December 02, 2013
— DrewM Mitch McConnell isn't too happy that conservative groups are tying to sway GOP primaries (his own mostly), so he's rallying the establishment troops to make sure the conservative insurgency is beat back.
“There were people who were basically afraid of [conservatives], frankly,” McConnell told the Washington Examiner. “It’s time for people to stand up to this sort of thing.”McConnell worries that the Senate Conservatives Fund and other insurgent groups are pursuing a confrontational, uncompromising strategy that makes it impossible for conservatives to govern.
“The Senate Conservatives Fund is giving conservatism a bad name. They’re participating in ruining the [Republican] brand,” McConnell said. “What they do is mislead their donors into believing the reason that we can’t get as good an outcome as we’d like to get is not because of a Democratic Senate and a Democratic president, but because Republicans are insufficiently committed to the cause — which is utter nonsense.”
Republicans are "afraid" of conservatives?
I have two reactions to that...
1- Good
and
2- Apparently they aren't afraid enough.
I like a lot of things McConnell does and I don't think primarying him is necessarily the best use of resources. As Dan McLaughlin has pointed out a number of times on Twitter, the primary is more about his record as leader and effectively winning an internal leadership race by general election than it is his record as a Senator. It may also have something to do with his relationship with Jim DeMint who founded the Senate Conservative Fund which is leading the charge against McConnell.
That said, his vision for the ideological makeup of the Senate GOP is purely weak tea Republicanism. You know, the kind we had at various points from 1994 to 2006. If you loved Trent Lott and Bill Frist as Majority Leader, you'll love Mitch McConnell too. Of course odds are that means you're a K-Street lobbyist.
Speaking of which...
A guy named John Feehry who is a top man with a high powered "bi-partisan" lobbying firm (Meaning they get paid by clients to get your money from both parties in Congress. He works the GOP side I guess) says the end of the filibuster for judges and sub-cabinent appointees means we need to elect Republicans that will help....wait for it...big business.
Obama can stack the court in his image and can put anti-business ideologues in places like the Department of Labor, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Commerce and Agriculture departments. And those ideologues can spend the next three years writing regulations that will govern this country for a generation or more.And those regulations will cost the business community trillions of dollars in compliance costs.
If you are in the coal industry, or if you are a utility that counts on nuclear power, or if you use corn syrup in your breakfast cereal, or if you are a lender or a homebuilder or operate a hedge fund or do any number of things, the Obama administrationÂ’s new power should give you pause.
Now, I agree that stopping Obama's regulatory onslaught is essential but as a party we need to frame these issues in a way that shows how it will hurt actual voters, not existing or potential lobbying clients.
Of course Feehry's partners on the Democratic side of his firm will bring in plenty of clients to lobby the Obama administration for exemptions, so it all comes out in the wash.
This also points to something that bothers mean about guys like McConnell. They keep attacking conservative opponents as simply in it for the money they can get out of dupes. Apparently people like Feehry, who I'm sure Mitch is more than ok with from a political temperament position, are simply doing what they did as volunteer work.
No boys and girls, the idea of money in politics wasn't invented by Heritage Action or the Conservative Senate Fund. Sorry to have to break that to you.
As for McConnell's anger, while he wanted to "punch the Senate Conservative Fund in the nose", he is always silent when someone like Bob Corker goes off and forms a "gang" to screw over the rest of the GOP (notice no Democrats screwed Reid by selling out limiting the filibuster) or Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski who voted with the Democrats on the judicial nomination.
Let's see if McConnell retaliates against Reid and the Democrats the way he wants to fight back against conservatives. That the retaliation didn't being immediately makes me think it's not coming. Time will tell.
Remember before McConnell's sense of self-preservation kicked in and he became Rand Paul's best buddy, McConnell orchestrated the ouster of longtime Kentucky Senator Jim Bunning and set up his pal Trey Grayson to take the seat. So what happened to Grayson after Paul beat him? He went on to become the Director of The Institute of Politics at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. Yeah, I'm sure they hire stalwart conservatives there all the time. All the time.
Liberalism is on the run so naturally the GOP's instinct is to circle the wagons and make sure they offer as bland an alternative as possible. I'm not saying we should nominate every nut job who comes along any more than we should trust that career hacks are always going to win. There's got to be thought put into candidate selection to ensure they are a match for the state they are running in. "Electabliltiy" is a threshold hold qualification. It can't be the sole reason for running someone.
Jim DeMint used to say he'd rather have 30 pure conservatives in the Senate than a majority of centrists. The McConnell and Feehry's of the world sound as if they rather have 51 moderates than 60 conservatives. There has to be a few options between the two.
If you look at where the Senate Conservative Fund is actively engaged, they aren't going after every sitting Republican Senator. They are going after two (McConnell and Thad "Big Spender" Cochran). They are also playing in two primaries where they are endorsing candidates other than The Chosen One's.
Some call that outrageous, I call it rather specific targeting. Hell, I wish they'd go after more. I'm looking at you Lamar!
Moderates used to say if you want to change the party you shouldn't sit out elections or vote third party, you should run in a primary. Now that people are they are saying stop running primaries.
It's almost as if the GOP is only interested in conservatives for money, volunteer support and votes. Almost.
Posted by: DrewM at
06:36 AM
| Comments (485)
Post contains 1146 words, total size 8 kb.
so GOP using fiscal sanity isn't a Republican virtue?
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 06:40 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: votermom at December 02, 2013 06:41 AM (0nRXz)
Posted by: votermom at December 02, 2013 06:42 AM (0nRXz)
Posted by: MTF at December 02, 2013 06:42 AM (F58x4)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at December 02, 2013 06:43 AM (xKYlY)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 06:43 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: Eton Cox at December 02, 2013 06:43 AM (QCc6B)
...........
How do you propose he "retaliate", Drew? Gimme one specific thing he has in his power to do.
I'll sit down and await your answer...
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 02, 2013 06:44 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 06:44 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: maddogg at December 02, 2013 06:44 AM (xWW96)
Posted by: Mitch McConnell at December 02, 2013 06:44 AM (HsJeN)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at December 02, 2013 06:45 AM (7ObY1)
As for the lobbyists for "big buisness", when are the people going to get a lobbyist?
Posted by: Vic at December 02, 2013 06:45 AM (YowqD)
Posted by: ghostofhallelujah at December 02, 2013 06:45 AM (XvrTA)
Posted by: Mr. Moo moo at December 02, 2013 06:46 AM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 02, 2013 06:46 AM (BAS5M)
Posted by: maddogg at December 02, 2013 06:47 AM (xWW96)
Posted by: Mitch McConnell at December 02, 2013 06:47 AM (HsJeN)
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 06:47 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 56% more DOOM! at December 02, 2013 06:48 AM (09o/X)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 02, 2013 06:48 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 06:48 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: KenH at December 02, 2013 06:48 AM (Q/K7q)
Posted by: georgeofthedesert at December 02, 2013 06:48 AM (Eq2MX)
Posted by: sock_rat_eez at December 02, 2013 06:49 AM (gUoN4)
jimgeraghty @jimgeraghty 26 Nov
So, how many folks out there really believe Mitch McConnell fights conservatives tougher than he fights liberals?
James with some unfortunate timing....
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 02, 2013 06:49 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 06:49 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: phoenixgirl @phxazgrl at December 02, 2013 06:50 AM (8JJ6O)
Posted by: DrewM. at December 02, 2013 06:50 AM (fgb4J)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 02, 2013 06:50 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: eman at December 02, 2013 06:51 AM (AO9UG)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 02, 2013 06:51 AM (VtjlW)
nevermind.
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 06:51 AM (nqBYe)
Send more Lees and Cruz' to the Senate, and the McConnells of this world will fall in line. He's all about winning stuff for Kentucky, and if he has to be conservative to accomplish his goal he will be as conservative as necessary.
But he'll still be a mole within the party looking to sell the conservatives out.
Kick his worthless ass to the curb while electing more Lee's and Cruzes and the rest of the fuckers will fall in line.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 02, 2013 06:51 AM (zF6Iw)
You forgot McCain.
>>
Was going to include him but he's not up in 2014. When he is up, booting him out means another 1,250% improvement in the Senate.
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 02, 2013 06:52 AM (BAS5M)
Senator Droopy Dog can suck a bag of dicks.
Posted by: garrett at December 02, 2013 06:52 AM (YEvZL)
Posted by: Cicero Skip at December 02, 2013 06:52 AM (3m9Uc)
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 06:52 AM (eytER)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 06:52 AM (LbjC3)
nevermind we divide the peons for Our personal bi partisanship where We play.
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 06:53 AM (nqBYe)
We want them killed. I did not say this. I was not here.
Posted by: Mitch McConnell's Neck Fat Spacing Guild Navigator at December 02, 2013 06:53 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 06:54 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 06:54 AM (/Crba)
11 -
I don't know Jerry, maybe he could start by using his words? You know, say some not nice things about Reid and the Dems?
Just a thought. Moderates sure do have no difficulty blasting conservatives every chance they get. Reid talks about what awful people Republicans (including McConnell) are, you'd think at some point the man could fight back.
Your preferred strategy is... what? Sit back and take in all those Republican seats you expect to win by keeping your mouth shut?
Good luck with that.
Posted by: BurtTC at December 02, 2013 06:55 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: DrewM.
.............
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha.. wait a minute.. gotta catch my breath... Hahahahahahhahaahahahaha.. oh never mind.
Screeching halt? Screeching eff'n halt? What the flying f*ck state do you think the Senate has been in for the past several years. They sit on their asses 95% of the time as it is.. but your solution is making them use a fraction of that down time actually debating stuff according to the rules to get to the exact same place they would be anyway? Brilliant!
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 02, 2013 06:55 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: rickb223 at December 02, 2013 06:56 AM (xZxMD)
Posted by: garrett at December 02, 2013 10:52 AM (YEvZL)
Try it new style. Now with more Elan
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 02, 2013 06:56 AM (BAS5M)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 02, 2013 06:57 AM (HVff2)
Drew, I disagree regarding primaries. Every Republican in Congress should be primaried. Every. One.
Nobody is entitled to a "safe" seat. Make them all earn it, every time. And in those times when voters decide they've had enough, they should be supported in dumping incumbents, regardless of what the expectations are for the general.
Posted by: BurtTC at December 02, 2013 06:57 AM (TOk1P)
"damaging the [Republican] brand"
Even whores have a sense of shame. But Mitch? Nah.
Right now the "brand" is that the GOP will sell out its base for a better table at Martha's Vineyard.
Posted by: Fen at December 02, 2013 06:58 AM (a422o)
Posted by: rickb223 at December 02, 2013 06:58 AM (xZxMD)
where i used to have the ugliest laundry area .
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 06:58 AM (nqBYe)
Hey Bob we do not want "things getting done" when the other side is unilaterally doing 'em...
I don't recall Chuck Tumor worrying about gridlock under Bush
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 06:58 AM (9jfyN)
Posted by: Squishy McSquisherson at December 02, 2013 06:59 AM (YmPwQ)
Baby, I'll pull out this time. Promise. Those other 256 messes? Utter nonsense!
Posted by: Fen at December 02, 2013 06:59 AM (a422o)
And the withholding of resources in the general.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ #NukeIowaCity at December 02, 2013 07:00 AM (/kI1Q)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 02, 2013 07:00 AM (HVff2)
It's YOUR fault not mine I screwed your sister babe...
