Loyalty in one direction.

That sums it up nicely.

It also can be easily explained - those who are absolutely morally correct can demand such loyalty and justify never returning it. To do so would be to engage in a sort of sin.

Purity is what they demand. And then they get Sanford-like hypocrites elected to office and they can't understand it.

Morons.

I would wager that Dede didn't resign on her own but rather that she got requests from Party insiders. Given that the candidate they replaced her with is from out of district, unfamiliar with their issues, and supported by a fundamentalist political machine she needs to do what's best for her constituents. In this case her decision on that was to endorse the Democrat. I might do the same in her shoes, and indeed run as a democrat in 2010. The Socons in Kansas created the same dynamic, and several seats went over to D...

When do we have to start paying protection money so we don't get thrown out of the party?

I really do hope that the "Conservative Party" takes off and that the SoCons flock to it. Then I'd go back to the Republican Party.

If the GOP is going to start enthusiastically carrying out tea party-style purges, it’s a bit hypocritical to complain about disloyalty from the ones who are cast out.

Absolutely. The thing the GOP is going to have to understand is that at the end of the day, many of us will remain loyal to our principles before we remain loyal to a party or candidate.

Perhaps if the party promoted the principles the majority of the American people hold, they would start winning elections again. Just a thought.

Anybody who thought this race should be decided by the endorsements of national figures, who started looking at this race about two weeks ago, deserves a little humiliation. I think the ones who back Hoffman deserve it more, and that's part of why I hope Hoffman loses.

This is really an object lesson in how to kill your farm teams.

Being left of center, I am somehow relieved that Newt's status as "voice of reason" only lasted a few days...it was just too weird to look at him that way!

Since there is no Republican running in the race, what does loyalty have to do with it?

re: #9 philosophus invidius

Exactly

re: #8 bratwurst

I was just thinking that of James Carville!
His quote about the big tent and all...

re: #2 Thanos

I would wager that Dede didn't resign on her own but rather that she got requests from Party insiders. Given that the candidate they replaced her with is from out of district, unfamiliar with their issues, and supported by a fundamentalist political machine she needs to do what's best for her constituents. In this case her decision on that was to endorse the Democrat. I might do the same in her shoes, and indeed run as a democrat in 2010. The Socons in Kansas created the same dynamic, and several seats went over to D...

Apparently she's been flirting with switching sides for a while.

Democrats Fan The Flames Of Scozzafava's Tax Troubles

July 22, 2009

Democrats once flirted with running Republican Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava for the seat Rep. John McHugh will soon vacate in NY-23, but now that she's a leading contender for the GOP nod, they are rushing to bolster conservative concerns about her alleged tax troubles.

Soon-to-be-former state Democratic Chairwoman June O'Neill today confirmed reports that Scozzafava's husband, an upstate labor leader, talked with key local Democrats and union heads about the possibility of his wife running on Row A if the party's presumed first choice, state Sen. Darrel Aubertine, takes a pass.

"Her husband spoke with several Democratic officials and, you know, people who are aligned with the Democratic Party," O'Neill said. "There was some discussion about whether or not Dede might switch parties, but the whole tax thing is problematic on a number of levels. We didn't want to start out with any problems."

According to O'Neill, this isn't the first time the Democrats have spoken to Scozzafava about switching sides.

The talks started after the GOP passed Scozzafava over in favor of her Assembly colleague, Will Barclay, to run against Aubertine in the 48th SD special election back in February 2008.

re: #7 Thanos

This is really an object lesson in how to kill your farm teams.

And then burn the crops and plow salt into the earth. All to make a point.

I'm reminded of the scene in the Hitchhiker series where Marvin the Paranoid Android meets up with a robot on a bridge. Marvin is defenseless but has been left to battle the other robot. When he explains this to other robot it gets pissed off that people would be so insensitive to an android and, in a fit of rage, manages to blow out the bridge he is standing on thus plummeting to his demise. IIRC Marvin looks down through the hole that the robot fell through and says "Pathetic".

re: #4 karmic_inquisitor

I really do hope that the "Conservative Party" takes off and that the SoCons flock to it. Then I'd go back to the Republican Party.

Amen.

This highlights a weird conundrum:

1) The radical right is purging people for not being loyal to their ideology, regardless of party.

2) The Republican Party leadership is purging people for not being loyal to their party, regardless of ideology.

What's left?

re: #2 Thanos

I would wager that Dede didn't resign on her own but rather that she got requests from Party insiders. Given that the candidate they replaced her with is from out of district, unfamiliar with their issues, and supported by a fundamentalist political machine she needs to do what's best for her constituents. In this case her decision on that was to endorse the Democrat. I might do the same in her shoes, and indeed run as a democrat in 2010. The Socons in Kansas created the same dynamic, and several seats went over to D...

What do you expect her to do? When the party abandons her because a bunch of carpetbaggers from Alaska and Florida demand that the party abandon her, how could she stay in? I would do the same as her.

