January 24, 2010
— Dave in Texas Thinly veiled hit piece on Palin. And Bush to a degree.
Before John McCain unwittingly picked a tabloid-magazine cover girl for his running mate, I was leaning toward going Republican this time around. I did the second time Bush was on the ballot and I very nearly did the first time, too. But as soon as Palin climbed out of her igloo and onto the national scene, well, there was no turning back for me.
This thing is such a mess I don't even know where to start. For a person who claims to be a "fiscal conservative" she seems just a bit more driven by cult of personality than political ideology. Tear it up for yourselves.
Parting shot, anybody buying her last line about hoping the Republicans can find a "president with experience and savvy, a Commander in Chief who puts our country and its citizens first."?
Not me.
*updated headline to point out this isn't my regret, it's somebody else's
Posted by: Dave in Texas at
02:49 PM
| Comments (329)
Post contains 178 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: TexasJew at January 24, 2010 02:53 PM (dcKUM)
You ought to have your voting rights permanently revoked.
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner At Large at January 24, 2010 02:54 PM (erIg9)
Posted by: John Kerry at January 24, 2010 02:55 PM (LwWtU)
The author's a David Brooks sort of crease-inspector. Style over substance every time.
Posted by: mrkwong at January 24, 2010 02:55 PM (G8Eo0)
Posted by: Voluble at January 24, 2010 02:55 PM (nZNTl)
I'm not sorry for you. I'm sorry for me. Because I voted for Obama for me, not for you.
She is a nasty, stupid person who really shouldn't be voting or expressing her asinine thoughts to anyone. She is one of the despicable, lying scumbag left who really don't deserve the benefits of modern civilization, since all they do is work to destroy it.
Dorkson's bitching about Palin just goes further to prove what a despicable person Dorkson is. She's your typical liberal. A waste of flesh and not two brain cells to rub together.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at January 24, 2010 02:56 PM (A46hP)
She's not impressing anybody in the comments, either, for obvious reasons.
Posted by: andycanuck at January 24, 2010 02:56 PM (2qU2d)
Posted by: ol_dirty_/b+tard at January 24, 2010 02:57 PM (VjRyf)
Posted by: Methos at January 24, 2010 02:57 PM (Xsi7M)
Parting shot, anybody buying her last line about hoping the Republicans can find a "president with experience and savvy, a Commander in Chief who puts our country and its citizens first."?
I could walk outside of my goddamn apartment and find twenty people who fit those criteria better than Obama.
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 02:59 PM (+EvNy)
Posted by: Winston Smith at January 24, 2010 03:00 PM (38rck)
Posted by: torabora at January 24, 2010 03:00 PM (CH5ak)
Posted by: thebronze at January 24, 2010 03:00 PM (1Arr7)
Sounds like it's a covert warning to Republicans not to pick a conservative in 2012. John McCain is okay, though.
Yeah, I'm sure the author really voted for Bush in 2004.
Posted by: This is the b-b-b-oner at January 24, 2010 03:00 PM (GRgk4)
Dorkson writes: "(Obama) bailed out the most wicked..." Why do I picture the crazy fat lady from "Trading Spouses" as writing this article?
Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at January 24, 2010 03:02 PM (DPM1U)
Posted by: torabora at January 24, 2010 03:05 PM (CH5ak)
Posted by: Look how tolerant I am! at January 24, 2010 03:06 PM (qyKoF)
Posted by: joejm65 at January 24, 2010 03:06 PM (O3dMD)
Lots of weeping and buyer's remorse over Obama after just one year, but Dennis the Peasant had the best response to these kinds of jeremiads:
"You didn't want a candidate with a record of achievement (and failure). You didn't want a man already measured. You wanted a blank slate. A blank slate you could project all your hopes and dreams upon without having to worry about reality.
You got what you wanted.
At the time of his election to the presidency, Barack Obama had no meaningful experience or accomplishments in the field of politics. You knew nothing of his character or his capacity to lead. You didn't care. He looked the part and said the right things. Your imagination did the rest. Now that Obama is faced with real life, and his lack of experience and defects of character have been exposed in the most painful manner imaginable, you find yourself professing shock...
Really? What did you expect? Seriously. What did you expect?
You didn't want the sort of politician who could draw on experience and strength of character to get things done, you wanted the sort of politician you could give yourself a big hug for supporting. It was never about Barack Obama; it was about you. And if he's fucked it all up, it is in no small part because you fucked it all up, too. You got what you wanted. You wanted Barack Obama and you got him.
That's not Barack Obama's fault."
Posted by: David Axelrod's Combover at January 24, 2010 03:07 PM (0n+kE)
Posted by: Screejay at January 24, 2010 03:07 PM (zQmv8)
Posted by: Look how tolerant I am! at January 24, 2010 03:08 PM (qyKoF)
Sounds a bit like Palin. Heh.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 03:09 PM (OkT2m)
>> Sounds like it's a covert warning to Republicans not to pick a conservative in 2012. John McCain is okay, though.
I hadn't thought of that aspect but I agree with you.
Anyway it's clearly not an "Obama is awful" piece so much as it is a "Palin is awful" bit.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at January 24, 2010 03:09 PM (Wh0W+)
Posted by: Look how tolerant I am! at January 24, 2010 03:09 PM (qyKoF)
I originally read that as "black slate" (raaaaacist, denouncing myself), which would also be correct.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 03:10 PM (OkT2m)
Lots of people make that claim. Unfortunately, the rest of their ideology lists to the port side.
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at January 24, 2010 03:10 PM (554T5)
Posted by: Pocono Joe at January 24, 2010 03:11 PM (B6yrY)
Can we get the SCOTUS to take the eligibiity case, now, state the obvious rule that having any other citizenship immediately obviates natural born status (as only makes sense and is what our Founders had clearly intended), and throw the Slumdog Precedent out, finally? Pretty please? It's one of the only solutions to the existential threat that looms over this nation.
Because, I hope everyone understands that the US cannot last through three years of this America-hating imbecile in the White House. Something has got to give.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at January 24, 2010 03:13 PM (A46hP)
Posted by: dudeinsantacruz at January 24, 2010 03:13 PM (3wYSZ)
yeah, I guess it's never too early for the DNC operatives in the media to pick our next presidential nominee
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 03:14 PM (GRgk4)
Posted by: Zombie Leona Helmsley at January 24, 2010 03:14 PM (QECjC)
Lots of people make that claim. Unfortunately, the rest of their ideology lists to the port side.
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at January 24, 2010 07:10 PM (554T5)
Social liberalism eventually comes with a pricetag everytime.
Posted by: AmishDude at January 24, 2010 03:15 PM (Vo2Ef)
I concur with other commenters, this Democrap wouldn't have ever said a word for disliking Chocolate Jesus a month ago. They're just mirroring the general dislike that's suddenly springing up across the country. 52%'er and one of the main reasons we're in this shithole now. Thanks alot, Bint. Fuck you very much.
Posted by: Schlippy at January 24, 2010 03:15 PM (2hX6Q)
Posted by: Jill Dorson at January 24, 2010 03:16 PM (kJLH9)
Posted by: Look how tolerant I am! at January 24, 2010 03:19 PM (qyKoF)
FIFY
Posted by: Schlippy at January 24, 2010 03:20 PM (2hX6Q)
Posted by: Schlippy at January 24, 2010 03:21 PM (2hX6Q)
Posted by: Darth Nihilus69 at January 24, 2010 03:21 PM (GfYt/)
Posted by: garrett at January 24, 2010 03:23 PM (3R688)
I originally read that as "black slate" (raaaaacist, denouncing myself), which would also be correct.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 07:10 PM (OkT2m)
I read it the same way the first time.
Posted by: Shannow at January 24, 2010 03:23 PM (LJcef)
Posted by: curious at January 24, 2010 03:24 PM (p302b)
Posted by: pep at January 24, 2010 03:25 PM (0K3p3)
>> I didn't hear if John McCain had said anything about the Court's decision. Did he?
Posted by: Dave in Texas at January 24, 2010 03:26 PM (Wh0W+)
God knows libs don't like when people are actually happy.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 03:26 PM (gofDd)
She'll never be able to disprove it for them. She'll eternally be known for Tina Fey's "I can see Russia from my house" line.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 03:27 PM (gofDd)
Posted by: me such a smart independent thinker at January 24, 2010 03:27 PM (qyKoF)
Posted by: diondrum at January 24, 2010 03:27 PM (QsSzZ)
ahhh, thamks, Dave
McCain sounds like he doesn't give a shit. I was half-expecting he'd echo the sentiments of Schumer and Obama.
