“Don’t ask me, I don’t give a damn / Next stop is Vietnam, uh, say, the King Sooper’s parking lot off Route 16…?”
Michael Barone on the Tea Party movement:
Like the antiwar activists of 40 years ago, the tea partiers include many good citizens moved to political involvement because of intellectually serious concerns about public policy. Similarly, they include a much smaller number of cranks, conspiracy theorists and congenital malcontents.
Tea partiers have caused some internal party splits (see the New York District 23 special election) and some may launch primary challenges or third-party efforts that will elect Democrats. Any time a large number of motivated people inject themselves into electoral politics, they cause a certain amount of chaos.
They also add a lot of energy, political creativity and enthusiasm into a moribund and dejected political party, like the Democrats of 1968 and the Republicans of 2008. New people change the positions and focus of their parties. The Democrats before 1968 were a pro-Cold War party. Since 1968 they have been, with occasional exceptions, a dovish party. Hawks need not apply (ask Joe Lieberman).
The Republicans for the last two decades have been a party whose litmus tests have been cultural issues, especially abortion. The tea partiers have helped to change their focus to issues of government overreach and spending. That may be a helpful pivot, given the emergence of a millennial generation uncomfortable with crusading cultural conservatism.
It’s not clear whether the tea partiers’ influence on Republicans will last as long as the antiwar cohort’s imprint on Democrats. But their concern — the fact that government spending is on a trajectory to increase far beyond revenues — seems likely to persist. In which case a spontaneous movement that no one predicted and that no one person led could end up, again, reshaping one of our great political parties.
[my emphasis]
In a quiet way, Barone makes a resounding argument here — and it is one we’ve explored on protein wisdom for several years now: namely, will fiscal and legal conservatism — which to my way of thinking is tied to free enterprise, smaller government, and individual rights (and so can properly be called classical liberalism or even libertarianism) — sell better, in national elections, than the standard rhetoric of “cultural conservatism” that has for years been (in many cases appropriately) tied to the GOP?
My own opinion is that yes, such a change in message is precisely what is needed to reinvigorate the popularity of the classical liberal ideals on which this country was founded. And my reason for believing this is twofold: first, the rhetorical strategy of the left has been to try to tether the tea partiers to precisely the kind of social conservatism they have for years caricatured. And so we have the popular depiction of Tea Party participants as uptight racists and Bible-clinging gun nuts — unsophisticated hicks whose prudishness can be highlighted with a “clever” and risque play on the name (teabaggers! Lulz!) — precisely because this is where, politically speaking, the left finds the “right” most vulnerable.
Second, I’ve long argued that a move to re-emphasize individual rights and true tolerance (of the kind intended in the First Amendment) — that is, a move to rectify the bureaucratic determinism of the PC culture — is a message that, while it might not cut across ideologies, will almost certainly cut across party lines, with many who self-identify as Democrat (rather than, say, “progressive”) willing to support candidates who run on such promises.
If, as many argue, we are truly a center-right country, there is no reason we should be held hostage by far left progressivism. But in order to win over “moderates,” we don’t need “compassionate conservatism”; what we need is fiscal restraint, and the foregrounding of classical liberal ideals.
I believe such a political formulation would resonate with many Americans; and I believe it would also take power away from left, who’d be forced to try to fit their caricatures around a message that demonstrably refuses to wear such buffoonish clothing.
Consider it the new culture wars. Only this time, the culture we are trying to save is “American,” first and foremost.
Hells yeah.
I think about it like this: if a guy like Huckabee is getting votes, we have a serious problem.
I don’t know, Jeff. Once a society gets used to sucking on nanny’s teat, it gets awfully hard to pull it out. Maggie tried it with us, and damn if it isn’t firmly back in our toothless mouths again.
Standing up for personal responsibility, limited government and fiscal restraint may not be a vote winner – I sure hope I’m wrong.
Bravo and well stated. Social conservatism pushes away many younger people and with reason. Many younger people aren’t necessarily loose morally (the so-con’s definition, anyway) but rather think that type of morality is better suited for institutions such as a place of worship, or more pointedly to the individual themselves to exercise. Issues, of much greater import such as legal and fiscal conservatism are far more enticing to young people than the leaders of the “progressive” movement would ever venture to guess. Hell, I don’t care who steers the ship, but a captain is needed for sure, in order for those classical liberal ideas to once again take root, and flourish, in the United States.
I think that finding oneself in the position of having to save the thing is a direct indicator that the thing is by definition, gone. The American thing, I think, was the overwhelming individual will of Americans to work together to preserve our charter, and the spirit (to use a vague, but common enough term) of that charter. Once that will has disappeared in great numbers, the American thing disappeared with it. Perhaps it can be reestablished, I don’t know, but I do believe that any such reestablishment will have to take place in those people who now no longer will the preservation of that charter, not in those who are trying against all odds to keep it.
I should add that I don’t see a natural and unavoidable conflict between fiscal conservatism and social conservatism. Rather, I think the very notion of “compassionate conservatism” and Huckabee-type rhetoric creates an unnatural and entirely avoidable wedge between these two groups.
It may not, SW. But at least we’ll know if it can stand or fall on its own.
McCain is a statist. So is someone like Huckabee. So why vote GOP? Voting Democrat allows you to be statist while pretending you’re for freedom because you didn’t vote for any of those “religious nuts” who will tell you how to live.
While you drive your hybrid car. On the way to your quota-ed job. Where you can’t smoke. Or make a member of the opposite sex feel uncomfortable. By, like, talking to them.
Your glass is half empty. If you want it half full, think of the thing as being on sabbatical, or vacationing at a theme park with the kids.
Compassionate conservatism has always been a misnomer. It was an attempt by the republicans to persuade people they “care” just as much as the democrats do. In truth, the republican party shouldn’t let compassionate be one of its primary virtues- instead, as Jeff points out, fiscal policy, smaller government and more free choice are the cornerstones of the philosophy. Quite frankly, compassion in government distracts from the real issues- ie can government do X, can government afford X, is X constitutional allowed. Conservatives, especially fiscal conservatives, should absolutely be the Party of No, when the no is applied to more government spending, more handouts for people who work and more social programs which further bankrupt this country but make some people “feel better.”
I dunno whether I can fit it into a vacationer as metaphor. It feels much more like a marriage in dissolution, with one partner hoping against hope the marriage can be preserved and the other hating the mere sight of its mate.
Things have a way of changing once you break up and start dating again and realize that the stranger you were mooning after is in reality a daft slut with an untrimmed bush.
Uhhh … uhhhh … um … Racist fear-mongering godbothering hilljacks.
I may be mistaken but I believe you have laid out Sarah Palin’s position(s) exactly. Fiscal conservatism, small government, rights of the individual.
I think Jeff and Matt are onto something with the compassionate conservative crap. It was carte blanche to spend in the name of compassion and it led to all the other Washington negatives for those in power which is why R’s got voted out of power. The voter knows hypocrisy when it sees it and many times that is all the voter needs to know.
*
It took roughly 150 years in the US before a politician had to articulate the principle “politics stops at the waters edge”. Why so long? Could it have been because until that time the principle had been taken for granted, a matter unnecessary to be spoken aloud? It took only another 50 years or so for the principle to be abandoned altogether. Something had happened.
True.
But perhaps something can happen again. Historically, have there ever been large scale anti-statist rallies all across the country?
We need a Math and Reality Party.
Sarah Palin shifts the focus back to hicktarded cultural issues every time she whores for the spotlight whether she talks about cultural issues or not. And she does it in the GOP’s name.
Not helpful.
Sarah Palin is a cultural issue I think.
And she was awful fast out of the gate with an endorsement of that Tebow cunt.
link
“But perhaps something can happen again. Historically, have there ever been large scale anti-statist rallies all across the country?”
No there haven’t been (anti-statist rallies), so far as I can recall bh. The Tea-Party movement is to my way of thinking, something new on the political scene. And very good, so far as it goes (has gone, for who can tell where it goes next?). But my concern is that the “something” which we’re in need of happening is a revolution in the minds of the numerous left in the country, who’s minds are genuinely set against the “thing” I believe the United States to have been, and who, in their numbers, can see to it the American thing is thwarted at every turn. Cooperation among the proponents of American liberty is to be expected and will be all to the good. Cooperation among those proponents of liberty and their opposition is the problem — I don’t see how that opposition changes themselves into cooperators. They seem to think they know better.
Ah, I didn’t know the American Tebow chasm was widening again. I’ve got to pay more attention. To Sarah Palin. Or something.
Cultural conservatives may have a hard time finding comfort in the new paradigm. It may prove useful to remind some people that morality cannot be assigned – if there are obligations to be met (charity, etc.) we can only meet them through our own acts. Appointing government to do so does not in any way absolve us from our own responsibilities, and because it may compel others to fund that which find abhorrent (e.g. Catholics and the Senate health care bill), is in fact immoral.
The point is that whores like Sarah Palin can’t help themselves from playing to abortion-obsessed freaks. Because it’s who she is.
And she makes the Republican party own it.
Unlike Obama, who says he doesn’t want his daughters punished with a child. No, he doesn’t own the issue one single bit.
Right. Unlike Palin who thinks teen pregnancy is a great opportunity to Celebrate Life and book a media tour.
Which, it’s not like her dumb as dirt Levi-fucking slut daughter had big plans.
Why no shared hate for Obama in regards to this issue? We know you are no great fan of his.
