[Unknown Member]

I’ll take the hit being wrong on predicting the Romney win, but the whole WMD and Palin thing are distortions of my positions.  I argued that there was sufficient evidence that Saddam was trying to buld WMD’s to warrant a pre-emptive attack.  I also felt that Palin energized the McCain campaign and was a better option than the Bammer, not necessarily that she was a the best candidate.  If you remember, McCain was lagging significantly before he announced the Palin and he surged ahead of the Bammer, until the financial crisis sunk his campaign.
 
If I held the liberal/leftist contingent to your posts, the list of times you guys were wrong would exceed the word limit, Starting with Thor and Obamacare, kpacks predictions of the salutory effect of Obama on Radiology and Lux’s ramblings  Man, were you wrong!

[eyoab2011_711]

I said PPACA would be upheld by SCOTUS…what was your position again?
 
So I accept your apology and will give you another opportunity to show where I have been wrong

[Unknown Member]

Quote from aldadoc

If you remember, McCain was lagging significantly before he announced the Palin and he surged ahead of the Bammer, until the financial crisis sunk his campaign.

And you can bet Comrade Soros manipulated the crash to guarantee a win for the left and One-World Government.  

[Unknown Member]

Quote from aldadoc

If I held the liberal/leftist contingent to your posts, the list of times you guys were wrong would exceed the word limit, Starting with Thor and Obamacare, kpacks predictions of the salutory effect of Obama on Radiology and Lux’s ramblings  Man, were you wrong!

Aldadoc, you only WISH you could cite something I said that turned out wrong.
 
 

[Unknown Member]

[b] but the whole WMD [/b]
 
NO NO NO NO NO NO
 
You were the biggest cheerleader and still are holding out hope

[Unknown Member]

Quote from aldadoc

I argued that there was sufficient evidence that Saddam was trying to buld WMD’s to warrant a pre-emptive attack.

“Sufficient evidence” is not [i]nearly[/i] the metric required by the USA to attack another sovereign nation and overthrow its regime. Rather, we require “proof”, not merely insinuating, compelling, or circumstantial “evidence”. And as a matter of fact, we not only require proof, but that proof must also indicate an “imminent” attack, not just “trying to build WMD”.
 
So apparently you were dead wrong, again, twice, on both the [b]WMD[/b] part as well as the part about any attack being [b]imminent.[/b] But Saddam’s dead now and that country has turned into a theme park asylum for any bad guys in that part of the world, so I hope you’re happy with your ability to spot “sufficient evidence”.
 
[EDIT]: Oh yes, and please never forget that your “sufficient evidence” resulted in the senseless death of 4000 of our innocent kids over there who actually believed they were fighting for our freedom.
 
 

[pratapchandraari_713]

Quote from Lux

Quote from aldadoc

I argued that there was sufficient evidence that Saddam was trying to buld WMD’s to warrant a pre-emptive attack.

“Sufficient evidence” is not [i]nearly[/i] the metric required by the USA to attack another sovereign nation and overthrow its regime. Rather, we require “proof”, not merely insinuating, compelling, or circumstantial “evidence”. And as a matter of fact, we not only require proof, but that proof must also indicate an “imminent” attack, not just “trying to build WMD”.

So apparently you were dead wrong, again, twice, on both the [b]WMD[/b] part as well as the part about any attack being [b]imminent.[/b] But Saddam’s dead now and that country has turned into a theme park asylum for any bad guys in that part of the world, so I hope you’re happy with your ability to spot “sufficient evidence”.

[EDIT]: Oh yes, and please never forget that your “sufficient evidence” resulted in the senseless death of 4000 of our innocent kids over there who actually believed they were fighting for our freedom.

 
But 4 people were killed in a US “pseudo-embassy” that had more CIA agents than actual state department employees!!!! 4 US CITIZENS WERE KILLED and our President decided to cover up the CIA operation rather than tell the American public EXACTLY what was going on in Benghazi.  He should be impeached for not outing the operation!!! There are so many questions as to why he couldn’t teleport F-16 fighters from Germany to carpet bomb the entire area as soon as he heard about it.  Who cares if innocent protesters outside the embassy are killed?  They aren’t Americans so they don’t matter.  Moreover, he should have had Navy seals practice for a few months in a mockup of the embassy, then send them over in a daring raid to free the captured ambassador (using a time machine of course).  Of course liberals are not going to be outraged when four US citizens are killed and always go back to Bush and Iraq.  
 
Everyone, including the UN and the millions of people around the world who protested the war knew that Saddam Hussein was a threat.  Everyone cheered when the US military did to Baghdad what Osama did to us on 9/11 multiplied by 1000 and joyfully called it “shock and awe”.   No one needs to know about the number of civilian casualties of the Iraq war, because they were not Americans.  
 
Four Americans were killed, we need another investigation!  Impeach Obama!
 

[btomba_77]

Christie tries to refocus the GOP on electability at RNC national meeting.
 
[link=http://m.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/08/chris-christie-says-he-wants-win-things-unlike-certain-other-people/68386/]http://m.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/08/chris-christie-says-he-wants-win-things-unlike-certain-other-people/68386/[/link]
 

Quote from Christ Christie

” For our ideas to matter we have to win. Because if we dont win, we dont govern. And if we dont govern all we do is shout to the wind. And so I am going to do anything I need to do to win.”

 
”
Chris Christie said he wants to win things, unlike certain other Republicans, at the Republican National Committee meeting in Boston on Thursday. “See Im in this business to win Im in it to win. I think we have some folks who believe that our job is to be college professors,” Christie said. This was [link=http://swampland.time.com/2013/08/15/chris-christie-lays-out-argument-for-2016/]interpreted[/link] to be a shot at Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a likely rival for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination. “Now college professors are fine I guess. Being a college professor, they basically spout out ideas that nobody does anything about. For our ideas to matter we have to win. Because if we dont win, we dont govern. And if we dont govern all we do is shout to the wind. And so I am going to do anything I need to do to win.”
Christie first became nationally famous by being [link=http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2010/09/09/nj-gov-christie-clashes-with-teacher-at-town-hall/]rude to people in town halls[/link]. (He still does it from [link=http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/01/christie-lashes-out-at-town-hall-bullst/]time to time[/link].) But Christie thinks you’ve got to pick and choose who you’re rude to. “I’m not going to be one of these people who goes and calls our party stupid,” Christie said on Thursday. This was [link=http://swampland.time.com/2013/08/15/chris-christie-lays-out-argument-for-2016/]interpreted[/link] to be a shot at Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who said the GOP needed to avoid being the “stupid party” after the 2012 election. 
The New Jersey governor’s speech was technically closed to the press, but the comments were obviously meant to get attention. Obviously, Christie is not unique among potential 2016 candidates in wanting to win. All of these people Paul, Jindal, Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan, Scott Walker want to win. That is how they got into elected office in the first place: by winning things. The real fight is over [i]how[/i] Republicans can win. Christie thinks it’s by being more moderate. Cruz thinks it’s by being more conservative. [link=https://twitter.com/robertcostaNRO/status/368099605277208576][i]The National Review[/i]’s Robert Costa[/link] tweets, “Just like Cruz is filling a vacuum on right, Christie is doing the same on center-right. Romney donors/RNC types looking for new spokesman.” 
“It was impressive. I forgot about the Obama bear hug,” said Tennessee GOP Chairman Chris Devaney told [link=http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/08/15/christie-raps-potential-2016-rivals-at-republican-confab/]CNN’s Peter Hamby[/link] in a self-contradictory statement. (The hug he almost forgot was the one Christie gave President Obama after Hurricane Sandy.) “The emphasis was on electability,” Texas GOP Chairman Steve Munisteri told [link=http://swampland.time.com/2013/08/15/chris-christie-lays-out-argument-for-2016/][i]Time[/i]’s Zeke Miller[/link]. “And he made the case that he is electable, so I think you saw a foreshadowing of 2016.” ”

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Adeelmd

There are so many questions as to why he couldn’t teleport F-16 fighters from Germany to carpet bomb the entire area as soon as he heard about it.  Who cares if innocent protesters outside the embassy are killed?  They aren’t Americans so they don’t matter. 

Everyone, including the UN and the millions of people around the world who protested the war knew that Saddam Hussein was a threat.  Everyone cheered when the US military did to Baghdad what Osama did to us on 9/11 multiplied by 1000 and joyfully called it “shock and awe”.   No one needs to know about the number of civilian casualties of the Iraq war, because they were not Americans.  

I’m assuming you’re being sarcastic with those lunaquips.
 
 

[pratapchandraari_713]

Quote from Lux

Quote from Adeelmd

There are so many questions as to why he couldn’t teleport F-16 fighters from Germany to carpet bomb the entire area as soon as he heard about it.  Who cares if innocent protesters outside the embassy are killed?  They aren’t Americans so they don’t matter. 

Everyone, including the UN and the millions of people around the world who protested the war knew that Saddam Hussein was a threat.  Everyone cheered when the US military did to Baghdad what Osama did to us on 9/11 multiplied by 1000 and joyfully called it “shock and awe”.   No one needs to know about the number of civilian casualties of the Iraq war, because they were not Americans.  

I’m assuming you’re being sarcastic with those lunaquips.

 
I would like to add that another rising star in the Republican party is North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory.  His stance against voter fraud by the left is making him popular in republican circles.  He will save a lot of taxpayer money by closing down voting precincts and shortening early voting.  Democrats are already scared that his tactics are spreading to other states, the American people are fed up with the HUGE national epidemic of voter fraud.  
 
It’s also obvious that the young people in this country are fed so much crap about student loan forgiveness and other government handouts from the left that having voting booths in or near colleges is just asking for trouble.   The youngens today are getting too much “mis”information from scientists, professors and other “elitists”; what they really need is a good spanking from their parents to show them whats right.   I am surprised he is not being mentioned as a possible front runner for 2016.  I would love for him to get the nod as the Republican nominee!
 
 

[kayla.meyer_144]

Yes, the GOP call to duty is
 
“END REALITY! IT’S A LIBERAL CONSPIRACY!”
 
Since we and they know that reality has a liberal bias.

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Frumious

“…reality has a liberal bias.”

Makes a nice tee-shirt.

[btomba_77]

[link=http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/how_ohio_slipped_through_romne.html#incart_river]http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/how_ohio_slipped_through_romne.html#incart_river[/link]
 
A retrospective review of the 2012 Romney campaign  from Ohio that comes with a warning:
 

 
And when it became clear Romney would be the Republican nominee, the Obama campaign carpet bombed Ohio with attack ads. From May through August of last year, the Obama campaign spent $30 million in Ohio on effective television ads accusing Romney of outsourcing jobs, having a Swiss bank account and investing in the Cayman Islands. During that same period, Romney countered with $10 million of his own ads.
It wasnt nearly enough. Obamas ads inflicted irreparable damage to Romneys reputation.
In retrospect, it (the election in Ohio) was probably over at that point, Balz told me. The Obama campaign didnt take anything for granted. But the ad campaign sort of put a weight on top of Romney.
Balz writes that the Romney campaigns strategy in Ohio irritated Sen. Rob Portman, referred to in the book as one of the campaigns most valuable assets, someone with special access to the candidate.
 
No issue hurt Romney in Ohio as much as his opposition to the automobile bailout. And it was especially damaging across the states northern tier.

 

Quote from Collision 2012: Obama vs. Romney and the Future of Elections in America

 
Balz is regarded as perhaps Washingtons fairest journalist, so Republicans should heed his warning in the books epilogue that the GOP has lost touch with the changing demographics of the American electorate:
 
Democrats have tapped into this new America, which in a matter of decades will no longer be a majority-white nation. Republicans awoke to this new demographic deficit after the election as if it had caught them unawares.
 
