1 Daniels isn't French, is he?  He needs to understand that there's a difference between "truce" and "surrendering to the opposition."

2

It doesn't matter. He's not running. I was more concerned with his talk on the VAT anyway.

3 I'd still like to know when the burden of proof was put on the defender of the status quo.  Was there a vote or something?

4 I think he said what he said in hopes that a candidate would win some of the "blue" States. However, I don't think going soft on social issues will turn any of the blue States.

5

Wasn't he Bush's budget director?

How do you think that will fly in the 2012 election if economics is the number one issue?

6

So OT: In line with how he governs, Obama is making sure he tackles the important issues of the day.

When I think I cannot loathe this Blight onto our country anymore....

7 >>>And why would anyone talk about having "enormous respect" for people who are trying to destroy the underlying fabric of our society? That doesn't even make any sense. Of course it does. You offer the "enormous respect" to the person you're shafting, as a consolation prize. You lose on the issue, but hey, I want you to know I have enormous respect for your position. Dude, you need to get over the idea as President as Blogger, spewing vile and insults at the opposition, like a blogger would. Presidents don't do that.

8 more to the point, how many times will the MFM repeat the phrase "Bush's Budget Director" when introducing him. It will become as common as the title governor or mr.

9

Boy gets award for snark. 

Boy takes vacation from snark.

Coincidence?

10 (I am going upstairs to masterbate) "I am going upstairs to masterbate."

11 >>>And why would anyone talk about having "enormous respect" for people who are trying to destroy the underlying fabric of our society? That doesn't even make any sense.

Of course it does. You offer the "enormous respect" to the person you're shafting, as a consolation prize.

You lose on the issue, but hey, I want you to know I have enormous respect for your position.

Dude, you need to get over the idea as President as Blogger, spewing vile and insults at the opposition, like a blogger would. Presidents don't do that.

I will not rest until we have a president who isn't afraid to smack a foreign leader or member of the opposition party with his genitalia

12 how many times will the MFM repeat the phrase "Bush's Budget Director" when introducing him.

Was that back when we had a 250B deficit?

13 I just think he's being disingenuous to everybody.  He doesn't want Socons to be screaming at him, but he doesn't want the socially liberal set to scream at him, either.  So he creates this "truce" which can't exist: the two sides are so ideologically opposed that neither side can just "let go."

To the socially liberal, they see any restraint on what they want to do as an assault on their liberty.  To the socially conservative, they see additional permissiveness on these issues as war waged against the socio-moral foundations on which American society was founded.  Those two ideas can't have a "truce."  If the left stops fighting for their position, the right wins- whether or not the right stops as well.  If the right stops and the left doesn't, the left wins.  Therefore there is no motivation to honor any "truce" on social issues.

14 >>I will not rest until we have a president who isn't afraid to smack a foreign leader or member of the opposition party with his genitalia If Palin takes this position, she has my vote.

15 7 - maybe he needs to send his dog Bo over to ole Vick's place for the weekend or better yet let him babysit his girls. Obama just keeps getting better and better.

16

Of course it does. You offer the "enormous respect" to the person you're shafting, as a consolation prize.

I think what ace is trying to say is this:

It's like inviting a girl up for pancakes, after the first date, and getting anal out of the deal. 

The next morning you might feel compelled to tell her that you respect her - but you don't.

17 Dude, you need to get over the idea as President as Blogger, spewing vile and insults at the opposition, like a blogger would. Presidents don't do that.

Posted by: ace at December 27, 2010 01:56 PM (nj1bB)

Huh?  Did I just dream the past two years or something??

18

The sad thing is I agree with him to an extent.

We should waste time on social issues in the primary.

It should be a given that the next republican president will name a conservative to the supreme court, will be pro gun, and anti abortion(but let's be serious, abortion isn't going anywhere in the next election.)

our primary should be about fiscal issues. Who cares what church you go to if America can't pay back its debt?

That said, he did so in a politically deaf manner

19

6 Wasn't he Bush's budget director?

No, that was Rep. Rob Portman, R-Ohio for W's first term, and Portmam was replaced by Rep Jim Nussle, R-Iowa in 2007.

20 >>>I just think he's being disingenuous to everybody. He doesn't want Socons to be screaming at him, but he doesn't want the socially liberal set to scream at him, either. So he creates this "truce" which can't exist: the two sides are so ideologically opposed that neither side can just "let go." Possibly; that's certainly how I took it the first time he mentioned "truce" (and wrote him off). But the examples he offers are one-way truce terms. If it's just a framing technique, it could be effective for us.

21 18 Hehe true. Ace didn't you know we are all enemies here?

22 But Mitch Daniels Doesn't Dig In On His "Truce on Social Issues" Statement is at 80 on InTrade.

23

I just think he's being disingenuous to everybody. 

O......r he's like a good number of people that just don't give two shits about these wedge issues either way. They hope that we just have a country left to salvage before the regressives completely flush it down the toilet.

24 So Ace, you snowed in?  NYC is pretty cool in 20 inches of snow.  Been there, done that.  Find a good Irish bar and settle in.

25

Posted by: garrett at December 27, 2010 02:01 PM (hYkUF)

Thanks for that analogy, even as decadent and depraved as it is.

AoS - come for Ace's long political strategy screeds, stay for the decadent simplified explanations!

26

Exactly what do social conservatives want with public policy that is possible for a President to change?

Daniels seems to be saying that he wouldn't change anything. This is exactly what happened during Reagan, George Bush I, and George Bush II. The only difference I see is that he is not lying to social conservatives by telling them he is going to pursue their policies while in office.

27

It's a silly argument if framed that way (i.e., "hey, liberals, just drop it for a few years").  It's silly because the left is always using the courts to try and legislate.  They will never stop doing this and if we pretend there is a "truce", we are basically allowing them a victory.

I doubt very much Daniels is thinking of liberals when he talks of a "truce".  He is speaking to social cons - saying essentially, "hey you wing nuts, can't you just give it a rest."

28 Don't know about you, but the actual Indystararticle is hoplessly broken for me,  You can read a copy at jconline.com if need be.

Q: When we did a similar interview one year ago, we asked you about running for president and the answer was 'not runnin'.' (Since then you have left the door open to a run.) So, I'm asking again, are you running for president?

A: I've said what I've said what I've said. That is I havn't made any decision, can't for at least awhile, need to think about it. When we were sitting here a year ago, I guarantee you I had no plans and haven't made any. But I'm astonished at the number and the caliber of the people who have asked me to consider this.

I've been laughing it off by saying the pickin's are slim, that sort of thing, but I haven't encouraged it, I haven't solicited it and I haven't lifted a finger to do anything about it. There's no exploratory committee running around out there somewhere.

More than that I cannot say. You'll see. I said, if not a year ago certainly in the course of the year, watch what we do, and we did what we said we would. We tended to our knitting here in Indiana. That will continue to be the case. I'm going to be completely focused on this General Assembly and our agenda, and that's going to take the next four months.


