1 Who is going to bring home all that pork to his district if he is distracted by another Presidential campaign?

2 Somebody needs to contact the mother ship to have them come and pick up ol' Ron, and on the double!  Before he wrecks any chance of us picking off Teh One in '12.

3 Gabe,

Don't just assume 2012 will be about the economy.  You know, world events and terrorist attacks and loose shit like that could happen.

4 Ron Paul!

5

What a waste of time.
I'm done here.

6 How about just an actual conservative and not a bat-shit crazy like Professor Science?

7 Paul/Rogers '12 FTW!!!  The "Reese's Cup of Crazy" Campaign.

8 Fiat luxury! Hey, I couldn't resist. It's a Paultard thread.

9

Chris Christi/Mike Pence..

...Christi for his take no fucking prisoners attitude...and Pence with the experience dealing with the idiots on both sides in Congress

10

shut up about the gold standard and fiat currency

As opposed to Stagflation 2.0 the Obamunists will probably cause?

Once again:

Where Ron Paul is pretty cool: Domestic Policy (immigration included here)

Where Ron Paul is batshit and needs to be laughed off: Foreign Policy (defense included here)

That rests the case for, and against, Ron Paul.

11 Err, what happened to the comments?

12

Um, FYNQ? Does that stand for "F**k You Ny Quil"? Because sheesh, NyQuil.

 

I got nothin'.

13 The last poll I saw showed Paul with a solid lead among independents—because independents are mostly right of the GOP, like I always say. He can't win a Republican primary, but he'd have a shot in the general against anyone the Dems have put up since Clinton.

Conservatives (and libertarians) have good reasons not to support Paul, but Republican primary voters reject him because he's not Huck enough.

53/15? Jesus F. Fuck.

14 He can't win a Republican primary, but he'd have a shot in the general against anyone the Dems have put up since Clinton.

He would lose all 57 states.  The guy is a crazy old loon and only crazy loons take him seriously.

15 Jeebus effing christ.  If niether Gingrich, Romney, nor Huckabee can get up to 20% unfavorable among Republicans then the party of Coolidge is dead and stinking up the place.

16 Abolishing social security? Not a bad idea, certainly workable, but whoever we nominate is going to need just a few Baby Boomer votes, y'know? Let's try and keep it a little real, okay? You see, Gabe, it's remarks like that which brand you as A Sellout Eleventy!!!11! What, you think we want to win elections, or something?

17 Ron Paul would have a chance against anyone the Dems have put up since Clinton?

I see we have a fan of "Dumb and Dumber" here with us today.

"So you mean there IS a chance."

"One in a million."

18 Huck - Paul = Total Fail

Nothing to see here.

19 "Let's try and keep it a little real, okay?"

Sure... all the way into fiscal insolvency.

Until Republicans grow some balls and start to acknowledge that you can't spend more than you take in (just every Republican in living memory is guilty of this - including Reagan), it's only a question of how badly we're screwed.

20

Legalizing marijuana? I love the idea. But it's probably not going to get many GOP followers in 2012.

 

Can we affix this somewhere permanently? Because whenever someone dumps on Christians for being icky Christians who will blindly and stupidly lead the GOP over a cliff with fringe issues, I can then quietly point to this. Can anyone cite a poll from any outlet (except Rolling Stones and High Times) that proves that this is a swing issue that will galvinze support (votes and/or money)? Where does this fit on Mitch Daniels' priority list?

21

 thinks that free trade agreements threaten U.S. sovereignty

Mexican truck drivers and smuggled illegal aliens could not be reached for comment.

I *get* that Paulians are foreign policy naifs and kooks. But if you are "sure 2012, like 2008 in the last two months of the campaign, is going to be all about the economy", what is the problem?

Frankly, I am not so sure. The appeasement and surrender policies of the Obamunists may ignite a war and USA losses in the next two and a half years. Which is why the batshit Paulians are non-starters. But if it was about domestic policy only, again, what is the problem?

22 Sure... all the way into fiscal insolvency.

Until Republicans grow some balls and start to acknowledge that you can't spend more than you take in (just every Republican in living memory is guilty of this - including Reagan), it's only a question of how badly we're screwed.

Yeah--so let's play with pixie dust and fairy farts about how Ron Effing Paul and his insanity posse are the answer.  One can plan on REALITY (see Paul Ryan for instance) without resorting to TEH CRAZY.

23 Rand Paul!

24

Gabriel must be angry at us today.

25

Here's where I put in my disclaimer that, yes, I did vote for Paul in the primary 2008. Some of you can quit reading what follows now.

Rest of you still here? Fine.

Re Ron Paul and Huckabee both, 2012 is a ways away, and there will be plenty of Republican politicos with the level of star power to get the base out.

People like Paul and Huckabee show up when the Republican Party bigwigs tell its own base what is good for it: nice, don't-rock-the-boat-too-much caretakers like McCain, Romney, and the various Bushes. When that happens, we the primary voters get the message that the race is effectively over. Some of us will choose between Romney and McCain.

People like me don't approve of those choices, so we vote for the kook who Sends A Message. Huckabee is aligned with social-conservatives, so his voters are telling the RNC they want more social conservatism. Paul is aligned with libertarians and fiscal-literates; I'm more inclined to the latter, so I went with him.

