Today's starter: Anyone going to CPAC? If so, be sure and visit the various MRC functions which include:
- An 11:30 book signing today for Brent Bozell's book "Whitewash"
- The official MRC booth where you can meet our staff as well as get some nice swag
- The NB presence at "Bloggers' Row." Managing editor Ken Shepherd and myself will be in and out throughout the conference
- A 12:00pm panel Saturday on web politics at which MRC will present our new Eyeblast video hosting service
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
An AMAZINGLY rare moment.
February 7, 2008 - 09:30 ET by sarcasmoYes, antilibertarian bias actually-admitted, albeit too-late to matter. Be still, my beating heart...At least we know those bridges to nowhere were all those damn libertarians' fault.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
How ya doing in those
February 7, 2008 - 10:25 ET by BDHow ya doing in those primaries..... (note, not caucuses, Primaries....)
You lost again, but as usual you have yet to admit it.
February 7, 2008 - 10:32 ET by sarcasmoSo I'll admit you're wrong for you again. See Maine primary -- 19% beats 10% last time I checked...
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
At least we are all in
February 7, 2008 - 10:39 ET by Roger the ShrubberAt least we are all in agreement. Your status as a loser is secure.
Oh, yours too, loser...
February 7, 2008 - 10:43 ET by sarcasmoBelieve me, there's NO WAY* one of these RINOs is gonna win over the Democrats, especially Obama. So the irony of your insult is even better than usual. Let's face it. BD predicted never above 10%, lost once and waffled because it was a caucus not a primary, and then lost-again so I admitted it for him. And then you whined about it and resorted to name-calling when, if anything, the name fits YOU best.
JMR
*Why's coming soon...
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
I will defer, Maine. You
February 7, 2008 - 10:48 ET by BDI will defer, he wond the Maine cuacus.. You are correct. But MAINE was a caucus....
Now will you admit that Paul is wasting his time prior to an eventual Libertarian Run?
Thanks for your honest, if assisted, admission.
February 7, 2008 - 10:55 ET by sarcasmoBut if your (and the biased media's) constant accusation/speculation fest were anything-approaching true on this subject, why is the guy's grandkid trying to raise money for what I've always told you (whether or not your reading comprehension's all-that-good...) is Plan B??? Let me guess, it's all part of an evil plot to go 3rd party instead???? To what end? The Libertarians & Constitutions both have a number of good, young potential candidates for a losing run at the Presidency.
IMO the evil-plot is instead to keep one fiscally conservative Republican seat in congress, despite the usual RINO objections. Think "you're gonna be seeing lots of 'I told you so' on C-Span" if this one works...
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
So, your theory is that Ron
February 7, 2008 - 11:03 ET by BDSo, your theory is that Ron Paul is actually using the Name Recognition gain of running as a Presidential candidate in order to actually make his re-election to the House more secure?
Please be clear on this point.
No, read what I said.
February 7, 2008 - 11:10 ET by sarcasmoReading is fundamental. I basically asked you: "if your & the media's accusation is true, then why is his own grandkid trying to raise money for Plan B?" I'm clear only if you don't hallucinate words I never-said -- otherwise I'm probably quite UN-clear. I have yet to say thing-one about name recognition in this context, and considering the blackout/bias I've repeatedly-busted, it wouldn't have made any sense even if I had.
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
Please tell me YOUR theory
February 7, 2008 - 11:14 ET by BDPlease tell me YOUR theory on this
I already did.
February 7, 2008 - 11:16 ET by sarcasmoReading is fundamental. He's tried the 3rd party thing. Duh.
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
So your theory is: He
February 7, 2008 - 11:51 ET by BDSo your theory is:
He cannot read. AND since he has already tried the Libertarian party attempt he will not try it again?
Essentially that is what your post above says.
Nope. Only if you hallucinate.
February 7, 2008 - 23:01 ET by sarcasmoOr if by "he" you mean yourself. I repeat, pay attention to my words, not your hallucinations, if you wish to know what I said.
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
SARCASMO! You have not
February 8, 2008 - 09:41 ET by BDSARCASMO! You have not SAID any words, just posted words said by OTHERS!!!!!
What are YOUR words.
That's crap, BD.
February 8, 2008 - 09:44 ET by sarcasmoI've said stuff, and you've hallucinated stuff, just as I posted above when you last did. This critique doesn't hold water, because of your reading comprehension difficulties. That dog won't hunt. Give it up.
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
SARC: I ask you
February 8, 2008 - 09:50 ET by BDSARC:
I ask you questions.
you then reply with a level of analysis on the issue usually goes something like this.
"You guys are all Whiners."
And then you insert a hotlink of a fabulous speech from the Paulian websites regarding the price of gold or some such nonsense.
And then you put a script at the bottom saying something like "Rally to the Paulian Websites, wanna see how?
This is analysis?
Nope. You try to put words in my mouth, again
February 8, 2008 - 09:54 ET by sarcasmoSo I make you look foolish, again. Lather, rinse, repeat. I said above why I don't think he's likely to run 3rd party again, you refused to accept it and instead hallucinated, so I pointed out the halluciation. Solution? Don't hallucinate.
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
Taking the only thing that
February 8, 2008 - 10:05 ET by BDTaking the only thing that pproaches analystical work and examining it, we come up with the following....
Well, deconstructing your work has been fun, but I gotta go grade some papers of real analysts doing their finals.
Sorry Roger and BD - I love you guys but Sarc is right
February 7, 2008 - 11:20 ET by Dee BunkWe are all losers and there is no point in saying who is a worst loser. None of our candidates won and now we are stuck with McCain. How much someone lost by doesn't really matter. A loss is a loss and we have all lost.
