If the goal all along really was to beat Obama as a matter of principle, the GOP establishment’s decision to throw its weight behind a candidate untrusted by the party’s base was probably a really really bad idea — particularly in light of the 2010 elections and the rise of the TEA Party.
So perhaps it’s time they rally behind us. You know, for a change.
And no need to thank me for the insights. I’m a giver.
Well, that was certainly unhelpful.
The Santorum hate over at Ace’s has almost permanently driven me away. And I’m not a huge Santorum supporter. (He’s not-Romney, and that is my number 1 criterion for candidate selection.)
They have a link about how the left wants to control your life, and so does Rick Santorum. Did they memoryhole Obamneycare entirely? Is that some ironic joke I just missed?
I come here just to feel sane.
So Santorum is their current Emmanuel Goldstein? Do they alternate between him and Palin?
I hope it’s not for the sake of contrast…
Santorum is liable to look down on your decision to whack off to sci-fi space chicks and comic books.
And we can’t have people looking down on us, or disapproving of what we choose to whack off to. Why, that’s the same thing as being enslaved!
I really can’t get over how much this election feels like deja vu. It’s 2008 all over again, except this time there’s no Palin to give you any hope at all.
Oh – and the crushing unemployment and 4 years of borgeoning government? It’s like whatever. It’s all Bush’s fault so let’s not think too hard!
I absolutely revolt. I WILL NOT VOTE. If I make it to retirement I’m moving to Nicaragua.
misspelling pfffff
Don’t worry, I suspect Romney will choose an energizing VP pick. Perhaps Jindal or Haley — the left seems to be gunning for those two rather hard lately.
Of course, then Romney will do something stupid, blowing the race. And insiders will come out to trash the VP candidate as a moron — to the accolade of Hollywood, the left, and RINOs.
If they don’t want Obama to win they should get Romney to drop out.
Exactly – if he picks Jindal or somebody like that…it really WILL BE 2008 again and we know how that ends!!
I had my cable shut off already in preperation. I don’t know how y’all can stay involved in this race without getting depressed.
Why would our depression at our politics be based on a stupid presidential race? Shit, the thing is far worse than that.
The Santorum hate over at Ace’s has almost permanently driven me away.
–So Santorum is their current Emmanuel Goldstein? Do they alternate between him and Palin?
Hey, you know how the adult, pragmatic, realistic Republicans see with pellucid clarity that conservatives need to shut up and line up behind Romney like teenagers at the Hunger Games premier? You know how hard-headed, tough-minded pundocrats like Ann Coulter now praise Romney to the skies while reminding us to center our attacks on Obama? Well, to be honest, she also seems to believe we have to attack them blockheaded uncooperative conservatives now.
http://shark-tank.net/2012/03/13/26803/
Now, I am not a fan of Palin and her coy, feckless prevarications about running earlier in the campaign. But that is not the point. The point is, Annie dear, if Obama is the enemy, why are you fueling Obama’s allies? Because the first link I was sent about this latest Coulter tirade was from an excited liberal acquaintance. Ann has a new fan. Very excited because bash Palin bash.
You may not love your allies, Annie my sweetums, but before you demand those of us not in love with your ex-governor moderate Republican boyfriend fall in line behind you, I have some advice. You know how you smart folks all know politics is perception? Stop bashing the people who are likely your allies. Stop giving the enemy ammunition. I thought Obama was the target. Or is the objective staying on TV and titillating liberals with matchless snark?
Rhetorical question.
Ace seems to have forgotten his own excellent advice over how to deal with the liberal media enemy. I spent the last fifteen minutes searching but cannot find the thread… Do any of you remember it? He posted something brilliant sometime after the BP spill in April 2010 declaring that if the MFM wants to play the “Katrina=Bush” game, and that is the law of the media land now, we must do the same with “Obama=Deepwater Horizon.” If those are the rules they want to use, we should use the same rules against them.
Oh well, good times.
Memory hole: I invented it.
If Romney loses it will because “we” didn’t give him enough support. Not because he was a poor candidate.
HE’S ELECTABLE.
Yeah Ace’s site has gotten so shrill, stupid, and obnoxious that it’s hard to read so I don’t. Maet was right. The feed lot’s not going to smell any better tomorrow and the old cow’s couldn’t stop now if they wanted to.
But Ace and his heap of cob-loggers is not unique.
Rick Santorum is also living rent free in Neil Boortz’s head as well. He really can’t shut about the guy. He sarcastically sing songs the guy’s name like that somehow makes the subject look foolish instead of the guy moved to do voices. I think when you mention Santorum’s obsession with sexual morality more than thirty times in an hour it makes YOU look even MORE obsessed with proselytizing on sexual morality than him. I guess Neil actually thinks that he is helping Newt with this crap. Oh well.
Ann Coulter is also burning down her career over Romney. Insulting the people who actually buy and read your books is not a bright move. Now she’s taken aim at Palin. Good luck with that Ann. I hope she sobers up soon.
The Santorum hate over at Ace’s has almost permanently driven me away.
Ditto, and for the longest time Ace was my favorite secular political blog. Ace himself has actually toned it down a tad, but the commenters there are ridiculous.
Ah, I found the bit Ace wrote.
http://bit.ly/xmne8M
The beef:
A lot of the times, when conservatives, attempting something like rigor of intellectual consistency, say “But then we’d be hypocrites!,” they are utterly failing to consider which rule actually prevailed in court — the court of public opinion and the court of media coverage and the court of political consequences.
Yes, we argued passionately for a different rule. But we lost, and a new rule was established. This is the rule, then, going forward for all parties, and we shouldn’t permit Democrats alone to take advantage of the rule, or, if it’s a vindictive rule, we shouldn’t allow Republicans alone to suffer from it.
(snip)
This isn’t hypocrisy: This is simply accepting that as we fight and argue certain precedents for future conduct are established, certain rules-going-forward laid out.
We can’t allow our opponents to endlessly establish one rule for themselves, loose and easy, and another rule, stringent and vindictive, for ourselves.
Doesn’t sound like Ace has taken his own advice much.
Romney actually thinks conservatives will rally around once he wins the nomination.
link.
Which is why Romney thinks he doesn’t need to do anything to make amends with the base.
Evidently, Mitt has forgotten that having the Senate and House in GOP hands is far more important than having a GOP president.