I hope that the Tea Party will force the Nice Republicans who were in charge back in '08 to get a clue, and either to leave well enough alone or else to nominate more Christies and fewer Crists. Then the base(s) of the Republicans won't feel the need to send that message.

I think Paul is right that 2010 and 2012 are setting up to be libertarian years, and that social-conservatives will end up less relevant. However I also think that it won't benefit Paul, because I'm expecting a major war to break out; and Paul's a pacifist and pro-Arabia. (Also, Paul's gettin' old. Happens to all of us.)

26 on second thought, maybe He only wants us to get our angst out early, and be mellow the rest of the day.

27 What, with the Crist polling, Fuckabee's tonguebath, and a restive Ronulan in the air, it is time to once again don my pessimistic cynical helmet of doom and prognosticate: We will be very, very lucky if we take back the House in November. If we do, it will be by the narrowest of margins. The Nation Below Canada slit its wrists in November 2008, and managed to pierce the arteries. Prognosis is dismal.

28

But it's probably not going to get many GOP followers in 2012.

Think again if that shitstain Huckabee is the GOP nominee.

29 The Republicans probably should be more libertarian, but rather quiet about it, and certainly not with Ron Paul as the leader.

Libertarian is generally the least popular of the three legs of the conservative tripod, but has benefited from Obama's overreach.

Run on rollback of the Obama agenda, and then when we win quietly pursue a completely conservative agenda.

30 #26 gets it, and #23 does not. Have a candidate who isn't wobbly and RINOey on domestic issues and Paul might just go back into irrelevance.

31 Run on rollback of the Obama agenda, Come now, you cannot be serious. Radicals have no place in this party, it's a big tent.

32 Congressman moonbeam will run Independent when he does not get enough support from repubs. That will ensure a loss for the entire US. as president Alvin Greene gets re-elected

33 I hope that the Tea Party will force the Nice Republicans who were in charge back in '08 to get a clue, and either to leave well enough alone or else to nominate more Christies and fewer Crists. Then the base(s) of the Republicans won't feel the need to send that message.

Republicans do better, MUCH better in elections when the populace thinks they stand for something different from the Dems - 2004, 1994, etc, and MUCH worse when the public doesn't see much difference - 2008, 2006, 1996, etc.

The record is pretty clear. People will vote for conservatives if given the choice, or fluffier moderates, aka Democrats, if they are not.

34

Huckabee is aligned with social-conservatives, so his voters are telling the RNC they want more social conservatism. Paul is aligned with libertarians and fiscal-literates; I'm more inclined to the latter, so I went with him.

Is it a Hegelian dialectic in the GOP? If Huck is Thesis and Paul is Antithesis, who can be synthesis? Thune? Palin? Cantor?

35 "Run on rollback of the Obama agenda, and then when we win quietly pursue a completely conservative agenda." "Rollback" would be a winner, but the GOP has no credibility on that. Their stock-in-trade, talking a good game, isn't going to work for them any more, IMO.

36 We have an good-sized brigade of young 'Pubs here in Heaven that are wasting huge amounts of energy and the goodwill of their fellows through the mindless worship of Mr. Paul.  Trying to establish dialogue with them is no different than speaking with the worst, manchurian obamite in line at a soup kitchen.

37 You know what would be really cool?  A Paul/Paul ticket.  I mean it would be "historic" right?

38

Sure... all the way into fiscal insolvency

Social Security is already insolvent...the GOP should be blasting the Jackassocrats daily on their blocking of reform..

..course they won't..cuz that would make them look like meanies

39

My early hope for 2012: Ryan, Christie, and Palin. Pick any two.

40 Congressman moonbeam will run Independent when he does not get enough support from repubs. That will ensure a loss for the entire US. as president Alvin Greene gets re-elected

Posted by: Mud

 

Obama 2012- going full Biden!!

41 Come now, you cannot be serious. Radicals have no place in this party, it's a big tent.

Posted by: GOP elitism without a sense of irony at June 21, 2010 01:07 PM (AZGON)

Yeah...these guys need to go.

I would suggest though that Republicans paint running on a return to pre-2008 as the moderate course, and continuing Obama's extreme agenda as the radical course.

Yes, the media will fight for the opposite interpretation, but I think it is a simple enough argument for the 2010 election that the media will have trouble defeating the argument...

42 You know, there really is a difference between libertarianism and bat shit insanity, not that you can tell from Ron Paul.

Also, Huck's a social conservative?  How?  Seriously, how is believing in liberation theology socially *conservative*?

43 "Rollback" would be a winner, but the GOP has no credibility on that. Their stock-in-trade, talking a good game, isn't going to work for them any more, IMO.

Posted by: Bugler at June 21, 2010 01:10 PM (VXBR1)

I would have understood if a la 1994 the Reps of 2004 had fought and lost - the State Media is a powerful ally to the Left - but the fact that they wasted that opportunity and have been Dem-lites since then has been astounding.

44 Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul! Ron Paul!

45 Also, Huck's a social conservative?  How?  Seriously, how is believing in liberation theology socially *conservative*?

