November 8, 2012

“No time for collaboration”

ALG’s Bill Wilson gets onboard the obstruction express!

[...]  Under normal circumstances, a re-elected President can direct the debate.  He has set out an agenda or has done so well in the first term that the country simply wants “more of the same.”  Nobody – and I mean nobody – wants four more years of the same inane, vapid socialism of Obama’s first term.  But, if Obama cannot determine the course we take, who does?

That answer is yet to be decided.  The reason the issue is in doubt is because we do not yet know what the Republicans in Congress will do.  They have a very real choice.  The Republicans can surrender to Obama, collaborate with his regime and institutionalize his radical, leftist agenda.

Or, they can fight; fight to the last man standing, refusing to concede an inch to an alien ideology that at its core is opposed to the founding principles and ethic of the nation.

What will the GOP in Congress be; Free and defiant, standing up for principle and fighting Obama and his cronies.  Or, will they cower at the sight of Obama’s meager margin and do his dirty work for him?

Wait, are these rhetorical questions?  I mean, it’s John Frickin’ Boehner.  He was ready to surrender before anyone told him there was a fight brewing.  And Cantor is no better.  Without a change in House leadership, we’ll see nothing but deals — and we’ll be told it could have been worse, and we don’t want to look like the party of obstructionists with the 2014 elections approaching, because the American people crave compromise.  And more such nonsense.

There are plenty of those inside the GOP who will want to cut and run.  Colin Powell, Ray LaHood, a host of northeast liberals, and more than a few in positions of power inside the House all embrace collaboration.  Seeing nothing worth fighting for, they are all too ready to peddle themselves to the highest bidder.

And on the surface, for all too many GOP officials, such a course may appear the easier, softer way.  After all, taking such a path will be sure to get rave reviews from the propaganda organs of the establishment-Left.  They will be invited to all the right parties and be hailed as having “grown” and being a “good Republican.”  Future employment opportunities will look very bright.

But there is another side to this.  To millions of conservative, free-market advocates and the core of the Republican Party they will be reviled and hated.  For these grassroots activists, such actions by their representatives in Congress or in Governors’ mansions will be viewed as outright treason.  Knowing that all the House of Representatives has to do is refuse to fund Obama’s monster government and the whole thing stops will mean that anything less is sure to be met with intense anger and resistance.

How this existential debate inside the GOP plays out will decide the next four years.  While it would have been better to have an adult partner in the White House instead of the childish, churlish Obama, it is of really little consequence.  The real battle for the future of America is inside the Republican caucuses.

I hate to say this, but being reviled and hated by Hobbits is a badge of honor for the establishment GOP ruling elite.  They prefer a permanent political class, and these small government types and untrained, unpolished intruders just make their whole collegial club look bad.

Honestly, I’m not sure what leverage we have to hold Boehner’s feet to the fire. Short of putting up a challenger for speaker who garners significant enough support that, win or lose, Boehner gets the message.

Also? It wouldn’t hurt to threaten to primary this guy — and all those like him.  If we’re going to lose the country, I’d rather it be the Democrats who bring it down, not mewling GOP party men who are consistently on their knees.

Posted by Jeff G. @ 11:34am
106 comments | Trackback

Comments (106)

  1. - Or they could decide they really want the Senate in 2014 and make the Democrats own this economy like a broken pot at Pier 1.

    - The T-party may have gagged on the GOP presidential candidate, just enough to push Jug ears barely across the line, but 2010 can certainly be repeated if the Reps play it right, and by a landslide.

    - Imagine majority’s in both houses and the future doesn’t seem so grim.

  2. we don’t even have a fire really Boehner already qualifies for his sweet sweet government pension

  3. I also laugh at the notion of Boehner finding any testicular fortitude, but let’s suppose he does. Let’s suppose he and the other republicans in the house decide to fight Obama every inch. So what? Remember the first debt ceiling fight? Some folks sent up the trial balloon about it being a national emergency and how the president had the power to raise the debt ceiling all by himself. Call it an EO, without actually signing anything. What do you think he’ll do now? He ain’t running for anymore elections. Sure, he could be impeached but what are the odds of that actually working? The Senators would just see it as cutting into their valuable time peddling graft.

    This guy did a whole lot of illegal crap during his first term, starting real early with the auto bailout. He had cover from the legacy media (boy how I wish all those articles about how they are on their way out were true), but now he doesn’t even need that.

