June 25, 2014

“No Concession in McDaniel Post-Runoff Speech, Vows to ‘Never Stop Fighting’”

Republican primary victors shouldn’t have their victories taken away by liberal Democrats urged to cross over and vote for the pol they won’t vote for in the general election. But the establishment GOP doesn’t believe that. They believe in power uber alles, and maintaining the coalition integrity of their long-term incumbent pork barrel back scratchers.

Chris McDaniels, thankfully, doesn’t agree — and he’s not afraid to say so.

Ironically, the very people on Twitter who fluff this feckless, impotent, Big Government, pro-New Deal establishment GOP are today mocking the TEA Party as sore losers — despite the fact that Cochran refused to bow out graciously when he lost the GOP primary, and had to use money from the NRSC, racialist robo-calls, Brett Favre’s payback to Haley Barbour, and black liberal Democrats to garner the Republican nomination, in essence, telling the majority of Republicans in MS that he, McConnell, Rove, Lott, Barbour, McCain, et al., don’t get to decide who represents them. Because they might get it wrong.

That’s not republicanism. Sadly though, it’s become Republicanism. Which is why I no longer count myself among its membership.

Look: I know you elite technocrats who don’t really believe in representative government want us to stop whining and just go away so that the real experienced Beltway elites can run the political sphere — because that’s worked out so well for the rank and file citizen! — and you express that by calling us crybabies or the like.

But the taunts won’t work. And the payback, I assure you, will be startling, especially to those of you who have grown so used to counting on us to vote for the lesser of two evils.

I hereby grant you permission to blow me. Because that ain’t happening ever again, and I aim to convince as many people as possible to follow that lead.

Posted by Jeff G. @ 10:37am
139 comments | Trackback

Comments (139)

  1. Remember how pissed off we were when the Democrats tried to change the rules in 2000, to steal the election for Al Gore? Now Chris McDaniel is saying, “Before this race ends, we have to be absolutely certain that the Republican primary was won by Republican voters.” Well, sorry, Mr McDaniel, but the rules were that Democrats who didn’t vote in the initial primary cycle could vote in the Republican run-off, and Senator Cochran’s campaign encouraged just those Democrats to vote for him in he Republican primary run-off. It can be argued that those are lousy rules, but Mr McDaniel chose to run under those rules when he started. I’d have rather seen Mr McDaniel win, but he just flat didn’t.

    Senator Cochran played hardball, and he won. If Mr McDaniel challenges the legality of the result, the only thing that he can do is to help the Democratic nominee. It’s time for Mr McDaniel to man up, and not be a stinking crybaby.

  2. We need a “None of the Above” ballot option that, when “None” wins, the election is held again but none of the rejected candidates are allowed to run in it.

  3. Our esteemed host wrote:

    I know you elite technocrats who don’t really believe in representative government want us to stop whining and just go away so that the real experienced Beltway elites can run the political sphere — because that’s worked out so well for the rank and file citizen! — and you express that by calling us crybabies or the like.

    That seems to me to be kind of a strange complaint, given that Senator Cochran just ran and won a hard-nosed election campaign. He’s the Republican nominee because he won more votes than Mr McDaniel. What is more representative than winning an election?

  4. Mr McDaniel challenges the legality of the result, the only thing that he can do is to help the Democratic nominee.

    You say that like it makes a difference.

  5. When it’s a party primary, what’s representative is winning with votes from members of YOUR party.

  6. Primary elections should either be totally open, like in Louisiana and California, or completely closed. Anything in between is utterly corrupt.

  7. dana, what you just said is so jaw-droppingly stupid, I’m stunned.

    The GOP has now made it abundantly clear they prefer to work with Democrats rather than have a conservative in the House of Representatives.

    So, again, dana, explain why conservatives should support a party that prefers to collude with their nominal opposition rather than work with their base?

  8. That seems to me to be kind of a strange complaint, given that Senator Cochran just ran and won a hard-nosed election campaign. He’s the Republican nominee because he won more votes than Mr McDaniel. What is more representative than winning an election?

    I so tire of this supposed nuanced sophistry. Cochran courted people who aren’t going to vote Republican in order to disenfranchise the Republican base that beat him the first time. This is a Republican primary, meaning it is intended to pick the representatives Republicans want for themselves.

    If Cochran wishes to run as a Democrat, he should do so. That he didn’t bow out gracefully when he lost tells you all you need to know about who the “crybabies” are. And I get royally pissed at being called purist by the likes of those who backed Dick Lugar, Charlie Crist, Arlen Specter, Mike Castle, Thomas Dewhurst, and all the rest — then refused to support the Republicans who beat them.

    Stuff your rules. I’m not playing your game any more.

    We are at the end game. Stop acting “curiously concerned” about supposed inconsistencies in the “process”. Start making a fucking racket. Or get out of the way.

  9. Mr McGehee, that’s the way it is in closed primary states, and that’s the way I’d prefer it, but that isn’t how Mississippi does things. The law is the law.

  10. The law says your exhalation is pollution.

    Normally I’d disagree, but right now I’m beginning to see the law’s point.

  11. The law is the law.

    Oooo, now there’s an infinitely useful tautological cul-de-sac.

  12. Our host wrote:

    Stuff your rules. I’m not playing your game any more.

    My rules? They are the rules specified by the state legislature of Mississippi, and Messrs Cochran and McDaniel both agreed to play by them.

    Did Mr Cochran “(court) people who aren’t going to vote Republican in order to disenfranchise the Republican base that beat him the first time?” Yup, sure did, and it worked. That’s politics, and it’s a rough-as-Hell game.