Posted by: alexthechick at June 21, 2010 01:12 PM

He's a Baptist Minister from the South.  He could campaign under portraits of Lenin and Stalin, and they would still try to sell him to us as "socially conservative."

46

My dream ticket: Ryan / Christie with a promise to appoint Palin as Secretary of the Interior. That or Palin should march into the RNC office, throw out Mikey Steele with his own testicles, and take his seat.

Actually if Palin could go that last thing by around 3 PM eastern-time today, that'd be super

47 I think everybody and his dog will be running against Zero. That is good, more candidates means more choice. Though Paul and Huckabee are not that candidate.

48 "Posted by: Paulbot at June 21, 2010 01:14 PM (DYJjQ)" I'm intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

49 Oh oh oh I will say though that I would love there to be a debate between Paul and Kucinich. Good times. Good times. Though I may run out of popcorn.

And, as is obligatory when discussing Kucinich, here's a pic of his wife.  So not fair that he's married to an Elven Queen.  So.  Not.  Fair. 

50 Nugent/Palin 2012!!!!!!!!!!!1

51 Ron Paul!^1000 Much easier.

52 The Huckster and then Paul? Malox anyone?

53 My dream ticket: Ryan / Christie with a promise to appoint Palin as Secretary of the Interior. That or Palin should march into the RNC office, throw out Mikey Steele with his own testicles, and take his seat.

If the Repubs do very well in 2010 with Michael Steele attending bondage clubs and complaining about conservatives, does that mean we are stuck with him through 2012?

54

You see, Gabe, it's remarks like that which brand you as A Sellout Eleventy!!!11!

What, you think we want to win elections, or something?

As opposed to pretending nothing is wrong with the Age 65 retirement age, and proposing modest privatizations that may improve rates of return, but that the Demunists will only demogogue anyway?

Reality: Reitrement ages *will* have to be raised to 70 if not 75, and retirement will have to be postponed for most people. People are living longer and birth rates have fallen. Too many oldsters, not enough younguns, proportionately.

55 So not fair that he's married to an Elven Queen. So. Not. Fair. Elven Queen? If you like your Elven Queens with shit for brains.

56 Is Gabe finding these stories just to start another week of pissed off morons?

57

My dream ticket: Ryan / Christie with a promise to appoint Palin as Secretary of the Interior. That or Palin should march into the RNC office, throw out Mikey Steele with his own testicles, and take his seat.

Actually if Palin could go that last thing by around 3 PM eastern-time today, that'd be super

Posted by: Zimriel

 

That last bit might prove to be a biiig fundraiser.

58 You know, there really is a difference between libertarianism and bat shit insanity, not that you can tell from Ron Paul. Not even libertarians can tell you exactly what "libertarian" means. Ask five different people, you get five different answers. It's not an ideology so much as an anti-ideology. What bugs me most about many libertarians is their naive foreign-policy viewpoint. "A friend of freedom everyone but guardian only of our own" sounds great as a soundbite, but doesn't work at all as national policy. In the age of intercontinental ballistic missiles, bio-warfare, and asymmetrical warfare, isolationism isn't going to cut it. The world is not going to love you for telling it to fuck off and leave you alone. I've always thought that big-L Libertarianism is more a rejection of political thought than a variant of it. It works great for smart, capable, and talented people because they know they can thrive in unstructured environments. But for the less capable (i.e., about 3/4 of all human beings), the libertarian ideal is terrifying and something to be avoided at all costs.

59

And, as is obligatory when discussing Kucinich, here's a pic of his wife.  So not fair that he's married to an Elven Queen.  So.  Not.  Fair. 

She's also a batshit lefty Brit. AOSHQ periodically posts lame stories of appeasement and political cowardice from the UK, but we have to understand where they come from. They come from people like her, despite her hotness. Whatever happened to some good English Roses?

60

I think every candidate* in GOP primary needs to promise to support the eventual winner 100%.  Paul did not do that in 2008, and he won't do it in 2012 either and that speaks volumes about him.

*I was going to say serious candidates but then I remembered we're talking about Ron Paul here.

61 19 If Huck is the GOP nominee, in '12 my first question will be, "So, just how crazy is the Libertarian candidate this year?"
Posted by: DrewM


Well now you have your answer.

62
The GOP needs to stop being the "democrat-lite/Socialist-lite" party.

Yeah - there's plenty of room for liberty, independence, and other fed -up constituencies.  Now if the GOP would just get out of its own way. 

63


mmmm, smell that blood in the water.

Chum away, Gabe.

I dislike Paul, but I LOATHE Fuckabee.

It would be a tough call who to despise more in the primaries.  I would stick to my guns and just not vote (we're screwed royally anyway if that's the choice) if Huck got the nod in the general, though.

Another W, but without the slightest hint of small-government conservatism, is NOT what we need right now.

Preening moralistic fucker.  And I say this as a pretty hard core social con.

64 Ugh, I sent my only republican friend to Gabe's thread and he sent me an email back telling me "your blog is missing it, it's going to be Mitch Daniels".....

65 "Reality: Reitrement ages *will* have to be raised" Yes. The people know they've been lied to. The time is ripe for the GOP to try a little truth-telling for a change. I don't think they have the balls to do it, but it could be a huge winner for them. Paul Ryan is an example. You can agree or disagree on any of his policy proposals, but you have to give him credit for at least trying to find a solution.