...and then he averted his gaze and smiled shyly to himself......

29 An extraordinary measure of putting aside of one's sacred cows may be necessary to purge this nation of the Ogabe stench in this next election. 

We must do WHATEVER. IT. TAKES.

I'd vote for Sponge Bob as president, with Plankton as VP if they got nominated.  There's very little that would cause me to stay home this coming election.  The republicans would have to nominate that imbecile Huckabee who wouldn't be much different than a bible thumping version of Obama.

30 This is like the Version 3.0 of "The Truce".

Remember this quote from June by Daniels?

He did, however, want to clarify that he's not just singling out controversial social issues. "I'm talking about all divisive issues," he said. Clear and unified priorities are the only way he sees the country rallying around common purposes.

As I wrote at the time, it's a fundamentally un-serious position. Daniels may well be a sincere guy who cares about the economic future of the country above all else but it's a silly political gimmick he is running out and he's not doing it very well.

31 >>It should be a given that the next republican president will name a conservative to the supreme court, will be pro gun, and anti abortion(but let's be serious, abortion isn't going anywhere in the next election.) >>our primary should be about fiscal issues. Who cares what church you go to if America can't pay back its debt? I think we may get there despite the attempts of many to take on social issues which as you noted are largely irrelevant. If the national economy continues or gets worse, and I think it will, and some state turn turtle, social issues are not going to be on many people's top issues.

32 No hope here.

33 Don't worry guys I will agree with this truce but politicians I vote for will appoint judges that cite foreign law, give rights to illegal aliens, and tell the military and government to recognize gay marriage. But really let's just stop talking about all these icky social issues and get back to talking about trillion dollar defecits that bush the evil forced on Obama.

34 If the national economy continues or gets worse, and I think it will, and some state turn turtle, social issues are not going to be on many people's top issues.

I don't know.  I'm bitterly clinging to my social issues.  Harder times might make me cling even more.

35

Exactly what do social conservatives want with public policy that is possible for a President to change?

Will the president appoint conservative judges?  Will the president adopt the mexico city policy with regard to abortion?  Will the president's Justice Department pursue voting fraud cases and cases like the new black panthers' case?  Will we pour money into the NEA and ACORN? 

I understand what you are saying about passing laws that change the status quo vis a vis social conservatism, but that does not mean a president has no part to play in such fights.  A president who is going to lay down on this front would not be a good president.

Also, I have long noticed that politicians who are self professed social cons don't go squishy on taxes, regulation and the like, while "fiscal conservatives" who are NOT social cons, tend to "grow" in office.  That is just something I have noticed.  It probably is not true 100% of the time, but I can't think of a single example.

That is why, although I am not a staunch social conservative, I tend to support social conservative candidates before those who are only fiscal conservatives.  Fiscal conservatives (a la Schwartzenneger) tend to fold like cheap lawn furniture when the going gets tough.

36 Back when Lawrence was decided, there was outrage at Scalia that pointed out that this could lead to gay marriage, sure enough, that was the clamor some years later, now other slippery slope behaviors are being bandied about, and we say, what could never happen, really, how much do you want to  make a bet on that?

37 I promise to have enormous respect for your position on gay marriage, - whatever it is, - but first, you will blow me.

38 A: I've sort of come to think of it this way. If there were a foreign army massed at our border right now, I think most Americans would rush to do what they could to help defend the country and they'd find themselves figuratively in the trench next to people that are very different from them and that held different views. If the threat were defeated, we might go right back to our disagreements. That's all I'm saying.

If you don't believe that the threat is as serious as I do, then you see the arithmetic differently than I do. But if you do see that then I think it leads you to this conclusion. That's all I have to say about it. Believe me, I completely respect, in fact I share the depth of feeling on some of these questions with some people. I'm just looking at, shouldn't we save America first while there's time?


Cool.  No being consevatives until he space alien invasion is defeated.  No multitaxing, people.

"And should we win the day, the Fourth of July will no longer be known as an American holiday, but as the day the world declared in one voice: "We will not go quietly into the night!" We will not vanish without a fight! We're going to live on! We're going to survive! Today we celebrate our Independence Day! "

39 As if the left would ever back down on social issues. That's their bread and butter. They even frame their views on fiscal policy as "social justice." When we call "truce," they see weakness.

40 I always took his "truce" to mean it was two-sided, ie: that the libs had to abandon their nanny state crap, too.  But I still think it was an ill-advised statement.  Everyone says what a great governor he is (I would give him a B based on what I saw in Indian), but nothing about him says national (or global) vision to me. 

41 The more that I hear about and from this joker, the less I like him. And it's not like I liked him much to begin with...I think the Mitch in '12 train is never going to leave the station.

42 I just clicked over to The Onion from the sidebar for the first time in like eight years. What's with that libtard year in review thing? Who's writing for their "humor" for them now, Journolist?

43

Calling a truce on social issues with a liberal/leftist is fucking stupid for one reason - they aren't going to honor any truce.

Calling a truce between FiCons and SoCons makes some sense, but it completely ignores the real enemy - the left.  Fiscal and social issues are so hopelessly intertwined in leftist philosophy that they can't even see a distinction between social and fiscal.  Any internal argument on our side only hurts the fiscal state of the nation. 

The leftists can align with the Whateverthefuckitarians long enough get their cherished state involvement, and then the Whateverthefuckitarians and the SoCons are left holding hotdogs and coathangers wondering where the country went.

44 too many social conservatives are worried that if this gay marriage thing passes their partners will start withholding sex until they get a ring.

45 "If there were a foreign army massed at our border right now, I think most Americans would rush to do what they could to help defend the country and they'd find themselves figuratively in the trench next to people that are very different from them and that held different views." Any foreign army massed at our border will be there because of the enemies within. Which enemy should be the first order of business?

46 Q: You have big majorities in the legislature. Does this mean you can pretty much now get what you want?

A: No. But it does mean that we can at least get a fair hearing for what we want.


BUSH 3.0.  No fair trying to win, people.

47 STFU, dunce.  Adults are talking here.

48 post got eaten - briebart has video saying Hillary stepping down any hear anything else about this?

49
If Daniels was smart, which he's not, he'd let his psotions on this issues speak for themselves everytime he opened his mouth.

In other words, he wouldn't mention it; he wouldn't pander to the interest groups.

Daniels would stay on his fiscal message. Instead he's a bumbling boob.

50 Posted by: ace at December 27, 2010 02:03 PM (nj1bB)

The problem is in the other underlying assumption: that the Left would keep their word.

Let's say we all lived in Daniel's fantasy land.  NAMBLA, La Raza, ACORN, and all the other Lefty organizations said: "Fine, we'll stop fighting about our social concerns until the fiscal crisis is over."  How long do we think they'd stay by that.  And there we'd be, stuck with Mitch Daniels whose own views we wouldn't know.

