Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

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

Archives

HUGH HEWITT IS NOT THE BOSS OF ME! STILL!

But that won’t keep him from telling us who should be allowed to run for the GOP nomination and who should be, well, not:

This is why the GOP needs to rethink its debate schedule and why the RNC should take over the operation of the debates and exile Cain, Johnson and Paul as well as every other candidate without a prayer of winning. (Santorum is a long shot, but he has a realistic though small chance of winning the nomination, while the others do not.) The seriousness of the fiscal crisis requires the GOP and its candidates to act seriously, and allowing marginal candidates to eat up time and distract from the enormous problems facing the country is not serious.

To borrow a line from the late great Chuck Heston, what intoxicating vanity.

I remember Hugh Hewitt trying to convince us all that Harriet Miers was a dandy SCOTUS pick — a happy political pragmatist and darn good gal who, let’s face it, would have sold her vote to the liberals any time an identity group brought a grievance and looked to find a new “right” (and those who disagreed with his assessment? Not fit to speak, really, their not being professional pundits and lawyers) — and now this same Romney-crony is lecturing the GOP (and us) on whom it should and shouldn’t allow into the tent to vie for the party’s nomination.

Here’s an idea, Hugh: how about you let the market — in this case, GOP and independent voters, along with those voters horrified by what Obama has done since taking office — decide who they want to represent them. You know. Like, as if you actually believed in such a thing.

Or else knock it off with the freedom and individual liberty shit. Because you’re proving yourself to be every bit the out-of-touch political insider that the TEA Party rose up to knock on their arrogant asses in 2010 — and in so doing, proving yourself to be less a conservative than a political opportunist and GOP party lackey. And frankly, we don’t need you to tell us who our candidates can and cannot be — and we’ll thank you to stop trying to pare down the field artificially so that you can stick us with the next bunch of stiff-haired, milquetoast, neutered, poll-managed centrist duds that Democrats enjoy beating in November like rubber-suited gimps.

(thanks to newrouter)

70 Replies to “HUGH HEWITT IS NOT THE BOSS OF ME! STILL!”

  1. The Monster says:

    Hugh just doesn’t want Coddington and the other fellows to drum him out of the club.

  2. Joe says:

    This is why the GOP needs to rethink its debate schedule and why the RNC should take over the operation of the debates and exile Cain, Johnson and Paul as well as every other candidate without a prayer of winning. (Santorum is a long shot, but he has a realistic though small chance of winning the nomination, while the others do not.) The seriousness of the fiscal crisis requires the GOP and its candidates to act seriously, and allowing marginal candidates to eat up time and distract from the enormous problems facing the country is not serious.

    Can we exile Hugh Hewitt from the conservative punditry? I hear David Frum is lonely and needs some friends. Because there is not too much different between those two.

  3. Joe says:

    And that block quote is Hugh Hewitt, not me.

  4. LBascom says:

    I won’t be surprised if they start telling us McCain could really win this time!

  5. Bob Reed says:

    The last thing we need is the GOP, or Hewitt, telling us who we should be allowed to vote for.

    If I recall, the primary process is to decide who the people want, not some radio talk show non-hack.

  6. Bob Reed says:

    So who is Hewitt down with anway? Mittens? The Huck? Or is he trying to sell us T-Paw, in a slightly more ham-handed way than Cap’n Ed does?

  7. Darleen says:

    Jaysus, Hewitt has been doing some great charbroiling of Establishment GOPers over the last several months and now this???

    Like, WTF with bells on.

  8. Joe says:

    Hewitt is just smitten with Mittens.

    Let Mitt Romney sink or swim on his own Hugh. If you want to support him great. But thinking up BS like excluding any candidate you disagree with is nuts. The only test (if we were going to impose one on the primary process) might be a pledge not to run as a third party candidate if they do not get the nomination. No point giving Trump or Paul a platform only to have them fuck you later on when they lose the nomination.

  9. newrouter says:

    A Mormon in the White House?: 10 Things Every American Should Know about Mitt Romney [Hardcover]
    Hugh Hewitt (Author)

    link

  10. Darleen says:

    Full disclosure, but I was a Romney supporter over McCain last time around. But I think he’s moving into Bob Dole territory – great resume and doomed to fail at the polls.

  11. serr8d says:

    But Chairman Preibus should intervene…

    WHO?????!!!!??

    I’m unenthralled with this character. That’s not even a word, but it matches his goofy name, so there’s that.