66

Obama administration leaking substance:

http://tinyurl.com/32bma5v

Even though he's an asshole, if Emanuel leaves, he will take with him some of the only true substance that this administration is already suffering a deficit of. 

67
One of the puzzles of the modern world is how libertarianism ended up associated with miserable, incompetent, unelectable bumblefucks like the LP and your average libertarian.

The crowning achievement of enlightenment era political philosophy is in the hands of complete asshats.

68 What bugs me most about many libertarians is their naive foreign-policy viewpoint.

Posted by: Monty at June 21, 2010 01:20 PM (4Pleu)

If you talk to a Libertarian about foreign policy, you would never know that such a thing as the Cold War ever existed.  It's kind of amazing.  Liberals have the same problem - as self-proclaimed Libertarians and liberals tend to be in sync on foreign policy for most issues.

69 'thinks the economy tanked because of our "empire"'

This sounds like a misrepresentation of his position. He has repeatedly said that we can't afford our empire, but he lays the blame for the economic catastrophe on the Fed, the Congress, and other actors.

You guys want small government and low taxation. Not sure how you can get there without cutting back the humongous "defense" budget. (Yes, I put that in quotes; not sure how any one can pretend that so many of our so-called defense expenditures actually defend us rather than expose us to greater danger. [See Korea, for instance]).

Jim

(Cue thoughtful response: "Jim, you are a moron.")

70 @57 The point is we cannot advocate abolishing Social Slimecurity altogether. Reform is where to start, if we have any hope of selling it. Incrementalism is the motive power in politics here, and we can't go in demanding too much at one time. On the other hand we have to demand more than we expect to get. It's a compromise, like so many things. Let's get the Demotards to start doing some of the compromising, however. Even the Frenchtards managed to raise the retirement age. Actually, you just know that the phony "Deficit Reduction Panel" that Barry wears for a fig leaf will demand a raise in the retirement age, higher taxes on benefits and higher SSI taxes. I'd prefer the beginning of a means to opt out of the SS scam. And don't cave on it like Bush II did.

71 One of the puzzles of the modern world is how libertarianism ended up associated with miserable, incompetent, unelectable bumblefucks like the LP and your average libertarian.

The crowning achievement of enlightenment era political philosophy is in the hands of complete asshats.

Posted by: Ronsonic at June 21, 2010 01:24 PM (VTm+A)

Pot heads.

72 A caller to Rush is saying that she thinks RAM will leave and go with Hillary's campaign....have heard dumber things....

73 This sounds like a misrepresentation of his position. He has repeatedly said that we can't afford our empire, but he lays the blame for the economic catastrophe on the Fed, the Congress, and other actors.
Jim

(Cue thoughtful response: "Jim, you are a moron.")

Posted by: Jim

 

cue definition of the word 'empire'. Get busy Jim.

74 Is Gabe finding these stories just to start another week of pissed off morons? Intertube traffic is your friend.

75 "(Cue thoughtful response: "Jim, you are a moron.")" That's not my response, Jim. Given our current fiscal crisis, all spending should be on the table. Defense is not my first choice for deep cuts, but there's nothing sacrosanct about it.

76 The crowning achievement of enlightenment era political philosophy is in the hands of complete asshats.

Posted by: Ronsonic at June 21, 2010 01:24 PM (VTm+A)

Pot heads.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at June 21, 2010 01:26 PM (Qp4DT)

And specifically I think the major libertarian outreach to college students in the 90s. In winning over the dopetarians, they lost their souls...

77 If you like your Elven Queens with shit for brains.

Dude, I am not interested in her for her brains.  Or speaking.  Stand there and shut up is about the right speed for her.

78 Not sure how you can get there without cutting back the humongous "defense" budget. There are many practical ways that actually would have no impact on our defense posture at all. One is to increase funding for R&D to replace our aging nuclear weapon stockpiles. A modernized nuclear deterrent would reduce the need for "large-footprint" defensive structures. Reduce the bureaucratic military overhead and abolish the NSA and CIA. The NSA and CIA properly belong under military aegis anyway. Merge NSA operations with ONI and appoint one of the Joint Chiefs to oversee it; CIA operations should be folded into Special Forces (which is where they should have been all along anyway). Abolish the Air Force. It's an artifact of the Cold War, and in an increasingly pilotless UAV world, it's an anachronism. Fold the service into the Army or Navy (probably Navy, because of the stronger aviator presence). Rotary-wing aircraft are already part of the Army, so no changes needed there. See? Easy.

79 Wow, Romney has the lowest negative number of all four potential nominees. I guess not everyone got the memo that he's a "Socialist". Anyway, without being a dick, I'd like someone to tell me exactly what they think Romney should've done when his vetoes were overridden (and when the Leg. Leadership made it clear exactly what they would and would not override, making it plain that they were calling ALL the shots, as their huge and permanent majority allowed them to). As far as I can tell, his only option was to dissolve the State Gov't, hunker down in his office and wait for the fellas from the nut-house to haul him away.