The social (really moral) issues are important.  They are every bit as important as fiscal and security issues- and all three can be reconciled with a little effort.  At some point, Republicans are going to have to learn that liberals don't play nice, and start acting accordingly.

51
Bottom line is this: Daniels' ploy is designed to help him, where, blue states, swing states?

Fuck 'em.

We don't need to waste our time in blue states.

52 Q: One controversial issue that might come up, and which the Indiana Chamber of Commerce has made part of its agenda, is right-to-work (which prohibits companies and unions from saying employees must contribute to a union.) Is that a debate the legislature should have this year?
A: Well, debates are one thing. But it is not on my agenda. It may be worth a look but I don't think it should be a subject of debate and vote in this particular General Assembly. It may be something to study but it is a big enough issue that it ought to be more openly discussed with the people of the State of Indiana.


The Republican Party^tm  Brought to you tonight by the fine folks at GM and the members of the UAW.

53

37 Fiscal conservatives (a la Schwartzenneger) tend to fold like cheap lawn furniture when the going gets tough.

 

So true, because they want to be "liked".  They want to be "nice guys" who can go to parties and be "nice" to people. 

54

Excellent analysis, Ace.

No voting record on this guy -- never having served as a legislator -- but with this sort of statement, he's digging a hole to start from.

55 Q: The Tea Party is taking aim at the man you first started in politics with, Sen. Richard Lugar. What do you think of that and would you discourage State Treasurer Richard Mourdock or State Sen. Mike Delph from running against him?

A: I've never made it my business to try to tell anybody not to run for office. But I'll be voting for Dick Lugar a year from May.

Q: What do you say to those who say he is not a conservative?

A: I don't think that's a fair reading at all of his record.


Hmmmmm......

56 What you need to do is to take off those damn dungarees and really think about wearing some more appropriate trousers!

57 Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2010 02:20 PM (xjHwH)

Okay, that's a complete non-starter for me.  I hate Home-Owners Associations.  Unions are the Devil.  Right-to-Work should be the base-line, not the "far right" position.

58 What is starting to piss me off about all these presidential candidate projections is that no one is really mentioning the person who has the balls to not only address the nation's fiscal situation but also the social denigration that's happening to us now.  This candidate has voiced overall conservative values very effectively more than once (almost daily) and has done so unashamed.  Shall I mention the name or has everyone figured it out yet.

59 Q: Republicans won the right to draw new congressional and legislative districts. They could draw eight of the nine congressional districts to favor the GOP, but it would require carving up Marion County. Would that be appropriate?

A: No. I'm not saying you could never divide Marion County, but I think I know what you're getting at and the answer is no. I think my role in redistricting is a negative role. I don't think it's for me to get out my pen and start drawing lines. Don't give me the Etch-A-Sketch. Wouldn't know how, not my main interest.

I've simply said for way over a year, I won't sign a gerrymandered map. So bring any map that the General Assembly wants as long as it is reasonable from the standpoint of compact, contiguous districts that respect communities of interest. It's got to be a big improvement on what we have now. So, no, I'm not going to intervene and make any positive suggestion about what the map ought to look like. I just know what it shouldn't look like, and I'll just try to be a fair referee on that front.

And I'm pretty encouraged about this. I think that all the people who will draw the maps understand that the public expects that they be drawn for the public interest and they seemed to be headed that way.


Again, no fair trying to win.  Wouldn't be prudent....

60 Posted by: gesc

Haven't seen anything but the Breitbart video.
Bill "La Raza" Richardson is reportedly taking her place at State? Wonderful.

61

If markets are allowed to be free, they do a great job in creating socially conservative incentives. We've abandoned the market (for example) in creating social benefits for single mothers, paying for layers of bureaucratic and 'educational' diversity nonsense, propping up the excesses of higher education and its expanding uselessness (see women's studies, Chicano studies).

The best thing that can happen for social conservatism is to allow markets to reign. When individuals and households have to be responsible for their own decisions, they make decisions that are more stable and constructive. If we start to remove some of the moral hazard out of the political and economic system, you'll see a more responsible culture.

62
"I'm Mitch Daniels and I'm unprincipled and I'm running for president!"

yes, that's an excellent way to announce your candidacy.

63 What is starting to piss me off about all these presidential candidate projections is that no one is really mentioning the person who has the balls to not only address the nation's fiscal situation but also the social denigration that's happening to us now.  This candidate has voiced overall conservative values very effectively more than once (almost daily) and has done so unashamed. Shall I mention the name or has everyone figured it out yet.

Okay it's me.

64

This candidate has voiced overall conservative values very effectively more than once (almost daily) and has done so unashamed.  Shall I mention the name or has everyone figured it out yet.

People are talking...

65 What is starting to piss me off about all these presidential candidate projections is that no one is really mentioning the person who has the balls to not only address the nation's fiscal situation but also the social denigration that's happening to us now.  This candidate has voiced overall conservative values very effectively more than once (almost daily) and has done so unashamed.  Shall I mention the name or has everyone figured it out yet.

Posted by: Soona 

C'est moi, c'est moi, 'tis I.

Ron Paul ODB

66
I'm not saying Daniels is a bad guy or would make a bad president.

He's just a lousy candidate.This isn't rocket science, you know. Just go out there and tell the truth.

67

It was Bush's socially conservative stances that drove him to appoint conservative judges and justices.  If he had worked only off of his economic or larger political stance then he would have been happy appointing libs to the bench.  It was his opposition to abortion that culled the field of judges he even considered.  On most other issues, like illegals or US sovereignty, Bush was as bad as any leftist and it would have been reflected in his judicial nominations.

Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 27, 2010 02:15 PM (G/MYk)

 

Agreed.  But, despite what the left believes, I would also hardly call W a social conservative.  Aside from abortion and maybe gay marriage, he was pretty left on social issues, as you pointed out.  No Child Left Behind.  Medicare Plan D.  Amnesty.  And on and on.  My guess is that absent 9/11, W would have governed at the extact center if not center-left.  He was not conservative on spending.  He was conservative on exactly 2 things - taxes and abortion. 

68 He's just a lousy candidate.This isn't rocket science, you know. Just go out there and tell the truth.

From a politician?  The deuce, you say.

69 Lugar IS a RINO so that is a big negative as well.

70 OT:  I thought that Juan "The Martyr" Williams' comment as reported at Hot air deserved notice:  "ThereÂ’s nobody out there, except for Sarah Palin, who can absolutely dominate the stage, and she can't stand on the intellectual stage with Obama."

Yeah, Obama is a super genius.  He just says and does stupid things, that's all.

71
I know, it's a tall order, Allen.

72 This candidate has voiced overall conservative values very effectively more than once (almost daily) and has done so unashamed.  Shall I mention the name or has everyone figured it out yet.

If nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve, probably.

