« | »

The Hive – Please Talk Among Yourselves

Here is our usual weekend discussion thread, where comments on the general topics of the day are welcome.

But please remember to post and comment on specific news items in the ‘News Selected By Our Correspondents’ thread below or via the link found in the sidebar.


This article was posted by Steve on Friday, December 16th, 2011. Comments are currently closed.

38 Responses to “The Hive – Please Talk Among Yourselves”

  1. Mithrandir says:

    Iowa GOP Debate—What I learned—
    From Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=V-lD3YqP9Sw

    The Bad….
    1. Michele Bachmann should quit! No one wants to hear this 5th place muckracker yammer on about non-issues, throwing snarky comments at every candidate, and basically embarrass herself.

    2. 55:28 SHUT UP about Iran and WMDs!Has Bachmann and Santorum been in a cave the last 10 years? Remember the Iraq war? Just like after W.W.I, Americans are SICK of war. Remember way back to the 2008 election, and Obama won as the anti-war candidate, AND YOU WANT TO DRUM UP ANOTHER BOOGYMAN WAR with Iran? A war-weary populace deeply in debt, losing their homes, doesn’t want to hear about another Arab engagement. What stupid comments.
    North Korea threatens Seoul every day, with a REAL nuclear weapon, needing only to travel about 50 miles, not some sophisticated ICBM. Anyone upset by that? Nope! Let’s puff up and posture about Iran, when Pakistan is even worse.
    Bachmann, “Mrs. Constitution” wouldn’t even go through Congress to attack Iran, she would just drag us into another Arab conflict.
    Hear is a reminder about what our “solid intelligence” got us before: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSwSDvgw5Uc

    3. 59:45, 103:22 Santorum / Bachmann war-mongering with another tail-chasing endeavor with Iran. Let’s blow another $1.5 trill down the drain on this issue too. Have you seen all those polls of the American people clamoring for a war with Iran? –I haven’t either, way to gauge the American attitude on this issue guys. . .

    4. Circa 135 Bachmann and others dragging out the old “I will end all abortions” nonsense again. –Ever been drunk in college, sleep with a girl, wake up and she is ugly, has a learning disability, says she might be pregnant?! Me neither, but that and worse happens every day, and you will be THANKFUL there is an abortion clinic in your city after that. 1,200,000 abortions / year, 20,000 adoptions. Hmm, that leaves ONLY just a shortage of 1,180,000 children needing a family every year, filling up our orphanages, or the streets, or abandoned in hospitals. Time for phase 2: work so that people are more responsible, and DON’T GET PREGNANT 1,200,000 times a year in the first place!
    The Good…..
    5. 44:26 Gingrich slaps down the courts! Big Time. Megan Kelly (lawyer) hates the idea of controlling the court-dictatorship we have, and SURPRISE! Ann Coulter (lawyer) hates it too! Also “conservative” Bush attorney generals hate the idea as well! What are the odds that every single lawyer in America thinks reigning in the arrogant, corrupt, abusive court system is a “dangerous” idea? Never listen to the lawyerocracy, they aren’t really Republican or democrat, they are aiding and abetting their little corrupt fiefdoms they have carved out for themselves. “ALL RISE for the Honorable _______.” –no one rises for me, and I am paying for the corrupt building and all corrupt people in it!
    *Burning all 3 of my Coulter books, never buying another one again. (and she supported Chris Christy for president: a former prosecutor–ehck!)
    UPDATE: Me & Newt totally on same page: http://www.breitbart.tv/gingrich-on-judicial-activists-cuff-em/

    6. Romney beats down Obama, and is FINALLY sticking his liberal finger in the air to tell people what they want to hear, so we can elect another democrat lackey that will do whatever they tell him to do.

    7. 122: 45 Ricky Perry owns on immigration.

    8. 125:06 RINOmny, Terrific! Go and come back with your background check, pay your passport, Visa stamps, AND a work sponsor! Apply for citizenship with the standard $500 green card fee, so we know who you are, and what you are doing here, and if you do drugs, engage in crime, we can rip up your Visa and send you back before your citizenship is approved. (Gingrich: break the law for 25 years=amnesty….terrible idea)
    Gingrich or Paul, the two smartest people in the race, and the only ones who would FORCEFULLY return our rights to us. All others should quit. No one is going to vote for ANOTHER Texas governor who mangles the English language, or a liberal Massachusetts governor, nor any of the 4th place or below candidates.

    • proreason says:

      Romney will probably win the nomination.

      He was very impressive on Greta last night (or maybe Thursday). Not impressive to hard-core conservatives or libertarians, but impressive to people who see themselves as moderates or independents.

      If he can maintain that kind of composure in the face of the blitzkrieg the running dog marxists will throw at him, he can beat Obama as well. Even if a lot of the hard-core right sits out, he can still win, because there are a lot more people in the soft middle than the hard right.

      One thing you have to give him credit for is discipline. He has only broken ranks once or twice in the last four years, and he has put in place the organizational elements that overcome even passion and hatred. The endorsement by Nikki Haley is an example. Another is the endorsement by the Iowa newspaper.

      And the concerted attack on Gingrich by all manner of republican / conservative / rightwing pundits and talkers is also impressive. For somebody who doesn’t generate much heat in his supporters, Romney sure has assembled a strange and extensive coalition of supporters who are willing to go after anybody who opposes him like rabid dogs.