In fact it has been a persistent and visible problem for years, which, with some notable exceptions, has been either ignored by the party or dealt with in such superficial and ineffective ways that it has done them no lasting good.
 
Asked if a lot of Republican leaders have figured this out, Balz answered, I dont know. Well find out by 2016.
 
And the state that supplies the answer in three years will probably be the one that gives us the name of the winner almost every presidential year.
This one.

 

[odayjassim1978_476]

Axlerod  started it with the dog picture

Quote from dergon

[link=http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/how_ohio_slipped_through_romne.html#incart_river]http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/how_ohio_slipped_through_romne.html#incart_river[/link]

A retrospective review of the 2012 Romney campaign  from Ohio that comes with a warning:

And when it became clear Romney would be the Republican nominee, the Obama campaign carpet bombed Ohio with attack ads. From May through August of last year, the Obama campaign spent $30 million in Ohio on effective television ads accusing Romney of outsourcing jobs, having a Swiss bank account and investing in the Cayman Islands. During that same period, Romney countered with $10 million of his own ads.
It wasnt nearly enough. Obamas ads inflicted irreparable damage to Romneys reputation.
In retrospect, it (the election in Ohio) was probably over at that point, Balz told me. The Obama campaign didnt take anything for granted. But the ad campaign sort of put a weight on top of Romney.
Balz writes that the Romney campaigns strategy in Ohio irritated Sen. Rob Portman, referred to in the book as one of the campaigns most valuable assets, someone with special access to the candidate.

No issue hurt Romney in Ohio as much as his opposition to the automobile bailout. And it was especially damaging across the states northern tier.

Quote from Collision 2012: Obama vs. Romney and the Future of Elections in America

Balz is regarded as perhaps Washingtons fairest journalist, so Republicans should heed his warning in the books epilogue that the GOP has lost touch with the changing demographics of the American electorate:

Democrats have tapped into this new America, which in a matter of decades will no longer be a majority-white nation. Republicans awoke to this new demographic deficit after the election as if it had caught them unawares.

In fact it has been a persistent and visible problem for years, which, with some notable exceptions, has been either ignored by the party or dealt with in such superficial and ineffective ways that it has done them no lasting good.

Asked if a lot of Republican leaders have figured this out, Balz answered, I dont know. Well find out by 2016.

And the state that supplies the answer in three years will probably be the one that gives us the name of the winner almost every presidential year.
This one.

[btomba_77]

On the Civil War in the GOP
 
[link=http://spectator.org/archives/2013/09/17/house-gop-reagans-or-fords]http://spectator.org/archives/2013/09/17/house-gop-reagans-or-fords[/link]
 

Quote from David Brooks

[blockquote] [b]DAVID BROOKS:[/b] Whats going on in the House, and a bit in the Senate, too, is what you might call the rise of Ted Cruz-ism.
[b]And Ted Cruz[/b], the senator from Canada through Texas, [b]is basically not a legislator in the normal sense, doesnt have an idea that hes going to Congress to create coalitions, make alliances, and he is going to pass a lot of legislation. Hes going in more as a media protest person.[/b]
[b]And a lot of the House Republicans are in the same mode. Theyre not normal members of Congress. Theyre not legislators. They want to stop things. And so theyre just being they just want to obstruct.[/b]
[b]And the second thing theyre doing, which is alarming a lot of Republicans, is theyre running against their own party. Ted Cruz is running against Republicans in the Senate. The House Republican Tea Party types are running against the Republican establishment.[/b] Thats how theyre raising money. Thats where theyre spending their money on ads.
[b]And so theyre having a very obstructive role which is going on this week,[/b] and I think its going to make John Boehners life even more difficult.

 
 
Yeah yeah Brooks is a RINO.   But this is how the GOP looks from the outside (or even from the center-right)
[/blockquote]

[kayla.meyer_144]

What’s going on with Rubin? The Kool-Aide wearing off? Or she took the reality pill? She’s editorializing on the Victimhoom Republicans!

[link=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/09/17/conservative-victimhood/]http://www.washingtonpost…nservative-victimhood/[/link]

[btomba_77]

And Newt piles on:
 
[link=http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/aug/15/newt-condemns-gops-negative-vicious-culture/]http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/aug/15/newt-condemns-gops-negative-vicious-culture/[/link]
 
Newt condemns GOP’s ‘negative … vicious’ culture[link=http://www.auntminnie.com/rss/weblog_entries/jay-bookman/] [/link][/h1]

In a speech to the summer session of the Republican National Committee, Gingrich warned Wednesday that the party has a very deep problem with a culture that promotes negativity.
We are caught up right now in a culture, and you see it every single day, where as long as we are negative and as long as we are vicious and as long as we can tear down our opponent, we dont have to learn anything. And so we dont, Gingrich told the crowd.

[eyoab2011_711]

Nope too much of a self loathing party for introspection
 
[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-14/food-stamp-cut-backed-by-republicans-with-voters-on-rolls.html]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-14/food-stamp-cut-backed-by-republicans-with-voters-on-rolls.html[/link]

[kayla.meyer_144]

Newt’s funny. He’s the one who threw gasoline then a match on an already vicious GOP culture in the 1990’s. Been burning since. Then McConnell & Boehner tripled down on the conflagration in Dec 2008. Been Dresden fire since and building. Consuming.

[odayjassim1978_476]

so Newt is embracing Obama’s HOPE
well, I guess he realizes that the arrogance of the hopeless is not good for the party.  He just IMHO doesn’t give you a warm and fuzzy feeling like Obama’s hope gives

[btomba_77]

Quote from Noah’sArk

so Newt is embracing Obama’s HOPE
well, I guess he realizes that the arrogance of the hopeless is not good for the party.  He just IMHO doesn’t give you a warm and fuzzy feeling like Obama’s hope gives

Newt isn’t [i]embracing[/i] anything.  He’s just positioning himself to reap the political benefits of  being the guy who said “I told you so!”
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Still, I disagree with her basic tenet. Obama is in a far different situation than FDR — FDR was never threatened with government shutdown by a rogue group of ideological extremists in a chamber of Congress. In fact, none of the FDR Republicans would be accepted into today’s GOP. For that matter, very few of the Reagan Republicans were right wing enuf to qualify as anything but RINO today.

Roosevelt might not have been “pointing a finger” at a political party with his “The only thing we have to fear…” speech, but that’s because both parties knew what had to be done and they worked together to do it and approved some VERY hefty spending programs in enough of a bipartisan compromised tone that it instilled confidence back to the Americam people. Who can say the same thing about the immutable whiners in the House GOP today who, at every turn, do what they can to instill fear and LACK of confidence at every opportunity? I’m quite sure if one party threatened to shut down the FDRs government he certainly would point a finger and it wouldn’t be his index finger either.

Rubin, rewriting history again.

[kayla.meyer_144]

The search for purity & the pogroms to do it.
 
[link=http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/09/19/conservatives-and-the-quest-for-political-purification/]http://www.commentarymaga…olitical-purification/[/link]
 

For some conservatives, using the threat of a government shutdown to defund the Affordable Care Act is an issue with which they have honest differences with other conservatives. For others on the right, however, the principled and patriotic Republicans support the effort to defund ObamaCare while pseudo-conservativesthe spineless, craven, and cowardly typesoppose the effort.
For this group, which includes prominent lawmakers such as Senator Ted Cruz, the defunding strategy has become a litmus test, a true red line, a historic moment in which the right-wing wheat and the RINO chaff are once and for all separated. To find a comparable moment in history, think of William Barret Travis at the Alamo (played by Mr. Cruz) and Henry V at Agincourt (played by Senator Rand Paul). We few, we happy few, we band of Tea Party brothers.
 
What a shame all this melodrama is a mirage, a farce, a game.

 
 

[Unknown Member]

Every time Cruz talks he creates more democrats
 
Should just let him talk
 
25% of the populace loves him
 
40 % hate him
 
the other 35% want him to shut up but everytime he talks this 35% realizes just how out of touch with reality the republican party is and shifts more towards the democrats

[Unknown Member]

Quote from kpack123

Every time Cruz talks he creates more democrats
Should just let him talk
25% of the populace loves him
40 % hate him
the other 35% want him to shut up but everytime he talks this 35% realizes just how out of touch with reality the republican party is and shifts more towards the democrats

One way for Cruz to make history is, after Democrats win big in ’14 & ’16, if he openly admitted he was really a Democrat in GOP clothing with a mission to sabotage the Party by exposing it as the blind obstructionist that it really is. THEN I might appreciate him for having some kind of twisted genius. But right now, he’s gone, gone, gone, and he’s taking the Party down with him for his own selfish spotlight.

But then the GOP stands for that kind of every-man-for-himself individualism, right? What goes around…

[Unknown Member]

He is weird too
 
Smart guy but weird

[drmaryamgh]

It is rather enjoyable to watch an intelligent man speak from the heart rather than from the teleprompter.
 

[Unknown Member]

Quote from radmike

It is rather enjoyable to watch an intelligent man speak from the heart rather than from the teleprompter.

Speaking from the heart, per se, does not a desirable leader make. McCarthy and Jim Crow spoke from the heart. So did Adolf, Stalin, and Pol Pot. History is full of destructive bad guys who spoke from the heart. You have a strange barometer for leadership.

[drmaryamgh]

You missed my point completely.  But I expected that from you.

[btomba_77]

Ted Cruz knows exactly what he is doing.  This is in no way a pitch to mainstream americans or even the mainstream of the GOP.    He is trying to cement himself as [i]the[/i] Tea Party conservative and differentiate himself as more ideologically pure than others who might wish to claim that mantle.
 
He could give a rat’s a** what happens in 2014.  If the GOP wins seats, great. If they lose seats it’s because the message and politics weren’t far enough to the right.
 
Either way, he tries to set himself for 2016 to have the GOP primary voting base (much further right than the GOP electorate) sewn up and taken away from Paul or Rubio or Santorum.
 
If Cruz were to get the nomination, that doesn’t bode well for the GOP’s chances in the general election, but he’ll worry about that when the time comes and hope to ride a wave of turnout and democrat-fatigue going in to 2016.

[Unknown Member]

[b]It is rather enjoyable to watch an intelligent man speak from the heart rather than from the teleprompter. [/b]
 
Just shows the difference in todays political divide.
 
I look at this guy and see a weirdo cutt off the nose to spite the face self promoter
 
You look at him and see a hero
 
just worlds apart

[Unknown Member]

Quote from radmike

You missed my point completely.  But I expected that from you.

Coming from you, I accept that as a compliment. Thanks.

[drmaryamgh]

I’m still waiting for Ted to talk about Navy CORPSEMEN.
The fact that you took my point as a compliment demonstrates how out of touch YOU are.

[eyoab2011_711]

Reading Tweets, Green Eggs and Ham and reciting Toby Keith…is that what passes for “speaking from the heart” these days
 
BTW you do realize Reagan  used a teleprompter

[drmaryamgh]

Corpsemen?

[eyoab2011_711]

That’s left for what you got… a stupid mispronunciation.  Should we compare thish to all the Bush malapropisms

[drmaryamgh]

Is Bush president right now?
No.  Instead we have someone whose favorite words are I, me, mine, and ummmm.

[Unknown Member]

Cruz’s tour de force performance showed us a man of principle, courage, intelligence and wit. This will serve him we’ll. We finally have a Ronald Reagan replacement. You haven’t heard the last of him. The Empire WILL strike back.

[kaldridgewv2211]

Quote from aldadoc

Cruz’s tour de force performance showed us a man of principle, courage, intelligence and wit. This will serve him we’ll. We finally have a Ronald Reagan replacement. You haven’t heard the last of him. The Empire WILL strike back.