80 I have been told for many years that if a RINO wins the primary I MUST support him/her. Well I have done just that and look where we are? A TOTAL FUCKING DISASTER! So I am done with that. If Romney or Huckabee is the nominee (or others) I WILL STAY HOME. I will not donate money. I will do nothing. If that makes me awful for letting Obama in, so be it. I do not care anymore. I know Obama will make me pay for his pals lifestyles, but I will be damned if I am going to vote for someone who will do the same damn thing with more big government and compassionate conservatism. Hey I am just one guy, so I am sure no one cares what I do, but this is it.

81 If you like your Elven Queens with shit for brains.

Dude, I am not interested in her for her brains.  Or speaking.  Stand there and shut up is about the right speed for her.

Posted by: alexthechick

 

I want very much to see your newsletter. With pictures.

82 Military spending can be reduced by cutting waste. But de-balling our boys in uniform will not help keep us safe. Peace through superior firepower. Government cutting wast ( sometimes I just kill myself )

83 82 If you like your Elven Queens with shit for brains.

Dude, I am not interested in her for her brains.  Or speaking.  Stand there and shut up is about the right speed for her.

Posted by: alexthechick at June 21, 2010 01:32 PM (8WZWv)

Well I don't know about that.  She is British afterall.  I wouldn't want her to shut up.  Just give her a limited list of words to choose from.  "Dirty" and "Naughty" among them.

84 84, Pretty simple. He should have NOT CHAMPIONED INDIVIDUAL HEALTHCARE MANDATES WHICH HE STILL DEFENDS TO THIS DAY! He did not veto that bill. He signed it smiling with Ted Kennedy laughing and smiling over his shoulder! HE WAS IN FAVOR OF IT. If he vetoed it and it got overridden, fine then he at least tried to fight it and lost. We just spent a year fighting Obamacare and its individual mandate!

85

Can someone tell me if there is a first principle of libertarianism?  I've read it's "no initiation of force," or some variety of "do as you like as long as you do no harm to others."  If so, what would be the libertarian argument against, say, necrophilia?  If the libertarian objection is based on property rights of the dead person's family in the body, then make it an animal. 

     

86 Well I don't know about that. She is British afterall. I wouldn't want her to shut up. Just give her a limited list of words to choose from. "Dirty" and "Naughty" among them. Okay, now I'm ready for the newsletter.

87

"What will motivate more people, a strong fiscal candidate or a strong socially conservative candidate?"

Why does it have to be either/or?  Most conservatives are both.  If you only have the one, you have a libertarian.  If you only have the other, you have a populist.  The GOP is primarily (membership wise, not it's ruling clique, unfortunately) conservative, and wants candidates who will be right ALL the time, not just part of the time, and who will be ready to lead on the issues, regardless of what the issue of the day may be.

88

Abolish the Air Force. It's an artifact of the Cold War, and in an increasingly pilotless UAV world, it's an anachronism. Fold the service into the Army or Navy (probably Navy, because of the stronger aviator presence). Rotary-wing aircraft are already part of the Army, so no changes needed there.

Uh, no. Even before it was a separate branch in 1947, the USAAF was *huge*.

Strategic bombing? Still a reality.

Air superiority? Still necessary.

Close air support? Perhaps one can argue that the USAF should have stayed the USAAF, because the regular Army influence kept that paramount. (See how the fine A-10 Warthog was treated as an unwanted stepchild by many USAF brass).

89 Abolish the Air Force. It's an artifact of the Cold War, and in an increasingly pilotless UAV world, it's an anachronism. Fold the service into the Army or Navy (probably Navy, because of the stronger aviator presence). Rotary-wing aircraft are already part of the Army, so no changes needed there.

See? Easy.

Posted by: Monty

 

The Air Force currently controls all of our heavy lift capability. We've already seen what happens when one of the services gets a mission that they decide it out of their preferred/core mission, when the Air Force kept trying to stop A-10 production and fobbed them off to the ANG. One of the reasons that the USMC maintains air wings is to ensure an air component that will support its core mission. For years, the Navy had a reputation of only grudgingly acquiring and supporting any aircraft that couldn't operate from a carrier. The ASW bombers were the exception, and that was part of the strategic mission that involved the US Navy maintaining multiple air stations patrolling the US coast.

90

I have been told for many years that if a RINO wins the primary I MUST support him/her. Well I have done just that and look where we are? A TOTAL FUCKING DISASTER!

So I am done with that. If Romney or Huckabee is the nominee (or others) I WILL STAY HOME. I will not donate money. I will do nothing.

Sorry, but no. What saddens me is how the Real Conservatives will support an Establishment GOP RINO should he win the primary, but the Establishment *will not* do the converse.

91 Strategic bombing? Still a reality. Air superiority? Still necessary. Neither of which is going to require human pilots within about five years. Also, "strategic bombing" hasn't been conducted since World War II by the United States. In what way is it still a "reality"? The whole thing now is precision: using one small bomb to take out a few bad guys, instead of a lot of big bombs that take out an entire city block.

92 Privatise the roads, police, courts, and the military man!

93

I don't care who you insult or praise - if you squishies don't throw your lot behind whoever the Tea Parties bless, then you're going to endure Democrats for years to come.