  13. Who knows, perhaps the state legislature will now change the law, if they don’t find this result palatable, but that won’t change the outcome of this election. Senator Cockran isn’t perfect by any means, but he’s a heck of a lot better than any Democrat.

  14. Who doesn’t love nonsense prancing around on stilts?

  15. Cochran made common cause with Democrats to win…and that makes him better than any Democrat? Seriously, dana, you’re trying to make that case?

  16. My rules? They are the rules specified by the state legislature of Mississippi, and Messrs Cochran and McDaniel both agreed to play by them.

    This isn’t cribbage.

    Nobody gets to “play” with my liberty.

  17. Be reasonable, Dana.

    Go pontificate elsewhere.

  18. but he’s a heck of a lot better than any Democrat.

    No, he isn’t. Democrats run as Democrats. Cochran runs to make sure the GOP primary voters who wanted someone else couldn’t have that someone else, and he did so by using racialist tactics.

    The enemy who is out in the open is easier to take on.

    Seems to me you’ve learned every wrong lesson in the last 6 years.

  19. Even if you’re not the same one.

  20. Oh. It worked. And politics is a tough game. Let’s give him credit for his hard-nosed, hard-won strategy that worked: namely, painting the GOP base of MS as racists and hicktards in order to get Democrats to give him the right to continue to represent these racist hicktards.

    Golf clap. Well done, good sir!

    Spit.

  21. Mr Goldstein wrote:

    And I get royally pissed at being called purist by the likes of those who backed Dick Lugar, Charlie Crist, Arlen Specter, Mike Castle, Thomas Dewhurst, and all the rest — then refused to support the Republicans who beat them.

    Well, then, you should love me, because I voted for Pat Toomey in the 2004 Republican primary in Pennsylvania, and voted for Mr Toomey again in the 2010 Republican primary — where he was unopposed — and the 2010 general election. For the others, well, I’m not a resident of their states, but I always support the Republican nominee, unless it is such a special case that I can’t. (For example, I wouldn’t have voted for David Duke when he won a Republican nomination in Louisiana once.)

    I used to live in Delaware, though moved away well before Christine O’Donnell beat Mike Castle in the primary. Delaware is pretty much of a blue state anyway, and Mr Castle’s popularity there transcended party, while Miss O’Donnell was considered to be pretty much of a nut case. Had I still lived in the First State, I’d have voted for her, but it wouldn’t have been a vote that I’d have been particularly proud of.

  22. Senator Cockran isn’t perfect by any means, but he’s a heck of a lot better than any Democrat.

    That’s what the Stabs keep telling us, but the evidence tells us otherwise.

    When I want to be loyal to my team no matter what, I’ll watch college football. In politics my allegiance is to the Constitution, not a party.

  23. I always support the Republican nominee

    90-plus percent of blacks always vote Democrat. What has it gotten them?

  24. “Who doesn’t love nonsense prancing around on stilts?”

    That all depends.

    Is it reasonable nonsense?

  25. but I always support the Republican nominee,

    Great. Grab a varsity jacket and take a seat on the bench.

    Maybe when the QB is done with that one slightly plump cheerleader, you can make a run at her.

    Me, I won’t support any Republican that would rather have Democrat votes than a conservative representative. There’s a reason the country has slid consistently leftward for decades, with the brief Reagan respite.

    People who “always support the Republican nominee” — and in so doing, don’t hold the bad ones accountable for acting against our interests — are part of the problem.

  26. ah, dana is a troll. Exact same opening comment appears at RSM.

    I wonder how much dana is being paid by the NRSCC?

  27. Did the voting process in MS yesterday require checking to ensure that people arriving to vote in the GOP runoff hadn’t already voted in the Dem primary? Since I live elsewhere, I’m genuinely curious, and even if a check was possible, it might not mean that the check was mandatory.

    Perhaps the people running the polling places could just skip over that step, and if those people just happened to be part of the establishment supporting an incumbent of 40 years, why, amoral sharks like Dana here could just boast about another area where Thad’s group played hardball to win.

    McDaniels ought to take as much time as he needs to see if there is a paper trail showing that people voted illegally — or, barring that, documentary proof that, of the people who voted in the Dem-heavy counties that Thad won, large numbers of them have a history of voting in the Dem primaries going back 12, 18, 24 years, etc.

    Dana, I don’t know what would be your problem with that: that”s not being a crybaby, THAT TOO is playing hardball.

    McDaniels would be doing nothing illegal in undermining the perceived legitimacy of the results last night. Instead, he would be exacting a heavy political price for the legal-but-unethical tactics used, and his doing so could pay political dividends down the road, either making a case for a closed-primary system, making a case for the removal of the current political leadership, or both.

    The only arguments against it are ones of sportsmanship and long-term party unity, but you apparently don’t care about either. Someone insisting that McDaniels be magnanimous in defeat should at least pretend to be outraged that Cochran was so underhanded in securing victory.

    And a genuine concern for the long-term health of a political party wouldn’t seek to normalize efforts to recruit the opposing party as an ally in a primary race.

  28. Dana is not a troll

  29. Oh, well, if happyfeet is vouching…

  30. We are now basically down to one political party…the party of Big Government. One party = Tyranny.

  31. If you don’t drink Coke, you just want Pepsi to take over the market!
    Yeah, the Ford Pinto’s not ideal but it’s better than any Chevy out there.
    Crap sandwich vs Giant Douche!
    Kang vs Kodos!
    Just as politics seems to have invaded the sports networks, we’re told that we have to wear Team Red’s jersey or we’re de facto on Team Blue.