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 03:28 PM (GRgk4)
That's pretty much what he's doing with the budget
Posted by: kbdabear at January 24, 2010 03:28 PM (sYxEE)
Yes. Plus, she didn't ride the coat-tails of her father or husband to political influence, like Clinton, Pelosi, etc.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 03:28 PM (OkT2m)
Click through to the (long) comment section on the original article.
There are some flat-out bashing comments - but by far the majority are taking the time to explain why she's completely clueless.
Posted by: Al at January 24, 2010 03:28 PM (0lyUI)
Are you serious??? Anybody can use a TELEPROMPTER!
Posted by: irony is lost on libs at January 24, 2010 03:28 PM (qyKoF)
I'm generally socially liberal--but I firmly believe people should pay for their own crap. No welfare programs, no paying for drug rehab, etc. I don't care if people want to destroy their own lives as long as I don't have to pay for it.
I think that makes me a small "l" libertarian.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 03:30 PM (gofDd)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at January 24, 2010 03:30 PM (RgXpA)
That is so fundamental when it comes to attempting to understand their thought process, or lack thereof.
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at January 24, 2010 03:30 PM (554T5)
Trust me, you pay for that.
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at January 24, 2010 03:31 PM (554T5)
I saw a headline at Hot Air along the lines of 'McCain says campaign finance reform is dead' but I honestly don't care what the man has to say beyond that.
Posted by: Methos at January 24, 2010 03:32 PM (Xsi7M)
Oh, as the system is right now, I know I do. But if I were Queen of the Universe, I wouldn't be.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 03:32 PM (gofDd)
Yeh, we sure dodged a bullet with that Palin hick who had experience running a state, fighting entrenched interests in her own party and taking body blows from the DemSM and getting right back up to fight again.
She's wondering why an empty suit who never ran as much as a lemonade stand and comes unglued at any criticism isn't up to the job.
Maybe that's why her business went tits-up, she can't properly analyze what's going on in the real world, she just takes "conventional wisdom" at face value
Posted by: kbdabear at January 24, 2010 03:34 PM (sYxEE)
Posted by: curious at January 24, 2010 03:34 PM (p302b)
Posted by: Tipsy McStagger, somewhere down in Texas at January 24, 2010 03:34 PM (vyFwl)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 07:32 PM (gofDd)
More gam pics. We'll talk.
Posted by: King of the Universe at January 24, 2010 03:34 PM (RgXpA)
Posted by: GarandFan at January 24, 2010 03:34 PM (ZQBnQ)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 24, 2010 03:34 PM (QECjC)
If she were a D and that were the only difference, she would be a media hero. Her only sin is the R, even being pro-life would not be a disqualification. She'd be a working-class feminist icon.
Posted by: AmishDude at January 24, 2010 03:35 PM (Vo2Ef)
Maybe that's why her business went tits-up, she can't properly analyze what's going on in the real world, she just takes "conventional wisdom" at face value
Posted by: kbdabear at January 24, 2010 07:34 PM (sYxEE)
Very good point!
Posted by: Tipsy McStagger, somewhere down in Texas at January 24, 2010 03:35 PM (vyFwl)
If this goes well for the lefties, look for increased pressure on Obama to put Bush on trial.
Posted by: K~Bob at January 24, 2010 03:35 PM (9b6FB)
Posted by: Ernie Arnastos at January 24, 2010 03:35 PM (JZa9d)
If people just took a minute to think about it, they'd realize that traditional American values and culture is the easiest on the tax-payer's wallet. In other words, it creates the least burden on taxpayers.
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 03:36 PM (GRgk4)
This fucking meme about how "I was before McCain until he picked that Palin bitch" is beyond old. The stupid author of this hit piece can't even come up with something new to slam Palin with?
Posted by: Portlandon at January 24, 2010 03:37 PM (wj9F2)
Posted by: Tipsy McStagger, somewhere down in Texas at January 24, 2010 03:37 PM (vyFwl)
To put a finer point on it: Who ends up paying for people's stupid mistakes and irresponsible behavior and poor life-choices?
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 03:38 PM (GRgk4)
I'm all for tax cuts, but I think Bush made the mistake of taking too many people off the tax rolls. When you're not paying (federal income) taxes, you shouldn't have any say on how taxes are spent. Unfortunately, that's how non tax paying citizens get to vote themselves the treasury. Dems promise them the treasury and hike taxes on "the rich" as if it's a segment of the population with endless amounts of money. (Ok, so some of them are, but not enough to support 300 million people.)
I guess people being added again (and their reaction) is some silver lining.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 03:38 PM (gofDd)
If you let them and their spawn die in the streets, the people being irresponsible.
Otherwise, everyone else.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 03:39 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 24, 2010 03:40 PM (QECjC)
Posted by: Ellie Light at January 24, 2010 03:40 PM (4L/Vr)
In an ideal world, no one but the person themselves. Since it's not an ideal world, and getting shoved towards a more socialist one, it gets foisted on the community.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 03:41 PM (gofDd)
Posted by: Tipsy McStagger, somewhere down in Texas at January 24, 2010 03:41 PM (vyFwl)
Before John McCain unwittingly picked a tabloid-magazine cover girl for his running mate
Thats all I needed to read to know what the gist of her article was going to be. Her piece reads like it was written by one of those "Concerned Christian Conservatives".
Posted by: Blazer at January 24, 2010 03:42 PM (t72+4)
Posted by: Tipsy McStagger, somewhere down in Texas at January 24, 2010 03:43 PM (vyFwl)
Remember all that worship to the vaunted single-mom bullshit started in the '90's like they were a special group of people like teachers and firefighters?
What a joke. The Left is brilliant at doing that shit, though.
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 03:43 PM (GRgk4)
I often define myself as a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. ~Dorkson
Social Liberalism has ramping costs that destroy fiscal conservatism. It's a match made in Hell, or at least in Retardville. It's a conflict that is self-fucking and leads to a default Liberal position with no resolution resulting, in the end, to mental instability.
Grow up Dorkson.
Posted by: Speller at January 24, 2010 03:43 PM (o0R2E)
Posted by: noislamocommie at January 24, 2010 03:43 PM (Jpn2p)
Opps. Except for the moronettes. They give me hope. Just wish their were like 149 million more of them.
Posted by: I Am Amish Jack at January 24, 2010 07:08 PM (IhHdM)
I'd also venture to say that Moronettes are fun to drink with, fun to be married to, have had numerous marriage proposals, are hands-down better looking that lib feminazis, always vote conservative and appreciate a level-headed Moron. Thanks, Amish.
Posted by: Moronette #33162 at January 24, 2010 03:43 PM (LKkE8)
I don't care what you do as long as I don't have to pay for it. (This really only works in an ideal world.)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 03:44 PM (gofDd)
...it gets foisted on the community.
So there you go. Now you realize you have a vested interest in your fellow man to behave like a 'normal' person.
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 03:45 PM (GRgk4)
Posted by: Shannon at January 24, 2010 03:45 PM (0Dx01)
Posted by: ingrid newkirk at January 24, 2010 03:45 PM (Dz//m)
Posted by: Ellie Light at January 24, 2010 03:45 PM (CCcDq)
If you're a sockpuppet, good job--sounds about right. If you're not.. I, and many others, have seen a great deal of change in the economy and how we are perceived abroad in the last year. Yeah. They're bother several orders of magnitude worse. And let's remember blah blah blah The OFFICE deserves respect. The guy in it only deserves respect if he does something to earn it. See the difference? (Probably not-- "Vive l'America; l'America, c'est moi.")
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 03:45 PM (+EvNy)
Ann Coulter has suggested repealing the 19th Amendment for years. She says removing the estrogen vote would let us straighten the country out in a generation.
She's right. For far too many women, voting in national elections is the equivalent of "I'll root for the Vikings because their uniforms are cuter".
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 03:46 PM (y4B2y)
I saw a headline at Hot Air along the lines of 'McCain says campaign finance reform is dead' but I honestly don't care what the man has to say beyond that.
Posted by: Methos at January 24, 2010 07:32 PM (Xsi7M)
The Republican Party will never be worth a shit as long as McCain is in the Senate. He is that toxic.
Posted by: TexasJew at January 24, 2010 03:46 PM (dcKUM)
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at January 24, 2010 03:46 PM (CCcDq)
Have we met?