    • tranquil.night says:

      “And the concerted attack on Gingrich by all manner of republican / conservative / rightwing pundits and talkers is also impressive. For somebody who doesn’t generate much heat in his supporters, Romney sure has assembled a strange and extensive coalition of supporters who are willing to go after anybody who opposes him like rabid dogs.”

      Yeah, with condescension, demagoguery, and an entitlement mentality like it all is owed to him and them. They’ll misrepresent facts, they’ll insult voters. Hey, it’s freaking politics, you scrubs. Just win baby. What a principled bunch. I’ll probably never listen to anything from Ann ever again. She can go sit in the crazy’s corner with Beck and play with his end-of-the-world toys.

      Romney may likely win the primary and I believe he can win the general too as long as his team stays as aggressive as they are now against us, but it is going to be an unnecessarily painful administration afterwards, followed by another massive electoral shift back to the Dems in another 8 years with very little having been done to weaken the Leviathan, albeit total collapse will have probably been averted for a couple years. Oh, and Romney’s/the Establishment’s future cronyism will be played out to the nth degree. And it will be, whether he tries to convince everyone that he’s a Conservative now or whatever. Not because there’s any direct evidence Romney’s corrupt, but because he was bought and allied himself with the interests of the status quo to secure his win. We’re gonna see guys like Paulson and Chertoff in his administration, government will continue to grow in the background for all the people buying access to it, whenever the Conservatives propose aggressive reform, they’ll likely be blocked and rhetorically isolated by both parties.

      Oh I droll go on and on about what we can expect from the Republican Establishment with Romney in there based on their demonstrated governing history. Not that they have any intention of telling us about now or probably ever themselves, especially now as he’s dropping his carefully calculated and well-discipline pander lines to con the Right into just giving him a chance. Forget actually having an honest and substantive debate about differences in vision or tactics. No, we just must smear anyone that has a different approach as zany and bombastic. Groupthinking bigotry. Whatever, a polished turd is still just that. But they’ve decided to go to the mat, and they’ll probably win because more than ideas or the future direction of the country, it seems everyone buys into the conventional wisdom that elections are determined by a group of the proudly ignorant who are attracted to shiny things.

      “there are a lot more people in the soft middle than the hard right.” – I profoundly disagree. Only in Yankville and the Left Coast does this odd breed of moderate thrive in any sort of meaningful numbers. That’s because they’re mostly cultural Liberals who are embarassed to be affiliated with the out-of-the-closet full-blood Gaia worshipping Marxist redistributive radicals, and even more embarassed to be associated with the angry unwashed rednecks on the Right. But they have no qualms really with big government or feeding at the trough, either. They in general favor government as the first means of solution because they aren’t rugged individualists. They also love controlling the purse strings for all that social engineering power. We’ve all gone over this drill before. Cultural Conservatives may not have the mainstream representation by the media, but they alone probably still match in number all the Liberals and moderates combined. The data suggests to me 2/3 of Independents lean a good deal right, at least 1/3 of them are strictly Conservatives who were disaffected by Republicans for being too moderate. The demographics are never that uniform but the consultants think you win by pandering to these different groups as if they all think the same. It’s elitist and moreover it’s bad politics.

      Nevertheless, the base just doesn’t have the inside-the-beltway organization to fend off both wings of the establishment. So all of the Conservatives never really had a fair shot to begin with, which should be upsetting if it weren’t always the normal standard. I guess I’m surprised and relieved they all have been able to make a good showing of it this far, because this has supposed to be an inevitable Romney nomination for months now, and every time that’s been challenged he’s had to respond by reshaping himself into a stronger candidate.

      Still, I can’t overstate my displeasure with the Establishment. More interested in preserving their own interests than uniting to reform the country for the better. The full Alinsky to anyone who dares to challenge that. For shame.

    • proreason says:

      Well, I was commenting, not agreeing with Romney. As you know, I prefer Newt.

      Regarding the soft middle vs hard right, aside from the pure numbers, I’m assuming the hard right will support Romney pretty well, or only marginally less than they would support Newt, so support from conservatives is kind of a wash. If there was a candidate who lights up conservatives, then it might be different, but Newt is also not roundly loved.

      So the question becomes the middle, which is where the anti-Newt forces put their emphasis. I’m still not convinced that Romney is better at Newt at attracting them, but the Greta interview is a clue. He was presidential, composed, and reasonable….which I assume is what they want. The thing to wonder or worry about (aside from the kamikazi attacks that are inevitable regardless of who the nominee is) is whether people in the middle are as turned off by the Moron as we are. If they are, then Newt will appeal more than Romney.

    • Mithrandir says:

      If RINOmny is nominated, I can only assume it was rigged from the get-go, and that The Big Government Party is never going to make any serious changes to the country and their rigged power structures. Remember how George Bush pretended to be a conservative, “no policeman of the world?” –aaaaaaand we became the BIGGEST policeman of the world we have ever been.

      That’s why I think they don’t even acknowledge Ron Paul, b/c they know he would take a wrecking ball to D.C. and all the Big Government lifers wouldn’t have any toys to play with. No military toys for the right-wing, and no social toys for the left-wing.

      Gingrich would flat out ignore everybody and do what he wanted, good or bad, and that would just enrage the Big Gov’t people, who have lobbyists to please, and careers to maintain.