He’s electable. He’s even worse than McCain and somehow he’s electable. We don’t even have hope that Romney and his awesome hair would check out early.
I can’t believe that’s how bad it’s gotten — I’m basing my vote on the hope that the actual candidate might die and the token VP might get a chance to lead.
And we’re supposed to be rallying for this??
OT (sorta): Headlines at Drudge:
Afghan president wants U.S. troops out of villages…
U.S. moves massacre soldier to Kuwait; Afghans furious…
Thousands protest, chant anti-American slogans…
Taliban suspends peace talks with U.S….
Obama Fills Out NCAA Basketball Bracket…
In the words of Dr. Henry Lee, “Something wrong here.”
This seems to be the plan:
1. Ignore 2010 success. Pretend that the tea party only LOST seats and ignore the california loss and other moderate losses.
2. Pick a loser moderate centrist type with a anchor around his neck (Romneycare).
3. Accentuate flaws of other candidates and join leftist press in culling all candidates but your loser. Ignore obvious flaws in your own candidate and punish and stigmatize any discussion of them. Prophesy that only your guy can win despite actual record of not winning. Demand support of your loser candidate before he has earned it. Forbid loser candidate from moving right to shore up support. Call anyone who does not support candidate crazy and embarrassing. Start talking about purging the party even though that would be like the strawberry ice cream purging the split banana, whipped cream, chopped nuts, cherry on top, and vanilla, and chocolate scoops from the banana split.
5a. Claim that winning the general means that moderates are the real republicans and the tea party and era of reagan are double over no backs. Cross the aisles once too often and watch the party split. Possibly fail to repeal anything despite promises. Wonder why president has minimal support from party and why donations are way down from people who no longer like, trust, or even listen to them.
5b. Claim that lack of support from crazy disloyal tea party types killed their candidate in the general and try to purge party of disloyal elements. Brace for waterfall of lame duck atrocities from Obama whitehouse that no longer feels leash tugs from worried voters.
It’s a great plan if you have brain damage and live in DC.
Don’t let anyone lie to you… conservatives came out to vote for McCain in 2008. McCain, Mr. Cross-The-Aisle, could not win enough swing voters, the “independents” often known as “the clueless.”
If Romney wins, it won’t be without conservative votes. And conservatives will not get much credit. Moderation will get the credit. Conservatives want Obastard out, period. If Romney loses, given history it is far more likely he will have failed to win the swing vote rather than failing to get conservative votes. Of course, the usual suspects will blame conservatives anyway.
Somehow I just know it’s all my fault for forcing the GOP establishment to anoint Romney over any conservative candidates. I’m not quite sure how I’m to blame, but that doesn’t change my certainty that it’s All My Fault.
Afghan president wants U.S. troops out of villages…
U.S. moves massacre soldier to Kuwait; Afghans furious…
Thousands protest, chant anti-American slogans…
Taliban suspends peace talks with U.S….
If this were Bush we would at least get giant papier-mâché puppets and assassination fantasies in print and film. Now, we get basketball brackets.
Progress!
1. Ignore 2010 success. Pretend that the tea party only LOST seats and ignore the california loss and other moderate losses.
Man, you got that right. The first thing you hear out of Pragmatic Republicans when mentioning the Tea Party is “Witch! Christine O’Donnell! Crazy Sharron Angle!”
Ignoring the massive, historic victories in 2010, and focusing like a laser beam on the two failures. Pragmatism!
Yeah, that Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina… two shining examples of moderate, realistic, actual Republican triumph, no?
At this point the hope is that Obama will lose the election because of his obviously terrible record and cheesy Chicago agitator campaigning against reality style .
Romney is not smart enough to run against the press and democrat collusion, or the democrat’s policy of pushing a radical tyranny of self proclaimed experts that divides the population by assigning pieces of it to various grievance groups. He probably won’t even run against the economic illiteracy and bad faith of the white house. I wouldn’t be surprised if Romney tries to run on muzzling the tea party.
Romney has already started tying his own hands with the gentleman’s cord because his knuckles are only for slapping his base around for being so ugly.
And while we’re busy making Ann Coulter cry over here, definitely read Peter Suderman’s exegesis on Romney:
http://reason.com/archives/2012/02/08/consultant-in-chief
If Romney wins, he makes a good case about the nature of his administration.
In this, his second primary campaign, the problem that consultant Romney has chosen to solve is not the Medicare crisis, the federal debt burden, or sluggish economic growth. Instead, it is how to appeal to a Republican Party torn between Tea Party activists and Beltway moderates.
Mitt has forgotten that having the Senate and House in GOP hands is far more important than having a GOP president.
I’m not so sure about that. Just look at Jeff’s farm children post for one example of many.
An energetic and engaged legislature would slap down that kind of executive over-reach. Unfortunately, we have a legislature more interested in pork-barreling and ribbon-cutting than doing their job.
Y’all refugees from AoS, maybe think of yourselves as did the refugees from old Europe arriving on the shores of America, with an opportunity to leave all that old bullshit behind and start afresh, eh? It may turn out the folks who’re already here don’t give a shit about rehearsing those foreign people’s melodramas over and again.
Quite, sdferr.
Doesn’t mean we can’t point and laugh, though.
No, sure, it doesn’t. Just after awhile the burrowing down gets a tad . . . what to say? . . . tedious. I mean, maybe there’s a good reason not to bother with the machinations in old land in the first place?
“He posted something brilliant sometime after the BP spill in April 2010 declaring that if the MFM wants to play the “Katrina=Bush” game, and that is the law of the media land now, we must do the same with “Obama=Deepwater Horizon.” If those are the rules they want to use, we should use the same rules against them.”
I gotta disagree George. We need to stick to the rule of law, the constitution, linguistic intentionalism , and truth. We need to counter their game of calvinball, but not join in.
Y’all refugees from AoS, maybe think of yourselves as did the refugees from old Europe arriving on the shores of America, with an opportunity to leave all that old bullshit behind and start afresh, eh? It may turn out the folks who’re already here don’t give a shit about rehearsing those foreign people’s melodramas over and again.
I can remember the halcyon days when Ace himself was appalled by the annointing of Mr. Inevitable. It was all of about three months ago.
While I haven’t quite given up on AoS, the flood of Romney apologists and the overall anti-Santorum slant have curtailed my interest. I’ll agree with Paul that Ace himself has dialed down the Santorum bashing after a bad run.