I respect your opinion, Dee,
February 7, 2008 - 11:46 ET by Roger the ShrubberI respect your opinion, Dee, and agree that McCain is unpalatable as my candidate. We are all losing out. That is the difference. We understand this. The guy with the least amount of votes is still in the race to syphon off more money, and douches like Sarky proclaim this as some sort of victory?
It's stupid, and I have a low tolerence for stupidity.
Roger: As a resident
February 7, 2008 - 12:27 ET by BDRoger: As a resident Arizonan I gotta tell you that we need to look at this in the Yin-Yang perspective. For every crisis, there is opportunity.
1.) McCain might be able to be shamed into giving up his Senate seat ala Bob Dole and we might get a real Republicn/Conservative in place of him.
2.) Since McCain will be fighting hard for the same base that either Barack or Hillary, it makes the actual swing vote the conservatives who can always decide to stay at home on election day. If McCain does not placate the conservatives, they can always ensure his defeat and thus have the trump car.
Just trying to "look on the bright side of life."
You have a good point, BD.
February 7, 2008 - 13:20 ET by Roger the ShrubberYou have a good point, BD. Romney dropping out means that our Lord and Saviour, the Most Blessed Ron Paul, is only two freak accidents away from being the Republican candidate.
I am not slitting my wrists over McCain. I wholeheartedly want him to win, and I encourage all of you who are disheartened to still vote in November, since there are plenty of congressional and senate races that need votes, and, to me, that is more important than the prwesidential race.
Count me a member of the "If you do not vote, you are not allowed to bitch" crowd.
we can't win all the
February 7, 2008 - 13:38 ET by TruthMongerwe can't win all the battles
but we can win the war(s)
Where, oh Whiner
February 7, 2008 - 23:04 ET by sarcasmoDo I ever call what's happened "a victory"?
Do you, amid all these hallucinations as to what I've allegedly-said which can't be backed-up in the least by reference to my words, see why you get the respect you DESERVE from me, instead of the respect you so-obviously crave when you're not busy whining??
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
Who said anything about BD
February 7, 2008 - 10:51 ET by Roger the ShrubberWho said anything about BD or Maine? I was making a general statement. You ARE a loser. No whining here, DasSarkbot, just "telling it like it is". The fact that you still come here to thump your chest over Ron Paul's "amazing" showing is verification enough for me.
Don't like reality? Tough. Deal with it, loser.
I did.
February 7, 2008 - 10:56 ET by sarcasmoI sometimes do his admitting for him around here, Whiner. Just like I sometimes point-out the fact that you tend to whine a lot.
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
Awww, is the wittle
February 7, 2008 - 11:04 ET by Roger the ShrubberAwww, is the wittle cry-baby all upset? Does poor Sarky need his official Ron Paul Binkie? Don't blame us for the PATHETIC 3% showing in your home state.
I guess you didn't vote enough times.
Oh wait, I forgot 3% is A SMASHING VICTORY FOR RON PAUL!!!
What a loser.
What a whiner.
February 7, 2008 - 11:11 ET by sarcasmoYou started it. I just responded in kind, but I'm glad to see you're admitting it, Whiner.
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
The person complaining "You
February 7, 2008 - 11:35 ET by Roger the ShrubberThe person complaining "You started it" usually is the one that ran home crying to mommy. She's right upstairs from you, Sarky-poo. She's making you grilled-cheese and tomato soup for lunch, your favorite! She will be calling you from the basement any time now.
You cannot handle simple statement of fact. A trademark of a loser.
Keep whining, Whiner
February 7, 2008 - 23:08 ET by sarcasmoI'm hoping for another meltdown, like you had when Ted Stevens' career ended and I made fun of it. And I see your side's still trying to re-write that history. How, I wonder, does it feel to be refuted THAT soundly??
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
Ted Stevens? Are you sure
February 8, 2008 - 08:11 ET by Roger the ShrubberTed Stevens? Are you sure you have your enemies straight, DasSarkBot? Kindly show us when and where this happened. Did you save it? I hope so, because a Shrubber's Meltdown is, indeed, a rare occurance. Once every two years or so, I imagine. Or, about as often as DasBlimp was able to leave the hanger...
Until then, you calling everybody who disagrees with you a "whiner" only shows that you have nothing. Your Lord and Savoir's "handlers" were too stupid to even have a booth at CPAC yesterday? It is fun to read your fellow Paultards cry and moan and pretend Ron Paul is NOT polling in the single-digits (except for a very few exceptions, so spare us the expected RP links)...
Not everyone, just the whiners.
February 8, 2008 - 09:39 ET by sarcasmoBut I call 'em like I see 'em, as always. If you act like a horse's ass, as above when you started the name-calling, I'll treat you like the horse's ass you are.
And whether or not you recall your own Ted Stevens FBI-raid meltdown, others sure do, and I don't need to look it up for you. The fact, and try to deny it all you want, is that some of YOU LIKE BIG SPENDING REPUBLICANS. Face the truth. And speaking of the truth, you tend to have meltdowns about every 2 months or so, from what I've seen, not every 2 years.
JMR
PS Speaking of CPAC, here's one DailyPaul URL you're not gonna see from The Whiner! At least CPAC didn't let a foul mouthed pundit shill her books in preference to actually-conservative candidates (not just Paul!) this time.
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
Yes, actually you DO need
February 8, 2008 - 09:47 ET by Roger the ShrubberYes, actually you DO need to "look it up". Throwing around accusations you cannot back up moves you from "Very Stupid" to "Extremely Stupid".
Your last post, to me at least, shows me that you are, once again, mentally-bankrupt, and this morning's meltdown is a sight to see. Once again, you have zero proof of a Shrubber Meltdown. If anything, LOSER, the meltdowns come from you on a monthly basis. Must be your time of the month. Keep it coming, LOSER Paulbot. Sucks to be you.
Hey, YOU look it up.