Posted by: Palin at January 24, 2010 03:47 PM (kmgIE)
Thank you, Ellie. Finally, a voice of reason. I am so glad you voted for me, and I promise to fill your universe with rainbows and unicorns. By the way, have you filed your taxes yet, Ellie?
Posted by: President Toonces at January 24, 2010 03:47 PM (554T5)
She can say something idiotic like that about Palin, but wasn't smart enough to see Ayers, Wright, Acorn and BO's total lack of experience. Dumbass.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 24, 2010 03:48 PM (DIYmd)
Feminists did huge injury to women by deciding that "never-married baby mamas" and "widows with children" were morally equivalent. I have sympathy for young women who were abandoned by the guy who knocked them up...once. Serial illegitimate children with multiple men is simply not the same as losing a husband/father to illness or accident, but we treat it like it is.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 03:48 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: Tipsy McStagger, somewhere down in Texas at January 24, 2010 03:48 PM (vyFwl)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 24, 2010 03:48 PM (QECjC)
He [McCain] is that toxic.
I'm afraid he already has his poisonous tentacles wrapped around Scott Brown.
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 03:49 PM (GRgk4)
To a degree, sure. But I don't like nanny staters on the left or the right. I don't like the anti-trans fats laws, the anti-smoking laws, the seat belt laws and helmet laws. Teach people to be responsible, but it's not always going to stick. There will always be alkies and druggies and criminals. But there has to be a point where you employ some tough love and stop paying for them.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 03:49 PM (gofDd)
Hey Ellie, got any good lottery picks? Anyone who is lucky enough to get their letter posted in the editorial section of over fifty different publications nationwide in only a matter of days should have some awesome lottery picks.
Posted by: Blazer at January 24, 2010 03:50 PM (t72+4)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 24, 2010 03:50 PM (DIYmd)
She's right. For far too many women, voting in national elections is the equivalent of "I'll root for the Vikings because their uniforms are cuter".
Nah, there are too many beta male sissy boys nowadays.
What would REALLY help would be raising the age requirement to at least 21, ideally as high as 30 given the sickening amount of entitled "professional student" twerps. Too few people with actual skin in the game are voting. Obviously, an exception could and should be made for those in service.
Posted by: Blackford Oakes at January 24, 2010 03:50 PM (qyKoF)
Posted by: Howard Dean at January 24, 2010 03:51 PM (dcKUM)
Posted by: Patrick at January 24, 2010 03:52 PM (OpnaT)
That's because for many of them, the women's movement was about irresponsibility and childish narcissism, not anyone's rights
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 03:52 PM (y4B2y)
I would actually change it to only people who pay property taxes and/or federal income taxes. Also, they should be made to take a poll test of sorts every presidential election year. It would essentially be the US citizenship test.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 03:52 PM (gofDd)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 03:52 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: Filly at January 24, 2010 03:53 PM (kmgIE)
Posted by: ingrid newkirk at January 24, 2010 03:53 PM (Dz//m)
Posted by: Tipsy McStagger, somewhere down in Texas at January 24, 2010 03:53 PM (vyFwl)
Some imbecilic lemming bint named Jill Dorson bought a bag full of Hope and Change seeds, planted them as directed, fertilized them religiously with copious amounts of delusion and irrationality, and now she's surprised she's harvesting a bumper crop of despair and pain?
Posted by: Purple Avenger at January 24, 2010 03:53 PM (3gX2w)
Posted by: Ellie Dimbulb, letter writer at January 24, 2010 03:54 PM (sYxEE)
Feminists did huge injury to women by deciding that "never-married baby mamas" and "widows with children" were morally equivalent.
I saw it as a clever ploy by the commies on the Left to silence the Church. It became un-PC to tell women (young girls, actually) to not have kids out of wedlock.
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 03:55 PM (GRgk4)
Exceptions granted for military and honorably discharged vets, if necessary, otherwise right on.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 03:55 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: Ellie Light at January 24, 2010 07:40 PM (4L/Vr)
I seriously hope this is a troll, and if so, go fuck yourself you worthless scrunt.
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner At Large at January 24, 2010 03:56 PM (erIg9)
Posted by: Al at January 24, 2010 03:56 PM (0lyUI)
Patterico has found 4 more "ellie lights" using different names, same letter.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 24, 2010 07:50 PM (DIYmd)
Someone name piperbaye posting over on Patterico and on The Plain-Dealer site said that she's thinks it may have something to do with Samantha Power. An Ellie also meaning "light" is a literary award that Samantha Power won in 2005 for her coverage of Darfur. Not to mention she worked for Obama until she was forced to resign over remarks about Hillary and her flaming anti-semitism.
Posted by: Blazer at January 24, 2010 03:56 PM (t72+4)
Posted by: MarkD at January 24, 2010 03:56 PM (nur8S)
You mean as the Founders essentially intended?
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 03:56 PM (y4B2y)
Let's face it, after every election, those in the middle are going to be distracted by the first shiny object they see.
Posted by: The Hammer at January 24, 2010 03:57 PM (YBTwf)
Yeah. If you're asking 23-year-old dropouts with five kids with daddies in prison to please stop already, you're opressing their right to free sexual expression (and probably a racist). When you tell married white women with one child they shouldn't be allowed to have a second because they're destroying the planet, you're on the side of social justice.
I hate the Left.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 03:58 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 24, 2010 03:59 PM (QECjC)
Posted by: eman at January 24, 2010 03:59 PM (MA/9d)
Posted by: RushBabe at January 24, 2010 04:00 PM (LKkE8)
My moonbat ex read the single mom book and got into her head that she wanted, needed to raise a child on her own (since her college education learned her real good what an outdated and silly concept marriage was). She assured me that my continued presence wouldn't be necessary and that she wouldn't pursue any financial obligations from me. So sad...
Posted by: Blackford Oakes at January 24, 2010 04:00 PM (qyKoF)
Hey, as Chris Rock says to these women....."Put the dick down.... put the dick down and walk away.."
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 04:00 PM (y4B2y)
Voting for "hope" is the same as believing you can catch a cloud and hold it in your hand.
We catch Obama's farts. Is that the same thing?
Posted by: the msm at January 24, 2010 04:00 PM (2qU2d)
She blames McCain for picking Palin--without her, he would've lost by 12 points. He blames McCain for other shit that I don't think meant a fucking thing. This woman is a bubble-headed twit that waits for Chris Matthews and the Dem-licking media to give her her opinion when, if she had a nickel's worth of sense and one-tenth the intelligence she ascribes to herself she would have seen that this unqualified speech-reader from a corrupt political machine was both radical and of no proven competence.
SHE VOTED FOR OBAMA, BUT PALIN'S THE IDIOT?
Posted by: nickless at January 24, 2010 04:00 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 07:55 PM (OkT2m)
Of course. Military exemptions are a given. I support lowering the drinking age for currently serving members. Old enough to vote, old enough to die for the country, but not old enough to drink? WTF?
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:01 PM (gofDd)
Theodore Dalrymple has written at length about how rich people can be amoral without suffering consequences, but the average person who acts as they do is fucked.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 04:02 PM (OkT2m)
Well, all of those being said about the 'stupid bitch' is true.
However, there is no denying her vote is just as valid as yours and mine.
The point is not to be little the poor soul, but to change her way of 'thinking'. Or just make sure she starts 'thinking'.
Posted by: always right at January 24, 2010 04:02 PM (8/wkb)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:02 PM (gofDd)
the hypocrisy is astounding, isn't it?
speaking of hypocrisy...I was listening to Stephanie Miller on the radio last Friday and I shit you not right after she had on Elliot Spitzer as a guest, she was snarking about Scott Brown's Cosmo pics like he was a gigolo and how Scott was 'putting his daughters on the market to the highest bidder.'
I have no doubt whatsoever Elliot Spitzer & John Edwards will be speakers at the 2012 DNC convention.
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 04:03 PM (GRgk4)
Posted by: kefka at January 24, 2010 04:03 PM (n1uMU)
Social liberalism eventually comes with a pricetag everytime.
Posted by: AmishDude at January 24, 2010 07:15 PM (Vo2Ef)
Um, dude I don't know, uh, what you are saying. Its like important, uh, we don't let the, uh, religious NAZIs like take, uh, our rights away n' stuff. But, uh, I am still like a moderate, you know? Cause like I'm not a Democrat just cause I voted for, uh, Bam, and Clifford, n' those guys.
Oh, and dude, like, we also need to like, save the Earth, so, like capitalism should, uh, be like outlawed. Yeah, uh George Jefferson grew, uh, hemp. We should, uh, do that instead.