Or a man of futile gestures who’d have better luck trying to touch the moon.

[Unknown Member]

Harry Reid’s Pyrrhic victory vs a man of courage who stood alone all night on principle, taking on special interests, Congress and POTUS. I’m putting my money on the latter.

[eyoab2011_711]

But our proposal isn’t just aimed at older Americans. In part three of our initiative, we will take steps to improve catastrophic illness coverage for all Americans, regardless of age. Under our plan, the Federal and State governments would work together to promote the formation of what are known as risk pools within the Stateshelping to provide insurance for those who could not otherwise obtain insurance.

Read more at the American Presidency Project: [link=http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33745#ixzz2fvkd9MRR]Ronald Reagan: Radio Address to the Nation on Proposed Catastrophic Health Insurance Legislation[/link] [link=http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33745#ixzz2fvkd9MRR]http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33745#ixzz2fvkd9MRR[/link]
Gee sounds strangely like Obama’s proposal except there is more coverage in PPACA and there is the mandate necessary to make it work (even Repubs know that the Reagan plan above would not work unless mandated—that’s why it never went anywhere and why the current crop believes killing the mandate effectively kills PPACA financially)

[btomba_77]

The rize of Ted Cruz  (and other far right GOP leaders) bodes ill for the party’s chances in 2016.
 
Statistically, a party that has lost a prior presidential election only wins when they present a more moderate candidate in the next cycle.       Giving the nod to Cruz (or Santorum or the like) might feel good and pure to the GOP base, but is unlikely to bring electoral victory.
 
And, as dicussed many times in these forums, that is [b]the[/b] big problem with Tea Party…. they’d rather nominate a pure candidate than a candidate that can win.
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Quote from aldadoc

Cruz’s tour de force performance showed us a man of principle, courage, intelligence and wit. This will serve him we’ll. We finally have a Ronald Reagan replacement. You haven’t heard the last of him. The Empire WILL strike back.

Don’t make me laugh. Plenty of criminals are men of[i] “principle, courage, intelligence and wit”. [/i]Big deal. 
 
Cruz is a tour de [i]farce[/i]. 
 
 

[Unknown Member]

[b]Cruz’s tour de force performance showed us a man of principle, courage, intelligence and wit. This will serve him we’ll. We finally have a Ronald Reagan replacement. You haven’t heard the last of him. The Empire WILL strike back.[/b]
 
Maybe in your alternate universe
 
But not in reality.  

[eyoab2011_711]

BTW Alda your blogging hero Jennifer Rubin has spent the better part of the last 48 hours flogging Cruz endlessly

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Thor

BTW Alda your blogging hero Jennifer Rubin has spent the better part of the last 48 hours flogging Cruz endlessly

It’s been giving me one helluva whiplash too. Amazing turnaround, if it’s real, and I suspect it is, just as David Brooks seems to be going center left at this point. As was said earlier, Cruz is turning center-right Republicans into Democrats with every[i] “principled, courageous, intelligent, and witty”[/i] word he says! 
 
 

[btomba_77]

An interesting read ….. this thread is as good as any, on the change of the Heritage Foundation from think-tank to activist group and how it relates to the GOP.  (Even you conservatives could read it and find educational rahter than enraging 😉  )
 
[link=http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/09/the-fall-of-the-heritage-foundation-and-the-death-of-republican-ideas/279955/]http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/09/the-fall-of-the-heritage-foundation-and-the-death-of-republican-ideas/279955/[/link]
 
 
[image]http://cdn.theatlantic.com/newsroom/img/posts/heritagereagan.banner.heritage.jpg[/image]

 
The Fall of the Heritage Foundation and the Death of Republican Ideas
How the Heritage Foundation went from the intellectual backbone of the conservative movement to the GOP’s bane — and how it’s hurting the party’s hopes for a turnaround…..

As the Republican Party has weakened, outside groups like Heritage have gained strength because they feed the grassroots hunger for true conservatism, said Dan Holler, Heritage Actions communications director. From 2003 to 2007, our donor base grew astronomically. It went from 250,000 to 600,000, he said. Folks were telling us, Ive stopped giving to the RNC and the NRCC. I want someone in Washington whos going to actually fight for conservative principles. Heritages goal, in Hollers view, is to push the policy discussion as far to the right as possible.
 
For Republicans, stuck in a defensive crouch, being pushed as far to the right as possible is an alarming prospect, particularly when they thought they were pretty far to the right to begin with.
Because of the threat of right-wing primary challenges, there seems to be no limit to how far right Republican politicians can be pushed, Edwards said. The American people dont want the government shut down. They want control over taxes and spending, he said. But when you carry that to the point of saying, We want what we want, and if we dont get what we want were going to shut down the government, I dont think thatll be popular at all. I think the Republican Party will be hurt a lot if Republicans in Congress go along with this idea.
 
But the Republican Party, as Republicans are finding out the hard way, is not the Heritage Foundations concern.

 

[Unknown Member]

Cruz is now the de-facto leader of the Republican Party. Conservatives have long waited for someone to take the fight to the Democrats, someone not afraid to upset the apple cart. We now have such a person in Ted Cruz. He is the antidote to unfettered progressivism.

RINOs like Mc Cain, Graham, King and Corker need to retire. They are an embarrassment to the conservative cause, entitled appeasers that they are.

Cruz is da Man. He’s the future. I would love to see him go tête-à-tête against Biden or Hillary.

[Unknown Member]

[b]Cruz is now the de-facto leader of the Republican Party.[/b]
 
If you are right that is great news for democrats

[Unknown Member]

Quote from kpack123

[b]Cruz is now the de-facto leader of the Republican Party.[/b]

If you are right that is great news for democrats

Totally. I LOVE Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz for President. Maybe pick Bachmann as his VP. What a dynamic duo that would be.

It’s so obviously bad that I’m starting to think the GOP is deliberately lowering its standards so that at the last minute in 2016 it can run Jeb or Christie and everyone will flock to either one in total relief that the Party hasn’t lost it’s mind completely.

The more I see clowns like Cruz getting such airplay, the more worried I get that Republican voters’ standards have slipped so far that they’d elect just about ANYONE better than Cruz, and that’s not a very pretty prospect.

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Lux

Quote from kpack123

[b]Cruz is now the de-facto leader of the Republican Party.[/b]

If you are right that is great news for democrats

Totally. I LOVE Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz for President. Maybe pick Bachmann as his VP. What a dynamic duo that would be.

It’s so obviously bad that I’m starting to think the GOP is deliberately lowering its standards so that at the last minute in 2016 it can run Jeb or Christie and everyone will flock to either one in total relief that the Party hasn’t lost it’s mind completely.

The more I see clowns like Cruz getting such airplay, the more worried I get that Republican voters’ standards have slipped so far that they’d elect just about ANYONE better than Cruz, and that’s not a very pretty prospect.

Yeah, soapy!!   You demo-crites have a real winner in the White House now.  Man, ain’t it wonderful?  The obummer has done more damage to our country than can be repaired during the aministrations of the next 2 POTUS.  But, not to worry, a Republican will be there to clean up the mess left by this socialist Kenyan.  Try as you may, and praying to your liberal deities, the end of this travesty is near.  Can we withstand the remainder of this ordeal?  Hope so!!!

[Unknown Member]

[b]You demo-crites have a real winner in the White House now.[/b]
 
I believe he won fair and square twice

[Unknown Member]

You still don’t realize how disconnected you are from the general population of America, do you? The guy was elected twice, and only 23% of America wants ACA to fail.

Denial, denial, denial, Point Man.

[odayjassim1978_476]

Obama had rally in Maryland to roll out ObamaCare and O” Malley was right there= he will be in the running for 2016
Hoyer was there to because the state has really been progressive in setting the process up

[Unknown Member]

The GOP tried the moderate candidate thing twice. … It failed. It failed because the moderates (McCain and Romney) failed to energize the base. The progressives win when the “moderate Republicans” allow incremental surrender of liberties by repeatedly compromising. Each compromise takes another bite out of our pockets or from our liberties. It takes a leader with a clear understanding that less is more and with the intestinal fortitude to fight institunionalized progressivism and bureaucratic creep. Hence it takes a leader such as Reagan or Cruz.

[Unknown Member]

I vote we try it Alda’s way
 
Cleanse your party………………….Thats what ya need!!!!!!!!!
 
 

[btomba_77]

Quote from aldadoc

The GOP tried the moderate candidate thing twice. … It failed. It failed because the moderates (McCain and Romney) failed to energize the base. The progressives win when the “moderate Republicans” allow incremental surrender of liberties by repeatedly compromising. Each compromise takes another bite out of our pockets or from our liberties. It takes a leader with a clear understanding that less is more and with the intestinal fortitude to fight institunionalized progressivism and bureaucratic creep. Hence it takes a leader such as Reagan or Cruz.

[image]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-X6pdpu1-02o/TnPMQxVmYkI/AAAAAAAACRQ/cb7KziGzVvM/s400/moderation.png[/image]
 
 
After losing two presidential races in a row, parties tend to nominate candidates who are more moderate than the prior nominee.  Jimmy Carter was more moderate than McGovern, Clinton was more moderate than Dukakis, and Bush was more moderate than Dole.
 
Maybe the present GOP is different due to the disproportionate power of its far right wing, but that isn’t at all a good thing for winning the next general election.  If the GOP were to nominate Cruz it would probably look at lot like 1964.

[eyoab2011_711]

Sorry Alda but Obama is far closer to Reagan (if not slightly to the the right of Reagan) than Cruz will ever be. 

[Unknown Member]

Obama close to Reagan? What planet do you live on?

Obama is the prototype tax-and-spend socialist that Reagan railed against. Reagan’s strength was the ability to articulate conservatism and capitalism in a way that the public understood. He took a very hard line against the conventional wisdom that tax rates could never be cut drastically.

[Unknown Member]

[b]Reagan’s strength was the ability to articulate conservatism and capitalism in a way that the public understood[/b]
 
Reagan was a spender a big spender, His credit card approach to governing is a large part of the reason we are in the debacle we are today.

[btomba_77]

I think you can argue many similarities between Obama and Reagan.  Obviously their policy opinions and politics are radicallly different, but if you view them as chimeric mirror images from the Right and the Left a lot of similarities arise.
 
Both men came into office in bad economies, both had disastrous midterms.  Both men were/are polarizing figures but who were able to use their personal likeability to keep out of the worst of the scandals around them.
 
Obama has looked to Reagan as transformative. It remains to be seen whether the Obama presidency will be transformative and start a path away from the inequality supply side huge defence world that accellerated under Reagan and went on for 3 decades … time will tell. 
 
 
 
 Reagan made conservatives feel good about themselves and showed that labelling yourself as conservative could win. Obama has done the same for liberals.    Both men shifted the political center in the country over the course of their presidencies. 

[Unknown Member]

Quote from kpack123

[b]Reagan’s strength was the ability to articulate conservatism and capitalism in a way that the public understood[/b]
Reagan was a spender a big spender, His credit card approach to governing is a large part of the reason we are in the debacle we are today.

More proof that aldadoc refuses to acknowledge a day past WWII. 
 
 

[suyanebenevides_151]

The irony of the blame Bush ideology is that Obama is actually just Bush on steroids. Does everything Bush did 10x over.
 
Why? He doesn’t know what to do. And spending more sounded good, too. Even the misguided Obamacare is in ways an extension of health care proposals of wasteful spending, like Medicare part D. The problem is, no one is going to end up liking Obamacare since it won’t actually make things better. Costs will rise and those that think they have insurance will end up with a rude awakening of how silly the notion of “coverage” is, especially for what it costs most (average) people.