  4. Tea Party? Gagged? WTF?

    Romney’s crew decided NOT to get nasty with the criminal conspiracy currently ruining our country, didn’t want to be labeled “racist”, or “divisive”, or “poor sportsmen” or whatever.

    “PLEASE don’t call me bad names.” Yeah, geniuses, that’ll work.

    Fuck that shit. GET nasty. But you’ll need to forcibly eject the Usual Suspects first. Bawlin’ Boehner, Eric “Mr. Reasonable” Cantor, etc. etc.

    Vote some goddamn Tea Party candidates IN.

  5. There’s a temptation to just let Obama and Reid have anything they want on the taxes/financial side. That way America can see what they just bought. Obama wouldn’t be able to run against an obstructionist Congress. We could just say, “Hey, we gave you everything you wanted” which is pretty much what led to the rout in 2010. People have short memories. They may need remindin’.

  6. “If you give up, you neither win nor live. That’s just the way things are.”
    – The Rebel Outlaw Josey Wales

  7. In his opening monologue last night, Mark Levin came out in favor of a TEA Party type challenging Cryin’ John Boehner for the Speakership — even if it had to be someone from outside the House [recall: anyone can be elected Speaker].

    So this is a good start to a campaign to challenge him.

    For over a year, I’ve been advocating that Michele Bachmann and Allen West join together and challenge Boehner and Cantor.

    Maybe now, considering what has happened, we can get others like Mr. Levin on board and make a real campaign of it.

    STAGE THE COUP!

    [I've got a WP blog address already reserved.]

  8. Sears and OCBill –

    Taken together, you’re both right. Obama will do it anyway. So the consequences will be the consequences. If Republicans can show they tried to stop it rather than giving Obama what he wanted as the rope by which to hang himself, they are in a better position to make the case that there’s a reason we have checks and balances, and separation of powers, and why they were doing their duty in trying to block disastrous policies, the effects of which you are all now experiencing.

    That not only makes for a great election pitch, but it also returns the narrative to the Constitution and why we have it and need to have it.

  9. I think you are definitely on to something with your last line.
    The problem (one of them, anyway) we face is that the conservative movement is inextricably linked with the GOP brand.
    Furthermore, the GOP brand is linked with the social and economic dysfunction created by the left, for many reasons, but strictly in political terms: the default reporting of any misery in which the government cannot escape blame, even with the vast array of “low information voters” is that it is symptomatic of the “political system” (Democrats and Republicans). Unless, of course Republicans are visibly in charge – in which case it is a result of Republican philosophy. That is to say, the destruction of inner cities that for generations voted for urban Democrats, is actually the result of a vague system, in which the Republicans must own up to as much as the Democrats – excepting the professional left and their useful idiots who will have their biases against capitalism reinforced – because the Republicans are the second half of a two party system.

    So, to answer a different, though not unrelated question; why on earth did California vote to empower Democrats with a 2/3′s majority in both houses (thereby giving them the power to tax at will), further bleed the productive class, and reinforce the public union supremacy? Answer, because it fully expects to be bailed out at the federal level. Even after it declares bankruptcy, the unions will give no quarter when it comes to their guaranteed benefits – and the media won’t call them on it either.

    This situation creates an opportunity that I hope both the conservative movement and the Republican party will seize: disband the Republican party in California. Do it publicly, do it loudly, and do it rudely. Basically tell anyone who would listen that we don’t want to be associated when this s*** comes down. The starkness of the move will get everyone’s attention, believe me. Besides, the few conservatives left in the state (mostly in the hinterlands) will be better off associated with a third party, new party, independently, whatever. The Republican party in California is only a rump of infrastructure, anyway.

    The bankruptcy of California is coming full steam ahead, and it will be the political equivalent of a neutron bomb. Even Democrats in other states dislike Californians – as those (productive citizens) who have been fleeing are finding out first-hand. To force Democrats to own the problem, you need to be as far away from it as possible, otherwise morons in other states will be told that it was a problem of the two party system and the idea that one party is more to blame is partisan opportunism – and thus “politics as usual.”

    Not that I am young enough or naive enough to think the Republican party has the gonads or the foresight to do it or anything. Just saying that it is easier to do than a fantasy right wing march through the institutions. Clock has almost struck midnight. Woulda, shoulda, coulda.

  10. Alan Simpson gave the game away a couple years back in a press conference over the Debt Commission. When asked what will happen if we don’t address the looming crisis his reply was (as near as I can remember) “you all will be picking grit with the chickens.” (emphasis added.)