Posted by: Another 'economic conservative' at January 24, 2010 04:03 PM (bgcml)
Posted by: Popcorn at January 24, 2010 04:04 PM (OOehk)
Posted by: kefka at January 24, 2010 04:05 PM (n1uMU)
Don't tell me.... her college major had "Studies" in the title? I'm assuming "Womyn's". Ombudsman's Law: Any college major with "Studies" in the title is bullshit political indoctrination disguised as education
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 04:05 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: TexasJew at January 24, 2010 07:46 PM (dcKUM)
eyeroll
Posted by: ingrid newkirk at January 24, 2010 07:53 PM (Dz//m)
Well, prove me wrong, genius. You know you can't.
Posted by: Howard Dean at January 24, 2010 04:06 PM (dcKUM)
Gonna be hard to attend when he's rotting in prison for war crimes. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'...
Posted by: not an INTERPOL agent (seriously, we don't even have those!) at January 24, 2010 04:06 PM (qyKoF)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 04:06 PM (OkT2m)
Well lets see now, when McCain picked Palin she WAS a governor, THEN the ass sucking left MADE her a frigging tabloid magazine cover girl.
The average lib is so stupid I'm surprised they don;t fall through their ass and choke themselves to death.
Posted by: Berserker at January 24, 2010 04:06 PM (gWHrG)
Posted by: kefka at January 24, 2010 08:03 PM (n1uMU)
Hey, people have to know what they are not allowed to do. That damn snowbilly almost beat us.
Posted by: Rahm Emanuel at January 24, 2010 04:08 PM (bgcml)
No actually it was a hard science from a prestigious university down here (rhymes with nice). She's a brilliant young woman, but like most leftists insists on outsourcing her thinking on most matters.
Posted by: Blackford Oakes at January 24, 2010 04:08 PM (qyKoF)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 08:07 PM (gofDd)
The problem with our current political structure is that we let anyone vote, whether or not they have a clue what they are voting on or whether they have any stake in our society.
It is absolutely insane that someone on the government dole can vote for a larger handout.
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:09 PM (bgcml)
For a while, starting in the '90s, it was the thing to do for women on primetime tv to have babies without daddies. They were treated like heroins, like they were doing their country a service, or being like an Olympian athlete by having these babies.
Posted by: This is lolpresident at January 24, 2010 04:09 PM (GRgk4)
Not me. Having a clue does not depend on what's between your legs. There are a lot of stupid, lazy, welfare-collecting men, too--why should they have more power than you and me?
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 04:11 PM (OkT2m)
Wherestherum, eighteen year olds used to be able to drink. They changed it for a good reason-- Packs of junior soldiers, sailors and Marines with a bucket of the bad stuff in them are like wolves in a fucking kindergarten. Assaults, destroyed property, fighting MP's, smashing up the barracks, and oh my God, fighting Every. One. In. Sight.
I say that, having been one of said jackals, BTW.
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 04:11 PM (+EvNy)
a prestigious university down here (rhymes with nice)
Rutgers?
I once banged a girl from Rutgers. What was her name again? C'mon, joe, think!
Posted by: joe biden at January 24, 2010 04:12 PM (2qU2d)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 08:11 PM (OkT2m)
Preach it sister.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 24, 2010 04:13 PM (Ei3oZ)
Posted by: Blackford Oakes at January 24, 2010 08:08 PM (qyKoF)
The group think aspect of the modern Left might be their most disturbing characteristic. They really are just looking for the right master to kneel too.
Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. --Sallust
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:13 PM (bgcml)
Translation: I'm not dumb, gullible and a poor business person, I'm a victim.
"My small company got thrown under the bus and my savings were ravaged - perhaps Wall Street is using them for bonuses this year."
What?
"I often define myself as a fiscal conservative and a social liberal."
And I often define myself as Brad Pitt's better looking younger brother. So?
Posted by: pep at January 24, 2010 04:14 PM (0K3p3)
Why couldn't Fred come to Wilma like a freakin' man and tell her he was a lazy lout who wanted to sneak out for a smoke with Barney? FTR, Wilma and Betty come across as the brainier voters in this one.
Posted by: RushBabe at January 24, 2010 04:14 PM (LKkE8)
it all started with Dan Quayle and Mouthy Brown
Quayle said the right thing and the Leftists crucified him for being judgmental and out-of-touch and sexist.
Posted by: This is boner at January 24, 2010 04:15 PM (GRgk4)
Posted by: Mindy at January 24, 2010 04:15 PM (UnVsw)
And be pandered to by political elites whose goal is to retain their jobs. We're getting perilously close to a situation where 50% produces and 50% consumes. He who robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul.
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 04:15 PM (y4B2y)
The average lib is so stupid I'm surprised they don;t fall through their ass and choke themselves to death.
Posted by: Berserker at January 24, 2010 08:06 PM (gWHrG)
Uh, like, McCain should have chosen, uh, someone serious, with experience, in like high levels of government. Can you imagine, uh, someone like Palin being President if like McCain had died?
She, uh, thinks there are 57 states man!
Posted by: A reflective Obama Voter at January 24, 2010 04:16 PM (bgcml)
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:17 PM (8PzSd)
Actually, what I really don't understand is why the women's vote needed it's own amendment. The 14th amendment allowed everyone to vote. Except women. Why?
And yeah, I know it really comes down to being informed than to gender.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:17 PM (gofDd)
Can someone help me out here, by the way? I've never been able to figure out what, exactly, the libs' objection to Palin was. Was there ever anything beyond "LOL she's a dumbass"?
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 04:18 PM (+EvNy)
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:19 PM (8PzSd)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:20 PM (gofDd)
I've never been able to figure out what, exactly, the libs' objection to Palin was.
Feminists think that women who actually use their uteruses are stupid.
Posted by: huerfano at January 24, 2010 04:20 PM (kJLH9)
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:21 PM (8PzSd)
She's Republican, therefore inherently racist, sexist, homophobic and hypocritical. Duh.
Posted by: Joy Behar at January 24, 2010 04:21 PM (qyKoF)
Can someone help me out here, by the way? I've never been able to figure out what, exactly, the libs' objection to Palin was. Was there ever anything beyond "LOL she's a dumbass"?
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 08:18 PM (+EvNy)
The critiques I saw beyond, "she's a dumbass" (because of things Tina Fey said, naturally):
She is religious
She gave birth to a disabled child, and has too many children
She isn't an intellectual
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:22 PM (bgcml)
Can someone help me out here, by the way? I've never been able to figure out what, exactly, the libs' objection to Palin was. Was there ever anything beyond "LOL she's a dumbass"?
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 08:18 PM (+EvNy)
I would wager that most of the libs can't answer that either, they were just following the herd.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 24, 2010 04:22 PM (Ei3oZ)
Um, I do believe that was the Anointed One
Unless, of course, my sarcasm detector is malfunctioning. In that case, carry on
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 04:22 PM (y4B2y)
She had a career--a good one, not just teaching Germaine Greer to kids who couldn't care less at a fourth-tier school somewhere--and a family.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 04:22 PM (OkT2m)
She energized the base in a very big way. That scared the crap out of them and, if it hadn't been for that "sky is falling" financial bullshit that no one will ever get the details on, McCain could have won with her on the ticket. Anything after that is just an attempt to justify their visceral revulsion.
Posted by: Peaches at January 24, 2010 04:23 PM (9Wv2j)
Um, I do believe that was the Anointed One
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 08:20 PM (y4B2y)
Indeed.
After the election, they did some polling of Obama voters. As is now common knowledge, most of them thought the Republicans controlled congress in 2006-8. One of the other snippets they found is that a plurality of them attributed Obama and Biden's stupid comments to Palin.
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:24 PM (bgcml)
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:25 PM (8PzSd)
So she isn't sorry for the rest of us that she voted for Obama; only herself. Well, lady, we have to live with the results of your vote and the votes of a lot of other people who didn't bother to look beyond the glittering rhetoric and sweeping generalities.
I knew within a very short time after he entered the presidential race that Obama was bad news. He scared the daylights out of me. The writer admits she misjudged Obama and Bush initially, but she still trashes Palin. The fact is, Palin was the only candidate in that group who had any executive experience at all, but our writer here didn't have a clue. And now she wants someone else to do the job of finding an acceptable candidate. How about you, dear? Your lack of responsibility helped get us into this mess, thank you very much.
