Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

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

Archives

"Mike Pence's Hillsdale College Speech on the Presidency"

Full text at the American Spectator. Here’s a sampling:

The presidency is the most visible thread that runs through the tapestry of the American government. More often than not, for good or for ill, it sets the tone for the other branches and spurs the expectations of the people. Its powers are vast and consequential, its requirements — from the outset and by definition — impossible for mortals to fulfill without humility and insistent attention to its purpose as set forth in the Constitution of the United States.

Isn’t it amazing, given the great and momentous nature of the office, that those who seek it seldom pause to consider what they are seeking? Rather, unconstrained by principle or reflection, there is a mad rush toward something that, once its powers are seized, the new president can wield as an instrument with which to transform the nation and the people according to his highest aspirations

But, other than in a crisis of the house divided, the presidency is neither fit nor intended to be such an instrument. When it is made that, the country sustains a wound, and cries out justly and indignantly. And what the nation says — the theme of this address… What it says, informed by its long history, impelled by the laws of nature and nature’s God… What it says quite naturally and rightly, if not always gracefully, is that we as a people are not to be ruled and not to be commanded. It says that the president should never forget this; that he has not risen above us, but is merely one of us, chosen by ballot, dismissed after his term, tasked not to transform and work his will upon us, but to bear the weight of decision and to carry out faithfully the design laid down in the Constitution and impassioned by the Declaration of Independence.

[…]

The presidency must adhere to its definition as expressed in the Constitution, and to conduct defined over time and by tradition. While the powers of the office have enlarged, along with those of the legislature and the judiciary, the framework of the government was intended to restrict abuses common to classical empires and to the regal states of the 18th century.

Without proper adherence to the role contemplated in the Constitution for the presidency, the checks and balances in the constitutional plan become weakened. This has been most obvious in recent years when the three branches of government have been subject to the tutelage of a single party. Under either party, presidents have often forgotten that they are intended to restrain the Congress at times, and that the Congress is independent of their desires. And thus fused in unholy unity, the political class has raged forward in a drunken expansion of powers and prerogatives, mistakenly assuming that to exercise power is by default to do good.

Even the simplest among us knows that this is not so. Power is an instrument of fatal consequence. It is confined no more readily than quicksilver, and escapes good intentions as easily as air flows through mesh. Therefore, those who are entrusted with it must educate themselves in self-restraint. A republic — if you can keep it — is about limitation, and for good reason, because we are mortal and our actions are imperfect.

The tragedy of presidential decision is that even with the best choice, some, perhaps many, will be left behind, and some, perhaps many, may die. Because of this, a true statesman lives continuously with what Churchill called “stress of soul.” He may give to Paul, but only because he robs Peter. And that is why you must always be wary of a president who seems to float upon his own greatness. For all greatness is tempered by mortality, every soul is equal, and distinctions among men cannot be owned; they are on loan from God, who takes them back and evens accounts at the end.

It is a tragedy indeed that new generations taking office attribute failures in governance to insufficient power, and seek more of it. In the judiciary this has seldom been better expressed than by Justice Thurgood Marshall’s dictum that, “You do what you think is right and let the law catch up.” In the Congress, it presents itself in massive legislation, acts and codes thousands of pages long and so monstrously over-complicated that no human being can read through them in a lifetime — much less understand them, much less apply them justly to a people that increasingly feel like they are no longer being asked, they are being told. Our nation finds itself in the position of a dog whose duty it is not to ask why, because the “why” is too elevated for his nature, but simply to obey.

The Tea Party as a movement seems — to me, at least — to embody a push back against a government grown at once too wide-ranging and too insular; and Obama — once a symbol of hope and cultural progress (in ways too superficial to stomach) — is fast becoming the symbol for a professional governing class that fancies itself for the people without fancying itself of them.

It’s time to remind the government who they are and who they work for. And to do that, one has also to remind the would-be kingmakers who they are and who they work for, as well.

Read the whole thing. And discuss.

(thanks to Blake)

174 Replies to “"Mike Pence's Hillsdale College Speech on the Presidency"”

  1. JD says:

    Indiana has a couple fine politicos, for politicos.

  2. sdferr says:

    I’ve been puzzling lately whether to think of the Tea Parties as one might think of an emergent order, a spontaneous natural growth in response to a longstanding problem left formally unaddressed. Mansfield, summing Tocqueville’s soft despotism for Robinson last week says:

    It’s a despotism which arises from the dangerous individuality or what he calls individualism in modern democracy. That’s when people decide that they can’t do anything on their own, with other people. That they are the victim of huge historical forces that are mindless and extremely powerful and so they react by returning to their own private lives, their family, their friends and themselves. And let government run their politics for them.

    And I wonder whether the Tea Parties aren’t precisely the refusal of the “people [to] decide that they can’t do anything on their own”, but to commune together to take action. I think they may be that, though incomplete in their acting as yet, with much to do and much still to be decided.

  3. Squid says:

    We can still astound the world with justice, reason and strength. I know this is true, but even were it not we could not in decency stand down, if only for our debt to history, the debt we owe to those who came before, who did great things, and suffered more than we suffer, and gave more than we give, and pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor — for us, whom they did not know. For we “drink from wells we did not dig” and are “warmed by fires we did not build,” and so we must be faithful in our time as they were in theirs.

    One cannot help but be struck by the difference between the debt we owe our forebears from generations ago versus the debt we owe our forebears from one or two generations ago. Or should I say, the debts we owe on account of those rotten bastards.

  4. Spiny Norman says:

    Whenever I think the trolls that post here are the most aggressively ignorant dickheads on the internet, all I have to do is see what the leftist cretins are posting elsewhere…

    o_O

  5. alppuccino says:

    With the abundance of information during this era, do you need someone to speak for you? If you’re in a cabin 3 weeks wagon ride from Washington, you need someone to represent you. We can all get to D.C. instantly with our opinion. There is not one person in Washington that’s smarter than you and they know it.

    TEA Party proves it. We don’t need representatives anymore.

  6. alppuccino says:

    The knock on Kasich in the Gov. race is that he “worked on Wall Street” though his office was in Ohio. I work on Wall Street for that matter, I just don’t have to leave my cattle farm in north central Ohio to do it. So if Kasich can be accused of being part of Wall Street while being in Ohio, why can’t we be our own Washington D.C. representatives from our homes across the country? You don’t need a broker who lives in NY, and you don’t need some fatass to go make your political “trades” in D.C.