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Cigar

The irony of the blame Bush ideology is that Obama is actually just Bush on steroids. Does everything Bush did 10x over.
Why? He doesn’t know what to do. And spending more sounded good, too. Even the misguided Obamacare is in ways an extension of health care proposals of wasteful spending, like Medicare part D. The problem is, no one is going to end up liking Obamacare since it won’t actually make things better. Costs will rise and those that think they have insurance will end up with a rude awakening of how silly the notion of “coverage” is, especially for what it costs most (average) people.

Yes, of course, Obama is doing all of this randomly without giving any consideration to the opinion of any number of expert economists available to him at his beckoning. He’s just aimlessly throwing money out the door, arguably to buy votes (how on earth can Obama “buy” any vote from any professional in these discussions who clearly support his policies?), and all the Democrats in Congress are all just clamoring to embrace such a brilliant strategy without any question at all. You honestly believe that every last one of them is in on the conspiracy to burn our treasury without having stopped to consider and address the consequences?
 
I’d like you to be specific about the comparisons you are considering when you characterize the spending habits of Obama and Bush as being similar. What spending did Bush do that he claimed was helping the economy? And what was the outcome in the economy following such spending? And how does that apply to Obama’s economic record of 160+k jobs GAINED per month as opposed to Bush’s 800k jobs LOST per month in his final stretch?
 
And you believe there’s absolutely no example anywhere, ever, where similar spending strategies have brought back an economy from free-falling into the maelstrom, huh? Have you ever heard of FDR?
 
Unbelievable.
 
 

[Unknown Member]

[b]Why? He doesn’t know what to do. And spending more sounded good, too.[/b]
 
If you are referring to the Bailouts of the Auto industry AIG and the Banking industry, then I ask …..What would you have done.  It is so easy to sit here and say let them go under as we drift into a worldwide 20 year depression.  The bottom line is he had 2 choices bail them out or watch them go under and he knew exactly what he was doing when he chose to bail them out
 
 
[b] no one is going to end up liking Obamacare since it won’t actually make things better. Costs will rise and those that think they have insurance will end up with a rude awakening of how silly the notion of “coverage” is, especially for what it costs most (average) people.[/b]
 
If you are correct then it will fall flat on its face and Obama as well as any legacy he may have will be shattered.
 
But just like your Gold going to 3500$ prediction we can wait and see how that shakes out
 
If you are correct about Obamacare then you will have no worries……….It will falll on its face and go away. And If you are flat out wrong Obama will be an ICON
 
My guess is  Obamacare puts us somewhere in the middle of moderate to extreme success and in 20 years he gets a lot of credit much like FDR for Social security and Kennedy/Johnson for Civil rights

[eyoab2011_711]

But compromises, trade-offs, and, yes, unintended consequences have been part of every reform in American history. The minimum wage and child labor laws took money out of the pockets of employers. Social Security raised taxes on workers. Today, Americans cherish those programs because the good far outweighs the badbecause what the country gained, in economic security, health, and freedom, more than made up for what it lost. The same standard should apply today.
If youre going to judge Obamacare, you cant do it by looking simply at the minuses or the pluses, as even its advocates are prone to do. You need to look at the whole thingto see whats getting better and whats getting worse. And you cant do that until you ponder a question few bother to ask: What would the United States look like today if Obamacare [i]hadnt[/i] become law?

 
[link=http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114870/obamacare-exchanges-start-tuesday-oct-1-heres-why-theyre-worth-it]http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114870/obamacare-exchanges-start-tuesday-oct-1-heres-why-theyre-worth-it[/link]

[Unknown Member]

Cruz is a one-term Senator who will act as a firebrand during the 2016 Presidential race but fail to win the nomination.  Then, mark my words, he’ll become a media personality/think tank grifter and make that money, son!
 
Hitching your wagon to Cruz is a waste of time, just like it was for any number of far right grifters of the last 10 years.  They are angling for campaign money, plum think tank positions, or Fox News spots to ease into retirement.  Not a single one is interested in governing or changing America.  They make money off of alda’s and pointman’s outrage, why the heck would they want to diminish it with actually doing something?  Better to make fake filibusters and tweet from Alaska and let everyone else do the work.

[btomba_77]

Quote from kpack123

[b]Cruz is now the de-facto leader of the Republican Party.[/b]

If you are right that is great news for democrats

 
Goldwater 2016!
 
 
As I said before, parties (both the Dems and the GOP) that lose the White House tend not to win until they put up a candidate [i]more moderate[/i] than the one they had in the prior election.  There are exceptions to that rule, Reagan in particular.  But Cruz coming out of the Senate as a very polarizing figure for 6 years will make it hard for him to reach to the middle independents he would need to win a general election.
 

[Unknown Member]

Quote from aldadoc

…a man of courage who stood alone all night on principle…

…stood alone all night on ego…
 
Who, among the Republicans in the House and Senate, stand with Cruz? You can count them on one hand.
 
That’s not a sign of a leader. 
 
 

[eyoab2011_711]

The de facto head of the republicans is a man who doesn’t get the intrinsic message of “Green Eggs and Ham”?  Don’t you think your leader should be someone who can at least understand Dr Seuss?

[Unknown Member]

Quote from aldadoc

The GOP tried the moderate candidate thing twice. … It failed. It failed because the moderates (McCain and Romney) failed to energize the base. The progressives win when the “moderate Republicans” allow incremental surrender of liberties by repeatedly compromising. Each compromise takes another bite out of our pockets or from our liberties. It takes a leader with a clear understanding that less is more and with the intestinal fortitude to fight institunionalized progressivism and bureaucratic creep. Hence it takes a leader such as Reagan or Cruz.

Excuse me, it takes about 5 seconds of research on the web to show that although Romney’s ideology has traditionally been rather centrist, during his POTUS campaign his base forced him to be way too extreme to the right to the extent that he had to downplay his main political success: universal healthcare in Mass. Most credible pundits all confirm that if he had simply presented a centrist platform he would have swept the election from left-center to far right. But because of his disingenuous attempt at energizing his far-right contributors, everyone from center right to extreme left voted for Obama. 
 
Or are you really trying to tell us that because he was too centrist, those to the right of center voted for Obama instead?! If anything, if you [u]REALLY[/u] believe Obama is that far left, then if Romney had simply been a “center left Republican”, he would have won by a massive landslide. 
 
Your logic is untenable as is most extremists’. 
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Criticism of Cruz by both Democrats and establishment Republicans reminds me of the treatment Ronald Reagan got for daring to oppose conventional wisdom of the ruling class.
 
Interesting parallels between Reagan and Cruz:
-Reagan was accused of being a right wing extremist who would lead us into a World War III. Wrong!
-Reagan was ridiculed for proposing a defense shield “Star Wars”, because it was felt that it would never work…  Ask the Israelites how they feel about their Iron Dome.
-Reagan vehemently opposed government control of health care. “The foot-in-the-door-policy”
[link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVnL2py4ndg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVnL2py4ndg[/link]
-Reagan defied his advisors and stood alone when he demanded from Gorbachev:  “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. 
-Reagan railed agains the welfare state.  He argued against centralized government. “Government does nothing better than the private sector”.
-He exposed liberalism for the empty farce that it is: “The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, it is just that they know so much that isn’t so”
-He fought against the regulatory state: “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size”
 
It is good to see once again a political figure and statesman who is honest, principled and unafraid.  Go Cruz, give them hell.    
 
[link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBswFfh6AY&list=TLMPmuspFEBd2jbtqO4egHU_VmsPT0uQwI]http://www.youtube.com/wa…2jbtqO4egHU_VmsPT0uQwI[/link]

[odayjassim1978_476]

Aldi…do you like winning
I am an underdog supporter as well  but your track record…IMHO..U got to stop backing losers
as an aside have you seen the new interview Zimmerman’s wife has given

Quote from aldadoc

Criticism of Cruz by both Democrats and establishment Republicans reminds me of the treatment Ronald Reagan got for daring to oppose conventional wisdom of the ruling class.

Interesting parallels between Reagan and Cruz:
-Reagan was accused of being a right wing extremist who would lead us into a World War III. Wrong!
-Reagan was ridiculed for proposing a defense shield “Star Wars”, because it was felt that it would never work…  Ask the Israelites how they feel about their Iron Dome.
-Reagan vehemently opposed government control of health care. “The foot-in-the-door-policy”
[link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVnL2py4ndg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVnL2py4ndg[/link]
-Reagan defied his advisors and stood alone when he demanded from Gorbachev:  “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. 
-Reagan railed agains the welfare state.  He argued against centralized government. “Government does nothing better than the private sector”.
-He exposed liberalism for the empty farce that it is: “The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, it is just that they know so much that isn’t so”
-He fought against the regulatory state: “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size”

It is good to see once again a political figure and statesman who is honest, principled and unafraid.  Go Cruz, give them hell.    

[link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBswFfh6AY&list=TLMPmuspFEBd2jbtqO4egHU_VmsPT0uQwI]http://www.youtube.com/wa…2jbtqO4egHU_VmsPT0uQwI[/link]

[Unknown Member]

Quote from aldadoc

Criticism of Cruz by both Democrats and establishment Republicans reminds me of the treatment Ronald Reagan got for daring to oppose conventional wisdom of the ruling class.

Interesting parallels between Reagan and Cruz:
-Reagan was accused of being a right wing extremist who would lead us into a World War III. Wrong!
-Reagan was ridiculed for proposing a defense shield “Star Wars”, because it was felt that it would never work…  Ask the Israelites how they feel about their Iron Dome.
-Reagan vehemently opposed government control of health care. “The foot-in-the-door-policy”
[link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVnL2py4ndg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVnL2py4ndg[/link]
-Reagan defied his advisors and stood alone when he demanded from Gorbachev:  “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. 
-Reagan railed agains the welfare state.  He argued against centralized government. “Government does nothing better than the private sector”.
-He exposed liberalism for the empty farce that it is: “The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, it is just that they know so much that isn’t so”
-He fought against the regulatory state: “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size”

It is good to see once again a political figure and statesman who is honest, principled and unafraid.  Go Cruz, give them hell.    

[link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBswFfh6AY&list=TLMPmuspFEBd2jbtqO4egHU_VmsPT0uQwI]http://www.youtube.com/wa…2jbtqO4egHU_VmsPT0uQwI[/link]

Cruz is banking on this idolatry.  Literally.  He’ll use you to fracture the GOP and suck cash and power off the parts that remain.  He’s a charlatan and a grifter who doesn’t actually care about changing America.

[Unknown Member]

[b]Cruz is banking on this idolatry.  Literally.  He’ll use you to fracture the GOP and suck cash and power off the parts that remain.  He’s a charlatan and a grifter who doesn’t actually care about changing America. [/b]
 
Sometimes it is best to just let people keep talking.  Cruz is one of these people.  Just let him keep digging
 
Remind me a lot of Rick Santorum……the more people know him him the more they realize how weird and deluded he is
 

[Unknown Member]

Quote from kpack123

[b]Cruz is banking on this idolatry.  Literally.  He’ll use you to fracture the GOP and suck cash and power off the parts that remain.  He’s a charlatan and a grifter who doesn’t actually care about changing America. [/b]

Sometimes it is best to just let people keep talking.  Cruz is one of these people.  Just let him keep digging

Remind me a lot of Rick Santorum……the more people know him him the more they realize how weird and deluded he is

Exactly: A Cruz/Rubio ticket will nail it for the Democrats. (Have you been keeping up with the rapidly degrading Latino sentiment regarding the GOP lately?)
 