//Mooch MacDonald
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 07:01 AM (9jfyN)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) on his phone at December 02, 2013 07:01 AM (J2PCZ)
^^^ THIS ^^^
In other news, Ann Althouse is hearing racist dog whistles again. Which one of you morons is teasing her?
Posted by: Fen at December 02, 2013 07:01 AM (a422o)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 07:01 AM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Vic at December 02, 2013 10:45 AM (YowqD)
Yup.
I used to assume (naively) that the Republican penchant for support of big business would help to cause of free markets, employment at will, low taxes, etc.
Now, with our brand of Fascism Lite (Lighted by GE!), I'm of the frame of mind that a good dose of populism is what we need.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at December 02, 2013 07:02 AM (oJ5Fd)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 02, 2013 07:03 AM (da5Wo)
I mean why accept lies from them if we don't from the other party?
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 07:03 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 02, 2013 07:03 AM (HVff2)
I'll sit down and await your answer...
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 02, 2013 10:44 AM (f9c2L)
How about raising questions concerning Reid's rumored pederasty?
What's that, you say? We can't do that because there's no proof? Well, "no proof" sure didn't stop the Searchlight Strangler from accusing Romney of not paying taxes.
Here's a counter question for you, Jerry - why is is that conservatives are supposed to let the Dems call us every name in the book, but we can't retaliate? Why shouldn't McConnell call Reid a known pederast with Webelo prOn on his Senate computer? Some mythical notion of "fair play?"
I'll sit down and await your answer. . .
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 02, 2013 07:03 AM (zF6Iw)
No Jack there *are* special Republicans who enjoy sucking Democrat dick enough replacing them is a net pick up...
1) Juan McQueeg
2) Lindsey Graham-McQueeg
3) Mooch MacDonald
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 07:03 AM (9jfyN)
Posted by: DrewM. at December 02, 2013 07:03 AM (fgb4J)
OT but time is of the essence.
Get your ass to Germany toot sweet before the proposed law is enacted.
"Germany's biggest political parties have agreed to ban so-called flat-rate sex offered by some brothels in the country.
The move is part of a clampdown on Germany's booming prostitution industry that critics say has gotten out of hand since a 2002 law legalized sex work. They view as exploitative the special offers in some brothels where men can have unlimited sex for 100 euros ($136)."
link on Drudge
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 02, 2013 07:04 AM (BAS5M)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 07:04 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 07:05 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 02, 2013 07:05 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 07:05 AM (t3UFN)
Good luck with that. Posted by: BurtTC
..........
Unfortunately, the press decides to not cover statements by Senate members of the GOP. For example, take the coverage of the Cruz "filibuster". It got covered, but nary a word about the content of what he was trying to say.
Bluster on the national level means nothing in local elections. Why should McConnell have to please the entire GOP base?
What is more important is that the GOP come up with a central theme to run on next year. They need to hit the Dems hard with Obamacare listing every vote their opponents made in favor of it, and contrasting that with the pain suffered by voters in his/her dictrict/state.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 02, 2013 07:05 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 07:05 AM (g1DWB)
The move is part of a clampdown on Germany's booming prostitution industry that critics say has gotten out of hand since a 2002 law legalized sex work. They view as exploitative the special offers in some brothels where men can have unlimited sex for 100 euros ($136)."
link on Drudge
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 02, 2013 11:04 AM (BAS5M)
How much for the Viagra and intravenous fluids?
Posted by: Insomniac at December 02, 2013 07:06 AM (DrWcr)
if those hired will not stop the bleeding what is the point?
I know ,
i know,
that losing will also not stop the bleeding. i hate politics.
what's the farkin answer to have them perform as They were Hired to do?
hugs* just in case you think i'm shrieking .
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 07:06 AM (nqBYe)
"I like a lot of things McConnell does and I don't think primarying him is necessarily the best use of resources."
Wrong! Every incumbent should be primaried. They should all have to explain why they should be re-elected.
I don't keep using the same car mechanic or plumber simply because I've used them before. They have to keep doing good work that I'm satisfied with, or I go someplace else.
McConnell needs to go.
Posted by: ExSnipe at December 02, 2013 07:06 AM (57ubW)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 07:07 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 02, 2013 07:07 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Client #9 at December 02, 2013 07:07 AM (/Crba)
Did Lee and Cruz lose their seats and I missed it?
How much buzz is there about the shutdown these days?
How much about Joke Obama webmeister?
Mooch MacDonald wants to punch me in the nose?
I want to flush him down the john.
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 07:07 AM (9jfyN)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 07:08 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: cajun caret at December 02, 2013 07:08 AM (UZQM8)
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 07:08 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 07:08 AM (/Crba)
That obama want's to go to Iran or that end is near?Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 07:09 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 07:09 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 07:09 AM (LbjC3)
Replacing McConnell with a more conservative Senator gives us a net pickup of 0.
Posted by: JackStraw
Really? Because what matters is how Senators vote, and a conservative replacement should be more likely to vote conservative.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 02, 2013 07:09 AM (kdS6q)
What is more important is that the GOP come up with a central theme to run on next year.
Two words: HAD ENOUGH?
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 02, 2013 07:10 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 02, 2013 11:04 AM (BAS5M)
Those hookers will end up as the Chevy Cruze's of the car rental lot.
Posted by: EC at December 02, 2013 07:10 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 07:10 AM (g1DWB)
I have some mixed feelings about him being hanged from a crane in a soccer stadium.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ #NukeIowaCity at December 02, 2013 07:11 AM (/kI1Q)
Mitch thinks Cruz and Lee are problems
Mitch looooves Murky, even though she lost the AK Republican primary and ran as a sore-loser renegade. She made it in because the Dems abandoned their candidate and voted for her.
Posted by: mrp at December 02, 2013 07:11 AM (HjPtV)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 07:11 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: EC at December 02, 2013 07:13 AM (GQ8sn)
104 -
I really don't understand Jack Straw. Tell him what a flack he is for his party, and he'll tell you he's not a Republican. Then you read all his comments in these intraparty squabbles, and he's all about the "us" and "we." And he ain't talking about conservatives when he talks about "his" team.
Posted by: BurtTC at December 02, 2013 07:13 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 02, 2013 07:13 AM (HVff2)
Breathtaking. It will shutdown the whole river.
*gigglesnorp*
shutdown.
I crack me up.
Posted by: Mitch McConnell at December 02, 2013 07:14 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at December 02, 2013 07:15 AM (olDqf)
Posted by: Sphynx at December 02, 2013 07:15 AM (OZmbA)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 07:15 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: iowaan at December 02, 2013 07:15 AM (T0dFH)
Maybe that's how the burning starts.
Posted by: EC at December 02, 2013 11:12 AM (GQ8sn)
When the Big Macs refuse to be boxed up, that's when the real chaos starts.
Posted by: Insomniac at December 02, 2013 07:16 AM (DrWcr)
The lobbyists are standing up to them, the IRS goons are standing up to them, the peanut vendors are standing up to them, and by God, if I could get down there, IÂ’d be standing up to them.
Bitch McConnell
Posted by: Larsen E. Whipsnade at December 02, 2013 07:16 AM (rXcBX)
I want to elect CONSERVATIVES who will help ALL BUSINESSES.
Posted by: Tex Lovera at December 02, 2013 07:16 AM (wtvvX)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 07:17 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 02, 2013 07:17 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Mitch McConnell at December 02, 2013 07:17 AM (Pr6hk)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 07:18 AM (LbjC3)
-
When they came for Der Wienerschnitzels, I did nothing because I don't eat Wienerschnitzels.
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 02, 2013 07:18 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at December 02, 2013 07:19 AM (da5Wo)
Posted by: Mitch McConnell at December 02, 2013 07:19 AM (rXcBX)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 07:19 AM (g1DWB)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 11:01 AM (g1DWB)
You do realize that the final bit of dirt hadn't been shoveled on Romney's dogshit campaign and Rove was front and center announcing that he would be getting involved with primaries to make sure "electable" candidates were produced. That was an early shot across the bow against conservatives and until the light in that pudgy pile of shit's eyes go out for the last time, it's game on.
Posted by: Captain Hate at December 02, 2013 07:19 AM (XQveP)
I think it's the scabs who are the ones planning to strike.
Posted by: EC at December 02, 2013 07:20 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: Tex Lovera at December 02, 2013 07:20 AM (wtvvX)
They DID win in the eyes of the LIVs because the message they were pounding was TRUE -- that Obamacare was a sack of expensive shit.
"Damn, ya know somethin'? That Cruz guy was right about this shit!"
Had they not 'made their stand' the message would not have broken through the ObamaMedia
Posted by: Sphynx at December 02, 2013 07:20 AM (OZmbA)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 07:20 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 02, 2013 07:20 AM (Hx5uv)
Establishment pols (R and D) have learned all too well how sweet it is to have your hand in the till and any conservative diversion to a smaller government tends to decrease the amount of money in the till, so I don't ever expect the RINO "leadership" to support, with either words or money, any conservative candidate, much less an upstart that defied his betters and won a place in the House or Senate.
Primary them all!
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 02, 2013 07:20 AM (XdnQT)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 07:21 AM (/Crba)
-
ObamaCare doesn't cover non-medical marijuana.
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 02, 2013 07:21 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Tex Lovera at December 02, 2013 07:22 AM (wtvvX)
http://tinyurl.com/mf9p922
Posted by: kbdabear at December 02, 2013 07:22 AM (aTXUx)
Posted by: Dandolo at December 02, 2013 07:22 AM (0XBx+)
He does agree with Cuomo about 90% of the time on policy after all...
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 07:23 AM (9jfyN)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 02, 2013 07:23 AM (Y92Nd)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 07:23 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: McConnell at December 02, 2013 07:24 AM (OZmbA)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 07:24 AM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Purp[/i][/b][/s] at December 02, 2013 07:25 AM (0OknM)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 07:25 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: ExSnipe at December 02, 2013 07:25 AM (57ubW)
Posted by: McConnell at December 02, 2013 07:25 AM (OZmbA)
Uh, news flash ... the GOP picked up six senate seats in 2010. Conservatives did pretty well in the House races, too, IIRC.
Posted by: mrp at December 02, 2013 07:25 AM (HjPtV)
Posted by: Mustbequantum at December 02, 2013 07:26 AM (MIKMs)
that would Help Unite conservatives into the Party!
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 07:26 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 07:26 AM (/Crba)
Do you have any examples of polls or anything else showing that LIVs think Cruz was right cause that would be great.
----------
Do you have any examples of polls or anything else showing McConnell's strategy of "putting Democrats on record" as supporting 404Care via meaningless votes is doing anything?
Because from where I sit, it sure ain't.
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 07:27 AM (eytER)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 07:27 AM (g1DWB)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Now with extra taunting. at December 02, 2013 07:27 AM (VtjlW)
Guys who don't come from safe districts like Lee and Cruz weren't going to damage themselves too much over a fight they couldn't win and would get blamed for.
Of course you meant safe states. Like Texas and Utah. Because Senators.