    Other than that I have no opinion on the matter.

  7. bh says:

    Awhile back someone linked to another good Pence speech. Think this was the one.

  8. Ernst Schreiber says:

    RE: that Mansfield quote,

    For more than a century now, we’ve had progressive types telling us to leave government to the experts; and the experts have more or less had their own way for almost 80 years now. It’s not just that people are throwing up their hands and saying the hell with it –it’s that they’ve been actively encouraged to believe that they don’t need to bother.

  9. Ernst Schreiber says:

    The only problem with your idea alppuccino, is that direct democracy is messy inconsistent and unstable. I don’t think I’m comfortable with the idea of passing legislation by texting/emailing/calling a number as if the budget (or Cap-n-Tax, DODT, DOMA, etc.) is no different than choosing your favorite American Idol or Dancing with the Stars contestant.

  10. sdferr says:

    The Frenchman:

    Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions: they want to be led, and they wish to remain free. As they cannot destroy either the one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite: they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians. Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large who hold the end of his chain.

    By this system the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master and then relapse into it again. A great many persons at the present day are quite contented with this sort of compromise between administrative despotism and the sovereignty of the people; and they think they have done enough for the protection of individual freedom when they have surrendered it to the power of the nation at large. This does not satisfy me: the nature of him I am to obey signifies less to me than the fact of extorted obedience. I do not deny, however, that a constitution of this kind appears to me to be infinitely preferable to one which, after having concentrated all the powers of government, should vest them in the hands of an irresponsible person or body of persons. Of all the forms that democratic despotism could assume, the latter would assuredly be the worst. […]

    Subjection in minor affairs breaks out every day and is felt by the whole community indiscriminately. It does not drive men to resistance, but it crosses them at every turn, till they are led to surrender the exercise of their own will. Thus their spirit is gradually broken and their character enervated; whereas that obedience which is exacted on a few important but rare occasions only exhibits servitude at certain intervals and throws the burden of it upon a small number of men. It is in vain to summon a people who have been rendered so dependent on the central power to choose from time to time the representatives of that power; this rare and brief exercise of their free choice, however important it may be, will not prevent them from gradually losing the faculties of thinking, feeling, and acting for themselves, and thus gradually falling below the level of humanity.

    I add that they will soon become incapable of exercising the great and only privilege which remains to them. The democratic nations that have introduced freedom into their political constitution at the very time when they were augmenting the despotism of their administrative constitution have been led into strange paradoxes. To manage those minor affairs in which good sense is all that is wanted, the people are held to be unequal to the task; but when the government of the country is at stake, the people are invested with immense powers; they are alternately made the play things of their ruler, and his masters, more than kings and less than men. After having exhausted all the different modes of election without finding one to suit their purpose, they are still amazed and still bent on seeking further; as if the evil they notice did not originate in the constitution of the country far more than in that of the electoral body.

    It is indeed difficult to conceive how men who have entirely given up the habit of self-government should succeed in making a proper choice of those by whom they are to be governed; and no one will ever believe that a liberal, wise, and energetic government can spring from the suffrages of a subservient people.2

    A constitution republican in its head and ultra-monarchical in all its other parts has always appeared to me to be a short-lived monster. The vices of rulers and the ineptitude of the people would speedily bring about its ruin; and the nation, weary of its representatives and of itself, would create freer institutions or soon return to stretch itself at the feet of a single master.

  11. alppuccino says:

    Point taken E.S., but shouldn’t anything the gov’t considers be closer to an American Idol contestant rather than a 4000 page tome filled with bullshit?

  12. alppuccino says:

    ……and also that brings back my “exclude those stinking renters from having a voice” proposal.

  13. sdferr says:

    How did the “they”, the government of the early to middle-late 1800’s cope with their poor communications systems, keeping to a more or less narrow, non-meddling path as they made law and conducted national policy? Why, when they might have done, did they keep their hands off citizen’s property to the remarkable extent they did? Why, for instance, was it not in their heads that they ought to command what acreage an Ohio farmer might plant in wheat in order to better “control” the “price” of wheat? What on earth was wrong with them, that they didn’t understand the proper exercise of their constitutional powers?

    (sorry, couldn’t resist the easy sarcasm there.)

  14. Ernst Schreiber says:

    de T. was an insightful fellow, sdferr. He was wrong about the timeframe, but it does seem like he got the final destination right, doesn’t it?

  15. happyfeet says:

    a big problem also what cruelly taunts conventional Team R conservatism is that most of your state governments are nearly as corrupt and insular as the federal one anymore, and in some cases more so

  16. Ernst Schreiber says:

    The short answer to your question is in Burnham’s Managerial Revolution sdferr. I wouldn’t be surprised if the idea was there, it just wasn’t practicable to attempt to implement it.

  17. sdferr says:

    Sometimes I suspect that there are lessons contained in murderous strife that are simply unobtainable for many people in any other form. It’s a problem, if true.

  18. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Agrarian Populism, which is something of an antecedent to Progressivism, was about, among other things controlling the price of wheat. (At least if my memory of a required course on “rural society” that I sat through for nine weeks in ’93 or ’94 isn’t totally cracked).

  19. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Lee Harris called that the “habit of forgetting” It’s an unfortunate side effect of inculcating the habits of cooperation that makes civilization possible.

  20. happyfeet says:

    murderous strife brings the clarity

  21. sdferr says:

    Would that merely thinking about murderous strife could do the same.

  22. Squid says:

    a big problem also what cruelly taunts conventional Team R conservatism is that most of your state governments are nearly as corrupt and insular as the federal one anymore, and in some cases more so

    1) State governments can’t print money.
    2) It’s a lot easier for me to move to a functioning state than it is to move to a functioning country.

    There’s a candidate for MN Guv right now whose campaign signs say “Don’t lose one more job to South Dakota.” I ain’t voting for the guy, but he certainly understands how competition between the states works.

  23. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Maybe if our betters in the media stopped embargoing video of the towers coming down and otherwise protecting our fragile selves from the big scary world, we would be able to “concentrate the mind.”

  24. happyfeet says:

    tasked not to transform and work his will upon us

    did the pitiful and cowardly journalism/media sluts of the United States work very very hard to convince people that this is what Mr. Bush had done so as to give their hand-picked obama whore license to do the same? I think so.

  25. sdferr says:

    “…he certainly understands how competition between the states works.”