Obsessed is an interesting word choice.
Perhaps it was unfair of me to use the ‘we’ formulation. Please consider ‘it is readily apparent that you are no great fan of his’ as my revision.
Dick Armey was on Laura Ingraham this morning, trying to clarify his point that when conservatives preach fiscal restraint, smaller gubmint, and localism, we win, but when we use statism to promote socially conservative values, we lose. Jonah Goldberg made the same case in Liberal Fascism
As I’ve said before, Huckabee is a snake, and a statist, and he’s totally on board with using the levers of state power to “make people be good.”
Which, in my religion, is why Lucifer fell from Heaven: he wanted to force us all to be good instead of letting us choose for ourselves (and take the risk of failure).
Also, ‘feets, I’m not sure why now is the time for anti-Palin rhetoric. Nobody here is a rabid Palinista nor a rabid anti-Palinista (except you). I think I speak for most of us when I say that if she turns out to be the one with the best chops to carry out a classically liberal agenda, we’ll pull the lever for her; otherwise, we won’t.
Not sure what the visceral sniping is good for. She’s not the enemy.
Uhh, Jeff,
HF is off its meds again. Drivel like the couple of above posts don’t help libertarian LEANING conservatives
at all. . . .
I want to personally and forcefully denounce JimK at #13 for wanton stick-poking and shitpot-stirring.
Thou Shalt Not Mention Sarah Palin.
Litmus tests, and all that.
“Not sure what the visceral sniping is good for. She’s not the enemy.”
dicentra, where Jeff says (I think correctly)
happyfeet’s concerns about Palin, it seems to me, may be directed at precisely how she and her image strike those “self-identified” Democrats, the very people proponents of liberty would need to win over. So to the extent that hf may be correct that Palin and her image put those people off, to that extent she and her image don’t help the Republican party hf is evidently intent on helping. Is how I read it.
Cooperation among the proponents of American liberty is to be expected and will be all to the good. Cooperation among those proponents of liberty and their opposition is the problem — I don’t see how that opposition changes themselves into cooperators. They seem to think they know better.
sdferr,
I don’t think it’s a case of turning the opposition into supporters, so much as it is about robbing the opposition of its support. Even here in the middle of blue-blue St. Paul, I’m surrounded by Democrats who complain loudly about fiscal issues.
If the Tea Party produces a few decent communicators who can convince people that morality is a local issue and not something to be decided in the Washington cesspool, I think we’ll go far. It’s true that we’re talking about taking away goodies for a lot of people, and that’s a really tough sell. But the flip side of the coin is that we’re not destroying these programs and policies; we’re pushing them back to the States and counties where they belong. We also have compelling arguments that programs maintained locally don’t come with the kind of strings that Washington’s dollars come with, and that removing power and money from Washington takes away their fuel from graft, corruption, and back-scratching.
Sooner or later, we’ll fall back on the hoary old “there’s no money, so eat shit” chestnut. I’d love it if we could set things to rights before that point, but I’m not holding my breath.
Problem is that fiscal conservatism is not as easy as it sounds. Example, meeting state pension obligations – should underfunded pensions be funded by federal bailouts? Simple answer is no. Problem is that many state workers are contractually entitled to these payments, failure to provide a federal bailout will mean draconian cuts in essential services, police, medical, emergency services. Unlike GM, default is not an option, and simply balancing budgets will not suffice. Of course a balanced budget would be a nice start.
My exit point is that honest limited government will always be undermined by politicians who make promises they don’t intend to keep and voters who want services that they cannot pay for. Structural change is necessary, but will be undercut by the same dishonest politicians and disenfranchised voters. : ))
Cause dicentra… Team R can’t celebrate Palin and slip the noose of cultural conservatism and re-brand themselves a small-government fiscally responsible party cause Sarah is a fusion of cultural conservative scoldings and tea party blather.
An obnoxiously loud fusion I think, and visceral sniping is a wholly appropriate response.
In general terms, I think you have something there Squid. Though I think I’d widen the issue somewhat: I think that it isn’t as simple as “taking away” but can be demonstrated to be more akin to bringing unknown but expected benefits to accrue in future — i.e., more freedom will yield more products through competitive effort to please the market (think drug development, for instance). It’s a complicated argument to have to make, but the truth of it may be the factor that puts it over the top.
Aw, jeez — not this show again. <changes channel>
Palin the person brands herself culturally conservative, Palin the politician, by record in office, does not. Massive disinformation campaigns to the contrary.
And too Squid, I failed to mention the inescapable waste of capital that necessarily plagues government spending. It is too great to overlook and I shouldn’t have. People can be brought to see the wasted effort, an honest effort even, a thing apart from corruption and graft but which is even larger as a function of monies spent, I think.
I’m less concerned about Palin than the willful embrace of Palin by people who would have us believe they only want what’s best for their little country.
But I don’t believe that. I believe they see themselves validated by her wins and feel a hot flush of humiliation when she fails. I think she’s a pop star type scrawl-her-name-on-your-trapper-keeper ego extension for adult people what should know better…
I believe such a political formulation would resonate with many Americans; and I believe it would also take power away from left, who’d be forced to try to fit their caricatures around a message that demonstrably refuses to wear such buffoonish clothing.
I am waiting to be resonated please. But Sarah Palin does not demonstrably refuse to wear buffoonish clothing, and she’s very dangerous to the endeavor what is envisioned here I think.
Too few people on Team R have an adequate appreciation for how reviled this woman is, and that has significance far beyond the political fate of one hoochie from Alaska.
So to the extent that hf may be correct that Palin and her image put those people off, to that extent she and her image don’t help the Republican party hf is evidently intent on helping. Is how I read it.
That point can easily be made without using “whore” and “dumb as dirt Levi-fucking slut” and “hicktarded.” Characterizing Sarah Palin and her fans in those terms is a Leftist tactic, ‘feets. Like it or not, conservative Christians are extremely plentiful in the TEA Party and other anti-statist crowds.
No need to let your personal predjudices get in the way of stopping the Progressive juggernaut. We can argue about that stuff AFTER we stop the proggs.
The math and reality party called me on the phone and wanted an answer so I missed a bit.
But, Squid said what I was thinking.
Sloganize it a few different ways and I think that’s a winner, sdferr.
Sarah Palin does not demonstrably refuse to wear buffoonish clothing, and she’s very dangerous to the endeavor what is envisioned here I think. Too few people on Team R have an adequate appreciation for how reviled this woman is,
We don’t? No appreciation? We’re not tuned in to the MSM sufficently to hear the horrid sniping and wicked slanders?
If you say that we should pull Sarah off her pedestal because of how she’s made out by progressives who hate her everlasting guts, aren’t we giving in to Leftist assumptions about reality? Is that who we are?
She is who she is. What, she’s supposed to pretend to be “sophisticated” to avoid embarrassing people who are afraid of being associated with a “hicktard”?
WTF?
Go feet youself, happyfuck.
Feets,
I’m dead. Leave me the fuck alone already!
It’s not a tactic, di… it’s heart-felt and sincere disgust, and it springs from the same well of my disgust with the current empty-headed pop star what is running our little country.
Like it or not, conservative Christians are extremely plentiful in the TEA Party and other anti-statist crowds.
If “conservative Christians” want to be just another feckless identity group what put their interests ahead of our little country’s then I piss on their heads with all the other interest groups. They’re not a whit better.
He can’t quite slide the dead horse under the door yet.
So what, happyfeet? If you’re against abortion you’re just supposed to shut the fuck up? Is that it?
I think you’re right. I do find Sarah Palin embarrassing. Just like I find that Tebow slut embarrassing.
Enough is enough I think. Conservative Christians don’t just want tolerance they want to foist their perverted lifestyles on our whole little country, and it’s time people stood up to them.
Quiet, people, I thought I just heard something.
…
Ahyep, little green feetfalls.
Yes, Mark. Anti-abortion people should shut their stupid fucking mouths quit their self-righteous and annoying whining.
‘feets, you’re painting with a brush about a mile wide.
Jesus. Our little country’s dying a not at all slow death and YES, we don’t need to be talking about abortion. Which is why I linked Sarah’s endorsement of that vile Tebow woman.
HF Make me shut up. You can’t cause yuor a foul mouthed piece of shit.
Tsar Barry shouting (overheard on radio today): “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.”
Citoyen: “I thanks my lucky stars. For now.”
On the other hand, David Thompson reminds us that Leftism is about virtue, whereas right-wing is not.
http://davidthompson.typepad.com/davidthompson/2010/03/but-left-equals-virtue-.html
Their country’s interest, as defined by…?
Then why are you?
Abortion is in the post Mr. McGehee… I agree wholeheartedly with this post…
I just… have to go to Ralph’s with NG.
I do find Sarah Palin embarrassing.
Who is the group of people in front of whom you’re embarrassed? Why do you seek their good opinion? Are you sleeping with (or hoping to) one or more of them?
Conservative Christians don’t just want tolerance they want to foist their perverted lifestyles on our whole little country, and it’s time people stood up to them.
They???? I’m a Conservative Christian, ‘feets. On whom do I want to foist my “perverted” lifestyle? And what exactly makes my lifestyle “perverted”? Which standard of “normal” are you using to define “perverted” and why should anyone hew to that standard?
Time to call me a bitch and a whore, ‘feets. I’m every bit as bad as the people whose guts you viscerally hate.
Though whether that says more about me than about you I’ll leave for others to decide.