73 Okay it's me.

Posted by: David Brooks at December 27, 2010 02:27 PM (BHLuE)

 

Touche' 

74
yeah, if only there was someone out there with whom we agree with 100%...

75 Whoa, it isn't like Mitch Daniels to make such comments for public consumption. There is something else going on here that you're missing.

76 Posted by: monkeytoe at December 27, 2010 02:30 PM (sOx93)

Actually, he was very socially conservative, he was just also a big government liberal (much like Huckabee).  It IS socially conservative to make sure the next generation is educated properly.  It IS socially conservative to make sure that the elderly are cared for.  Many social conservatives even fall for the "just looking for a better life" claptrap of the illegal immigration debate, and so consider amnesty a socially conservative idea.

The difference in what I want from a Socon President and what W gave us is this: I want the underlying principle of a President to be Federalism: the People know what is best for them on most issues, and that should be honored as much as possible.  No Child isn't bad because it's a bad idea (okay, that, too, but even if it were a good idea) it's bad because the Federal Government should have no place in my child's education.  Medicare D isn't bad because it's bad to take care of Seniors, it's bad because the Federal Government shouldn't be "taking care" of anyone.

77 74 - that is such a stupid comment for Juan to make because anyone can get a teleprompter. I have never heard Obama in a discussion without one where he made sense. But, that is the meme they continue to push. They are in full Alinsky mode for the next two years.

78 Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 27, 2010 02:32 PM (mpQs4)

One day, a National Politician will tell the complete, unvarnished truth: and the world will end.

79  that is such a stupid comment for Juan to make because anyone can get a teleprompter. I have never heard Obama in a discussion without one where he made sense. But, that is the meme they continue to push. They are in full Alinsky mode for the next two years.

Posted by: gesc at December 27, 2010 02:35 PM (8PtPP)

 

Yup.  We ain't seen nothin' yet. 

80

Regardless, we're going to be like the NFL yesterday.

We'll puss out and make the wrong choice.

Take it to the bank.

81 So, the guy with the big, honking, log moving machine says,  "Do you want to try it?" 

The girl says, "Yes, I do." 

Then she does it. 

82
Mitch Daniels: elected in '04 and reelected in '08.

IN legislature: under R control.

Mitch Daniels is such a beacon, such a shining example of fiscal conservatism...both he and Obama won in Indiana in 2008.

83 Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 27, 2010 02:43 PM (mpQs4)

Meh.  It's hard to hold that against him: Obama ran (well, the Media portrayed him) as a Fiscal Hawk, remember?

84 A couple of blonds decide they want to cut their own Christmas tree from the forest.  They tramp about in the snow for hours, rejecting one tree after the other as inadequate.  Finally one turns to the other and says I'm freezing to freakin' death.  I say we take the next tree we find whether it has ornaments on it or not.

85
Obama was an amazing candidate. It's true that he ran as a fiscal hawk.

But Obama did something that no other successful candidate in history has done.

Obama, in the same sentence, could say he was going to lower taxes and raise taxes. Obama said he was going to cut spending...and increase entitlement programs, in the same sentence.

86

You know what a real truce on social issues would look like? A return to federalism. If that's not our starting point as conservatives, it's a surrender, not a cease fire.

Cut the regulations, cut the madates, cut the hand-outs.

87 But, that is the meme they continue to push. They are in full Alinsky mode for the next two years.

Posted by: gesc at December 27, 2010 02:35 PM (8PtPP)

Hell, the top headlines on Yahoo's main page are:

Poll: Obama is most admired man for 3rd year in a row

...followed immediately by:

Republican Hopefuls Stumble in Early Jockeying for 2012

Anyone who thought the honeymoon was over between Barky and his media knob-slobbers needs to wake up. 

88 You can say anything you like when the MSM is lining up to suck your dick.

89 Actually, he was very socially conservative, he was just also a big government liberal (much like Huckabee).  It IS socially conservative to make sure the next generation is educated properly.  It IS socially conservative to make sure that the elderly are cared for.  Many social conservatives even fall for the "just looking for a better life" claptrap of the illegal immigration debate, and so consider amnesty a socially conservative idea.

Actually, I'd prefer policy makers to give up entirely on "making sure" even of good things. We as a society can do a lot to advance our goals, but not make sure that everyone has all the good things we legitimately vaule without restricting freedom. Government can't come close to making sure without radically overstepping it's authority.

90

What a fucking RINO. Fuck him and the horse he rode in on.

spit

91 Hillary's running. YAAAY!

92 Posted by: Randy, a CA resident at December 27, 2010 02:55 PM (D0PNd)

Agreed, as I believe the rest of my post should have made clear.

The problem isn't the ideas- it's the policy.  The fact is, it is entirely possible that one day some State will figure out a way to run State Run Health Care without breaking the bank or condemning the ill to an early death (no, I don't think it'll ever happen- just mentioning that it falls within the relm of "possible").  Even if they do, it's not the Federal Government's purview to try to replicate it- since the solution will be specific to that State at that time, and most certainly won't work when applied across a whole nation.

93 97 Hillary's running. YAAAY!

Like OMG !

94 I would weep tears of joy if everyone would STFD and STFU about gay marriage.

95 Posted by: alexthechick at December 27, 2010 03:03 PM (bQ5xy)

Yeah... but that's so not going to happen.

96 Yeah... but that's so not going to happen.

I also want a pony.  And a billion dollars.  And to wake up tomorrow a foot taller and 100 pounds lighter.  As long as I'm asking for stuff I'm not going to get. 

97 And a billion dollars.

Don't be so sure you won't get that one... just give it a couple of years of the Fed's QE induced hyper-inflation and that's what it'll cost to fill up a vespa.

98

Good analysis ace. I don't think it's totally clear where Daniels is going with this -- hell, he may not exactly know himself. It seems like he's just tossing this shit out at this piont. I think fiscal issues need to be the main focus of the next campaign, but you can't just ignore socialcons. You can get away with a bit on gay marriage now, but not on abortion. For alot of people, this is an end-all thing. Like my mom; she basically votes straight Republican, but the one thing she makes sure on a candiate is that they're pro-life. If they're aren't, she's not going to vote for them, not matter how big a fiscal warrior they are. You may not like it, but that's the way it is.

99
we're looking at $4/gal gas this summer?

100

Let's face it.  The gay rights/marriage agenda and the pro-life agenda are opposite sides of the same coin.  Both sides want legislative and/or judicial validation of their issues because they can't win via the voting public.  Obama has never come out in favor of gay marriage because supporters can't move the needle to their side *in California* fer cryin' out loud.  What's he got to gain?

Polls seem to show that abortion likely won't be overturned at the ballot box, though, frankly, has anyone ever tried?  I think pro-lifers need to stop trying to pull the Republican Party and the Tea Party Whatever in their direction, and go straight to the state ballot boxes.  Find out where you stand.  If you can win some of those, the Parties will come to you.  If not, the de facto truce on social issues is on.

101
iknow is right.