Posted by: Count de Nitpicker Monet at December 02, 2013 07:27 AM (BAS5M)
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 07:27 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 11:19 AM (g1DWB)
Reagan got his tax cuts with a donk house because he did the hard work of targeting vulnerable Reps that would be between a rock and a hard place on opposing a popular bill. Where is the evidence that any current Repub leader even knows how to do this? Just pointing out the numbers is the tactic of a lazy turd who would rather fundraise that engage in real work. The problem is that Boehner and McConnell aren't leaders.
Posted by: Captain Hate at December 02, 2013 07:28 AM (XQveP)
1. When McConnell actively goes after conservatives, I don't care about his voting strategy in the past. He is effectively endorsing more of the same, and that is no longer acceptable.
5. Don't bring up immigration reform is a really sound strategy, especially if you intend to support full blown amnesty once elected and don't want any nasty sound bites thrown at you for violating a campaign pledge.
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 02, 2013 07:28 AM (XdnQT)
The most important point here, however, is how do I continue to get paid?
Posted by: Mitch McConnell at December 02, 2013 07:28 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at December 02, 2013 07:29 AM (c2oll)
-
Why don't they just use punch cards like Pizza Hut? Or partner up with Burger King and advertise that you can have it your way.
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 02, 2013 07:29 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: MTF at December 02, 2013 07:29 AM (F58x4)
Posted by: Meggie McMac at December 02, 2013 07:31 AM (Dwehj)
Posted by: Purp[/i][/b][/s] at December 02, 2013 07:31 AM (0OknM)
No . He does not.
Your welcome.
Posted by: Your Trusted MSM at December 02, 2013 07:31 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: rickb223 at December 02, 2013 07:31 AM (xZxMD)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 07:31 AM (g1DWB)
Poll? You mean like my JUNK?
Posted by: Legions of LIV's at December 02, 2013 07:32 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 07:32 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 02, 2013 07:32 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 07:32 AM (LbjC3)
-
I want Big Macs delivered via drones to my home.
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 02, 2013 07:33 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at December 02, 2013 07:34 AM (0LHZx)
I wonder if a better response than "fuck you, you spendthrift bastard" would be to note that regulatory super-state is preventing Mr. Rojas from his chosen profession, and invite him to help us to scale it back.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ #NukeIowaCity at December 02, 2013 07:34 AM (/kI1Q)
>>"Damn, ya know somethin'? That Cruz guy was right about this shit!"
Really? I haven't seen this reported anywhere. Do you have any examples of polls or anything else showing that LIVs think Cruz was right cause that would be great.
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 11:24 AM (g1DWB)
Yeah, I'm sure ABC and NBC are running to get those polls set up right now.
What did it get Cruz? A platform. Nightly coverage. Hear much from the establishment R's who opposed Obamacare at the time. Nope? Didn't think so.
It got Cruz on Jay Leno where he did well and didn't come off as a hot head partisan the way all O-media want to paint him.
It got him interviews with non-Fox shows on CNN, etc. Hostile interviews, yes. But Cruz handled it well.
It got the message out to a group who otherwise would never know there was opposition to the damn Obamacare shit tide.
This exposure in the press and popular media to an actual non-pro-Obama message is priceless to begin reaching the "reg's" -- the Regulars, the LIVs. Especially when they begin getting their 'your coverage is not adequate' letters and later when the employer insurance takes a hit. Let's hope some of those letters go out before the Nov. election.
The LIVs don't give a shit about politics. They don't give a fuck about inter-necine warring in the Republican party. They don't even know about it. they're not aware of it beyond a stupid expression on Jon Stewart's face.
That's your bubble.
Posted by: McConnell at December 02, 2013 07:34 AM (OZmbA)
Hey, Christie yelled at a teacher once. Also, a reporter. He also got 20 percent of the black vote and 43 percent of the Hispanics running against a white cipher. Draft him for 2016!!!!
Posted by: Squishy McSquisherson at December 02, 2013 07:36 AM (YmPwQ)
Posted by: nerdygirl at December 02, 2013 07:36 AM (6da/j)
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes C'est Magnifique at December 02, 2013 07:37 AM (JSOLr)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 07:37 AM (LbjC3)
Picking up six Senate seats and re-taking control of the House is part of getting rid of ObamaCare. Obama was forced to lie and re-lie about ObamaCare in order to get re-elected in 2012. And the Tea Party was #1 enemy on the president's target list, not the docile McConnell-Boehner leadership. The Tea Party. Ordinary citizens. Who just won't shut up. Who want to keep more of their own money. That they worked for. Because ... Freedom.
Posted by: mrp at December 02, 2013 07:37 AM (HjPtV)
Question:
On a scale 1-10, how hard have the elected Republicans been making the case on TV against obamcare?
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 11:32 AM (LbjC3)
Answer: As hard as Bob Dole is when Bob Dole has run out of Bob Dole's little blue wonder pills that Mrs. Bob Dole didn't reorder in time.
Posted by: Bob Dole at December 02, 2013 07:38 AM (BAS5M)
Well, I haven't really been keeping track, but I am sure McConnell, McCain, and Graham has been out there daily pointing out the flaws, inadequacies, and statist nature of Obamacare.
Oh wait, wrong universe!
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 02, 2013 07:38 AM (XdnQT)
Take a look at any poll going into 2014. Dems are running from Obamacare as fast as possible and are actually trailing on the generic ballot with registered voters. In fact, they dropped double digits in the month of October. What happened in October? Obamacare became real.
-----------
I see. So that trailing going into 2014 absolutely cannot be because of a highly visible fight in October vis a vis a shutdown over O-Care or Paul/Cruz/Lee - led filibusters, but are instead the fruit of McConnell's strategery from 2009-2011.
Because what else happened in October? Yeah, a shutdown over funding O-Care with the Dems acting like petulant children and shutting down open-air monuments.
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 07:39 AM (eytER)
Stay away from open flame, Drew. That 30 foot tall strawman might catch fire.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 02, 2013 07:39 AM (SY2Kh)
It would be one thing if there was a string of victories TruCons could point to, but instead it's just train wreck after train wreck. And it's usually in states that SHOULD be easy wins. The one win they loved to crow about was Rubio (which everyone supported over Crist) and then Rubio almost single handedly destroyed the country with his Amnesty bill (despite promising to be against Amnesty) Even when the playbook "works", it doesn't.
I'm also sick of the amateur political activist that decides they want to be a US Senator, yet they've never so much as volunteered at a phone bank.
This idea that getting ideologically pure Senators that have zero resume or record is going to be the keys to the kingdom is childish, and I think many conservatives have started to get openly hostile to this idiocy handing over elections every time.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 07:39 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: TC at December 02, 2013 07:40 AM (vYB+W)
Since the House vote, what have the R's done to capitalize on obamafail?
We are fixing it as fast as we can!
Posted by: Senator John McCain at December 02, 2013 07:41 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: maddogg at December 02, 2013 07:41 AM (xWW96)
"Mr. Rojas said he had studied for a pharmacy technicianÂ’s certificate,
but he had been unable to save the $100 needed to apply for a license."
He can't save $5 a week for 20 weeks? Really? Or $10 a week for 10 weeks?
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 07:42 AM (4df7R)
you know what Republicans also lose some!
Posted by: willow at December 02, 2013 07:42 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 07:42 AM (g1DWB)
You just don't understand the challenges faced by our youths!
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 02, 2013 07:43 AM (XdnQT)
I'm also sick of the amateur political activist that decides they want to be a US Senator, yet they've never so much as volunteered at a phone bank.
Yeah that never works. Twice.
Posted by: Barack Hussein Obama at December 02, 2013 07:43 AM (5ikDv)
They are saying "shut up bitch and make me a sammich"
We read that here daily, only couched in "strategy speak" terms
Posted by: kbdabear at December 02, 2013 07:44 AM (aTXUx)
Posted by: Mindy at December 02, 2013 07:44 AM (lCBX+)
Hey Mooch you forgot..."got rolled by Searchlight Stalker on judicial nominees...and said I'ze crying yo"
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 07:45 AM (9jfyN)
But Cruz and Lee ultimately lost because they didn't have the votes. Principled stands are great. Principled stands that ultimately win are much better.
Posted by: JackStraw at December 02, 2013 11:10 AM (g1DWB)
Already forgot why they lost huh? Kentucky Kickback ring any bells? They were backstabbed by their fellow Repubs like Mitchy-boy.
Posted by: KG at December 02, 2013 07:45 AM (p7BzH)
Posted by: Hrothgar at December 02, 2013 11:43 AM (XdnQT)
I guess not!
Heck, if he still lives with his parents, and they haven't tossed him out on his worthless ass, I assume that means they care for him. Maybe even actually love him. So maybe he could, i dunno, borrow the $100 from his parents and then pay them back once he's gotten his pharmacy job. Gosh, what a thought! And maybe they wouldn't even charge him interest because they know their son is simple, bless his heart.
Or maybe his parents recognize that he's a fuck-up who can't handle money, and that loaning him any would be tantamount to pissing in their own well.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 07:46 AM (4df7R)
http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Rev7/6701-6800/rev6762-Zotz-32059/00.shtm
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 02, 2013 07:46 AM (B9up3)
If by "we" you mean the establishment DC insiders it's possible, just pretty damn unlikely
Show me an establishment Republican who says he'll eliminate Obamacare, not "fix" it
Posted by: kbdabear at December 02, 2013 07:48 AM (aTXUx)
Posted by: rickb223 at December 02, 2013 07:48 AM (xZxMD)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at December 02, 2013 07:48 AM (xKYlY)
Senate than a majority of centrists."
To me, that is the absolute stupidest play in politics I've ever heard, but this super awesome strategy from DeMint is repeated all the time for the reason why we have to nominate losing candidates.
If Democrats had 70 votes in the Senate, we would be Venezuela in a few short years. You think ObamaCare is an abomination? That would be a joke compared to what would get rammed through.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 07:48 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 07:48 AM (t3UFN)
Well, yes. but there's more to fixing a problem than simply experiencing the pain. What Cruz and Lee did was remind the country that conservative members of the GOP have the cure and the will to end this disaster.
Posted by: mrp at December 02, 2013 07:49 AM (HjPtV)
It's not as satisfying as sneering, though.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ #NukeIowaCity at December 02, 2013 07:49 AM (/kI1Q)
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 07:50 AM (CMlD4)
Psst McAdams we're already on our way with "True GOP heroes" like Mooch, Lindsey, and Juan
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 07:50 AM (9jfyN)
I'm also sick of the amateur political activist that decides they want to be a US Senator, yet they've never so much as volunteered at a phone bank.
Who the fuck cares about whether you've volunteered at a phone bank or not? Last I checked, "history of political involvement" wasn't a requirement for running for political office.
If you are a doctor, and you see that Obammycare is going to destroy the healthcare industry, and you try and tell people and you try and tell Congress and NO ONE LISTENS, then why the SHOULDN"T you run for Congress? Or if you happen to run an energy business, or are a self-employed contractor who sees firsthand how regulations and bureaucracy are stifling economic growth? Why do you have to have "worked a phone bank" to throw your hat into the ring?
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 07:50 AM (4df7R)
If Democrats had 70 votes in the Senate...
Posted by: McAdams
The Democrats have 70 votes in the Senate. Just so happens a dozen or so of those are Republican.
That's kinda the problem.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 02, 2013 07:51 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: cajun caret at December 02, 2013 07:51 AM (UZQM8)
Posted by: McAdams
Didn't you hear? Harry Reid ended the filibuster rule for non-Supreme judiciary nominees and Senate confirmation of executive appointees. All we need is a majority.