Then again, you'll enjoy your Folsom Street Fairs, Up Your Alleys, fetus-drillings, and whatever other "progressive" things you happen to like, because they'll be around every street corner.

94 I would also point out that all the people objecting to abolishing the Air Force are part of the problem with trying to cut defense spending: everyone thinks their system or program is absolutely necessary. It isn't. The Air Force's operations could easily be folded into the Army and Navy -- as I said, they are an anachronism of the Cold War. The Air Force is about bombers, not fighters, and bombing is old-fashioned. Cruise missiles and even conventionally-armed ballistic missiles can do the job just as well, and at far less cost. If you must have human beings drive the plane, the Navy can do it just as well as the Air Force.

95 Didn't the libertarian geniuses at Reason back Obama?  They have all the credibility of Christopher Buckley.

96

"If you must have human beings drive the plane, the Navy can do it just as well as the Air Force. "

So Monty, does that mean we could start making jokes like "Did you know the Air Force is a Department of the Navy?" "Yeah, the women's department!!"

97

Neither of which is going to require human pilots within about five years.

Projections like this were made in the 1950's, it was believed guided missile technology would take over. The reality? Fighter jocks flying "lead sleds" over Vietnam, built to carry a load guided missiles but not to dogfight, were down from the 10:1 kill ratios of WW2 and Korea down to 1:1 - parity - against the North Vietnamese! Ack!

(Bill Whittle had a great blog post on this sad matter, and how the superb F-15 and F-16 came into being)

Also, "strategic bombing" hasn't been conducted since World War II by the United States. In what way is it still a "reality"? The whole thing now is precision: using one small bomb to take out a few bad guys, instead of a lot of big bombs that take out an entire city block.

More accurate long range strategic bombing is still long range strategic bombing. The B-52s may carry JDAMS now, but the principle is still the same. Don't confuse the number of planes with the nature of the mission.

98

The Air Force is about bombers, not fighters, and bombing is old-fashioned. Cruise missiles and even conventionally-armed ballistic missiles can do the job just as well, and at far less cost. If you must have human beings drive the plane, the Navy can do it just as well as the Air Force.

Sorry, but next you will be telling me the (Army) Air Force and Navy can use the same plane. They tried that in the McNamara Era and found it wanting. Sorry, but you are rehashing a debate from the 1950's and 1960's, and your side didn't fare well either. Better machines are great, but they *do not* replace the manned pilot. They just don't. Maybe one day....

99 Pawlenty is a useless Gore-bot and Ryan is a lifetime politician who never dirtied his hands in the "icky" private sector. I'd still take Romney over either one of them in a heartbeat, purity be damned.

100 Curmudgeon: If I only need to drop a single bomb on a single mud hut or yurt for a "strategic" result, why do I need a B-52 to do it? Predators have been doing yeoman "strategic" work in Pakistan for years. Big bombers are not needed. I can't even think of a scenario any more where they would be needed in any conflict we might have. Any target-package you can think of can be handled just as well by cruise missiles, Predator drones, or long-range arty with GPS shells. The only exception is CAS, and the Army and Navy could cover this quite well. Better than the Air Force, actually, because it'd be in their own chains of command. Our air-superiority fighters haven't faced a worthy enemy in decades, and aren't likely to before robots take over. The F-22 is so much better than any other plane in the air right now that other countries have basically just quit trying. Better to build lots of cheaper and less-capable planes than try to match the Americans in air-superiority. (Even the vaunted Russian "F22-ski" is really just a Su-35 with vastly upgraded electronics and adjustments to the airframe. It's no match for the F22. Maybe the F35, but not the F22.) In short: we haven't faced a real air-superiority enemy for 30 years (the Russians over Vietnam), and aren't likely to any time soon. Time to focus on cheaper and more reliable drones than hideously expensive pilot-driven gizmos.

101 Better machines are great, but they *do not* replace the manned pilot. Which makes me think I'm speaking to a retired AF guy. No offense, dude, but human pilots are on the way out. The Predator is just the first wave of that reality. It will continue. (This reminds me of that argument in the movie The Right Stuff, where Pancho is saying, "There has to be some son-of-a-bitch to take the thing up; and some son-of-a-bitch has to bring it back down. And that son-of-a-bitch is a pilot." I love that movie.)

102 Sorry, but next you will be telling me the (Army) Air Force and Navy can use the same plane. I understood that this was the whole point of the JSF/F-35. Was I misinformed?

103 Ron Paul isn't a libertarian.  Just because that's what he calls himself -- because it sounds cool -- doesn't hide the fact that he's nothing but a Bircher crank.

Legal pot will get the krazy kollege kids until you tell them that it isn't free pot.

104 95, you are 100% right about the converse not being true. I know because I am one of those conservatives that have always done my duty and supported the RINOS in the general. Well Now I notice that since the favor is never returned I need to draw a line in the sand or else we will continue to get fucked forevor.

105 "Legal pot will get the krazy kollege kids until you tell them that it isn't free pot." The kidz will probably figure it's only a matter of time before pot is included in their "free" health care. Hell, it's probably cheaper than the Ritalin they've all been raised on.

106

If I only need to drop a single bomb on a single mud hut or yurt for a "strategic" result, why do I need a B-52 to do it?