      My family and I will probably sit on our hands again like we did in 2008. Keep sending up liberal Republicans, you can forget the votes, the campaign donations, the envelop licking, and the door-to-door volunteering like we have done in the past.

    • tranquil.night says:

      Pro, I’m sorry if my anti-Romney rants come across as critcism’s of your points. I think my frustrations are more a result that I agree with you that he does come across very well on the surface, is banking on the right’s support and therefore doesn’t feel any genuine need to do anything but pander to us, and therefore I’m lamenting an unfairness in politics that always going to be there. Plus raging against all these media personalities who’ve taken it upon themselves to be their candidate of choice’s personal attack dog so the candidate themselves can appear to stay above the fray. Bachmann’s wedge politicking I find disingenuous and misguided, but at least she’s got the pair to level her charges face to face where they can be met with a response. Everybody knows we will unite around our nominee for the sake of the good of the country, and even that becomes a weapon against us. Meanwhile the chances aren’t good that if a Conservative were nominated that the establishment wouldn’t defend them, but rather sit there and passively snipe at them until they lose wherein they can eternally say “Told you so” that Conservatism doesn’t win. C’est la vie. We got work to do with the country and within the Party. We might have to work on the country while we continue to work on fixing the Party.

      @Mith, everybody on the Right at least is ignoring Ron Paul because his attitudes regarding America’s enemies are insane, the Foreign Policy doctrine his attitudes cause him to adopt are dangerous, oh and he’s a closeted bigot, whose allies are not-closeted bigots, and he’s all for Freedom.. as in freedom to be a drugged out pile of human debris that’s going to require government aid throughout their lives. There’s no conspiracy to keep Ru Paul out. The State-controlled media love him. They’re going to do everything they can to see to it that he does well enough to entice him into a 3rd party run.

    • proreason says:

      If one of those online polls is heavily weighted on domestic issues, Ron Paul usually comes out as my top or close to top chose, so I’m in sympathy with him domestically and would love for someone to take a wrecking ball to DC.

      The problems with Paul lie elsewhere, in foreign policy, with his strange lifelong flirtation with white supremacy and with his overall wierdness. If he were somehow elected, he would be even worse for the country than Obamy, because the make believe media would dedicate itself to destroying him, not protecting him, and because leftists would not show the amazing restraint the right has shown with Obama. There would be riots BEFORE he was inaugerated, and the violence would mount from there.

    • Mithrandir says:

      @ tranquil.night. Ron Paul. “They attack us because we are over there!”–Well, that’s true. Osama was angry that U.S. troops were on “holy” muslim sand in Desert Storm, AND they are all still mad they were driven out of Spain in the 800s. Where ever muslim feet have trodden, they think is theirs.
      There was “BLOW BACK” as can be expected when you get involved with these people. American people hate their gov’t BUT ARE SHOCKED that people overseas ALSO hate the meddling puppeteering they have to suffer through? Really? You are shocked that other people want to attack “us” (read: our gov’t)? It’s a mystery to you? The gov’t is to blame, antagonizes these people, then when they fight back, they hide behind the American people and say, “See? They hate you! YOU should join the military and defend US.” –what a crock of crap people don’t understand this. . .

      WE didn’t cause 911, our gov’t caused 911. The WTC attack in ’93, the USS Cole, the Embassy attacks? The FBI asleep at the wheel ignoring reports muslims were NOT training to land airplanes? BUH! Ron Paul is right on that one. Does the gov’t take any blame for 911? Oh my G*d no! When has it EVER taken the blame for anything?

      He’s Wrong that trading with Arabs and terrorists is the answer to all our problems, that terrorists blow up everybody because they demand more trade…..and that IS nutty.

      UPSIDE is that the DOMESTIC Ron Paul is industrialized DRANO! The opportunity to sweep away these useless departments, send them all packing home, and the crony appointments to paper-pushing jobs, the strict interpretation of the Constitution makes my heart race! -And at $15 trillion in debt, + about $100 trill in obligations, you folks are hand-wringing that he might be too radical? Please…..

      RINOmny will be a 100% disappointment. He is just a steady hand steering the TITANIC. “Don’t worry, we are taking on water at an even rate, no need to turn left or right or do anything zany, just keep moving forward. Yes, we ignored all the iceberg warnings, but it was the iceberg’s fault, not ours. The ship may sink in site of New York if we don’t rock the boat, we don’t want to upset the 1st Class passengers, the lobbyists, judges, lifetime politicians……as the important people will be the last to take on water…”

  2. Illusions says:

    Will likely be talked about later in full thread.

    North Korean leader Kim Jong Il has died

    EOUL, South Korea – Kim Jong Il, North Korea’s mercurial and enigmatic longtime leader, has died. He was 69.

    Kim’s death was announced Monday by the state television from the North Korean capital, Pyongyang.

    Kim is believed to have suffered a stroke in 2008 but he had appeared relatively vigorous in photos and video from recent trips to China and Russia and in numerous trips around the country carefully documented by state media. The communist country’s “Dear Leader” — reputed to have had a taste for cigars, cognac and gourmet cuisine — was believed to have had diabetes and heart disease.


  3. artboyusa says:

    What a weekend for extinction: Christopher Hitchens (he’s with God now), Vaclav Havel and The Dear Leader…the first two are terrible losses, the third is no loss to anyone.