  32. There’s a reason the country has slid consistently leftward for decades, with the brief Reagan respite.

    Let me preface this by saying that I agree with you 100% regarding your complaints about the GOP, and what Thad Cochran did in his campaign. That said – regarding your comment above: isn’t sliding consistently leftward the natural order of things? I just consider myself lucky that at least in my childhood, I was still a free person.

    The Great Alexander Tytler

  33. Had Dems crossed over to disrupt the runoff in a kind of “Operation Chaos,” that would have been bad, but not as outrageous as this: this isn’t merely infiltration from overt political opponents, it’s betrayal by ostensible allies inviting such infiltration AND doing so by repeating some of the Dems’ worst lies about “fellow” Republicans.

    This shit may be legal, but it’s deeply immoral, and people like Dana here — and John Podhoretz, who theoretically ought to know better — are proving that they have no principles, just a lust for power.

    This is all just a repeat of sorts of Boehner’s dishonest behavior at the 2012 RNC, acting as if a voice vote clearly passed a rules change that weakened the state parties and grass roots.

    There’s no reason not to conclude that they hold the conservative base in far more contempt than their Marxist “colleagues” in DC, and it’s certainly obvious that they do not deserve our trust to represent us.

  34. you should keep reposting that robocall I think

  35. The law is the law.

    OH! The LAW!

    THE LAW IS AN ASS.

    The fact that our own putative party hates our guts and will play “hardball,” as you call it, to keep one of their good old boys in power TOTALLY FLEW OVER YOUR HEAD. As long as it’s legal, no harm no foul, right?

    GOD you people make me sick. Get off my lawn.

  36. here is a nice story about baltimore

    how odd

  37. but I always support the Republican nominee

    Remember the last time you scratched your head over those silly black people who vote Democrat ALL THE TIME even though the Dems have screwed them over for years?

    Yeah. What’s up with them, right?

    ‘feets, Dana is an Establican shill who is popping up in every thread critical of the MS results to peddle the Establican line. THIS is how the Establicans use social media: to lay down thick steaming piles of sophistry against those who would limit their filthy power.

    Otherwise, where has Dana been up until now, huh? Has he been touting McDaniels all over the ‘sphere? Been complaining about open primaries?

    I thought not.

    Had McDaniels won the primary, the Establican machine would have worked tirelessly to defeat him, not graciously support the winner. Same goes for Bevin and all the other people who lost their primaries to the Establicans. They insist we have to get behind their guy when they would never, EVER get behind ours.

    It’s the Beltway vs. the rest of us, the Capitol vs. the districts.

    Go take your blind, sycophantic party loyalty elsewhere. It’s not welcome here.

  38. Dana likes fetuses a LOT and is scared to death what happens when the fascists nail down another whore on the supreme whore court

    this is a legitimate fear i think

  39. (that’s just my take on Dana it’s not an authoritative take on Dana just mine one)

  40. but I always support the Republican nominee, unless it is such a special case that I can’t.

    I’m guessing that “actively courting Democrats to vote for him”, while also employing people that destroy campaign property of, and using robocalls that are outright lying about, the more conservative candidate, isn’t enough of a reason to qualify for that “special case”.

    Go Team! *spit*

    Burn it down.
    Scatter the stones.
    Salt the earth.
    Buy lots of rope.

  41. I’ve got good news and bad news. The good news is that Republicans showed they can be ruthless. The bad news is they’re only ruthless when firing on their own troops.

  42. What McGehee said. On all of the above. But especially the constitution part.

  43. Ding!

  44. Senator Cockran isn’t perfect by any means, but he’s a heck of a lot better than any Democrat.

    Objection. Facts not in evidence.

  45. Maybe the conservative Republicans who voted for McDaniel need to cross the line or stay home in November and teach Cochrane a lesson. May mean another Dem in the Senate but, not sure it would make a difference as long as the House stay in Republican hands.

  46. At this point, I’m thinking it’s better to oust Establicans by any means necessary, including letting the Democrat win, than to lend the least amount of support to the Old Boys Fraternity.

    It’s not to “teach them a lesson”; it’s to get them the hell out of office. NEXT election cycle we can run a conservative against the Dem.

    Given that the Establicans don’t listen to us any better than the Dems do, what difference, at this point, does it make which party wins?

  47. In the wake of this GOP machine alliance-victory with the race-solidarity crowd, it may be a good day to watch Elia Kazan’s masterpiece On the Waterfront to take a long look at what you each are up against.

  48. A McDaniel write-in campaign run by others than McDaniel seems a plausible means to put Cochran out of office, and possibly even put McDaniel in if a genuine furor rises.

  49. John Boehner is a pathetic cunt.

  50. Pathetic cunts everywhere are insulted by the comparison, sdferr.

  51. I’m open to more apt comparisons SW.

  52. JD used to possess a vivid selection, I recall.

  53. I might be a little late to the party, but I needed to chime in specifically for Dana’s sake to tell her/him to kindly go troll elsewhere.

    This concluding paragraph of the Sun-Herald’s story pretty much sums things up:

    Instead, establishment Republicans and a surprisingly high number of Democrats helped deliver a come-from-behind victory for a senator known for his soft-spoken patrician air and his ability to bring home millions in dollars of federal spending.

    Read more here: http://www.sunherald.com/2014/06/25/5668607/black-voters-in-mississippi-helped.html?sp=/99/100/&ihp=1#storylink=cpy

    This, friends, is why comments like Dana’s “he’s still better than a Democrat” would be absolutely laughable, if they weren’t so pathetic. There’s no entertainment value, however, in seeing someone whose abilities of reason and logic are roughly on par with the common clove of garlic as they try to demonstrate their intellectual superiority to those of us who still believe in things called principles.