As usual, the so-called social cons were sitting there minding their own business and the Left, as usual, foists its social shit upon us.

102 Ace, did you really think Mitch was going to give examples that would piss off people who might actually vote for him, as what the DADT and GM crowd won't...

103 As I wrote at the time, it's a fundamentally un-serious position. Daniels may well be a sincere guy who cares about the economic future of the country above all else but it's a silly political gimmick he is running out and he's not doing it very well. Posted by: DrewM. at December 27, 2010 02:06 PM (HicGG) Right. It is a gimmick. Anybody remember Lamar Alexander wearing flannel farmer shirts, trying to be a farmer presidential candidate? There is no such thing as a truce here. Hell, the Dems were positioning themselves for the 2002 elections in between the the first plane hitting the WTC and the second plane hitting it. (Ok, maybe not that soon. Maybe.)

104 "Polls seem to show that abortion likely won't be overturned at the ballot box, though, frankly, has anyone ever tried?" WTF? Have you never heard of Roe v. Wade?

105
If the Republicans were smart, which they're not, they'd politicize this energy crisis we're about to find ourselves in.

Nuke plants, offshore drilling, coal, etc.

Energy independence + job creation = political win!

106 Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 27, 2010 03:10 PM (G/MYk)

Like my (planned) response if my son ever gets in a fight at school:
Stupid Teacher: "It takes two to fight."
Me:  "Yes, because when only one person does it, it's called a beating."

Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 27, 2010 03:10 PM (mpQs4)

That wouldn't surprise me.  But, on a related note: consider me not (quite as) anti-Rick Perry.

107
The last thing the Democrats want the Republicans to do is bring up domestic energy.

That's why the Left keeps throwing these silly distractions at us such as DADT and gay marriage and what Haley Barbour mighta said in 1982.

108 If the Republicans were smart, which they're not, they'd politicize this energy crisis we're about to find ourselves in.


What up?

109 Purple Avenger #31 - I'd vote for Sponge Bob as president, with Plankton as VP if they got nominated. There's very little that would cause me to stay home this coming election. The republicans would have to nominate that imbecile Huckabee who wouldn't be much different than a bible thumping version of Obama. Exactly. There is only one guy (with a reasonable chance at the nomination) who would keep me from voting against Obama, and that is Mike "National Smoking Ban" Huckabee.

110

"WTF? Have you never heard of Roe v. Wade?"

What?  We voted on that?

111 Posted by: RC at December 27, 2010 03:12 PM (RuF8n)

Really?  Anti-abortionists want MORE government control?

The "status quo" at the time was that each State had its own laws.  Then the Supreme Court decided it could just make up some law, and so we have that abortion of justice ROE v WADE.

What the pro-life crowd want (at least, as a first step) is a return to the previous order: let the States Decide.

And, here's the dirty little secret: many states would make abortion much, much more difficult to obtain (if not flat illegal) if it were really up to their electorate.  The landscape is in its current configuration only because of judicial over-reach.

When we talk about "conservative justices" and "overturn[ing] ROE v WADE," we simply mean a return to the proper dynamic- State control of the issue, not Federal.

112 There is only one guy (with a reasonable chance at the nomination) who would keep me from voting against Obama, and that is Mike "National Smoking Ban" Huckabee.

I hope everyone knows why Huck is so down on Romney. It is because they are exactly alike. They both spent the entire 2008 election running away from their record as Governor. Only with Huck his liberalness was not as widely known as Romney's.

113 106
we're looking at $4/gal gas this summer?

If we're lucky.  There are plenty of things that may occur next year to drive the cost of oil/gas well north of $4/gal. 

114 Posted by: Vic at December 27, 2010 03:21 PM (M9Ie6)

I don't care why.  They're both non-starters in the Mr & Mrs AllenG household.

115

If the Republicans were smart, which they're not, they'd politicize this energy crisis we're about to find ourselves in.

Politicize energy?  Are you kidding?  Energy has been heavily politicized since the 70's.  Ever heard of Green Peace?  Sierra Club?  Jimmah Carter? 

116

  It was the liberal San Fran mayor who decided that disallowing gay marriage was un-Constitutional (LOL) and just started issuing marriage certificates. 

Ah, yes, our wonderful new Lt. governor.

117 Like my (planned) response if my son ever gets in a fight at school:
Stupid Teacher: "It takes two to fight."
Me:  "Yes, because when only one person does it, it's called a beating."

I am so stealing that.

118 I think Huckberry also holds the Mormon thing against Romney or at least used it to his advantage. If one person brings up someone's religion (okay if they are muslim I may give them a pass) but if they do fK them after what we have in the white house now. I do not like Huckberry at all he also creeps me out.

119 For at least the hundredth time---- care away, just don't expect me to pay for it. Isn't that easy?

120

Observation 101- why I like Mitch Daniels:        The media love to frame all conservatives with the abortion issue.  Which is why the MSM always ask conservatives how they feel abot abortion - and the MSM never ask democrats how they feel about abortion. Conservatives want to make abortion illegal - thus making the state in charge of a woman's body.  Kind of odd - and the liberal media knows it is odd and so they throw all the aobrtion questions at conservatives.  Then the media throws the soft-ball questions to the democrat.  Daniels is pushing back.  I don't like aobrtion but I hate the idea of the state in control of it.  It's a lose lose situation alwasy will be - and conservatives, no matter what the polls show will alwasy lose on this issue.  Ken Buck in CO is the perfect example of a social-con who lost when other R's won in the state.

 

121 What I'm suggesting is that Mitch Daniels might be using this Why Do You Care? argument from the conservative side, against liberals.

Doesn't Occam's Razor force us to say he's gone lefty and is doing the minimum to keep himself viable in the primary? Sorry, but I don't trust Rep politicians that waffle anymore. Because once it starts it ends up in DIABLOism...

We need a candidate that will push for all three planks of conservatism.

Focusing on one at the expense of the other two is exactly what the State Media wants - and you can even seem them switch which they try to push Republicans towards as time goes on.

Consider, for example, the strange respect the State Media gave Pat Buchanan a few years ago. A solid SoCon, but lefty on economics and foreign policy...

122
That's not the type of politicization I meant, Soona.

It's an opportunity to push to open up the doors for domestic energy production, and not that 'green' shit, either.

123

Ah, yes, our wonderful new Lt. governor.

Gavin Slurpscum (sp?)

124 A successful candidate will promote Liberty and Opportunity over everything else. Liberals hate Freedom. They think Freedom means you have every right to be a Liberal.

125 Posted by: Soona at December 27, 2010 03:22 PM (p00j9)

I think he means specifically start citing things like $4/gal gas, Deepwater Horizon, etc. as reasons for expanded domestic (near-shore, ANWR, etc.) drilling and expedited Nuclear plants.