February 8, 2008 - 09:51 ET by sarcasmoI don't need to, because I know what I recall. You got annoyed when I did the "Ding, dong, the witch is dead" dance the day of the Stevens-raid, like it or not. Call me all the stupid names you want, It just makes you look like what you are. A loser.
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
Once again, throwing aruond
February 8, 2008 - 10:18 ET by Roger the ShrubberOnce again, throwing aruond accusations without having the facts to back it up are the tactics of a LOSER. Using your "steel trap" of a brain as your evidence would not hold up in a court of law, genius.
You make Libertarians look bad, you sad, sad, little boy. Go to your corner and pout, and do not come back until you are ready to behave like an adult.
John Kerry
February 7, 2008 - 09:31 ET by ricklailLurch is now saying that the tornadoes that ripped through the south were caused by global warming. Did he get his scientific credentals from a box of Crackerjacks? He needs to be "Swift boated" on this BS.
If you ain't the lead dog, the scenery never changes.-Lewis Grizzard
feeling left out
February 7, 2008 - 09:54 ET by SouthJersey1953Kerry is just feeling left out and unfortunately (or maybe it is fortunately) he can't think of an original idea to "champion" on his own...
Nothing but RINOs in '08 - Grrrr!
Lurch needs to study
February 7, 2008 - 10:03 ET by OldSailor88Without cold fronts meeting warm fronts, tornados can't form. If the world were warming as they say it is, and the world were completely warm, there would be no cold fronts and thus no tornados. Food for thought.
Stultus est sicut stultus facit
Question
February 7, 2008 - 09:55 ET by GothampcIs it possible for McCain to pick a non-Republican running mate? Would a McCain/Lieberman ticket be possible or can the Republican Party step in and say no?
He is free to do any stupid
February 7, 2008 - 10:25 ET by HermanoHe is free to do any stupid thing he wants once he gets the nomination. Of course, they will try to persuade him in one direction or another.
So in essence I should be
February 7, 2008 - 10:28 ET by GothampcSo in essence I should be looking to move to a more stable country?
I have a feeling he will
February 7, 2008 - 10:50 ET by bassndudeI have a feeling he will select Huck for a running mate.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Possibly, but watch for him
February 7, 2008 - 10:59 ET by BDPossibly, but watch for him to go Bi-Part and select Joe Lieberman under the "We are both Terror warrior Mavericks" mantra...
Even though I put the
February 7, 2008 - 11:28 ET by Dan The Man 2Even though I put the notion forward in another post, I dont think that is a possibility. Of course I may be wrong, once I though I was but I wasn't..
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
How much power does a VP have?
February 7, 2008 - 11:18 ET by GothampcBut is he going to take counsel from his VP? If Supreme Court justices start to "slip the surly bonds of earth" is he going to choose another Ruth Badgirl Ginsberg?
pollute your favorite kid's mind today!
February 7, 2008 - 09:56 ET by sarcasmoWith a classic comic book by my favorite tax-felon, Irwin Schiff, now available free online.
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
Calm Down!
February 7, 2008 - 10:17 ET by mattmCalm Down!
Anyone going to CPAC?
February 7, 2008 - 10:25 ET by LeonI know who isn't.
Ann Coulter.
CPAC wins Leon's Thumbs Up of the Day Award for denying entry to loudmouth, ignorant, hate monger.
I hope she has fun running her 'Q&A Session' groups in the back alleys of DC, in the shadows of the CPAC.
censored was she:)? no
February 7, 2008 - 11:03 ET by TruthMongercensored was she:)?
no doubt by "free speech" liberals...
TM, You must be joking.
February 7, 2008 - 12:58 ET by LeonTM,
You must be joking. What would liberals have to do with planning CPAC?
Do you even read or do you just see a word or two and respond?
your so right leon - very
February 7, 2008 - 13:48 ET by TruthMongeryour so right leon - very sorry - it's so obvious that you've done a ton of reading on this...
"Democratic Party boss Howard Dean demanded that Republican presidential candidates denounce conservative columnist Ann Coulter..."
http://www.thatpoliticalblog.com/serendipity/archives/478-Right-Wing-News-Ann-Coulters-Juvenile-Comment-At-CPAC.html
TM, Are you implying that
February 7, 2008 - 13:52 ET by LeonTM,
Are you implying that CPAC dropped Ann Coulter b/c of Howard Dean?
You are seriously out of your mind.
I really should know better
February 7, 2008 - 14:50 ET by TruthMongerI really should know better than to make a serious effort to inform this guy:)
I guess it's fun to try - once in a while - in a strange sorta way...
What time is the yearly
February 7, 2008 - 10:29 ET by balboaWhat time is the yearly outlandish statement scheduled for? I just wanna be prepared...
Watch the news. You can hear
February 7, 2008 - 11:56 ET by Chris NormanWatch the news. You can hear any number of outlandish statements uttered by Democrats on an hourly basis.
Zing!
February 7, 2008 - 11:59 ET by balboaZing!
The gold is gone.
February 7, 2008 - 10:30 ET by sarcasmoWhat I find interesting about this article (aside from the whole situation of a financial news media with antilibertarian-bias so-blatant that a group would actually spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on an ad to try to get around it) is the mention of the Barrick Gold lawyers' admission(pdf) that -- just as GATA's "kooks" have always-accused -- Barrick is engaged with central banks. These lawyers, who had full access to Barrick's books and top officials, swore to the truth of what was the core basis of Blanchard's lawsuit when submitting that statement to the court. Yeah, I'm sure trading gold swaps, leases, and futures won't affect gold prices...I believe the government!! Riiight....
JMR
If this is winning, I think I'd rather lose...
And now, today's Shrub
February 7, 2008 - 10:36 ET by Roger the ShrubberAnd now, today's Shrub Report®:
John McCain missed yesterday's economic stimulus vote. Exactly the kind of leadership I want in the White House.