I'm philosophically small-c "conservative," and steadfastly Independent every time I vote. I have a question I hope a big-C "Conservative" can answer: isn't local determination one of the central tenets of Conservatism? That is, the only people who can rightly decide the political destiny of district IS that district? How do these social/religious "conservatives" square local determination with what they've done in NY-23?

On a second front, if the former Republican candidate decides the best person of the remaining candidates to represent her constituents is the Democratic candidate, how can they not accept any responsibility for that state of affairs after they forced her out of the running? Who did they think she was going to back, the people who torpedoed her career?

(Be nice to me, I'm new here, I'm just trying to understand what the HELL is happening out there...)

Has Gingrich called for purges in the Republican party? If not we should be careful interpreting his disappointment as condoning the hard right.

The Religious Right threatened to do the same thing to John McCain, endorse a Conwservative candidate. McCain accepted Sarah palin as a running mate, and we see what that got him.

Now Sarah Palin retired from her office and is cointinuing with this approach, turning against her own party if the candidate is not conwervative enough for her.

I'm not surprised by Gingrich's anger at Scozzafava. He thought he was doing the right thing for the party, and is "rewarded" for his troubles by watching Scozzafava endorse the Democrat. As NJDhockeyfan notes above, she was toying with a party switch, and the NYS GOP should have known something was afoot, but they went ahead on this anyways.

This is about questioning the competency of the party leaders who thought that Scozzafava was a candidate worthy of representing the district for the GOP.

Gingrich and other GOPers who backed Scozzafava appear to have been misled by her in thinking that she was a party loyalist, when she was in fact looking to jump ship.

At the same time, it looks like Scozzafava may have seen that she wasn't getting advancement like she wanted from the state GOP and looked to the Democrats to do the job for her; but when the state GOP decided to reward her with the nomination for the special election, the rank and file got angry.

All this points to the serious problems with the state GOP at the local level. They party bigwigs simply don't understand the issues and concerns at the local level, and they will continue to face trouble until they realize that they can't run lukewarm candidates.

But it also doesn't give the right wing carte blanche since their message doesn't resonate with large parts of the northeast and pushing out those who are to the left of them in the GOP will simply gut the party. Ed Cox has to balance competing needs and interests, but there is one place on which he can and must start - getting back to a message of fiscal responsibility.

re: #19 ralphieboy

...turning against her own party if the candidate is not conwervative enough for her.

That sounds like it will be as effective as a Shaker breeding program.

So let me get this straight - she fails to pass a purity test, and is all but booted (let's be honest, there's very little questions she was not-so-gently nudged out of the race), and Gingrich is mad at *her*?

That's the Newt I remember. Welcome back. You'll be such a boon to the new GOP...

/

re: #20 lawhawk

Excellent analysis, Lawhawk.

re: #4 karmic_inquisitor

I really do hope that the "Conservative Party" takes off and that the SoCons flock to it. Then I'd go back to the Republican Party.

Sadly, it won't happen. As I've noted before (here? comment on another blog? shrug) there's Gold in the Republican name.

In most states the Republicans (and the Democrats) get electoral benefits worth millions. The states pay part of the cost of the primaries. (What, the Constitution party wants a primary? Ante up.) Neither party has to pass a 'number of participants' test (signature on petition or other authorized proof). They don't have to file a great deal corporate/non-profit paperwork, no expanded bank accounts, already have large bank accounts in place, and so on and so forth.

No, the SoCons won't leave the Republican Party NAME. Right now it appears they have control of those millions of dollars; and nobody throws away millions of dollars.

re: #17 OneMonkeysUncle

I'm philosophically small-c "conservative," and steadfastly Independent every time I vote. I have a question I hope a big-C "Conservative" can answer: isn't local determination one of the central tenets of Conservatism? That is, the only people who can rightly decide the political destiny of district IS that district? How do these social/religious "conservatives" square local determination with what they've done in NY-23?

On a second front, if the former Republican candidate decides the best person of the remaining candidates to represent her constituents is the Democratic candidate, how can they not accept any responsibility for that state of affairs after they forced her out of the running? Who did they think she was going to back, the people who torpedoed her career?

(Be nice to me, I'm new here, I'm just trying to understand what the HELL is happening out there...)

First, we have to establish what is conservatism, and judge the answer to your question based on the different interpretations. I lean towards the Barry Goldwater school, and would say it IS a conservative position to support local control.

Since the so-called "conservatives" are the ones not practicing what they supposedly believe, I would say they're not conservatives, and that's you're answer. The RINO hunters are the actual RINOs.

I don't know. I admired Newt Gingrich's loyalty to his party when he stood behind Dede Scozzafava. The real RINOs were the Republicans who wouldn't support their parties' own candidate. In my opinion, Dede Scozzafava could have shown similar respectable loyalty by staying in the race and standing up for herself all the way to the ballot box. Instead she dropped out and endorsed the Democrat. I think New Gingrich has good reason to feel personally let down by Dede Scozzafava.

If the GOP is going to start enthusiastically carrying out tea party-style purges, it’s a bit hypocritical to complain about disloyalty from the ones who are cast out.