Jeff, I couldn’t agree more with this post, and the opinions of both you and Barone.
Maybe I’m older than the prevailing bunch here, but it was precisecly this message that brought together the “Reagan coalition”. Regardless of his personal religious convictions, he was not going to put the weight fo the US government behind social issues; precisely because it infringed on the rights of others to choose their own lifestyles.
While he used to meet, and sympathized with, pro-life groups, he never pressed for laws against abortion…
just my two cents, and that’s about all it’s worth…
And BTW, those horrible Jesus freaks who insist on not funding abortion with gubmint funds are stopping ObamaCare from passing. Don’t be spitting on your allies because they “embarrass” you.
The same sentiment is in Barone’s piece. Bolded. And then followed up by Jeff in broader terms. What more do you want?
People can think what they want. If you want to change what they think, convince them. But you’re not doing that. Not at all. If you think this is important, then prove it by actually trying to persuade people.
Then why did you need to go full-thor-stupid about Sarah Palin?
The next time I lose patience and TrollHammer you, ‘feets, you’ll stay TrollHammered.
“Don’t be spitting on your allies because they “embarrass” you.”
Did hf cite Stupak somewhere? I must have missed it.
I’m glad Bart Stupak didn’t get that memo.
Via Insty is a Cato article laying out the cost of something self-styled conservatives always overfund from “compassion”.
Think of the children. By paying too much and getting too little.
If Palin were to run on a fiscally conservative, classical liberal platform, I’d vote for her — particularly if she had a record of governing like a libertarian.
Whether or not the party would want to nominate her, given the social baggage that now travels with her, is another (and a different) question — one that would need be considered from several perspectives.
Oh. And I don’t see how Tim Tebow’s mother is “vile.” I mean, you may as well call the people who press you to spay and neuter your pets “vile.”
Then stop. Seriouly.
Seriously, feets. Are all people who are anti-abortion vile? Or just the people that do commercials about it?
Goddamnit, there are people’s feelings involved here! REAL people, Jeff. With REAL feelings. And that whore breeder cunt and her hicktard Godbotherer marketing enablers don’t care how many not-mommys get theirs’ hurt. FEELINGS, Jeff.
Understanding happyfeet’s lament, but questioning the execution. He sure and hell does sound an awful lot like an over emoting progressive do gooder here, doesn’t he.
I hate to be an annoyance feets, but have you been to a Tea Party? As someone who has attended them, I’ve seen a good cross section of the American public, from the strong libertarians to the cultural conservatives to just the average American Joe and Jane who don’t like the massive governmental failure in D.C.
It’s easy to cherry pick from what the MSM presents, but to actually attend one and talk to the tea partiers is a different story. Just because Mrs. Palin has embraced the Tea Party and is cheerleading it doesn’t make every one who attends one just like her.
Palin shows up and draws crowds everywhere she goes. HUGE crowds. Name another pol on our side that does that. Think hard. Nobody comes to mind, huh? Plus, she infuriates all the right people. Which is nice. After this buffooon in the Oval Office, the tall skinny one that smokes–she will be so very refreshing.
Gee, I didn’t mean to start something, just a simple reflection. Values. No more no less.
Oy. Values’ll get us every time. No, really.
I generally avoid being where I’m not welcome. If “team R” doesn’t want me, being a Christian and voting my conscience, I’ll vote for someone else.
Good luck finding a majority of fiscal conservatives while demeaning Christians.
Heh, that cracks me up. $1 for a double cheeseburger is a value.
Principles, not values.
I really don’t think that’s the thrust of the post, Lee. It’s certainly not something I agree with.
I agree with your post wholeheartedly Jeff. And I think a classically liberal fiscal conservative could get votes from Republicans and Democrats – a-la Ross Perot.
But I have little hope for this country getting on the fiscal conservative and classically liberal bandwagon any time soon. It will never happen while Dems are in power, and I won’t trust Republicans until they vow to put spending cuts ahead of tax cuts.
Gee, I didn’t mean to start something, just a simple reflection
Ordinarily, you wouldn’t have started anything. It’s just that ‘feets has a thing against Palin and other prominent cultural conservatives.
Because he’s not a cultural conservative. Fine. Neither is Jeff. Neither are half the people on this blog. No one’s asking them to change.
Unless I was too drunk to remember the time I wrote 27 posts at the pub and innumerable comments insisting that What This Country Needs Is For Everyone To Be Mormon, And If You Disagree With Me You’re Going To Hell Tomorrow, Here: Let Me Send You There.
I remember that series of posts, dicentra, but I was definitely drunk at the time.
Tea Party blather panders to me exactly baxtrice… it’s fine with me… it’s just that when Sarah Palin mouths it then it loses much of its charm.
But yes that Tebow woman is a vile strumpet I think, Jeff… and she can lord her unaborted half-wit son in front of women who made a different choice all day long if she wants, but I’ll still piss on her head for it.
Did hf cite Stupak somewhere?
No, but the alleged “logic” that ‘feets is using today puts Stupak in that camp.
I think happyfeets needs to go fuck himself with a frozen sawfish, is all. Don’t shoot the messenger, though.
But the point Mr. Jeff is that this blog is calling for a focus on limited government while lauding the Tebow hoochie and sneering at teen lesbians.
It’s quintessentially nutshell of where Team R finds itself these days.
dicentra – I am not pro government funding of abortion but I could care less if the government funds abortion if it funds everything else. What on earth difference would it make?
I don’t see how Tim Tebow’s mother is “vile.”
Because, like Sarah, she chose not to abort, and by making that choice public, she “lord[s] her unaborted half-wit son in front of women who made a different choice all day long.”
Lords it over. By saying, “I’m glad I didn’t abort,” she’s lording it over someone who did.
How does that work, ‘feets? Did someone who did abort do something to be ashamed of? If not, how can the pronouncement “I’m glad I didn’t abort” be construed as some kind of judgment?
BTW, ‘feets, aren’t you glad Jeff’s birth mother didn’t abort? I am.
That was aimed at hf bh , Jeff hasn’t demeaned anyone.
I could care less if the government funds abortion if it funds everything else. What on earth difference would it make?
You want your tax dollars to go to Focus on the Family? I thought not. How about no gubmint funding for anyone anymore? I’m down with that.
She cast her vile ass in a SUPERBOWL commercial, di. That’s fairly lordy I think. But if you followed the ad’s call to action and went to the video online you were treated to Daddy Tebow taking a break from his molestings of filipinos to kindly exhort you not to “kill your baby” … and me I think that was a really bitchy message for the self-righteous Tebow cunt to get on board with.
Ok, I’m now prescribing two frozen sawfishies, rectally, for hf’s deadhorsebeating OCD.
You crazy anarchist. I say we still fund the guys with guns and the legal system. Then I’m in too.
A really bitchy message that the witless Sarah Palin endorsed enthusiastically.
I’m down with the no government funding for anyone anymore, di.
Hi OI yes my execution sucks.
I tried to figure out a more better one and failed.
Sorry happyfeet, but you’re the enemy because you’ve chosen to disagree with a portion of Teh Narrative. What you’ve done is worse than an abortion, because free thought imperils all else. And by free thought, I mean pointing out that Sarah’s not very bright. To be useful, you must cling to Teh Narrative in the face of the most self evident facts.
Barone is an idiot.
First he starts out trying to defend the antiwar f~tards and trying to compare those commie KGB backed treasonous pricks to the Tea Movement is an insult. The TEA Movement is nothing like and has absolutely noting to do with the KGB backed 1960’s antiwar movement.
Then he tries another bit of revisionist history in order to blame the Tea Movement in saying
“Tea partiers have caused some internal party splits (see the New York District 23 special election) and some may launch primary challenges or third-party efforts that will elect Democrats”
That’s all BS. First off; the Republican Party hacks caused the mess in NY23, not the Tea Party and Independents. Second; he’s also wrong to say that Tea Parties backing candidates in the Primary will win Democrats Elections. That right there is false on it’s face. Totally false, as he’s talking Primaries, not General Elections. If we run and back Conservatives in the Primaries it can result in a stronger Republican Candidate in the General. Reagan proved that strong Conservatives win the Republicans elections, pussy RINOS generally loose them, ie John McCain.
And there is certainly nothing stopping the Tea Party from running and or supporting a Conservative Dem for a more robust Democrat Party Primary election too. Save for the fact that they’d actually have to find one to run first.
Think about that for a minute. No reason we can’t be working to take back the Democrat Party too, and bring those treason committing bastards kicking and screaming back from European Socialism and deprogram them too.
Why does it always have to be Republicans against Eurotrash lovin’ Socialist Democrats here? Why cant’ we ever get back to American Constitution minded Republicans vs American Constitution minded Democrats? Why?
Why do you Democrats always gotta opt for Slavery over freedom?
Reading comprehension: it’s not just for dinner any more.
It’s hard not to imagine the above as Chuckie offering ‘feets some candy if he gets into the van.
Run, ‘feets, run.
happyfeets’ purported free thought:
That was some fearsome thinking, there. I am so imperiled.
Wake me up when Charles says something else remarkably stupid.
No it’s more an abjuring of identity politics I think, Charles. And Sarah Palin’s popularity is the essence of identity politics even moreso than the little president man is the essence of identity politics.
And there’s every reason to think that identity politics will be doing more of the movings and shakings for Team R come 2012 than principles about limited government, and very little reason to think otherwise.