    What Cochran did was likelylegal, but it was unethical as hell. It was also an abject betrayal of every value that could be considered conservative in any light whatsoever. It was the act of a “by any means necessary” politician trying to hold onto power and privilege until his dying breath like it’s his inalienable right to do so. It was an act of a traitor to the health of the republic.

  54. Senator Cockran isn’t perfect by any means, but he’s a heck of a lot better than any Democrat.

    How can this kind of comparison be made, given that he actively courted the Democrats in order to eke out a narrow victory, and that if he had stuck with actually trying to persuade members of his own party, he would be busy planning a retirement party, instead of a November campaign?

    When you have to persuade people whom you KNOW will not be voting for you in November solely in order to help you survive the primary challenge, then you deserve to lose come November. If I were a Mississippi Republican, I would be staying at home, or voting for the Democrat, rather than voting for someone who pulls the kinds of stunts he has pulled, just to keep his job.

    Remember, they work for us, not the other way around. It’s time they were reminded of that fact. The lesson can come easy or it can come hard, but it WILL come.

  55. Remember, they work for us, not the other way around. It’s time they were reminded of that fact. The lesson can come easy or it can come hard, but it WILL come.

    Sorry to go all Eeyore again, but you and what army?

    You can insist that they work for us all you want, but IIRC the boss usually has some kind of choke chain at his disposal. Pols are supposed to be kept in line by fear of losing an election.

    But in case you haven’t noticed, the ballot box doesn’t work anymore, there is enough corporate cash to offset any of our funding surges (or withholding), and a rally on the mall — or in their very offices — would waste your time and annoy the pig.

    Not to mention land you in jail.

    We CANNOT afford to think of them as our elected officials anymore. They’ve congealed into a genuine criminal organization similar to Chicago’s Daley machine. They cannot be defeated using the system because they ARE the system.

    I actually think Glenn Beck is onto something with his “strange bedfellows” outreach. I doubt many rank-and-file Democrats are cool with the cronyism and corruption in DC. Regardless of how big you think the gubmint should be, demanding that it not be corrupt — and that our seized tax dollars be used to feather nests and reward cronies — is something that a lot of people can get behind.

    The mobsters have been pretty good at setting red and blue against each other so that we don’t notice that they’ve teamed up against the rest of us.

    None of this will be untangled through the usual channels. Voting the bums out cannot happen through the ballot box — only a giant trebuchet launching them into the Potomac will do.

  56. ERRATUM: …and that our seized tax dollars NOT be used…

  57. Has anyone said this yet?

    If dirty tricks one him 5 plus % of the vote, then obviously the situation is too out of control. But he squeaked by. You don’t let someone squeak by and obstruct the people’s true desire with dirty tricks. You fight.

    You make people realize that they can’t do this and have people accept a “Get back to work,” mentality. Otherwise, there’s never a chance of having people begin to understand the corruption they’re really voting for.

  58. But in case you haven’t noticed, the ballot box doesn’t work anymore

    There are four kinds of boxes that can be used to effect changes in government: soap, jury, ballot, and ammo. The first three have failed, agreed.

    “Those that make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” — John F. Kennedy

    “The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed – where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.” — Justice Alex Kozinski

    “The Revolution was effected before the War commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their religious sentiments of their duties and obligations … This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.” — John Adams

  59. Disagreement is not what makes a comment trolling. Dana did not troll and isn’t one as far as I know from previous comments.

  60. Agreed. Dana is not new here and he’s not trolling. He just enjoys being played, apparently.

  61. OK, can we do something about the Michael Jackson autoplay video that clearly doesn’t belong here?

  62. Shitweasel Medved opened his show by telling the lie that Democrats wanted McDaniel to win and Cochran’s victory is good for conservatives.

  63. geoffb & Pablo, as much as I respect your opinions generally, the assertion that essentially any Republican is preferable to a Democrat is, particularly on this blog, a troll’s statement, as is Dana’s position that distills into taking Jeff to task for not agreeing that this is the way things are designed to work, politics being a rough game and such.

    I do not attempt to equate disagreement with trolling. There’s room for any reasonable voice in debate, but the aforementioned position and statement remove the person in question from the realm of reason.

    If Dana is not a troll, as you two assert, then perhaps he/she can contribute meaningfully to the discussion. As the comments stand, though, my exhortation to troll elsewhere stand pat…because that’s what was happening with Dana’s opening comments.

    As a Mississippian who saw what happened yesterday first-hand, however, I’d rather lop off my hand than vote for Cochran in November. If that means a Democrat takes the seat, so be it.

  64. Dana is not new here and he’s not trolling.

    He’s SHILLING.

    How pitch-perfect was that apology for Establican perfidy?

    Scripted, that’s what. Either that or brainwashed.

  65. Medved then went on to explain that the hot smelly liquid pouring down conservatives backs was merely a pleasant summer rain, and that the pile of shit in the living room is merely evidence that there’s a goddamned pony somewhere.

  66. Shitweasel Medved opened his show by telling the lie that Democrats wanted McDaniel to win and Cochran’s victory is good for conservatives.

    I’ve written off Salem Radio Network entirely. Medved’s by far the worst, but Hewitt and Prager stumped for Mitch.

    I have no use for firefighters who cannot spot a fire.

    “Stop being a crybaby because the underhanded tactics are legal-ish” is trolling at this juncture. I’ll NOT consent to losing the Republic on legal technicalities.

  67. Drumwaster: Water the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots!

    So the answer to my question “you and what army?” is to launch a French Revolution?

    Unless the armed resistance is backed by the authority of a sovereign state (not State as in federal but “state” as in Montana or Wyoming), you’re only going to get yourself kilt and the rest of us under martial law.