If the country survives this presidency, do us all a favor next time. Don't vote.
Posted by: Nancy at January 24, 2010 04:25 PM (3TdgB)
Posted by: tdpwells at January 24, 2010 04:26 PM (Ei3oZ)
To me it means making citizen-government the most important relationship in everyone's life.
Posted by: kefka at January 24, 2010 04:26 PM (n1uMU)
Ellie Light's English cousin shows up in the UK in a "spontaneous" AGW letter-writing campaign to Conservative MPs.
Posted by: andycanuck at January 24, 2010 04:27 PM (2qU2d)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:27 PM (gofDd)
I heard her discuss it on Red Eye
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 04:28 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:28 PM (8PzSd)
Living in a small town, as I have most of my life, going on fifty years now,(scary)! I have learned to live within my means. Small Towns dont pay squat. In the Old Days, it was better paying, what with lumber mills rockin rollin, the industries that supported the mills.. loggers, trucking, trains, etc. All Gone Now.
Town has shrunk population wise, and, like some have said, all on purpose. I really believe that. To see the current events now backs up this meme.
My Point. I think, is there are a Lot of folks living in a low income situation not chosen by them, Well by not choosing to move to a city somewhere. Screw the cities. I guess what im saying is; There are alot of conservatives living in smaller, run down towns, who remember what it was like. We miss it.
Reading some commenters here reminds me of the Upper Crust dudes educated on Mary Jane. Piss Pore Road To Go Down. Lets save the owl.
Posted by: Not So New Here at January 24, 2010 04:29 PM (fMvui)
you're absolutely right
social liberalism = big govt programs and big govt nanny-statism
therefore, social liberalism ≠ fiscal conservatism
Posted by: This is boner at January 24, 2010 04:29 PM (GRgk4)
Well, I guess I got my question answered. Thank you, all.
There's no hate like liberal tolerance.
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 04:29 PM (+EvNy)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 08:20 PM (gofDd)
1) Opposes any restrictions on abortion, and believes it should be publicly funded. Medical professionals should be forced to participate. The right to have children should be restricted.
2) Favors gay marriage.
3) Wants to criminalize 'hate' speech and marginalize/ban religious speech.
4) Only regulated individuals should have guns: police, high profile bodyguards, etc
5) Believes that government schools should be in the business of re-educating students to make sure they don't think like their parents.
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:29 PM (bgcml)
Posted by: Tipsy McStagger, somewhere down in Texas at January 24, 2010 04:30 PM (vyFwl)
Have we met?
Posted by: Palin at January 24, 2010 07:47 PM (kmgIE)
SERIOUSLY.
Posted by: Sarah Palin's Uterus at January 24, 2010 04:30 PM (CH1cF)
Most women are stupid. Hate to say it but it's true.
I once told a group of women that Chelsea looked like Webb Hubble and they thought I was talking about the telescope....
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:31 PM (8PzSd)
I'm genuinely curious. I don't believe in gay marriage or welfare or entitlements, I think there should be some restrictions on abortion and legalizing certain kinds of drugs. I'm all for tax cuts, smaller government, pro 2nd amendment, etc.
Oh, boy, I'm going to get flamed.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:31 PM (gofDd)
I once told a group of women that Chelsea looked like Webb Hubble and they thought I was talking about the telescope....
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 08:31 PM (8PzSd)
I bet they all know what Halliburton is though...
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:31 PM (bgcml)
Isn't funny how the 'socially liberal' lefties have no problem with banning smoking and telling people what they can and cannot say (or even think, e.g., hate crime laws)?
Posted by: This is boner at January 24, 2010 04:32 PM (GRgk4)
Check the archive at Ann Coulter dot com, has all her columns going back to 2004. It might have been a chapter in one of her books or a zinger she said on tv.
Posted by: Ann Coulter at January 24, 2010 04:33 PM (qyKoF)
Ok, so can someone define small "L" libertarianism?
Makes sense in theory but in reality you get Ron Paul and Lydon LaRouche.
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:33 PM (8PzSd)
I don't know if Tim Blair writes his own headlines for his MSM blog, I think he does, but if it was someone else at the newspaper, yeah, he/she made a good one, Tipsy.
Posted by: andycanuck at January 24, 2010 04:35 PM (2qU2d)
Posted by: Twinks at January 24, 2010 04:35 PM (LeFbD)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 08:31 PM (gofDd)
Belief that the government should provide a "watchman state" and nothing more.
No welfare, no affirmative action, no gun control, low taxes, police focus is on violent and property crime, etc.
Libertarian stands are fairly close to the right's. Which makes sense as the two political philosophies that are country were built on are what we would today call conservatism and libertarianism.
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:35 PM (bgcml)
I bet they all know what Halliburton is though...
Nope. They know it is a bad bad thing, perhaps a company, who wants blood for oil, and is connected to horrible illegal scandals involving Cheney and Bush. That's all they know. Nothing else. Nada.
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:36 PM (8PzSd)
Isn't funny how the 'socially liberal' lefties have no problem with banning smoking and telling people what they can and cannot say (or even think, e.g., hate crime laws)?
Of course they have no problem with it-- their entire philosophy is based on laziness, envy, and love of power.
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 04:36 PM (+EvNy)
Posted by: Peaches at January 24, 2010 04:36 PM (9Wv2j)
You mean the company hired by the Clinton administration in 1998 in a 10-year, no bid contract? The company whose KBR subsidiary was the only company qualified to provide satisfactory logistical support to our soldiers, allowing more of them to, you know, soldier?
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 04:36 PM (y4B2y)
Also, they want draconian/totalitarian laws to "Save teh Planet." While they respect your right to fuck everything that moves, they also insist the government be allowed to dictate what type and size of lightbulbs go in my bedside lamp. For "the environment."
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 04:36 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: This is boner at January 24, 2010 08:32 PM (GRgk4)
Hey, do you really expect us to tolerate those we deem intolerant? Freedom doesn't include anything I might call hateful, mean, or wrong.
Posted by: A Tolerant Lefty at January 24, 2010 04:37 PM (bgcml)
libertarianism: for small govt and not giving a shit about what other people do
the problem with libertarianism is that you need to keep a leash on people or else you'll become their slaves. You can't just let the Left do what they want with our society.
Posted by: This is boner at January 24, 2010 04:37 PM (GRgk4)
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 08:36 PM (y4B2y)
Uh, dude, uh, like Cheney, uh, owns Halliburton. Uh, no way Clinton, uh, would have worked, uh with those guys. He was like, honest, and for the little guy.
Posted by: A Well Educated Lefty at January 24, 2010 04:38 PM (bgcml)
Most of the "live and let live" of the libertarian stuff only works if most people live morally/conservatively. Example, decriminalizing marijuana. If a few people use recreationally on their days off, society will be OK; if everyone's perpetually stoned, we're in trouble.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 04:39 PM (OkT2m)
Hmm. I guess I'm not socially liberal. I'm a small "L" libertarian.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:41 PM (gofDd)
Also, they want draconian/totalitarian laws to "Save teh Planet." While they respect your right to fuck everything that moves, they also insist the government be allowed to dictate what type and size of lightbulbs go in my bedside lamp. For "the environment."
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 08:36 PM (OkT2m)
Is environmentalism a social or economic issue? They want your money, and to restrict how you live your life...
I don't really like the social/economic breakdown anyway though as I think it clouds the real debate.
I do love liberals who support draconian environmental laws in one breathe and then claim that the government should not restrict abortion because you "the government doesn't have the right to tell you how to live your life."
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:43 PM (bgcml)
232 I know what it is and that no other company even offers the same kind of services as Halliburton which is one reason they get the contract.
Going back to 2004, I was asked if I was going to vote for Bush again. I said, yes--that was met by a gasp--"after all the scandals?" "What scandals I replied?" "You know, Halliburton." "What did Halliburton do?" I asked. You know. "No, no I don't, please enlighten me." (This is one of my favorite games)
They can't answer and look like fools but don't seem to get it anyway.
My top all time favorite is to start a discussion with libs about Bush v. Gore. Let them talk and then ask them specific questions about the opinion-which they didn't read.
A sick hobby but rewarding...
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:44 PM (8PzSd)
Remember when someone put a passage from a book and loads of people thought "heh, that Palin is soooo stoopid!!"