    I’d want to be wary of him, for he may well not understand. Kinda like the union guy in Darleen’s post doesn’t understand.

  26. Ernst Schreiber says:

    If MN wants to stop losing jobs to SD, then MN damn well better start cutting its satte income tax. I’m guessing that’s Emmers, Squid?

  27. cranky-d says:

    The only thing MN is going to to with state income taxes is raise them. They have the $10 Billion light rail project to pay for. That’s all we need, a train running from Mpls to St. Paul, right down University Ave. Right where the buses run now.

  28. Blake says:

    Mark Dayton is the only gubernatorial candidate that makes Jerry Brown look like the second coming.

    Dayton can truly be said to have only a distant relationship with reality.

  29. Ernst Schreiber says:

    The only thing MN is going to to with state income taxes is raise them.

    Good for South Dakotah!

  30. Blake says:

    Cranky, last time I was in Minneapolis, I was appalled at how badly traffic has been screwed up by light rail.

    Made it much more difficult to find my favorite bar.

  31. Blake says:

    Made it much more difficult to find my favorite bar.

    Should read” “Made it much more difficult to get to my favorite bar.”

  32. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Dayton wasn’t stupid enough to say that, was he?

    Don’t answer that. I KNOW Mark “How am I supposed to stop running for office if you people won’t elect me?!” Dayton is stupid enough to say that, I just assume that he keeps minders around to save him from himself.

  33. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Makes it much easier to get to the Humpty-Dumpty Dome on game day, however.

  34. cranky-d says:

    The light rail is a blessing and a curse. I live within a short walk of one of the stops, and I can take it to the Metrodome to hit one set of bars, or all the way downtown to hit another set of bars. So for me it’s good, but it still screws up the traffic.

  35. sdferr says:

    This is a pretty good speech as political analysis, isn’t it? At least, I think, the bulk of it is, up to the point at the end where he turns to stroking his auditors with encouragements.

  36. happyfeet says:

    my little brother lives outside the city and they kinda like all the transportationings they can do really nice wholesome day trips as a family for cheap, which is nice

  37. Ernst Schreiber says:

    You’re spoiling the MN flavor of the thread sdferr. Whasta matta? Taste of lye bother you or something? [snicker]

  38. happyfeet says:

    Levere said one way to encourage more people to save would be to expand a tax credit aimed at encouraging retirement savings for middle- and low-income people.

    As it stands the amount of the credit depends on taxable income, she said. Making it refundable for those who do not earn enough to pay income taxes would encourage more people to open accounts.

    “By making it refundable, you go from helping six million families to helping 50 million families,” she said.*

  39. sdferr says:

    Taste of lye must have some association with a foodstuff I’m guessing, though the only one I can think of offhand is grits, so that can’t be it, since I had some of those this morning and enjoyed them as usual. Is it that rumored to be icky fish dish?

  40. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Not to mention increase the size of 401k IRA pool of money for the democrats to go after someday. My point being that the gubmint people need to stop speculating on getting their hands on all the sweet sweet retirement monies.

  41. sdferr says:

    Somebody ought to fine tune-up Andrea.

  42. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Is it that rumored to be icky fish dish?

    It is indeed. All “real” Minnesotans eat it. Which is why I’m not a real Minnesotan!

  43. Blake says:

    Twins take the Central, as usual. Ho hum. They then field the “B” and “C” lineup and spank Cleveland.

    Hopefully, this year the Twins get beyond the first round.

  44. geoffb says:

    Some quotes from the article about Woodward’s book:

    By the end of the 2009 strategy review, Woodward reports, Obama concluded that no mission in Afghanistan could be successful without attacking the al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban havens operating with impunity in Pakistan’s remote tribal regions. […] “We need to make clear to people that the cancer is in Pakistan,” Obama is quoted as saying at an Oval Office meeting on Nov. 25, 2009. Creating a more secure Afghanistan is imperative, the president said, “so the cancer doesn’t spread” there. […]

  45. LBascom says:

    then and now for the proposition that all men are created equal, then with Frederick Douglass, now with Clarence Thomas; then and now in the conviction that, as Americans are not horses, we were not born to have saddles placed on our backs, by anyone, at any time, and for any reason

    yippie kay-ey

  46. geoffb says:

    Skip that I hit say it too soon.

  47. geoffb says:

    Some quotes from Woodward’s book:

    By the end of the 2009 strategy review, Woodward reports, Obama concluded that no mission in Afghanistan could be successful without attacking the al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban havens operating with impunity in Pakistan’s remote tribal regions.[…]

    “We need to make clear to people that the cancer is in Pakistan,” Obama is quoted as saying at an Oval Office meeting on Nov. 25, 2009. Creating a more secure Afghanistan is imperative, the president said, “so the cancer doesn’t spread” there. […]

    An older war – the Vietnam conflict – does figure prominently in the minds of Obama and his advisers. When Vice President Biden rushed to the White House on a Sunday morning to make one last appeal for a narrowly defined mission, he warned Obama that a major escalation would mean “we’re locked into Vietnam.” […]

    Obama kept asking for “an exit plan” to go along with any further troop commitment, and is shown growing increasingly frustrated with the military hierarchy for not providing one. At one strategy session, the president waved a memo from the Office of Management and Budget, which put a price tag of $889 billion over 10 years on the military’s open-ended approach. In the end, Obama essentially designed his own strategy for the 30,000 troops, […]

    The document – a copy of which is reprinted in the book – took the unusual step of stating, along with the strategy’s objectives, what the military was not supposed to do.

    The Left has never understood Vietnam nor accepted responsibility for their part. These quotes above show the same mentality in play that was there in the Johnson administration. Obama and Biden think that the problem of Vietnam was political and was caused by the large number of US troops that were deployed, the video images and the causalities. This was the way the Left attacked Bush on Iraq and so they hope to limit their political exposure by limiting those three things. They are setting up a massive failure due to their ideological tunnel vision.

    Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam are mistakenly called “wars”. This word makes them seem to be self-contained and not related to any other thing. They are not “wars” but are/were theaters of operation in a larger war, the actual war. There are parallels, just not the ones the Left thinks there are. Some of them are…

    Theaters of operation, called “wars” and viewed as self-contained entities even though they were part of a larger, much longer conflict with an enemy which could not be directly attacked either in their minor sanctuaries nor in their actual homelands from which ideology, training, and support flowed. Even naming the actual enemy was made politically impossible by the Left both times. Thus we are/were left to talk about “The Cold War” and “The War on Terror” without any sense of either the driving ideology nor the main State actors pushing the ideology. Reagan brought clarity to the earlier conflict which was needed to make victory possible. we are still looking for a Reagan in this one.