 

[odayjassim1978_476]

lol but there are some dem strategist who are probably saying ooh please make them the ticket/  please we believe in Aldi Logic[:)][:)]

Quote from Lux

Quote from kpack123

[b]Cruz is banking on this idolatry.  Literally.  He’ll use you to fracture the GOP and suck cash and power off the parts that remain.  He’s a charlatan and a grifter who doesn’t actually care about changing America. [/b]

Sometimes it is best to just let people keep talking.  Cruz is one of these people.  Just let him keep digging

Remind me a lot of Rick Santorum……the more people know him him the more they realize how weird and deluded he is

Exactly: A Cruz/Rubio ticket will nail it for the Democrats. (Have you been keeping up with the rapidly degrading Latino sentiment regarding the GOP lately?)

[Unknown Member]

Cruz/Perry or Cruz/ Walker or Cruz/Paul would be winning tickets. Rubio is not the right guy, too political.  He has his finger in the air too much.  Christie is the Democrats’ wet dream RINO.  

[odayjassim1978_476]

they may be on the stage debating but really???? over Jeb and CHristy
Newt has a CNN gig so HE may not do the debates but what female will be up there from the GOP side???? your thoughts? curious???

Quote from aldadoc

Cruz/Perry or Cruz/ Walker or Cruz/Paul would be winning tickets. Rubio is not the right guy, too political.  He has his finger in the air too much.  Christie is the Democrats’ wet dream RINO.  

[btomba_77]

I think we’d be more likely to see Cruz at the bottom of a GOP ticket.   An electible mainstreamer establishment type at the top with a Cruz as VP with a nod to the Tea Party.  The VP candidate gets to be the inflammatory attack dog on the campaign trail and Cruz could do that well.
 
Walker — maybe
Perry – I think his national chances are  pretty poor.  The “oops” is a real sticker…. like Howard Dean’s cathartic scream.
Ryan – I don’t think we’re done with him yet.  But I don’t think he would be willing to at the bottom of the ticket a second time… Been there/done that.
 
If anyone much more right than Romney (of the primaries) takes the GOP nomination it is highly likely that the Democrats will win again.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Flim-flam men.

[Unknown Member]

Quote from aldadoc

Cruz/Perry or Cruz/ Walker or Cruz/Paul would be winning tickets. Rubio is not the right guy, too political.  He has his finger in the air too much.  Christie is the Democrats’ wet dream RINO.  

The only people who believe this are hardliners. That should tell you how likely your scenario is. But I’m just shouting at the wind here. You will once again be disappointed as America rejects the pure conservatives and the gop is forced to run a centrist who can’t rally his base but can’t pull independents either.

[eyoab2011_711]

And yet Christie is the closest politically to Reagan…Repub governer of blue state; able to work with others, etc.  Just another reminder that Reagan would of beendrummed out by the current crop of Repubs

[eyoab2011_711]

Turns out those red states not only like their govt spending….they also love their govt jobs!
 
[link=http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/09/27/business/Big-Government-States.html?ref=business]http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/09/27/business/Big-Government-States.html?ref=business[/link]

[odayjassim1978_476]

This shutdown will be the GOP’S WATERLOO
since congress has voted how many times on this issue..then for everyday there is a shutdown, then they should not be paid(share the pain).  Also some in Kentucky from what I heard are going to health care fairs and saying oh this is great why can’t Obamacare do this..like tap on the shoulder, they are calling it something different in your state but it is OBAMACARE

[Unknown Member]

Yeah, already the far right is mewling about delaying the mandates being just good enough (“bbbb-but that one Democratic Senator said that one thing!”).  Plus the device tax repeal.  Too late, kids.  You “revolutionaries” wanted to die on that hill.  Here it is, get to dying!

[odayjassim1978_476]

saw Cruz on Meet the Press..he went to Harvard???? Has he had some work done?????

[Unknown Member]

Doesn’t Cruz look like Joe McCarthy?
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Picture wont post
 
 
[link=https://www.google.com/search?q=joe+McCarthy&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=MopIUo60AoXi8gSh04DoAg&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1097&bih=620&dpr=1]https://www.google.com/search?q=joe+McCarthy&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=MopIUo60AoXi8gSh04DoAg&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1097&bih=620&dpr=1[/link]

[btomba_77]

Quote from nobody2008

Yeah, already the far right is mewling about delaying the mandates being just good enough (“bbbb-but that one Democratic Senator said that one thing!”).  Plus the device tax repeal.  Too late, kids.  You “revolutionaries” wanted to die on that hill.  Here it is, get to dying!

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the device tax as a potential compromise point.   It was a contrivance to make the bill look less costly on paper in the first place.  Obama could give on that point without it effecting the ACA rollout. The GOP could save some face in stopping “Obamacare taxes”.
 
 
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Quote from aldadoc

Christie is the Democrats’ wet dream RINO.  

Jeb/Christie would beat Hillary/anyone (including Bill as either VP or First Gentleman).

The fact that aldadoc thinks Christie is the “Democrats’wet dream” shows how foggy he’s become. Dems currently fear Christie like the plague, and Christie is showing his pure brilliance with every step he takes. He could become the Springsteen of politics if he keeps this up.

[Unknown Member]

Quote from dergon

Quote from nobody2008

Yeah, already the far right is mewling about delaying the mandates being just good enough (“bbbb-but that one Democratic Senator said that one thing!”).  Plus the device tax repeal.  Too late, kids.  You “revolutionaries” wanted to die on that hill.  Here it is, get to dying!

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the device tax as a potential compromise point.   It was a contrivance to make the bill look less costly on paper in the first place.  Obama could give on that point without it effecting the ACA rollout. The GOP could save some face in stopping “Obamacare taxes”.

If that is the only compromise, the far right will lose face in a big way.  It would essentially be getting nothing for a protracted temper tantrum.  They are pinning their hopes on a delay of any kind but I’d be surprised if they got anything.  They are already walking back their insane demands suggesting the fact that Reid and Obama won’t negotiate is finally sinking in.  The tears of these “revolutionaries” taste salty!

[btomba_77]

[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-30/republicans-shutdown-fight-exposes-simmering-civil-war.html]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-30/republicans-shutdown-fight-exposes-simmering-civil-war.html[/link]
 
Peter King saying to blame Ted Cruz for the shutdown.
 
And this nice little piece…. guess I’m not the only seeing hints of Goldwater. 🙂
 
 
 

The conflict now exposed within the party may shape its future for years.
 
An intraparty tug-of-war, largely confined to campaign primaries during the past three years, is exposed on the national stage as Republicans challenge each other on tactics as a [link=http://www.auntminnie.com/quote/FDEBOUTL:IND]government[/link] shutdown looms, coming as early as tomorrow.
 
Its a civil war that has beset the party before, as base activists grow impatient with established leaders they claim have grown complacent in the anti-government fight. The results can be unpredictable, perhaps more so this time given that its taking place 13 months before the next election.
 
[h2]Goldwater 64[/h2] The rise of [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/barry-goldwater/]Barry Goldwater[/link] in 1964 as the Republican presidential nominee ended in the landslide election of Democratic President [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/lyndon-johnson/]Lyndon Johnson[/link].
 A revolt led by [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/newt-gingrich/]Newt Gingrich[/link], then a Georgia congressman, culminated in the 1994 Republican takeover of the U.S. after 40 years in the minority.
Gingrich, who became House speaker, and his majority prompted the 1995-96 partial government shutdowns, which dimmed the partys approval ratings and fueled the re-election of President [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/bill-clinton/]Bill Clinton[/link].
 
This is a battle that has been under way slowly since 2010 and is now coming to a head, said [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/david-redlawsk/]David Redlawsk[/link], a political science professor at [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/rutgers-university/]Rutgers University[/link] in New Brunswick, New Jersey. This is part of a bigger question about what that party is going to be. That may have major repercussions in another year.
 
The fight in Congress today is between members who want to avoid the fate of Gingrichs majority and those convinced that conditions have changed to their advantage.
 
[h2]Strategist Outrage[/h2] Several Republican strategists have privately expressed outrage in recent weeks at the lengths to which some of their own partys activists are willing to go to stoke shutdown fervor, complaining that they are spending time and money targeting their party colleagues while giving Democrats a pass. The Republicans requested anonymity because they didnt want to publicly disparage party allies.
Among the targets of their complaints are the Heritage Foundation, helmed by former Senator [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/jim-demint/]Jim DeMint[/link], a South Carolina Republican, which has been leaning on Republicans to tie keeping the government open to defunding the health-care law, and the Senate Conservatives Fund, a political action committee DeMint founded that backs Republican primary candidates.
The fund released a television advertisement on Sept. 5 saying Senate Minority Leader [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/mitch-mcconnell/]Mitch McConnell[/link] of Kentucky is refusing to lead on defunding Obamacare. Last week, it accused McConnell and Republican Senator [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/john-cornyn/]John Cornyn[/link] of Texas, the No. 2 leader, of the ultimate betrayal for allowing a government-funding bill to go forward.
 
[h2]High Stakes[/h2] House Speaker [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/john-boehner/]John Boehner[/link] of Ohio has less pressure to exert on members than outside groups urging confrontation, Schnur added. Boehner can take away a committee assignment — these groups can take away their jobs, Schnur said.
Keith Appell, a consultant whose clients include Tea Party-aligned groups, said if they cave again theyre looking at multiple primaries in the spring and their base sitting home in the fall, in a base election. Caving is not an option.

[odayjassim1978_476]

Has Cruz proposed to forego his salary for everyday the government is closed…oh but I heard an interview from a GOP guy on cable who was like he would forego his check because I will always get repaid once the government reopens.  What about the Americans who live pay check to paycheck and have to pay their rent??? What about the dialysis patient who can’t get insurance but you want them to wait 1 more year to get insured???
This guy went to Harvard???
Would he last 1 week at Georgetown med????

Quote from dergon

[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-30/republicans-shutdown-fight-exposes-simmering-civil-war.html]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-30/republicans-shutdown-fight-exposes-simmering-civil-war.html[/link]

Peter King saying to blame Ted Cruz for the shutdown.

And this nice little piece…. guess I’m not the only seeing hints of Goldwater. 🙂

The conflict now exposed within the party may shape its future for years.

An intraparty tug-of-war, largely confined to campaign primaries during the past three years, is exposed on the national stage as Republicans challenge each other on tactics as a [link=http://www.auntminnie.com/quote/FDEBOUTL:IND]government[/link] shutdown looms, coming as early as tomorrow.

Its a civil war that has beset the party before, as base activists grow impatient with established leaders they claim have grown complacent in the anti-government fight. The results can be unpredictable, perhaps more so this time given that its taking place 13 months before the next election.

[h2]Goldwater 64[/h2] The rise of [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/barry-goldwater/]Barry Goldwater[/link] in 1964 as the Republican presidential nominee ended in the landslide election of Democratic President [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/lyndon-johnson/]Lyndon Johnson[/link].
A revolt led by [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/newt-gingrich/]Newt Gingrich[/link], then a Georgia congressman, culminated in the 1994 Republican takeover of the U.S. after 40 years in the minority.
Gingrich, who became House speaker, and his majority prompted the 1995-96 partial government shutdowns, which dimmed the partys approval ratings and fueled the re-election of President [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/bill-clinton/]Bill Clinton[/link].

This is a battle that has been under way slowly since 2010 and is now coming to a head, said [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/david-redlawsk/]David Redlawsk[/link], a political science professor at [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/rutgers-university/]Rutgers University[/link] in New Brunswick, New Jersey. This is part of a bigger question about what that party is going to be. That may have major repercussions in another year.

The fight in Congress today is between members who want to avoid the fate of Gingrichs majority and those convinced that conditions have changed to their advantage.