Because:

(1) politically, sometimes you just can't station *any* land based aircraft, manned or unmanned, within short - range distance, and

(2) carrier based aircraft just can't pack enough punch and still fit on a carrier. They also had this debate in the 1950's, when the Navy argued for nuclear deterrent light bombers on carriers. (See A3D / A-3 Skywarrior and A3J / A-5 Vigilante). They just couldn't pack enough punch and still fit.

Moreover, a B-52 (or now a B-2) can loiter and take out literally dozens of huts, while the drone is usually a one shot deal and after a few huts the carrier based plane runs out of fuel range and has to turn for home.

Predators have been doing yeoman "strategic" work in Pakistan for years. Big bombers are not needed. I can't even think of a scenario any more where they would be needed in any conflict we might have.

*cough* Red China *cough*.

Any target-package you can think of can be handled just as well by cruise missiles, Predator drones, or long-range arty with GPS shells.

You are making a political assumption that may not hold up. Even the longest range arty would still have to be stationed close by, and that may become politically impossible in Pock-ee-stahn given the Obamunists any day now, or even in Iraq if the Status of Forces agreement stands.

The only exception is CAS, and the Army and Navy could cover this quite well. Better than the Air Force, actually, because it'd be in their own chains of command.

Here, you have a point. It may be time for a revived USAAF for just this purpose, or perhaps cross training West Pointers in Colorado Springs and vice versa.

Our air-superiority fighters haven't faced a worthy enemy in decades, and aren't likely to before robots take over.

Somewhere Zombie Robert McNamara is smiling. This has been asserted before.

The F-22 is so much better than any other plane in the air right now that other countries have basically just quit trying. Better to build lots of cheaper and less-capable planes than try to match the Americans in air-superiority.

Somewhere Gary Hart, who in 1984 wanted three F-5's for every one F-16, is also smiling.

In short: we haven't faced a real air-superiority enemy for 30 years (the Russians over Vietnam), and aren't likely to any time soon.

Once again, *cough* Red China *cough*. Assuming we will always be deterring / fighting ragheads isn't right.

107

I understood that this was the whole point of the JSF/F-35. Was I misinformed?

You were not misinformed, but sadly, history will repeat itself. See TFX / F-111, and see also F-4. The Air Force and Navy have different needs.

108 I understood that this was the whole point of the JSF/F-35. Was I misinformed?
Posted by: Monty at June 21, 2010 02:05 PM (4Pleu)

Different versions.  The Naval variant has a beefier undercarriage and the hardware to accomodate the catapults and arrestor wires found on carriers, and the ariel refuelling system is different.  And then there's the VTOL version that the Marines will be operating.

109

Which makes me think I'm speaking to a retired AF guy.

Not me, just my old man.

No offense, dude, but human pilots are on the way out. The Predator is just the first wave of that reality. It will continue.

Sorry, but WE HAVE HEARD THIS BEFORE. Or my old man heard it in his day. See BOMARC, and Matador, and Snark. Missile tech is cool, but it *still* can't replace the pilot.

(This reminds me of that argument in the movie The Right Stuff, where Pancho is saying, "There has to be some son-of-a-bitch to take the thing up; and some son-of-a-bitch has to bring it back down. And that son-of-a-bitch is a pilot." I love that movie.)

And "Pancho" Barnes, speaking on behalf of her friends like Chuck Yeager, was right on then, and I will wager still is.

110 Once again, *cough* Red China *cough*. If you're waiting for frigging China to be a conventional adversary to the US, you're going to be waiting until you're old and gray. I cannot grasp why people fear China -- they are a third-world nation and will remain one for the forseeable future. Their military is lamentable, their equipment shoddy, and their officer classes corrupt and incompetent. Just like the USSR, in other words. They are geared up to re-take Taiwan, not to engage the US. We need to be far more frightened of their industrial espionage and cyberwar capabilities. But other countries are just as formidable in this area, including Japan and Israel.

111 You failed to mention Glenn Beck, who is also a Libertarian and pushing these ideas and values on his show.

112 Moreover, a B-52 (or now a B-2) can loiter and take out literally dozens of huts, So can an Army AC-130 Spectre, at far lower cost and less interservice BS. And don't even get me started on the hangar-queen B2. That is the most useless airplane we've ever built. Literally -- it was built for a conflict that never happened, and can only be used -- at great cost -- in situations where other planes would serve just as well. It requires a huge maintenance budget, has a service life less than half of what was claimed, and costs a fortune to keep in the air.

113 AC-130 Spectre And yes, I know this is an AF bird, not an Army one. My point is that there's no reason it couldn't be an Army bird to begin with.

114

I cannot grasp why people fear China -- they are a third-world nation and will remain one for the forseeable future. Their military is lamentable, their equipment shoddy, and their officer classes corrupt and incompetent. Just like the USSR, in other words.

And being prepared for the Soviet Union was a good outcome, no? Compare the outcomes of Stalin / Captive Nations and Kruschev / Sputnik to Hitler / Rhineland. It *never* hurts to overestimate a foe. It can be fatal to underestimate one.

They are geared up to re-take Taiwan, not to engage the US.