Despite "Energy" being a political battlefield for the last 40 years or so, the Republicans haven't figured out they need to fight there.  One of the few things that the public trusted the McCain/Palin ticket over the Obama/Biden ticket on was energy: "Drill, baby, drill," "Drill here, drill now," and "All of the above," were very effective tactics on that front- but that's actually a little unusual for the GOP.

126  Conservatives want to make abortion illegal - thus making the state in charge of a woman's body.  Kind of odd

Or not.  Try to sell a kidney.

127

"Sorry, but that's just not true with abortion.  The SCOTUS took abortion and assigned power over its regulation to no one and nothing but the SCOTUS, itself (which was an interesting change in the American Judiciary). "

Well if that's true, what are we arguing about?  There's nothing to be done.  If on the other hand, a state issue was put on the ballot to stop, say, partial birth abortion, and it won (and even if it was judicially overturned), well that would be a huge bargaining chip to sell the agenda to your average politician, who likes winning, too.

 

128

Question?

I know Festivus is celebrated on 12/23. But I don't think we had a proper Airing of Grieances.

We should probably do that.

129 Conservatives want to make abortion illegal - thus making the state in charge of a woman's body.

Quibble- Given that Abortion is a huge social issue and that, at some level, Government will be involved no matter what, Conservatives want the States in charge of whether it will be illegal or not, not the Federal Government.  Social Conservatives then go further in that they, personally, would like to see it outlawed (or greatly limited) in their own states.

130 Mitch Daniels? Where do we get these people from, I mean people mention them and your like who the fuck is that.  I am starting to believe we have a lot of top Republicans that are truly fucked in the head.

Why should we hide our beliefs, federalism is the way to go.  Everyone can vote for the laws they desire in their state, marry your dog, hand out money hobos, subsidize the french comedy channel.  We just won't bail you out for enacting the laws that bankrupted you.  Why is it so difficult for one of our top guys to spell this out!

131 Nothing on Hillbuzz (that I can find) about Hill stepping down, Fox Megyn Kelly said that the spokesmen from State had "no reaction" to the report, and Breitbart hasn't fleshed out the story any since it was posted around midnight.
Maybe nobody is talking/leaking because a big "unveil" is about to take place? Or maybe it's just a goofy rumor?

132 RE: Huckabee One word: Maurice Motherfucking Clemmons The only way Huckabee gets that shitstain off his record is if he stands trial in Clemmons' place for those four police officers and then serves whatever sentence comes down--up to and including lethal injection or however they take out the garbage in Washington state.

133
Can you imagine the impact on Obamanomics that $4/gal gas will have?

It will kill the economy any emerging recovery. Kill it, dead.

Am I wrong on this? I view high energy prices (mostly fuel, that is) as bad for our economy as high taxes.

134 Posted by: RC at December 27, 2010 03:27 PM (RuF8n)

Of course there's something "to be done."  Elect Conservative Presidents who nominate Conservative Justices who will return the issue to the States, where it belongs.  But the argument has to be had, first.

And no State will run such a ballot initiative, because it would be sued as trying to overrule Federal Statute before the ink on the ballots was dry.

So the argument has to be made in the public arena without the "benefit" of putting it on a State's ballot.

135 If the Republicans were smart, which they're not, they'd politicize this energy crisis we're about to find ourselves in.

Nuke plants

Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair


OK, Plan A is throwing billion of dollars to GE and construction unions in what just might be the most highly government regulated industry of all.

Plan B perchance?

136

Speaking of gas, it's now up to $3.21. It jumped 16 cents in about three hours.

Awesome.

137

Winning abortion issues:

 Remove all public funding of abortion.  Winner.

- Make late-term aborition illegal.  Winner.  Make all abortion illegal?  Loser.  Sorry - it's not going to happen. and if it does, it should be a state by state issue.  Over-turning RvWade, no matter how horrid the law is, isn't going to happen or be polpular.  my 2 cents.

138 One of the few things that the public trusted the McCain/Palin ticket over the Obama/Biden ticket on was energy: "Drill, baby, drill," "Drill here, drill now," and "All of the above," were very effective tactics on that front- but that's actually a little unusual for the GOP.

If I remember correctly McCain is the reason we didn't get to drill in ANWR and offshore in the 2005 energy bill. That was one of the things Palin said she and McCain would have to disagree on when questioned in 2008.

McCain and a few other RINOs sabotaged the original Bush energy bill. I went from being a supporter of the bill to an opponent of it after the Senate got done with "amending it".

139 "Really?  Anti-abortionists want MORE government control?"

Nope.  We all want the same thing - state control.  But seems to me that pro-lifers are trying to fight horrible judicial fiat (Roe v Wade) with legislative fiat.  If you can't push a state ballot issue over the line, don't expect parties and candidates to get behind you - see Obama and gay marriage.

140

Um, do social issues have nothing to do with our current economic woes?   Are we not f#cked in the ass, at least, partly because of social issues?   How the hell do you seperate social issues from our current debt?

Even if that were not one of the problems I have with what Daniels is saying, I have another issue with him.

VAT.   When that little term came out of his mouth, I was done.

141 Nuke plants

Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair

We are building them now even as we speak. The Dems actually almost did something right. They made the federal government responsible for paying for any excessive delays caused by eco-tard court cases.

What they should have done is removed the ability of the eco-tards to tie them up in court at all.

142

Well first I'm gonna pit Bo against whatever cur dog Vick can grub up.

Next I'm gonna make Bwany Fwank a 57 star General of the Army. He can have his pick of tens of thousands of gay sailors and corpsemen.

Then, after I get done with this round....waitasec....FOUR!.....*smack*......I'm gonna do a stand in on one of my Death Panels. There's just too many white people ya know? They're cosumin' all the oxygen.

Then I'm making Mike Singletary NFL Football Czar. It's time we bust that up too.

I'm likin' this Prezidentin' ...Not bad for a Monday, huh?

143 Over-turning RvWade, no matter how horrid the law is, isn't going to happen or be polpular.  my 2 cents.

Overturning Roe v Wade will not "Make all abortion illegal."  Overturning Roe v Wade will do exactly what you propose: send it back to the States.

Further, no one wants to "make all abortion illegal."  If you're going to attack a position, attack one someone actually holds.  What the most rabid of Social Cons want is for all elective abortion to be illegal.  Those theoretical cases "where the life of the mother and/or child is in danger" would still be okay (I'm not sure, with modern medicine, they exist, but I could certainly be wrong on that).  The most rabid of Social Cons believes that it's not the baby's fault you were raped or molested by a close family member. (sorry for the seeming callousness, there, but I couldn't think of a better way to put it).

144

VAT.   When that little term came out of his mouth, I was done.

Posted by: Steph at December 27, 2010 03:34 PM (CUlig)

Daniels supports a VAT????  That is a deal killer by itself.

145 - Make late-term aborition illegal.  Winner.  Make all abortion illegal?  Loser.  Sorry - it's not going to happen.

How about we start enacting restrictions and see how things go?