Word up.

Did anyone question Sarah Palin's "loyalty" when she turned against her own party? Or are they still too afraid of her popularity or to charmed by her money-raising postential?

At first glance, I thought Scozzafava wasn't sticking with the GOP because she couldn't tough the election process out. After reading into the story, it becomes clear that she feels the party and her "leadership" didn't defend her against the "conservative" uprising in NY-23, and therefore she owes them no loyalty in return. In fact, if Owens looses, she will be well set to chalenge Hoffman in 2010, so this endorsement is starting to look like a pretty smooth move. Actually, this makes even more sense when one considers that her carear with the GOP is now toast even if she sat on her hands instead.

Summary: Hell hath no fury like a politican scorned!

re: #26 Lawrence Schmerel

I agree (with both you and Lawhawk). Scozzafava dropping out of the race left Gingrich looking like he has egg on his face for supporting her.

I might be a little pissed off as well.

re: #28 ralphieboy

Did anyone question Sarah Palin's "loyalty" when she turned against her own party? Or are they still too afraid of her popularity or to charmed by her money-raising postential?

It's only mavericky for a GOP woman to do that when her positions are in line with the religious right. If they're not, the GOP woman is given a scarlet letter to wear and cast out as a radical.

SCHADENFREUDE! LOLOLOL!

One consequence from all this: if Mr. Newt ever had any presidential aspirations, they're deader than MSNBC's ratings.

His idea of what fits the district was polling in third place. What does that say about his ability to read the pulse of the electorate?

How did the architect of the Contract With America manage to latch on to such a tax-greedy candidate who supported the stimulus pork? The GOP has got to recruit candidates who are solidly behind less taxes and less spending. And who aren't infatuated with ACORN, an organization with long ties to election fraud.

re: #30 Honorary Yooper

I agree (with both you and Lawhawk). Scozzafava dropping out of the race left Gingrich looking like he has egg on his face for supporting her.

I might be a little pissed off as well.

But that is not a question of loyalty, it is jut one of making him look like a dolt. Which was the risk he took for taking a position in the first place.

re: #2 Thanos

I would wager that Dede didn't resign on her own but rather that she got requests from Party insiders. Given that the candidate they replaced her with is from out of district, unfamiliar with their issues, and supported by a fundamentalist political machine she needs to do what's best for her constituents. In this case her decision on that was to endorse the Democrat. I might do the same in her shoes, and indeed run as a democrat in 2010. The Socons in Kansas created the same dynamic, and several seats went over to D...

Except that she wasn't replaced. Hoffman isn't a member of the GOP; he's running as a Conservative Party candidate. It's really unfathomable that the GOP would back Hoffman over one of their own. The GOP has now officially lost in the 23rd, and will see their minority membership in the House decreased by one, regardless of the outcome of the actual race, because there is no Republican running now.

Hey major political parties, piss off the both of you.

You have had the country between you for many decades; had you been cooperating for the common good the country would not be in the state it is in now.

I cannot stand either of you.

re: #35 Ojoe

Hey major political parties, piss off the both of you.

You have had the country between you for many decades; had you been cooperating for the common good the country would not be in the state it is in now.

I cannot stand either of you.

-Insert obligatory Modern Whig Party reference here-

re: #35 Ojoe

Hey major political parties, piss off the both of you.
...
I cannot stand either of you.

Let me guess were this is leading...

The big tent is now a revival tent.

Learn to speak in tongues if you want to converse with anyone.

re: #35 Ojoe

Hey major political parties, piss off the both of you.

You have had the country between you for many decades; had you been cooperating for the common good the country would not be in the state it is in now.

I cannot stand either of you.

Hello American electorate: you have voted overwhelmingly for the two major political parties for decades, the ones who got us into this mess.

I cannot stand any of you.

re: #38 karmic_inquisitor

The big tent is now a revival tent.

Learn to speak in tongues if you want to converse with anyone.

Outstanding. Here, let me get your next round.

re: #38 karmic_inquisitor

The big tent is now a revival tent.

Learn to speak in tongues if you want to converse with anyone.

Hakuna matata.

re: #35 Ojoe

What? You mean there are other parties?

What would one of these other "parties" be called?

re: #20 lawhawk

A god analysis Lawhawk, but if more Republicans than Michael Steele and Newt had stood up for Scozzafava, this whole mess wouldn't have happened. In fact, did any GOP'er of note denounce the Hoffman insurgency as a threat to party unity? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall anybody speaking up to that effect...

Lots O Lizards were praising Newt for his integrity when he stuck with Dede. Perhaps the shaudenfreude isnt from them, but it does seem a bit hypocritical to me to be slamming him for being disappointed that the candidate he supported bailed and changes parties.

re: #37 Bagua

Let me guess were this is leading...

Join the party that is and always will be the party of the future...

Whigs

Michael Steele is one of the biggest losers in this whole scufflle, but I suspect that he is not without enemies within his party, if for nothing else than that joke of a website they launched...