    As regards domestic events; I watched Romney with Chris Wallace last night. Saw and heard nothing to change my original opinion of him. Looked nervous, was self-censoring like crazy, worried he’s commit some “gaffe”, which means he didn’t say anything real. Nice guy for sure, good neighbor no doubt and that’s about it. No one who isn’t a member of his good looking family or being paid by him seriously wants Romney to be president and if he’s the nominee he will lose.

    I can’t agree with him on everything and who would serve in his administration I have no idea but I’m liking Ron Paul more and more. He’s the most radical candidate and the times call for radical measures, so….

    • The Redneck says:

      The problem with Ron Paul is that if he became president we’d see a mushroom cloud over an American city within a year, and one over Tel-Aviv in half that time. President Paul would respond by apologizing to islam.

      Romney is a bad choice, no doubt about that, but the blunt truth is we (the GoP as a whole) have given up on the bright choices. We’ve even given up on the half-bright choices. Now we have to choose between the stupid choice and the retarded choice–and Romney’s the stupid choice.

    • beautyofreason says:

      Fair points TR. When Ron Paul discussed the cause of the 9/11 attacks, he pointed to a statement by Osama Bin Laden against a U.S. military base in Saudi Arabia. Paul’s opinion is that we should have no bases in other countries of the world. But our base is in that country by consent. Bin Laden was exiled from Saudi Arabia for opposing the government there. So Paul is quoting a radical Muslim who was not even representative of the Saudi government as a lesson on foreign policy with that government. We also built the pipelines that allowed Saudi Arabia to extract oil thus moving their citizens from tribal goat herders to rich Islamists who export Wahhabi literature. In Ron Paul’s world everyone reaps the benefits of American intervention, except us. China takes over the mining contracts in Afghanistan and bloats itself on the spoils of our war. If, as Ron Paul implies, we cannot even have bases by consent then there is no point in having allies or leaving our borders. “I scratch your back, you scratch my back” becomes pointless. That is why he defines his foreign policy as non-interventionist, but I see it as isolationist. Nothing less than a direct attack would draw Ron Paul to an international conflict. He is like Neville Chamberlain prior to Britain’s entrance into the Second World War, during the appeasement of Munich. “A peace of our times,” said Chamberlain. About 50 million dead civilians across Europe are the collateral of this ill-conceived, slow-to-act pacifism. A ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure, goes the old adage. Same with foreign policy.

      Ron Paul has also spent too much time with the conspiracy theorists and is repeating their points. Last week he said that former President Bush was excited after the 9/11 attack, because it gave him a pretense to go to war with Iraq. Although Paul’s plainspoken views are a boon to his supporters, he will turn off a lot of voters with that caricature.

    • Melly says:

      “He’s the most radical candidate and the times call for radical measures, so….”
      Well, if you want an in-your-face media campaign that will produce great thrills for the true believers, you’re absolutely right. But if you actually want to elect an effective executive who is right for this moment, then I respectfully think you are wrong.

    • proreason says:

      There wouldn’t be time enough for a mushroom cloud.

      There would be riots before he was inaugurated and the violence would escalate from there.

      The leftists aren’t as patient as we are, and they thrive on violence.

      It wouldn’t have a thing to do with foreign affairs. It would be a combination of his promised huge cuts in government spending and his past racism. He might be able to get away with one or the other but not both.

      But it doesn’t matter. A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Obama. There is zero chance Ron Paul can ever be elected.

      If you want to protest vote, then you have given up the franchise and votd for the destruction of the country. It’s that simple. That’s why the Obamy Cartel funds Ron Paul in the first place.

      In football, if a team controls it’s anger, it usually wins. If the anger controls the team, it always loses. There are a lot of similarities between football and life.

    • artboyusa says:

      Mushroom clouds? I suggest that our current foreign policy, which combines aggression, cowardice, ignorance and wishful thinking, is more likely to produce mushroom clouds than anything Ron Paul would do. My position is that the only thing keeping America from turning into Western Europe is Obama’s incompetence. I live in Europe; my today is your tomorrow and it is not good. Give Obama another four years and he might actually learn to do his job and then we’re really screwed.

      Romney can’t win, Ron Paul might. Even if Romney won, it would change nothing. We’d only get worse more slowly. Ron Paul would mean real change, or at least the opportunity for real change. And even if he lost, his candidacy would put everything on the table; the role of government, the rights of the citizen, foreign policy – it would all be out there and the status quo would have to defend itself and we could have a real debate on what the future of the country should look like.

    • chainsaw says:

      If someone did, I missed it. RP, should he win, will be the oldest inaugurated President by 8 years. He’ll be 77. What happens when we get that old?

    • proreason says:

      This discussion is really a joke, isn’t it?

      If you have a cancer that will kill you in a year, with 99% certainty, take the chemotherapy.

      Unless you want to die.

      Ron Paul has no chance to beat Obama. He wouldn’t get 30% of the vote. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out.

      Of course Romney has a chance. Saying he doesn’t is ridiculous. He’s leading is some polls for goodness sake.

      I can’t believe the nonsense I read sometimes. It’s as if every iota of common sense is deliberately repudiated by some people. I suppose people don’t really believe it; they just want to be provocative.