    Micromanagement by the White House of precisely what could and could not be done by the military. Management done for political ends without any sense of or idea of military victory, only domestic political ends.

    Looking for an “exit strategy” not a victory because victory is possible only by winning the actual larger conflict. The one which shall not be actually named and which we have compartmentalized this conflict to be apart from.

    Woodward quotes Petraeus as saying, “You have to recognize also that I don’t think you win this war. I think you keep fighting. It’s a little bit like Iraq, actually. . . . Yes, there has been enormous progress in Iraq. But there are still horrific attacks in Iraq, and you have to stay vigilant. You have to stay after it. This is the kind of fight we’re in for the rest of our lives and probably our kids’ lives.”

    True, until we wake up to what we are fighting and start working toward victory in the actual conflict with the actual enemy not just managing the political effects of multiple, continuing, proxy conflicts.

  48. LBascom says:

    Blockquote>Why is this good? It is good because the sun will burn out, the Ohio River will flow backwards, and the cow will jump over the moon 10,000 times before any modern president’s conception is superior to that of the Founders of this nation.

    Word.

  49. Squid says:

    Is it that rumored to be icky fish dish?

    Lutefisk. The piece of cod which passeth all understanding…

  50. sdferr says:

    And if the politics of your own election or of your party intrude upon your decisions for even an instant — there are no words for this.

    Almost sounds as though Pence was leaning in to listen to the same conversations Woodward was hearing. Though I’ve little doubt that Woodward will have found the words to cover Obama’s shame.

  51. A fine scotch says:

    I see a future bit for Jeff: Mike Pence’s Presidential Hair commenting on current events and being berated by Regis.

  52. Blake says:

    Outstanding speech.

    Should have received a lot more coverage.

    I just happened to run across it.

  53. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I’ve little doubt that Woodward will have found the words to cover Obama’s shame.

    It’s the stuff that he can’t cover up or explain away that ought to exercise the sphincter.

  54. sdferr says:

    Like the presence of David Axelrod in national security meetings as a for instance, I’d suggest. That and Petraeus’s one step out of his characteristic sophrosyne, intimating he’d like to rip off one of Axelrod’s appendages and beat him to death with it.

  55. Ernst Schreiber says:

    That, and the overly analytical, “we could take a hit,” bullshit. And the I don’t want to spend a trillion on the war overseas contingency operation because then I won’t have it to spend on my domestic legacy building project. And…

    Jesus how long before somebody really tests his resolve? Like in Taiwan maybe.

  56. sdferr says:

    I concur in toto with all that Ernst, though I note we’ve moved from one indictment — using national security matters as a tool with which to play partisan politics — to another, positively weakening the national security through a propensity to simple stupidity, or incapacity to think strategically. Both are serious charges enough, though different sorts of things, I think. One might be innocently stupid and just make bad decisions in the latter case. There isn’t anything innocent about the former charge though, it must be inherently cynical.

  57. happyfeet says:

    Retired Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen, who led the government’s response to the spill, said there must be sustained efforts to develop new technology.

    “We somehow forgot the value of (research and development) about five years after Exxon-Valdez,” Allen said. During this time, he said drilling became even more complex, venturing into deeper waters.*

    yup you nailed it Thad

    fucking retard

  58. sdferr says:

    As for the US, President Barack Obama praised the plebiscite as proof of the “vibrancy of Turkish democracy.” As Michael Rubin has noted in National Review, not only has Obama approved the sale of 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters to Turkey, the Defense Department has demurred from conducting a study to see whether the sale will threaten US interests in light of Turkey’s burgeoning strategic ties with Iran. And not wishing to embarrass the administration that has given a full-throated endorsement to Erdogan’s regime, the Democrat-controlled Senate Armed Services Committee has refused to ask the Pentagon to conduct such a review.

  59. mojo says:

    “Mount up, boys! There’s Federales ta put outta our misery!”

  60. Dave in SoCal says:

    not only has Obama approved the sale of 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters to Turkey

    Hell, if they’re such good friends that we’re going to sell the 100 of our cutting edge technology fighters, why not lease them a few B-2’s as well while we’re at it?

    the Democrat-controlled Senate Armed Services Committee has refused to ask the Pentagon to conduct such a review.

    Correcting this mistake needs to be at the top of the ‘to do’ list for the Republican-controlled Senate Armed Services Committee in January.

  61. happyfeet says:

    I think Meghan’s coward daddy might head Armed Services, no? His #1 priority is to work with the dirty socialists to vastly expand government regulation of the nutritional supplements industry, not making America more safer or stronger. He’s a statist cocksucker is why.

  62. Admiral Halsey says:

    RE:#47 geoffb:

    When Nixon started bombing Hanoi with B52s in earnest, the Communists practically tripped over themselves running for the Paris peace talks and got the bombing stopped. The lesson of how to end the war was lost on the morons in the Nixon administration.

    The Communists at the top had no interest in living in the jusgle any more than the people pushing jihad from the top want to live in a cave. When you get intel indicating that a particular government is responsible for an attack, bomb their houses with B52s and you will note a marked drop-off in attacks worldwide.

    Preferably when they are home having dinner with their families*. Sort of like a deadly form of telemarketing, but with the call coming from 40,000 ft.

    *Don’t be horrified. The Islamo-faschists will respect you more for having done it. Be the strong horse.

  63. happyfeet says:

    omfg

    In a surprise move, Senate Republicans decided not to remove Sen. Lisa Murkowski from her top position on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Wednesday, according to several Republican senators who refused to explain their decision.*

    There is no class of whore on earth to rival a Republican senator.

  64. Ernst Schreiber says:

    OT: somebody hit ace up the side of the head with the clue bat. Maybe…

  65. happyfeet says:

    the Team R pledge to America thingy looks really pretty good at first glance

  66. Admiral Halsey says:

    “There is no class of whore on earth to rival a Republican senator.”

    A hirsute 300 lb. transvestite in an evening dress working the docks for spare change comes close.

    The Republicans are demonstrating daily why as soon as we dispatch the Democrats, the majority of them are next. This internet thing is very useful for deciding which ones go first…

    and downloading porn, of course.

  67. happyfeet says:

    that’s from the House Rs I should say… not the cowardly whorish senate ones

  68. sdferr says:

    The welt will fall and he’ll be right back where he’s always been.