Until they found the passage was from "Dreams From My Father"
Posted by: kbdabear at January 24, 2010 04:45 PM (sYxEE)
Posted by: Berserker at January 24, 2010 04:45 PM (gWHrG)
I was cringing in expectation of getting flamed like I would have been at HA.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:46 PM (gofDd)
Yeah, they're kind of entwined. Fluorescent bulbs trigger my migraines, though, and when I'm dizzy, puking, and in excruciating pain can't fuck everything that moves, so they definitely violate my right of sexual expression.
Keep your laws off my body, assholes.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 04:47 PM (OkT2m)
Was it Howard Stern that sent out one of his minions and attribute all of McCain's campaign stances to Obama and all the black people interviewed said they agreed? And the reporter guy also asked if they like Obama's running mate Sarah Palin and they thought she was great?
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:47 PM (gofDd)
My top all time favorite is to start a discussion with libs about Bush v. Gore. Let them talk and then ask them specific questions about the opinion-which they didn't read.
A sick hobby but rewarding...
Good lord, do you also enjoy banging your head against the wall?
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 04:47 PM (y4B2y)
Oh, boy, I'm going to get flamed.
There is nothing wrong with being a libertarian in theory. Garry Johnson may be running for president and I think he's great. Watch the problems that are created; 1. selling it and, 2 How do you implement it without, 3. the immediate chaos that ensues with the underclasses new "unlimited freedom". without 4. A moral society to prevent 3 and 4..
Please respond
Posted by: mghorning at January 24, 2010 04:47 PM (Q4Edg)
Posted by: Peaches at January 24, 2010 04:48 PM (9Wv2j)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 08:39 PM (OkT2m)
We have no government armed with the power capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and true religion. Our Constitution is made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. --John Adams
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:48 PM (bgcml)
So much nervousness... Anyone would think we were a bunch of Val-U-Rite drinking, hobo-hunting wierdos who dip out nuts in pudding or something!
Wait...
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 04:48 PM (+EvNy)
Posted by: TexMex at January 24, 2010 04:49 PM (8wYhX)
You know I have a friend who just lost her job. She has been thinking about starting a small business for years. Our friend told her she can get a grant casue she is a woman. So after three weeks of trying she came back to us all saying, "no one can get a grant, who are they giving this money too if not to someone like me who just lost their job and is trying to keep their house?"
Posted by: curious at January 24, 2010 04:49 PM (p302b)
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 04:50 PM (XFwRZ)
Besides, to libs, feelings trump facts every time
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 04:50 PM (y4B2y)
Posted by: Peaches at January 24, 2010 04:50 PM (9Wv2j)
Posted by: Tipsy McStagger, somewhere down in Texas at January 24, 2010 04:50 PM (vyFwl)
Why? Nothing you espoused was either unreasonable, nor inflammatory. Seems to me your core values are basically sound, and that you have a good head on your shoulders. Certainly nothing to flame there.
Posted by: President Toonces at January 24, 2010 04:50 PM (554T5)
Before the 60s, I think it would have been more of a possibility. And it was almost assuredly even more libertarian than today's society. The thing about libertarianism is that it also promotes self-responsibility. You can't have libertarianism without that. Since no one cares about personal accountability anymore, there's no hope of having that kind of rule as a whole.
I don't think there's a way to erase the entitlement mentality without taking away the entitlements as a whole. Which will never happen.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:51 PM (gofDd)
Until they found the passage was from "Dreams From My Father"
Posted by: kbdabear at January 24, 2010 08:45 PM (sYxEE)
One of my favorite activities of the 2008 election was pointing out that apparently the thought that the President might have used cocaine bothered Lerfties so much that they went out and chose a cokehead to represent them.
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:51 PM (bgcml)
Can't tell for sure, but from your previous posts, I would have guessed a federalist.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 24, 2010 04:52 PM (DIYmd)
I'm right with you. Sometimes it's the smaller violations of personal liberty perpetrated by these fuckin' busybodies that pisses me off the most.
Posted by: President Toonces at January 24, 2010 04:52 PM (554T5)
I got to be Treasury Secretary. Well, eventually.
Posted by: Lloyd Bentsen at January 24, 2010 04:52 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: Meghan McCain at January 24, 2010 04:53 PM (tE2Go)
I don't think there's a way to erase the entitlement mentality without taking away the entitlements as a whole. Which will never happen.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 08:51 PM (gofDd)
I would actually argue that entitlements as we now know them will go away at some point. Now whether it will be because conservatives and libertarians convince people that the government shouldn't be in the business of bread and circuses, or whether they will go away because the national socialists will no longer need to buy the votes of the dependent class is an open question.
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:54 PM (bgcml)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:54 PM (gofDd)
Posted by: President Toonces at January 24, 2010 04:55 PM (554T5)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 24, 2010 04:56 PM (MNxpu)
Posted by: eman at January 24, 2010 04:57 PM (MA/9d)
I would agree with that.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 04:57 PM (gofDd)
Fiscally and socially, I am 100% in line with libertarianism. Ah, shit, I've gotta go back to the football game.
Posted by: Peaches at January 24, 2010 04:58 PM (9Wv2j)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 08:51 PM (gofDd)
You know, I sometimes fantasize about President Palin making a speech early after her inauguration, saying that we're done, flat broke, busted. Entitlements are no more. We either have to pull ourselves out of this mess or cease being a country. (The libs would probably vote for the latter as long as they could keep somehow getting bennies.)
We're going to start over again, and it's going to be every man for himself. The govt is through paying for you. We'll go back to relying on family, friends, churches and charity.
Posted by: RushBabe at January 24, 2010 04:59 PM (LKkE8)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 08:54 PM (gofDd)
Well...I'm not sure that what passes for 'libertarian foreign policy' really is. Look at Thomas Jefferson, for example, who is often held up as seminal libertarian thinker. His war against the Barbary pirates was a lot more George Bush and a lot less Ron Paul...
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 04:59 PM (bgcml)
Hmm. I'm inclined to go with the latter out of pure cynicism. The government has long stopped being what the Founding Fathers envisioned it to be. It didn't start with teh Won (arguably it started with FDR) and it won't end with him.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 05:00 PM (gofDd)
I don't think there's a way to erase the entitlement mentality without taking away the entitlements as a whole. Which will never happen.
See how you answered your own question there. I do/did not disagree with you view or your answer.
Posted by: mghorning at January 24, 2010 05:00 PM (Q4Edg)
Ombudsman, I spent a week back in Chicago last summer. And, walking through Lincoln Square, I get buttonholed by a couple of earnest, attractive, and extremely stupid coeds ("Do you have a minute for the environment?"). But I'm feeling froggy, so I tell them I do contract work for oil companies ("So, um, how do you, like, feel about that?" was the response) and listen to their line of bullshit. It was the usual--His Divine Majesty the God-Emperor of Mankind is going to create "millions of green jobs" but bad old Big Oil (which was capitalized in their pamphlet, BTW) is standing in the way, and we need alternative energy sources.
So what are you talking about? Corn ethanol? Biodiesel? Wind power? Run everybody's car on Bacardi?
"Well, um, we don't have one picked out right now..." They DIDN'T HAVE A FREAKING CLUE. It was awesome. Hook, line, sinker, no thought required or desired.
What a pity. What a waste. One of them was freaking hot, too.
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 05:00 PM (+EvNy)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 09:00 PM (gofDd)
Even farther back - Woodrow Wilson. Have you read Goldberg's Liberal Fascism?
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 05:01 PM (bgcml)
I think the current libertarian movement has been co-opted by the Ronulans and some uber lefties. Reason (the mag) seems to go 50/50 politically. The opinion seems to be that libertarians only care about legalizing pot and becoming isolationist. Which is probably true with the noisiest part of the party.
But the original philosophy, I'd wager, is closer to what Jefferson believed. Also I think Washington should have been heeded re foreign wars when he made his farewell speech.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 05:03 PM (gofDd)
Are you serious??? Anybody can use a TELEPROMPTER!
Posted by: irony is lost on libs at January 24, 2010 07:28 PM (qyKoF)"
Yes, I am quite serious. Intelligence is not measured by just book smarts and whether or not you had the means and the connections to go to an ivy league school. She has more smarts in her pinky than many of these so called ivy leageuers. But we shall see right?
Posted by: curious at January 24, 2010 05:03 PM (p302b)
What about those of us who "accidentally" sit on light bulbs. A lot. Can they dictate the size of those?
Posted by: Kevin Jennings at January 24, 2010 05:04 PM (0K3p3)
What a pity. What a waste. One of them was freaking hot, too.
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 09:00 PM (+EvNy)
See, this is why you wingnuts aren't very bright. I would have asked the earnest, brilliant young lady to come back to my place to talk about her pet issue and whatever else might pop up.