One commenting shill actually tried to cite Romney’s four years of (constitutionally-mandated) balanced budgets as a reason to support him. When I pointed out that Jennifer Granholm had eight years of constitutionally-mandated balanced budgets and suggested that we should make her Veep, he didn’t react well.
How many times do we gotta explain it to you, Dale? Arguing from evidence is cheating!
Well, keep in mind that the odds a crazed leftist will kill anyone who dares replace The Won are pretty high…
Be patient, Squid–I’m a slow learner.
It may turn out the folks who’re already here don’t give a shit about rehearsing those foreign people’s melodramas over and again.
Point taken… and we will have plenty of our own melodrama during the coming months. Old wounds heal slowly.
You know, if the GOP really wants to play hardball, let’s nominate Obama. He is certain to appeal to the moderates, and we know he’s electable, by 52% last count. He has had a far more meteoric rise in his political career than Romney. I’m sure Obama is actually a reliable conservative. Don’t laugh. His predicament is just like Mitt’s, namely that he’s had to run in blue states his whole life, and govern a center-left electorate. What else could he do? For this reason, we can’t blame Mitt for Romneycare, so we certainly can’t blame B. Hussein for Romneycare’s lovechild.
missfixit: You might want to re-think your move to Nicaruagua. Commie-central right now. Nice place, great people, terrible government. You are welcome in Costa Rica, though. Let me know if you need any information.
Well, keep in mind that the odds a crazed leftist will kill anyone who dares replace The Won are pretty high…
I think, win or lose, the streets are going to run with blood.
I don’t mind when people wash up from other places — it reminds me why I quit those other places and only check in here , heh
There’s only so much time in the day, after all, and we are approaching Armageddon. Or something. ANybody watch Doomsday preppers? lol I draw the line at camping. Guns and food stores are fine, but camping? nope
Gulermo! How are you?
The objection I have seen the most about Santorum is that he is a scold. I guess that’s true, but so what? I don’t need the president to say nice things about my voluntary behavior, or indeed anything else about me. I don’t need government approval. What I need him to do is leave me alone, and get the rest of the government to do the same.
If he were in my home and giving me heck, I would have a problem, and would ask him to leave. All I would have to do with him as president is change the channel when he starts to annoy me, much like I do with Obama now pretty much any time he’s on.
Costa Rica it is! Sign me up!
missfixit I concur about camping. No thanks.
Camping is right out, but those underground bunkers are kind of cool, though frightfully expensive.
I have another plan, though transporting my ammo stores for my non-existent guns could be an issue.
Give us a jingle if you need help, cranky. We have lots of room since the tragic barn fire.
Finer than frogs hair, split three ways. Email me at wsmith9198 at that hot mail point com
“Conservatives want Obastard out, period. “
No. Conservatives want Obama out, and conservatism in. Does no use to replace him with a cheap imitation.
“If Romney loses, given history it is far more likely he will have failed to win the swing vote rather than failing to get conservative votes. “
Want to bet? If Romney gets the nomination, I predict there will be many ballots cast voting for conservative congressmen and the presidential chad left firmly in place.
Maybe California Republican voters were actually ahead of the thing in 2010. When presented with Meg Whitman(Arnold with breasts) and Carly Fiorina, republicans stayed home.
I personally voted for Nightingale for governor, to the disgust of many, because I wouldn’t buy what the establishment was selling. I checked later, and found Jerry Brown got 5 million votes out of 9 million cast. He got a million more votes than all the other candidates combined. Now there are many reasons for that I think, public union organization and illegal immigrants for two(or one). Meg was all for public unions and illegal immigration mind you, but come on…Jerry is their freak’in godfather. However, I will assert independents and moderates had little to do with Megs loss. She is about as moderate as you can get. No, the reason she got blown out of the water is because many conservatives stayed home.
Romney will lose for the same reason.
Want to bet? If Romney gets the nomination, I predict there will be many ballots cast voting for conservative congressmen and the presidential chad left firmly in place.
Perhaps, but that wasn’t the case with McCain. I’ll still take Romneybot over Obama. At least there is a 50/50 chance Romneybot will nominate conservative justices, despite Sununu. Obama, zero chance.
I’ll still take Romneybot over Obama.
So many people have broadcast that willingness, over so long a time, that it has become the only option the establishment will ever give us. We are long, long overdue for changing the terms of their calculation.
“Barely better than Obama” is simply not good enough for me to grant my blessing or my vote (same thing, I suppose) to a technocrat who sincerely believes that government can solve most people’s problems, so long as it’s his government doing the solving. It’s no longer a matter of my holding my nose and taking one for the Team; if the Team isn’t going to meet me halfway, then screw ’em.
The simple fact is that moderates don’t stand for much of anything and therefore they don’t MEAN much of anything. They have no consequences or advantages of their own. They attract only the confused or indolently apathetic. Not having made any significant ideological decision does not constitute a full ideology. The middle ground is very flat. There are no real allies and a LOT of enemies.
Squid says it so. perfectly.
Also people who showed up for 2008 showed up for 2008. I think they did so with the understanding that 2008 would be a one time thing.
How popular is being insulted and threatened for a yearAFTER SUCCEEDING in 2010, and then asked to trudge in to the polls and do your duty for “2008 part II: Even 8ier” REALLY going to be ?
I think some dumb asses in in for a huge shock. I still hope that Obama loses and with his record he CLEARLY deserves to but the GOP has been too stupid for too long.
How weak and pathetic is the GOP right now?
Obama is doing bad comedy sets against the people asking for more drilling right now.
We’re hurting, and the president is like “Ha ha, but seriously folks! Tip your waiters! Try the veal! I’ll be here all week.”
Why? Because he assumes, hell, he KNOWS the GOP will let him get away with it in the mistaken belief that it will make them seem classier.
Moderate, Independents, the Great Undecided. Spare me.
It always galls me to be a week out from a presidential or other major election and have the “Man on the Street” interviews with the “undecided. Fuck them. If they haven’t come to a conclusion a few days before they pull the lever or punch a chad, then they should have their voter registration cards revoked and stamped with a big “S” for stupid.
“Perhaps, but that wasn’t the case with McCain.”
Voter turnout was high in that election, but it’s hard to say there weren’t a few million protest non-votes, which would have made a difference. If it wasn’t for Palin, McCain would have been crushed.
Given the way Palin was treated, and the mood of the right this time, I don’t think Romney will get any votes based on his VP pick.