  12. newrouter says:

    i could see being a romney supporter in 2008. but, after obamacare was passed and mittens not having any regrets about romneycare, i can’t see him as a “serious” candidate.

  13. newrouter says:

    “But Chairman Preibus should intervene”

    says alot about hughhewit that he calls for a top down solution to his problem.

  14. Darleen says:

    WSJ is noticing Mr. Cain.

  15. Garym says:

    Mittens didn’t show up, Palin didn’t show, up Huckleberry didn’t show up, Daniels …etc. That is an unbelievably stupid statement from Hewitt. The more people to debate the better it will be for us to choose someone we like. Stop being such a blatant Mittens supporter Hugh, in my eyes he doesn’t have much of a chance of winning thanks to Romneycare.

  16. Crawford says:

    Well, we all know what Hewitt’s problem with Cain is…

    Cain has a radio show. He’s a competitor.

    What did you think I was going to say?

  17. Crawford says:

    We all know the nominee is going to be either Romney or T-Paw. It’s “their turn”, after all. Never mind that Romney is the exact opposite of who should be leading the charge against Obamacare, and that T-Paw is liberal enough to get elected in Minnesota.

  18. newrouter says:

    via erick erikson’s radio show(used to be herman cain’s)

    herman cain to announce his candidacy for president on may 21, 2011 12:00 pm @ atlanta’s centennial park

  19. newrouter says:

    cain also said this(paraphrase): dc ain’t changing cain cain changing dc

  20. zino3 says:

    Thank you, Hugh Hewitt. I really need your input to make up my mind. ASSHAT!

    Cain is the man, but the Obama media will scorch him.

    OMG! He’s a lack person! Do not stray from the reservation, BOY. “Funging white zaaZANigger!

    We are fudged. The left has taken our schools and our children. Just try talking to your child, and it will scare the crap out of you.

    And McGeehe – I am passionate – not filled with Popov.

    Sometimes I get really pissed off, and go truly insane. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZI have been sober and clean sincer 1996

    You know what? It’s really not your business, anyway.

    Having gotten this out of the way,I understand your need t be the alpha male. You are welcome tO the title

    And I can’t spell to save my life. Maybe you could have a less “Obama profile?”

    My shit doesn’t stink, either.

  21. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    And…we’re back to useful idiots citing creases in pants as reason for presidential stature.

    Mr. Hewitt. With all respect. Do fuck off, sir.

    I’m learning to never place faith in the GOP (stop laughing).

    As Mal Reynolds said, “That’s a long wait for a train don’t come”.

    I get it now. No balls allowed for the GOP in DC. Elections/ politics/ golf/ tennis/ squash/ scrotum…

    …NO BALLS! NEIN!!!

    And as for Cain?

    Liberals: “Wonder Twin powers activate! Form of: Clarence Thomas smear! (side power: ignore abject racism and obvious hypocrisy, crucify black man that employed 20,000 + and is dark enough to make Obama look white).”

    While I was always a Mr. Gattis fan after little league games, please stay in Mr. Cain.

    ‘Cause this is gonna be fun.

  22. Darleen says:

    It’s “their turn”, after all.

    OH GOD … if Bob Dole wasn’t enough of a lesson, what about McCain???

  23. Joe says:

    Hugh Hewitt’s brain is huge I tell you. Huge!

    And it is dangerously swelling inside his skull.

    He has Romney Fever. Anyone who threatens Romney is bad.

  24. newrouter says:

    The seriousness of the fiscal crisis requires the GOP and its candidates to act seriously, and allowing marginal candidates to eat up time and distract from the enormous problems facing the country is not serious.

    i agree hughhewitt: romney, daniels, gingrich and pawlenty are marginal candidates eating up too much time.

  25. Joe says:

    Hugh Hewitt blog does not allow comments. His blog used to. Townhall wanted comments. But Hewitt argued no comments for his stuff. I wonder why?

    Probably the same reason Podhoretz got rid of comments at Commentary. But they did not change the name to just Ary.

  26. guinsPen says:

    I blame whomever mentioned pomegranate martinis.

  27. guinsPen says:

    “Agree with it or disagree with it, COMMENTARY cannot be ignored. To read it is to take part in the great American discussion.”

    Read. Shut up. Partake.

  28. McGehee says:

    And McGeehe – I am passionate – not filled with Popov.

    Sometimes I get really pissed off, and go truly insane. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZI have been sober and clean sincer 1996

    You know what? It’s really not your business, anyway.