    • artboyusa says:

      I don’t want to be provocative, pro – I want to win and I want us to learn from our own history, which is that conservatives win and RINOs don’t. If we put forward another one of these country club quasi-libs he will get respectful treatment from the media, he will run a nice, tepid campaign, he will poll moderately well up until November and then he will lose by 5%.We’ve seen it all before. I’m sure Romney will give a very gracious concession speech but its a speech I don’t want to ever hear. Obama with his arm around a tearful Michelle, waving goodbye as he boards the helicopter for the last time as president, is what I want. How to make that vision reality? Given the woeful quality of our candidates, given that I refuse to vote for that smug, pumpkin headed, adulterous, larynx-for-hire, and given the absolute metaphysical certainty of Romney’s defeat, I’m willing to consider a radical alternative, which is RP -that’s all.

    • proreason says:

      You want theory artboy, study quantum mechanics or particle physics.

      I am so tired of this stupid “only conservatives can win” meme that I’m about to throw up. Rush Limbaugh must control the brains of 50% of his listeners. When I hear somebody as brilliant as yourself say it, it just makes me horribly sad. I love Rush, but my god, think for yourself man. “only conservatives can win” is the equivalent of “the only healthy diet is carrots and tofu”, because like carrots and tofu being a great-sounding diet that nobody can adhere to, there is no true blue conservative that who a chance to win. It’s a fine theory as a starting point but a dangerous proposition once the field has thinned to a few candidates.

      Reality is that there are only a handful of candidates running, and the two with by far the best chance of getting the nomination are Romney and Gingrich. Reality is that Ron Paul is a kook who has written and/or supported racist newsletters, would denude the American military, and is a 9/11 truther. He is also 76 and has no chance to be elected. Period.

      Perry and Santorum have slight chances of getting the nomination and being elected. If you want to protest, support one of them or hope for a deadlocked convention in which another candidate can emerge. At least they aren’t truthers and have done more in their lives than developing a cult of lonely perpetual adolescents. People who support Ron Paul are really supporting Obama, whether they know it or not.

    • artboyusa says:

      Pro, I live in England. I couldn’t listen to Rush if I wanted to and his website is blocked by the place where I work (its “hate speech”, apparently) but from what you say it sounds like I may be in agreement with him about this, which is worrying. My view is that the country is desperate for change, which explains the phenomenon of Obama in 2008, and the country didn’t get change, it got more of the staus quo. The appetite for change hasn’t gone away and the candidate who can tap it will do well. Does Romney look like “change” to you? No, me either. The only person who ever looked at Romney and thought “That man should be president” is Romney himself, and maybe Mrs Romney.

      The UK has been ruined by staus quo politicians. We have three main parties here, two of which are in coalition together, and there is barely a chink of light between any of them; they are all Left-leaning, big government, high tax,welfare state enthusiasts the only difference is in degree. In the US the UK Conservative Party would be Democrats. I see the US going the same way and at the very least a RP candidacy would offer a clear choice and put everything on the table.

      Oh, and btw, the way that Fox News and the GOP establishment keep trying to suppress Paul only makes me like him more.

    • proreason says:

      artboy, you don’t have to listen to Rush and the other talkers to be influenced by them. Of course you know that, so I don’t know why you brought it up. It’s Rush’s long-time meme that people should always support the most conservative candidate, paying no attention to who might be viable…and it’s gets on the net and then to you. It’s a rigid ideological position that ends up doing more harm than good. And the fact that at the end of one of his monologues he says he will vote for the Republican, no matter who it is, only mitigates the damage slightly. By the time he says it, his audience is furious at Romney or whoever doesn’t meet Rush’s rules of the road for this week. Rush isn’t the worst of course. Now the worst ones are Mark Steyn and Ann Coulter, who are absolutely slaughtering Gingrich, who is the other riiiiiinoooooooo candidate who actually has a chance to be nominated.

      The classic example is the Nevada 2010 election. Mark Levin pounded and pounded that Sharron Angle was the perfect candidate and she was only NOT, she was a horrible candidate. The election could have gone against Harry Reid and one of the worst slugs in Senate history could have been removed. But noooooo. We had to vote for the person who had no organization, limited political skills, and no support from the republican powers in the state. But she mouthed the talk radio talking points perfectly, just like Herman Cain did, until somebody asked him a question. So we lost an extremely critical election.

      The same thing is becoming more and more likely to occur this time. Anybody who doesn’t vote for the Repulblican candidate is voting for Obama.

      You are the evidence.

    • tranquil.night says:

      “and no support from the republican powers in the state”

      Yep, that’s totally Sharron and talk radio and all those mindless right wing drone voters’ fault. Mhm, mhm, this is how the game is played. Politics isn’t about policy, it’s about knowing your place! Don’t you dare recite their talking points, you recite OUR talking points and you endorse OUR people if you want to get the stamp of approval to go anywhere. Y’hear?!

      I genuinely doubt whether Reagan could even get elected in a Republican primary today, but I really don’t care at this rate. If it’s come to this, then I’m thoroughly dispirited.

      Self-censoring a lot more about this and instead am bowing out of the battlefield because a) It’s pointless and b) It’s Christmas and no words can be said which directly oppose the gross self-worship that is politics more clearly than the actions of Christ.

      So yeah, have a special and refreshing holidays, everyone. The Truth will still overcome.

    • proreason says:

      It’s just reality, tn.

      If you think letting Harry Reid have 6 more years to run his criminal enterprise was worth sticking to your guns for a bad but righteous candidate, you are going to be sticking to your losing guns for a long time.