Also people who showed up for 2008 showed up for 2008. I think they did so with the understanding that 2008 would be a one time thing.
Exactly. It was one thing to swallow one’s pride for McCain in the light of events in 2008, but to accept a moderate a year after the tea party victories, and considering how beatable the incumbent is, is simply unacceptable. If we can’t win with a conservative in this environment, when are we going to win?
Remember folks, keeping and controlling your own property is now a controversial and extremist position.
Your money, your land, your stuff, your kids, your doctor, your decision making power all exist under your control under the possibly very temporary sufferance of the government. The bill of rights is highly optional. We are a nation of people not laws.
I don’t fully comprehend the Santorum as sex-obsessed moral scold thing. The fact is our entire culture is sex-obsessed, and the only thing Santorum seems guilty of is pointing out that the emperor and empress are bumping uglies in the middle of the parade. This makes him sex obsessed?
If we survived Ron & Nancy lecturing us not to do drugs, I think we can survive Santorum’s disapproval of whatever kinks each of us may have.
As I’ve said before, you’re not going to teach “the Establishment” anything if you don’t vote for the nominee. If you don’t vote for the nominee and Obama wins, you’ll be learning the difference between a Romney presidency and an Obama presidency, which you seem to think is going to be identical. “Barely better than Obama??” Come on, that’s pure hyperbole. Romney’s skill set is much more suited to an executive position than Obama and at the very least, Romney understands economics, whereas Obama was too smoking pot to learn anything in college, other than “you’re a black man who’s entitled” Yes, there are some troubling similarities but the men are not even remotely the same. I don’t know why many of you are focusing on the similarities rather than the differences but you’re just incorrect when you (and others) repeatedly assert there is no difference (or “barely any difference”).
The truth is, the tea party movement which really started this journey back to true conservatism, has simply not been around long enough to make any fundamental changes at the top. It will take time to get better candidates.
What do you teach them if you vote for Romney? You teach them that a statist candidate will get your vote. You will then get more statist candidates.
You do understand that the GOP will NEVER offer up a conservative candidate? It is who they are. Conservative in name only. Compromise for thee; none for me, as it were.
Matt,
You do understand the difference between a primary and a general election, yes?
And you know this because…you’ve said it before?
Guess what. I voted for McCain in 2008 — that is, I voted for the promise of Palin — and we didn’t win. We didn’t win with Dole. We won once with GHWB — because of Reagan — but he lost once he surrendered the promises of Reagan and raised taxes. We won with GWB, but he beat out McCain, who was even worse, and that was against Gore, who had all the likability of a shit stain on a thong.
So it seems the establishment keeps getting their guy, keeps losing with him, and not changing the kinds of candidates it keeps foisting on us.
When Obama wins, then, it’ll be they who are to blame, not those of us who spoke in 2010 and who have been demanding they don’t give us a repeat of 2008.
As I’VE said before, vote for Romney if that’s what your conscience tells you do do. If not, you haven’t voted for Obama. You’ve simply expressed disapproval with what both sides have put on offer.
Hey Matt,
Lucy says Bullwinkle wants you to watch him pull a rabbit out of his hat.
Right after you kick the football she’s holding for you.
Then we ran the guy who lost to Bush, and he lost again. Now we are being asked to run the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Bush.
My only question is: how fucking retarded are you people?
What the Republican Establishment needs to learn is that they need conservatives and the tea-party more than either needs the Establishment.
Matt, have I ever told you how delicious I find the fear of a Romney supporter in the face of his candidate’s continued inability to close the sale with his own party?
‘Cause I find it really, really delicious. Please do keep serving it up.
Wrong question Moe,
The real question is, how fucking retarded do they think we are?
I’m guessing their answer is Epsilon semi-moron, seeing how the media, whose esteem they crave, sees us as easily led.
If Mitt really wanted to be President, he’d set his hair on fire.
the mittens making the right noises
link
Set his fair on fire? Pffft. Mitt won’t even burn his ships. In fact I don’t think he’s even left his ship.
When Obama wins, then, it’ll be they who are to blame, not those of us who spoke in 2010 and who have been demanding they don’t give us a repeat of 2008.
This is why it is not only fine if this primary challenge continues, it is salubrious. Let Romney fight and win this to the last ballot if he really wants it, and no one owes it to him. It’s up to everyone himself to decide whether to vote for the R in the general, whoever it may be. But the choice is binary; it will be either the R or Dear Leader. In a state like Clownifornia, your vote may be meaningless either way.
By the way, as a tonic to the notion that “we have to shut up and consolidate behind Romney so he can attack Obama,” consider this. Nothing is stopping Romney and his surrogates now from concentrating his campaign efforts against Obama instead of the other candidates. That’s what a confident candidate would do in his position. Let him do it. Furthermore, has it occurred to us that a prolonged primary campaign may actually keep Team Obastard off-balance? They have been plotting to run against Romney for months. A prolonged primary season may actually be screwing up their tactics.
But such a postulate would require discarding the idea that We Must Unite Right Now (Behind Romney), so unserious unhelpful.
Matt, I know where you’re coming from, but I gotta tell you, your skills of persuasion suck. Also, your timing sucks.
With the latter, we’re in the primaries, that’s a good time to contrast the various candidates with Obama. Romneycare Romney doesn’t stand out.
As for the former, you are not addressing the concerns of those rejecting Romney out of hand, you are asserting redundancy.
What we are arguing now, during the primaries, is Romney’s “electibility”.
The establishment types tell us he should be the candidate because he can get the most votes. Many Conservatives are saying not so fast, and list a long litany of reasons why that is not so, and how another candidate would do better.
Romney people just keep parroting “electability”, and demand everyone discard their list of misgivings and fall in line. That’s why they don’t want him to be contrasted with Obama, who is a nice man, just in a little over his head, and contrast himself instead against the corrupt little sneak Gingrich and wild-eyed morality cop Santorum.
Romneycare makes the man un-electable to far too many in the base, I think it’s time the Romney people recognize that and put their support behind a viable candidate.
No…not Ron Paul.
Hey if Romney wants to impress me and earn my vote and prove that he can represent me that’d be great. But he won’t ever get that by having his hordes of snarling idiots try to scare or slap it out of me or claim that I just owe it to him.
I hope he can do better than that.