    Note how he did not include himself in that formulation?

    The ruling class will continue can kicking, if only to ensure their own nests are adequately feathered.

    It is as inevitable as inflation.

  11. jrd –

    I like the idea. But I don’t think a classically liberal march through the institutions is as fantastical as do you. I believe — truly — that with the slaying of certain linguistic assumptions, we can essentially force a course change in epistemology, and this will take away the left’s greatest weapon: its hold on our language.

    It’s difficult to indoctrinate those who have been trained to resist it by way of a coherent notion of how language works.

  12. We can start by redefining “compromise” to mean “I want to cut government spending by half, but I’ll agree to cut it by only a quarter.”

  13. Not that I set out to defend Simpson (since I generally agree he stands with the status quo ante-ists) but there does remain an aspect of the sense of choice underlying his response. That is, gisting: “if you choose the worse option [voters!], then you’re going to reap the worse circumstances in your own lives”. And hearing the talk today of the shrunken electoral turnout, I’m beginning to wonder just how far “the worse” has been chosen for its own sake.

  14. Jeff – i agree completely in concept (which is why I’ve been a big fan of your site), however, consider what is involved.
    Perhaps this is pessimism due to the proximity of the election, but where on earth do we begin? Realistically?

    The school’s are untouchable. School boards (designed to be limited to localized entry points) are rubber stamps for curricula that comes down the pike from the state level – which rubber stamps what the edu-crats put forth, and the process is well on its way to becoming nationalized, indeed, internationalized. The swamp of credentialization that a parent needs to go through just to be taken seriously is immense. My children are home-schooled and many more families are opting for that, but believe me, the economics required to do it is only becoming tougher.

    As for higher education, the guardians are extremely ruthless and efficient. Plus they will recognize the play before it is able to gain a foothold. The vast majority of college students are apathetic anyway. Are we supposed to start a revolution within the engineering / physics departments (increasingly made up of foreigners beside)?

    Any entry into pop-culture must occur under the shadow of metaphor and analogy – and let’s face it, most consumers are to dim to make the connection.

    We could take all of that Super PAC money and invest in another television station or make-work movie studio, but then we would be lost in the segmented media environment, and would probably be laughed off the reservation by trained “cynics” who serve as gatekeepers. And who are the artists we would invest in? Kirk Cameron? The people who made the laughable (production value-wise) Atlas Shrug movies? A big part of the reason the entertainment industry is locked out is that is contains many leftists who are experts at the craft.

    Through families? Marriage and the relationship between sexes have been redefined to the point that it is too uncomfortable to even think about.

    You couldn’t rely on the churches (outside of salvation) because their space is being systematically destroyed – and those that will survive, survived against much longer odds and for about a thousand years before the country was even conceived. In other words, if it comes to the point where the church (proper) becomes a major cultural player again, we are playing on completely different turf. There will always be the church – individual liberty and constitutional republics are much. much, more fragile.

    I am a firm believer that a huge problem is that so much of our message is lumped in with political static (and betrayed by lack of credibility – one can only promise to shrink the government for so long and not deliver) and therefore the only rational and effective way to campaign is to be as controversial as possible. However, even if successful, we are still playing a hand that is dealt. Perhaps that is how we begin to change the terms – a full frontal attack on shibboleths such as white guilt and feminism without beating around the bush…

  15. “The school’s are untouchable.”

    Must be for a reason. So that’s where to start. The sanctum sanctorum, so to speak. Could be, in fact, the only place to start.

  16. We’re working on something, jrd. Can’t get much into it right now, but we hope to go around the guardians you mention. The nice thing about their having become entrenched and their incoherent ideas systematized and institutionalized is that it will be liberating to be able to affect the anti-establishment stance.

    We’re the new counter-culture. And as such, we aim to be honest and mirthful in our deconstruction of the post structuralists and antifoundationalists. Much like you suggest. In your face but with an air of amusement and a bit of sadness for the poor dumb souls.

    And if we’re effectively able to show that what’s being taught now is not only wrong but is actually a recipe for being controlled — and we can show how that works — it might take on a life of its own over time.

    You have to start somewhere.

    As for the pop-culture bit. You’re right. I still plan on writing a novella that, in a humorous way, illustrates the utter inanity of what we’ve come to accept with respect to language and interpretation, but I’m not sure how many people would bother reading it, much less get the takeaway.

  17. I nominate Mark Levin as Speaker of the House and John Bolton as the whip.

    Who’s with me?