It just isn't Mardi Gras without the customary shootings and murders…
It's been a Storm Porn extravaganza this week: blizzards, tornadoes, earthquakes, flooding, volcanoes, etc. John Kerry whining about global warming is just the cherry on top. Meanwhile, the world feels even more hardships caused by Global Warming.
This Shrubber is disappointed with the headline of this Washington Times piece. Even the LA Times got it right. Tsk, tsk, Wash Times
Today's PaulBots Living in FantasyLand Update. It is like a endless fountain of nutty goodness.
FastEd's News Story of the Day!
Read this piece about a military contractor ripping off the government. I wonder if the two ND senators (Dorgan & Conrad) with a "D" after their name are responsible?
All across America, dumbasses went to the polls on Super Friggin' Duper Tuesday, even when it was not that states' day to vote. At least these dumbasses in Chicago were live voters.
Man receives life sentence for beating girlfriend to death with a microwave oven.
The Top Ten Grammy Snubs of All-Time. (Pardon the language within)
A Dennis Kucinich fundraiser seat can now be had for $25. Is this one at a Cleveland Denny's?
Another example of the Utopian European universal healthcare system.
The UK slides further into the abyss.
Meanwhile, the tide continues to rise against the Global Warming douchebags, but Lady Pantsuit still keeps chanting the same old talking point… At least the lawyers are getting rich.
Speaking of Douchebaggery…
And, finally, an Ash Wednesday Update.
Worried about abyss sliding...?
February 7, 2008 - 11:08 ET by TruthMongerhere's how you can help:)...
Partner with Islam…
http://progressivemuslims.org/
Worried about the same
February 7, 2008 - 11:29 ET by Roger the ShrubberWorried about the same 4-year-old link being posted by Tumbler, er, PartialTruthMonger?
Here's another example of partnering with Islam.
speaking of the truth, it's
February 7, 2008 - 13:55 ET by TruthMongerspeaking of the truth, it's actually that they STARTED 4 years ago, have been working hard at it ever since, have been graciously asking for our partnership and assistance, and you still fail to respond - tsk tsk...
eyes wide shut:)
read the parable of the good Muslim...
Sioux manufacturing is from
February 7, 2008 - 11:55 ET by BDSioux manufacturing is from the Fort Totten reservation near Devils Lake ND. I always assumed it was one of those companies who go thte contract based on the fact that they were minority controlled (I think they call them 8-A corporations) and are sort of an affirmative action program.
Actually, having lived in ND for 22 years, I can tell you both Senators and the Congressman would likely defend this contractor even if the helmets spontaneously combusted on contact with the soldiers head.
Hey shrubbo -- talking
February 7, 2008 - 11:19 ET by Jack BauerHey shrubbo -- talking about primary voting on the right day...
I tried voting in the Democrat primaries abroad, over in London (you can)...
Except they DEMANDED a photo I.D. to PROVE I was entitled to vote. What's THAT all about.
Weird huh? For the Democrats, that is.
So Jack - explain yourself!
February 7, 2008 - 11:27 ET by Dee BunkAre you talking about voting for U.S. or GB candidates? Are you registered in the U.S. ? If you were voting U.S. did you vote Dem because the Rep was a lock where you are registered?
Also - you are allowed to vote in person in London for a U.S. candidate?
You have me so confused!
Dee - I was only jesting
February 7, 2008 - 11:41 ET by Jack BauerDee - I was only jesting to make a point.
The Democrats are allowing Americans to vote in Democratic primaries in many countries. BUT they have to show a photo I.D. to prove citizenship.
Maybe they think, ya know, folks may uh-- lie about their status!
I thought that was ironic, as Democrats are leading many court challenges to overturn State laws requiring photo I.D.'s in elections. Because, of course, no one lies in America about their right to vote!
Jack - I had no idea they were doing that . I knew people could
February 7, 2008 - 12:21 ET by Dee Bunksend absentee ballots but not vote in other countries. Are you registered here or can you only vote in GB elections?
Jack,
February 7, 2008 - 11:40 ET by R D HelmExcept they DEMANDED a photo I.D. to PROVE I was entitled to vote. What's THAT all about....Weird huh? For the Democrats, that is.
Next time, don't shave or shower for three or four days prior to showing up to vote. Also, a Hawaiian flowerdy shirt and sandals would probably be a good idea, too. Perhaps even cutoffs would be in order.
That way, there is no possible way the Brits would confuse you with anything other than a lib. :-)
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Oops, sorry Rog.
February 7, 2008 - 11:52 ET by R D HelmMissed the link in your post.
Late morning dyslexia, ya know.
Relax!
February 7, 2008 - 11:59 ET by mattmRelax!
HsuGate Update: A BIG Fish Lands in the Net
February 8, 2008 - 01:08 ET by BritcomSource: CQ Politics
Hilarious skewering of media
February 7, 2008 - 12:06 ET by balboaThe Daily Show looked at media coverage of Super Tuesday. Very good.
http://www.thedailys...
Rick Santorum just made a
February 7, 2008 - 12:09 ET by Clear thinkerRick Santorum just made a remark concerning the cpac conference today in reference to McCain. I may have the exact wording off a bit but you will get the gist.
"The people at this conference are not the Republican rank and file, these people pay attention"
I know what he was getting at, but I was struck at how correct this statement was. The Republican rank and file are as uninformed as the Democrat rank and file, and as far as I'm concerned, that's part of the problem we have in getting real conservatives to run for POTUS.
Just a thought.
Anyway, I can't wait to see if McCain get's boooed!
The Conservative movement is about to be reborn.