Someone else can post "Whig"

and yes,

re: #39 ralphieboy

Hello American electorate: you have voted overwhelmingly for the two major political parties for decades, the ones who got us into this mess.

I cannot stand any of you.

Huge supply of morons apparently.

re: #44 DaddyG

Lots O Lizards were praising Newt for his integrity when he stuck with Dede. Perhaps the shaudenfreude isnt from them, but it does seem a bit hypocritical to me to be slamming him for being disappointed that the candidate he supported bailed and changes parties.

I'm not slamming Newt, I never liked him and don't really care who he endorses.

re: #32 Alan K. Henderson

SCHADENFREUDE! LOLOLOL!

One consequence from all this: if Mr. Newt ever had any presidential aspirations, they're deader than MSNBC's ratings.

His idea of what fits the district was polling in third place. What does that say about his ability to read the pulse of the electorate?

How did the architect of the Contract With America manage to latch on to such a tax-greedy candidate who supported the stimulus pork? The GOP has got to recruit candidates who are solidly behind less taxes and less spending. And who aren't infatuated with ACORN, an organization with long ties to election fraud.

Uh - see my post above. Scozzafava was the only GOP candidate in the race. Are you seriously demanding that a GOP loyalist like Gingrich back a candidate from another party?

There seems to be an awful lot of "Hoffman is the REAL GOP!!!" circulating around here. Which perhaps shows the level of political thinking currently emanating from the party's base. Hoffman is NOT a member of the GOP - he's a member of the Conservative Party. Scozzofava's withdrawal leaves the GOP with NO candidate in the race, and a guaranteed reduction in their minority membership in the House by one more.

It's stunning how many ditto-heads cheering this development seem to have no idea at all of the actual players or issues involved. Thus run the GOP's fortunes, as well as those of modern Conservatism today, lost in a fever swamp of hatred and denial.

re: #35 Ojoe

had you been cooperating for the common good the country...

I'm trying to decide exactly when it left port, but that ship sailed a long time ago. I know there are rabid partisans on both sides, but I truly think that the majority of Americans are mature enough to understand "give and take". Suddenly each and every issue is a hill to die on, and more and more people are sick of it.

More and more Independents, so they say...

re: #48 Killgore Trout

I'm not slamming Newt, I never liked him and don't really care who he endorses.

At least you are consistent.

re: #43 Surabaya Stew

A god analysis Lawhawk, but if more Republicans than Michael Steele and Newt had stood up for Scozzafava, this whole mess wouldn't have happened. In fact, did any GOP'er of note denounce the Hoffman insurgency as a threat to party unity? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall anybody speaking up to that effect...

No you are absolutely correct, because a lot of the party doesn't like a RINO, as per their understanding. Why would you expect otherwise?

re: #46 ralphieboy

Michael Steele is one of the biggest losers in this whole scufflle, but I suspect that he is not without enemies within his party, if for nothing else than that joke of a website they launched...

Steele has been hanging on by a thread since he started. He's one of those moderates that the Tea Parties are getting rid of. He's near the top of their list.

re: #41 Sharmuta

Hakuna matata.

Ohbladee, ohbladah.

re: #53 Killgore Trout

Steele has been hanging on by a thread since he started. He's one of those moderates that the Tea Parties are getting rid of. He's near the top of their list.

And I guess if they are planning on veering that far to the right that they must feel that they no longer need a token minortiy member to put up for show.

re: #5 Sharmuta

Absolutely. The thing the GOP is going to have to understand is that at the end of the day, many of us will remain loyal to our principles before we remain loyal to a party or candidate.

Perhaps if the party promoted the principles the majority of the American people hold, they would start winning elections again. Just a thought.

They believe that they are. You and I may not agree but I think it remains to be seen. If win their races tomorrow and again in 2010 the purge will continue.

re: #54 The Sanity Inspector

Ohbladee, ohbladah.

MahNah MahNah

re: #55 ralphieboy

And I guess if they are planning on veering that far to the right that they must feel that they no longer need a token minortiy member to put up for show.

I suspect that they will be purging ALL black conservatives from the party shortly.
//

Don't blame the two dominant political parties for the mess that we allow them to be by not voting in local elections and neglecting local politics. You could make the Democratic and Republican parties illegal today and the same crop of power brokers will take advantage of what we replace them with unless more people get more politically active ealier on in the process.

Looks like the rumors of Rudy endorsing Hoffman are true...
NY-23: Rudy Giuliani Robocalls for Hoffman
It's a shame to see Rudy pander to the nuts in hopes that they'll eat him last. Fuck off, Rudy you appeasing coward. They're going after you next.

re: #54 The Sanity Inspector

Ohbladee, ohbladah.

A whop bop a-loo whop a whop bam oooh.

re: #58 Walter L. Newton

I suspect that they will be purging ALL black conservatives from the party shortly.
//

Colin Powell endorsed Obama, remember?

re: #45 Walter L. Newton

Join the party that is and always will be the party of the future...

Whigs

LOL, way to choose a party name that will be meaningful with the average American.

The word "fringe" comes to mind.

re: #62 ralphieboy

Colin Powell endorsed Obama, remember?

So?

re: #55 ralphieboy

And I guess if they are planning on veering that far to the right that they must feel that they no longer need a token minortiy member to put up for show.

With the Birchers in the ascendancy, Steele's days are certainly numbered, as are those of any other minorities within the GOP. Those that don't leave on their own, in disgust, will be tossed out because of their complexion.

re: #64 Walter L. Newton

So?

Are there any black conservatives left to purge?

re: #28 ralphieboy

Did anyone question Sarah Palin's "loyalty" when she turned against her own party? Or are they still too afraid of her popularity or to charmed by her money-raising postential?

This what I don't get.
Just who is Palin popular with?
All the polling I've seen show her with huge negs with a cross section of Americans.
I guess if one is talking just of the base, then I guess she is popular with them.

re: #57 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

re: #65 SixDegrees

With the Birchers in the ascendancy, Steele's days are certainly numbered, as are those of any other minorities within the GOP. Those that don't leave on their own, in disgust, will be tossed out because of their complexion.

Sadly true.

re: #63 Bagua

LOL, way to choose a party name that will be meaningful with the average American.

The word "fringe" comes to mind.

I actually have to give credit to Vince Carroll, ex-editor of the Rocky Mountain News... it was his description of the Libertarian Party.

re: #60 Killgore Trout

I thought his political career was over anyway

re: #63 Bagua

Well it is historic, that name, and we are a bit backward looking in this country right now, so maybe it is a good name. The Golden past and all.

re: #66 ralphieboy

Are there any black conservatives left to purge?

Well, yes, I know a good number of black conservatives in the Denver area, but I'm not going to give you their address.
//

re: #67 webevintage

This what I don't get.
Just who is Palin popular with?
All the polling I've seen show her with huge negs with a cross section of Americans.
I guess if one is talking just of the base, then I guess she is popular with them.

I can only assume that she simply overwhelms them with the solid grip she does have on a part of the voting constituency along with an enormous fundraising potential wherever whe goes.

And especially if she succeeds in NY (as it seems she will), she can continue to barge into local elections all across the country like a rampant Bull Moose (why does Teddy Roosevelt come to mind here?) and force Republicans to either tow the conservative line or lose the election.

re: #71 philosophus invidius

I thought his political career was over anyway

He could run for governor but he's not presidential material. I'm disappointed by his pandering. I liked him because I thought he'd stick to his morals. I was wrong.

re: #43 Surabaya Stew

You're asking the wrong question. Which GOPers in the district were standing up with Scozzafava and which were going for Hoffman, who is on the conservative party ballot.

The lack of support from GOP rank and file in the district doomed her chances, far more than any outside assistance.

Remember, this is a special election, so the usual primary rules are out the window; the state party leaders chose their candidates - Owens on the Democrat side; Scozzafava for the GOP, and Hoffman on the conservative line. Those in the district weren't exactly jumping for joy with Scozzafava, as witnessed by the polling that didn't exactly favor her; Hoffman got out of state GOPers to go for his conservative schtick (Palin, etc.), and Scozzafava and the state GOP needed some to bolster their own candidate. They got Gingrich and Steele.

Even Pataki came in to support Hoffman at the end of the day when the writing was on the wall.

But before everyone writes off the GOP because of the statewide problems with the GOP in NY, bear in mind that if Christie wins in NJ, it's a huge hit to Obama, who has been publicly supporting Corzine (and I'd argue that it's come to the point of being a referendum on Obama because Corzine's negatives are so high and Obama's people are pretty much running the show there - with all of Corzine's money at their disposal). Christie has been endorsed by a whole litany of GOPers, including Palin, Jindal, and Gingrich.

The mess in NY-23 would have been averted had a solid GOPer ran in the first place; the first mistake was the state GOP choosing a candidate who was toying with being a Democrat.

re: #66 ralphieboy

Are there any black conservatives left to purge?

Alan Keys?

*shudder*

re: #69 Killgore Trout

Sadly true.

Wait 'til the immigration issue comes to the forefront once again. They can finish the job of alienating every Hispanic voter in the country for the next couple of generations.

re: #49 SixDegrees

Hoffman is NOT a member of the GOP - he's a member of the Conservative Party. Scozzofava's withdrawal leaves the GOP with NO candidate in the race, and a guaranteed reduction in their minority membership in the House by one more.

Hell he's not even a resident of the district and seems to not know nor care about the needs of the district's residents.

re: #72 Ojoe

Well it is historic, that name, and we are a bit backward looking in this country right now, so maybe it is a good name. The Golden past and all.

Unless a third party suddenly has a majority, you will still be governed by either the left or the right, and you won't even be able to say you had anything to do with it.

This is not a EU country, where a small but vocal minority can sit in government and make points.

Make a difference, change the system, stop running away.

Bachmann's New Effort To Rally Against Congress -- And Do It Inside The Buildings -- Endorsed By GOP Leadership

re: #49 SixDegrees

Hoffman would likely caucus with the GOP, so the actual effect will be reduced by the party affiliation. An Owens win is a clear pickup for the Democrats by contrast.

Also, this race basically gets fought again next year since this is a special election to fill the seat vacated by McHugh. We might have the same players in action again - although I doubt Scozzafava will be a GOPer for it. The GOP primary in NY-23 for 2010 will be vastly different than the mess we saw with this special election.

re: #75 Killgore Trout

He could run for governor but he's not presidential material. I'm disappointed by his pandering. I liked him because I thought he'd stick to his morals. I was wrong.

Why do I have a hard time believeing you would be announcing your "like" for Guilani if he had "stuck to his morals" and not pandered to the hard right?

re: #60 Killgore Trout

Looks like the rumors of Rudy endorsing Hoffman are true...
NY-23: Rudy Giuliani Robocalls for Hoffman

The kind of amazing thing to me is that a neo-Confederate who's written articles for and posted links to white supremacist and neo-Nazi websites has managed to weasel into close proximity with this campaign, and nobody seems to notice or care.

re: #66 ralphieboy

Start here...

[Link: www.nbra.info...]

re: #66 ralphieboy

Are there any black conservatives left to purge?

That guy who took the semi-auto rifle to the Arizona Obama appearance.

And Ken Blackwell.

re: #78 SixDegrees

Wait 'til the immigration issue comes to the forefront once again. They can finish the job of alienating every Hispanic voter in the country for the next couple of generations.

Hispanics are not monolithic about immigration reform.

re: #20 lawhawk

My only thought about the whole "rank and file" being mad meme is where is the proof of it?
It seems to me that the situation was tonking along, and coasting to a looking good, if a bit too close win (most likely because of Obamas coattails) for her before the national Conservatives got all down on her, and by the publicity and money tossed into the race, got some momentum, but before that, not so much.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but that was my perception.

re: #75 Killgore Trout

Sorry, I can't agree that he had any particularly good morals to begin with.

re: #68 suchislife

Has it's own wiki...

re: #82 lawhawk

Hoffman would likely caucus with the GOP, so the actual effect will be reduced by the party affiliation. An Owens win is a clear pickup for the Democrats by contrast.

Also, this race basically gets fought again next year since this is a special election to fill the seat vacated by McHugh. We might have the same players in action again - although I doubt Scozzafava will be a GOPer for it. The GOP primary in NY-23 for 2010 will be vastly different than the mess we saw with this special election.

All correct. But caucusing doesn't help lessen the GOP's minority status - it adds to it.

My point is the same as yours, I think: the GOP bungled this whole episode badly, and the result is the loss of one more GOP seat.

re: #49 SixDegrees

Scozzofava's withdrawal leaves the GOP with NO candidate in the race, and a guaranteed reduction in their minority membership in the House by one more.

I don't believe that's accurate -- Hoffman can always caucus with the Republicans (if he wins) and run as one nect time.

re: #72 Ojoe

Well it is historic, that name, and we are a bit backward looking in this country right now, so maybe it is a good name. The Golden past and all.

I'm familiar with the name, as are the rest of the 1/100th of one percent of the population with a taste for irrelevant trivia.

I suppose with ten or twenty years of serious effort and publicity, the Modern Whigs may arrive at the dizzying heights of irrelevance as say, Ralph Nader's Green party with its stunning capture of 0.38% of the vote in 2004, and 0.56% in 2008.

re: #43 Surabaya Stew

What is more important, party unity, or getting the party to back the correct issues? We can't fix our biggest problem - the economy - if we run candidates who want to do the things that will break it further.

This is why the GOP has been losing steam since 1996. It surrendered to the Dems on spending after the 1995 government shutdown. It should have continued to fight for more spending control, even with the Dems numerous enough to block passage of such measures. Success is not measured in getting bills passed; it is measured in fixing stuff, or preventing further breakage. The Congressional GOP wasn't dedicated to attacking spending, which eroded its ability to recruit candidates - and ultimately voter support - along those lines.

People don't have hope in you if you're not even trying to do what they want. Americans want the fiscal hemorrhaging to stop. Republicans, stop running vampires for office!

re: #87 DaddyG

I don't think that's what he meant. The point is that GOP politicians and pundits, as well as their vocal followers on the streets, will always voice anti Hispanic sentiments during immegrations debates.

re: #84 Charles

The kind of amazing thing to me is that a neo-Confederate who's written articles for and posted links to white supremacist and neo-Nazi websites has managed to weasel into close proximity with this campaign, and nobody seems to notice or care.

I think it's pretty much an open secret at this point. Everybody knows but nobody want to make a big deal out of it.

re: #84 Charles

That is a symptom of people not being involved in politics and waiting for parties to spoon feed them messages two weeks before an election. I doubt anyone even recognizes those names outside of the blogosphere.

Sadly it seems the extremes are energized and the bulk of Americans are disenfranchised and apathetic.

re: #84 Charles

The kind of amazing thing to me is that a neo-Confederate who's written articles for and posted links to white supremacist and neo-Nazi websites has managed to weasel into close proximity with this campaign, and nobody seems to notice or care.

Fits right in with the Bircher ascendancy I mentioned earlier. We'll probably see overt racism being spewed by party members before too much longer.

re: #90 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I didn't know that! I just love the Muppets version.

Well, when it came to morals, I had the choice of looking for either a politician with morals, or a virgin in a New Orleans brothel.

Hmm...hey, that piano player's pretty good. And what's your name there, little missy?

re: #93 Bagua

I'm familiar with the name, as are the rest of the 1/100th of one percent of the population with a taste for irrelevant trivia.

I suppose with ten or twenty years of serious effort and publicity, the Modern Whigs may arrive at the dizzying heights of irrelevance as say, Ralph Nader's Green party with its stunning capture of 0.38% of the vote in 2004, and 0.56% in 2008.

The problem with third parties is the barriers erected in some many states to make it hard for them to get on local ballots, let alone into national elections.
It may be actually easier to run nationally then it is t run statewide.

re: #87 DaddyG

Hispanics are not monolithic about immigration reform.

Hispanics support for Bush during his first term was in the high 40s. By the time the GOP got done outright insulting them with their worthless hate-mongering over immigration, that support dipped into the thirties. In the last election, is was in the low 20s and falling.

Draw your own conclusions.

re: #99 suchislife

I didn't know that! I just love the Muppets version.

I like the creepy version better.

re: #102 SixDegrees

Hispanics support for Bush during his first term was in the high 40s. By the time the GOP got done outright insulting them with their worthless hate-mongering over immigration, that support dipped into the thirties. In the last election, is was in the low 20s and falling.

Draw your own conclusions.

/I think we can all agree America would be better off without immigrants.

Hatch: Health Care Reform Threatens America's Two-Party System

I'm finally starting to understand the right wing fear. First they are afraid that Obama's policies going to screw up the country. That's a legitimate fear. I'm also starting to notice that they're also afraid his policies are going to work. Republicans have viciously opposed everything and if these policies end up being popular Republicans are going to have a very hard time in the future.

re: #20 lawhawk

As NJDhockeyfan notes above, she was toying with a party switch, and the NYS GOP should have known something was afoot,

Except that the article NJDhockeyfan quoted said the Dems were sending her invitations, *not* that "she was toying with a party switch." She did in fact run as a Republican. IMHO, she has every right to feel victimized here and her support for the Democratic candidate is a stand on principle.

Hey Charles, they are talking about you over on Think Progress...
[Link: thinkprogress.org...]

and not in a bad way.

re: #103 Bagua

I love how youtube clips are basically the primary LGF diversion. I end up bookmarking a lot of them.

re: #49 SixDegrees

Uh - see my post above. Scozzafava was the only GOP candidate in the race. Are you seriously demanding that a GOP loyalist like Gingrich back a candidate from another party?

Who do you think Hoffman will caucus with?

Why should I side with NY GOP leaders against NY-23 GOP constituents? I'm not a royalist.

re: #107 webevintage

Hey Charles, they are talking about you over on Think Progress...

and not in a bad way.

But is that progress?

re: #92 charlz

I don't believe that's accurate -- Hoffman can always caucus with the Republicans (if he wins) and run as one nect time.

It's accurate. Hoffman is not a member of the GOP, and his presence can only reduce the GOP's numbers. It doesn't matter who he caucuses with; it's still one less GOP seat in the house.

This will be more important next year. If the GOP manages to pick up seats during the midterms, there's a (vanishingly small) chance they could regain majority status, along with all the perqs of power that come along with it. It really is one of those times when every single seat held by the party counts, and Hoffman won't be counted if he retains his seat, because he isn't a member of the party. (The 23rd will hold it's own elections, so we'll get a redo and Hoffman may lose, but this is how the math in Congress works.)

Newt and Rudy are making a terrible mistake in trying to appease the socon/teaparty nuts.
It will not stop the tea-partiers from vilifying them as RINOs nor will it keep them from trying to gain absolute control of the party. As I have said many times, the socon and religious right leadership is not really interested in winning. They would be perfectly happy to have the GOP as a permanent fringe party as long as they get to be in charge.

re: #108 suchislife

I love how youtube clips are basically the primary LGF diversion. I end up bookmarking a lot of them.

Just one more thing to love about the Internets best blog site: LGF.

Now with Mp3 as well.

re: #105 Killgore Trout

Republicans have viciously opposed everything and if these policies end up being popular Republicans are going to have a very hard time in the future.

The GOP is putting all its chips on "FAIL" and spinning the wheel. There is evidence right in front of everyone's faces, and they still are hell bent on taking the risk.