  69. Ronaldus Magnus says:

    When you get intel indicating that a particular government is responsible for an attack, bomb their houses with B52s and you will note a marked drop-off in attacks worldwide.

    Well…. I suppose I could have ordered in the B-52s. But Adm. Poindexter assured my that the F-111s would get the job done, since Qadaffi was living in his summer tent.

  70. Ernst Schreiber says:

    On Merde-cowski, the thinking seems to be that if they removed her, she’d just vote with the Democrats in the lame duck session out of spite. She probably will anyways.

  71. sdferr says:

    Andrew G. Biggs at AEI: Why does government grow and grow and grow? :

    Brooks and Ryan answer that, despite Americans’ broader preferences, elected officials present the public with marginal choices in which bigger government always wins. Feed hungry children? Check. Keep grandma out of poverty? Check. Once you check enough of these boxes, you end up with big government even if you say you’d prefer something smaller. Brooks and Ryan argue that citizens need to be presented with larger, macro-oriented choices rather than incremental ones, since only with big choices do voters focus on the larger decisions that need to be made. I agree with this strategy.

    — elected officials present the public with — need to be presented with —

    I’d argue that, as with our choices when it comes to candidates — meekly accepting what is by fait accomplis placed before us — this too is an area where we are doing it wrong and ought to look to change both “it” and ourselves, that is, ourselves in regard to how we approach “it”.

  72. geoffb says:

    Brooks and Ryan answer that, despite Americans’ broader preferences, elected officials present the public with marginal choices in which bigger government always wins.

    I agree[d].

  73. Admiral Halsey says:

    Murkowski should be given every opportunity to vote with the Dems in their upcoming mutual orgy of lame-duck legislative self-immolation that will render both the Democrats and Lisa’s smoldering and moldering careers quite dead.

    Could not happen to a better group of betters.

  74. happyfeet says:

    I don’t see why Team R needs to woo Murkoswki… she’s a whore… they’ll either outbid the dirty socialists when the time comes or they won’t

  75. urthshu says:

    Haven’t read the comments yet, sorry

    My fear about the TEA Partiers is that they might be nothing more than the usual “Good Government” type movement – reformers that peter out after their “big year” or two. The politicians just pander and bide their time in those cases.

    Plunkitt of Tammany Hall put it that politics ‘is the ocean and reform movements are waves to be ridden’. Only solution is to build a better machine with all of those attendent problems.

  76. happyfeet says:

    that thinger the House Rs released today is a love letter to the Tea Party and I think it’s neat

  77. sdferr says:

    Dunno if it would help to allay your fears vis a vis the Tea Parties urthshu, but Doug Schoen, I think in the 10 questions piece at Daily Caller a few days ago, said he doesn’t see them going away or petering out. He thinks they are here to stay for a good long while.

  78. sdferr says:

    Wonder whether the King of England didn’t have similar expectations of his colonists now and again? They’ll fold and fade away, we’ve just got to keep the pressure on them for another few months.

  79. newrouter says:

    The entirety of this Promise is laughable. Why? It is an illusion that fixates on stuff the GOP already should be doing while not daring to touch on stuff that will have any meaningful longterm effects on the size and scope of the federal government.

    This document proves the GOP is more focused on the acquisition of power than the advocacy of long term sound public policy. All the good stuff in it is stuff we expect them to do. What is not in it is more than a little telling that the House GOP has not learned much of anything from 2006.

    I will vote Republican in November of 2010. But I will not carry their stagnant water.

    link

  80. urthshu says:

    Maybe. If the TEA folks can keep pressure on, take some solid bases – we don’t need all at once, you know – keep growing. Thats the important bit. I just have my doubts, since I think most will just say “I’ve done my part, now where’s my Reality TV?”

  81. urthshu says:

    Oh, the pledge thinger: This is the parody end of history repeating itself, I think

  82. happyfeet says:

    I hate when that happens

  83. newrouter says:

    the bonerman is thick as a brick

  84. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – Listen carefully……*******revolt, vote, revolt, vote, revolt, vote*******

    – That sound you hear is the silent majority. The weakest of the political forces, with total penetration and coverage at the great effect and distance on the future of American politics.

  85. geoffb says:

    Looks like “The Contract with America” in becoming “The Pledge” has undergone the kind of inflation the legislative bills have had too.

    Just need a list with the heading “We shall vote to REPEAL:”
    [……………………………………………]

    Ending with “And keep at it until they are REPEALED so help us God.”

  86. serr8d says:

    Seems the Elite Republican’s ‘pledge’ is weak sauce, if Eric Erickson gets it right. Without even looking at it, I’m inclined to dismiss it forthwith.

    Does it defund ObamaCare? Does it defund the Department of Education and the EPA? If not, it doesn’t come up to the standards we really need to stay solvent.

  87. sdferr says:

    The Pledge looks like a wholesome start to me. Certainly it is far better than anything I’ve seen R leadership commit to in the last decade or more, and has the makings of a beginning to prioritize our national questions, to address those questions piece by piece and to do that with a view to what can be done being done. I think it’s best to see the thing roll out before condemning it out of hand.

  88. sdferr says:

    A Plan to Repeal and Replace the Government Takeover of Health Care

    The American people wanted one thing out of health care reform: lower costs, which President Obama and Democrats in Washington promised, but did not deliver. Instead of expanding the size and scope of government with more debt, higher taxes, and burdensome mandates, Americans are calling for reforms that lower costs for families and small businesses, increase access to affordable, high-quality care and strengthen the doctor-patient relationship. We have a plan to do just that.