I mean, even the very stones (not to be confused with The Stones) know that happyfeets’ thinking in these matters is barely deeper than the little puddles on my pool deck where the contractor didn’t quite level the slab all the way.
If pressed, happyfeet will say that he supports free speech, so long as he’s allowed to proclaim loudly and violently against those who make speech he disagrees with, those who support them, those who denounce them insufficiently, and those who wonder what all the fuss is about.
I’m a guy who thinks the government should stay the hell out of the abortion quagmire altogether, but I personally find abortion troublesome, due mostly to questions of when an unborn child’s rights supersede a not-yet-mother’s rights. It’s a terrible philosophical debate, with murder on one side and slavery on the other, which is another reason why I don’t want the State anywhere near it.
There used to be a time when “legal, safe and rare” was a fine position to take regarding abortion. But until I embrace the beauty of abortion, and join happyfeet in extolling its virtues, I’m denigrated as an unenlightened hicktard.
A few months ago, that sort of treatment by happyfeet would have upset me greatly. Today, I worry more about happyfeet’s well-being than I do his regard for me. And that’s sad.
I’m just against putting stupid people in higher office. When a craven politician sells out his country for his own gain, I at least want the worthless fuck to be aware of what he’s done.
Palin became a no go for me when she endorsed McCain. Do I win some sort of prize?
‘Cause, if protein wisdom is confused as a Yeah4Palin message board to some, I’ll point out it existed for many years before the last presidential election.
So, I can deduce that Charles is pretty fucking stupid, too? Because other people in this here joint say that it is so. No? It’s all relative, and just a tad over blown. This whole intelligence canard. Listen, I’m willing to accept that in certain ways Barack Obama is a very bright man. However, he is an absolute fucking disaster for the stuff you claim to hold true and I absolutely hold true. Intelligence didn’t serve us to well, there, now did it.
Part of the problem with elites, both self styled and annointed, is that they hated on Palin due to reasons completely non aligned to intelligence. Her vocal inflections for one. Her “down home” nature for another. She’s never impressed me that much, but not because my “betters” told me to be unimpressed. So, spare me your unique, if by unique I mean worn, tired and unoriginal, “Palin’s an idiot” trope, Charles. I expect somebody smarter than her to tell me, and you have done nothing to convince me that you’re the one. Plus, I think happyfeet’s biggest problem with her is policy driven. The yuks about her intellect, hoochiness, etc…are more stylistic than descriptive is my guess.
Isn’t that the definition of free speech? (well, minus the violently part)
And Sarah Palin’s popularity is the essence of identity politics even moreso than the little president man is the essence of identity politics.
What identity group is that, hf? Hockey Moms? MILFs? Happily married women who support their husbands’ successes and their own successes at the same time?
Oh, no, wait — faithful Christians who encourage their daughters not to have abortions. Oh, Gaia, save us from such wicked monsters!
I agree with the endorsing of McCain being a deal-breaker.
And that’s not fair Mr. Squid… I don’t embrace the beauty of abortion… I don’t care about it. I don’t want to think about it. Mama Tebow and Sarah Palin wanted to have a discussion about abortion. I decided to oblige the insipid whores.
I may have to walk this back partway. It could just be that the rubber under hf’s thoughts is not making very good contact with the road, and is instead performing doughnuts on some vacant, frozen high school parking lot in the midwest.
Obama’s most redeeming quality is that he’s a terrible politician. In my book the best Democrat is the one that can beat out all the other Democrats, but then fail to get anything accomplished. Running in the wrong direction is not progress.
Unfortunately, I have very little hope for the Next Republican being much better.
Then you have put too much emphasis on the speaker and not the message. It is demonstrably shown that even our socialist president could campaign on fiscal responsibility and get elected. Now that it’s been over a year, we know he was just mouthing those words – but the end result is themessage is still strong no matter who’s speaking it.
If you want my opinion, Sarah didn’t ask for this spotlight, but she is reveling in it. The MSM will continue to shovel dirt on her and she will continue to poke them in the eye for the treatment she received on the campaign. A scorned woman, ‘feets…
I should say that they hated on Palin FIRST due to the above mentioned reasons and then Palin, for whatever reason, gave them some ammo to ratch up operation “Alaskan Hicktard”.
OI my biggest problem with Palin is that she has no… she’s seemingly unconcerned with how much damage she does. She’s appallingly self-interested I think given the straits our little country finds itself in.
She validates the politics of empty charisma.
Isn’t that the definition of free speech?
Yes, Chuckles, though many of us around here would prefer it if the base insults could be leavened with a bit of actual argument once in a while. Free speech may allow for substanceless insults, but its higher function is to promote reasoned debate, which is something that ‘feets seems to have abandoned altogether.
Well, that is very fair in my estimation, happyfeet. But all politicians are “appalingly self-interested”. It’s almost a requirement to hold higher office. We have the most vacuus charismatic president in ages in the white house right now. I share your hope that we don’t double down, especially with one ostensibly espousing our “values”. But as Jeff said above, IF she runs as a classical liberal, and there is sufficient proof that she will, then she’ll get my vote.
And ‘feets, I remain immensely fond of you, and I cherish all that you’ve contributed to this group. I’m just saddened by the uncontrolled vitriol that this topic brings out in you, and I wish we could move past it.
Well, it would be, complete with counterpoint, right up until some jackass says something moronic like this:
…because then, everyone does a quick facepalm and starts looking really hard at their shoes and wishing they were somewhere a great distance from said jackass. Which really puts a damper on the conversation, if you know what I mean.
Damage? WTF?
Please insert the little old word “if” before “there”.
I’ve made gobs of substancey arguments, Mr. Squid. Then I get told I heart abortions and hate Christians. Which is not true.
But here’s something blatantly substancey: Team R is not up to the task of a laser-like focus on limited government and fiscal responsibility.
Cause abortion is shiny, and Sarah Palin is apt to dangle it at the darnedest times.
Like she did when she was Governor, ‘feets? Remember when she called for outlawing it? Me neither.
Agreed.
Neither is Team D, I think.
EMERGENCY BRAKE!!
hf’s starting to take out the light posts
Now Pablo, I’m cool with your vitriolic retort, but Squid would “prefer it if the base insults could be leavened with a bit of actual argument once in a while.”
I love all you guys almost, OI, and I wish our little country had the luxury of a Sarah Palin and other social conservative la la la… a prosperous and free country can ban abortion and hang teen lesbians by their nipple rings if it wants to. A downtrodden piece of shit dirty socialist one?
Good luck with that.
Mr. Pablo I linked a link… and Sarah Palin dangles abortion implicitly… cause she had a retarded kid on purpose, which I have no problem with, but it’s a very Lifey thing to do, and she’s not the one to pick for when you don’t want to talk about abortion I don’t think.
Mitt probably isn’t either.
Oh, that’s not vitriol, Charles. It’s an observation.
Some people pay good money for that, hf.
that was inadvertently kind of hot I thought
NTTAWWT, I forgot to add.
Dude. Then don’t read it. Change the channel. Take a few deep breaths, shake your head a few times and then go to the Food Network and watch Giada DeLaurentis, preferably in HD. Or regular porn. Anything else, really.
Personally, I think that team R is up to the task of focusing on not only limiting government, but shrinking it-like Reagan did, as well as fiscal responsibility; especially freed from having to support a social agenda driven by “compassionate” conservatism…
And especially when public the public consciousness indicates that the vast majority of low information and uninvolved voters have finally realized the benevolent tyrrany as well as the unsustainable economic recklessness of pur current path…
“W” didn’t get the vast support he did simply by being the “Un-Gore” or the “Un-Kerry”; he did so by promising to address the social security entitlement economic black hole. But then he started cutting deals with statist Democrats in order to retain their support for the then badly going war in Iraq…
I disagree with hf that Palin is a dangerous to our Republic as the imperious Obama is. But, regardless of my loathing and objection to abortion, I agree with him that it should not be a prominent issue when the rest of the Republic is going to hell in a handbasket.
It would be enough for me, and should be enough to all social-cons, that the gonernment not be in the business of funding or facilitating it. That means no federal funding of the process, or of it’s proponents, like the Planned Parenthood eugenists. Likewise, no money to Focus on the Family for the opposite endeavors either.
Deep pocket social-cons can continue to fund foundations that pay ladies not to abort, but adopt instead. Likewise, population bomb believing gaia worshippers can do the same for planned parenthood.
But Palin is not even in the same league as Obama, make no mistake…
Can anyone else see the echoes of the original slavery arguments during the constitutional convention here besides me?
How long has this Giada woman been on television and why wasn’t I informed?
But anyway, I’m not sure how Palin “implicitly dangles” abortion. Get one, don’t get one; whatever your reasons either way, none of my concern.
There’s room for Democrats in the limited government camp. Thing is, it has to be true that if Uncle Sugar isn’t giving you goodies, he’s not controlling your toilets or paint stripping, either.
The hanging nipple ring made me think of A Man Called Horse. Not hot.
BTW,
‘feets, Facebook? Really? You know what happened when the little president man fell for that, right?
and Sarah Palin dangles abortion implicitly… cause she had a retarded kid on purpose, which I have no problem with, but it’s a very Lifey thing to do
happy,
With all due respect, she was walking the walk, so to speak. It shows a measure of character and the courage of her convictions. I doubt seriously that Trig is merely a social-con political prop.
Seriously, my friend.
I take it you’re also unfamiliar with Nigella Lawson, bh?