By the way overturning RvW would not ban abortion. It would simply allow the states to enact their own laws.

Interestingly, the US currently has one of the most liberal abortion laws in the world - significantly more so then most of Europe for example.

146 "That framing issue is critical. People tend to support whatever the 'neutral, natural default' is defined as being. That's how the MFM works its biased magic-- it always sets up the consensus center-liberal position as the neutral, natural default and all deviations away from that as 'ideological,' 'controversial,' and, in a pinch, 'extremist.'"

Oh, man. You're giving the game away!

147
We're building new nuke plants? I didn't know that.

It seems like something the Republicans should be trumpeting, even if they're not the ones responsible.

148 Posted by: RC at December 27, 2010 03:34 PM (RuF8n)

The "legislative fiat" is, indeed, in direct response to the judicial.  We want a law that, basically, invalidates Roe v Wade and says "This is a State issue, the States can handle it."

If you don't see the difference, I can't help you.

And the problem is that we have very, very few Conservatives who can hold their own in that argument, even though I suspect that most of the nation agrees with our actual position: it's not the business of people in Maine if you want to get an abortion in California.  Or, indeed, if Texas wants to make almost all abortion illegal.

Posted by: Vic at December 27, 2010 03:33 PM (M9Ie6)

Indeed, but once the campaign really started going, he started supporting "Drill, baby, drill."  I'm not sure he ever supported drilling in ANWR, but I know he supported expanded off-shore drilling.

149 Mitch Daniels Talks VAT

VAT Bastard | Nov. 10, 2010 12:24 PM EST

Indiana's Republican Governor Mitch Daniels wears leather, rides a Harley-Davidson motorcycle, and once fished discarded quarters out of a toilet bowl so he could pay for a beer. (Okay, not your typical Princeton graduate, but points for originality.)

We're talking about Daniels because of his recent statement before the Hudson Institute that a VAT would make sense for America under the proper circumstances. The qualifying circumstance he had in mind was combining a VAT with a flat-rate income tax.

Hallelujah! We finally have a prominent conservative who gets it right on VAT and isn't afraid to speak his mind, even if that means alienating anti-tax zealots in his own party. In case you're wondering, Daniels refuses to sign the anti-tax pledge promoted by the conservative group Americans for Tax Reform.

Daniels' VAT remark follows separate statements to Newsweek magazine about the necessity of tackling the federal budget deficit: "At some stage, there could well be a tax increase ... They say we can't have grown-up conversations anymore. I think we can."

tax.com

150 135  Conservatives want to make abortion illegal - thus making the state in charge of a woman's body.  Kind of odd

Or not.  Try to sell a kidney.

Posted by: toby928™ at December 27, 2010 03:26 PM (S5YRY)

Liberals will say you can't smoke in public places because it might hurt/annoy people around you. Conservatives (some) will say you can't stick sharp objects into your uterus because you might kill the person inside you.

And yet Conservatives are the ones trying to run peoples lives, despite the fact that I could have come up with dozens of more examples for the liberal comparison.

151 We're building new nuke plants? I didn't know that.

Yes, several going up in NC and at least one in GA that I know of.

152 Daniels open to VAT, oil tax hike
October 15, 2010

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels opened the door Thursday to supporting both a value added tax and a tariff on imported oil, bold proposals that could cause trouble for him with conservatives as he flirts with a long-shot bid for the presidency.

The Republican, staying mum about his 2012 plans, was the guest of honor at a dinner sponsored by the conservative Hudson Institute. He received an award named for Herman Kahn, the legendary nuclear theorist who founded the respected institute 49 years ago and helped inspire the character “Dr. Strangelove” in the movie by the same name.

Daniels, once the Hudson Institute’s chief executive, described himself as an acolyte of Kahn’s and marveled at the creative thinking evident in his 1982 book, “The Coming Boom.”

Daniels recited from Kahn’s book: “It would be most useful to redesign the tax system to discourage consumption and encourage savings and investment. One obvious possibility is a value added tax and flat income tax, with the only exception being a lower standard deduction.”

“That might suit our current situation pretty well,” said Daniels, who served as George W. Bush’s Office of Management and Budget director and was a senior adviser in Ronald Reagan’s White House. “It also might fit Bill Simon’s line in the late ‘70s that the nation should have a tax system that looks like someone designed it on purpose.”

The so-called VAT, common in European economies which have stagnated, is a toxic acronym to fiscally conservative activists like Grover Norquist and Dick Armey. It slaps a tax on the estimated market value for products at every stage of production. Progressives, meanwhile, loathe flat income taxes because theyÂ’re regressive and punish the poor. But some on the right have found the VAT attractive as an alternative to progressive income taxes and levies on capital gains.

Daniels also suggested support for increasing gasoline taxes. Kahn wrote, in a passage Daniels read from Thursday, “One fully justifiable tax would be on imported oil. Any large importation of oil by the U.S. raises security problems. There are, in effect, external costs associated with importing oil that a tariff would internalize.

“Now, maybe that transgresses some philosophical viewpoint of yours,” Daniels told the well-heeled crowd of 250. “But to me, that’s an interesting point today, just as valid as the day he wrote it.

These comments come on the heels of a September profile in Newsweek, in which Daniels said tax increases might be necessary to tackle the federal deficit. “At some stage, there could well be a tax increase,” Daniels told the magazine. “They say we can’t have grown-up conversations. I think we can.”

Politico

Path to victory, indeed.....

153 Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 27, 2010 03:41 PM (xjHwH)

Consider his DOOM! sealed.

No one with a brain can think that VAT + any form of income tax makes sense.

I like this way of describing it:  If you institute VAT + flat tax, you'll end up with VAT + progressive tax.  Since we're not going to get rid of the Income Tax amendment any time in the foreseeable future, the only thing that makes sense is a flat tax- since, then, when Congress gets ahold of it, we're just back to status quo, instead of status quo + VAT.

154 Daniels is a squish on Gay issues which is why he has such "respect" for those issues. His truce is more like Obama's. He personally is against it but will hold fast and do nothing till the media created tide for support of these issues overwhelms him. He is fine with other conservative socials issues like abortion because that is totally up to the courts now.

Your liberal opponent offers this argument: Why do you care so much? Why don't you just let it go? Why don't you just drop the issue entirely?


As to this argument I have my own retort. I don't care, at all. The fact that you are making an issue of it is the only reason I express anything about it at all. I will fight you on this issue not because I particularly care about it but because I know you will aggravate me about something else the moment the issue "go away".
These issues are all based on the idea that there was fundamentally something wrong with the USA about these issues which is why they always attempt to tie them to racial issues which was America's only flaw. It's total bullshit.

I don't care and your change is an attempt to make me care. I will steadfastly fight such an effort.

155

Um, do social issues have nothing to do with our current economic woes?   Are we not f#cked in the ass, at least, partly because of social issues?   How the hell do you seperate social issues from our current debt.