And I think it’s rather funny that the pods for Mitt are now showing signs of being worried that all the people they just spent three months shitting on, discouraging, and calling traitors or stupid losers, might not pull the daggers out of their backs, smile, and get in line to vote like the plan/prophecy said that they would have to.
They dug a hole and jumped in it and now they want to blame the poor shovel for leaving them trapped. Assholes.
“I think it’s rather funny that the pods for Mitt are now showing signs of being worried “
They’ve always been worried, it’s why the “electability” meme was introduced early.
I was just wondering, thinking on the dirty campaign Romney has run, I mean the thought just popped in my head, I wonder what Mitt has on Coulter? Like if he got some pictures with Dick Morris sucking her toes or something?
Eewww, bad thoughts!
But he won’t ever get that by having his hordes of snarling idiots try to scare or slap it out of me or claim that I just owe it to him.
The “of course they’ll come running back to the Mittster” interview he gave a couple nights ago is extra f-u motivation for me not to vote for him.
I hope he can do better than that.
The thing of it is, he doesn’t even think he has to try. He thinks the Obama Panic card is all he needs to play. In the meantime, he smarms and shivs his way through the primaries, reserving his venom for his opponents and the Marquis of Queensbury rules for the President.
And I think it’s rather funny that the pods for Mitt are now showing signs of being worried that all the people they just spent three months shitting on, discouraging, and calling traitors or stupid losers, might not pull the daggers out of their backs, smile, and get in line to vote like the plan/prophecy said that they would have to.
Yeah, screaming “LOOK AT THE MATH” and insulting every electorate that fails to bow to His Electability (the stuff levied against Alabama and Mississippi was indistinguishable from Daily K*s) is just a brilliant way to rally the troops to your banner. The plan to obliterate the opposition with Super-PAC negative ads has managed to depress primary turnout. It’s bidding fair to depress the November turnout as well.
None of which will be Romney ’12’s fault, of course.
Apparently Santorum has declared he plans to rid the internet of porn.
Let’s face it, after that balancing the budget, shrinking government and peace in the middle east will be a fucking cake walk.
i heard that santorum wants to give amnesty to all the pederast priests because roman polanski’s friends says it is no big deal
I don’t come here so much for the camaraderie as I do for the invective.
There is some museum quality stuff tossed off around here.
And now, we return you to your regular programming.
“Apparently Santorum has declared he plans to rid the internet of porn.”
Has declared he plans to rid the internet of porn, or that he would prefer there were no porn? If it’s the second one, it ain’t nothing new. You don’t hardly ever hear of Christian churches clamoring for more porn on the internet.
Relax, I don’t think even a devout Catholic wants to fundamentally transform America into a theocracy.
http://www.ricksantorum.com/enforcing-laws-against-illegal-pornography
I know I’ve posted this before, but what the hell.
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/early-rnc-campaign-ad
“enforcing-laws-against-illegal-pornography”
almost as bad as enforcing laws against illegal aliens!!11!!
link
LBascom: With that in mind; is that even possible? The entire history of art is replete with pronograhic images; ie: photography.
bmoe here’s the problem
too many laws and regs
The entire history of art is replete with pronograhic images; ie: photography.
Not just photography. Japanese “pillow books” and the Kama Sutra. Would the museums have to scoured of Renaissance pieces? That Rubens and his slutty, slutty paintings of Sasha, his wife. Hmmph!
newrouter: “too many laws and regs” This.
leigh : Sorry, should have been ex:. Go back further. The frescoed walls at Pompiea. The fetish figurines from the pre-Sumerian cultures. I also remember the hunters in the Lascua cave paintings were depicted as rather well endowed. That is only in the Old World. Many examples in the New World, Meso-America and South America, as well. So, how far back in history do you want to go?
Exactly. Look at all the antiquities of female fertility figures from the Stone Age.
I think it’s a fool’s errand and not one that is at the forefront of national concerns about getting our house in order.
I’ve been lurking here for a looong time and I had never bothered to register. Just wanted to say “thanks” for this post. I’m tired of being told “if you don’t vote for Romney, you’re voting for Obama”. I got into it earlier today at AoS with, well, about 3/4 of the regulars because one of them decided to say “anyone that won’t vote for Romney is a liberal, and a traitor.” Fun stuff.
Anyhow, thanks.
Hey, Mom! I’m In Playboy Magazine!!
Poor Meghan is dumber than a sack of hammers. Bless her heart.
Anybody who won’t vote for Romney is a liberal and a traitor?
Wow. And anyone who supports Santorum is a Jesus-y Biblehumping scold. And anyone who supports Palin is a retard caught up in a personality cult. Ditto with Cain. And anyone who votes for Bachmann gets the crazy all over their shoes and won’t be allowed inside on the rug. And so on.
So do as you’re told: vote for Romney, now that Rick Perry stuttered his way into irrelevance. Or else you’re a traitor. And a liberal.
— Who probably supports minimum wage tied to inflation. And state-run health care. And cap-and-trade. And TARP. And the stimulus. And thinks Obama is really a good guy.
The way I see it, the party establishment already betrayed the GOP, so no biggie.
I will say that my response to said post was…impolitic at best.
Yeah, I don’t think Santorum is thinking of going after the entire history of art. He’s talking about enforcing existing law.
This position really surprises you?
And voting for a liberal Republican to prove I’m not liberal?
Sister, please.
No, it doesn’t. I also think he’s a scold. But, at least he embraces it.
and madd and the anti smoking/peta/handicap/voter id/anti coal/ anti oil / anti keystone folks are nice peeps
– Who probably supports minimum wage tied to inflation. And state-run health care. And cap-and-trade. And TARP. And the stimulus. And thinks Obama is really a good guy.
You can’t spell “Romney” without “erony.” (well, it almost works)
well #ows: romney = r money
lol
“r” money 2012
go for it george will
I said he embraces it, nr. I don’t see how that’s a leap to all those other folks are “nice guys”.
I’ll bet that Santorum won’t let me dress up like a bunny and piss all over cops either. PRUDE. He’s a total theocrat. He’ll probably make me go back to church and won’t let me sit in back and play with an ipod. This is a serious presidential issue. Romneycare is not. Yesiree!
I sure hope that Santorum gets rid of all those dirty etruscan coffin lids and those Hindu bas reliefs of guys screwing horses. Or that hermaphrodite statue.
Oh wait. Those aren’t even in the US.
Never mind.