    WHAT WE’RE UP AGAINST
    The core promises Washington Democrats made to force the health care law through Congress have already been broken:
    • Jobs. Employers large and small coast-to-coast have announced that they are considering laying off employees or dropping their health care coverage in response to the new law, despite President Obama’s boast that it is also a jobs plan.
    • Costs. Both the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the chief actuary at the Obama Administration’s Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have confirmed that the new law fails to lower health care costs as promised.
    • Deficits and Debt. The Obama Administration’s Social Security and Medicare Trustees report confirms that the new law does little to address the nation’s growing fiscal crisis despite President Obama’s pledge that passing his plan constituted the “most important thing we can do” for the nation’s financial future.
    • Taxes. The new health care law includes at least a dozen violations of President Obama’s pledge not to raise taxes on middle-class families. The Obama administration has conceded that the ‘individual mandate’ at the heart of the new law is indeed a tax, a notion the president “absolutely” rejected last fall.
    • Seniors. The chief actuary at the Obama Administration’s Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has confirmed that the new law’s massive Medicare cuts will fall squarely on the backs of seniors, millions of whom will be forced off their current Medicare coverage.
    • If You Like It… You Can’t Keep It. The Obama Administration has been forced to acknowledge that the new law will force some 87 million Americans to drop their current coverage despite President Obama’s promise that Americans would be able to keep the coverage that they have.
    • Abortion. Americans are overwhelmingly opposed to using tax dollars to pay for abortion, and the executive order issued by President Obama in conjunction with congressional passage of the health care law is inadequate to ensure taxpayer funds are not used in this manner.
    Instead of bringing the full weight of the government to bear in enforcing this job-killing health care law, Washington Democrats should listen to the American people and stand down. Our Plan to Repeal the Job Killing Health Care Law and Put in Place Real Reform
    o Repeal the Costly Health Care Takeover of 2010: Because the new health care law kills jobs, raises taxes, and increases the cost of health care, we will immediately take action to repeal this law.
    o Enact Medical Liability Reform: Skyrocketing medical liability insurance rates have distorted the practice of medicine, routinely forcing doctors to order costly and often unnecessary tests to protect
    15
    themselves from lawsuits, often referred to as “defensive medicine.” We will enact common-sense medical liability reforms to lower costs, rein in junk lawsuits and curb defensive medicine.
    o Purchase Health Insurance Across State Lines: Americans residing in a state with expensive health insurance plans are locked into those plans and do not currently have an opportunity to choose a lower cost option that best meets their needs. We will allow individuals to buy health care coverage outside of the state in which they live.
    o Expand Health Savings Accounts: Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are popular savings accounts that provide cost-effective health insurance to those who might otherwise go uninsured. We will improve HSAs by making it easier for patients withhigh-deductible health plans to use them to obtain access to quality care. We will repeal the new health care law, which prevents the use of these savings accounts to purchase over-the-counter medicine.
    o Strengthen the Doctor-Patient Relationship: We will repeal President Obama’s government takeover of health care and replace it with common-sense reforms focused on strengthening the doctor-patient relationship.
    o Ensure Access For Patients With Pre-Existing Conditions: Health care should be accessible for all, regardless of pre-existing conditions or past illnesses. We will expand state high-risk pools, reinsurance programs and reduce the cost of coverage. We will make it illegal for an insurance company to deny coverage to someone with prior coverage on the basis of a pre-existing condition, eliminate annual and lifetime spending caps, and prevent insurers from dropping your coverage just because you get sick. We will incentivize states to develop innovative programs that lower premiums and reduce the number of uninsured Americans.
    o Permanently Prohibit Taxpayer Funding of Abortion: We will establish a government-wide prohibition on taxpayer funding of abortion and subsidies for insurance coverage that includes abortion, this includes enacting into law what is known as the Hyde Amendment. We will also enact into law conscience protections for health care providers, including doctors, nurses, and hospitals.

  89. geoffb says:

    A short form.

  90. serr8d says:

    “The situation is dire, there is no doubt, the gravest since the Civil War. The only hope I see is with the anger of the TeaPartyers. That anger is directed just as much towards Republican cowards as towards Democrat fascists. We don’t have to wait long to see the power of that anger. Just six days from now (6/22) in South Carolina, Nikki Haley the TeaPartyer is going to wipe out Gresham Barrett the RINO, even though the state GOP establishment is doing everything slimy to smear her.

    “I think your player-friends have to see things not as Democrat vs. Republican but as the Court Party – the establishment in power be they Democrat or GOP – vs. the Country Party, the TeaPartyers who want an end to all the corruption, Dem or GOP. Your players are part of the Court Party. The TeaPartyers you might think are like those who led the French Revolution – but they are like those who led the American Revolution instead.

    “Yes, the TeaPartyers own most of the 300 million guns in America, but they don’t want blood unless there’s no choice. Note the ‘unless.’ November 2nd better be an honest election. What the TeaPartyers must grasp is Churchill’s call after the battle of El Alamein [November 1942], that November is only ‘the end of the beginning.’

    “So you are right – the only hope is radical surgery to cut out all the metastasizing cancer, to amputate unconstitutional gangrene, or another metaphor, to be like Alexander and cut the Gordian Knot with a swordstroke.

    “But the question really is not whether Republicans have the courage to perform the surgery, to defund ObamaCare, to defund the entire Obama agenda, to defund entire agencies like the Department of Education, Energy, and the EPA. It is whether the TeaPartyers have the courage and capacity to force the Republicans to. I mean, how is eliminating the EPA extreme, and EPA unconstitutional fascism not extreme? We’ll find out, because they are America’s only hope now.”

    Everyone waited for our host’s response. “And the hyper-inflation? The debt’s already baked in the cake, no matter what future spending is cut.”

    “Hyper-inflation is only another word for total default. The only way to avoid it is a government default on its debts only. Then we can switch from a worthless fiat currency to an asset-backed currency.” I smiled. “Gold brings freedom.”

  91. newrouter says:

    I think it’s best to see the thing roll out before condemning it out of hand.

    while retreating they put up a modest counter attack. me i like patton hit them hard on multiple fronts. attack attack attack.

  92. urthshu says:

    >>>- Listen carefully……*******revolt, vote, revolt, vote, revolt, vote*******

    Rollercoaster of votes
    rollercoaster woo.hoo.hoo.

  93. happyfeet says:

    I’m with Mr. sdferr I’m favorably impressed and I will confess to being rather willing to be critical and yet I found little in the pledge what I didn’t think was pretty much ok.

  94. newrouter says:

    I found little in the pledge what I didn’t think was pretty much ok.

    no sprinkles

  95. sdferr says:

    This is them trying sincerely to be serious, which, while it falls short in some respects, is so far better than what I (for one) had come to expect of them I think they deserve a few moments to breathe easier at least. We can go back to hammering on them after a week or so, no problem. In the meantime, it will be interesting to see how widely this document penetrates the people, how far they themselves choose to agree with it and how far or not it helps to elect more R’s to Congress, which new R’s, I don’t doubt, will instantly set to improving the Pledge to their own satisfaction and to the satisfaction of their constituents. This is going to be a dynamic next six months.

  96. happyfeet says:

    plus it only pays token lip service to jesus issues

    That’s a huge step forward for America.