Posted by: Bill Clinton at January 24, 2010 05:05 PM (bgcml)
You mean Woodrow "The KKK is my BFF" Wilson? Do the Dems gloss that part over, or just pretend he never existed?
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 05:05 PM (+EvNy)
I'd originally typed in Wilson and put in FDR instead because it was more overt under FDR. I have Goldberg's book on my stack. I haven't gotten to it yet. Mark Steyn's America Alone is next followed by GB's Arguing with Idiots.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 05:05 PM (gofDd)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 09:05 PM (gofDd)
I'm reading Steyn's right now. Love that guy. Some LOL moments in that book so far.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 24, 2010 05:07 PM (Ei3oZ)
Wilson was a Democrat???? /sarc
Same way they deal with Robert "KKK" Byrd. It never happened.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 05:07 PM (gofDd)
He's my favorite sub for Rush. He's funny and brilliant.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 05:08 PM (gofDd)
Small 'l' libertarianism is basically the tendency to want limited government, and that especialy includes in areas where consenting adults are harming no one. It's pretty much "conservatism" without emphasis on church-based rules. In fact, I'd guess many libertarian Republicans are agnostic. However libertarian Republicans are often tolerant and respectful of religious people and their faith.
The Republican party has many of these folks, and several are highly respected (William Safire was one, Walter Williams is one).
Another characteristic of small 'l' libertarians is disgust with uppercase 'L' Libertarian party types. The hard-core Libertarians are a mass of contradiction when it comes to things like national defense, federalism, banking, and other institutional things.
Some professed Libertarians are like John Stossel, and are decent, intelligent folks who don't mind a few rules that help society get along. Some (all too many, alas) Libertarians are nearly anarchist.
The ones who prefer to vote Republican are not like the Ron Paul crazies.
Posted by: K~Bob at January 24, 2010 05:08 PM (9b6FB)
I was staying with my parents, and I could not have brought this chick anywhere near my mom. They would have found her flayed body in a Dumpster.
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 05:09 PM (+EvNy)
and we need alternative energy sources.
I went to a focus group the other day and was cornered with whether the statement that a company was investigating or utilitzing "alternative energy sources" made me more likely to shop there on a scale of 0-10. I shocked the group by saying "less than 0".
"Oh why, pray tell?" I was asked
"Tell me what the alternative sources are, I replied." If I think they will raise the prices of their goods, like solar investments, then I will avoid them. What are they?"
No one knows. Alternative energy must mean solar because that's all there is that works and is transferable and they have been working on that since the '70s to little improvement.
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 05:11 PM (XFwRZ)
Patterico has a story up about a shitload more Astroturfer letters being found. The fake names are adding up fast.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 24, 2010 05:11 PM (Ei3oZ)
McCain, still alive and energetic, would've been in one year so far.
Hopefully, he'd have steered a better course on the economy and healthcare, and I know we'd all be safer than with Barry.
Also, after Climategate, he'd have walked out of Copenhagen altogether.
Last, Palin would now have enough experience to take over at any time.
OTOH, the Tea Partiers wouldn't be a force, so there's some advantage, I guess.
Posted by: evil midnight bomber what bombs at midnight at January 24, 2010 05:12 PM (hCQG5)
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 08:50 PM (y4B2y)
And they're not embarrassed to admit that - as we just saw a SCOTUS nominee whose only real qualifications were the fact that she was a she, a dark she, and empathetic. Thank you, Lady Lindsay for letting that one out of committee ... sheesh.
Leftism is ensconced in emotion. That wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, but leftists also tend to be Staticists (they can only envision a static, unchanging world) which is why they are so quick to try and centralize control and steal everyone's wealth and money, because any static system is easily and efficiently centralized (as all that is needed to run a static system is to decide how many paper clips go to desk #43998 next week, ...) and they want to steal people's money because they don't understand dynamics and how wealth is created.
I spent some time on Israeli Kibbutzim and one could see everything one needs to know about leftist ideas there - including their major problems. Growth and dynamics are what kills leftist structures, as they are built for a static world. Even normal population growth drives leftist structures to ruin, since there is a stratification that is introduced just by the need for new housing that kills any equality they might have forced on the society at that point.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at January 24, 2010 05:12 PM (A46hP)
Lucky for you, only the twisty ones will be legal in 2012.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 05:12 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 09:03 PM (gofDd)
The LP and many Libertarians made a *big* mistake in the mid-late 90s. They wanted to be relevant, but not tied to conservatives, so they looked at where their were votes for the taking. The answer was obviously college students. And the pitch then became drugs.
Now in fairness, libertarianism should oppose drug criminalization. But only after it has dramatically reduced the scope of the IRS, EPA, HUD, etc...
But college kids generally aren't interested in such things. So the LP's strategy made them center more and more on drugs and less on the important stuff. At the same time, gay rights and millennial environmentalist propaganda were being hammered into these kids as the LP folks stood by.
So today you can find many 'libertarians' that want to all but ban Christianity and capitalism. Insanity.
Libertarians should instead have formed a shadow party that essentially just endorses R or D candidates who will advance real libertarian goals and stop with the fringe candidates.
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 05:13 PM (bgcml)
All that you said was my understanding of libertarianism. And you summed it up more eloquently than I could. Thanks.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 05:14 PM (gofDd)
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 05:18 PM (XFwRZ)
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 09:05 PM (gofDd)
You will be surprised by how bad Wilson was...
There is a reason most people don't know much about the progressives besides their views on the problems with the meat packing industry and political machines...
Posted by: 18-1 at January 24, 2010 05:20 PM (bgcml)
HA! Gotta love Moms. I sometimes think theyre more protective of their sons than their daughters. I know my mom was. Maybe because, as a woman she knows that guys are ruled by testosterone and their dicks.
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 05:22 PM (y4B2y)
You mean Woodrow "The KKK is my BFF" Wilson? Do the Dems gloss that part over, or just pretend he never existed?
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 09:05 PM (+EvNy)
Wait, people don't like the KKK? We throw the best bonfires!
Posted by: Robert Byrd at January 24, 2010 05:22 PM (bgcml)
Yep, Wilson was like the worst president we've ever had. Well, until now.
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 24, 2010 05:24 PM (MNxpu)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 24, 2010 09:25 PM (MNxpu)
Uh, I prefer, like, the way you, uh, put it originally.
Posted by: The Eloquent, Godlike Barack uh Obama at January 24, 2010 05:26 PM (bgcml)
Posted by: curious at January 24, 2010 05:26 PM (p302b)
Posted by: RushBabe at January 24, 2010 05:27 PM (LKkE8)
#307
Well, if you throw more commas in there, it becomes Valley Girl!
Yep, Wilson was, like, the worst president we've ever had.
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 05:28 PM (+EvNy)
Posted by: curious at January 24, 2010 09:26 PM (p302b)
Lucianne has it - http://bit.ly/7toDI1
Posted by: tdpwells at January 24, 2010 05:31 PM (Ei3oZ)
Posted by: maddogg at January 24, 2010 05:32 PM (a5ULY)
All that you said was my understanding of libertarianism. And you summed it up more eloquently than I could. Thanks.
Posted by: wherestherum at January 24, 2010 09:14 PM (gofDd)
You just wrote that to make me blush.
Good thing even non-libertarians are okay with the occasional beer or ten. I think I'll go get me one. Or more.
Posted by: K~Bob at January 24, 2010 05:34 PM (9b6FB)
Well, if you throw more commas in there, it becomes Valley Girl!
Yep, Wilson was, like, the worst president we've ever had.
Posted by: Secundus at January 24, 2010 09:28 PM (+EvNy)
Fur Shuuuuure!
Posted by: K~Bob at January 24, 2010 05:35 PM (9b6FB)
"Can someone help me out here, by the way? I've never been able to figure out what, exactly, the libs' objection to Palin was. Was there ever anything beyond 'LOL she's a dumbass'?"
The objections I've generally heard are:
- In favor of censoring libraries.
- Forced rape victims to pay for their own examinations.
- Played fast and loose with expense accounts.
- She is stupid and uninformed.
All of which are lies, but they give cover. The real reasons, though, are:
- She talks with a funny accent. You'll never hear those hard consonants in a Cambridge common room or a Georgetown dinner party.You think I'm kidding, but I'm not: there's an enormous amount of snobbery bound up in accents, and liberals are, above all, snobs.