    I’m convinced.

  29. bh says:

    Let’s say, just for the argument, that Hewitt is actually your boss. I’ve tried running vinegar through the coffee maker. I buried that hexed toad.

    I’m running out of ideas.

    This can’t end well.

  30. Joe says:

    Hugh Hewitt has stacks of that Romney book in his garage and just needs a long primary season to move them.

  31. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Also worth mentioning: There is no GOP to speak of. There’s a bunch of fundraisers, coordinators, facilitators etc. with a D.C. building and expense accounts who call themselves the GOP. And then there are the 50 state organizations, such as they are.

  32. newrouter says:

    down memory lane at “contentions”

    ContentionsUno McCainJennifer Rubin 02.17.2008 – 5:00 PM
    I am an unrestrained dog lover and never miss a Westminster Dog Show. This got me thinking that John McCain is the Uno of the 2008 presidential race — not fancy, not elegant and certainly not emotionally aloof, but down to earth and entirely comfortable in his own coat, er, skin. He does occasionally howl at the wrong time, but you could live with him comfortably for 8 years. There are more elegant choices and, goodness knows, there are tougher candidates (you can figure out who is who), but there is something endearing about him. I agree with Michael Kinsley that his nomination might be the ultimate political dirty trick, and the GOP may have found a crowd pleaser. Well, at least he was best in group.

    link

  33. newrouter says:

    funny that the “opinion leaders” of 2008 look like idiots today.

  34. Joe says:

    Osama did not get 72 virgins.

    But Obama did have 72 versions of what happened to him.

    Sorry, just had to break the who Hewitt mood.

  35. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    I blame whomever mentioned pomegranate martinis.

    I’m gonna make a Food Network watermelon/ cucumber margarita and even things out with that martini… or…possibly trigger a nuclear explosion.

    You might wanna stand back.

  36. guinsPen says:

    Agree with it or disagree with it, whatever that guy on the train was eating tonight could not be ignored.

    Vinegar soaked toads, perhaps.

  37. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    I’ve tried running vinegar through the coffee maker…

    And I’ve peed in one.

    Can I shoulder up to you and announce to the office folk that we were both trying to make some kinda point?

    It’s cool if you say no.

  38. newrouter says:

    so from above kinsley says:

    Only a couple of years ago, there were noises that McCain might admit he was much too nice to be a Republican and might run for President as an independent–or even as a Democrat. Democrats swooned and said they would vote for McCain because he was “honest.” McCain is perceived as authentic, which is a deeper form of honesty than mere truth-telling. He says he’s antiabortion? Oh, he doesn’t mean that.

    link

  39. bh says:

    There is no GOP to speak of. […] And then there are the 50 state organizations, such as they are.

    My change.

    That’s something to think about. Take out five or six of those 50 and you have a national GOP. Doomed to roam the desert? Nah, probably not. Able to pull in Pennsylvania, a couple of the Midwestern states and Florida?

    Yeah… actually.. I think so.

  40. Kevin says:

    Hugh gave Harriet Miers the thumbs up for the Supreme Court. I haven’t listened to him since.

  41. newrouter says:

    john fund on hannity: “we need mitch daniels”!!11!1

  42. bh says:

    Uhhh, joke-makers, with the making of jokes and all that?

    Stop it. You’re not funny. We all worship that gitterdun dude.

    I’m tired of reminding y’all.

  43. newrouter says:

    i don’t think top down is going to work this time

  44. bh says:

    Not pitching that as top down, nr.

    I’m talking about allowing currently functional entities to carry on while finally ignoring that which we’ll never attain.

    Actually, yeah, that’s sorta top down. But, it’s a top down directive to kill the Buddha. So… not really.

  45. Bob Reed says:

    Wasn’t gitterdun a Geman general? Wo ist generelle Gitterdun? Finden sie ihn!

    Or a charachter from a Wagner opera? Die Gitterdun

  46. Bob Reed says:

    bh,
    I didn’t understand a word of what you wrote in #44.

    Are you talking about Hewitt? Fund? Or the punditocracy in general?

  47. newrouter says:

    to bh

    i wasn’t remarking on what you said, more hughhewitt and jenrubin mind meld; also in wi news:

    Some unions would drop official status instead of recertifying
    By Jason Stein of the Journal Sentinel May 6, 2011 5:12 p.m.

  48. bh says:

    All of it really, Bob. Killing the Buddha is shorthand for shedding our useless respect for useless tradition.