    Which will only be temporary, mind, as long as “temporary” can mean eight decades.

  68. ‘S a good point, JamieC.

  69. Water the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots! – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=54145#comment-1089889

    Screw that. Water it with the blood of traitors. Patriots will be needed afterwards.

    I’m merely remembering how this country was founded, and realizing that the Declaration of Independence has some good ideas. Yes, we will need one or more of the Several States to tell the Feds to pack sand, but we are almost at that point.

    The problem isn’t one where We The People will spontaneously rise up and hang the bureaucrats (although that will likely occur anyway), but rather one where the proles will be rioting over food (the first time the welfare checks don’t get sent because there isn’t any more money to be borrowed or printed), and the central authority won’t be able to do anything about it. I’ve been predicting something along those lines prior to 2025 for a few decades now, and I see no reason to change my mind. We The People don’t have to do anything but survive.

    The next question is “what form will the new nation take?”. I am predicting a Balkanization, generally along ideological and societal lines, but the war will settle down to between “them that grows the food” and “them that eats the food”.

    JMO

  70. He’s SHILLING.

    How pitch-perfect was that apology for Establican perfidy?

    Medved’s by far the worst, but Hewitt and Prager stumped for Mitch.

    I have no use for firefighters who cannot spot a fire.

    One of these things is a lot like the other.

  71. Hear old Tom, who though he admired the Frenchmen, was no Frenchman: *** These devoted Colonies were judged to be in such a state as to present victories without bloodshed, and all the easy emoluments of statutable plunder. The uninterrupted tenour of their peaceable and respectful behaviour, from the beginning of colonization; their dutiful, zealous, and useful services during the war, though so recently and amply acknowledged in the most honourable manner by His Majesty, by the late King, and by Parliament, could not save them from the meditated innovations. Parliament was influenced to adopt the pernicious project; and assuming a new power over them, have, in the course of eleven years, given such decisive specimens of the spirit and consequences attending this power, as to leave no doubt concerning the effects of acquiescence under it. They have undertaken to give and grant our money without our consent, though we have ever exercised an exclusive right to dispose of our own property [. . . ] ***

  72. The problem isn’t one where We The People will spontaneously rise up and hang the bureaucrats (although that will likely occur anyway), but rather one where the proles will be rioting over food (the first time the welfare checks don’t get sent because there isn’t any more money to be borrowed or printed), and the central authority won’t be able to do anything about it. I’ve been predicting something along those lines prior to 2025 for a few decades now, and I see no reason to change my mind. We The People don’t have to do anything but survive.

    While I won’t claim a few decades, I’ve been of the same mind for a number of years. Kinda bored waiting for the train to finally wreck. I’m fixing to fall back to a more defensible position.

  73. Nah. No deal for one more snuggle.
    That contract is broken. This is no alliance.

    Many times we told you.
    Didn’t mean to scold you.
    Sorry that it’s cold now.
    Doesn’t mean we’ll hold you.

    I know we didn’t charm you
    Warning this could harm you
    Seems a bit like karma that
    Your new blue coat won’t warm you.

  74. one where the proles will be rioting over food (the first time the welfare checks don’t get sent because there isn’t any more money to be borrowed or printed), and the central authority won’t be able to do anything about it

    Unless the central authority is PLANNING ON that scenario, hence the arming and SWATTIFICATION of the executive agencies.

    Bottom up (rioting in the streets),

    Top down (imposition of martial law),

    Inside-out (New world order).

    Van Jones and his kind are explicitly working to make this happen. Survive? Only if you hide in the mountains.

    Which, I’m already there, but we don’t have enough water for all y’all.

    Kinda bored waiting for the train to finally wreck.

    That’s me. That’s Beck too, who — broadcasting from his ranch — is so spitting mad he had to go shoot a few bullets from his porch to avoid his head exploding. When Beck essentially said he’d vote for the Dem, Stu asked if he wanted to destroy the country faster, so Glenn backed off.

    A bit. I reckon Glenn just wants more time to do whatever he’s got cooking.

    Me, I figure a fast death is better than a slow one.

  75. I tinks apocalypse is come: Ubaldo got through the first two innings without issuing a single walk.

  76. [T]he pile of shit in the living room is merely evidence that there’s a goddamned pony EPA employee somewhere.

  77. ubaldo needs to get his epa stuff up to snuff

  78. Just walked De Aza in the top of the fifth. It’s a miracle to have got that far.

  79. Jamiec wrote at 1:32 PM:

    What Cochran did was likelylegal, but it was unethical as hell. It was also an abject betrayal of every value that could be considered conservative in any light whatsoever. It was the act of a “by any means necessary” politician trying to hold onto power and privilege until his dying breath like it’s his inalienable right to do so. It was an act of a traitor to the health of the republic.

    Your whole comment is damn well put, but it must be noted that Cochran did not devise or execute the strategy used – he’s obviously in the early stages of dementia. It was people like Barbour and the Senator’s ‘girlfriend’ who executed this Leftist strategy.

  80. Dana comments frequently over at The Other McCain and I have seen no evidence of any kind that he is a paid troll or a typical troll.

    Mores the pity, for him.

    At least if he were one of those, Dana would be merely another ‘player’ in ‘The Game’, albeit one who was unethical and immoral.

    The sad, pathetic thing is: he really believes the naïve and foolish pablum he pukes. He refuses to understand that this is not a Game, that we are engaged in a battle of Life and Death, that the losers in this War will end-up either in enslavement or dead on the pavement.

