to me.”
The other role is it provides the confidence and assurance that someone is watching their back. In one infantryman’s words, “You have got to trust them more than your mother, your father, or girlfriend, or your wife, or anybody. It becomes almost like your guardian angel.”
There is a lesson to apply to this, if one considers it sincerely.
http://www.militaryinfo.com/news_story.cfm?textnewsid=516
Oops, week html-fu this morning.
source
– I didn’t have a problem with Krauthammer’s initial reaction and analysis the day it happened. It’s that he won’t shut up about it, which isn’t helpful and sort of negates the very thing hes going on about, active support once the die is cast.
I dunno. Krauthhammer’s comments the last few nights on the All Stars have been kinda funny.
On MOnday, he said he hopes she wins, but that’s she’s a long shot. Last night, he said something – not negative, just pointing out that Castle would have been head, Bret pointed out to direct all angry letters to Charles.
second of all nishi is well within the realm of reason to find the status quo a bit wanting, even if her prescriptions are not what yours or mine might be
There was this chap some years ago who found the status quo a bit wanting, fellow went by the name of Adolph Hitler. You may have heard of him.
Even though “his prescriptions were not what ours might be”, are we supposed to give them a fair consideration? Do his ideas merit a fair hearing? Or do we write him off as a foul person who we no longer need to listen to?
If your answers to the above are “no”, “no” and “yes”, then maybe you can explain how we should treat nishi’s genocidal thoughts any differently.
[…] â??Those who oppose Tea Party Movement would have opposed Reagan … […]