Well, you got me there. There’s nothing I like more than social conservatism, and nothing I hate more than lesbians.
Michael Barone isn’t an idiot. The anthemic what the naive anti-war protesters were listening to, and singing themselves even. What did they know at the time? Was it that their government was lying to them? Isn’t this well understood today? That our government is happy to lie to us? Yeah, no similarities there.
Familiar now, Jim. Thanks Google. Curvy, that one. I have to start watching the Food Network apparently.
Quick reaction to Giada link above: Boobies!
One should not question what one likes, but simply enjoy it.
Have the TEA partiers rushed to embrace Stupak? Because if they have I’ve missed it.
My understanding is, lacking the abortion funding issue Bart Stupak would fully embrace Obamacare.
Perhaps that is the reason the TEA party people have not made him their champion?
Squid do really think that Sarah Palin transcends identity politics?
I think that’s where she begins and ends. Have you noticed how chary she is about using the word I and favors we wherever she can?
It’s a trick!
Jeff I didn’t say you I said the blog. I can take it back if you like.
Mr. Reed first of all there is no respect due whatsoever, but with respect very much due to you I just meant that you’d be hard-pressed to divorce Sarah Palin from the abortion issue. She’s just sort of evocative of it is all I meant.
is that lady related to Dino?
Daughter, I think, hf.
Granddaughter
Granddaughter.
Whatever the food she actually cooks, I’m prepared to rank her as the greatest chef of all time.
Don’t count out Mario Batali. At least on the boob front…
good talk
I watched her make Osso Buco once. I gained 4 pounds and a case of priapism.
Somewhat related.
Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Fool me thrice, smarmyfeet it is, then.
Because she chose not to have one. And said so. In front of other people.
She’s a married, churchgoing conservative woman, so naturally she evokes abortion in the minds of those who are so obsessed with the issue they want everybody else to stop talking about it.
There are only three things that can explain such full-thor stupidity:
1. Fear
2. Guilt
3. Fear and guilt.
What they are at, whatever it is they are at, is, they are still at it, evidently.
Maybe it’s disgust, Mr. McGehee?
Between the insipid Sarah Palin and that nasty Tebow woman and the feckless Michael Steele and the odious Meghan’s daddy I’ve really come to doubt there’s any point in taking an interest in the politics of this doomed little country.
I’ve seen all on offer and I’m not impressed at all I don’t think. I deserve better.
Team R is not up to the task of a laser-like focus on limited government and fiscal responsibility.
You got that right. But it’s not because of abortion. It’s because:
1. Politicians are loath to vote themselves less power.
2. We’ve all, to some extent or another, bought the Progg argument that the Congress is supposed to identify our needs and then address them through legislation.
3. Team R is embarrassed by their base, due to their lack of “sophistication” and “intellect,” making limited gubmint horribly déclassé.
4. Team R believes what the press says about them: a bunch of old white meanies who hate minorites and women and gays and who are practically Nazis themselves and if they’d just scootch left a skosh, that would be just ducky.
The “good” news is that fiscal responsibility may be forced on the gubmint in the near future, on account of how you can’t be a spendthrift when you ain’t got no money.
They will inflate I think.
I take ‘feets at his word when he describes his problems with Palin et al. No need to conjecture that there are background personal issues.
Likewise, I take others at their word when they describe what they like about Palin et al. No need to conjecture that they’re fooled by identity politics.
But, I’m like that. Super-fucking-awesome, that is.
I think #2 is bang on. And this is why Sarah’s endorsement of Meghan’s daddy was so fatal for her I think.
Among the sort of people for whom that sort of thing is fatal anyway.
happyfeet,
Please don’t confuse my respoect for you or your opinion as snark; I trukly meant “with all due respect”. And I see your point wgere for some folks Trig will always be symbolic of her pro-life beliefs. I don’t see personally what’s wrong with that though, as it speaks volumes of her character and integrity; doing what was she thought was right in accordance with beliefs that she had long professed.
I think that it is equally important to recognize Pablo’s point too, that she has never tried to codify her personal beliefs nor even has pushed to do such, even as Governor of Alaska. At the risk of sounding trite, I think that she “plays” to the pro-life crowd in the same sense that Reagan did. She acknowledges their common beleif while promising nothing legislatively. Whether that is phony or not is left to the individual to gauge.
Much like Jeff, regardless of how much I “like” her, I’ll withold my political support for her until such time as she runs on a fiscally conservative, classically liberal, footing; and credibly convinces me that it is an agenda she will stick to…
So no need to “Mr.” me, my friend; we’re more like brothers disagreeing than adversaries arguing…
Thank you bh… I promise this is not an explosive outbreak of a long-simmering mental illness. But for reals I think people what like Sarah Palin identify with Sarah Palin. Which, I sort of identified with Mr. Bush so I get that, but with Sarah it’s more discomfiting cause she’s such an idiot.
Oh, and sorry for the spotty participation. My electricity has been out since Saturday afternoon, along with another 100K folks on Long Island, and I have to weigh in between battery chargings at my neighbors.
And we’re part of the smart grid!
Ah, progress…
I deserve better.
ENTITLEMENT MENTALITY!
Yes, ‘feets, our Founder’s republic deserves better. But on the other hand, we end up getting the gubmint we deserve.
Years and years of not beating back the progg-rot, letting the obssessive control-freaks gain control of the narrative, not questioning the very concept of “entitlements” and not pointing out how bad it is for us to suck on the gubmint teat for any longer than you absolutely HAVE to?
We let this happen just as surely as they made it so.
We deserve it. Let’s just hope there are enough of us left when it all falls to pieces that it can eventually be rebuilt.
No I truly meant that I’ve been terrible and no respect is necessary – and yes – speaking of the symbolism is exactly what I meant.
But Sarah Palin is ruined I think Bob. I could like her all day long but there’s no sense to it. I started off as a huge fan – I can go back and get the links but they’re all here –
She quit. She went to Fox. She endorsed Meghan’s daddy.
These things were all betrayals of one kind or another. What did Mr. guins say about fooling me thrice?
Happyfeet has convinced me. I’m voting for Sarah Palin in 2012. Even if I have to write her in.
Jim Leach, “Republican“, illustrating #4.
Sigh. I like it more better when people don’t validate my sense of hopelessness, di.
This is such a mess.
This is what it sounds like when doves cry.
“…when it all falls to pieces…”
That it already has (long ago and unnoticed) is the thing I haven’t been able to articulate apparently.
I’m less convinced that Sarah would have the audacious hopeyness to run for president than I used to be lee. But it was touch and go there for a bit.
even doves have pride though
The Prince joke was self-directed. No outward dig intended.
This blog is funny that way. In real life, I’m the most curmudgeonly of my friends. With you guys, though, I’m a regular Pollyanna.
I would have too — if he hadn’t gone full-thor-stupid about it, multiple times.
Get me talking about the Lakers sometime, McG. I’ll make ‘feets seem like a piker.
if he hadn’t gone full-thor-stupid about it, multiple times.
see you make like that’s a bad thing. But it’s a very honest expression of the divisiveness of that Palin woman and a very honest expression of the disdain what she arouses, how I talk about her. And vitriolic contempt in all of its forms remains a scant commodity in our little country while the demand grows exponentially each passing day.
Prince is the best thing that ever happened almost I think.
Yeah. Nothing more contemptible than someone with a belief who, you know, seems actually to believe it.
Sure, she hasn’t legislated that way. But America is all about saying one thing and then, after getting elected, doing what you want anyway.
This cunt just can’t seem to get that.
She’s just a half-term cunt at that.
Please, not like Reagan. Yes, he cut government, but not proportional to taxes, and as a result made the politi-meth of deficit spending socially acceptable. A couple decades later, the country’s teeth and hair have fallen out, and it’s skin is covered with lesions, and it’s whoring out its children to what used to be the third world to get cash for another hit.
So no, it’s not the Reagan “fiscal conservatism” that we need more of.
Sigh. I like it more better when people don’t validate my sense of hopelessness, di.
Prepare for the worst; hope for the best. I’m telling you: stock up on soup and other canned goods.
It’s people what need daily medicine such as insulin that worry me. I can go off my meds and still live (miserably), but the diabetics and others who need something every day — people who would have died outright 100 years ago — that’s what has me worried.
Also, ‘feets, it sounds like you know some girl people what had abortions and were horribly hurt by the Tebow and Palin thing.
I don’t know if this is pertinent, but sometimes people think you’re being all judgmental when you’re not. And by “you” I mean me. I avoid going to parties and gatherings where alcohol is being served because it tends to be a wet blanket for those who imbibe if there’s someone Sitting There Not Drinking For Religious Reasons. I don’t even have to say anything: people thing I’m being judgy just by my presence. It would be different if I were not drinking because I’m the designated driver or a recovering alcoholic or becuase I have medical reasons.
When religious people do, for religious reasons, the opposite of what everyone else thinks is OK, everyone else can get pretty snippy about it. That’s just how it is.
see you make like that’s a bad thing
It is.
Fuck thor. Fuck nishizonoshinji.
And welcome to the club, smarmy.
She’s just a half-term cunt at that.
You forgetting about the full-metal jacket of malicious lawsuits that she was being pelted with, draining her family’s finances and keeping her from doing her job?
I’d have quit, too. Our legal system doesn’t have a mechanism to protect us against the people who were harassing her. Her other options were to stay there and present those morons with a lovely target, bankrupting her family in the process, or refusing to play the game anymore.