Posted by: mrp at December 02, 2013 07:52 AM (HjPtV)
+1 you get it...
225 cajun caret at December 02, 2013 11:51 AM (UZQM
How ya doin'?
//Kermy Gosnell
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 07:52 AM (9jfyN)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 07:53 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: A Founding Father... at December 02, 2013 07:53 AM (lZBBB)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 07:53 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 11:48 AM (2TMCu)
Have you actually paid any attention to anything that's happened in politics since Obammy was elected? Like, any at all?
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 07:53 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at December 02, 2013 07:53 AM (DL2i+)
Welcome to the wonderful racket of "Licensed Professional."
This is why there are so many Chefs out there. No paper needed. Just a funny coat, hat and an ego strong enough to call yourself 'Chef ________ ', in public.
Posted by: garrett at December 02, 2013 07:53 AM (8vRuS)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 11:48 AM (t3UFN)
You know, I preach that to my kids all the time. My reward? All my relatives call me tightwad. I prefer the term frugal.
Posted by: maddogg at December 02, 2013 07:54 AM (xWW96)
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix
.............
Really? Because McConnell has a 100 ACU rating for 2012. And a 86% rating lifetime. WTF votes are you talking about?
It's like a fucking frenzy around here.. Primary him! He doesn't yell enough!!!1!!1
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 02, 2013 07:54 AM (f9c2L)
Like McCain, McConnell is likely more loyal to his Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle than outsiders, and that includes his non-name constituents and uppity Tea Party folk.
Posted by: Lizzy at December 02, 2013 07:54 AM (JRmiD)
It would be one thing if there was a string of victories the NoCons could point to, but instead it's just train wreck after train wreck. And it's usually in states that SHOULD be easy wins. The one win they loved to crow about was Romney. ooops. er, McCain. Well, he still has his Senate seat over that maniac JD somebody! Rubio has turned out to be my kind of Senator, runs as a conservative then backstabs them, and wonders why people get upset.
I'm also sick of the amateur political activist that decides they want to be a US Senator, yet they've never so much as volunteered at a phone bank. Unlike our President, Pubs can't do this, because abortion. Akin, who was not Tea Party, exhibit A!
This idea that getting ideologically pure Senators that have zero resume or record is going to be the keys to the kingdom is a straw man argument, and I think many squishes have started wringing their hands that their phony-baloney jobs may be in jeopardy.
Posted by: Mac Adams at December 02, 2013 07:55 AM (YmPwQ)
Now they are and the results were always predictable. Cruz was right, but so were a shitload of people who came before him who have been saying this for years.
<<
Yes, but his "stand," his "antics" allowed him to break through to the knuckleheads, at least a LITTLE bit.
Do an experiment for me, will you? Go to a nearby college and ask some political questions of random people, questions you know the answer to and that you think all these people know the answers to as well and base their opinions and voting on. Do the same thing at a Wal-Mart or to a random person on the street.
Yeah, no, these LIVs don't listen to the political arguments in the press like we do. They catch soundbites, which they don't understand anyway.
"That handsome Anderson Cooper guy seems to like Obamacare and I know the president wants to help people, so it's got to be good." That's about the extent of their political awareness.
But somebody on Jay Leno, who seems to make sense for a minute and, what, he's a Republican and he's not frothing at the mouth or shooting up the studio audience? And he's telling me my health insurance rates are going up? Damn, they DID go up! Wow, I'm suddenly vaguely politically aware!!!
Now, take that and add a few YouTube hits, some social media messaging, etc., a joke on a sitcom about O-Care, and you're starting to pierce the fog.
Posted by: Sphynx at December 02, 2013 07:55 AM (OZmbA)
I'm also sick of the amateur political activist that decides they
want to be a US Senator, yet they've never so much as volunteered at a
phone bank.
Ssshhhhh. Don't spoil it for me
Posted by: Senator Al Franken at December 02, 2013 07:55 AM (BAS5M)
Posted by: rickb223 at December 02, 2013 07:55 AM (xZxMD)
Posted by: Chef Amy Bouzaglo at December 02, 2013 07:55 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 02, 2013 11:46 AM
You bring us nice things, we'll bring you nice things
http://tinyurl.com/kqglgnq
Posted by: kbdabear at December 02, 2013 07:56 AM (aTXUx)
Commenter
(sorry dont remember if it was the same one all the way thru): Cruz's filibuster helped him get his message out to LIVs.
JackStraw: Oh yea? Prove it.
Commeter: He was able to get on TV shows LIVs watch and deliver.
JackStraw: That doesn't matter, everyone already knew Obamacare was a screw up, etc, etc.
The sophistry is quite breathtaking. Win the argument at any cost, eh Jack?
Posted by: KG at December 02, 2013 07:56 AM (p7BzH)
If that truly is the case, then I'd look into micro-loans, or pawn everything I didn't absolutely need to survive day to day.
Hell, pick a hot street corner and you can panhandle $100/day. My bro who strikes up conversation with panhandlers, has met a few in Chicago who worked corners where they said $300/day was possible. Even a loser street corner is probably good for $20.
Posted by: Purp[/i][/b][/s] at December 02, 2013 07:56 AM (0OknM)
Posted by: Mallfly at December 02, 2013 07:57 AM (bJm7W)
Posted by: Brother Cavil at December 02, 2013 07:57 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 07:58 AM (t3UFN)
That's kinda the problem.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix
No it's not.
Every single Republican in the Senate voted against ObamaCare. Every single one. And every single Democrat voted for ObamaCare.
If the Democrats had just 1 or 2 more Democrats in 2008, they would have passed universal health care and everyone would be on MediCare as we speak.
And to keep pointing at McCain or Graham is dumb, we can be against those two clowns but also against quixotic bids like O'Donnell, Sharon Angle, Ken Buck, Akin, etc.
I'm a big fan of the Buckley rule, the most rightward candidate that can WIN. Too many activists forget that last part.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 07:58 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 07:59 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 02, 2013 07:59 AM (B9up3)
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 07:59 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 07:59 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: NCKate at December 02, 2013 08:00 AM (X/4E9)
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ #NukeIowaCity at December 02, 2013 08:00 AM (/kI1Q)
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 11:58 AM (2TMCu)
From here, it don't look like the centrists have been doing so well with that last part. Care for a few examples?
Posted by: maddogg at December 02, 2013 08:00 AM (xWW96)
He's right. Gosh, remember that utterly imbecilic government "shutdown", where you idiots fought really hard to save Obama and the Democrats from the idiocies of ObamaCare?
You want to win? Then get more Republicans in office. No more Christine O'Donnell's. And no more stupid fights just because you want to fight.
You're in it to win. Or you're in it to jerk off. Which is it? Because the shutdown was a "jerk off".
Posted by: Greg Q at December 02, 2013 08:00 AM (4Pleu)
Posted by: Purp at December 02, 2013 11:56 AM (0OknM)
Just be careful what streetcorner you choose, or you're likely to get knifed by the panhandler(s) who usually work it.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 08:00 AM (4df7R)
Really? Because McConnell has a 100 ACU rating for 2012.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry
And in 2012 Lindsey Graham was given a -- 92.
Are you -- sure -- you want to grasp on to that particular life preserver?
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 02, 2013 08:00 AM (kdS6q)
Show me an establishment Republican who says he'll eliminate Obamacare, not "fix" it
Show me an establishment Republican who says he'll eliminate anything!
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 02, 2013 08:01 AM (zF6Iw)
I'm also sick of the amateur political activist that decides they
want to be a US Senator, yet they've never so much as volunteered at a
phone bank.
I coulda been a contender!
Posted by: Ashley Judd at December 02, 2013 08:01 AM (BAS5M)
Posted by: A Founding Father... at December 02, 2013 08:01 AM (lZBBB)
Posted by: mrp at December 02, 2013 11:37 AM (HjPtV)
This and the recall success in Colorado showed the mandarin class that they can be cast out despite their high paid election consultants and slush funds. It frightened all of them including Bitch McConnell.
Posted by: Larsen E. Whipsnade at December 02, 2013 08:01 AM (rXcBX)
Here is the kit Washington Nearsider is looking at Almost $300. And roughly 1 meter by 1 meter in size when finished.
http://www.modelingmadness.com/spl/hk17.htm
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 02, 2013 08:02 AM (B9up3)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at December 02, 2013 08:03 AM (t3UFN)
Because its a revenue center for local government.
They say its all about protecting the public, blah, blah, but do they ever turn anyone down with the creds? No, they just take your fucking money.
Plumbers, electricians, etc all get ripped the same way. If you passed the journeyman's tests, you should be good to go, but nooooooo
Posted by: Purp[/i][/b][/s] at December 02, 2013 08:03 AM (0OknM)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 02, 2013 08:03 AM (Y92Nd)
Your local meth making biker would probably front you $100 if you filled some dodgy Sudafed scripts for him.
Or, just suck a few dicks.
Posted by: Sandra Fluke at December 02, 2013 08:03 AM (8vRuS)
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 08:03 AM (CMlD4)
And yet all the nation sees is that Obama is floating the idea of implementing the Cruz solution.
Winning is losing.
Up is down.
As Jean said up thread , can you imagine a Dem telling Sheila Jackson Lee that she is a bully and needs to get in line?
This is why conservatism is done as a national force.
All hail Caesar!
Posted by: Sheila Jackson Lee at December 02, 2013 08:04 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 02, 2013 08:04 AM (Y92Nd)
Because its a revenue center for local government.
Shit. I have to drop $100-150 for half the rivers I guide on, anymore. That's in addition to my license fees.
Posted by: garrett at December 02, 2013 08:04 AM (8vRuS)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 08:04 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 08:04 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 02, 2013 08:04 AM (lZBBB)
Posted by: Sasha in DC at December 02, 2013 08:05 AM (/1ATA)
Not a joke. The high-earning street corners are very competitive. If I was an apprentice panhandler I'd start with the lesser ones until I'd built some cred on the street.
Posted by: Purp[/i][/b][/s] at December 02, 2013 08:05 AM (0OknM)
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix
...........
Oh.. ok.. so, now it is not how they actually vote, eh? It's how they comport themselves. It's statements they say or do not say.. it's how they didn't go batshit crazy on TV for you, dear viewer.
Amiright?
Their votes mean nothing.. ok. I get it now.
Now I see the light.. Why, voting "No" for Obamacare really meant voting "Yes"! My God! Why did I not see that before???
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 02, 2013 08:05 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Comanche Voter at December 02, 2013 08:05 AM (dtuXM)
I'm also sick of the amateur political activist that decides they want to be a US Senator, yet they've never so much as volunteered at a phone bank.
Phone bank white man toy. No likeum.
Posted by: Elizabeth Warren at December 02, 2013 08:05 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 08:06 AM (CMlD4)
The Tea Party was a cool idea, but apparently it's become a Trojan Horse for Neo-Birchers.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 08:06 AM (qiXMt)
Idea is that the Government breaks the populace up into 'corporate groups'... sometimes companies... but other times special interest groups... and uses a partnership with them to leverage power.
The banking system in the US is a perfect example.
And here I thought Rollerball (original w/ James Caan) was the perfect example. "jonathan! jonathan! jonathan!"