Obama to Catholic Church: Deal, bitches!
It’s on.
lol
link
No biggie. We still have freedom of worship in the US.
Just do it in a church. Bitterclingers.
Not to go all Godwin out of the gate, but even Hitler knew better than to take on the Catholic Church.
I agree with Pablo; it’s on!
Ironic that a country built by people running from the Old World so that they could practice their religion as they see fit without government molestation, will end with an enlightened, secularized Supreme Court telling them that the Constitution they and others like them enshrined to protect themselves and their religious liberties is the very thing that allows for their return to being molested by a government over attempts to practice religion as they see fit.
Let’s not talk about the extent to which the Catholic Church built the health care system in America.
ah fabian socialism: we make a new world-
link
J. Madison (whose birthday it is tomorrow), from a speech on the floor of Congress, December 22, 1790:
oh shut up pablo. there is a new fabian world forming.
Too bad there is not enough money to sustain fabian socialism. We just don’t have those magical freindly robots or startrek style replicators yet.
I will not submit.
Riffing off of leigh’s comment about Santorum the scold:
I think we live in such an I’m okay, you’re okay —all values are equally valuable to those who value them that somebody willing to attest that the moral tradition which he lives by is better —and we’d be better if we would live by it too— shocks us out of our egalitarian complacency.
Hence, Santorum is a scold or a smarmy know-it-all if, and only if, on some level, you harbor just enough doubt about your own value framework to suspect that you might ought deserve to be scolded, or that he might know something that you don’t.
oh look from 1980 sumthing
Kate Bush The Big Sky
To the Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia, a Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, J. Madison, 1785
It’s not ust me who thinks he’s a scold, Ernst. He owns it. I give him props for that.
Thanks for the Madison sdferr. It’s good to be reminded of what our forefathers fought for.
link
Allan Bloom noted that “[t]he great democratic danger, according to Tocqueville, is enslavement to public opinion.” Bloom continues:
This is why Nancy Pelosi wants us to know that 90% of Catholic women use birth control.
Ernst, geoffb sent me a link you might enjoy reading, relating to democracy and pulling Bloom into the commentary.
There were more than 200 people at Republican caucus from my precinct. I attended as an observer.
I was elected a state delegate in 2008 from an attendance of about forty. Which was a remarkable turnout, according to the regulars.
I support about 95% of the state party platform. If they could field candidates that could even pretend 50% I’d still be a Republican.
Orrin Hatch may not make it out of the State Convention. He will most certainly face a primary challenge.
Yay! I have an avatar!!!!!
I know it’s not just you leigh, I was making a point about the zeitgeist. If Santorum makes us uncomfortable, it’s because the root assumptions upon which we rest in our intellectual lazy-boys aren’t very stable.
link
Yeah, I saw that the other day sdferr. Mansfield is Mr. Tocqueville.
I knew what you meant Ernst.
Well then, there was no reason to remind me that you’re not the only one who thinks he’s a scold, was there?
he said wryly
“From this analysis Bilakovics concludes that Tocqueville saw democracy as “openness,” open to dualities such as cynicism and idealism, so that we always expect less of democracy at the same time that we expect more of it.”
another bs artiste. more hot dogs with mustard.
That was for general consumption, not for you in particular. ;)
bloviation by sdferr to follow
Protein Wisdom: come for the conversations with the Morning Bowl of Oatmeal, stay for the artistic stylings of newrouter
Cut ‘n’ paste Reagan speech to follow.
I’m curious. Did you read the article all the way through newrouter, or do you just instinctually know bullshit when you see it?
link
cass sunstein call home
Mansfield teaches us many different things while newrouter specializes in teaching patience and forbearance.
the aclu/peta/seiu/aflcio/… will tell you what “your” ‘rights’ are
small d democrats as in self-governing citizens rather than subjects newrouter.
Mansfield (and Tocqueville) are talking about active citizenship, taking the time to go to the caucuses or volunteering for a campaign or political party.
Doing more than showing up on election day and flipping a coin.
yes mansfield
note: no leave me the eff alone bs in THE MANSFIELD
Which is why we have the NRA, Heritage, AEI, and the Federalist Society —to say “no you won’t.”
mansfield is derrick bell without affirmative action
This is hilarious.
tell it to the head of hhs. it’ll decide for you per barackycare.
Derrick Bell wouldn’t know how to say “Somehow a reasoner ought to take the side of reason”, let alone recognize the need.
binary stuff like bell and mansfield lead to such conclusions.
Well, at a time like this, all one can say is
your entitled to your opinion.
but if you had a question/point of order you could do that clearly in english or ebonics.
Romney scolds the right wing precisely the way that his followers accuse Santorum of scolding everyone else.
Obama is also a scolder.
Scolder’s are in. This is a time of confrontation and political beat downs.
I get scolded for wanting cheaper gas and more jobs and smaller government. I get scolded for thinking that Obama is a rotten president and that the people who still support him are idiots, opportunists, utopians (another breed of idiot), and thugs. I get scolded for expecting the president to abide by the separation of powers and protect rather than assail the bill of rights.
Like it or not, those who self proclaim that they are the clear minded and free of heart will furrow their brow and grow prudish and demanding about something and usually it is something stupid and intrusive by which they seek to set themselves above the commoner.
Socialists breed mobsters, lunatics, and vikings/pirates. Anytime you have a social contract that most people can’t sign then you end up waiting for the wolves to come and pull down the ruins you’ve made of society. You end up with ugly fat eloi who won’t breed and aren’t even smart enough to run in flocks, and you morlocks who can’t fix or produce anything. Eventually they end up paying dangeld to bear cloaked hordes which is a bit like being forced to rent your own head so the barbarians won’t take it away. That is where socialism. It’s where most monarchy leads too.
newrouter says March 15, 2012 at 6:40 pm
bmoe here’s the problem
Current federal “obscenity” laws prohibit distribution of hardcore (obscene) pornography on the Internet, on cable/satellite TV, on hotel/motel TV, in retail shops and through the mail or by common carrier.
too many laws and regs
The solution to “too many laws and regs” is less laws and regs, not a vow to hire an AG with enforcing all those laws and regs as a top priority.
Even if it isn’t his intent, which I somewhat doubt, this is just opening the door wider to increase control and regulation of the internets.
This seems to be the plan:
1. Ignore 2010 success. Pretend that the tea party only LOST seats and ignore the california loss and other moderate losses.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, you mean like Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, and Miller in Alaska ?