She chose right.
‘feets, is Palin paying any rent for all that space she’s taking up in your head?
“But it’s a very honest expression of the divisiveness of that Palin woman and a very honest expression of the disdain what she arouses”
Bullshit. You have merely embraced Alinsky tactics that you think worked for the Dems.
What you don’t understand is that fiscal responsibility is a pipe dream when there is no honor left.
I love you guins.
My friend T was reading. Y’all met her when we talked about getting college education online. Which, her husband gave it a shot but it didn’t work for him. She was impressed with the program though she said…
There’s a whole story there.
But dicentra I don’t think Palin’s quitting is defensible without definitive proof that a legal defense fund was unworkable… and she never established that. It’s still in operation in fact it seems.
She could have quit to run for Senate… she didn’t do that. At the time She quit to bank on her notoriety. But it goes as much to her experience as to her character… and it’s an unimpressive level of executive experience…
I just don’t think she brings all that much to the table next to people what can bring so much more with so much less baggage.
I don’t know why She is capitalized.
lee that is not true… I genuinely loathe Sarah Palin. Or I did. More and more I think she’s just sort of devolving into an Ann Coulter meets Peggy Noonan meets Daisy Duke type media personality.
I like Ann Coulter. Her abrasiveness tends to make all the right people cry, plus she’s funny and more than a little attractive. I would concede she has gone a little too far on occasion, as do most comedians and opinion makers who are worth a shit.
I wish Sarah Palin hadn’t quit her job, as she had a good record on both social and fiscal issues. Plus she’s pretty and probably makes a great home cooked meal.
happyfeet = Andrew Sullivan ???? My suspicions are piling up.
That was mean.
But that’s ok I understand how you might feel attacked when I attack someone you closely identify with. Someone like Sarah Palin.
No. You are hard pressed to divorce her from abortion. Most of us don’t have that much trouble at all.
When I first grew my hair long, it was back when that was still an issue with a lot of old folks, especially country folks. Some of them would talk shit to you, not hire you, that kind of thing. I was bitching about that to my Grandfather one day, telling him all about how the length of somebodies hair shouldn’t matter, its not that big of a deal, yadda yadda yadda; and he just smiled and said, “If its not that big of a deal, why don’t you just cut it off?”
You going off your nut about abortion kind of reminds me of that conversation.
In any case. As a social con, I could point out that I don’t feel any particular need to push an issue such as abortion on the political front, because in general the movement on that front is positive. The goal is to reduce abortion, and if the polls showing that youth is now more likely to align with the pro-life side then it seems that a reduction in numbers of non born fetus persons is likely to follow.
The same seems to be true on the gay marriage front, as their seems to be a pushback against the horrid behavior of those demanding it.
Sorry feets, didn’t mean to be mean. I just notice some similarities on certain key issues.
I don’t really closely associate with any politician. Too easy and likely to get your heartbroken. I’m more inclined to grudgingly pick one that I hope will fuck me over the least, knowing that they are almost all going to be power hungry, narcissisticly egotistical and in the end likely morally bankrupt.
That said, when I look at Sarah Palin’s record in office, there is much there to be admired and/or emulated.
She isn’t helping me very much with the divorcing though, B Moe. And I don’t think she helps move the conversation forward. But it goes to the post… the boldy part up there… and I think Sarah Palin is a sign and portent that Lifey issues are not going to recede even as they become more and more preposterously irrelevant to life in Barack Obama’s America.
They don’t love her for her mind or her experience. It’s “what she represents” that gets them all worked up. And a big part of “what she represents” is Lifeyness I think.
Mr. Allahpundit called her the defacto leader of the pro-life movement in America.
I think he was serious.
You can’t always tell.
Mr. Allahpundit called her the defacto leader of the pro-life movement in America.
I think he was serious.
You can’t always tell.
Mr. Allahpundit doesn’t speak for me.
An editorial dated 3/14 from the Minneapolis StarTribune wesite. (sorry, I don’t know how to do orange things yet)
“Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan’s plan for reducing the frightening federal deficit calls for some harsh medicine. Just for starters, Ryan proposes privatizing or placing limits on spending for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, the nation’s big three but much-depended-on entitlement programs.
So the reaction from readers to a recent piece on these pages outlining the Republican’s plan was surprising. The expected fear and loathing was in short supply. Instead, many of those commenting seemed relieved that someone, somewhere, was proposing something that might actually work: a plan that would stem the nation’s red-ink spending and balance its books.”
I quote this as some evidence that the message of fiscal conservatism is beginning to gain traction.
My sister has been active in the local tea party movement. When I spoke to her today, she expressed concern that the tea party was holding a $20/head event featuring Sean Hannity. Her worry was that Hannity would alienate indy and dem voters who might otherwise identify with the general tea party message.
I think that she is correct, and that one of the problems the tea parties face is a failure to believe in themselves and their message. Now that they are on the map, they are growing insecure. What to do to keep the momentum? Should they get a “rock star” at the event? What about Palin, Hannity, Rush, Beck, Coulter, or Bachmann?
This seems like a trap that the tea partiers haven’t figured out, and it is a trap that will hurt them. (I think that is part of hf’s point, and to that extent, I agree with his position.) For a year we have watched the media furiously spinning to identify the “leadership”…of the GOP and now the TEA folks. Why? Because they need someone to personalize and attack so as to better neutralize the threat. That is a message that all should heed, IMO.
P.S. to Duke: Thanks for your kind words on a prior thread!
I don’t think he speaks for me either I just think that was a remarkable remark to remark.
Paul Ryan is teh awesome and he’s very Lifey.
Been reading this thread off and on in a very busy day with no time to comment. Below are my thoughts for whatever they are worth.
What is an identity group? What is an identity? Politically it is some characteristic other than positions on issues that bonds you to a candidate. Race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation. This form of political identity is a boon to politicians who wish to get, keep, and increase their personal power. It’s not just the group that the politician “identifies” himself with it is also the group(s) that are identified as enemy, alien, the hated other. That is also part of the bond.
Making up an identity group for your opposition is crucial for identity politics. You must place your political enemy into an identity group that you have picked out for them. On the Left are identity groups that you can be said to have been “born” into. Race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation too. But what of the Right?
Social-conservative? Fiscal-conservative? Libertarian? Neo-conservative? Paleo-conservative? WTF. Are you born into these? Is there some visible mark that can be seen by all. From a distance? Closeup? These are manufactured groups, made-up, designed to be “the other”.
Useful to those promoted or self-promoted as “leaders’ of these “groups”. Much more useful to those whose interests are in direct opposition to the ideas and ideals of freedom. Much easier to deal with a splintered opposition, especially one you have splintered along lines of your own making. It is the State-ists, the lovers of power who have defined these “groups”. Said that it is somehow necessary to choose, to weld yourself to one, to have it make your identity.
This is where the tea parties confound and infuriate the Left. All these manufactured, separated groups are finding, in meeting together, common ground. A common ground that is utterly opposed to the Left’s main aims, their entire purpose. Freedom is beyond all identities and is a foundation for a true identity to build from. The only “hated other” to freedom is tyranny.
I think there’s an other what the TP rails against at times… the “elites.”
David Brookth is very sensitive to this.
The people what don’t live in Sarah Palin’s “real America.”
I remember that one in particular really bothered Mr. SEK.
That was mean.
Ironic?
— Who is a disingenuous apparatchik for progressivism.
He really does think he both knows and is better than you.
Even after probably watching his own YouTube videos.
That’s just delusional and wrong.
My suspicions are piling up
they seem to be forming up in threes, people…
…
once they group and get moving, the squawkie goes dead…
…
ohnoes, its thorizonosmarmi !!!
I’m conflicted about our usage of both “intellectuals” and “elites”.
Look, I don’t come here because I find Jeff to be an idiot. Nor do I respect Friedman or Hayek because I think they share my sense of grit. I don’t like the music I like because it reminds me of a high school marching band back home.
What actually bothers me about some intellectuals and elites is that, well, they’re not.
I think the next real leader will not make us fight like this amongst themselves. They will just be.
For instance, I don’t dislike David Brooks because he’s an elite intellectual. I dislike him because he’s an easy to fool idiot.
I cannot believe that bh did not know who Giada was.
I’m conflicted about our usage of both “intellectuals” and “elites.”
Intellectual = Someone whose primary output is ideas. (Sowell)
Elite = Someone who is at the tippy top of their game, compared to all the rest.
Elitist = Someone who fancies him/herself as intellectually elite (or who is) AND who also fails to recognize his/her deficiencies AND who cannot recognize non-intellectual strengths in others as valuable AND who has an aristocratic attitude toward anyone who is not in their elitist club.
AND who feels that he/she is entitled to rule over the chusma.
Agreed, di. People are kinda sloppy with those distinctions sometimes, including myself.
Who would have guessed that all the attractive women were on the Food Network, JD?
AND whose glass is empty.
Chop-chop.
I just feel so much better for getting it all off my chest, Mr. guins.
I like that definition of intellectual. But it is important to note that it draws no distinction between those who promulgate good ideas and those whose output is dreck.
Brooks is an elitist, sadly Brooks qualifies as an intellectual, just not an elite intellectual.
As I understood Sowell ThomasD, his contention was that because there is no way to test the ideas of the intellectuals, there is therefore no way to draw the sensible distinctions between the good and the otherwise. They float, so to speak, and it is precisely the floating that renders them pitiful.