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 02, 2013 08:07 AM (BAS5M)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 02, 2013 08:07 AM (B9up3)
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at December 02, 2013 08:07 AM (Y92Nd)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 08:08 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 12:06 PM (qiXMt)
What is actually apparent is that you are a dumb ass shit stain.
Posted by: maddogg at December 02, 2013 08:08 AM (xWW96)
The GOP Establishment's new Battle Cry!
Posted by: noone, really at December 02, 2013 08:08 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: Velvet Ambition at December 02, 2013 08:08 AM (R8hU8)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 08:08 AM (/Crba)
I'm not pushing a "centrist" GOP, I'm pushing for mainstream conservative, but just the last election had Christie winning by 20 points in deep blue NJ where as the TruCon/TeaParty darling Cuccinelli lost in Virginia where the last Republican Governor had won by nearly 20 points, despite running against an unlikable crook.
Had ObamaCare not come to a head during that time, Cuccinelli probably would have lost by double digits.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 08:08 AM (2TMCu)
The Tea Party was a cool idea, but apparently it's become a Trojan Horse for Neo-Birchers.
Prove it or STFU.
Posted by: Elizabeth Warren at December 02, 2013 08:09 AM (zF6Iw)
I would imagine the casinos probably vet their hires more thoroughly than the freaking FBI. Government imprimatur has zero value add for them.
Posted by: Purp[/i][/b][/s] at December 02, 2013 08:09 AM (0OknM)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 08:09 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: Velvet Ambition at December 02, 2013 12:08 PM (R8hU
They would eliminate the Teaparty, given a chance. Thats about all.
Posted by: maddogg at December 02, 2013 08:09 AM (xWW96)
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 02, 2013 08:10 AM (lZBBB)
Posted by: Wide Eyed Mitch Mc. at December 02, 2013 08:10 AM (OZmbA)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at December 02, 2013 08:11 AM (32Ze2)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at December 02, 2013 08:11 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 02, 2013 08:11 AM (zF6Iw)
Fixt that for you, Mitch.
Posted by: Jazz at December 02, 2013 08:12 AM (roO4n)
Posted by: The Commenting Software at December 02, 2013 08:12 AM (kkbgQ)
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 08:13 AM (eytER)
Posted by: Sphynx at December 02, 2013 08:13 AM (OZmbA)
So since abortion is popular in NoVA we should dig up a "pro-abortion Republican candidate"?
Then we can sh*t all over the Tea Party with you and RINO McConnell and McVain!!
Great plan!
Many winz will result!
Posted by: noone, really at December 02, 2013 08:13 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: Jazz at December 02, 2013 08:13 AM (roO4n)
They cheat to get every seat, dude.
KY elected Rand Paul for crying out loud. Why would the GOP have to run a squish to win *there*? Well, besides the fact that they're dumber than a box of rock, of course.
Posted by: Your LIV Neighbor at December 02, 2013 08:14 AM (4I3Uo)
He's shrewd enough to have given his only reasonable Dem governor opponent the open Senate seat. And he had no coattails whatsoever. The legislature remains solidly Dem. And unless that lapband surgery really starts working, he's going to be destroyed in the press like you wouldn't believe.
Posted by: Biff Boffo at December 02, 2013 08:14 AM (YmPwQ)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 08:15 AM (sOx93)
"Prove it or STFU."
I have yet to hear a single "Oops, Christine McDonnell. Our bad!" In fact, the dummies who defend that pick come up with an elaborate way to suggest that her lost she was a secret strategy to win big in 2010. Ridiculous.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 08:15 AM (qiXMt)
- Angle was the product of a 3 person primary, with 2 better conservative candidates (if I recall), where Angle, the weak candidate, won because the DEMOCRATS ran ads on attacking Angle as the 'conservative' giving her 1) bonifides and 2) name recognition going into primary election day
- Angle was the product of a 3 person primary, where Atkins, the weak candidate, won because the DEMOCRATS ran ads on attacking Angle as the 'conservative' giving him 1) bonifides and 2) name recognition going into primary election day
- Alaska was unique is that a qualified conservative candidate WON the primary, but the RINO was a sore loser. Especially dangerous in a state where every extra federal tax dollar gets put into the populations checkbook because of there budget surplus refunds.
- Notice the trend of DEMOCRATS choosing who they run against.
- Cunicelli lost in VA because he was massively outspent, because the RNC only allocated $3 million to the campaign, instead of $9 million as Michael Steele had done in 2009. Which while seeming excessive, is smart for a purple Governor's mansion in the heart of the political press corp, when it was the ONLY election the RNC had to raise money for. The lack spending also killed an important State AG position
Posted by: phreshone at December 02, 2013 08:16 AM (Pr6hk)
Hey Sooth...Mooch seems to want a Conservativeless GOP...
I aim to take him at his word unless he shuts the fuck up and fires left for a change.
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 08:16 AM (9jfyN)
Now I see the light.. Why, voting "No" for Obamacare really meant voting "Yes"! My God! Why did I not see that before???
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry
Well I'll be darned, you really are going to ride that all the way down to Davy Jones' Locker.
As we know, the ACU rating is calculated off a dozen or so final votes hand selected by the ACU. It does not include all their votes, votes in committee or procedural votes such as voting to let a bill get to the floor but switching on the final vote for the campaign commercials.
Case in point, you might think the ACU 2012 selected vote on "Increasing domestic energy production through new oil and gas leases throughout the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)" was one of the dozen most critical votes in 2012. Many would say votes on budgets, taxes, debt ceiling, appointments and other issues were far more important and a better determined how conservative someone is.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at December 02, 2013 08:16 AM (kdS6q)
The leader of the Senate Republicans says conservatives must be beat back. Amazing, yet not surprising. Why I left the gop.
Come on Kentucky conservatives, Beat this MFer Back.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at December 02, 2013 08:16 AM (caCiW)
Posted by: maddogg at December 02, 2013 08:17 AM (xWW96)
Posted by: The Commenting Software at December 02, 2013 08:17 AM (kkbgQ)
McCauliffe won unmarried women vote by 67 to 25 .
GOP Sandra Fluke GOTV FTW!
Posted by: noone, really at December 02, 2013 08:18 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 08:18 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 02, 2013 12:05 PM (f9c2L)
Why are we constantly going back to how they voted on Obamacare? Yes? And? Voting "no" on Obamacare was so clearly the RIGHT thing to do that anyone who claimed to be a Republican and voted "yes" would have been kicked right the fuck out of Congress alongside the turncoat Blue Dog Democrats; who, by the way, are an extinct species now. Pubbies could see the political suicide of voting for Obammycare. Voting "no" was a no-brainer.
So quit talking about how individual 'Pubbies voted on Obamacare. How have they voted since? What has been their record in terms of gun control? Amnesty? Have they made any public denouncements of the Dems or their blessed Lightbringer's unconstitutional actions? Have they turned on members of their own party for having the gall to do that very thing? Because THAT'S what matters. Not whether or not they voted correctly on the Socialist Redistribution of Wealth Act, or "ACA."
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 08:18 AM (4df7R)
I have yet to hear a single "Oops, Christine McDonnell. Our bad!" In fact, the dummies who defend that pick come up with an elaborate way to suggest that her lost she was a secret strategy to win big in 2010. Ridiculous.
Your argument that the Tea Party has been infiltrated by neo-Birchers is because nobody apologizes for Christine McDonnell?
Man, that is blinding political insight right there. If I were you, skippy, I'd send a resume in to Karl Rove before nightfall.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 02, 2013 08:19 AM (zF6Iw)
It's a leftard concern troll.
He yowls all the left talking points, claims the TEA Party is all about fascism, yet he cannot post proof of such behavior.
The notion of us electing a Republican without a built-in gimp mask and ball-gag frightens him.
Posted by: Kristophr at December 02, 2013 08:19 AM (c6N69)
- AKIN was the product of a 3 person primary, where AKIN, the weak candidate, won because the DEMOCRATS ran ads on attacking AKIN as the 'conservative' giving him 1) bonifides and 2) name recognition going into primary election day
Posted by: phreshone at December 02, 2013 08:19 AM (Pr6hk)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at December 02, 2013 08:19 AM (32Ze2)
Posted by: The Commenting Software at December 02, 2013 12:17 PM (kkbgQ)
Heh. I would go down on CZJ if I knew for a fact it would give me cancer 
Posted by: maddogg at December 02, 2013 08:19 AM (xWW96)
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 02, 2013 08:20 AM (lZBBB)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 08:21 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at December 02, 2013 08:21 AM (DL2i+)
Posted by: Biff Boffo at December 02, 2013 08:21 AM (YmPwQ)
You're welcome. Now that I've posted a new thread will appear.
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 02, 2013 08:21 AM (Hx5uv)
1) Christie is not a mainstream conservative. He is a populist if anything.
2) Cuccinelli lost because the state/national GOP withheld support since he didn't wait his turn behind King RINO Supreme Bill Bolling. Hell, Bolling and other RINOs were out bad-mouthing Cuccinelli before the election, and a few went so far as to endorse McAuliffe.
If anything, your example shows just how far the moderate RINO statists will go to win power. Posted by: @JohnTant
I'm not pushing Christie, just giving an example. Christie was not a TruCon, Cuccinelli was, those were the election results. A mainstream Republican would have trounced McAuliffe.
But I love the TruCon attitude of "Fuck Off Establishment, we don't need you" and then "please, please, please Establishment, save us, we can't do anything without you. Don't badmouth us, it will destroy us. We need your money and expertise because we can't win elections"
Bolling not endorsing Cuccinelli was not why he lost, that has to be the dumbest reason I've heard. The sitting Governor endorsed Cuccinelli.
This is like the TruCon reason why Christine O'Donnell losing was because Karl Rove badmouthed her. How much power do you really think these people have?
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 08:21 AM (2TMCu)
He lost because of his dumb bill. Are people ever responsible for themselves anymore? Are we conservatives or not? McAuliffe killed him for that bill, and by the time the shut down was over (which Cuccinelli was also killed for, thanks Cruz!) the Obamacare attack was too late.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 08:22 AM (qiXMt)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at December 02, 2013 08:22 AM (HVff2)
I approve of this thread.
Posted by: Karl Rove at December 02, 2013 08:23 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 08:24 AM (LbjC3)
But I love the TruCon attitude of "Fuck Off Establishment, we don't need you"
Examples, please?
Posted by: noone
An example? This whole thread.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 08:26 AM (2TMCu)
How about the fact that the RNC only pumped in $3 million into Virginia in an off-year when NO other significant elections were being held, versus the $9 million pumped into Virginia in 2009, which got the Republicans the Virginia Governor's mansion away from the donks. It was close enough, that if the RNC had provided the same support, the seat (and AG seat) could have been held.
Posted by: phreshone at December 02, 2013 08:26 AM (Pr6hk)
But I love the TruCon attitude of "Fuck Off Establishment, we don't need you"
Wrong.
It's, "Fuck you, Establishment. YOU NEED US."
I love the Establishment attitude of, "We need you, conservatives, but fuck the honey. You'll get vinegar and you'll FUCKING LIKE IT, dipshits. Now vote for us and shut up!"