  18. Seconded.

  19. I just copied your post and sent it to Harry Reid, lest he forget why filibuster rules changes are a good idea. I raise my drink in hopes that Obama end-runs around the House every chance he gets.

  20. Forward!

  21. Help me out here, slippery — how does a post about the fecklessness of a House leader have anything to do with filibuster rules in the Senate?

  22. Because the whole post is about ensuring that there is no compromise. No negotiation. No budging.

    To me then, the only choice is simply to cut Republicans out of the loop as much as possible. House and Senate.

  23. We’re the new counter-culture.

    The trick is that when the Left took over the institutions 50 years ago, they crept in while the old guard were sleeping, or at least not paying attention. We counter-revolutionaries are going up against a group who know exactly how important the battle is. Granted, the vast majority of their herds have no clue, but the shapers aren’t going to let us supplant them without a fight.

    We do have one big advantage, though — we have a cause worth fighting for, and we need not hide it behind a bunch of lofty-sounding feel-good lies. We’re like the ruggedly handsome, well-dressed man at the end of the bar — we don’t need to lie about our emotional availability or our income or our really great screenplay, nor beg for a pity fuck.

  24. Ah, thanks for that, slippy. Nice to know that you’re among those who’d shred our founding documents just to gain yourself a little temporary power to control your countrymen.

    Emphasis on the temporary.

  25. So remind me again, what is it that Harry Reid and Barak Obama are going to give in exchange for Republican support for tax hikes?

    Or is compromise newspeak for you take your whipping and like it?

  26. It wouldn’t hurt to threaten to primary this guy — and all those like him.

    FTFY. There’s no threatening to be done here. Do it. The orange man must go. Full stop.

  27. It’s kinda refreshing to see the Fascist Liberals step up to own their beliefs for a change. One Family, One nation, One people — by any means necessary.

  28. is there straw man at the bottom of the slippery slope?

  29. To me then, the only choice is simply to cut Republicans out of the loop as much as possible. House and Senate.

    You mean like the first two years of Obama’s first term?

  30. I just copied your post and sent it to Harry Reid, lest he forget why filibuster rules changes are a good idea. I raise my drink in hopes that Obama end-runs around the House every chance he gets.

    I’m sure he’s very interested in what you have to say.

    “Slipperyslope? Didn’t I already fuck him and leave him cab fare?”

    You’re a useful idiot. The fascists who actually can affect a power grab hold mites like you in contempt.

  31. ‘VOTE WAS ASTRONOMICAL FOR OBAMA IN SOME PHILADELPHIA WARDS.’ You don’t say: “In 13 Philadelphia wards, Obama received 99 percent of the vote or more.”

    The “or more,” is a nice touch. Fortunately, the Philadelphia Inquirer assures us that there is absolutely no – and I mean no, n.o. – reason to worry about voter fraud. I know I feel relieved.

    link

  32. Bill Ayers points the way.

  33. You mean the first two years where Obama worked with Republicans to make sure changes they requested were in bills, and then they voted against the bills anyways, and then they bragged about the shit they got into the bill that they voted against? Yeah, those guys. Fuck’em.

    Ernst – I think the founding fathers may have anticipated that the branches of government would work together in good faith, but the second you take negotiation off the table (as Jeff et. al. demand), that premise is gone.

  34. ” I think the founding fathers may have anticipated that the branches of government would work together in good faith, but the second you take negotiation off the table (as Jeff et. al. demand), that premise is gone.”

    Did you intend to show your ass, or was it merely an accident?

  35. The Democrats showed us their good faith when Reagan was in office. They promised to cut spending in exchange for a tax increase. They promised to increase border enforcement in exchange for the amnesty. They did neither.

    So, please, go on about good faith behavior. Maybe if you talk about it enough you’ll convince yourself that the Democrats and the President act in good faith even though all the evidence points to them being unscrupulous liars.

  36. You mean the first two years where Obama worked with Republicans to make sure changes they requested were in bills

    delusional revisionism

  37. Our system was designed to not get things done.

    Maybe we should concentrate on using it as intended.

    Also, Harry Reid, you may remember –it was mentioned around here– made a point of stating that he wouldn’t work with Romney were he to be elected President.

    Nice show of good faith before he even knew who else would be at the table with him, wouldn’t you say?

  38. In any event, I hope he does go ahead and nuke the filibuster.

    We’ll thank him for it some day.

  39. So if you want the Republicans to simply make uncompromising demands – why should Obama bother with them? What’s the point?