And we want to acquiesce to this, as well as to their veiled threats to the rest of Asia? I suppose you could say the Soviets just wanted Berlin, too.

So can an Army AC-130 Spectre, at far lower cost and less interservice BS.

So long as it stays high enough to not get hit by an RPG. Can they put JDAMS on "Puff The Magic Dragon"?

Not that the Spectre isn't a great plane for it's role, but everything has its limits.

And don't even get me started on the hangar-queen B2. That is the most useless airplane we've ever built. Literally -- it was built for a conflict that never happened

That is how Deterrence works. That, to me, is money well spent.

115 And we want to acquiesce to this, as well as to their veiled threats to the rest of Asia? Well, the Taiwanese sure don't seem particularly concerned about it, seeing as how they've let their own defense budget languish for the last decade or so. I have a real problems with defending people who aren't willing to defend themselves. South Korea at least went to the time and trouble of building up their own military. Taiwan just seems to assume that America will cover their asses no matter what, so why spend money on the military? It's stupid, and it's going to bite them in the ass.

116 Who doesn't want their government to be more like Jesus?  How is that NOT an awesome idea?

117 You guys want small government and low taxation. Not sure how you can get there without cutting back the humongous "defense" budget.

I'm in favor of reinstating spoils and tribute.

118 Nah, there's no spinning Mitch Daniels -- he's a pussy.  We need a real fighter up next.

119

Datel is Sage's largest UK partner, providing implementation, consultancy and support. ROI-focussed suppliers of sage 200, sage line 200, Sage 1000 and Sage ERP X3

120

anyone to slide into debt, but more importantly have all the knowledge and contacts to get you out of debt for good - whether it be through an IVA, Debt Management, Debt Settlementor Debt Consolidation, we will find the easiest way for you to eliminate or Consolidate Debt.

121

At Simply Finance we have a team of Debt Consultants who know how easy it is for anyone to slide into debt, but more importantly have all the knowledge and contacts to get you out of debt for good - whether it be through an IVA, Debt Management, Debt Settlement or Debt Consolidation, we will find the easiest way for you to eliminate or Consolidate Debt.

122

Before shopping around to Buy life insurance, it's essential to have an unbiased and experienced consultant to give you free,impartial advice about the different types of policy available, and the pluses and minuses of each one. Here at Simply Finance, we have a specialist team of consultants focused on Over 50 life insurance. That's because we know that those looking for over 50 life insurancehave different needs to others.

123

Before shopping around to Buy life insurance, it's essential to have an unbiased and experienced consultant to give you free,impartial advice about the different types of policy available, and the pluses and minuses of each one. Here at Simply Finance, we have a specialist team of consultants focused on Over 50 life insurance. That's because we know that those looking for over 50 life insurancehave different needs to others.

 

124

Wall Climber build climbing walland traverse wall facilities for schools, organizations and individuals, tailored to their requirements and budget

125

Incisive Edge is expert in one simple thing. They help their clients to make more money.
Incisive Edge Business Coachingturns clients' businesses into revenue-generating machines..

126

An Electronic Cigarettefrom Mirage is guaranteed to be 100% legal in all British bars and clubs. An Electric Cigaretteallows you the freedom to smoke wherever and whenever you like. Because Mirage electronic cigaretteuse liquid nicotine, your smoking experience will give you the same benefits as a real cigarette – only Mirage smokeless cigarettes are safe and healthier.

127 If you're wondering 'Where is the best place to quickly Value My Car then sell my car ', you've found it!

128

 

Power-Rite (UK) Ltd is one of Britain's leading diesel generator hire, generator rental, repair and maintenance specialists. We are forward thinking company that is able to respond to ever changing needs to generator sales and load bank hire.

129

 

 

Marble Fireplace Surrounds specialise in the installation and manufacturing of quality marble fireplaces. All our marble fireplacescan be custom made to suit any style or budget and can be ordered from our online store, over the phone or from our marble fireplace showroom in Nottinghamshire. We also stock a range of fireplaces then can come with either gas fires or electric fires.

130

 

 

Varme is the UKÂ’s premier brand of electric underfloor heating.

With a wide variety of systems to suit all installation types, from a simple bathroom renovation to a complete home heating solution Varme underfloor heating systemshas the perfect solution.

With manufacturing & quality control taking place in Scandinavia, the home of underfloor heating, we believe that the quality & reliability is second to none. As testimony to this fact we offer a lifetime warranty against cable failures.

131

 

 

Timberzone are importers, distributors and installers of a quality range of Wood Flooring, including Solid Wood Flooring and Engineered Flooring

132 Thanks for sharing.

133
Thanks for sharing. A real lot of useful info here!



<a href="http://www.gucci4lover.com/gucci-wallets-women-c-39.html">Gucci Wallets Women</a>

134

It¡¯s really great article. I would like to appreciate your work and would like to tell to my friends.




<a href="http://www.gucci4lover.com/gucci-wallet-c-13.html">Gucci Wallet</a>

135 Your tips are really great except the one suggesting to steal our competition articles haha . Nice tipps, thanks!

136 asdfasdfh dafasdf

137 Shelves into the list for the production of mulberry bags sale various color, material leather materials