Let’s please stop pretending the Tea Party is infallible.
I’m quite shocked there is any question about the anti-Santorum sentiments at AOSHQ. Ace and his cohorts are generally a libertarian leaning lot of conservatives. They aren’t interested in being told how to live by Rick Santorum much more than they want to be told how to live by Barrack and Michelle Obama. Its really quite simple.
And the idea that Rick Santorum represents all conservatives is ridiculous. Santorum is a big government nanny-statist. And he couldn’t beat Barrack Obama in a general election in Bizzaro World.
One commenting shill actually tried to cite Romney’s four years of (constitutionally-mandated) balanced budgets as a reason to support him. When I pointed out that Jennifer Granholm had eight years of constitutionally-mandated balanced budgets and suggested that we should make her Veep, he didn’t react well.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gee, that doesn’t seem to be helping his predecessor, Deval Patrick. Despite the fact that balancing the budget is constitutionally required, he can’t seem to get it done.
I’m quite shocked there is any question about the anti-Santorum sentiments at AOSHQ. Ace and his cohorts are generally a libertarian leaning lot of conservatives. They aren’t interested in being told how to live by Rick Santorum much more than they want to be told how to live by Barrack and Michelle Obama. Its really quite simple.
And the idea that Rick Santorum represents all conservatives is ridiculous. Santorum is a big government nanny-statist. And he couldn’t beat Barrack Obama in a general election in Bizzaro World.
Is that supposed to be an argument for Romney or something?
If I were a conspiracy theorist, and I am
not. I’d be tempted to think the pragmatic forces behind the Romney candidacy wanted Obamacare off the table. Maybe so they could a) control how it gets implemented so they can reward friends in the insurance and pharma businesses and b) what gets implemented so they can reward friends in the insurance, pharma and medical device businesses.But don’t worry, I’m sure a former governor of Massachusetts doesn’t have any markers outstanding with those guys. I mean, c’mon. He’s a Republican!
Oh, you mean like Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, and Miller in Alaska ?
And Marco Rubio and Ron Johnson and Scott Walker and Mike Lee and Rand Paul and about 1/3 of the Republicans in the House. Funny how the anti-tea party types selectively bring up names from the 2010 campaign in order to fit their narrative.
. They aren’t interested in being told how to live by Rick Santorum much more than they want to be told how to live by Barrack and Michelle Obama.
If people actually equate the Obamas to Santorum, then they are intellectually defective. Santorum, by and large, does not want the government to dictate how people live their lives. He identifies cultural issues that have negatively impacted our society and addresses them. The Obamas are the ones mandating government action and implementing far-reaching programs.
Santorum is a big government nanny-statist. And he couldn’t beat Barrack Obama in a general election in Bizzaro World.
No matter how many times people repeat these things, it doesn’t make them any truer.
RSM does some checking and it appears that Romney and Gingrich also think it’s a great idea to enforce existing obscenity laws. RSM finds the timing of the attacks on Santorum to be somewhat suspicious. Link.
Anyone else noticing a pattern of attacks on Santorum coming from “our side” whenever Santorum starts getting some real traction?
Gee, that doesn’t seem to be helping his predecessor, Deval Patrick. Despite the fact that balancing the budget is constitutionally required, he can’t seem to get it done.
Except that his successor (whom he declined to run against) is getting it done. With a billion plus rainy day fund built up at this point.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view/20111028rainy_day_fund_balance_up_to_14_billion_as_patrick_signs_budget_bill/
Yes, Patrick hasn’t eliminated the structural deficit problem, but his budgets are just as balanced at the end of the fiscal day as Romney’s.
That word doesn’t mean what you think it means. </Inigo Montoya> The word you want is “successor.” Don’t let the first seven letters throw you off, the relationship to “success” as commonly used is glancing at best.
It helps if you remember that “predecessor” literally means, “one who died before.”
I live in Ca, so I don’t get much of a say as to who the nominee is. I’ll be voting for whoever it is even if I have to wear a bag over my head to do so as long as it isn’t Obama.
“Santorum is a big government nanny-statist.”
God, I never get tired of the cluelessness of this line as deployed by Romney minions. A *Mitt Romney* fan calling someone else a “big government nanny statist.”
The Chutzpah Meter detonates.
Dale, isn’t it possible both Romney and Santorum are big government nanny statists? That’s the way I see it anyway. The nanny state mentality just manifests itself in different ways. I mean, I keep hoping I’ve misread or misunderstood Santorum’s comments about banning porn. Who the hell cares about porn in this election? I would have much preferred discussion to be primarily about the economy- I realize that the candidates are being baited by a hostile media but can’t they turn the conversation back to gas prices, jobs, etc, rather than opining about porn and birth control? There’s my frustration with Santorum, I guess.
I keep hoping I’ve misread or misunderstood Santorum’s comments about banning porn
You have. Read McCain’s link a few comments above yours. He wants to enforce existing laws – as do all the other candidates.
There’s my frustration with Santorum, I guess.
Rick Santorum responded to a questionnaire months ago, posted his position on his website, and just now the Daily Caller decided to broadcast his response. The media is playing you.
I’ve actually read Santorum’s book and have listened to him during the debates. He is no nanny statist. He’s no libertarian, either, and that’s what ruffles feathers.
LOL as if porn is ever going to be banned or restricted from the internet. This is hilarious, you and what army of police are going to monitor the whole country for improper distribution of pron? ha ha
It’s like the drug war — we need a government 10X the size to effectively fight all of our domestic moral wars, and yet the government is already too big.
I’m wondering at this point if there is any solution outside of libertarianism for our current crisis. Conservatives and Liberals are for societies who are not on the brink of collapse, financially speaking.
Romney ’12: Shivs for Republicans, Bouquets for Obama:
http://theothermccain.com/2012/03/15/pornographic-politics-did-the-daily-caller-pull-a-media-matters-on-rick-santorum/
I’d have much less problem with Romneyite scorched earth tactics if there was even the slightest hint they’d do this for the general. But they’ve indicated the Gentlemanly Approach will be in force then.
It’s almost like they’re trying to alienate wide swaths of the party.
Look, guys. ALL the nominees have potentially fatal flaws as far as adhering to conservatism goes. Each of them has a Big Govnerment Solution for their particular pet problems.