      The time to make a stand is BEFORE the barbarians are beating down the walls or during a minor skirmish with the barbarians, not during the key battles when losing can destroy the army.

      George Washington accepted a lot of little defeats, but he won the battles he had to win.

      The Nevada Senate election was a massive failed opportunity…for what? to placate Mark Levin? who would have soon been jabbing Ms Angle once she dared to stick a toe outside his reservation anyway. About the only one of them that doesn’t do that is coo-worthy Michelle Bachman, who hasn’t accomplished anything in her brief career other than declaring what she would do if she ruled the world, which will never happen.

      And artboy voting for Ron Paul would be even worse than that. It would be like spitting in the face of the guy about to chop your head off instead of getting help when you had the chance from an ally you disagree with from time to time.

      If the matter wasn’t so serious, I could understand a protest vote. I guess people think it’s just another election. Ho hum.

    • tranquil.night says:

      Well I think Captain Hindsight always has the answers, but the lesson I personally took from Angle’s loss is that when given the chance to take down a corruptocrat leader, the GOP establishment will sit on the sidelines if voters choose someone not of their taste. There’s plenty of worthy criticism of how the grassroots played that election sure (while never enough appreciation for what actually was accomplished by political amateurs, nor perspective towards the Establishment candidates the grassroots did settle for who also lost). But for whatever Angle and the others’ faults, it should not have been hard to make the case that there’s nothing that compares to their Demopoop opponents. The Party told them they’re on their own with their organization and messaging operation instead.

      You’re right, that was reality. We learned then that with the country in chaos the Republican Establishment didn’t care about anything more than their fruity little club, and that the only criteria they’ll consider as “electable Conservatism” is someone extremely polished, brilliant and exceptional like Rubio, who can overcome not only Democrats but also Republicans when they line up against you. Which Rubio did. Or if you’re from the South, where they can’t do much to stop you from winning, so they have to try and isolate your power in Washington instead (DeMint).

      It’s a stupid strawman. The Establishment says only they can win. Conservatives say blanket Conservatism represented by literally just about anyone is enough to win when it isn’t. Both are wrong.

      I don’t accept either premise, especially not the one that says we have to censor ourselves and tow the line because that’s the way the Republicans run things and there’s nothing we can do about it but shut up because it’s our only chance at winning and we. must. win. It may be the safest and most pragmatic chance sometimes to settle, but it’s not the only way it can be done, and I certainly don’t think it should be accepted for no substantive reason other than that the GOP establishment will throw away the election if voters don’t listen to them. Nobody that treats our representative leaders like that is ever going to be anything to me more than that which I have to work with or listen to if there’s literally no other choice.

      So we do and what happens? Everytime we tell the Republicans we’ll go along with the way they want to do things, moderate our position, the message behind our principled disagreement on the matter gets lost (see the current payroll tax cut extension), we never get credit for the compromise; instead we’re just told that we have to compromise more. We all have the lines we won’t cross lest we plunge down a slippery slope. For me, letting the Establishment dictate false narratives out of what they think is political expediency without challenge is one of them, because when their feet aren’t held to the fire they happily just watch the goal posts move back and back until big-government Welfare Statism is the acceptable Centrist position to which there shan’t be a challenge of the status quo. No that doesn’t mean we take ourselves to the extreme where every little thing is going to be a ‘hill you’re going to die on’ situation.

      But I get it. Politics isn’t reasonable. It’s just where liars and cheaters go to be with their kind and continue conflating their sorely damaged egos. No amount of logical discussion or real world consequences is ever going to get them to think government isn’t god, nor are they affected by or even interested in the knowledge unless they can use it to their benefit somehow. So respectfully, again, I wash my hands of it, let the ‘professionals’ do their work, and am continuing to pray it isn’t bunker time come November.

  4. tranquil.night says:

    I knew it was too early to start singing praises. No matter how much they try to make it look like they’re fighting for us, they’ve just shown their true colors at the last minute too many times now.

    The House passes the bipartisan Payroll Tax Cut/Keystone Pipeline compromise, and McConnell undercuts it before it even gets to the floor of the Senate: http://www.redstate.com/dhorowitz3/2011/12/18/house-must-decouple-payroll-tax-cut-from-broader-%e2%80%98extenders%e2%80%99-package/

    In a premature capitulation, they agreed (89-10) to amend the House extenders bill by eliminating most of the spending offsets, all of the UI reforms and the policy riders, with the exception of the Keystone pipeline provision. They will fill in the $33 billion two-month gaping budget hole with nebulous revenue increases from higher Freddie/Fannie mortgages over ten years. To the extent that those revenues will be actualized, this deal will indeed make it harder to shut down these officious venture-socialist enterprises. The Senate action was akin to grounding into a triple play for Team GOP, yet the underlying bill passed with unanimous consent.

    Until Saturday, the House was the only body that had proposed a workable solution to preempt a tax increase on every American worker. The Democrats had been on the run for the entire week. Sadly, in his last act of the year, McConnell, in what appears to be a unilateral move, has launched a drive-by preemptive assault on the House-passed proposal. Was he in such a rush to get home?

    Snatching defeat from victory. That’s the only thing they excell at. (Psst, because they don’t really want to be pursuing our agenda, but pay lip service to it because they have to, while really just continuing to pork out).
    Just a reminder that these are our friends the Republican Establishment at work and this is the type of “reform” we can expect from a certain super-slick managerial president.