  40. Adding to Ernst’s comment, our government was designed with built in gridlock in order to avoid a tyranny.

    Obviously, slippery is okay with a King, Dictator, or whatever. He’s okay with Obama going around Congress in order to “get things done.”

    But slippery doesn’t acknowledge that that’s tyranny. The mind boggles at the stupidity.

  41. “What’s the point?”

    You mean, what’s the point of a Constitutionally prescribed government? That is, rather than the dictatorship you advocate?

  42. So if you want the Republicans to simply make uncompromising demands – why should Obama bother with them?

    Because, stupid, that is the way our government was designed. It was built that way on purpose.

    By the way, why hasn’t Harry Reid and the Senate passed a budget? So, who, again, is abusing the power of government? I do believe the House and voted on and passed budgets, but Harry won’t allow the budgets to be voted on.

  43. Look: Slippery HAS to be right and we have to be wrong. Everyone knows no one has ever experienced unintended consequences before, ain’t that right more or less ever revolution except for America? French Revolution, I’m lookin’ at you!

    Besides.

    Free candy! You guys. FREE. CANDY.

  44. William, um, no according to NHSUSA, candy is now proscribed, because of the health risks. In fact, if you’ve even so much as looked at a Pixie Stick in the last 10 years, treatment will be denied.

    Free rice cakes for all (appropriately labeled as to whether or not they contain any genetically modified grains, of course)

  45. Vote some goddamn Tea Party candidates IN.

    I’m a fan of the Karl Denninger line: “Stop the looting. Start prosecuting.”

    Make it a point to not only vote ‘em out office, but to file charges afterward.

  46. Ugh, right, right.

    Free Rice Cakes, everybody! Just vote Democrat and do 10 jumping jacks for Uncle Sam!

    God bless America, home of the fee. Free! Sorry, sorry. What did I say?

  47. You mean the first two years where Obama worked with Republicans to make sure changes they requested were in bills

    And yet those obstructionist Republicans, taking advantage of Obama’s good will, wouldn’t give a single vote to ObamaCare — and this after all those changes they demanded!

    The bastards.

  48. Ernst – I think the founding fathers may have anticipated that the branches of government would work together in good faith, but the second you take negotiation off the table (as Jeff et. al. demand), that premise is gone.

    See, there’s your problem: you begin with “I think” and then you show immediately thereafter that your thoughts are based on assumptions that are flatly false. Not only that, but the evidence for such is the entire history of our founding. Our government was intentionally designed to limit the power of the federal government and to prevent tyranny. The revolution was fought against a central power.

    I’m beginning to think I could support a poll tax.

  49. Everyone knows that the Founding Fathers believed in government run as Federally as possible. Why, imagine if Washington was run from across the Atlantic ocean. Then they’d really be able to answer our needs!

    After all, everyone knows the more power you have, the better your choices.

  50. Obama won by 2%. So, give him 2% of what he wants.

  51. I’m beginning to think I could support a poll tax.

    RAAAAACIST!!

    Believe me, that won’t be getting old for a while. Four years or so, I think.

  52. You can tax anything though. Robert’s said so. You can even tax people’s taxes if you want to.

  53. I’d support a “You there, boy. What day is it!” tax.

    Only rich misers say that, I think.

  54. Jeff – If the effort you are referring to is systematic and visible, then I wish you godspeed – and would support however i could.

    However, the left, being parasitic in nature, thrives on decadence. You cannot undermine the left by disabling its language because if you have succeeded in disabling its language you have already destroyed the left. The left is it’s language. Or, to put it another way, the left’s undoing will be the very collapse of the foundation that it has dedicated itself to destroying. (The problem for us, obviously, is that we also depend on the foundation and are therefore held in check by a hostage).

    Their language has power because it has practical purposes. Language can only have power when it has a practical use.

    The riddle, I think, is pushing the ledger of the cost / benefit analysis for those of whom the language controls. For example, a lot of people are aware P.C. is constrictive to some degree, but they are not about to threaten their livelihood to stand against it, especially if its (what they perceive) to be no big deal. For those of us who have worked in offices, be honest, would we really be comfortable arguing against affirmative action or abortion – but isn’t it strange that come election time you will have no shortage of people clacking the opposite positions fully confident they will not be charged with threatening workplace comity. They are not idealists, and probably haven’t given it much thought, but they are signifying and status-building. Drip…drip…drip…

    Meanwhile, ironically, the greatest threat to the left comes at the point when they must rely on direct force to exert control – that is when conflict-resolution theory becomes subservient to the guy with the gun. That is when human nature can no longer be blithely contradicted.