Apocryphal John and Pruning the Rotted Branch, or What Would Rea
February 7, 2008 - 12:15 ET by LCT688Even amidst their own turmoil surrounding the Billary / Obama contest, the Democrats and the MSM all are salivating over the prospects of the kinds of damage that will be brought onto the Republican Party by the nomination of John McCain. That the Party will fissure is beyond doubt, the only question remaining is their minds is how deep will be the wound be and how long it will it leave the Republicans weakened while it heals, if ever.
The Republican Party and its conservative principles and not some feral beast to be wounded, but rather a strong tree, irrevocably rooted in our country’s long traditions of low taxation, small government, personal freedom, self-reliance and individual responsibility.
Sometimes as with any healthy, growing tree, there are branches that have been corrupted or infected. Or maybe even it’s a growth that has somehow grafted itself to the tree. If the rank and file, along with the Party officials are to be wise and dutiful arborist of that tree, than perhaps the time is now, before the convention starts to declare the McCain branch to be not only apocryphal to the core concepts of the Republican party, but now be apostate as well. Convene the convention without his delegates. Bring in representatives of all the other candidates who have participated in this primary process and seat the Platform committee to produce a document clearly delineating our history, our core beliefs and how we feel they apply to the world today. The task would then be to re find a candidate who will not just stand by them but pledge to them and actually build his campaign on them.
Let the Senator from Arizona and his “independent voters” go stand with his friend Joe Lieberman. They can call themselves “Lieberman Independents” or McCain Democrats” or the “John and Joe Traveling Road Show”. What they cannot call themselves is Republicans. Being for the troops and pursuing those who wage war against us makes you a patriot, not necessarily a Republican.
Turn the paradigm of the whole election on its head once more. Let the left worry about how liberal voters may split their vote between Billary / Obama and McCain / Lieberman. All while we reunite our base around either a new or unforeseen candidate. Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson all come to mind.
We have all asked ourselves “What would Reagan do?” If he were looking over your shoulder while you are reading this, I think he just might be smiling.
I may be just an old line Republican whose roots go back to Joe Martin of Massachusetts, but I have no access to the halyard line that would be required to run this idea up the appropriate flagpole. Know anyone who might?
"A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master and deserves one."
Alexander Hamilton
American al-kaya traitor Gadan killed by US military?
February 7, 2008 - 12:26 ET by Jack BauerAlthough Afghanistan is THE WAR THE DEMOCRATS SUPPORT
(indeed O'Bama wants to invade Pakistan last time I heard)...
so it's kinda funny that no Democrat could be bothered to praise the troops they "support" when it was announced last week that US Afghan based forces had Hellfired a missile up the ass of Osama #2 Abu Laith al-Libi.
However Republicans who support the missions, as well as troops, should be partially uplifted by unconfirmed reports that al-kayda spokes-massmurderer the "American" Adam Gadan was also vaporized in the same strike.
Check out..
http://hotair.com/ar...
http://mypetjawa.mu....
another good
February 7, 2008 - 12:31 ET by mattmanother good one
http://terroristdeathwatch.com/
matt - GREAT anti-terrorist
February 7, 2008 - 12:38 ET by Jack Bauermatt - GREAT anti-terrorist site. Bookmarked it. thanks.
DRUDGE -- Rush reporting Romney out!
February 7, 2008 - 12:30 ET by Jack BauerDRUDGE -- Rush reporting Romney out!
Rush is flagging Drudge report that Mitt Romney will annouce he's out of race at CPAC.
Ron Paul continues ... pitching for Romney supporters (only kidding!)
→ CPAC
February 7, 2008 - 12:38 ET by Cool ArrowFox is reporting from CPAC Romney is about to take the stage in 5 minutes possibly to announce dropping out.
♣ a seal
Just heard it on the local news
February 7, 2008 - 12:40 ET by ChaitealoverThat leaves us with no hope for a candidate in the general that's even close to conservative.
Please don't anybody tell me Ron Paul will give me hope, he doesn't.
Chai
“...Bury me on my face,” said Diogenes; and when he was asked why, he replied, “Because in a little while everything will be turned upside down.”
just remember - the
February 7, 2008 - 13:57 ET by TruthMongerjust remember - the Almighty did allow Hitler and Stalin to lead once, too
sh*t happens
McCain Campaign Promises
February 7, 2008 - 12:31 ET by candanceTo help out my dear undecided friends on here, I thought I'd post some of John McCain's lesser known campaign promises so you can make a more informed decision.
If elected president in 2008 McCain plans to:
-Cut the federal interest rate to zero
-Leave us in Iraq for ten thousand years
-Discuss diplomacy with the wrong man in Germany
-Drool over legislation that darn Congress won't send
-Show us all how fighting in Vietnam taught him economics
-Call reporters jerks when they make him mad
Calling a reporter a jerk
February 7, 2008 - 12:38 ET by Ruths husband BenCalling a reporter a jerk will not redeem McCain, but it is a start.
Don't quit, Mitt!
February 7, 2008 - 12:40 ET by R D HelmThis is bad news. Really bad news.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Well, with Romney out does
February 7, 2008 - 12:54 ET by Jack BauerWell, with Romney out does anyone think McCain and Huckabe will finally start attacking each others policies?
Maybe we'll enter a real DADA phase and they'll both continue attacking Romney!
My guess is that Huckabee
February 7, 2008 - 13:50 ET by HermanoMy guess is that Huckabee drops out tomorrow.
McCain's so-called mandate
February 7, 2008 - 12:54 ET by candanceHe is beating Romney by less than a million votes...not exactly what I would call a mandate.
Leon's Questions of the Day
February 7, 2008 - 13:04 ET by LeonWhat happens when Romney officially drops out and Newsbusters actively rallies against the Republican nominee? (let's face it, this is an Anti-McCain website from top to bottom, across the board)
Wouldn't that make Newsbusters an enemy of the Republican party?
Wouldn't that further mean that Newsbusters is essentially working for the goals of the Democratic party?