Yeah I wonder if welfare reform was considered fiscal or social? Social security?

The bottom line is the role of the state. Conservatives ideology also happens to be long term fiscally possible, unlike progressives.

156 Daniels is a squish on Gay issues which is why he has such "respect" for those issues.

Posted by: Rocks



The biker leathers were a bit of a giveaway, weren't they?

157

Damn, I can't believe most of you didn't know about Mitch's views on VAT & taxes.

Dogged research.   It is your friend. 

 

158

"States have been passing such laws ever since Roe.  But it always goes back to the SCOTUS for approval and the SCOTUS has been pretty determined to show that it holds all power over this issue. "

I'd like to see some examples of such - not meant at all in a negative way.  I've never heard of that, and would be very interested in some info.

Regardless, *maybe* fighting fiat with fiat is the way to go, but for me, what I'm saying is... both gay marriage and pro-life supporters are still in the "winning hearts and minds" mode.  When they can win enough of those to win elections, those issues will become party planks.  Until then, they shouldn't be expected to be.  (Unless I find out that there are tons of overruled state initiatives out there, in which case I'll have to rethink... I hate rethinking.)

 

159 We are on a sinking ship from Social Issues Gone Wild. A nuetral position is allowing the ship to continue to take on water. We need agressive cutting action on Social Pork Futures.

160 Let's get one thing clear- once and for all:

ALL Liberal issues ARE social issues. And Progressivism IS their religion. And most importantly: the Left bases their entire agenda on the bastardized definition of "Rights".

"All rights are Divine rights" - G.K.Chesterton

161 can we haz no baby hilling ?

162 The Left has ALWAYS been fighting a social war. And as long as RINOS keep avoiding that fight, the Left will continue to win.

Wake the fuck up people.

163 The Left advocates the murder of the most innocent and defenseless of all humanity in the unborn. And yet-  they have the audacity to drape every issue of their corrupt agenda in the tapestry of "social justice". And thanks to the growing movement of moral relativism in our increasingly secular society- more and more people simply don't give a shit.

We are have gotten the government we deserve. It is merely a reflection of our society.  Next time you see a RINO- thank them.   

164 I kept waiting for all the moderates to come into the Multiple McCain offices in multiple swing states where I worked to volunteer for the campaign. Problem was, THEY NEVER SHOWED UP. Pro Life activists were the ones doing all the work even though they were far more conservative than the nominee. People volunteering also surged once Palin was picked. LIBERALS WILL NOT VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!!!!! Why is this so hard to understand? We just ran the most moderate liberal nominee in the last 50 years at least, and we had the MODERATE republicans declaring allegiance to Barack Obama like Colin Powell!!!!! Attracting moderates is a great myth. Stand on your values. Articulate them. Show the contrast. Bending over does not get you votes from the other side. NEVER HAS NEVER WILL. Everyone I know here in Chicago describes themselves as moderate. They think NPR is right down the middle, ACORN is great, and we do not spend enough on entitlements, yet they will get angry if you call them anything other than moderate. IT IS A SCAM. They are liberals, but like to say they are moderates in order to get people to vote for their marxist candidates.

165 GOD! I wish Palin would stop saying such dumb things! Oh what...Daniels said this? The guy who everyone says is a genius? OH OK. Daniels needs to study up on campaign strategy 101. His first step appears to be "alienate the base." Genius I tell ya!

166 I think we may get there despite the attempts of many to take on social issues which as you noted are largely irrelevant. If the national economy continues or gets worse, and I think it will, and some state turn turtle, social issues are not going to be on many people's top issues.

Posted by: JackStraw at December 27, 2010 02:08 PM (TMB3S)  - and echoed by others

I so long for the day when so many, that I agree with on so much, have their eyes opened so they may see that one of the main reasons we came to where we are is a turning away from the principles and practices that made this country great in the first place.
Many of the folks here claim to really like Jim DeMint.  Have you heard/seen/read his 'you can't be a conservative if you're not a so-con' speech?  There's food for thought there folks.

167 I live in Indiana and I can honestly say that he is a fiscal hawk. That is what his primary concerns are. He is also a social conservative and always has been. He is pro life and he does not even  support civil unions much less gay marriage...but he has also made it plain that he feels that his primary job as Governor is to keep the state running, it is not to preach to the people who live here.

168 "...but he has also made it plain that he feels that his primary job as Governor is to keep the state running, it is not to preach to the people who live here."

Liberal politicians always openly legislate based on their libtard social ideologies.

However, Social Conservatives are told to keep their ideologies to themselves and OUT of their political policies- lest they be "preaching" to the masses.

See how that works?

Now look around at the current state of our society. Now look at the current state of our government.

Is it sinking in yet?

169 Wasn't he Bush's budget director? Right, he steps right into W's 30% approval rating. Dead in the water.

170 iknowtheleft - AllenG - Socialcon and others.  I haven't been around for a while.  Glad to see the folks here have been in good hands. You too Laurie.  Oh, just wonderin,,, is David your last name, or should your handle be Laurie, ...

171 You too Laurie.  Oh, just wonderin,,, is David your last name, or should your handle be Laurie,

Posted by: teej



I guess for the curious, the LDC nick came about during some riffing here among posters when the story of Gore's failing marriage and possible philandering* was being talked about.  Seems to have stuck, and Lord knows it makes it easy to google up your own comments later, but it actually has nothing to do with any real life info of mine.  I keep my online ids and real life fire-walled. Seems wise policy in general, especially now during the Obama years, what with the conservative reeducation camps going in along the I-10.**


*he's guilty

**I used to kid about things like this.  Now, its almost too true even for black humor.

172  I was a three term Republican Precinct Chairman before I retired. The fiscal hawk/socially liberal people might exist. I realize that there is a scattering of Log Cabin Republicans. for instance.

 Perhaps they are very wealthy and put up oodles of money for the campaigns. What I never saw was any of them working the phone banks or walking the precincts. Never.

 Sorry, those were the Socons, who, oddly enough were staying home in '08 and were thick on the ground in '10. Notice a difference in the results? I'm real tired of the Party peeing all over a very major part of the electorate in order to attract a "mythical majority".

173 Dude may not be charismatic, but he is quick on his feet. Only took him a few months to clarify what he meant. And I am sure a unilatereal withdrawl on social issues will work on Obama and Nancy. If only somebody had thought of offering an olive branch of truce, we could have stopped the democratic social agenda. Bummer!

174
" Sorry, those were the Socons, who, oddly enough were staying home in '08 and were thick on the ground in '10. Notice a difference in the results? I'm real tired of the Party peeing all over a very major part of the electorate in order to attract a "mythical majority".

Posted by: Peter at December 27, 2010 09:01 PM (6mGtA)"

STOP, please stop, your hurting my ears.  Your making too much sense! We need to grovel and crawl on our knees threw broken glass, we must get the MSM and the supposed moderate middle to love us.