    My point is, I guess, I think it behooves Constitutionalists to start playing the board in anticipation of reality smacking the country in its face, hard. We are sentient that we are no longer one nation made up of states in mutual agreement through a constitution. When it becomes clear to everyone else, when it can no longer be denied that the American Empire is every bit in effect in the 50 states as it was imagined to be beyond them, that shock will be the moment the pressure that has been building will be released and the people will be forced to make a choice (unable to hide behind fantasy) that will determine political organization out in the open. No more hostage.

    I believe California will be that moment, and that having an opposition party is pointless other than providing the left with a dupe. If Mr. Coal Miner’s Daughter thinks he has a mandate, or thinks that he will be able to effectively stand up against Obama at this point, he is high. What possible incentive does Obama even have to operate within the constitution at this point. He passed his immigration law by fiat and was rewarded. Taking it to congress is just a way to get the Republican establishment to shoot itself in the head by handing it a nice, big fat wedge issue to chew on. The fight is elsewhere.

  55. So it’ll go something like this:

    Republicans: We demand cuts, and tax breaks, because the deficit. Deep cuts. Ryan budget. Take it or leave it.

    Obama: Well fella’s, I don’t think we’re going to be doing all of

    Reps: WE DEMAND

    Obama: Now guys, let’s see if we can negotiate and get some of your ideas in here, some of the things you want.

    Reps: What do we want? 19th century sized government. When do we want it? Now. We don’t compromise. Why don’t you go on another apology tour, Muslim Kenyan!

    Obama: Uh, ok, how about I let Jan 1 roll around and taxes go up on everyone. Then I agree to sign a tax cut for the middle class. And then you get to explain why you won’t go for it without a tax cut for the rich. And tick-tick, we just get closer to April 15th, and I keep saying, “I’ll sign a middle-class tax cut today”. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

    Reps: But the constitution! He won’t work with us. He’s partisan.

    So when I say “fuck’em”, I mean in a constitutionally compliant sense. Because they (you’ve) demanded to not be negotiated with. So again I ask, why fucking bother talking to the Republicans when they think it’s their place to simply issue orders.

  56. You cannot undermine the left by disabling its language because if you have succeeded in disabling its language you have already destroyed the left. The left is it’s language. Or, to put it another way, the left’s undoing will be the very collapse of the foundation that it has dedicated itself to destroying. (The problem for us, obviously, is that we also depend on the foundation and are therefore held in check by a hostage).

    We are only held hostage by their rules for language, not by the language as it really exists and functions.

    But yes, if you disable its hold on language rules you have blunted the left’s hold on a lot of power. It dissipates like a mist.

  57. . So again I ask, why fucking bother talking to the Republicans when they think it’s their place to simply issue orders.

    when is harry reid going to vote on a budget? it has been 3 years.

  58. slippery, Reid hasn’t passed a budget in almost 4 years. Why is that?

    As for your stupid fantasy, slippery, your side plays that game all the time, but you’re not honest enough to admit it.

  59. nr, I thought we were getting closer to 4 years since a budget vote in the Senate. Is it still only around 3 years since a budget was passed?

  60. “So it’ll go something like this:”

    You needn’t write pointless fictions moron. It has already gone like this: The House passes another bill in a long series of bills, sends it to the Senate for consideration, where it dies, never having been taken up.

  61. i think 3 + but 4 works too because it will become true

  62. So, now the left is reduced to explaining their strange delusions about civics when they are in power, though bizarre straw man skits.

  63. Nothing has changed. The President is a Democrat, now lame duck. The congress is Republican. The Senate is asleep. Congressional Republicans think the President is a socialist. The President thinks Congressional Republicans are neanderthals. The President cannot compromise on the centerpieces of his campaign. Result: we certainly are not going to see big legislation. Anything new will happen by executive order or by regulation.”

    link

  64. palaeomerus, outstanding summation of slippery’s foolishness.

  65. Slippery left out the incident where Obama negotiated with Republicans, came to an agreement, then changed the terms of the deal after the agreement was in place. At that point the Republicans said, “forget it.”

    Obama was angered by it, and took his ball and went home.

    But, sure, let’s negotiate with someone who has already demonstrated his bad faith. Let’s compromise our principles for an opportunity to have our names on a piece of legislation that goes against everything we believe in, just like the Democrats do all the time.