  49. Joe says:

    Hewitt’s post is like a martini. Take a lump of fresh dog shit and put it in a glass, pour in some cheap warm vodka or gin, shake and serve. How’s that drink?

  50. Bob Reed says:

    Amen.

    I’m hoping that for a change GOP voters will choose the candidate, with the exception of a couple of copperheaded open primary states.

    I’m really confident that the usual movers and shakers won’t be doing very much of either this time.

    Especially with Herman Cain drawing the tea-party types. Except for the assimilated Ronulans.

  51. newrouter says:

    my prob with hughhewitt is that his whole legal/financial career is attached to the endangered species act and other moonbat laws. yo conflict of benjamins.

  52. bh says:

    Amen to your amen, Bob.

    I read the Contentions from Commentary over the debate and I discovered something.

    There is no reason to care about their opinions. They’re not nuanced or insightful. They’re just snarky. That’s not their implicit unique selling proposition, though, is it? I like snarky. Yet, I don’t like them.

    I expect them to deliver some analysis.

    Everywhere we look now we find people throwing their legacy into the gutter. And, we’re to respect them for it? Because they can do the low level sarcasm we might find in the TV Guide?

    Really?

    No. I reject that. They’re lazy. They’re unnecessarily parochial. They’re fading right before our eyes.

  53. Darleen says:

    uh newrouter, HH defends against the whackadoodle enviros

  54. newrouter says:

    “uh newrouter, HH defends against the whackadoodle enviros”

    so he doesn’t make money from that? please point to the show where hughhewitt says “repeal these laws”.

  55. newrouter says:

    “uh newrouter, HH defends against the whackadoodle enviros”

    another wack at this:

    this country should be repeal all federal environmental laws from 2011 – 1970. at this point let the states take care of the conditions in their state. we don’t need dc anymore.

  56. geoffb says:

    Everywhere we look now we find people throwing their legacy into the gutter.

    I’ve seen this a lot over the years, Sandy Berger, Sam Dash, John Glenn and many more during the Clinton/Whitewater/Monica situation, Dan Rather and the memos. Always thought it was a Left thing but now believe it to be more a ruling class one.

  57. newrouter says:

    i see on greta’s show tonite that the rev. graham is talking about the need of food in n. korea. rev. graham: did you ask the communists at the may day rally in la about this prob.?

  58. newrouter says:

    also as a cain, bachmann,palin,santorum fan:
    this is what democracy looks like!!11!!

  59. Darleen says:

    please point to the show where hughhewitt says “repeal these laws”.

    oh for crissakes … IIRC he’s had Walter Olson on (overlawyered) and they both are on record against these laws

    why not criticize HH for what he actually does instead of making up shit?

  60. dicentra says:

    Hugh really has spent a lot of time going full-on thermonuclear on whichever hapless GOP critter he could get on his show–and this after being fairly confident that the GOP had learned its lesson–but alas, it appears that Hugh is the one who hasn’t learned. He’s still relying on conventional wisdom to suss out who’s “viable” and who ain’t.

    In all fairness, Hugh hasn’t really beat the drum for Romney much since 2008. I haven’t heard him mention his Romney book for a loooooong time, and although he’s had Romney on for a few interviews, he also does T-Paw and other plenty as well.

    Also, Hugh spends a LOT of air time railing against the enviros and their economy-killing regs.

    But if we’re going to assert that Hewitt is more GOP than conservative, and that he needs to change his taste in candidates… well, I can get on board with that.

    Cain/West. Wouldn’t THAT make progg head explode?

  61. George Orwell says:

    the RNC should take over the operation of the debates and exile Cain, Johnson and Paul as well as every other candidate without a prayer of winning. (Santorum is a long shot, but he has a realistic though small chance of winning the nomination, while the others do not.)

    Wait… so Hugh, who has been surprisingly intolerant of conventional Republican weakness following their November 2010 victory, who criticized their swift and unimpressive compromise on taxes last December and has been tough on their fecklessness in the current budget battles, now speaks of exile? Exile for “unrealistic” candidates like Cain, but he thinks Santorum has a “realistic” chance?

    The RNC hasn’t exactly covered itself with glory of late. It took a glacier’s age to get rid of Michael Steele. Now he wants them to “take over?”