- She's in her mid-40s and hot. And attractive women are bimbos. You see, liberals are not only snobs, their sexist snobs.
- She did not attend an Ivy League university. See my points about snobbery, above.
- She didn't off the 'tard. Now we get to the heart of the matter. She is a walking, talking rebuke to every pro-choice liberal out there. Now, it's certainly possible to be pro-choice and respect a woman's decision not to kill her child; but most liberals I've known are not so open-minded in their attitudes. For them, her decision to bear her child is a slap in the face; and the fact that she is open about her inner struggles over her decision only makes it worse for them.
- She's a Republican. She's getting much the same treatment that Elizabeth Dole and Laura Bush and Nancy Reagan and other prominent Republican women received. Only worse, because she represents a genuine threat to them.
Do you remember The Silver Chair? American politics these days is like Experiment House, with Sarah Palin as Jill and the Democratic power establishment and media as Them.
Posted by: Brown Line at January 24, 2010 05:41 PM (CEmtf)
Yep. Most are gone now. They went out of business and the few that happened onto money-making industries tended to be ripped apart because the children of leftists don't tend to be leftists, so much. The losers stay on the kibbutz while anyone with possibilities leaves.
How do the rest of the Israelis feel about them? Their existence in Israel seems antithetical.
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 09:18 PM (XFwRZ)
Kibbutznics are known to be a bit weird. But they are part of the founding of the nation, having done a huge amount of the work in securing Israel in the beginning. Also, a huge percentage of the military elite used to come from the kibbutzim (something like 35% of the commando forces from a population comprising some 2% of Israel - my numbers are probably a little off, but that's the general line). Personally, I think this is because the kibbutzim were farms and farmers just tend to make heartier people (from the hard work and long hours) and real kick-ass soldiers.
But, the kibbutzim are pretty much all gone, now. They either sold off or started inviting outsiders in for rent and board.
But, the kibbutzim were the purest implementations of leftist theories ever, and on the most workable of scales (from a hundred to several thousand people). They used to do the really weird leftist borg-like practices, like taking very young children from their parents and raising all the kids together in a communal house - that practice died at most kibbutzim within two generations. It was amazing to see, really.
But, in the end, you could see that the kibbutzim were fine until they had to adjust to some change. They had to build new housing for growing families, but then there was stratified housing and people got jealous of each other. They used to rotate people through jobs, with no thought of whether anyone was good or not, but had to abandon that with the specialties in the fields and work in their factories - though they wasted tons of money learning that not everyone can do every job. And on and on.
I very much enjoyed my time on the kibbutzim (they were big parties) but you could feel the stagnation of the system. And that is what leftism always leads to - stagnation, as they try to stop the dynamics of the world around them and fit it into the static world that they imagine in their minds.
Sorry if I rambled on a bit. I get constricted in these little text entry boxes
Posted by: progressoverpeace at January 24, 2010 05:41 PM (A46hP)
~dagny
Socially Liberal means government defining the basis of social culture from the top down.
Real culture bubbles up from the grass roots, it is defined by how the mass of citizens actually live. The citizens will define culture through their living, economic choices, and ultimately, how they vote.
In Israel, they majority of people have a common weal based on Jewish culture and a mostly common religious view that is defined by their religion(which has a certain book that tells them how to live). The communism Israel has is a voluntary social pact accomplished through a common view defined by that certain book.
What we understand as social liberalism is a top down elitist culture dictated to the proletariat(citizens) by the government and enforced through legislation and the limiting of choices through economic restrictions commonly known as International Communism.
In social liberalism the government tells us what culture is, instead of the majority of citizens deciding what culture means to themselves through living their choices.
Posted by: Speller at January 24, 2010 05:46 PM (o0R2E)
"I was staying with my parents, and I could not have brought this chick anywhere near my mom. They would have found her flayed body in a Dumpster."
Secundus, a middle-aged woman who was reading this comment over my shoulder remarked, "Well, duh! Beauty fades, but stupid is forever!"
Posted by: Brown Line at January 24, 2010 05:52 PM (CEmtf)
Posted by: dagny at January 24, 2010 05:54 PM (7WYdw)
Posted by: curious at January 24, 2010 09:26 PM (p302b)
I'm a Beck guy, by and large, but I wasn't impressed. His style doesnt lend itself to documentaries, and the information presented was basic and a little disorganized. I TIVOd it but didnt keep it.
Posted by: Ombudsman at January 24, 2010 05:57 PM (y4B2y)
Theft, Murder, Honor ancestors, false witness, covet not neighbor's wife.
The expanded 'Don't covet any of the neighbor's crap' lines up.
The idea of a Restday/family day isn't anethema to our secular society.
And the 'Golden Rule' flies pretty well as regards to fairness.
That's a pretty sizable chunk of 'the way things work well' without strictly drawing any of the religious trappings in at all.
If you interpret another couple of the commandments somewhat differently than the normal, they line up with some fairly non-religious but useful ideas as well:
No adultery -> Don't mess up functional families.
No idolatry -> Even for political figures. (Principles over slick-talking.)
No blasphemy -> Strive for civil speech.
That's nine of ten plus the golden rule. Once you've accepted that much, one might as well call oneself a strict Calvinist and blame every single deviation on predestination anyway.
Posted by: Al at January 24, 2010 05:59 PM (0lyUI)
progressoverpeace, in Alberta Canada we have a group of people, originally from Germany, called Hutterites.
They have a Kibbutz-like structure and have been here for many generations longer than Israel has existed and do fine, both economically and socially, including buying up some of the best farmland in the province. They have also made major upgrades in their standards of living even though they lived like the Amish in the U.S.A. at one time in the recent past, making everything like clothing, homes, furniture, etc, from scratch.
By the way, the American Amish seem to be doing just fine with the commune thing. Success in a commune is dependent on having a common world view.
Posted by: Speller at January 24, 2010 06:04 PM (o0R2E)
How strong is their central organization? Do they confiscate cows from one family for redistribution if they have more than another?
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 06:14 PM (OkT2m)
You make a good about the Amish and your German group in Canada. I would note, though, that the Amish seek stagnation, which is the key to it all. But for any group that values progress, it won't work. Well, I don't believe it will work, because centralized systems force the surrounding environment into stagnation - to stay in sync with the centralized control structures. And centralized systems are unable to develop highly complex infrastructure that requires many different actors individually trying all sorts of different schemes, with many failing and suffering in the process, until they finally hit on the right combination and we get a strong, adaptable industry - for the larger scale societies.
But you brought up a good point, Speller, with the Amish and Hutterites and I'll have to check into it and see how it fits into my leftist-commune spiel.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at January 24, 2010 06:44 PM (A46hP)
Posted by: progressoverpeace at January 24, 2010 07:03 PM (A46hP)
Posted by: Tom in Korea at January 24, 2010 08:15 PM (nS7nk)
Posted by: Tom in Korea at January 24, 2010 08:19 PM (nS7nk)
Shorter version for the time challenged:
ME! ME! ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!
And I regret not being able to write 4,000 more of ME!
Posted by: memomachine at January 24, 2010 08:45 PM (/+tPT)
Posted by: Ellie Light at January 24, 2010 10:54 PM (gJL6J)
Posted by: Jane at January 25, 2010 02:58 AM (TJOhv)
as a concerned -gasp- conservative professor of really important sooper smart stuff, i must agree with this important writer... i too am concerned about that damn ice woman from alaska being our standard for family women everywhere!!! who does this trollop think she is ? married, children, working womyn, for gods sake just spike the ball ...she puts her family above the grass roots efforts to smear her by the whitehouse, the devil herself....
we must do all we can as concerned conservatives to stop this womyn from gaining power of any sort... stop watching fox, don't buy the nypost or wsj and for gods sake write in to all backers of these products...
we must band together as god fear'n folk and promote a real conservative womyn such as barb milkuski of whoopi goldburg...
ps- this damn woman and her nephew , trig , MUST BE STOPPED....
back to my research on why conservatives are inferior to progressives, and why i am so scared of black people
Posted by: professor von poopyants at January 25, 2010 05:07 AM (91IME)
Posted by: Sean at January 25, 2010 07:22 AM (KNDcs)
yes,you are all right.
chi hair iron are precious possession for not only women but men also. you may have a try make
everyone in your family fashionable.
Posted by: Chi Hair Straightener on sale at January 31, 2010 04:49 PM (/NRfc)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2285 seconds, 457 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Why would anyone read beyond that bit of ignorant racism?
Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 24, 2010 02:51 PM (OkT2m)