    Oh, wait.

  66. So again I ask, why fucking bother talking to the Republicans when they think it’s their place to simply issue orders.

    “I won.”

    Damned if I can figure out the attribution for that. It’s a head-scratcher.

  67. Remember the fake lectures about an imperial presidency?

    Good times.

    [This is me trying out bemused mocking.]

  68. bh, that made me laugh.

    Haven’t been too many of those recently.

  69. Shorter me: I hope the Democrats continue to run roughshod over the Constitution, even more blatantly than they have already. I hope they do all this crap without any Republicans (just like they did ObamaCare), and I hope people are paying attention when they do it.

    If our representatives had any balls, they would obstruct everything Obama does.

  70. Excellent, bh.

    Apparently I don’t do bemused well. I shall work on that failing.

  71. http://barnhardt.biz/

    Ann is advocating a tax strike to starve the beast.

    I cannot disagree with her idea and her hope that a tax strike will somehow avoid civil war.

    Unfortunately, I think a tax strike would precipitate civil war.

  72. Cheers, Blake.

    Heh, you’re doing far better on the prognostication front though, cranky. So you got that going for you.

  73. By the way (and I should have mentioned it back when), on the bemusement Dicentra cited t’other day, there’s a famous instance of the older meaning available for consideration: namely, Socrates’ pause along the wayside on his and his companions’ progress to Agathon’s play celebration party depicted in the Symposium. A problem takes him and he falls into thinking. His companion goes on without him, leaving him to think, and so Socrates arrives at the party a little bit late.

  74. Bhahaha. The Tax Strike is a super idea. I’d add, “Blow your foot off with a shotgun” to the list of protest moves. Also, “Slam your thumb in a door until the door breaks.” And then, “Get your nose pierced, put a ring through it, and then find a democrat and rip the nose ring out RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM and say, ‘THERE!!! TAKE THAT!!!”

    Oh, and this guy:

    http://www.libertarianrepublican.net/2012/11/the-end-of-liberty-in-america-only.html

  75. I’d add, “Blow your foot off with a shotgun”

    unlike you most on our side know how to use fire arms

  76. Re: Ann Barnhardt

    I am going to obey the law until they try to take away my right to self-defense.

    After that, all bets are off.

    So, even though I’m self-employed and could easily simply not pay them my quarterly estimated taxes, I will continue to do so.

  77. Cranky, feel free to not pay your quarterlies. No one’s going to knock on your door. You just owe more on April 15th.

    As to taking away your right to self defense… Remember how Obama was going to take away your guns in his first term? Refer to that when you wake up in a cold sweat, hug your blunderbuss, and scream, “…PRY FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS! COMMIE!”

  78. Remember how Obama was going to take away your guns in his first term?

    technically baracky’s still in his 1st term

    Re-elected Obama Pushes Anti-2nd Amendment Gun Grab

  79. I want to point out one more thing to slippery: if I visited a progg site and trolled like he is trolling here, I would be banned. That’s how your side does it. And yet, here you are, still posting.

    I know the point is lost on you.

  80. Gad, slippery, you really inhabit the “Real World” MTV style.

    The US is going ahead with talks about the small arms treaty at the UN. The illegal long gun registry was put in place because of Fast and Furious, which was a government operation designed to create a problem that didn’t exist.

    You’re a complete tool and fool, slippery.

  81. We used to get better trolls. This slippery fellow is boring.

    But he’s been here before and he was boring then.

    Did you ever finish up at Community College or are you still part-timing it at Starbucks?

  82. Here’s your compromise: You want 2000 level taxation. We want 2000 level spending.

    Actual spending, not % of gdb or adjusting for inflation.

    You take Bill Clinton’s last budget out of storage and submit anew to both the House and the Senate.

  83. product, broduct, whatever

  84. I’m guessing “broduct” is something frat boys produce.

  85. Speaking of budgets, have Obama’s even gotten Democrat votes?

    We could probably look that up somewhere.

    /bemused

  86. “broduct” . . . . vas deferens?

  87. I wonder when it will dawn on ss that he’s won nothing in this election but failure and all the glory that goes along with it.

  88. But wait bh, you mean power isn’t a good in itself? Who knew?

  89. They will still blame the failure on Bush, bh. It’s all good.

  90. I believe, bh, that the last budget Obama presented to the Senate was voted down 99-0.

    Perhaps he should have negotiated with all of them.