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 08:26 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: The Commenting Software at December 02, 2013 08:26 AM (kkbgQ)
Saying, "hey, maybe we should try winning instead of losing" is now "left talking points." And I dare you to find where I said the Tea Party was fascism. I think the Tea Party has its heart in the right place but is not using it's brain. And I think many Right wing groups that were burnt by Bush are using it to get back into power.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 08:26 AM (qiXMt)
And Establishment moderates are doing any better? Do the names Scott Brown, Pete Hoekstra, Connie Mack, Denny Rehberg, Tommy Thompson, George Allen, Nick Berg, Carly Fiorina, and Heather Wilson mean anything to you?
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 08:27 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: soothsayer is connectin the dots at December 02, 2013 08:27 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: Biff Boffo at December 02, 2013 08:28 AM (YmPwQ)
Yea, she must be a Nazi ... she's pro-life, supports a balanced budget, wants to boot illegals back to Mexico, and does not think the government should give homosexuals special subsidies.
I can just see her setting up deathcamps tomorrow ( that was all sarcasm, in case you are too stupid to detect it, Shoot Me).
Stop pretending you are just helping us sit at the cool kids table. Fuck off, libtard. Go do something productive, like admitting your insanity to local judge and having yourself committed.
Posted by: Kristophr at December 02, 2013 08:28 AM (c6N69)
Indeed...
I can get a GOP or Donk flavored Fascism and that is it evidently....
this gun's retired.
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 08:28 AM (9jfyN)
Shoot Me, you're a troll. YOu've been a troll since you first commented here, and you're STILL a troll. Seriously, just go back to Candy Crush.
And Karl Rove is doing a pisspoor job as McAdams.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 08:28 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 08:28 AM (eytER)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 08:29 AM (QXlbZ)
I thinks more: "You'll get vinegar, and if you don't vote for us - you'll get more vinegar, faster. Now shut up and enjoy it."
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 08:29 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix
...............
Ok.. go for it..
Here's his record.
http://tinyurl.com/modfbuy
You tell me what is so all fired liberal about that record that it would be in Kentucky's best interest to primary him and chance a Akin or Angle result? Go ahead...
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at December 02, 2013 08:30 AM (f9c2L)
the DEMOCRATS ran ads on attacking AKIN as the 'conservative'
giving him 1) bonifides and 2) name recognition going into primary
election day"
And yet we hear some people attack the Establishment for turning on him and not supporting him with funds. Turns out that they were right about him being a bad candidate, yet people attack the RNC and not, say, Akin himself for staying in the race.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 08:30 AM (qiXMt)
Posted by: Shoot Me
You started your comments by calling tea party members neo-birchers. None of the candidates running against Bush in 2000 were birchers.
Your insults and your reality challenged opinion pretty much makes your comments worthless.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at December 02, 2013 08:30 AM (uCNam)
It has worked so well so far.
Maybe you are not a libtard. Maybe your are just bone stupid.
Posted by: Kristophr at December 02, 2013 08:30 AM (c6N69)
Posted by: lolmcconnell at December 02, 2013 08:30 AM (LbjC3)
Also, because when the Democrats spend $12Million claiming that the GOP is making a "War on Women," the Establishment responds, "Hey, that's not us, that's those Tea Party whacko-birds."
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 08:31 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 08:31 AM (eytER)
Get out of their way 2014...
Let it burn and save yourself.
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 08:31 AM (9jfyN)
Bullshit. She lost because she was a bad candidate who ran a lousy campaign. No Vast Right Wing Conspiracy necessary.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at December 02, 2013 08:31 AM (SY2Kh)
As for the Fat Man, he would have had a real dogfight had Booker ran for governor instead of taking the gift Senate seat. Mr Unification did wonders for the GOP there.
Posted by: Biff Boffo at December 02, 2013 08:31 AM (YmPwQ)
How about the fact that the RNC only pumped in $3 million into Virginia in an off-year when NO other significant elections were being held, versus the $9 million pumped into Virginia in 2009, which got the Republicans the Virginia Governor's mansion away from the donks. It was close enough, that if the RNC had provided the same support, the seat (and AG seat) could have been held.
Posted by: phreshone
Because they did polling and Cuccinelli was so underwater for so long, they knew it was a lost cause. He was losing by double digits to a Democrat that should have been easily put away, even after a $3 million investment. ObamaCAre came to a head and helped, but he still went down.
At some point, a candidate has to carry themselves to the finish line. They can either raise the money or they can't. $3 million is a lot of money BTW, from a national group to put into a race. It might not be all he wanted, but that's what happens when you nominate a long shot candidate who wanted to talk about sodomy laws and birth control.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 08:31 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: Biff Boffo at December 02, 2013 12:28 PM (YmPwQ)
Right
Posted by: WalrusRex at December 02, 2013 08:31 AM (Hx5uv)
so GOP using fiscal sanity isn't a Republican virtue?
Inside the DC Beltway, it's no virtue for EITHER party.
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at December 02, 2013 08:32 AM (XO6WW)
Posted by: lolmcconnell at December 02, 2013 08:32 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: Biff Boffo at December 02, 2013 08:33 AM (YmPwQ)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 08:33 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: lolmcconnell at December 02, 2013 08:33 AM (LbjC3)
Posted by: Vandal Savage at December 02, 2013 08:33 AM (/Crba)
The nominating mechanism became an issue because of the way the Establishment locked out the primary for Mittens in '12. Had they allowed others to compete, Romney would have still won the primary - and lost the election; Cooch probably would not have even tried to flip to a convention, and Bolling would have gone on to get crushed by McAuliffe's cash. All that being said, if the election were two week later - Cooch wins.
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 08:34 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: Brother Cavil at December 02, 2013 08:34 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 08:34 AM (eytER)
Did the candidate want to talk about those issues, or was that the Democrat media establishment?
And about those sodomy laws, would you prefer that all the sexual predators convicted with those laws were still on the prowl?
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 08:35 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 12:31 PM (2TMCu)
You are truly delusional. I hope you don't work for a Republican, because such delusion really needs to be contained.
Posted by: KG at December 02, 2013 08:35 AM (p7BzH)
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 08:36 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 02, 2013 08:36 AM (B9up3)
So mission accomplished for TMA, I guess - if I take you at face value (which I don't), you were put off from voting for a Republican because of out-of-state dem money.
Good job. Fucker."
I guess I read Ace's take on the election and you didn't. Look for the election results thread. Read Cuccinelli's bill.
I ask again: Are people not responsible for their own actions anymore? Are we not conservatives?
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 08:36 AM (qiXMt)
And yet he only lost by 3%. Did their "polls" show that?
The genius GOP playing 3d chess.
But the conservatives should shut tup and eat at the kids table.
#GOPwinning
Posted by: noone, really at December 02, 2013 08:36 AM (5ikDv)
You are confusing fundamentalists with the TEA Party.
Two different things. The TEA Party only stands for balanced budgets and constitutional legislation, and nothing else.
Religious beliefs by candidates is a personal matter, and not part of the TEA Party agenda.
If you want to prevent a bible-thumper from accidentally throwing an election, then maybe you should be working to support actual conservatives, instead of just throwing a fit because religious zealots attempt what they always attempt, political infiltration of legitimate political groups.
Posted by: Kristophr at December 02, 2013 08:36 AM (c6N69)
Posted by: 1bulwetweft - doom, Doom, and more DOOM at December 02, 2013 08:37 AM (d2CZd)
BRB...I'm burning up 1/6th the economy Yo!
//Barky O'Douchebag
Posted by: sven at December 02, 2013 08:37 AM (9jfyN)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at December 02, 2013 08:38 AM (xKYlY)
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 08:39 AM (eytER)
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 12:36 PM (qiXMt)
What you mean "we," dickhead? I know I am. I don't know what the fuck you are.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/i][/u] at December 02, 2013 08:40 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at December 02, 2013 08:41 AM (xKYlY)
Because, hey, scary conservative. Easier to do business with a piece of shit like TMA, at least as far as the GOP is concerned...you already have an idea of HIS price, after all. Posted by: @JohnTant
So you're denying Cuccineli didn't try as Attorney General to get sodomy laws put back on the books?
So the problem is Democrats pointing out what Cuccinelli did as Attorney General. How about the problem being NOT doing stupid things as Attorney General?
SoCons want their cake and eat it too. They make candidates take absurd positions saying it's really important, then blast Democrats for calling them on it, saying the election shouldn't be about those issues. Which is it?
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 08:41 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 08:41 AM (eytER)
Posted by: Kristophr at December 02, 2013 08:42 AM (c6N69)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at December 02, 2013 08:42 AM (B9up3)
Get that through your thick skull, dumbass.
Posted by: Kristophr at December 02, 2013 08:43 AM (c6N69)
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 08:43 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 02, 2013 08:43 AM (lZBBB)
Who's this "we" stuff? Tell me, do you think all true conservatives post on message boards screaming for the RNC to throw red meat while all establishment people sit in their mansions rigging elections?
Yeah, our lot sucks but I'm sick of the loudest among us throwing away easy-moderate wins for no apparent reason except for the satisfaction of ... I don't know, whining about being the victims of the Establishment.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 08:44 AM (qiXMt)
Posted by: @JohnTant at December 02, 2013 08:44 AM (eytER)
Get that through your thick skull, dumbass.
Posted by: Kristophr
It's been co opted, dumbass.
Please show me a "pure" Tea party candidate that's socially liberal?
I would love a movement that focused on fiscal conservatism, it's when these candidates get caught up in the fever swamps of SoCon idiocy they go down.
Cuccinelli didn't lose because of his stance on budget and tax issues.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 08:45 AM (2TMCu)
Some feller up there in the capital city once said "At some point, you've earned enough money". Well, there's a problem with that.
Posted by: mrp at December 02, 2013 08:46 AM (HjPtV)
Ding!
Except, the problem with "ding!" is that too many of the people who have been attempting (and sometimes succeeding) in primaries are ding-bats. who can't win in general elections, and cause collateral damage beyond their own races.
O'Donnells and Akins need to be filtered out. That's the hard part.
Especially in open-primary states versus Democratic incumbents, where Democrats have figured out how to help pick the weakest, nuttiest possible GOP opponent.
Todd Akin was deliberately selected by McCaskill as her best path to re-election victory, and a bunch of determined Democrats, thus duly instructed, went out and voted for Akin in the MO open primary. It worked.
Posted by: torquewrench at December 02, 2013 08:46 AM (gqT4g)
Do you even live in Virginia, or do you just get a MSNBC/HuffPo summary of you facts fed to you like strained peas?
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 08:48 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: @JohnTant
It was all bullshit.
You can prosecute child molesters without having sodomy laws on the books. Ace also tore this meme to shreds.
He was doing it because he knew it would help him in the next primary/convention. It was a dumb move.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 08:48 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars [/i] [/b] [/s] at December 02, 2013 08:48 AM (plNej)
(BTW, Mitch McConnell recently backed off from supporting a repeal of Obamacare, and now says he is open to fixing it. http://scoamf.us/HU)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 08:50 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: Captain Hate at December 02, 2013 08:50 AM (XQveP)
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 02, 2013 08:51 AM (lZBBB)
Primarying is a waste of time and money. Mitch will crush anyone who tries.
Er, uh, Matt Bevin is a self-made man, worth $25M. He beat Madge with 85% of the vote in a recent straw poll in Boone County, KY.