  5. Mithrandir says:


    1. Romney wins, Republicans sit on their hands, Obama gets 4 more years to destroy America.

    2. Romney wins, beats Obama, then acts like the typical Republican abuse victim.The democrats will beat him up and down, trash him every opportunity they get, and Romney will stop the abuse by handing them the farm, the chicken coop, the barn, the house, and the back-40. ~Republicans are betrayed again, and liberals cake-walk the 2016 election with the most radical communist they can drum up.

    3. Gingrich wins, and consolidates the conservative/libertarian ticket and beats Obama.

    4. Ron Paul wins, and consolidates the conservative/libertarian ticket and beats Obama. All the Big Government people sit out of the election, and the House and Senate stay as they are.

    Republicans are too stupid to seize this opportunity I think.

    Instead of consolidating the fired-up libertarian voters with the fired-up conservative base voters, they are going to discourage both of them, rip each other apart, and just hand the keys to the liberal Republicans who can’t win anything. Forget a super-power coalition, just screw the whole thing up…..well done!

  6. artboyusa says:

    “a certain super-slick managerial president”… I can’t imagine who you mean.

  7. Reality Bytes says:

    Liberty: a system where even the mediocre can accomplish the exceptional.

    Best definition – from Mark Levin’s show last night. By contrast, in the European model, be it a laborer or a lawyer, you are what your parent were. To compare the exceptions with America would only further prove the point.

    Thank Me!

  8. proreason says:

    The grown-up speaks:


    Mr Sowell says it very well:

    “Do we wish we had another Ronald Reagan? We could certainly use one. But we have to play the hand we were dealt. And the Reagan card is not in the deck.”

    “concrete accomplishments when in office are the real test. Gingrich engineered the first Republican takeover of the House of Representatives in 40 years — followed by the first balanced budget in 40 years.”

    “Romney is a smooth talker, but what did he actually accomplish as governor of Massachusetts, compared to what Gingrich accomplished as Speaker of the House? When you don’t accomplish much, you don’t ruffle many feathers.”

    “Those who want to concentrate on the baggage in Newt Gingrich’s past, rather than on the nation’s future, should remember what Winston Churchill said: “If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost.” If that means a second term for Barack Obama, then it means lost big time.”

    Mr Sowell probably underplays Romney, since he was handicapped with the liberal Massachusetts legislature, but he is certainly directionally correct.

    This kind of clear and rational thinking trumps all of the arrogant Beck’s and Steyn’s petulant sophistry from the steroidal world of chest-thumping conservative punditry.

    If we’re lucky, he will soon share his thoughts on electability. The last quote, I think, is a hint of what he thinks about that.

    (btw, everyone should listen to the numerous 5 minute interviews of Sowell that are available on NRO. He isn’t a mean guy by any means, but it’s amazing how he can cut through the bullshit with a single comment that gets to the heart of a matter every time. He’s not a “smooth talker”, just a straight shooter who sees things that others don’t.)

  9. sticks says:

    If Romney wins the nomination, I will vote for him. I’ll be dammned if I’m going to sit on my hands and give another four years to the Obmonster who’s in there now. I realize all it will do is just slow down the bleeding, but if Obama gets reelected he will go for the jugular.

    • Mithrandir says:


      ~Ok then, Romney is the painfully slow removal of the band-aid which takes hours to pull off. Or
      ~Obama, which immediately rips the band-aid off.
      ~The really bad news is, you are going to bleed to death at the same rate after the band-aid is removed.

      With Romney, you are setting up a LONG-TERM DISASTER. He is like Jimmy Carter, that was so horrible, the Republicans got the W.H. for the next 12 years. It’s better to have a conservative go up against Obama, win or lose, than let another liberal Republican TOTALLY screw up the whole thing, ruin the party name and marketing until an even worse democrat comes along, and people forget about how awful Republicans are.

      My family and friends won’t vote for Romney. Screw it! When it all collapses, we own land, we can grow our own food. . .

    • sticks says:

      Mithrander, I read a lot of your comments and respect them, but I respectfully disagree.
      Obama and his flying monkeys are surely holding back at this point because they want more than anything else to retain power beyond 2012. Once that happens, which it will when those in opposition are deeply divided, especially if they refuse to vote, he will be free to go full bore with his agenda and he will have help from the other big government idiots in the senate and the house on both sides of the isle. Obamacare will be an absolute disaster for the country when it really kicks in and there will be much more besides. With Gingrich or Romney there is at least a chance for the Tea Party with others to slow or even stop that juggernaut, and maybe put some reigns on the EPA and other agencies as well. With Obama and the current crop there is no chance and not everyone has land to escape to. Anyway I didn’t say I approved of Romney I just think it will be either him or Gingrich unless something unlooked for happens at the convention and if it spits out a reasonable candidate I will vote for him. What it comes down to is we really have to vote against Obama, even if we hate being in that position (and I do) it is what it is.

  10. artboyusa says:

    I’m with you, Gandalf. Romney’s not a bad person; he’s got great hair, nice teeth and he keeps in shape. When he was governor of MA he finagled Billy Bulger, (longer term Dem Speaker of the House, brother of gangster Whitey Bulger and known locally as “the corrupt midget”) out of his 8 figure salary, no show job at UMass and that took some skill, so I give him credit for that, at least. Like I’ve said I’m sure he’d make a good boss, a friendly neighbor and a good loser, but he’s no conservative. He’s just another rich guy who thinks he should be president because he can’t decide what to do with the rest of his life and that is not good enough for me.