    The time is coming for Dana when he will have to decide whether to join General Gage and his troops on those ships heading to Nova Scotia or whether he will cast away his blinders and saddle-up.

  81. in miss and ok we should launch a write in campaign ala mercowsky in ak. give the establishgopgrifters a little of their own meds

  82. Dana isn’t a troll. He’s a good guy, but he has his head in the sand on this.

  83. TW Shannon got taken out by robo-calls from out of state, editorials in the big papers and accusations of running a “dirty campaign.”

    Lankford is big on the Christian Camps circuit here and was endorsed by Dr. Coburn—who is practically infallible, depending on who you ask (that wouldn’t be me). It was all over but the shouting a few weeks ago.

  84. oh and bevin in kentucky should mount a write in. some more mercowsky please. eff the senate take out the gop leadership

  85. i want to stuff mercowsky’s write in back in their faces in “safe” states

  86. I once was more accommodating of misled and/or naive “good guys,” but that went away about 3 election cycles ago.

    If anyone is still so simplistic (read: moronic) as to vote blindly for a party, I have no use for them. Period. Because at this point, you’re being just as damaging to our society and our republic as the ones whose political stances revolve entirely around free stuff and feelings.

    He’s a useful idiot at best, a shill/troll at worst. Not a “good guy, but” anything. Don’t forget that he opened fire as the first commenter. It’s not as if he was defending something he’d said that someone else called him on.

  87. ” He’s a good guy…”

    So’s our President.

  88. >Dr. Coburn<

    politically naive. good that he retires

  89. I stand corrected about Dana.

  90. Dana has been around here and the ‘sphere for years. He is not a bomb thrower. Clearly, his opinion on this runs exactly counter to the general sentiment, which is to say that he’s utterly and completely wrong. But he isn’t a troll. He’s a resident of this neighborhood. A very misguided resident.

    Can’t say I recall coming across jamiec before. Oh, and #DefundTheGOP.

  91. By the way SW, it’s all about the folds within folds within folds with John Boehner: a weepy quitter if there ever was one.

  92. I see Dana’s comments at RSM’s blog, and generally he usually seems okay — but on this I fault his verbatim repetition of comments on multiple blogs. It’s not as if he had a witty turn of phrase to offer or a unique perspective. Rather the comment smelled of talking points lamely defending party unity despite the Stabs’ divisive, backstabbing track record.

  93. defending party unity despite the Stabs’ divisive, backstabbing track record.

    Dana goes with the “turn the other shoulder-blade” policy.

  94. well dana has 3 choices. dem/reps, occupy ws(side show to dem/reps) or the”tea party”

  95. Been around for quite a number of years, Pablo. Bought a DVD or two from Jeff before his move. Frequently too busy with life’s commitments to log a lot of keyboard time, but I’ve been here through thick and thin for somewhere upwards of ten years.

    I won’t get into a pissing match that boils down to “I was here first,” though. I simply state that I won’t countenance a troll with a “good guy” moniker.

    Jeff has understood from my earliest exposure to his writing that we were losing a battle that we absolutely must win, for the sakes of our progeny. When the internet tide turned against him, it was a predictable turn as a result of his unwillingness to “play nice” with so much at stake, and to his credit he’s not backed down, in the face of threats to his professional reputation and the physical well being of his family.

    Fact is, I don’t know you or Dana from Adam’s off ox, and therefore the scope of my judgment is limited to observable online actions and statements. To chide Jeff for not placidly accepting this outcome was trollish at best.

    I’m not here to make enemies, guys, but I’m not here to win friends either. I’m one of many voices in Mississippi who are mad as hell right now, and ready to stand with the no-longer-silent minority of those who will stand to say, at long last, “Enough!”

    And I don’t give a damn whether you or anyone else knows me.

  96. Dana has been on here for years, so I wouldn’t call him a troll.

    sdferr is right about turning the other shoulder-blade. It’s a shame.

  97. I’m one of many voices in Mississippi who are mad as hell right now, and ready to stand with the no-longer-silent minority of those who will stand to say, at long last, “Enough!”

    I know it’s early yet, but what are you considering (and hearing from your acquaintances in Miss.) as the best course of action come the fall, jamiec?

  98. Third party, if there’s a solid candidate, or just stay home. I refuse to put a mark by Cochran’s name, and made that decision a few years ago.

  99. Keep us in the loop as time goes on and you hear more on the scene, I hope? We can all do with on the ground information from our friends.

  100. Now somebody make Ken Harrelson cry.

  101. I just got threatened by Wombat at RSM’s place for calling out Dana. Calling Dana a troll and telling Dana that he/she is part of the problem didn’t sit well there.

    Anyway, I told Wombat that all he has to do is ask me to leave, politely, as I know I have no “right to free speech” on someone else’s blog.

  102. Dana is a good pickle

    whereas Thad Cochran is a racist piece of shit with dementia

    and Haley Barbour is just a nasty tub of fuck

    also Dana is a good pickle

  103. Blake: That was very unlike Wombat. I don’t understand it. We all have our bad days, I guess.

  104. There’s a lot of frayed nerves on the Right today.

  105. Bob, a lot more people joined the “Let it Burn” crowd today. They received a rude awakening as to just how craven the GOP is.

    Honestly, I hope the GOP takes a pasting in both the Senate and House races.

    As for Wombat, bad day or not, someone who has the power to ban someone (although, as a threat, it’s somewhat laughable, because there’s no need to ban me, just ask me to leave.) should be a bit more circumspect.

  106. Dana isn’t a troll. He’s a good guy, but he has his head in the sand on this.

    Just like most of my Twitter feed, looks like. Nobody can peel themselves away from ESTABLICAN > DEMOCRAT. That MAY HAVE BEEN TRUE at one time, but it has ceased to be.