[h2]Strategist Outrage[/h2] Several Republican strategists have privately expressed outrage in recent weeks at the lengths to which some of their own partys activists are willing to go to stoke shutdown fervor, complaining that they are spending time and money targeting their party colleagues while giving Democrats a pass. The Republicans requested anonymity because they didnt want to publicly disparage party allies.
Among the targets of their complaints are the Heritage Foundation, helmed by former Senator [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/jim-demint/]Jim DeMint[/link], a South Carolina Republican, which has been leaning on Republicans to tie keeping the government open to defunding the health-care law, and the Senate Conservatives Fund, a political action committee DeMint founded that backs Republican primary candidates.
The fund released a television advertisement on Sept. 5 saying Senate Minority Leader [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/mitch-mcconnell/]Mitch McConnell[/link] of Kentucky is refusing to lead on defunding Obamacare. Last week, it accused McConnell and Republican Senator [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/john-cornyn/]John Cornyn[/link] of Texas, the No. 2 leader, of the ultimate betrayal for allowing a government-funding bill to go forward.

[h2]High Stakes[/h2] House Speaker [link=http://topics.bloomberg.com/john-boehner/]John Boehner[/link] of Ohio has less pressure to exert on members than outside groups urging confrontation, Schnur added. Boehner can take away a committee assignment — these groups can take away their jobs, Schnur said.
Keith Appell, a consultant whose clients include Tea Party-aligned groups, said if they cave again theyre looking at multiple primaries in the spring and their base sitting home in the fall, in a base election. Caving is not an option.

[Unknown Member]

The GOP is so screwed.  A handful of guys and their extremist moneyed backers are driving them off the cliff.
 
It is a wondrous sight to behold.  It is also instructive to see who thinks this course is a winner and worth the cost.  Those folks are either going to take their political beatdown or physically revolt.  

[odayjassim1978_476]

Great example of biting your nose off to spite your face// Cruz forego wife’s salary too

Quote from nobody2008

The GOP is so screwed.  A handful of guys and their extremist moneyed backers are driving them off the cliff.

It is a wondrous sight to behold.  It is also instructive to see who thinks this course is a winner and worth the cost.  Those folks are either going to take their political beatdown or physically revolt.  

[Unknown Member]

I can’t imagine what our friends on the right in these discussions are thinking at this point? And where are they? I expect at least aldadoc to once again chime in with his misguided wishful thinking about how America hates ACA, even tho they voted for Obama TWICE and only 23% of them want it defended.

But it’s unfathomable that our House extremists would try to attach such strings to a general operations budget to pay bills Congress already had approved. This is NOT the way to lead. A hospital Board may not threaten to shut down the emergency room because it doesn’t like the food in the caf.

If the House was truly interested in serving Americans, boehner would have allowed a House vote on the Senate bill. The fact that he held it back because of a minority that does not represent the general population clearly shows his incompetence.

The House behavior is simply indefensible.

[kayla.meyer_144]

What happens when the John Birchers take control of the GOP. Isn’t this what Buckley was worried about in the early 1960’s? Well his son has been bounced out of the club for being a RINO. He would be a RINO today too. As would Reagan.

[eyoab2011_711]

Theyre not boxed in by the electorate. Theyre boxed in by their own acceptance of the New Deal consensus, and their simultaneous unwillingness to admit that there is such a consensus. They think the government is too way big but theyre not in favor of specific ways to make it much smaller. And when the resulting incoherence of their agenda becomes clear, they get angry, because they have no idea what the hell they are doing.

Many Republican politicians are bitterly resisting the Medicaid expansion in Obamacare. But not a single state has chosen to withdraw from the traditional Medicaid program, even though that would produce real budget savings and put a major dent in Lyndon Johnsons Great Society legacy. Even states with Republican legislative supermajorities and very conservative electorates stay in. I can only conclude that conservatives do not actually want to undo Medicaid.

Read more: [link=http://www.businessinsider.com/conservatives-are-angry-because-they-have-no-idea-what-they-want-2013-10#ixzz2gfxnwyBQ]http://www.businessinsider.com/conservatives-are-angry-because-they-have-no-idea-what-they-want-2013-10#ixzz2gfxnwyBQ[/link]
And as if on queue
Were not going to be disrespected, conservative Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., added. We have to get something out of this. And I dont know what that even is.
 
[link=http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-stands-firm-against-funding-bill-will-link-to-debt-ceiling-fight/article/2536750]http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-stands-firm-against-funding-bill-will-link-to-debt-ceiling-fight/article/2536750[/link]

[btomba_77]

[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-04/why-republicans-shut-down-the-government.html]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-04/why-republicans-shut-down-the-government.html[/link]
 
[b]
[h1]Why Republicans Shut Down the Government[/b][/h1]

Democracy Corps issued a report this week on six focus groups conducted with Republican subgroups — two each with Tea Partiers, evangelicals and moderate Republicans. The results somehow manage to be unsurprising and shocking at the same time — largely due to the bracing effects of reading the real words of (almost) average Americans.
 
First, a word on focus groups. Unlike a poll, which asks a series of standardized questions to hundreds of people and then tallies the results, a focus group is more like a conversation. Usually 10 or 12 people are chosen because they meet certain demographic and partisan profiles and invited to a conference room. A professional moderator is charged with keeping the conversation flowing in a productive (for the researchers) direction, and a sense of safety is established among participants.
Safety is largely a function of sameness. If you want to know what black working-class men think about Mitt Romney, for example, don’t throw three white professionals with briefcases into the mix. Instead, surround like with like. Groups that are homogenous in terms of race and class tend to produce far more uninhibited responses.
That’s what Greenberg did — putting together separate homogenous groups of white Tea Partiers, white evangelicals and white Republican moderates.
 
 
 
 
 
For them, Greenberg notes, Washington looks nothing like the capital many others see. Gridlock? There is no gridlock. Only a socialist steamroller before which the Republican Party is feeble and afraid. “Evangelicals who feel most threatened by trends embrace the Tea Party because they are the ones who are fighting back,” the report states. Republican base voters “think they face a victorious Democratic Party that is intent on expanding government to increase dependency and therefore electoral support.”
This is the context of the fight against Obamacare. The basic idea — similarly [link=http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/15/4-questions-with-ted-cruz-on-defunding-obamacare/]articulated[/link] by some Republican officeholders, including Texas Senator Ted Cruz — is that Obama has extended a new entitlement to create a class of lazy, poor voters whose well-being is dependent upon the Democratic Party. Shorthand: more 47 percenters.
 
“Their party is losing to a Democratic Party of big government whose goal is to expand programs that mainly benefit minorities,” the report states.
The Republican moderates were staunch fiscal conservatives, but most readily embraced new gender relations and minority empowerment, including gay rights. The Tea Partiers and evangelicals spoke as if they were in the midst of War of the Worlds. As the report characterizes the Tea-Party worldview: “Obama’s America is an unmitigated evil based on big government, regulations and dependency.”
 
 
It’s a tough situation to rectify. A lot of Americans were not ready for a mixed-race president. They weren’t ready for gay marriage. They weren’t ready for the wave of legal and illegal immigration that redefined American demographics over the past two or three decades, bringing in lots of nonwhites. They weren’t ready — who was? — for the brutal effects of globalization on working- and middle-class Americans or the devastating fallout from the financial crisis.
 
 
Their representatives didn’t stop Obamacare. And their side didn’t “take back America” in 2012 as Fox News and conservative radio personalities led them to believe they would. They feel the culture is running away from them (and they’re mostly right). They lack the power to control their own government.
 
But they still have just enough to shut it down.

 
 
 

[Unknown Member]

That is scary.  My working theory is the TP is defined by baby boomers who didn’t get the American dream their parents got, mostly thanks to Reaganomics.  So, they are lashing out at the “other” since it feels good and the echo chamber tells them.
 
The irony is they ignore the people who crushed the unions, stopped middle class wage improvements, and otherwise stripped their ability to retire with ease and comfort.  Looks to me like the folks who paid Rush, Hannity, and the other swindlers their payola got their money’s worth.

[btomba_77]

[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-11/republican-hostage-game-has-only-just-begun.html]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-11/republican-hostage-game-has-only-just-begun.html[/link]
 
[h1]Republican Hostage Game Has Only Just Begun[/h1]  

The reason Republicans are being routed is that the House leadership caved not just to the wishes of the party’s anti-government extremists, but to their strategy. The Republicans’ burn-it-down caucus is powerful enough to bend Speaker John Boehner to its will, but appears to lack a single competent political strategist in its ranks.
 
 
 
…. there is no reason to believe Republicans will be chastened by the debacle they have brought on themselves. The party appears to have no expectation of seeing the inside of the White House anytime soon, as evidenced by its hunkering down into a congressional and regional [link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-05/political-polarization-as-massive-resistance.html]resistance[/link]. The political dynamics that encourage Republican extremism aren’t abating, and have deep roots. Congressional Republicans,[link=http://www.nationaljournal.com/political-connections/will-the-kamikaze-caucus-doom-the-gop-20131010] wrote[/link] Ron Brownstein, are channeling “the bottomless alienation coursing through much of the GOP’s base.”
 
In an essay on the same theme, Tom Edsall [link=http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/08/anger-can-be-power/?smid=tw-share&_r=0]wrote[/link], “The depth and strength of voters conviction that their opponents are determined to destroy their way of life has rarely been matched, perhaps only by the mood of the South in the years leading up to the Civil War.”
 
Republicans are too dysfunctional and splintered to produce much viable legislation, and the next presidential election is not only three years away but potentially out of reach to all but Hillary Clinton. For a party blistered by grassroots rage and struggling to achieve parity under traditional political norms, political extortion will remain a tempting shortcut to power.
The hostage-taking didn’t work this time. But Republicans will do it again.
 
Next time, they will do it better.

 
 
 
 
 

[odayjassim1978_476]

they keep trying top sell the same script but with a different cast…luckily for us the cast that they pick are too  B- list and can’t just sell IT…

Quote from dergon

[link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-11/republican-hostage-game-has-only-just-begun.html]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-11/republican-hostage-game-has-only-just-begun.html[/link]

[h1]Republican Hostage Game Has Only Just Begun[/h1]  

The reason Republicans are being routed is that the House leadership caved not just to the wishes of the party’s anti-government extremists, but to their strategy. The Republicans’ burn-it-down caucus is powerful enough to bend Speaker John Boehner to its will, but appears to lack a single competent political strategist in its ranks.

…. there is no reason to believe Republicans will be chastened by the debacle they have brought on themselves. The party appears to have no expectation of seeing the inside of the White House anytime soon, as evidenced by its hunkering down into a congressional and regional [link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-05/political-polarization-as-massive-resistance.html]resistance[/link]. The political dynamics that encourage Republican extremism aren’t abating, and have deep roots. Congressional Republicans,[link=http://www.nationaljournal.com/political-connections/will-the-kamikaze-caucus-doom-the-gop-20131010] wrote[/link] Ron Brownstein, are channeling “the bottomless alienation coursing through much of the GOP’s base.”

In an essay on the same theme, Tom Edsall [link=http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/08/anger-can-be-power/?smid=tw-share&_r=0]wrote[/link], “The depth and strength of voters conviction that their opponents are determined to destroy their way of life has rarely been matched, perhaps only by the mood of the South in the years leading up to the Civil War.”

Republicans are too dysfunctional and splintered to produce much viable legislation, and the next presidential election is not only three years away but potentially out of reach to all but Hillary Clinton. For a party blistered by grassroots rage and struggling to achieve parity under traditional political norms, political extortion will remain a tempting shortcut to power.
The hostage-taking didn’t work this time. But Republicans will do it again.

Next time, they will do it better.

[kayla.meyer_144]

Direct and interesting comparison to Kurtz by Ross Douthat in today’s editorial.
 