Should be interesting.
Leon becomes an agent for the Republican Party - Topsy-turvy
February 7, 2008 - 13:13 ET by Dee Bunkindeed. Very telling.
Newsbusters and most of us will hold our noses for McCain just like you would have if Lieberman won the Nomination in 2004.
McCain will lose.
Dee, McCain has a very
February 7, 2008 - 13:15 ET by LeonDee,
McCain has a very good shot at victory.
My feeling is that if he goes up against Hillary he will win.
If he goes up against Obama, he will lose.
→ Si Amigo
February 7, 2008 - 13:18 ET by Cool ArrowI see it the same way.
♣ a seal
Cool, I really want Obama
February 7, 2008 - 13:22 ET by LeonCool,
I really want Obama to get the nomination.
I genuinely believe that in this election, more than any specific policy issues or the war, people just want hope. That want to have somebody that will energize them and give them something to look forward to.
This is Obama.
McCain and Hillary are old guard. People are tired of their stale game.
Yeah that's what the Dems
February 7, 2008 - 13:30 ET by SemperrightYeah that's what the Dems need hope. Not ambition, not responsability, not action, not work ethic but hope.
All Obama is gong to bring to the Dems is a basket of excuses and some flowery talk.
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference.
The MARINES don't have that problem."
President Ronald Reagan - 1985
Semper, Who knows what
February 7, 2008 - 13:40 ET by LeonSemper,
Who knows what he'll bring? Your predictions are as worthless as everyone else's.
I'll tell you something he definitely won't bring though.
Decades of being in the back pocket of corporate lobbyists. And as far as I'm concerned, that's a big deal.
Lobbyists are ruining our government. Just look at the decision in Iraq to not open any contracts up to foreign contractors. That was a grievous error. Had we done this, would have had:
1) More competitive pricing
2) More support from other industrialized nations
3) More efficient rebuilding process
"Your predictions are as
February 7, 2008 - 14:30 ET by Roger the Shrubber"Your predictions are as worthless as everyone else's" . At least you are admitting your proclamations yesterday were worthless.
"I'll tell you something he definitely won't bring though. Decades of being in the back pocket of corporate lobbyists." You are also unsurprisingly naive when you claim that Obama will not bring his own brand of lobbyists into the White House.
And those lobbyinsts include
February 7, 2008 - 14:38 ET by BDAnd those lobbyinsts include the dreaded "Sierra Club."
You wanted to open the
February 7, 2008 - 14:36 ET by BDYou wanted to open the contracts to the French?
Do I want a French company to be running the messhall at Camp Victory? Nope.....
Do I want French Contractors wandering about Camp Liberty? Hell NO!!!!!!!
By the way, MORE EFFICIENT REBUILDING PROCESS? You gotta be kidding....
BD, There are many
February 7, 2008 - 14:47 ET by LeonBD,
There are many non-military reconstruction projects that we are engaged in in Iraq.
More effecient rebuilding process, I must be kidding you?
Nope. I mean, realistically, could it possibly be any less efficient and wasteful? Doubt it.
Nope. I mean,
February 7, 2008 - 16:39 ET by BDNope. I mean, realistically, could it possibly be any less efficient and wasteful? Doubt it.
I see you have never worked at NATO....
No, but our own version of
February 7, 2008 - 17:02 ET by Roger the ShrubberNo, but our own version of Alan Colmes did play intramural lacrosse at Swarthmore for one semester. Does that make him qualified?
Stay at a Holiday Inn
February 7, 2008 - 17:19 ET by BDStay at a Holiday Inn Express????
Oh Rog, 1) I fail to
February 7, 2008 - 17:22 ET by LeonOh Rog,
1) I fail to see how being a 4 year varsity starter in college could be a negative.
2) I fail to see how going to one of the top educational institutions in the country could be a negative.
So if that's what you're going to attack me on, then by all means, go right ahead.
What's next your going to complain that I'm too good looking?
You're my number one stalker and advocate all rolled into one convenient Pennsyltucky format. I love it.
Yinz yokels are a real hoot!
Leon: YOu have
February 7, 2008 - 18:10 ET by BDLeon:
YOu have insinuated in your posting that Europeans should be allowed to compete for American financed contracts in the warzone to add efficiency.
Can you prove that such competition from French, Belgian, or Luxumbourgian companies would produce improved competition? Can you prove that there is a company that could produce the same items that Halliburton or Brown and Root at a cost efficient basis?
I know of only one competitor to Halliburton (It is French) and doubt you can prove that they would be able to compete effectively.
BD Halliburton can prove they still have. . . .
February 7, 2008 - 18:23 ET by JayTeeHaliburton can prove they still have the Blueprints from when Brown and Root/Haliburton built much of the Iraq Oil producing infrastructure in the first place.
Leon just wants to Create his own United Nations based Oil Services Industry, so he can get some of that Oil Money flowing back in UN pockets again.
All you are proving is that
February 8, 2008 - 17:07 ET by Roger the ShrubberAll you are proving is that a faux-Ivy League education doesn't mean squat when it produces geniuses like you, Pumpkin.
Since you played four years of lacrosse at the varsity level (and most likely 4 more years at the high school lvl), surely you know that you should attack your opponent's weaknesses. I do that all the time to you here, Pumpkin. You must have been a real treat to coach, since you never seem to work on those weaknesses.
So, let's sumarize this: you are oblivious to your weaknesses and incapable of rectifying them. Yep. You have been prepared well for real life.
Sucks to be you, I guess.
BD, Asking you for an
February 7, 2008 - 17:31 ET by LeonBD,
Asking you for an objective analysis of the Iraq War is like asking a tobacco lobbyist for information on cigarettes.