Posted by: RushBabe at December 02, 2013 08:51 AM (hrIP5)
I have always found that... odd.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 08:53 AM (QXlbZ)
Except -- tragic slaying of a lovely theory by an ugly fact -- Cooch, while claiming that his defense of the case had nothing to do with animus towards homosexuals, had a massive prior history of clearly demonstrated aninmus towards homosexuals.
Some guy who as late as 2009 was calling homosexuality "intrinsically disordered" and suchlike is not going to win married white moms in suburban VA in 2013.
Even though they are a prime GOP demographic, and they vote reliably, Cooch got far fewer votes from those married white suburban moms than Romney did just the previous year. Why? Married white suburban moms in 2013 Virginia (and most of the rest of the country) don't like people slamming on gays for simply being gay. Full stop
Certain socons think that there is still a debate to be had in front of the general public about whether simply being gay is wrong. That's bullshit. There WAS a debate, past tense. More than a decade ago. _Will and Grace_ won that debate, at least as far as general public attitudes go. Sorry.
And, certain socons like Cooch who can't accept having been outdebated by a damn TV show still try to relitigate that in the court of popular opinion. And lose. As Cooch lost.
Posted by: torquewrench at December 02, 2013 08:53 AM (gqT4g)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 08:55 AM (sOx93)
It might not be all he wanted, but that's what happens when you nominate a long shot candidate who wanted to talk about sodomy laws and birth control.
**shaking head**
The MFM has to be destroyed. That needs to be lesson one for anyone considering a run for office.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at December 02, 2013 08:55 AM (zF6Iw)
Posted by: Captain Hate
Reid had a 30-something approval rating. A Republican ran against Reid's son on the same ballot for Governor and stomped him in a landslide.
Angle was a dingbat and she lost in a wave election year. A better candidate would have beaten Reid. Instead, Angle lost by around 10 points.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 08:56 AM (2TMCu)
I guess it isn't "retaliation" as such, but I would be a lot happier if all these "moderates" (1) stopped joining up with Democrats in "gang of whatevers" which typically end up opposing conservative positions; and (2) whenever they are about to blast a conservative or another R in the media, stop, take a deep breath, and blast a Democrat instead.
Is that really so hard?
Posted by: RM at December 02, 2013 08:57 AM (fRppw)
I'd love to live in an America that gave us the choice between moderate Republican and hardcore Conservative, but some of us think that it's better to elect Dems to teach the Establishment a lesson.
What is the Establishment? If you listened to the shutdown debate, only Cruz (and Lee?) was NOT establishment. (I guess 2010 wasn't a Tea Party victory after all.) It's maddening.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 08:58 AM (qiXMt)
Looks like you have finally decided to quit pretending come out as a candidate for the Beltway Party.
Posted by: Ray Van Dune at December 02, 2013 08:58 AM (mnKhG)
Right. We vote as we do because we actually want to see our agenda enacted... limited government, regulatory reform, border security. Not because we care that our team gets to hang its banner in the locker room, or because we want Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham to have access to the best pork.
Give the Democrats credit. Their constituency votes for "Free Sh-t from the Government," and their elected politicians deliver it.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 08:58 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 09:01 AM (sOx93)
and Ace was wrong. Going forwards, we can prosecute them with different laws - but that wasn't the case in front of the AGs office.
The Dims even walked away from that one, they spent their money of the "War on Women" theme, I got 64 war on women mailers and mor ethen 30 on evil guns - maybe one or two mentioning sodomy obliquely.
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 09:01 AM (CMlD4)
What is the Establishment? If you listened to the shutdown debate, only Cruz (and Lee?) was NOT establishment. (I guess 2010 wasn't a Tea Party victory after all.) It's maddening.
Posted by: Shoot Me
I'm still waiting for this magic list of all the good Republicans versus bad ones. It seems any Republican not named Cruz and Lee are responsible for ObamaCare, not the Democrats that actually passed it.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 09:01 AM (2TMCu)
They got purtier moufs.
Posted by: Ray Van Dune at December 02, 2013 09:02 AM (mnKhG)
*ahem*
You were saying?
Posted by: noone, really at December 02, 2013 09:02 AM (5ikDv)
The Bush-McCain-Rove-McConnell wing of the Republican Party who believe in the same policies as the Democrats.
The Bush-McCain-Rove-McConnell wing of the Republican Party that is more committed to stomping out Tea Party opposition than to opposing the Democrat-Socialist agends.
The Bush-McCain-Rove-McConnell wing of the Republican Party that cannot even articulate a coherent alternative agenda to paternalistic Big Government socialism.
Also, any Republican that joins a "gang" of Democrats to help advance a Democrat agenda.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 09:02 AM (QXlbZ)
And not the only dingbat in the NV GOP primaries that year, either.
Sue Lowden was out there saying, gee, the solution to high health costs is to go back to a barter system, just like Grandpa used to take a chicken along to pay when he visited Old Doc Smithers.
I actually physically cringed when I heard that. What. The. Fuck.
Tailor-made to make Republicans look like old fogies totally out of touch with 21st century realities, and sure enough, Lowden (who would have been a better general election pick than Angle) immediately got hit with Democratic "chickens for checkups" parodic attack ads. It destroyed her.
Seriously, WHAT THE FUCK must someone be thinking to say something like that on the campaign trail?
Posted by: torquewrench at December 02, 2013 09:02 AM (gqT4g)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at December 02, 2013 09:03 AM (xKYlY)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 09:03 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: rfichoke at December 02, 2013 09:04 AM (J87gl)
Posted by: McAdams
That better candidate LOST to Angle in the primary. If that "better" candidate couldn't beat a loser like Angle - then how much better were they?
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 09:04 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 09:06 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at December 02, 2013 09:06 AM (xKYlY)
and Ace was wrong. Going forwards, we can prosecute them with different laws - but that wasn't the case in front of the AGs office.
The Dims even walked away from that one, they spent their money of the "War on Women" theme, I got 64 war on women mailers and mor ethen 30 on evil guns - maybe one or two mentioning sodomy obliquely.
Posted by: Jean
So let me get this straight, in Virginia, you could molest children because Cuccinelli was unable to get sodomy laws back on the books? Right?
How is is that every other state is still able to prosecute these people without reinstating sodomy laws?
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 09:06 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 09:08 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: Jean
Sort of like when Reagan lost to Gerald Ford in '76?
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 09:08 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 12:56 PM (2TMCu)
Oh for fuck's sake, you can almost always find a poll at some point in time that is wildly at odds with what ended up happening. Ted Cruz didn't poll well when he took on Dewhurst but he prevailed. I'm sure you're right that Angle was a terrible candidate but she's far from alone in that regard. Looking at the nitbrains who Reid defeated previously looks like an inmate chart in a fucking asylum until you get to Paul Laxalt. Plus that state seems to have a thing for additional party candidates.
Posted by: Captain Hate at December 02, 2013 09:09 AM (XQveP)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 09:09 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: ScoggDog at December 02, 2013 09:09 AM (bh4aG)
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 09:11 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: McAdams
Angle was the incumbent, sitting President? Big difference.
Posted by: Jean at December 02, 2013 09:13 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale
It's a straw man argument, I didn't support those Republicans. FWIW, I live in AZ, and I voted for JD Hayworth over McCain in 2010 because I loathe McCain. I hope Graham gets beat in SC.
But this isn't about "me", I don't care if I'm viewed as a RINO. What I'm tired of seeing is conservatives handing over elections to Democrats because they field losing candidates. Good people are being conned, and Democrats are laughing all the way to the bank. Soros could never engineer such an ingenious way to get Democrats elected.
I'm not saying we should back liberal Republicans, I'm saying the next time an O'Donnell or Sharon Angle comes along, we kick them to the curb. We don't field dingbats, period.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 09:15 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: Jean
But the analogy is the same. If Reagan couldn't beat Ford, how could he beat Carter? Yet he blew him out of the water.
The idea that the winner of a primary is always the strongest is deeply flawed. Do you really think had somebody besides Akin had won, there would still be a Claire McCaskill in the Senate? Of course not.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 09:18 AM (2TMCu)
1. The current system is fiscally and econonomically unsustainable absent major reform.
2. The Establishment GOP is too invested in the system to reform it.
3. So, the burning is inevitable.
4. So, who cares which party wins?
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 09:18 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at December 02, 2013 09:20 AM (xKYlY)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 09:20 AM (sOx93)
Including tax cuts and the War on Terror! The latter the true cons never like to talk about even though it's the number one reason why the Republican brand has gone to crap for the public.
I hear so much about the Tea Party and the Constitution. OK, so why are there so many so-called Tea Partiers who don't seem to understand that you have to compromise to get laws passed?
It sucks that Bush was weak due to the Dems dirty tricks in Florida, and it sucks that we waited to long to push him towards the Right, but we've overcompensated with this RINO hunting nonsense.
I'm probably in trouble with the blog for saying "Neo-Birch" but this party/movement has become paranoid and it bothers me.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 09:20 AM (qiXMt)
Posted by: McAdams
That's up to the primary voters in their respective states, so in most cases, the "we" is "them". Seriously, I'd like to hear McAdam's, Rove's, Hollowpoint's, Chi-Town Jerry's, etc., etc., opinions on open primaries, where Dems are free to vote for Republican candidates in a primary. For the record, I strongly support closed primaries.
Posted by: mrp at December 02, 2013 09:23 AM (HjPtV)
Bush 43 still left tax rates at higher levels than Bush 41 and made no effort to reform the tax code.
And the War on Terror has become the Surveillance State.
Meanwhile, Bush 43 bequeathed to us Sarbanes-Oxley, McCain-Feingold, two tries at Amnesty, an unsustainable Medicare drug entitlement, a pork-bloated highway bill, a pork-bloated highway bill, the TSA, the expansion of the ethanol mandate, Chief Justice John "Obamacare" Roberts, and the incandescent lightbulb ban.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 09:25 AM (QXlbZ)
Doesn't mean they would have been the better Senator/President, etc. Or, in the case of a primary, that they would have been the better general election candidate.
But, the question remains, if you want to be the general election candidate for your party, shouldn't you be able to defeat a candidate that you are claiming was a) terrible and b) a nutjob?
That this candidate couldn't beat such a piss-poor crazy candidate in the primary does not speak well of that candidate does it? And - as someone else pointed out upthread, Reid has defeated a lot of GOP candidates over the years. I suppose when the non-tea party GOP loses it is OK and does not reflect at all on the GOP but when a tea-party GOP candidate loses, it means all of the Tea Party is terrible and crazy? Right? Weird how that works. Posted by: monkeytoe
If primaries were all runoffs between the top two candidates, I would be more open to that theory, but they're not. There's different wings and different alliances of the GOP, and depending on how they're split up, it means a nut can slip through when it gets crowded.
Obviously, Akin was not the strongest Republicans that emerged, his two rivals beat each other bloody and ignored Akin.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 09:25 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at December 02, 2013 09:27 AM (xKYlY)
Posted by: mrp
As do I. Usually, the Democrats join the TruCon retards and help put them over the top when it's an open primary.
What I don't support is conventions where 1% of the GOP picks the candidates, that's when you get train wrecks like Cuccinelli.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 09:27 AM (2TMCu)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 09:29 AM (sOx93)
exactly!
Posted by: Affordable Care Act at December 02, 2013 09:30 AM (5ikDv)
understand that you have to compromise to get laws passed?