  97. JD says:

    Uninspiring but better than I expected.

  98. sdferr says:

    An old Norman P. piece, America the Beautiful, up at City Journal, touches on another aspect of the American exceptionalism cynn played at missing the other day. That aspect is apparently cynn herself. heh.

  99. newrouter says:

    plus it only pays token lip service to jesus issues

    because the feds need to adress gay, baby killer, and segregation agendas

  100. happyfeet says:

    hey these are the same jackoffs what passed super special terri schiavo vegetable management laws –

    it’s a big step

  101. JD says:

    Baby steps, baby steps …

  102. george smiley says:

    All in all, it’s an ok document, the House will be generally better than the Senate as these sorts of things, although Sessions 1/13 track record this season, doesn’t terribly reassure.

  103. sdferr says:

    I dunno JD, given their recent previous actions and comparing them to this, these are looking more like giant strides than baby steps, even recognizing the stepwise shape of the proposals they make. They are indicating more to come, I think. At least they’d better be, since the new class will, as I say, want to be doing rather more than this.

  104. bh says:

    Taking this as a positive step as well.

    Remember, there’ll be a larger than normal freshmen group coming along and they’ll have some ideas of their own. As an initial baseline from the old guard? Could be much worse.

    I’d be interested in seeing how many of the new faces we can get to put their names behind Ryan’s efforts. That’ll be something worth pursuing while the Dems are lame ducking the country all to hell.

  105. bh says:

    At least they’d better be, since the new class will, as I say, want to be doing rather more than this.

    Yeah, I’m of the same mind. Just a minute late. Damn you!

  106. sdferr says:

    heh. ’twas a fit of zeal brought on by newrtr and serr8d bh, so don’t blame me, blame them.

  107. JD says:

    You gentlemen are correct. From the douchenozzles in power, this is a good step, a positive step. The key for me is that it is a first step.

  108. newrouter says:

    ’twas a fit of zeal

    nay. moving the overton window many notches to free markets.

  109. newrouter says:

    The key for me is that it is a first step.

    in a fit of “bipartainship” these fools sell out. got keep modo happy.

  110. sdferr says:

    “…to free markets.”

    I suggest reading the Podhoretz; then learning to write as well as he does. You’ll be moving windows in no time.

  111. happyfeet says:

    at the very least it means they can be taught

  112. bh says:

    moving the overton window many notches to free markets

    There really is something to that notion. The planets are aligning. (Witchcraft!) I’d rather try for too much this cycle rather than later wish we’d gone for more.

    But, as Pablo said somewhere else, I don’t think the politicians are leading this anymore. Gotta say though, to just see them move because they can see something scary and indeterminate looming on the horizon, I’m heartened.

  113. newrouter says:

    I suggest reading the Podhoretz; then learning to write as well as he does

    just commenting on a 1st rate blog. i don’t think the commentary crowd are very intelligent nationally. neo con pauline what’s her name opinion.

  114. newrouter says:

    i read jen rubin’s cutesy thing at 7 am and think i know this already and you suck as a writer.

  115. newrouter says:

    I suggest reading the Podhoretz;

    for what warmed over krautman and karl the rover

  116. sdferr says:

    Norman, in my opinion, is a far superior thinker as compared with his kid John, who more often than not disappoints. As to the rest at Commentary, sometimes they’re good, fewer times very good, sometimes kinda mediocre and sometimes, though more rarely, crappy. As to my own claims as a writer, I think I pretty much agree with you newrouter, I do suck, which is why I never have pursued the thing.

  117. happyfeet says:

    you don’t suck as a writer who sucks as a writer is new other guy at work he can’t punctuate for shit

  118. bh says:

    I heart Jen Rubin and Podhoretz the Elder. These are your natural friends, nr.

  119. JD says:

    I think it is important that we do not allow ourselves to be placated by them taking an initial positive step. Or even several positive steps. They have a crap load of work just to reach trustworthy, and then the real work begins.

  120. happyfeet says:

    I promise I will not be placated

  121. sdferr says:

    “They have a crap load of work just to reach trustworthy, and then the real work begins.”

    Here here.

  122. newrouter says:

    I think I pretty much agree with you newrouter, I do suck,

    i meant jen not you fwiw. you write well.

  123. JD says:

    People that diss Jen Rubin should reconsider.

  124. bh says:

    It’s very easy to write and punctuate well when your desk is clear and people aren’t yelling about sexually abusing your corpse through the door.

    This is a true, if vulgar, thing.

  125. happyfeet says:

    I’m sorry that happened to you

  126. newrouter says:

    These are your natural friends, nr.

    i find her hook of the day annoying. just post it.

  127. sdferr says:

    Corpse abuse is against the law. You tell them that bh and see what it gets ya.

  128. newrouter says:

    People that diss Jen Rubin should reconsider.

    her 7 am theme of the morning post suck

  129. bh says:

    That you get used to, ‘feets.

    What you can never get used to is the freaky rich dude who talks about the regional digestifs of Italy for an hour when you just want to pitch your shit and then go home.

  130. geoffb says:

    I like it but was hoping for something shorter in form. Not bumpersticker or poster short but under 200 words so that it could be easily carried around to show or email.

  131. sdferr says:

    the regional digestif of brooklyn: egg cream.

  132. newrouter says:

    under 200 words so that it could be easily carried around to show or email.

    cut the fed. gov’t by 65%. works on twitter.

  133. happyfeet says:

    who cares about scrounging around Italy for a snack that’s just bad time management

  134. JD says:

    bh’s office sounds kind of trippy. Munging corpses.

  135. newrouter says:

    Podhoretz

    nice little attack on cod by junior. he the “bearded marxist” is ok.

  136. bh says:

    That’s why I haven’t gone in all that frequently for quite awhile, JD. I’m developing a very strict buy-me-a-dinner-if-you-want-to-talk-to-me rule.

    The old way sucked balls. Nerds need nerd time where they can pace around and drink coffee and look at the screens. In peace.

  137. bh says:

    This is why cell phones are the devil’s work. You can give each of them ironic ring tones but they’re still calling and you still have to pick up.