    The seriousness of the fiscal crisis requires the GOP and its candidates to act seriously,

    So perhaps Hewitt can come up with a serious response for his boyfriend Romney’s bizarre reluctance to repudiate Romneycare. Perhaps he can come up with a serious defense for his refusal to disavow socialized medicine, not the one Hugh himself has peddled with ridiculous irrelevant assertion. Hewitt dismisses the Romneycare debacle with the politically pedantic, unrealistic assertion that Romneycare is okay because it is a state program and not federal.

    Well, I guess we should all celebrate socialized medicine so long as it comes from our individual states’ capitols rather than DC. Please, O Hugh of Divine Realism, tell us how your argument sways someone who thinks socialized medicine is a monstrously fucking bad idea, whether from DC or Sacramento or Albany or Boston or East Assrape, Pakistan? Please explain how someone like you or Romney who thinks socialized medicine is just dandy when it emanates from Boston can convince the rest of us that it automagically becomes an abomination just because it crosses artificial state boundaries? “Oh, it’s unconstitutional.” Uh, it’s already the law of the land. Perhaps it will remain constitutional, if Obama gets enough judges to say so. But so what if Hugh says it’s unconstitutional? For someone who thinks “realism” is his watchword, he is startlingly ignorant of the fact that lots of voters won’t plain fucking care if issue X is constitutional, they just care if it is a good or bad idea. Especially when it affects the delivery of our medicine. The constitution has been folded sixteen ways to seventeen thousand sunset over the last hundred years; it is mere foolery to imagine that significant opinion will be swayed over this pedantry.

    I can hear it now. Obama: “My opponent Romney says his government guarantees of medical coverage are great in his state, but he thinks you shouldn’t have your own if your state refuses to get on the ball and look after its people. He says ‘It’s unconstitutional.’ I guess he just thinks his people are better than you and deserve protections he would deny the nation. For a slick businessman, he sure loves to hide behind legalisms.”

  62. SDN says:

    he is startlingly ignorant of the fact that lots of voters won’t plain fucking care if issue X is constitutional, they just care if it is a good or bad idea.

    And that right there is the root of the problem. Because to a huge number of voters, “good idea” = “it makes me feel good about myself”.

  63. JoanOfArgghh says:

    More free speech for the Right! I’ve been watching the fearful and those with a paycheck to defend (same people) start to blanche at the thought of an “outsider” or “third party” candidate. Well the newly self-appointed elite of the punditsphere are just as disagreeable in their quest to manipulate the outcome as are the GOP good ol’ boys.

    More free speech.

    The debate was the first I’ve seen of T-Paw ever, after seeing his name touted everywhere. I was immediately and completely turned off by his political smarm. Just, ick.

  64. newrouter says:

    “why not criticize HH for what he actually does instead of making up shit?”

    you’re allowed to do that to cleve. browns fans

  65. geoffb says:

    OT:

    For anyone who has read the Neal Stephenson novel “The Diamond Age: Or A Young Ladies Illustrated Primerthis development is something already written about.

  66. newrouter says:

    I don’t believe in a market selecting nominees –political parties ought to do that. And I certainly don’t believe in independent voters selecting Republican nominees, and given that the independents of New Hampshire gave us Senator McCain in 2008, I think the case why we don’t want that is pretty clear.

    Nominations are bestowed by parties operating under rules and governed by committees, and parties that want to win important elections don’t waste time and money and especially argument space on marginal candidates like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, Alan Keyes or Dennis Kucinich or Tom Tancredo. That which gets rewarded gets repeated, and by rewarding two-percenters (those who score there or lower in national opinion polls) or extreme ideologues like Paul, we encourage more and more each year. They bring nothing to the stage except diversions of attention and false divisions exploited by a hostile media.

    There is an uphill political battle to be won, a crucial, incredibly important battle. The GOP should not have to strap a bunch of can’t-wins on the party’s back as it climbs that hill for the benefit of the MSM or the very small number of enthusiasts who urge that the market decide what the market has already decided –that their guy cannot win.

    So, Jeff, what is the rule for limiting access to the stage? There has to be a “barrier to entry” or is it come one, come all? Yeah, that’ll beat the president.

    link

  67. mojo says:

    “Sorry, Invertebrates only. Nothing with a back-bone can get in.”

  68. […] on his ukase, and told to let the political market have its choices, Hewitt doubles […]

  69. Pablo says:

    Nominations are bestowed by parties operating under rules and governed by committees, and parties that want to win important elections don’t waste time and money and especially argument space on marginal candidates like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, Alan Keyes or Dennis Kucinich or Tom Tancredo.

    All this time I thought that voters nominated candidates. You learn something new every day.

Comments are closed.