And why is it that whenever Establishment Moderates compromise with Democrats, Democrats always come out ahead.
In theory, Republicans want to cut spending, Democrats want to increase it. Every compromise always results in spending increasing, just slightly less than Democrats would like. Never... NEVER... does a compromise result in spending being cut, just not as much as conservatives would like.
Take the sequester/fiscal cliffs. Democrats got a tax increase and got to gut the military. Entitlement spending and domestic social spending and Obamacare funding all came through with barely a scratch.
I wouldn't mind compromise if conservatism didn't lose every stinkin' time.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 02, 2013 09:34 AM (QXlbZ)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 09:36 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: monkeytoe
I think it's pretty easy to spot the freaks, at least for me. Also, someone running for Senator with ZERO elected experience should be a huge red flag.
There's also positions that candidates take that make them unelectable, a big one being "no abortion even in cases of rape". We can go round and round on that as a moral question, but in a political sense, it's radioactive, and actually only moves the country further away from sensible, pro-life positions.
I'm not going to hand a seat over to a left-wing Democrat in order to make a point. If there's a more conservative candidate that can knock off a liberal Republican AND win the general election, I'm all for it, but I'm not going to back O'Donnell type dingbats because I think it might make John McCain mad.
Posted by: McAdams at December 02, 2013 09:36 AM (2TMCu)
Also, man or woman up and talk with your normal user name. I'm too lazy too look up what 5ikDv stands for today.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 09:37 AM (qiXMt)
Posted by: Dole, McCain & Romney Inc. at December 02, 2013 09:39 AM (QKYRm)
Posted by: Akin, Cuccinelli, O'Donnell, Angle, Buck, and Mourdock! at December 02, 2013 09:41 AM (2TMCu)
F U ,moby troll.
Posted by: 5ikDv at December 02, 2013 09:43 AM (5ikDv)
So, what THE FUCK is time going to tell us, Drew? I was good with "Let It Burn" but what the fuck is "Time Will Tell"? TWT stands for "twat", or "twit", take your pick.
Posted by: Born Free at December 02, 2013 09:44 AM (xL8Hf)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 09:49 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 10:05 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: Fen at December 02, 2013 10:41 AM (a422o)
You're arguing that the Tea Party isn't responsible for it's failure in Delaware because of its emotions.
This is NOT a good argument for the Tea Party.
Seriously, the Tea Party lost it's cool. May I ask if this is still a problem? And why take it out on Mike Castle, and not, say, McCain?
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 10:42 AM (qiXMt)
Wah. What I'm tired of seeing is elected conservatives handing over issues to Democrats because they have no spine.
Posted by: Fen at December 02, 2013 10:46 AM (a422o)
Batan: "Nope. Not this one either"
Los Angeles: "Trust us, we're going to make a stand. Just not here."
Denver: "The optics are bad. Hang tight. We will engage when the time is right!"
DC: ""This is not the hill we should die on. Keep your powder dry for the important fight".
[....]
Posted by: Fen at December 02, 2013 10:51 AM (a422o)
"But he's soft on immigration. RINO!"
"Oh. We have another great candidate!"
"But he's boring. He doesn't give me the thrill in my leg. RINO!"
"Ooookay. We have this candidate with a great history..."
"He sat on a couch. RINO!!!!"
"...I guess we're stuck with the guy you don't like."
"WHY DOES THE ESTABLISHMENT ALWAYS FORCE TERRIBLE CANDIDATES ON US!!!!?"
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 11:21 AM (qiXMt)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 11:24 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 02, 2013 11:27 AM (sOx93)
http://tinyurl.com/mgjg3rd
http://tinyurl.com/kzserer
It is not just Mitch's seat here that we are fighting for -- it's the future of the entire Republican party. McConnell is the head of the snake and if he remains senate leader, it literally won't matter how many Ted Cruz's conservatives elect because Mitch will use parliament rules to thwart us.
If McConnell is not defeated by Matt Bevin in the KY primary, I sincerely hope he is defeated by a Dem in the general -- just so we can get him out of leadership. The man IS a Democrat in sheep's clothing. He is poison.
Posted by: Aslan's Girl at December 02, 2013 01:00 PM (KL49F)
Posted by: Fen at December 02, 2013 03:11 PM (a422o)
Apparently not us little people. Only you?
Or - is it some secret decoder ring people admitted to the deepest secrets of the GOP? "
You, me and everyone in this country are allowed to have opinions. You're upset that I'm not agreeing with you.
"I'm confused as to what the point is in having voting at all? I mean, why don't we just give the parties the power to decide everything? They have done such a smash up job and you are arguing for us to have no voice - so you must support that, right?"
I'm arguing for the Tea Party and Base to take a step back and reflect on themselves and America. There's more to politics than RINO and not RINO, and the RINO hunters are driving me crazy. And knock it off with the victim mentality.
" If you don't think primarying McConnell is a good idea, go here:
http://www.dumpmcconnell.com/"
A 'Donate' button? Of course.
"Posted by: Aslan's Girl at December 02, 2013 05:00 PM (KL49F)"
I'm warning you, please don't trust Matthew Boyle or Dan Reihl. Or at least demand more proof from them, to prove me wrong. Pleeease.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 05:21 PM (qiXMt)
Customer? I thought the Tea Party was trying to replace the Establishment? Does the Tea Party believe in competition and free markets or does it just intend to stomp its foot until it's given full access to the party?
But following your analogy, most people would be upset by the developers attitude. But then again, most people would *then* get a competing product that was either better or just as good, not GOD AWFUL batcrap insane. I don't jump in raw sewage mouth open because I'm mad at a McDonald's hamburger.
"In the meantime, O'Donnell wasn't quite the known quantity she is now."
Oh she wasn't? Because I'm going to call nonsense on that. I think this just excuses the Tea Party for not doing its homework. Especially given how quickly the Dems shredded her.
"I guess your precious GOP can never do wrong, huh? "
Why is it always either/or? You seem to think that people like me are offering you a choice between "vote GOP or else." You don't seem to understand that you're offering people like me the choice between "vote non-Establishment or RINO!!"
If the Tea Party is so great, why is it so hard to be critical of it? Criticism is not a bad thing.
"All of you fools who rail against the TP fail to see the bigger picture."
The larger picture is that we blew some easy Senate seats that we desperately need to get rid of ObamaCare. Could we avoid that in the future? No, we seem to want to throw away some Senate seats to prove a point.
"And, of course, the fact that the GOP would be to the left of Bill Clinton right now absent the TP means nothing as well."
Am I the only one who remembers Republican history from 2003-2007?
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 02, 2013 05:48 PM (qiXMt)
Since you're the one insinuating that they are NOT trustworthy, the burden of proof is one YOU. YOU prove ME wrong.
Posted by: Aslan's Girl at December 02, 2013 06:07 PM (KL49F)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 03, 2013 03:57 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 03, 2013 04:01 AM (sOx93)
Posted by: monkeytoe at December 03, 2013 04:08 AM (sOx93)
481. The GOP is inadequate in thought, word and deed.
QED, shoot them first and leave the bodies to the crows.
Posted by: gary gulrud at December 03, 2013 06:07 AM (uv0Aw)
You're projecting your biases onto me. I don't think the Establishment should be untouchable, but you sure do think the Tea Party should be. I don't. I don't think heroes and saints are good for the Conservative movement AT ALL. The Tea Party should take it's lumps as good as anybody.
"My point is that it is perfectly fine to challenge the GOP and its incumbents. What is your point?"
Be careful? Be wary of people who tell you what you want to hear?
"Apparently your memory of it is pretty bad."
No, I remember when the Base was cool with Bush until he pushed Immigration, which flies in the face of revisionist history that's been pushed. And again, you didn't mention Iraq/The War on Terror, which the Base wanted and got. I wish the Base would point fingers at itself as much as it points it elsewhere.
There was always (light) grumbling about Bush before Immigration, but now the Base has seemed to be overcompensating now. You sneeze a certain way and you get labeled a RINO.
"We wouldn't even be in position to win senate seats absent the TP."
America was pretty pissed that Obama Care was passed the way it was. The Tea Party showed up at the right time.
"Your delusion is that you believe the GOP is conservative."
Your delusion is that anyone who challenges your narrative is a RINO ESTABLISHMENT whatever.
"The TP cannot try to change the GOP?"
Well, it can't if it puts up Christine O'Donnells. That just tells the people in charge of the RNC that the Tea Party is not to be taken seriously.
"And you question whether voters are customers?"
If you put up a challenger, you're now a competitor. And guess what? Competitors compete. Not just on products, but on image, and ideas. The Tea Party (or the True Cons who try to hijack it for their own agenda) seems to think that it doesn't have to compete.
WHY is your candidate better? Sometimes "because he's not Establishment!" isn't enough. We need to know that your guy isn't going to go Todd Akin or Christine O'Donnell on us.
"We can challenge the GOP, try to change it, or try to replace it. Whatever we damn well please. "
And an independent observer can say, 'hey, maybe this (candidate/platform/group) isn't a good idea.' You don't seem to agree with that.
"So, basically, you are dishonest, delusional and stupid. Nice combo there. "
You hurt me feelings. I'm going to vote for a wacko to show you!
"Gee, I guess that means the GOP and Castle are completely incompetent idiots then, no? Or, do you really think that it was entirely TP people who voted for her in the primary in DE?"
To be honest, I didn't comment too much on the race itself because all I remember is that Sarah Palin gave her endorsement and put Christine over the top. That wasn't Saint Sarah last bad endorsement. (No, I'm not talking about Cruz. I forget who but it was a woman.) Hopefully her power to influence has waned after her non-run for Pres.
" instead of simply a catch-phrase to describe a phenomena."
How convenient. No one is responsible! You know how we're going to reform the Republican Party? With a non-group that doesn't have to take any responsibility for its actions. Hey, the Tea Party is practically the Republican Party already!
"You would have us act as slaves of the GOP..."
Victim mentality.
"Ultimately, since your entire political philosophy boils down to "do what the GOP tells me", why are you even here at a conservative blog? "
My philosophy is, "No more heroes." If the Tea Party can't compete with the Republicans pathetic standards, than what good is it?
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 03, 2013 07:52 AM (qiXMt)
I understand that ObamaCare got passed because the Base got excited by the RINO hunting of 2006. How'd that go? Oh yeah, now the Base believes everything is a RINO. (But don't you name-call the name-callers!) Even after the supposed Tea Party wave of 2010, everybody is a RINO except Cruz and maybe Lee. It's ridiculous.
"I'm merely saying it is perfectly acceptable to challenge "R" incumbents. You are the one claiming it is not. Please explain why?"
I'm saying people like you are BAD at challenging incumbents. Not everyone agrees with the idea that it's better to lose big to make a larger point.
Do you even know the story behind the Senate Conservatives Fund besides the fact that it's against McConnell? Do you know how furious Conservative representatives were when the SCF stabbed them in the back during the shut down? I'm betting not.
Drew M. is a total emo but he's usually smarter than what he wrote in this post. Today (well, yesterday. We're such dorks.) he made the mistake of thinking that the enemy of his enemy is his friend.
You accuse me of supporting anything with an "R', then donate to anything with "conservative" on it.
Posted by: Shoot Me at December 03, 2013 08:06 AM (qiXMt)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2326 seconds, 613 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Kristophr at December 02, 2013 06:38 AM (c6N69)