Vote for the most conservative that can win. We’re still in the primary. Right now, I’m not impressed with the faux “purity” arguments. Vote in a Congress that can pull a moderate President to the right, if thats what we face.
Hopefully, if we win, the first item on the agenda is repealing Obamacare, and not some SoCon bullshit abortion restriction bill, like they did in 2010.
I’m not voting to install the new Jesus and I am tired of voters that do. But, I’ll vote for Santorum any day over Obama.
Thanks for that link to McCain. Explains alot. So the DC has become a Romney schill too ? Anyway, I just wish issues like “enforcing internet porn laws” would be shoved aside for this next election. Other than the exploitation of children and child pornography, which should be vigorously investigated and prosecuted, what adults want to do to each other put on film shouldn’t be regulated by the state. I’m probably naive about what’s out there but I’m tired of hearing about “porn’s effect on the human brain”. HUmans are going to do what they’re going to do, no matter the consequences. Mixfixit raises a good point- war on porn would be about as effective as the war on drugs has been.
Personally, I’d prefer Santorum’s AG spend more time looking into the multiple ways in which Eric Holder has broken the law while in office than enforcement of porn laws which ban certain types of indecent acts.
*bands head slowly against desk*
Like fricking clockwork.
First, Santorum was “making war on women” now Santorum is “making war on pornography.
Yet, sites like the Daily Caller have shown complete disinterest when it comes to reporting on Romneycare.
And Pat Toomey and Kelly Ayotte. But if it wasn’t for the damn Tea Party we would have one every seat in the contest!
The GOP held every one of its seats and picked up 6 Dem seats. That’s called winning, kids.
The whole “Sharron Angle was a crazy candidate” idea is a misleading representation of what probably happened in Nevada.
More than likely, Senator Reid was behind Angle getting the GOP nomination, figuring Angle would be easier to beat than any of the other GOP candidates.
Also, and someone correct me if I’m wrong, I believe changes were made to the voting process in NV that favored Harry Reid.
Yet, even with all that, Reid barely won in what was, most likely, an election rigged to favor Reid.
Oh well, OT but no new thread so, here goes:
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/03/16/against-partial-repeal/
Sigh. While sometimes Erickson becomes a bit breathless in his alarums, today this sounds exactly like what Romneybot and the Realists will deliver on Obamneycare:
Remember, one of the Republican concerns with fighting against Obamacare at all during this election year is the potential for the Democrats to attack the GOP for repealing popular portions of the law.
“McConnell may also want to shield his Senate GOP colleagues from voting to repeal popular portions of the healthcare law, such as the provision allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ health insurance until age 26 or another barring insurance companies from discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions.” quote from The Hill
Once the bipartisan fixers have gotten rid of all the stuff on which there is bipartisan agreement, every additional point of repeal becomes a full on partisan fight just like a full repeal vote, but with one big difference: a full repeal vote has the American people on the side of the GOP. Each additional partial repeal vote will have the public breaking off back and forth between the GOP and the Democrats, making partial repeal a mine field for the Republicans.
Remember Romney’s comment last year about repealing the bad but keeping the good in Obamacare? Yeah.
Yet, even with all that, Reid barely won in what was, most likely, an election rigged to favor Reid.
If some establishment squish had lost to Reid in that election, it would elicit a shrug and a “whaddya expect?” But because it was an actual reform-minded conservative, it has taken on the color of a devastating rebuke of everything the Tea Party stands for. Because winning 90% of our battles simply wasn’t Good Enough.
…such as the provision allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ health insurance until age 26…
Language alert! The provision doesn’t allow adults to pretend they are children. It mandates that private companies pretend that grown adults are children. Let’s not even consider the fact that at 26, my grandfather had a wife, four children and a farm…
If your Mommy and Daddy want to pretend that you’re still their precious baby, then Mommy and Daddy can carry a rider on their policy, at whatever price they and their agent agree on. Washington need not worry itself about it.
” Vote for the most conservative that can win. We’re still in the primary. Right now, I’m not impressed with the faux “purity” arguments. Vote in a Congress that can pull a moderate President to the right, if thats what we face.”
I’m not looking to elect anyone ‘pure’. And I’m certainly not looking to impress anyone with my vote. Romney simply isn’t a conservative by his record much less a pure one and his “can win” is largely a matter of a mantra rather than an actual feature. I can only vote in one congressional district and two senate races. I simply can’t trust a 2008 rino clown president chosen by idiots who have set out to sink everything gained in 2010. I am not bound to be a team player with a team that set out to screw me and holds me in contempt. Now the contempt has grown mutual. The GOP advisory cognoscenti picked a bad time to crack the whip and they show more spine to the desires of their own base than they do to their competition/opposition. They fucked up. Romney needs to move himself right or he can just fade away and die AGAIN.
Mansfield teaches us many different things while newrouter specializes in teaching patience and forbearance.
I’m just waiting for newrouter to develop an unhealthy appreciation of $6 boutique cupcakes…
” deadrody says March 16, 2012 at 4:23 am
This seems to be the plan:
1. Ignore 2010 success. Pretend that the tea party only LOST seats and ignore the california loss and other moderate losses.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, you mean like Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, and Miller in Alaska ?
Let’s please stop pretending the Tea Party is infallible.”
Notice how you failed utterly to address the actual charge while you ‘addressed the charge’ ? You listed three TP losses, ignored the moderate losses, and ignored the TP wins. Then you somehow transformed an accusation of Romney’s toad force not appreciating tea party wins and success in 2010 into “the tea party is infallible” ?
That is why your lame attempt at a pushback failed.
There were reports that casino and hotel industry workers were told to vote for Reid.
And here’s the thing: had the GOP establishment gotten behind Angle, O’Donnell, et al., and not sabotaged them in the press and by not financing their campaigns aggressively, they may have won.
It was more important to the GOP that these candidates lose and the GOP retain its power to pick candidates than it was to them to see candidates they didn’t back win.
And yet, I’m a liberal traitor for telling them to get stuffed if they think I’ll bend over and take a Mitt in the ass just because they tell me it’s smaller and less intrusive, ultimately, than a Barack.
As an aside, Sharron Angle almost knocked of Reid despite the John Ensign scandal.
If the tea party must step aside because they are not infallible then what does that make the centrist moderate GOP? Super-mechafailzilla? America’s self appointed self destruct switch? Stuck on stupid? Hypnotized by the press? What?