    “At what point does the GOP lose your loyalty,” I asked one Twitterlocutor. “My loyalty to the GOP extends only as far as their ability to stop the Democrats,” he responded.

    HELLO??? IS ANYONE IN THERE??? MC FLY?? THEY DON’T STOP DEMOCRATS ANYMORE!!!

    THEY ONLY STOP CONSERVATIVES LIKE YOU!!

    Step AWAY from the normalcy bias, people! SPOCK HAS A GOATEE! I REPEAT, SPOCK HAS A GOATEE!!!!

  107. Now that I look at it, I think multiple lines of orange text is better than just the one.

  108. Buck up, cupcakes.

    Pull on your best red velvet, dust yourselves with sprinkles,
    and get with the program.

  109. Two thoughts, neither new:

    Cochrane didn’t win by playing hardball, he won by playing lowball.

    Sitting out/voting third party or democrat isn’t whining, it’s paying the Thad Cochranes of the world back in kind.

  110. The Democrats didn’t help Cochran win the nomination because they thought he’d be harder to beat in November.

  111. You can’t talk about Thad Cochrane like he was Todd Akin. Mitch McConnell and Karl Rove won’t stand for it!

  112. Did Mr Cochran “(court) people who aren’t going to vote Republican in order to disenfranchise the Republican base that beat him the first time?” Yup, sure did, and it worked. That’s politics, and it’s a rough-as-Hell game.

    There’s a monument to sophistry

  113. “a rude awakening as to just how craven the GOP is.”

    Hasn’t “politician” been a pejorative for centuries, if not millennia?

    Twenty McDaniels won’t bend the curve of The Endarkenment.

  114. Did Mr Cochran “(court) people who aren’t going to vote Republican in order to disenfranchise the Republican base that beat him the first time?” Yup, sure did, and it worked. That’s politics, and it’s a rough-as-Hell game.

    There’s a monument to sophistry

    And to criminality. It’s against the blessed rules in MS to vote for someone in the primary when you don’t intend to vote for them in the general. The fact the law can’t be enforced doesn’t mean the Establicans didn’t suborn voter fraud.

    But you keep on sticking your finger in that socket. One of these times it won’t hurt anymore.

  115. “Establicans” are Republicans

    they own the brand

    that’s the whole point

  116. Quit whining, ya tittybabies. Someone earlier actually mentioned Operation Chaos – did you guys get upset when Rush Limbaugh was urging Coloradoans to mess with the Dem primary by voting for Hillary? Course not, you love dirty tricks until they’re used against you. I just can’t figure out why a safe repub seat in effing Mississippi is of such dearness to you. It’s Mississippi. Who cares. But you hobbits do need some more wins for the Shire – at the end of the primry season you’re going to be left with one achievement – the flukey ouster of Eric Cantor. You ditched a powerful republican and replaced him with a zero. Ummm, success? Why not cut one of your nuts off while you’re at it?

    At least some of you are beginning to wake the fuck up and realize that the billionaires are not your friends. For the last 30 years you’ve been hornswoggled into supporting the Adelsons and Kochs of the world because you somehow think they’re just hardworking joes like you who just worked a little harder. Look, this whole tea party thing was doomed to fail. You were able to momentarily rush the owner’s skybox, grab some of his beer, and plop your ass down in his seat and tell him that you guys are runnin things now. He was thrown off for a minute and stomped off, but then came back with the private security goons to have you rolled out of there. He owns the Republican party. You do not. You really thought they wanted to share their power with you? You’re an unemployed nobody from Fucksville, Colorado who runs a website with a few dozen readers. They have billions of dollars. Gee, I wonder whose gonna win. Not the unemployed guy who “pioneered blog grammar” or some such horse shit.

    But but but Citizens United! Billionaires spending unlimited amount of money/speech is a good thing! It was supposed to hurt the libruls, not meeeeeeeeee

  117. Quit whining, ya tittybabies. Someone earlier actually mentioned Operation Chaos – did you guys get upset when Rush Limbaugh was urging Coloradoans to mess with the Dem primary by voting for Hillary? Course not, you love dirty tricks until they’re used against you.

    Operation Chaos was ostensibly a conservative/GOP effort to screw with the Democrats. This was a GOP effort to fuck over the GOP base. Missing the nuance there, genius?

    The Kochs are my friends. They’re funding the sorts of things that are pissing the likes of Cochran and friends off. America needs more anti-establishment billionaires.

    Hey, how’s that Oregon Obamacare exchange working, slappy?

  118. I just can’t figure out why a safe repub seat in effing Mississippi is of such dearness to you. It’s Mississippi.

    That’s because you’re about as deep as a gnat bite and as bright as a dirt clod.

  119. Blake wrote:

    As for Wombat, bad day or not, someone who has the power to ban someone (although, as a threat, it’s somewhat laughable, because there’s no need to ban me, just ask me to leave.) should be a bit more circumspect.

    Indeed, but, considering all the good he does, I think he deserves a bit of slack cutting.

    However, I do think you’re response over at TOM was spot-on and quite witty.

  120. That auto-play is killing me, BTW.

  121. freshovenbakedcodfish says June 26, 2014 at 5:07 am

    I normally don’t respond to noises coming out of a horse’s ass, but this comment in its entirety is worthy of a “fuck you and fuck off.”

    As I said previously, go troll somewhere else…though I’m sure I’ll get lectured about how codfish is really “a nice guy” who’s just misguided.

  122. Screwed up the quote tag…gonna be one of those days.

  123. Blake: That was very unlike Wombat. I don’t understand it.

    The problem was the word “paid.”