First thing in the morning, dude.
Count your blessings I’m not a ChiCom tank jockey.
Tell you what, let’s hate Nancy Pelosi.
Together.
Also, happ, I formally retract the feetfalls thing up there.
I do hate her.
She’s awful.
thank you… awesome song…
There are theorists and there are experimentalists. Need both and feedback between them to get at what is and is not. Intellectuals seem to have walled themselves off from the ones who test out the ideas and report back.
I used to wait tables in an Italian place what played nothing but Frank… I loved that place…
I don’t know if this is pertinent, but sometimes people think you’re being all judgmental when you’re not. And by “you” I mean me. I avoid going to parties and gatherings where alcohol is being served because it tends to be a wet blanket for those who imbibe if there’s someone Sitting There Not Drinking For Religious Reasons. I don’t even have to say anything: people thing I’m being judgy just by my presence. It would be different if I were not drinking because I’m the designated driver or a recovering alcoholic or becuase I have medical reasons.
When religious people do, for religious reasons, the opposite of what everyone else thinks is OK, everyone else can get pretty snippy about it. That’s just how it is.
but di, don’t you know that FEEEEELINGS are teh Most Important Thing EVAH!!? More important then people like Trig or Tim Tebow. They shouldn’t even be allowed to breathe let alone be allowed out in proper Brooksian society.
Reading this I figured maybe Sully had crawled up happyfeet’s colon, but then maybe it was really Barrett Brown who inserted himself there in light of the huge wall of verbage he vomited forth to call the Catholic Church more EVVVILLLL than Hitler because ::::gasp::: they murdered souls by telling people they were going to hell for this or that. Inquiring minds might wonder why an avowed atheist would even give the concept of “souls” more than a moments thought, or do more than suppress a case of giggles if someone told them of hellfire and damnation. But to Barrett, such talk of soul murdering is WORSE than real dead Jews in ovens.
So I guess for Barrett’s buttbuddy happyfeet, heroes are the woman who killed two of her unborn triplets rather than being sentenced to shopping at WalMart or Costco rather than cunts like Palin or Tebow who not only bred when they shouldn’t have, they have the audicity to tell others that actually giving birth is not all that bad!!!
Maybe hf should hook up with the obviously superior woman who recently tweeted her abortion and go to the ACLU and file a lawsuit against Palin and Tebow for saying things that might hurt her feelings.
I mean, scraping out your uterus is the ultimate political expression of Grrrrrl Power! Babies? Ick!
So Sowell was actually suggesting that the term intellectual is generally negative, or at least not a complement. Ok. i can appreciate his reasoning.
Certainly there are some variety of ideas that resist testing, but surely many ideas can be tested and many have been. Isaac Newton springs to mind, to name but one.
Perhaps that could be the first distinction for intellectuals? Are their ideas in any way testable? If they are to forever remain in the realm of not falsifiable (a la Popper) then perhaps we could argue that they are of the useless (and sadly more typical) variety of intellectual.
Think Michael Keaton in Night Shift
Barrett’s a good guy I think.
We already talked about the babies in the next thread. NG is gonna have a baby person so I gave her half my brownies today. I can’t remember if I told you guys that yet.
About the baby person. The brownies just happened today cause they were in my mailbox.
“So Sowell was actually suggesting that the term intellectual is generally negative, or at least not a complement.”
I think so ThomasD, though I hasten to add I don’t have his book but merely heard him talking about it with Peter Robinson. brb. Here
Those categories are what is said about physical science, am I right geoffb? Theorists and experimentalists? Which is all well and good when we’re talking about dropping objects like bowling balls and feathers off the Leaning Tower. But when we’re talking about human intentions? It’s a tougher nut, I think.
Regarding the awkwardness of not drinking at social situations due to religious reasons, I had an older friend who use to order Rum and Cokes (hold the rum) or Gin and Tonic’s (hold the gin). Nobody but you and the bartender needs to know what’s in your drink, and once the initial round is over a simple “I’ll have another one of these” helps you not stand out so much. Working this plan out with the bartender quietly at the outset is how this all works.
Just a thought.
Congrats to NG.
Which would be funny to say, if you did in real life, “This internet guy who I know as bh and who knows you as NG says congrats on the baby type person.”
When someone is smart you say they’re smart.
When someone appears to be smart, but then says something moronic like, “I think Obama loves America, and respects individual freedom as enshrined in the Constitution”, you call them an ‘intellectual’ because ‘retard’ is insensitive.
I told NG she was NG when we were in Chicago and I thought she might meet JD… she was surprisingly ok with it… Other Guy doesn’t know I talk about him sometimes though… his last day is Friday… I guess soon we’ll have NOG to get to know
I will tell her though.
It’s a tougher nut, I think.
Amen to that.
I read through about post 30 and knew what happened to make this such a lengthy thread. I don’t get the Palin hate but what’s our alternative? I’ve been saying for a year its Romney and he can argue he has a successful history as an executive. Get over his support for state run health care imho. I’m a conservative christian and don’t care if he’s mormon. What’s important to me is he understands this country must stop burning money and whoring ourselves out to China for social programs for people who refuse to work.
I think the GOP’s best bet is a Romney/Palin ticket. Personally, I’m open to an alternative but I don’t see any conservative leaders streaking to prominence out of nowhere. Because it takes alot of time to raise money and we all know Obama has been campaining for a second term since he took office.
OT: In case you didn’t see the link over at Cafe Hayek, sdferr. Haven’t listened yet but it sounds relevant to topics we’ve discussed.
I like Mitch Daniels, Matt. He’s competent and steady and not seeking to inspire anybody or touch them inappropriately or promise them a bunch of stupid hopey crap.
President Daniels is the future.
I suspect Romney/Ryan will be chosen as more ‘palatable.’ I also suspect, at this point, that Palin is angling more for kingmaker than candidate.
I used to wait tables
Gin Gimlet.
Chop-chop.
Hey thanks bh, I hadn’t seen it yet and ‘ll be listening after a bit.
I’ll take a Daniels/Ryan ticket with Palin playing kingmaker.
As it would be too optimal, it could never happen.
It’ll probably be Huckabee/Collins with David Brooks playing kingmaker.
Daniels/Ryan I would fight and die for.
Romney smacks of charisma.
Romney smacks more of anti-charisma to me, though it’s a vague sense of the thing I have.
eeecccch, bh
Huckasuck is no conservative.
It’s like he has all the charisma ingredients he just doesn’t have the recipe right I guess.
Probably yes though I can’t say for some of the softer fields. Still when some “theorist” or entire school of them does the equivalent of sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH when any evidence comes knocking nearby I believe their entire “school of thought” should be considered fiction.
Yeah, he’s terrible, Darleen. Just terrible.
Part of the mess-engendering fault I lay at the feet of science-like thinking is that politics can be made to be scientific. It’s a hopey changey dreamy sort of thought some people had ’round about two centuries ago and, I think, has gone a long way to ruin the world.
Interesting point, sdferr. At times, I really think you can say the same about economics.
That which can be described scientifically might not always be explained scientifically being the issue, I’d say.
Some italics might have emphasized that better. Described and explained.
Listening to Boudreaux and Roberts bh, (which by the way, I don’t recommend at the same time as trying to keep up with the conversation here as both ends get lost against the other, so I’m stopping them for the nonce) I noticed Roberts speaking of James Buchanan as writing in English (puzzled) and then later (clarifying), of Kenneth Arrow as writing in Mathematics. heh
Heh. Arrow’s another Chicago boy.
Maroons!
Check.
Is that the not so real leader’s fault, though? I’ve always hated the “he or she is a divisive figure” phrase. They used it on Bush constantly and I never understood it. A person just is. Lefty loons hated Bush for a multitude of reasons. First and foremost, imo, is his being an unrepentant Christian. But, he was also kind of like one of them in his whole compassionate conservatism governance. Also, I don’t think divisiveness in and of itself is a bad thing. I’m not sure how Palin is divisive, though. But, to be honest I may not be paying her enough attention as she never has done much for me politically anyhow.
Daniels/Ryan would be a great ticket.
bh
Huck is what Lefties HOPE is a “con” candidate… he is as dedicated to Big Government telling you how to live as any granola crunching, recycling, ban automobiles and jail people for exceeding their BMI Leftie. But they pretend because HIS expressed values are family and G-d, well then …
Palin, on the other hand, rejected an attempt to pass an anti-gay law because she new it would be unConsitutional.
but she’s the cunt
Interesting thread. Makes me glad I have to work 10 hours, or I would’ve posted things at 8 AM and regretted them by 6 PM.
But ‘feets, congrats on your first (?) born. Oh, and I do like one of your likes, Paul Ryan, especially since I just got my Imprimis in the mail today and it’s right on time…
I’m for a government that’s smaller, less intrusive. Less far-left, mostly. And George Bush was better that Gore and Kerry, but only slightly. Remember REAL Hope and Change ?
(Oh, and guinsPen, ‘thorizonosmarmi’ caused my new monitor to needs cleaning. It’d been better if it had only brought a smile to my stone face, but things were all pent up and ready to blow. )
Couldn’t agree more on Huck, Darleen. That guy loves him some State.