    /bemused

  91. Re-elected Obama Pushes Anti-2nd Amendment Gun Grab

    Boy, this slipperslope fellow can’t buy a break tonight, can he?

  92. Gun grabs are stupid. People can make guns if they have metal shot tools. If they have steel-tool CNC machines they can make GOOD guns with high tolerances.

    If OBama taxes the shit out of ammo and gin cleaning/maintenance supplies with exceptions of certain hunting loads, he brings in a lot of money or makes a lot of guns useless and they become a status symbol for the rich.

  93. gun cleaning not gin cleaning.

    sigh.

  94. Eugene Robinson:

    WASHINGTON — So much for voter suppression. So much for the enthusiasm gap. So much for the idea that smug, self-appointed arbiters of what is genuinely “American” were going to “take back” the country, as if it had somehow been stolen.

    On Tuesday, millions of voters sent a resounding message to the take-it-back crowd: You won’t. You can’t. It’s our country, too.

  95. I think Mr. Robinson doesn’t so much mean that it’s also his country. I think he just means to say that it’s his country.

    I’m sure that will work out very well for him and he will never experience any comeuppance whatsoever.

    /bemused

  96. It’s almost as though Robinson has taken on an autochthonous myth-form as to his relation to the poor old place, at least insofar as the notion America hasn’t got such myths, didn’t need them since it isn’t founded on blood and soil, but on a small set of ideas — ideas which Robinson and crew have never managed to take on board — ideas which can’t suit his sense of possession and being possessed. So they’ll revert to the ancient ways in their autochthony: Our soil, our blood. And it will be as they say it will be — hang your stupid Constitution.

  97. So, even though I’m self-employed and could easily simply not pay them my quarterly estimated taxes, I will continue to do so.

    For what it’s worth, you don’t have to. I can say from years of experience that all it means is that you’ll pay an insignificant “underpayment penalty” — and you know, it’s only money. I don’t mind spending more money to not file quarterly, and they don’t seem to mind, to the extent that it’s not something they’re going to send you to jail over. As long as you pay your taxes every April 15th (along with an underpayment penalty), you’ll be fine. (IANAL)

  98. If OBama taxes the shit out of ammo and gin cleaning/maintenance supplies with exceptions of certain hunting loads, he brings in a lot of money or makes a lot of guns useless and they become a status symbol for the rich.

    He creates another very lucrative market for his homeboys, which will cause an escalation in violence he could use to justify increasing the power of the police state.

    All unexpectedly, of course.

  99. that should be “creates another lucrative * black * market”

    And I will go ahead and denounce myself for teh racism.

  100. You can call it an unauthorized undocumented hoarder/looter’s market if you want to.

  101. “On Tuesday, millions of voters sent a resounding message to the take-it-back crowd: You won’t. You can’t. It’s our country, too.”

    I guess we’ll see what the millions (who were smaller than 2008′s millions) want to take back in two years. They might not like forward so much when they see what is in front of them getting closer and closer and they realize that the people who are telling them that everything is fine and wonderful are lying.

    Of course by then damage will be done and the whole US will be weaker from the families at the bottom to the federal government at the top. And out enemies will likely be emboldened and stronger.

  102. [M]illions of voters sent a resounding message to the take-it-back crowd: You won’t. You can’t. It’s our country, too.”

    And we have a right to your stuff! Is the implied bit at the end.

  103. On Tuesday, millions of voters sent a resounding message to the take-it-back crowd: You won’t. You can’t. It’s our country, too.

    It is until you use your choice of government, implemented by a far-Left Party affiliation, to pick the pockets of your fellow citizens. Then it becomes our responsibility to spank your filthy hands.

    You needed to learn virtue, Eugene Robinson. As Bill Whittle said ‘splains early in that overly-long post-election video (starting at about the five-minuet mark), virtue is best taught by religious institutions. It’s possible to teach virtue by other methods, but very difficult. And we know today’s punk-ass, soft, weak, ‘American Citizen’ sorts don’t have the character, intelligence or patience to learn and comprehend things that are difficult. Give me my free shit, bitches, or I’ll take what I want ! BARACKOBAMA!

  104. Give me my free shit, bitches, or I’ll take what I want ! BARACKOBAMA!

    Well. We all know what King Leonidas said to that.

  105. Heh. Damned far-Left Persians!

  106. King Leonidas was sent out to die by his ephors as a sacrifice to the god of war. And he had a lot of other greeks backing him and his 300 up, to help him hold the warm pillars.

Leave a Reply