  124. No, jamiec, that’s a repeatedly banned troll who is indeed trolling. Dana is just wrong.

  125. Two nearly consecutive comments by two different people, with quote tag issues? I just don’t see it. ;-p

  126. Pablo, one word is enough to bring down the wrath of the moderator? If I’d have kept pounding on that particular line, I could see getting in trouble, but I said it once and went on to other things.

    Ah well, so it goes.

  127. I wouldn’t call that wrath, Blake. More of an admonition. Wrath has consequences.

  128. Setting aside MS’s unenforceable rule [law?] what’s most troubling is accounting for nearly 60,000 NEW votes/voters in the REPUBLICAN RUNOFF [a special election exercise, not an open Primary]. MS law states none of those votes can come from anyone who voted for the Democrat candidate in the June 3 open primary. Someone correct me if I’m wrong. But doesn’t it seem completely statistically impossible that 0.00% of those additional votes were not cast by voters who originally voted for the “D” candidate on Jun 3?

  129. reattempting to post the reference to the MS Code.

    apologies for html #FAIL.

  130. Jrez, I think there are a few people here who have documented others bragging on social media that they voted in the Democratic primary, and/or will support the Democratic candidate in November, but who turned out to vote for Cochran. There are numerous examples of Cochran supporters (whether employed or independent, I don’t know) circulating racially-inflammatory propaganda through flyers and robocalls to get black voters to turn out and vote for Cochran in the primary, with the only disclaimer being in small print. It’s a case of everyone here knowing what happened, but searching for ways to prove it.

    As far as I know, there were no checks at the polls that would have excluded anyone from voting, even if they did cast a ballot in the Democratic primary. I certainly didn’t see any such verification at my polling place, just a general voter roll, although I’d concede it’s possible that names were excluded if they signed in and voted three weeks ago on the Democratic side of the room.

    Of course finding out there were crossover voters would raise the question of “what then?” and it would be likely determined by the Establishment politicians that run the state whether to certify the election anyway, or whether to declare it invalid and call for a repeat, with checks in place to prevent the crossover vote. That, because of the racial demographics of Mississippi, would probably be halted because of the outcries of “suppression” of the black vote.

    The only proper outcome, in my opinion, would be for there to be a pointed investigation as to whether the Cochran camp effectively encouraged (and there are rumors of bribery having taken place) people to break the law to vote for him. If that were to develop, it could create a scenario where we start back at the primary level again.

    There’s no way to view this as anything better than a big warm soft turd sandwich.

  131. As far as I know, there were no checks at the polls that would have excluded anyone from voting, even if they did cast a ballot in the Democratic primary.

    The organization True The Vote [Katharine Englebrecht and J. Christian Adams being two movers of that org., an org. attacked by Lois Lerner's private IRS mafia enforcer group] was present in Miss. in force, observing and documenting the process, and I suppose, offering criticism where they saw rule breaking in real-time. I believe we can expect a serious and thoroughgoing report from True The Vote.

  132. That, because of the racial demographics of Mississippi, would probably be halted because of the outcries of “suppression” of the black vote.

    In fact, I would expect Eric Holder’s Department of Injustice to use the mere “charges” of vote suppression in pre-vote campaign literature (legal or illegal, it matters not) as a pretext to send waves of Federal Agents from the DoIj ‘Civil Rights’ division into Miss. to ‘investigate’. Bet on it.

  133. Pablo, “the admonition of the moderator” just doesn’t sing like “the wrath of the moderator.”

  134. sdferr, I sincerely hope they were looking for measures designed to prevent crossovers. This is the first year that ID at the polls was being required, and iirc, that group is more focused on that issue.

    I share your sentiment about Holder & company likely investigating down here. Particularly if it looks like McDaniel might gain some legal traction.

  135. Given Christian Adams’ professional concern with voting law and voting rights, I’d expect he would have tutored poll observers in the full range of irregularities to keep on the lookout for, and not confined the observers to a single type of problem. But that’s just a guess on my part.

  136. Irrespective of the pigmentation in one’s skin [there is no such thing as "Race(tm)," constraining a voter's current voting ability based on whom they "intend" to vote for at some future date is not only problematic but virtually impossible to enforce. But that's conflating the two issues here in my view: documented history [again, in the blind vacuum of a "skin-pigment-free zone] that is WHOM you actually voted for on JUN 3 is a knowable fact that does not stray into the thorny bushes of future intention. To the extent McDaniel has a viable action to pursue here, it is this one.

  137. What I notice in at least one assumption among many, though I think a salient one, is the presumption (an absurdity in my view) that should McDaniel (or Miss. voters apart from him) choose to support either a write-in candidate or a third party candidate or both together, which while such a candidacy might oust Thad Cochran, cannot defeat a Democrat in the Miss. Senate race. Which, y’know, ain’t necessarily so. Surely winning a write-in or third party campaign isn’t going to be an easy thing, but damned if I’d rule it out before it has even begun, particularly as more evidence of the fraud and intra-party treachery comes to light and can provide and impetuous to energy and a vigorous prosecution of such an ad hoc campaign. It’s amazing to me how people so frequently destroy active possibilities through a facile acquiescence to propaganda.

  138. There’s no way to view this as anything better than a big warm soft turd sandwich.

    So make sure Mitch McConnell is the one who has to eat it.

    This was about the leadership of the Senate Republican caucus being willing to pay any price to see Cochrane’s name on the ballot because they think that’s the surest path to enjoying all the added perks that come with being the leadership of the majority caucus.

    Prove Make them wrong by making the price Cochrane on the ballot the majority.

Leave a Reply