[link=http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/opinion/sunday/douthat-the-kurtz-republicans.html?hpw]http://www.nytimes.com/20…z-republicans.html?hpw[/link]
 

THEY told me, Martin Sheens Willard says to Marlon Brandos Kurtz [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9oBiD7-kAM]in Apocalypse Now,[/link] at the end of a long journey up the river, that you had gone totally insane, and that your methods were unsound.
 
His baldness bathed in gold, his body pooled in shadow, Kurtz murmurs: Are my methods unsound?
 
And Willard filthy, hollow-eyed, stunned by what hes seen replies: I dont see any method at all, sir.
 
This is basically how reasonable people should feel about the recent conduct of the House Republicans.

 
It’s twilight in America, the message of the GOP, the 180 degree opposite of Reagan’s message. This is what you get when you don’t set limits on your extremists & extremist rhetoric that nothing is good, not the government, not the institutions, not even the GOP itself can be trusted.
 
 

[Unknown Member]

Any scuba diver knows the basic tenet: Plan your dive, and then dive your plan!

Without a clear plan to handle such dangerous terrain, you invite total catastrophe, but apparently that’s the current MO of the Republican Party.

[Unknown Member]

The avalanche of rightie pundits admitting defeat is pretty impressive.
 
The TP won’t be chastened, you’d better believe it.  Like good dead-enders, they’ll take this defeat as proof of their righteousness.  They will try and replace the entire GOP leadership while burning down the country.  The only thing that can stop them is the traditional GOP power base.
 
If the Dems were smart, they’d help both sides.

[Unknown Member]

Perhaps “Citizens United”should be changed to “Citizens Ignited”.

I’m convinced the TP lunacy is about big money sponsorship and has nothing to do with the drive to serve and protect Americans.

[Unknown Member]

[b]It’s twilight in America, the message of the GOP, the 180 degree opposite of Reagan’s message. This is what you get when you don’t set limits on your extremists & extremist rhetoric that nothing is good, not the government, not the institutions, not even the GOP itself can be trusted[/b]
 
This is like life
 
If you try to make your world smaller with cute little names and insults to people who don’t ageree with you you alienate everyone over time
 
In the long run this is what Limbaugh and hannity and savage and all the right wingnuts with anger hate and pettiness get you
 
You get to be alone
 
Like shallow hal—-Alone at night clutchin your pillow

[Unknown Member]

Quote from kpack123

Like shallow hal—-Alone at night clutchin your pillow

Unfortunately, it’s really more than that though, isn’t it? Loneliness, in itself, is not so destructive. But loneliness sometimes begets anger and a sense of entitlement that invokes resentment toward the group in the next room who seem happier. And since those in the next room are happier, it must be that they’re happier BECAUSE it’s a [u]group[/u], and many extremists call that socialism which is always always always a very very very evil thing…which is totally ironic since radiologists make their fortune from insurance revenue which is a totally socialist economic construct.
 
It’s basically become a very disturbing ideology.
 
 

[btomba_77]

[link=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/10/15/goldwater-rockefeller_redux_120325.html]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/10/15/goldwater-rockefeller_redux_120325.html[/link]
 
Don’t worry, GOP. Pat Buchanan knows that that if you just hold to your principles in a couple election cycles you’ll get another Nixon! 
 
(( btw — I would be loathe to take advice from anyone who takes too much positive history from the Goldwater campaign))
Goldwater-Rockefeller Redux[/h2]

Republicans should refuse to raise the white flag and insist on an honorable avenue of retreat.
And if Harry Reid’s Senate demands the GOP end the sequester on federal spending, or be blamed for a debt default, the party should, Samson-like, bring down the roof of the temple on everybody’s head.
This is an honorable battle lost, not a war.

And if Republicans are paralyzed by polls produced by this three-week skirmish, they should reread the history of the party and the movement to which they profess to belong.

And, lest we forget, one other national Republican spoke up for Goldwater and conservatism in that 1964 humiliation, the retired Hollywood actor and impresario of GE Theater: Ronald Reagan.
 
Nixon and Reagan would go on to win four of the next five GOP nominations and presidential elections. In the one convention Reagan lost, 1976, the right, as the price of its support of Gerald R. Ford, demanded that Nelson Rockefeller be dumped as vice president.
 
America is at a turning point.
If she does not stop squandering hundreds of billions on liberal agenda items like Obamacare and if she do not end these trade deficits sucking the jobs, factories and investment capital out of our country, we will find ourselves beside Greece, Spain, Illinois and Detroit.
Even if America disagrees, as in 1964 when it embraced LBJ’s Great Society plunge to social and economic disaster, Republicans need to stand up — current polls and corporate Republicans be damned.
If the right is right, time will prove it, as it did long ago. 

[Unknown Member]

The only problem is that even Nixon and Reagan are considered RINO’s to the loons in the House right now. Besides, who is Buchanan to give the GOP any advise? He has no credibility based on his own track record. He’s preaching to the Incredibly Shrinking Choir. 
 
He may think it’s noble for the captain to go down with his ship, but he forgets that the ship is indeed going down. 
 
 

[odayjassim1978_476]

grab the popcorn like can we say we will be spectators to something similar to the bar scene in Star Wars

Quote from dergon

No more hiding it:

[h1]Republican Civil War Erupts: Business Groups v. Tea Party[/h1]  

A battle for control of the Republican Party erupted today as an emboldened Tea Party is moving to oust senators who voted to reopen the government, and business groups began mobilizing to defeat allies of the small-government movement.

Primary blood baths coming

[kayla.meyer_144]

The Right’s analysis, as usual, is that they weren’t right enough. It was the moderates who prevented the success of the Tea Party and Boehner’s lack of leadership.
 
Next time they swear to be more crazy.

[Unknown Member]

Quote from Frumious

Next time they swear to be more crazy.

Oh fingers crossed, let’s hope so.

[btomba_77]

Fareed’s take on modern conservatism ( from today’s GPS) couldn’t be more on the mark:
 
[link=http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-conservatism-needs-to-lighten-up/2013/10/16/49418e5c-3692-11e3-80c6-7e6dd8d22d8f_story.html]http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fareed-zakaria-conservatism-needs-to-lighten-up/2013/10/16/49418e5c-3692-11e3-80c6-7e6dd8d22d8f_story.html[/link]
 
 
[h1]Conservatism needs to lighten up[/h1]

The current fear derives from Obamacare, but that is only the most recent cause for alarm. Modern American conservatism was founded on a diet of despair. In 1955, William F. Buckley Jr. began the movement with a famous first editorial in National Review declaring that the magazine stands athwart history, yelling Stop. John Boehner tries to tie into this tradition of opposition when he says in exasperation, [link=http://www.speaker.gov/video/speaker-boehner-president-s-budget-it-time-washington-deal-its-spending-problem]The federal government has spent more than what it has brought in in 55 of the last 60 years[/link]!
 
 
But what has been the result over these past 60 years? The United States has grown mightily, destroyed the Soviet Union, spread capitalism across the globe and lifted its citizens to astonishingly high standards of living and income. Over the past 60 years, America has built highways and universities, funded science and space research, and along the way ushered in the rise of the most productive and powerful private sector the world has ever known.
 
___
 
 
For many conservatives, the rot to be excoriated is not about economics and health care but about culture. A persistent theme of conservative intellectuals and commentators in print and on Fox News is the cultural decay of the country. But compared with almost any period in U.S. history, we live in bourgeois times, in a culture that values family, religion, work and, above all, business. Young people today aspire to become Mark Zuckerberg. They quote the aphorisms of Warren Buffett and read the Twitter feed of [link=https://twitter.com/BillGates]Bill Gates[/link]. Even after the worst recession since the Great Depression, there are no obvious radicals, anarchists, Black Panthers or other revolutionary movements save the tea party.
 
For some tacticians and consultants, extreme rhetoric is just a way to keep the troops fired up. But rhetoric gives meaning and shape to a political movement. Over the past six decades, conservatisms language of decay, despair and decline have created a powerful group of Americans who believe fervently in this dark narrative and are determined to stop the country from plunging into imminent oblivion. They arent going to give up just yet.
 
The era of crises could end, but only when this group of conservatives makes its peace with todays America. [b] They are misty-eyed in their devotion to a distant republic of myth and memory yet passionate in their dislike of the messy, multiracial, quasi-capitalist democracy that has been around for half a century a fifth of our countrys history. [/b] At some point, will they come to recognize that you cannot love America in theory and hate it in fact?
 

 
 

[kayla.meyer_144]

In spite of the attempts of the backward looking culture warriors, Luddites, Isolationists, republicans & tea party-ites to pull us back, I think we will do well. Most of us still have American Optimism. People still line up to come here & invest in America.

[link=http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/americas-not-in-decline–its-on-the-rise/2013/10/18/4dde76be-35b1-11e3-80c6-7e6dd8d22d8f_story.html]http://www.washingtonpost…e6dd8d22d8f_story.html[/link]

“But predicting the decline of the United States has always been risky business. In the 1970s and late 1980s, expectations of waning power were followed by periods of geopolitical resurgence.
The U.S. fiscal picture is also looking up. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the annual budget deficit will drop below $650 billion in 2013, the smallest shortfall since 2008 and approximately half the size it was in 2011. Meanwhile, the dollar remains the worlds top reserve currency.
Even more transformative, the United States is experiencing an energy revolution that the McKinsey Global Institute estimates could add as much as 4 percent to annual GDP and create up to 1.7 million new jobs by 2020. America is poised to overtake Russia as the worlds largest producer of oil and natural gas, and there are signs that low-cost and abundant energy is driving a revival of the U.S. manufacturing industry. Although the United States will have an enduring interest in stable global energy prices, it will no longer rely on direct and uncertain access to Middle Eastern oil, in sharp contrast to energy-starved countries in Asia.
The United States also remains the linchpin of the international community. Through hard-nosed diplomacy, economic pressure and the specter of military action, Washington has retained its ability to marshal effective multinational coalitions, bringing down Libyas Moammar Gaddafi, getting weapons inspectors on the ground in Syria and embarking on serious negotiations to curb Irans nuclear weapons program. You can quibble with process and style, but its hard to argue that any of these would have happened without the United States.”

[odayjassim1978_476]

this is why I do my own little boycott of people who have given up their American citizenship…if it’s an artist song playing, I turn to another station or turn off the radio or if it is someone in the news paper, I stop reading the article and go to the next

Quote from Frumious

In spite of the attempts of the backward looking culture warriors, Luddites, Isolationists, republicans & tea party-ites to pull us back, I think we will do well. Most of us still have American Optimism. People still line up to come here & invest in America.

[link=http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/americas-not-in-decline–its-on-the-rise/2013/10/18/4dde76be-35b1-11e3-80c6-7e6dd8d22d8f_story.html]http://www.washingtonpost…e6dd8d22d8f_story.html[/link]

“But predicting the decline of the United States has always been risky business. In the 1970s and late 1980s, expectations of waning power were followed by periods of geopolitical resurgence.
The U.S. fiscal picture is also looking up. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that the annual budget deficit will drop below $650 billion in 2013, the smallest shortfall since 2008 and approximately half the size it was in 2011. Meanwhile, the dollar remains the worlds top reserve currency.
Even more transformative, the United States is experiencing an energy revolution that the McKinsey Global Institute estimates could add as much as 4 percent to annual GDP and create up to 1.7 million new jobs by 2020. America is poised to overtake Russia as the worlds largest producer of oil and natural gas, and there are signs that low-cost and abundant energy is driving a revival of the U.S. manufacturing industry. Although the United States will have an enduring interest in stable global energy prices, it will no longer rely on direct and uncertain access to Middle Eastern oil, in sharp contrast to energy-starved countries in Asia.
The United States also remains the linchpin of the international community. Through hard-nosed diplomacy, economic pressure and the specter of military action, Washington has retained its ability to marshal effective multinational coalitions, bringing down Libyas Moammar Gaddafi, getting weapons inspectors on the ground in Syria and embarking on serious negotiations to curb Irans nuclear weapons program. You can quibble with process and style, but its hard to argue that any of these would have happened without the United States.”