On Palin, the McCain endorsement really bothered me. Beyond that, I simply don’t understand the visceral reaction against her. Just don’t.
oh…thank you but NG is just the New Girl at work… we are co-workers like on tv when you have two people what work together without making the babies ever ever ever… I should have been more clear
it’s a very small office – right now it’s me and NG and boss person is all
I’m still very excited but more in a where are you registered way than in a help paint the nursery way
Yep. I fucking hated Bush in 2000, said many of the same things then that happyfeet is saying now about Palin, thought he was a total Bible thumping moron, but was really upset that the Democrats got their ticket upside down, so I voted Libertarian. Luckily, I was very wrong about Bush.
I still believe though that if the Democrats had run Leiberman for President instead of Gore,W would have never happened.
I would love to be wrong about a long list of things.
I felt amazingly better when the AP did that story about how our little country could get busted down on its credit rating. It’s a little thing but it was reality.
Still trying to wrap my head around the recent Obama admin uproar against Israel, I’m wondering, is it possible that Barcky is a knee-jerk racist jew-hater on account of he thinks jews are knee-jerk racist black-haters? Or is it as simple as Said?
This I agree with.
The fact that with hundreds of millions dead, murdered to try again and again, failing again and again, to impose the same systems would seem to me to be experimental evidence that these systems get these results. Not that humans should be experimented on but that at least some conclusions could be drawn from studying what has been tried and what happened.
Somewhere recently I read of this being done in Economics. Instead of theorizing about future, studying what has happened over time due to various inputs. wish i could remember where I read it. Probably in the browser history on my home system.
The latter, if I had to guess.
Victims, the other, orientalism, blah.
helps you not stand out so much.
Except that standing out from the crowd is one of the reasons for the prohibition in the first place. The four substances that are forbidden me — coffee, tea, alcohol, tobacco — are all used in friendship rituals. (Find me a culture that doesn’t employ one or all four!) In the world but not of it and all that.
Also, if I appear to be drinking an alcoholic beverage, I risk damaging the reputation of 13 million other people. (Yes, I do have to think of that all the time.) I outed myself as LDS rather quickly when I settled here at pw so that I would behave myself.
But thanks for the advice anyway. I’ll use it if I ever end up in espionage and I have to blend in to save my life. :D
Don’t look too hard, Geoff. If it’s true, that sounds like new homework.
The thing that put me on to the first thought bh, was the evidently personal style injected, that is, something like the serious emotion of an outburst, which, emotion, Barry generally hides pretty well.
dicentra, on account of my ignorance, I have to ask: what’s the teaching on consuming a cup of tea, say, at home alone where it isn’t part of such a ritual?
I just got my Imprimis in the mail today
I didn’t. ::pouts::
My real last name starts with M. Maybe I’m in the middle of the stack.
Or is it as simple as Said?
Given that Said is Teh Man in academia, I’d say: yes.
And if you go to that David Thompson article you’ll see that for the fascist/commernist/marxists/proggs of yore, the Jews were Capitalism Personified, so they had to be destroyed in order to destroy capitalism.
I saw that over there, though I couldn’t make the leap to Barry from it.
sdferr: Verboten.
The idea that it’s all about the social ritual is mostly my formulation. Ask most LDS and they’ll tell you it’s for health reasons. Which it is, but I’m more comfortable with the social ritual where coffee and tea are concerned, because they don’t seem to be all that harmful to me.
On the other hand, both are considered staples but they have little nutritional value. When you live in the third world, you can ill afford to be spending your sparse money on things that Cost Money but don’t fill the belly. If you could get 3rd-world people off those four substances, BTW, they’d be a lot better off. They smoke like fish and drink like chimneys.
Not being familiar with the teaching at all, I took the ritually bit to be in it. But not. So, ok. Is there a teaching? Cause from the sound of it, the health reasoning is itself an add-on.
bh,
Your terseness confuses me. Is this something old which has been shown to be faulty or sophomoric? I’m not reading somethings too well tonight I fear.
jeff
a time to choose
geoffb, that Dan Mitchell article over at BigGovernment hitting on the wizard behind the curtain has some of the flavor of looking at the results of policy as opposed to assuming the results into modeling.
No, Geoff. Just joking around with you, buddy.
I’m just saying that relatively minor things might require me to live at my desk for weeks.
Thank you sdferr that was it. This is the quote I was thinking of.
I make a mean chicken pot pie, in theory.
*Drumming fingers on desk*
Hungry, damnit.
Okay, no new homework. Another way of putting that is, oh yeah, let’s bet on it.
Meantime, savor this little morsel.
Oh, not that sort of NG, huh, ‘feets?
C’mon, own up! Or in two year you might too be in an internet video !
(s)
Glad no new homework. Some days, for me, everything gets to be a “grey area”.
Same here, G. Also, everyday is like that. I should record my day. You’d get a kick out of it. No such thing as psychics, right? Tell that to the people calling me on the phone.
“I have no fucking idea, how could I?” I should make that my voicemail message.
sdferr:
Here’s the actual revelation, given after the women complained about having to clean up the terbakky juice off the floor after the menfolk left the meetings.
Notice verse 4. I have to believe that’s a reference to hard drugs and narcotraficantes, among other things. Also, the “hot drinks” is understood to mean coffee and tea, not hot cocoa or other hot beverages.
Thanks dicentra. Somewhere along the way I’ve got it in my head that caffeinated drinks like Coke or Dr. Pepper are right out too. Am I guilty of making that up?
bh,
Same here. My solution is to triple any estimate of time or money. Then when I come in under I’m a genius. Helps to be good too so that the shiny doesn’t wear off over time.
Same same, Geoff. Not triple but I do add something for the How should I even guess, factor. It’s all in-house but still.
By the way, I swear way too much. Just noticed that again. Yikes, way too much.
Terrible punctuation as well.
Bad juju.
I’m inclined to think I don’t swear enough bh, but then my sainted mother isn’t here any longer to encourage me by example. The bitch.
You devil child you.
My house was like Christmas Story and yes Lifebuoy tastes terrible.
The nuns said something along the lines of swearing was lazy because you were saying a repetitive word rather than figuring out what you actually meant.
Bought that for awhile until I actually meant to express things perfectly congruent with imaginative cursing.
Now, I just do it out of laziness again, sdferr.
Some of us as tiny tykes are just spongiform absorbers, soaking up whatever speech passes our ears, all willy-nilly like. Can’t be helped, damnit.
I figure that tiny infants, just beginning to listen get an exemption, sd.
The #$@$$W@.
In re Israel, just saw a list of ostensible Obama demands at Powerline. I’ll be in the bathroom puking.
Now we have the definition of “smart” and “power” laid out on the front table with little bows tied to resemble unicorns.
As a couple of you may know I’ve been working on this idea in fits and spurts for years. I believe a Liberal Capitalist Party would attract 60% of Republicans, 40% of Democrats, 80% of independents, and 95% of Libertarians. It would dominate American politics for the remainder of our lifetimes.
I think the idea they are apparently most pissed about Israeli building and develop speaks volumes. The Palestinians turn prime Medditeranian beachfront into a third world slum and they are heroic victims, the Israelis turn a desert into arable land and build houses on it and they are the evil oppressors.
Obama and his friends are not good people, and they do not want what is best for you. How much fucking plainer could it be?
It’s not so much the identifying closely with, as it is that Ms Palin would cut your nuts off for talking about her like that, if she knew. Or cared.
See, it’s this business of smack-talking behind people’s backs that I don’t care for so much. If you feel so strongly about Ms. Palin’s retarded baby, then you should write her about it, and quit wasting so many pixels spraying it around the Internet.
Man you guys were busy last night! Where do I start?
“And ‘feets, I remain immensely fond of you, and I cherish all that you’ve contributed to this group. I’m just saddened by the uncontrolled vitriol that this topic brings out in you, and I wish we could move past it.”
Seconded,
Feets I thought we had an agreement irt Palin. You promised you wouldn’t bring her up unless she started a campaign. You also said that you were going to be less dysoptic (your word) in the future.
And your #54 was particularly disturbing, perhaps I am overreacting but that seemed personal and demeaning. I think you owe Mark an apology.
“But, I’m like that. Super-fucking-awesome, that is.”
Yes you are bh, anyone that can bring a Prince song into this discussion deserves the best assistant head hall monitor evah award;)
“Congrats to NG.”
Seconded as well Feets!
Sweet! I should have prepared a speech. Something about the inherent importance of hall passes maybe.
“Palin the person brands herself culturally conservative, Palin the politician, by record in office, does not. Massive disinformation campaigns to the contrary.”
Does the same thing work if you replace “culturally conservative” with “fiscally conservative.” ?
Thanks dicentra. Somewhere along the way I’ve got it in my head that caffeinated drinks like Coke or Dr. Pepper are right out too. Am I guilty of making that up?
No. Many LDS believe that coffee and tea are verboten because of the caffeine, so they also avoid caffeinated sodas. I used to avoid them myself. Might as well: who needs the addiction, however mild?
However, it has also been made clear that drinking caffeinated sodas does not constitute a violation of the dietary code. (Neither does drinking mate, which contains a truckload of caffeine.) Since developing this fatigue, I’ve taken to drinking Mt. Dew on weekdays to keep me focused on my work. (I also use Korean ginseng and adrafinil [imported from France: WAY cheaper than the U.S. counterparts]).
can you give a link for where you buy the adrafinil?
I love the stimulants!
it looks neat but says you shouldn’t take it every day cause of the liver enzymes
that place is not cheap – it’s a buck a pill and you need two pills to get to the 600mg dosage that this other web page said was a nice dosage
that is very spensive for a pill from the 70s I think