You're an apologist, you have shown you have more interest in towing the party line than actually winning. It's a shame b/c you clearly have an awful lot of information, but you have a job and an employer that requires you to sugar-coat/propagandize everything.
Your opinion is just no valid anymore. You're an ad man.
Leon: All war is
February 7, 2008 - 18:06 ET by BDLeon:
All war is inherently wasteful. Yet, you have claimed without proof that waste is a key or strategic center of gravity in warfare.
I have simply asked you to prove that such waste of individual contracts as you discribe will cause the Strategic or Operational Centers of gravity to fall ot hte enemy and thus we lose.
For instance, you were upset that a key educational facility had faulty construction tht allowed feces to rain onto the students. I agree that this is disgusting and BAD. However, I am asking for proof that such faulty construction will cause us to lose a single key center of gravity.
By the way, my employer does not require me to sugar coat ANYTHING. My opinions are my own. Are yours?
→ Point taken Leon
February 7, 2008 - 13:32 ET by Cool ArrowIt's obvious Obama has something going for him. The question is, what is it?
The only upside to an Obama Presidency is that it would dispel the myth that some dreams are unattainable for minorities.
Star Parker makes some interesting points over at Townhall.
Looks like we're going to get a Jimmy Carter before we get another Reagan.
♣ a seal
Thanks for the big
February 7, 2008 - 13:34 ET by Roger the ShrubberThanks for the big chuckle.
Hope and change.
Change and hope.
Hoping for change.
You're Welcome Rog! Don't
February 7, 2008 - 13:36 ET by LeonYou're Welcome Rog!
Don't chuckle too hard though, we don't want your 3 Pennsyltucky-style teeth falling out.
No worries. I am sure my
February 7, 2008 - 14:16 ET by Roger the ShrubberNo worries. I am sure my dental health will be in good hands with the Hopeful Changer.
No worries, Roger!
February 7, 2008 - 15:31 ET by OldSailor88Your teeth, like the Werewolf in London's hair, will be perfect. Because Leon's tax money will be paying for it. Thank you for the great president, Leon! I can't WAIT to give up more of my hard earned money to freeloaders, crap, I mean people who deserve it more than me. It makes me all smooshy inside.
Stultus est sicut stultus facit
Leon, McCain hasn't a snow-balls chance against either.
February 7, 2008 - 13:48 ET by R D HelmOnce Sen. McClinton has the nomination locked up, the liberal MSM is going to open the flood gates on him. By the time the GE rolls around, much af America is going to see McCain as a senile, doddering, war-mongering old fool. Even if this is not true, the reality won't matter to most, only the perception.
What many people have failed to understand, and that includes many people on this very site, is that the MSM's apparent "love" for this man is an illusion. It does not exist. It never has.
They will turn on McCain with a vehemence that most are not going to believe. When it is all over, McCain won't be able to get himself elected dog catcher in Dixville Notch, New Hampshire.
Just watch.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
RD, You're viewpoint seems
February 7, 2008 - 13:50 ET by LeonRD,
You're viewpoint seems a little paranoid, but I suppose there's a chance that what you say could be true.
However, what could they possibly bring up about McCain that hasn't already been brought up? The guys been raked across the coals for the past 8 years. It's all old news. There are no skeletons in his closet.
I don't see the re-hashing of old stories to be a very effective attack tool.
Leon, there is a reason why the MSM has been "supporting"
February 7, 2008 - 14:05 ET by R D HelmLeon, there is a reason why the MSM has been "supporting" McCain getting the repuplican nomination, and it is not because they think he can beat Broom Hilda or Obama.
I watched McCain very carefully in the debates. The man is easily confused and appears less than coherent at times. Whatever mental sharpness he once had has left him. Neither Hillary, nor Obama, have this problem. He will get clobbered in the debates that will be coming.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Liberals have short
February 7, 2008 - 14:32 ET by NL207Liberals have short memories. Probably explains why they are liberals in the first place: They are not able to benefit from experience.
Read this here first: "Keating 5".
Today, the MSM has amnesia. After the nominating conventions, the MSM will suddenly remember all about this and may talk of little else until the general election.
So with the mighty MSM
February 7, 2008 - 19:35 ET by balboaSo with the mighty MSM working against you guys all the time, how has a Republican president ever been elected?
boa... With our own
February 7, 2008 - 19:40 ET by bigtimerboa...
With our own intelligence.
And there's the difference between us.
February 7, 2008 - 13:17 ET by RJConservatives are willing to openly debate the positive and negative aspects of their candidates, while leftists aren't.
But I'm wearing a clothespin when I go to my voting site in November:^)
→ Leftists
February 7, 2008 - 13:21 ET by Cool ArrowGet a bunch of Lefties together, and somebody breaks out a gut string guitar and suddenly they're all singing some old Joan Baez tune.
♣ a seal
Sure
February 7, 2008 - 13:21 ET by LeonSure RJ,
Right.
That's exactly what you did with the oh so 'conservative' W in 2004.
Please.
You only openly debate the positive and negative aspects of candidates you don't like. You've been deep in the throes of a Romney love fest these past couple months, not once addressing any of his negatives, which are plentiful.
Nice try though.
leon's daily fantasy
February 7, 2008 - 13:41 ET by RJYesterday you fantasized that I said evangelicals would put aside their views of Mormonism when they voted. Of course, that was pure invention on your part, and as you so often do, with your hit and run posting, you immediately ran away from my response.
Today, you fantasize that I'm in the throes of a Romney love-fest. Wrong again little one. I've clearly stated my reservations about Romney. He became my choice only after more conservative candidates dropped out.
My primary defense of him was against bigots like you who were regularly attacking his religion.
And that reminds me....I came across this yesterday: "As a non-religious person, I never take the religion of a candidate into account." -leon, June 21, 2007
Kinda flies in the face of your subsequent behavior, leon.