    • canary says:

      Romney did a very poor job on O’Reilly just recently.

      He skirted and avoided answering O’Reilly’s questions to include his former liberal record.
      O’Reilly kept asking him what “conservative” actions he took as Gov.

      Finally, after grinning and bobbing around Mitt’s eyes lit up as if he had a grand awakening, Mitt
      impressed himself bragging he aided foreigners to learn English through immersion.

      We all know anyone is better than Obama/Biden

      And, as I think Obama’s muslim upbringing, relatives, and friends obviously made up his agenda,

      I think Romney being a “TBN?” True Blue Mormon?, could have some consequences. I have seen in my life, mormons raised and spouses converted to mormon. The worst is people who join and play morom to get money from the church. Heard a lot of stories how the Mormons paid for everything for a long time. And this makes it easy for them not to leave the church. Do we know charities that Mitt has given to?

      We already know anyone would be better than Obama & Biden.

  11. canary says:

    Ship impounded for carrying missles and explosives lead to Erratic reporting and headlines by conjoined media as to details.

    BBC: Finland ‘finds Patriot missiles’ on China-bound ship

    Dec 21 2011

    The Finnish authorities have impounded an Isle of Man-flagged ship bound for China with undeclared missiles and explosives, officials say.

    The MS Thor Liberty had docked in the Finnish port of Kotka after leaving Germany last week.

    Dock workers became suspicious after finding explosives poorly stored on open pallets, and the missiles were then found in containers marked “fireworks”.

    The managing director of the ship’s owner, Thorco Shipping, expressed surprise.

    Another company official, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed the ship had been detained in Finland and said the missiles could have been loaded on to the vessel by mistake, AFP adds.

    Police did not confirm Finnish media reports that the ship had also been scheduled to stop in South Korea, Reuters news agency reports.

    It was bound for the Chinese port of Shanghai but there was no indication for whom the military cargo was destined.

    “Actually in our investigation at the moment, we have got the information that we found 69 Patriot missiles on the ship and around 160 tonnes of explosives,” said Detective Superintendent Timo Virtanen from the Finnish National Bureau of Investigation.

    Patriot missiles, designed by the US company Raytheon, are supplied to “US and allied forces”, according to the company’s website. South Korea is among states which deploy them.


    Hopefully the mass of weapons will be properly escorted to South Korea with no Fast and Furious snags.

  12. artboyusa says:

    OBAMA –his Rise and… Fall. Let’s time travel in our minds to January, 2013…

    “And we’re here on the South Lawn, waiting for president – I mean former president –Obama and his family to emerge and board the waiting helicopter for the short flight to Andrews Air Force Base, from where they’ll fly to the president – sorry, former president’s homeland of Indonesia for an extended vacation”.

    “You know, Brett; I suppose it’ll be awhile before we get used to calling him ‘the former president’. I mean, he’s been such a significant part of all our lives for the past four years”.

    “You’re certainly right about that, Tammi. Significant is the word. Just a minute; I think we can see the former First Family; the president, his wife Michelle and their daughters Diptheria and Malaria, starting to walk toward the helicopter…”

    “The former First Lady seems upset, she’s clinging to her husband and… is she crying, Brett?”

    “It would seem so, Tammi but Mr Obama himself seems composed, almost regal in his demeanour”.

    “As he always has…and here comes President Ron Paul. He seems to be accosting the former First Family and waving a sheaf of paper at them”.

    “I believe that’s the audit of White House furniture, furnishing and works of art that the new president demanded Mr Obama complete before leaving office. It looks like there may be some kind of a problem, President Paul appears to be speaking sharply to Mr Obama and he’s certainly waving those papers around in a very agitated sort of way”.

    “The former First Lady is shaking something from her hair and now something has fallen out, bright and shiny it appears to be, and President Paul has picked it up and now he’s holding out his hand and Mr Obama is handing him what appears to be a rolled up oil painting that the former president had somehow been carrying inside his trouser leg”.

    “It looks like a Gilbert Stuart; how it could have fallen in there is anyone’s guess”.

    “These things can happen to all of us, I suppose. The former president, his wife and daughters are now handing over various items that appear to have somehow found their way into their socks, hair, waistbands and back pockets. Geegaws, trinkets, whatnots, memorabilia, collectibles…”

    “That’s quite a costly haul that’s piling up on the lawn there, Brett…”

    “It certainly is, Tammi. We’ll be back with our live coverage of ‘Obama – a Media Mourns’ after these messages…”

    Well, its only a dream now but if we work really, really hard and we’re very, very good and we’re busy little elves we can make his downfall a reality and have a very special Christmas next year, the Best Christmas Ever…so MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!

    • canary says:

      Priority : make sure Obama doesn’t take the “wooden pen” carved from President Lincoln’s desk; gifted to the White House from PM England in exchange for the toy AF1 helicopter
      The enormous rare Golden Necklace Obama’s bow to King of Saudi Arabia earned him. May be a snag as the Saudi King said it was very rare and only given to honor his most closest friend. Obama will say it was a personal gift, but it needs to be melted down into a statue of an bald eagle or U.S. flag and set properly in the White House.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »