Shackleford on "Compromise."
Yeah, Rusty. Your mouth saysyes:
Just remember, politics isn't religion. Voting for someone other than Reagan or Jesus doesn't make one dirty or a sinner. The alternative to having candidates who don't perfectly reflect our preferences is a multi-party parliamentary system. And if you want that, move to France.
But your eyes say no:
So, go support Mitt before it's too late.
Not Johnny Mac. Mitt. If McCain turns out to be the nominee, Rusty . . . we can talk then. I understand about laws, Chief Executives, and sausages . . . but I can only eat so many insect parts.
Posted by: Darrell at January 31, 2008 09:40 PM (wsT11)
2
Ann Coulter = media whore idiot. At least I tried to warn CPAC. Oh, you helped too, Attila. Thanks.
Posted by: Sean Hackbarth at January 31, 2008 10:06 PM (IpB84)
3
Yeah, well. I may not be a big Ann fan, but I think there are reasons to believe "Hildebeast" would prosecute the war on terror more vigorously than McCain--they both like to run counter to expectations. And Hillary, as The First Female President, might feel she had a lot to prove.
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 31, 2008 10:21 PM (vuv+H)
4
I don't think Hillary can damage the country as much as McCain can. The Repubs on the Hill will end up in the weird position of objecting to McCain's legislative initiatives, even if he's nominally from the same party. For a lot of what McCain wants to do, the Dem's will line up behind him.
I don't think the Repubs have the testicular fortitude necessary to stand against his bad ideas. Expect to see McCain-Kennedy resurrected from the dustbin of history.
Hillary will be like Bill before here - she'll be ignored by Democrat majorities on the Hill, and have to partner with the Repubs and then hope to peel off enough Dems to get her agenda thru. There will be a limitation on what she can do. And if she does go too far, she'll end up with Repub majorities in the House and maybe the Senate in two years.
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at February 01, 2008 06:45 AM (1hM1d)
5
I will not vote for nor endorse or campaign for the Hildabeest. But if Johnny Rotten is the alternative, I'd rather see a Republican Congress and the Hildebeest at the presidential helm. At least the Repubs will be inclined to oppose her more vigorously than they would Mr. Rotten.
As an example, you notice how Mr. "I never saw a piece of legislation I wanted to veto" has started vetoing stuff with the Dem's in charge of Congress? Recall how little Clinton I was able to get done in the 90's?
Gridlock = good!
Posted by: Desert Cat at February 01, 2008 09:36 AM (B2X7i)
6And Hillary, as The First Female President, might feel she had a lot to prove.
yeah right and the rest. She would govern as a Republican. All that you are scared of now you would wake up in Hillaryville and say "Well thats OK then".
Hillary Clinton is a Republican.
Posted by: dave bones at February 01, 2008 07:24 PM (P/R17)
7
"Hillary Clinton is a Republican"
Hillary was a budding Leninist, Menshevik, Bolshevik, Trotskyite ... What really mattered to Lenin - and what Saul Alinsky taught Hillary to value - was power.
Barbara Olsen, quoted in http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/hillarys_oedipal_problem.html
Tune out the Media for a moment and vote for Mitt Romney whenever you get the chance and we won't have to worry about McCain any more. Why are we letting the Left choose our candidate?
Posted by: Darrell at February 01, 2008 10:32 PM (WAbRb)
8
Oh, believe me: I adore Romney now. All the things that used to bother me about him make me starry-eyed at this point: bland?--no, no: he's staked out a consistent set of positions to which he will adhere! Unintellectual? No! He'll be a pragmatic leader! Mormon? Not really--just a representative of a fine, iconoclastic Western-states philosophy that promotes solid family values. Sexless? Heck, no!--just never fell out of love with his wife!
Hair too nice? Simply an accident of birth, no doubt.
Go, Mitt!
Posted by: Attila Girl at February 01, 2008 11:48 PM (vuv+H)
9Hillary was a budding Leninist, Menshevik, Bolshevik, Trotskyite
And where are the Trotskyites now but the neocon wing of the Republican Party?
Posted by: Desert Cat at February 02, 2008 10:19 PM (DIr0W)
Hackbarth on Romney, Part 2
I do wish we could all just shut up about the GOP frontrunners' real and imaginary shortcomings—at least until after we get trounced this coming fall. I mean, can't this all be done in post-mortem?
And don't give me that truth = beauty crap, either. Keats just had that one wrong. Truth is a thing one must face every now and then. Beauty is the snowfall along the Angeles Crest Mountains, and/or a PT Cruiser with fake-wood siding.
Even if his conservative conversion is genuine, Romney still hasnÂ’t had the time to develop that core, that conservative instinct. He may think and believe conservatism is the right set of ideas, but one must soaked in it to get to the point of defending it in a Presidential campaign. MittÂ’s not there yet.
I'm not so sure about this. Sean's thesis has to do with Romney not having read enough "books, magazines and weblogs" to really grasp the principles of the "conservative movement. (Whatever that is; am I a part of that? Can someone advise me, here?)
But if Romney's experiences in business and as governor of Massachusetts brought him to a genuine turnaround, based on solid experience, that's a great deal more important than any theoretical grounding or wonky intellect.
When I think about which is more important to me—having a reader in the White House, or an executive—I would have to go with the executive. The do-er.
Let Romney's advisors read books, and brief him. Let him get his own Cheney—some smart, hands-on VP (um . . . Fred? You listening?).
I do not want theory from my President. I want practice. I want someone who will take decisive action.
And I do not—do not, do not, do not—want John McCain. Unless at some point I become convinced that he has been converted to the cause of conservatism.
Excuse me: I need to go laugh bitterly into my mug of red table wine.
1
What if McCain offers the VP spot to his good friend John Kerry? Like JK did to him, of course, but McCain couldn't accept without forever foregoing his dream of being the POTUS.
Maybe then JK can explain his dishonorable discharge. The two Johns can arrive at the Republican National Convention in a Swift Boat and announce that they are reporting for duty. I'm sure Minneapolis has river access.
Posted by: Darrell at January 31, 2008 09:12 PM (wsT11)
2
A newcomer like Mitt who isn't immersed in conservatism and its arguments is at a disadvantage in a Republican debate. Someone like that won't know how to effectively deal with the rhetorical attacks. If Romney's conversion is genuine he's at a disadvantage to a McCain who has swam in Reganism for decades.
Romney can be a fine conservative do-er, but he needs to convince conservatives he's their guy. I don't think he's learned the vocabulary yet to bet talk to them.
Posted by: Sean Hackbarth at January 31, 2008 10:17 PM (IpB84)
3
On the other hand, the base might be more predisposed to turn out for Romney vs. McCain. There are people who work a lot of hours each week, and don't have time to delve into these issues in the depth you do, Sean--or even in the depth that I do.
If it's McCain, the base stays home. Of course, if he's opposing Hillary, hers does as well. So I suppose that might be interesting to watch . . .
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 31, 2008 10:25 PM (vuv+H)
Dreamboat Green
. . . has been drunkblogging the GOP debate. A couple of the money quotes:
6:20pm You know what rocks about the 21st Century? I can drunkblog and order a pizza on the internet all at the same time. Of course, I have to rely on somewhat more primitive technology to get the pizza to me from the front door to the bedroom — but Melissa is used to that by now.
6:41pm TheyÂ’re letting Huck talk again. IsnÂ’t that cute?
7:19pm It’s the martinis talking, I know. But what I want is the Frankenstein Candidate — half Paul, to cover the domestic stuff, and half Nixon to bomb the crap out of anyone who needs it.
Works for me.
Via Insty, who remarks, "he's going to need a new liver before this election is over."
Advance Cause has a couple of candidate comparison charts. Unfortunately, they are broken down by party, which makes it less user-friendly if we end up with a choice between Hillary Clinton and John McCain.
Goldstein's talking about writing in "the ashes of Hunter S. Thompson" (or, alternatively, "the good part of Hunter S. Thompson's remains"). Personally, I'm going to write in Goldstein—and Burge, of course.
1
I took a more detailed quiz some months ago. I matched up best with Sam Brownback, followed by Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul.
Of the three, only Paul is left.
And McCain fared only barely better than the Dem candidates.
Posted by: Desert Cat at January 30, 2008 09:19 PM (DIr0W)
Jeff Is Back, Baby.
If you need me, I'll be at Protein Wisdom. I love his co-bloggers, but it just ain't the same.
Today, we have Goldstein's spirited response to those—including his own Craig C. who are willing to suck it up and vote for Johnny Mac:
Allow me to make the following suggestion to those whose entire political worldview is based around this amorphous (and purposely non-specific) desire for change: try crystal meth, or bang a tranny prostitute, or go pee-pee from an unfamiliar launching point. But please, please, donÂ’t chose your president based on the promise of something different.