[kayla.meyer_144]

Now even judges are coming back saying they’ve decided wrong in the past. How about Posner & his upholding of the Voter ID laws. He said he didn’t realize the laws would be exploited to deny voting rights to a specific population who voted Democratic. Where’s he been all this time. DUH! His decision should have been upholding the real conservative opinion, why are such laws needed, why does the State insist it needs such laws with zero evidence of abuse.
 
But then the political geography has changed now compared to then too.
 
[link=http://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/thoughts-on-judge-posner]http://www.acslaw.org/acs…oughts-on-judge-posner[/link]s-admission-of-error-on-the-indiana-voter-id-law
 

As the lawyer who argued the constitutional challenge to the Indiana Voter ID law in the Supreme Court in 2008, I was both fascinated and pleased to hear that Judge Richard Posner the author of the [link=http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/Rokita-Judgment.pdf]Seventh Circuit majority opinion[/link] [link=http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/CrawfordSCtOpinion.pdf]affirmed by the Supreme Court[/link]in [i]Crawford v. Marion County Elections Board [/i] has now publicly stated that he was wrong.  It is refreshing, if not unprecedented, for a jurist to admit error on such a major case. 
I was a little less pleased to see that he attempted to excuse his error by blaming the parties for not providing sufficient information to the court.  As he put it in an interview [link=http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/16/us/politics/judge-in-landmark-case-disavows-support-for-voter-id.html]quoted in the [i]New York Times[/i][/link], We werent given the information that would enable that balance to be struck between preventing fraud and protecting voters rights.  Really?  The information provided was enough for the late Judge Terence Evans, dissenting from Judge Posners decision, [link=http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/Rokita-Judgment.pdf]to say quite accurately[/link]: Lets not beat around the bush:  The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly-veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by folks believed to skew Democratic.
That insight about the purpose of the law was supported by this information, all of which was provided to Judge Posner and the Seventh Circuit:
[blockquote]There had never been a single known incident of in-person voter impersonation fraud in the history of Indiana and [link=http://www.acslaw.org/publications/issue-briefs/the-new-wave-of-election-regulation-burden-without-benefit]there have been precious few nationally[/link]  yet the Indiana law targeted only in-person voting.
The law was passed immediately after Republicans took complete control of the legislature and governorship of the State of Indiana. 
Every Republican legislator supported the law, while every Democratic legislator opposed it.
[/blockquote] [b]It is certainly true, as Judge Posner told the [i]Times[/i], that in 2007, competition between the parties had not yet reached the peak of ferocity that its since achieved.  But the unfortunate approval of the Indiana law that the Seventh Circuit provided cannot fairly be blamed on how the case was litigated.  As Judge Posner now recognizes, voter ID laws are widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention.   But Judge Posners dissenting colleagues recognized that all along.  His was a case of judicial passivity in the face of a quite apparent affront to important constitutional values.[/b]

 
 
 

[btomba_77]

Tom Ridge fires into the Tea Party.   Chapter 2 of the GOP civil war ….. The Establishment fights back..
 
[link=http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2013/10/tom-ridge-torpedoes-tea-party-era-at-log-cabin-din.html]http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2013/10/tom-ridge-torpedoes-tea-party-era-at-log-cabin-din.html[/link]
 

In order to govern, we must win national elections. To do so the narcissists and ideologues within our party need to understand that Americans are, more conservative than liberal, but are more practical than ideological and more tolerant and open-minded than judgmental. They are also looking for real not rhetorical solutions,” Ridge said. “They are not attracted to a party that imposes an even more severe litmus test on its own members, projects an unacceptable rigidity and self-righteousness on social issues, and spends more time and energy objecting to bad law rather than proposing alternatives.” 
 
If we want a government that acknowledges our God-given right to freely choose how we live in regard to marriage and others issues we must demand a government that respects the rights of others to choose and follow their conscience just the same. 
And if the Republican Party does not champion free will and free thoughts as a component of freedom writ large, we will not only find the Republican Party permanently divided, but the country itself.
Many Americans are outraged by the moralistic attacks on the gay and lesbian community from some within our party. Perhaps they should be more concerned about their own relationship with God. As both Saint Matthew and Saint Luke taught us, Judge not, lest ye be judged. It is an important enough lesson to be mentioned multiple times.
The blanket condemnation of illegal immigrants and the failure to find a way to at least legitimize their status (not citizenship) of those who have been law abiding since their arrival is wrong and a grave political mistake.
And yes, there is another group of Americans to whom the GOP appears insensitive and uncaring. Last fall thirty-plus Republican senators walked by one of our great contemporary political leaders, Bob Dole, to vote against the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It would have no effect on U.S. Law. But instead, those Senators wanting to look big in front of the hardcore dont like the UN crowd made their country look small themselves look small minded and once again, made their party look exclusionary.
Lets face it, whos left to offend perhaps just white males and we are beginning to lose support with that group as well. 
 
 
[b]Do we want to lose on divisiveness or win on good leadership?[/b]
 
If we want to win, then we need a bigger tent. And we need to fill it. We need to fill it, just as we have filled this room. With people of good will, of understanding, and of a desire to see each other succeed, not see how many we can help fail. 
 
If we want to win, we need to be a party worthy of the 21st century. A nonjudgmental party where all who support us are welcome. A party where diversity of view, race, ethnicity, gender and religion are relished and promoted and nourished.
 
If we want to win, we need to remember that we are the Party of Lincoln Lincoln, who believed in the principle of thoughtful, respectful debate, but also believe in the dignity and hopes of every person.
 
I dont know about you but I want to win.

[Unknown Member]

They have been living of this center right idea of a country for 40 years
 
In actuality the country is and always was in the center.  
 
They just moved their goal posts farther toward the right

[odayjassim1978_476]

Nice D

Quote from dergon

Tom Ridge fires into the Tea Party.   Chapter 2 of the GOP civil war ….. The Establishment fights back..

[link=http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2013/10/tom-ridge-torpedoes-tea-party-era-at-log-cabin-din.html]http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2013/10/tom-ridge-torpedoes-tea-party-era-at-log-cabin-din.html[/link]

In order to govern, we must win national elections. To do so the narcissists and ideologues within our party need to understand that Americans are, more conservative than liberal, but are more practical than ideological and more tolerant and open-minded than judgmental. They are also looking for real not rhetorical solutions,” Ridge said. “They are not attracted to a party that imposes an even more severe litmus test on its own members, projects an unacceptable rigidity and self-righteousness on social issues, and spends more time and energy objecting to bad law rather than proposing alternatives.” 

If we want a government that acknowledges our God-given right to freely choose how we live in regard to marriage and others issues we must demand a government that respects the rights of others to choose and follow their conscience just the same. 
And if the Republican Party does not champion free will and free thoughts as a component of freedom writ large, we will not only find the Republican Party permanently divided, but the country itself.
Many Americans are outraged by the moralistic attacks on the gay and lesbian community from some within our party. Perhaps they should be more concerned about their own relationship with God. As both Saint Matthew and Saint Luke taught us, Judge not, lest ye be judged. It is an important enough lesson to be mentioned multiple times.
The blanket condemnation of illegal immigrants and the failure to find a way to at least legitimize their status (not citizenship) of those who have been law abiding since their arrival is wrong and a grave political mistake.
And yes, there is another group of Americans to whom the GOP appears insensitive and uncaring. Last fall thirty-plus Republican senators walked by one of our great contemporary political leaders, Bob Dole, to vote against the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It would have no effect on U.S. Law. But instead, those Senators wanting to look big in front of the hardcore dont like the UN crowd made their country look small themselves look small minded and once again, made their party look exclusionary.
Lets face it, whos left to offend perhaps just white males and we are beginning to lose support with that group as well. 

[b]Do we want to lose on divisiveness or win on good leadership?[/b]

If we want to win, then we need a bigger tent. And we need to fill it. We need to fill it, just as we have filled this room. With people of good will, of understanding, and of a desire to see each other succeed, not see how many we can help fail. 

If we want to win, we need to be a party worthy of the 21st century. A nonjudgmental party where all who support us are welcome. A party where diversity of view, race, ethnicity, gender and religion are relished and promoted and nourished.

If we want to win, we need to remember that we are the Party of Lincoln Lincoln, who believed in the principle of thoughtful, respectful debate, but also believe in the dignity and hopes of every person.

I dont know about you but I want to win.

[odayjassim1978_476]

what did Sessions say??? this after the speaker’s comments to Harry R… it’s is time this party class up their act and start acting in a dignified manner.  This type of conduct should have been stopped with the You lie breech of conduct… this is unhelpful/ non American behavior

Quote from dergon

Tom Ridge fires into the Tea Party.   Chapter 2 of the GOP civil war ….. The Establishment fights back..

[link=http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2013/10/tom-ridge-torpedoes-tea-party-era-at-log-cabin-din.html]http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2013/10/tom-ridge-torpedoes-tea-party-era-at-log-cabin-din.html[/link]

In order to govern, we must win national elections. To do so the narcissists and ideologues within our party need to understand that Americans are, more conservative than liberal, but are more practical than ideological and more tolerant and open-minded than judgmental. They are also looking for real not rhetorical solutions,” Ridge said. “They are not attracted to a party that imposes an even more severe litmus test on its own members, projects an unacceptable rigidity and self-righteousness on social issues, and spends more time and energy objecting to bad law rather than proposing alternatives.” 

If we want a government that acknowledges our God-given right to freely choose how we live in regard to marriage and others issues we must demand a government that respects the rights of others to choose and follow their conscience just the same. 
And if the Republican Party does not champion free will and free thoughts as a component of freedom writ large, we will not only find the Republican Party permanently divided, but the country itself.
Many Americans are outraged by the moralistic attacks on the gay and lesbian community from some within our party. Perhaps they should be more concerned about their own relationship with God. As both Saint Matthew and Saint Luke taught us, Judge not, lest ye be judged. It is an important enough lesson to be mentioned multiple times.
The blanket condemnation of illegal immigrants and the failure to find a way to at least legitimize their status (not citizenship) of those who have been law abiding since their arrival is wrong and a grave political mistake.
And yes, there is another group of Americans to whom the GOP appears insensitive and uncaring. Last fall thirty-plus Republican senators walked by one of our great contemporary political leaders, Bob Dole, to vote against the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It would have no effect on U.S. Law. But instead, those Senators wanting to look big in front of the hardcore dont like the UN crowd made their country look small themselves look small minded and once again, made their party look exclusionary.
Lets face it, whos left to offend perhaps just white males and we are beginning to lose support with that group as well. 

[b]Do we want to lose on divisiveness or win on good leadership?[/b]

If we want to win, then we need a bigger tent. And we need to fill it. We need to fill it, just as we have filled this room. With people of good will, of understanding, and of a desire to see each other succeed, not see how many we can help fail. 

If we want to win, we need to be a party worthy of the 21st century. A nonjudgmental party where all who support us are welcome. A party where diversity of view, race, ethnicity, gender and religion are relished and promoted and nourished.

If we want to win, we need to remember that we are the Party of Lincoln Lincoln, who believed in the principle of thoughtful, respectful debate, but also believe in the dignity and hopes of every person.

I dont know about you but I want to win.