  138. Rupe says:

    Pence is a good guy. I don’t know if he is ready for the big leagues yet, but I’ll definitely keep listening to what he says.
    feets – I never understood the large percentage of people who wanted Terri Schiavo dead – I mean people who were very upset that she went on living. I think a “Useless Eater” bill might make it through Congress. Scary –

  139. newrouter says:

    we need to push the window waaaay over there. so when the O! quibbles you say “this is about 3 letters j-o-b-s” thanks hairplug

  140. happyfeet says:

    I can’t imagine why congress cared either way really unless they were looking to underscore a perception of being flitty and unserious and sort of scarily ready to flex the muscles of the state in matters what were none of their business at all

  141. newrouter says:

    if these idiots had balls they’d defund O!’s czars.

  142. newrouter says:

    you can’t play the “safe” team r-d game now with the slime bags from chi-town . cut their f**kin’ nuts off NOW

  143. Rupe says:

    Congress already pokes into things that are not their business. That should already be debated by any serious candidates. I truly wonder how far they can go without anybody watching.

  144. sdferr says:

    Chris Coates to testify at the Civil Rights Commission on the NBP case from Philly. He’s ignoring instructions from the DOJ. Should be interesting.

  145. happyfeet says:

    especially Meghan’s coward daddy he wants to regulate your nutrition supplements he’s fucking mad with power

  146. bh says:

    If we’d have stocked up on ephedra we’d be rich right now, ‘feets.

  147. happyfeet says:

    rich and regally thin

  148. bh says:

    especially Meghan’s coward daddy he wants to regulate your nutrition supplements he’s fucking mad with power

    On this point, this, this is why I give ‘feets far less hell than a lot of you guys.

    He’s attacking from the right on whole bunch of shit. His instincts are often… staunch.

  149. JD says:

    Now that should be interesting, sdferr.

  150. JD says:

    Feets is good people.

    Unlike Seth on Top Chef Desserts, who is a living breathing train wreck.

  151. george smiley says:

    It was about not abetting a culture of death, the Hemlock society, the Final Exit guy, all those in love with death

  152. Stephanie says:

    #145 or not… nothing like a corroborating witness suddenly saying “there’s nothing to see here, move along.” Why is he doing so NOW? He’s been on the hot seat for what, 9 months? Why now? And the administration can run around saying, “see we ARE honest on voting issues…” BAM. Now the new talking point is, the Rs have already shot this wad and no one got preggers…

  153. newrouter says:

    especially Meghan’s coward daddy he wants to regulate your nutrition supplements he’s fucking mad with power

    hey bonerman could devolve power to the states. tell O! fu

  154. JD says:

    Stephanie – It is likely due to some of the FOIA requests that appear to show some of the prior testimony in re. this topic was less than forthcoming, if not outright dishonest.

  155. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – Thanks for the link sdferr – Wonder if they’ll carry the hearing’s on CNN?

  156. sdferr says:

    “Why is he doing so NOW? He’s been on the hot seat for what, 9 months? Why now?”

    Good questions all. I don’t know is the short answer. Speculating, perhaps he wanted to keep his job while holding on to the hope that the DOJ IG would do his, saving Coates from the need to testify. Seeing now that the slow walk is in effect, Coates may have decided (after months of pressure from his friends and co-workers possibly) that it’s time to walk the plank to see justice done and the Obama DOJ get its comeuppance. But all that’s just guessing on my part.

  157. geoffb says:

    U.S. Total Federal Government Outlays vs Median Household Income 1967-2009.

  158. sdferr says:

    Be sure to see if Andy McC might have anything to say about this business when he comes to Emory (is it?).

  159. Big Bang Hunter says:

    #154 – Yes, that’s always a possibility, the old rope-a-dope, which is pretty much standard policy with Bumbblefuck and this administration.

    – But with the current mood running rampant among the Washington ruling class right now, get out of dodge and CYA has taken hold in this season of panic as that tsunami builds and roars louder each day, so maybe he’s doing a last minute whistle, bail, and run. Lets hope.

  160. george smiley says:

    She’s generally pretty good but Dyer and Boot, are better for more in depth topics, Wehner (Bennett’s ghost) is more of the ‘clean toga’ crowd

  161. Stephanie says:

    Sdferr, that would be a good Q to ask, but I think the jizz of his speech is to unload on the jihad-sympathizers in the WH and state.

    Will file it for later, though.

    JD, so which side will he come down on? The prior testimony is correct and someone lied or the prior testimony was taken “out of context” yada yada yada? Tis a wonderful time for someone to fall on his sword over election matters 40 or so days before an ELECTION. Color me jaded. We’ll see… too many bureaucrats become beholden to the system and their place therein.

  162. sdferr says:

    Spakovsky seems to believe Coates will back Adams’ prior testimony on the case. Adams himself testified that Coates was in the room or aware of the facts to which Adams had testified.

  163. Stephanie says:

    Stuff like this…. http://tiny.cc/fz54w

    is why I don’t trust the fuckers any farther than I can throw them, and I’m pushing 50 (just to nicely tie into the prior thread). Anything election, vote or civil rights related is suspect right now and especially right now.

  164. JD says:

    I have no doubt he will be taking one for the team, Stephanie. But it should be interesting.

  165. Stephanie says:

    ((Spakovsky seems to believe Coates will back Adams’ prior testimony on the case. Adams himself testified that Coates was in the room or aware of the facts to which Adams had testified.))

    Yeah, and some thought those Republicans would be… well… republicans when they lost.

  166. JD says:

    I hope he tells the truth. It is sad that simple honesty is viewed as a goal with this group of clowns.

  167. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – The Elephants are going to have a clown car circus with investigations if they take over Congress. Wonder if it happens if they’ll go easy… ::schnort::

  168. JD says:

    G’night, racists.

  169. Big Bang Hunter says:

    – Honesty is a bug, not a virtue with the Donkeys JD.

  170. Stephanie says:

    ((It is sad that simple honesty is viewed as a goal with this group of clowns.))

    Not even viewed as a goal…. one of the tenets of their ideology is “the ends justify the means.” Taquia (sp), it’s what’s for dinner.

  171. Ernst Schreiber says:

    my impressionistic first impression which is based largely on how everyone else is reacting:

    1) too wordy: The GOP court party looks like their talking down to the rabble in the country party
    2) hedging: in case the tea party does fizzle out, they’re offering the minimal concessions neccessary to gain support now, hoping to get back to business as usual after 2012.
    3) this morning it seems that already the state controlled media wants to discuss this as a wedge issue –it doesn’t satisfy the demands of the tea-party movement.

    4) I like the court-party/country party dichotomy (Codevilla?); I like optimates versus the populares better

Comments are closed.