That’s what gave us Jimmy Carter. And we’re still living with that nightmare — even if a certain giant river bunny who took a presidential oar to the skull may not be.
And he's probably right.
I'm still a National Security voter above all else. But I'm not convinced that Hillary would be any worse than McCain in that regard, despite the rhetorical differences between them. Hillary might, after all, have something to prove as the first female President. And that's what I want in the White House: a man or woman whom the Iranians, et al. don't exactly know what to make of. Someone whose actions they cannot necessarily predict.
White-haired bully, crazed female. All the same to me. I want our enemies (yes, we do have enemies) quaking in their boots. Once that's happening, I'm willing to move on to matters domestic.
The exception being speech: speech and guns. Without those two, the entire country loses itself. Johnny Mac's record on those first two Amendments remains troubling.
I may check around to see if I can simply have myself frozen until 2012. It's the most practical option.
1
"Troubling" is an understatement.
If you find a cryo place do me a favor and pass the info my way.
Posted by: Janette at January 30, 2008 04:40 PM (5R+zg)
2
I do find it interesting to see much of the right blogosphere coming around to the same level of frustration I was feeling a few weeks ago, now that it looks more and more like Johnny Rotten will be "our" candidate.
...urp...
Posted by: Desert Cat at January 31, 2008 11:58 AM (B2X7i)
I mean, it isn't like I had a hard-on for Romney anyway. (Pardon the genderfuck: I've never been able to find a good female analogy to that particular expression. "Romney never made me wet"?—sounds a bit slutty, no?)
It might be just as well for the Democratic establishment—Obama, Mrs. Clinton, McCain—to get aboard with the War on Terror anyway.
1
Why is it that everyone who promises 'change' always fails to mention what everything will be changed TO?
Todd/Lovett '08!
"How about a shave while we discuss this new treaty, Mr. Jong Il?"
I'm new. Nice site.
Posted by: TroyOunce at January 29, 2008 11:24 PM (vAIZm)
And Yet More Rape by the Patriarchal Democratic Establishment.Oy gevalt.
See, when I wrote this, I sort of thought I was, you know—joking.
But now that I've thought it through, I think there's a serious point to be made. Not the ridiculous notion that a failure to endorse Hillary Rodham Clinton as the Democratic nominee in 2008 is a form of rape—but the irrefutable fact that not sending me money and/or expensive gifts is a form of rape.
I've only had a few responses so far to my CPAC fundraising appeal. You don't want to be thought of as a misogynist, do you? Or a cheapskate? Or a cheapskate misogynist? Please look into your heart: is your desire to keep me—a woman—out of the nation's capital based on an unconscious desire to perpetuate the "old boys' club" of traditional politics? Yes. Yes, it is. But there is a way to make up for it—my tip jar!
h/t for the Hot Air link: Ace, who—if he actually read my site—would be rolling his eyes around now . . .
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:38 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.
While itÂ’s unlikely Super Tuesday will be decisive in a mathematical sense, the nomination will likely be all but HillaryÂ’s by dayÂ’s end. Obama is both the candidate most appealing to the Democratic base and the one best positioned to win in the general election; a rare combination, indeed. HeÂ’s unlikely to be the nominee despite that, though, owing to the compressed schedule and ClintonÂ’s superior support network.
Emphasis mine; fortunately for the Dems, our candidates are even lamer than theirs, so even if they put Mrs. C up, they aren't in terrible shape. Unless we get someone feisty like Rudy involved, which we won't.
1
HA!
Best Democratic presidential campaign EVER! At least the catfights in the Democratic party are helping to keep me distracted from the disaster that's our candidates.
Posted by: Janette at January 27, 2008 10:03 AM (5R+zg)
Of course campaign staffers do not work a couple of months every two or four years. They have jobs in the interim—usually as lobbyists.
The problem here is that the Reform Institute seems especially connected to McCain, and especially interested in promoting his agenda. And staffers seem to move fluidly between McCain's staff and the Reform Institute. And, of course, McCain served on its Advisory Board in the past. He seems to have resigned to avoid questions of conflicts of interest, or to avoid jeopardizing its tax-exempt status.
For a guy who campaigned on closing campaign donation loopholes and limiting how much money could flow from special interests to candidates, he seems to be exploiting a pretty big loophole.