"He was a would-be sharp operator who lacked for the satisfaction of his ambition only the quality of sharpness..." -Michael Chabon, "Gentlemen of the Road"
RJ, 1) You're simply
February 7, 2008 - 13:49 ET by LeonRJ,
1) You're simply lying about the evangelical statement. That's fine. You're the one that has to live with yourself.
2) You are in the throes of apologist Romney love fest. You're so blinded by love you can't even see it. It's quite cute though.
3) I never said people shouldn't vote for Romney b/c of his religion. I said you shouldn't vote for Romney b/c he's a phony. My comments on his creepy religion were just commentary. Not an analysis of what people should be voting for
4) No it doesn't fly in the face of any of my behavior. But we do love the fantasy world of RJ infallibility that you inhabit. Keep it up, it's a real trip.
Prove your latest lies, leon
February 7, 2008 - 14:02 ET by RJYour fantasies are becoming even more pathetic than usual. Show me where made that statement. As usual, you know you can't. :^)
How ridiculous that you have to rely on lies to bolster your sad self-image.
In fact, you even make up childish, laughable lies when presented with proof:
"As a non-religious person, I never take the religion of a candidate into account." -leon, June 21, 2007
RJ, I already showed that
February 7, 2008 - 14:52 ET by LeonRJ,
I already showed that quote has nothing to do with my Romney critiques. I've never said you shouldn't vote for him b/c he's a mormon. I said you shouldn't vote for him b/c he's a two-faced phony.
I merely mentioned as an interesting side note that he's a member of a religious group that advocates racism and child abuse.
Furthermore, I love how you dug so deep to get that quote. That's why it took you so long to respond. You make me feel so important. You're a proven liar whose word is worthless on this website. Everything I've said about your prior statements are true. You specifically stated that Romney's religion would be a non-factor, even with evangelicals, but now you say it IS a factor.
It's just funny. You're funny.
PS And don't feel sad about the superbowl, your team didn't lose, because Connecticut doesn't have a team.
Still can't back up your lies, leon?
February 7, 2008 - 16:37 ET by RJCome on, leon/hater, let's see some proof for those lies of yours. You can't provide it and you know it....because it doesn't exist.
Your Romney quote was a "side note?" Haha, nice try at revisionism. Deny it all you want, but "As a non-religious person, I never take the religion of a candidate into account" is pretty clear and straight-forward. I do love the funny attempts at reinventing yourself, though.
Sorry, little guy. You're just not as big a deal in my life as I obviously am in yours. Your fantasy about me "digging" for that quote is another example of just how large I loom. I didn't have to look for that quote; it came up when I was looking for something else. Recalling your bigoted behavior over Romney, it made me laugh at your hypocricy and I saved it. :^)
Speaking of your lies, it reminds me of another little thing you said: "I just say whatever I feel like saying. Sometimes it's true and sometimes it's not." -hater
Was that comment about the Super Bowl supposed to make me feel bad? Sorry. In my life it was just a football game (as I said before the game)....something to enjoy and then forget.....but you come across as immature once again. Thanks for offering another big laugh at your expense. hahaha!
RJ, I'll give you
February 7, 2008 - 17:26 ET by LeonRJ,
I'll give you credit. You're the only person on this website with enough stubbornness to actually try to manuevar through the worthless search function.
I don't have the time or the inclination to do that. I know what you said, call me a liar, I don't care.
In your heart, you know what you said. You can live with it.
Translation: I have nothing to back myself up with.
February 7, 2008 - 19:49 ET by Roger the ShrubberRJ: 7
Hater/Leon/Alan Colmes: 0
Leon, I cannot speak for NB
February 7, 2008 - 13:37 ET by R D HelmAs I have only been around for a month or so, ;-) but I can speak for myself.
The treachery that the "establishment" republicans have been carrying out against true conservatives for the last two decades is now complete. By their forcing McCain down our throats (and that is exactly what they have done here) and essentially telling us to like it or lump it, they have now managed to drive many of us from the party completely, at least at the national level.
They have been taking the votes of conservatives for granted for the last twenty years, much in the same fashion the democrats have been doing with the votes of black Americans for the last forty five years.
Sorry, but this conservative refuses to go along any longer. As such, the republican party has, in a certain sense, made me an enemy.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Chill Out!
February 7, 2008 - 14:28 ET by mattmChill Out!
mattm... Pricless! A picture
February 7, 2008 - 15:18 ET by bigtimermattm...
Priceless!
A picture worth a thousand words....
I am sending this to all on my email list!
Thanks for making my day!!!
Oh, Brother...
February 7, 2008 - 15:13 ET by MassConservSaw this and had to share it. I'm speechless.
http://news.yahoo.co...
MC... OMG! Leave it to
February 7, 2008 - 15:16 ET by bigtimerMC...
OMG!
Leave it to SF.
Pathetic.
Do you know how the vote
February 7, 2008 - 19:55 ET by ChaitealoverDo you know how the vote turned out? Or where the money is supposed to come from?
Chai
“...Bury me on my face,” said Diogenes; and when he was asked why, he replied, “Because in a little while everything will be turned upside down.”
Hi Chai,
February 8, 2008 - 07:24 ET by MassConservI looked up the results of the vote.
While the initiative failed, not surprisingly over 25% of San Fran approved of the proposal. More than likely it didn't pass just because they like the money the bad, ol', ugly prison brings in from tourists.
Here's a link...
http://www.mercuryne...
Thanks, MassConserv
February 8, 2008 - 16:19 ET by ChaitealoverI guess SF does still have tourists. I woudn't know as everyone I know in SoCal decided long ago not to spend their money there because of the 25% that would want something like a taxpayer supported "Peace Center".
Chai
“...Bury me on my face,” said Diogenes; and when he was asked why, he replied, “Because in a little while everything will be turned upside down.”