It just occurred to me that one of these jokers — Clinton, McCain, Obama or Romney — is going to be the next President. It’s almost enough to make one pine for the old days of Bush v Gore.
1
Nope.
Something mankind in general did to you today, or can we see the evidence in a link?
I guess that proves your point. Best to let that go over our heads, isn't it?
Posted by: Darrell at January 25, 2008 11:17 PM (Sep1Y)
Posted by: Darrell at January 25, 2008 11:18 PM (Sep1Y)
3
I don't understand what you're talking about.
There was always a link; the link always worked.
Comments don't go into limbo.
Women don't get cranky one week out of the month, and bloody/crampy the following week. We most certainly don't leave bloodstains on anyone's sheets.
If anything goes wrong, it's Bush's fault.
The invasion of Iraq was illegal, unconstitutional, ineffective, and immoral.
Think. Thank. Thunk.
"Of all the hice in this town, how did you happen to wander into mine?"*
* Place this quote. And do not, for crying out loud, Google it—or I will lose all respect for you, and will not permit you to send me expensive gifts any longer.
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 26, 2008 12:15 AM (TWjW+)
4
No, we're not too bright.
I blame it on boobies.
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at January 26, 2008 12:43 PM (1hM1d)
5
Assuming "hice" is to "houses" as "mouse" is to "mice," I don't have a clue. As for Google goes, I wouldn't want to lose any privileges, would I?
Posted by: Darrell at January 26, 2008 12:54 PM (4d9Qj)
6
I got the "hice" line from James Thurber. I love James Thurber.
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 26, 2008 06:05 PM (vuv+H)
Hackbarth on Romney.
He's endorsing no one, yet, but has some thoughts:
Since I saw Romney at the 2007 CPAC heÂ’s struck me as looking the part of a President. He has an executive background, was a governor, and accomplished a few things. MittÂ’s problem is his conversion to conservatism. Supporting Romney is about how much you think his conversion is real.
Less so for me, of course. After all, I had a thing for Giuliani early on, and Rudy's no conservative. He's still my favorite candidate, and I'd love to see him win his current delegate gamble. I'm fairly certain he will not, however, which leaves me in the position of "settling" for Romney, or "settling" for McCain, or leaving the tent for the Dems or the Libs—or writing in Burge-Goldstein, which I would relish doing.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
03:22 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 140 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Bush the First had little basic competence in politics. he got elected in 1988 by riding on Reagan's coattails and because his opponent in the general election was even worse.
One rule of American politics is that you cannot be elected president unless you are either a Democrat or a man of your word. Bush was neither, and Dole was neither, we got eight years of Clinton.
Posted by: John at January 25, 2008 03:26 PM (vsPzN)
1
I'm moderately pissed myself.
I'm not supporting Romney, no matter what Fred says, and the fact that I got 17 Fred emails a day asking for money, and jack shi'ite to announce his departure really pisses me off.
2
Unless you were signed up to 17 Friends of Fred Thompson accounts you weren't getting 17 e-mails a day. I should know; I send half of them out.
Be mad; it's understandable (I'm not thrilled either), but we don't need the silly hyperbole.
Posted by: Sean Hackbarth at January 24, 2008 12:11 PM (IpB84)
3
We're just working through things, Sean. Isn't hyperbole one of the stages of grief?
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 24, 2008 01:46 PM (TWjW+)
4
William Congreve, in The mourning bride, 1697:
As you'll answer it, take heed
This Slave commit no Violence upon
Himself. I've been deceiv'd. The Publick Safety
Requires he should be more confin'd; and none,
No not the Princes self, permitted to
Confer with him. I'll quit you to the King.
Vile and ingrate! too late thou shalt repent
The base Injustice thou hast done my Love:
Yes, thou shalt know, spite of thy past Distress,
And all those Ills which thou so long hast mourn'd;
Heav'n has no Rage, like Love to Hatred turn'd,
Nor Hell a Fury, like a Woman scorn'd.
Posted by: Hog Beatty at January 24, 2008 10:25 PM (wksJa)
5
Thanks for the input. I'll be burning your house down soon--just so you know.
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 24, 2008 11:16 PM (TWjW+)
6
Hey. Nothing wrong with me that can't be cured by roasting FDT over an open fire, and then eating his liver with fava beans and a nice chianti.
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 25, 2008 12:50 AM (TWjW+)