You have been very consistent in pointing out that most countries have passed some type of stimulus package at one point or another. If things really are improving (and I understand there is some argument about that at this point,) what will be there response to opponents saying that they voted against the stimulus? Or are they hoping that partisanship will carry the day?

re: #106 charlz

Except that the following makes it clear that toying with switching sides was actually contemplated:

"Her husband spoke with several Democratic officials and, you know, people who are aligned with the Democratic Party," O'Neill said. "There was some discussion about whether or not Dede might switch parties, but the whole tax thing is problematic on a number of levels. We didn't want to start out with any problems."

Her husband was working on her behalf, and the fact that there were conversations talking about possible problems with a switch tells me that they were actively contemplating it.

re: #45 Walter L. Newton

Join the party that is and always will be the party of the future...

Whigs

Because it will never be the party of the present?

What is "socon"?

re: #117 Alan K. Henderson

What is "socon"?

"Social conservative" Basically the religious right and its make or break issues, abortion and gay rights.

re: #109 Alan K. Henderson

Who do you think Hoffman will caucus with?

No one knows. And it doesn't matter. The GOP lost another member of the House as a result of this episode. Note that a majority can be decided by a single member - Hoffman will never count toward the GOP tally. If the midterms get the GOP to within a single vote of that majority, and Hoffman retains his seat...the GOP remains a minority, no matter who Hoffman likes best.

re: #111 SixDegrees

It's accurate. Hoffman is not a member of the GOP, and his presence can only reduce the GOP's numbers. It doesn't matter who he caucuses with; it's still one less GOP seat in the house.

This will be more important next year. If the GOP manages to pick up seats during the midterms, there's a (vanishingly small) chance they could regain majority status, along with all the perqs of power that come along with it. It really is one of those times when every single seat held by the party counts, and Hoffman won't be counted if he retains his seat, because he isn't a member of the party. (The 23rd will hold it's own elections, so we'll get a redo and Hoffman may lose, but this is how the math in Congress works.)

Hi Six! Interesting point. Wonder what would happen if, after the election (think Specter), Hoffman were to announce a switch to the GOP (assuming there were "invitations"). It would add an R to the mix. I guess my question is whether or not the constituents in NY23 would go along, or be put off by that?

re: #111 SixDegrees

It's accurate. Hoffman is not a member of the GOP, and his presence can only reduce the GOP's numbers. It doesn't matter who he caucuses with; it's still one less GOP seat in the house.

I don't see why that's a distinction without a difference, SD. It's the same thing as Lieberman -- elected as an Independent but caucuses with the Dems so is counted in the Dem majority, at least for vote counting purposes.

re: #104 Baier

/I think we can all agree America would be better off without immigrants.

Well said, Kemo Sabe.

/

re: #116 Decatur Deb

Because it will never be the party of the present?

My point exactly.

re: #112 Shiplord Kirel

I think you're right. They just want to be in control of the GOP, let it be damned that it will never win elections outside very conservative districts.

re: #66 ralphieboy

Are there any black conservatives left to purge?

Here's a roundup of black conservative bloggers' reactions to the NY-23 race.

re: #120 subsailor68

Hi Six! Interesting point. Wonder what would happen if, after the election (think Specter), Hoffman were to announce a switch to the GOP (assuming there were "invitations"). It would add an R to the mix. I guess my question is whether or not the constituents in NY23 would go along, or be put off by that?

Constituents tend to view party switches, especially shortly after an election, very unfavorably. Spectre is floundering badly and will probably lose his seat; his move to the other side of the aisle has played at least some role in that.

Next up...Crist vs. Rubio.

It is going to be a replay of NY-23, except that Crist isn't quite as 'moderate' as Scozzafava. This one is going to be Ugly (with a capital 'U'), Joe Klein did his column in Time magazine about it this week.

Marco Rubio, the new ultraconservative poster boy running for the U.S. Senate in Florida, offered the Volusia County Republican Party a carefully calibrated, and rather compelling, celebration of freedom. He spoke about his Cuban heritage. His parents had escaped Castro. "It is possible to lose your freedom. You can have your family business taken over by 'the people.' You can lose your country. My parents did," he said,

(snip)

"Lord, save me from the purists," says Jim Greer, the state's Republican Party chairman and a Crist supporter. "If the party keeps going in this direction, all we'll have left will be three people sitting around a table. They'll be absolutely pure, but none of them will be holding office."

[Link: www.time.com...]

An eye for an eye
A tooth for a tooth
Vote for me and I’ll set you free.
Ball of confusion.

re: #118 Shiplord Kirel

"Social conservative" Basically the religious right and its make or break issues, abortion and gay rights.

They're really better termed "theocons" or "theocrats" due to their politics and beliefs.

re: #129 Honorary Yooper

They're really better termed "theocons" or "theocrats" due to their politics and beliefs.

Correct. There is nothing even remotely Conservative about their policies.

re: #126 SixDegrees

Constituents tend to view party switches, especially shortly after an election, very unfavorably. Spectre is floundering badly and will probably lose his seat; his move to the other side of the aisle has played at least some role in that.

Yeah, I think you're right about that. If Hoffman needs republicans and independents to beat Owen, I suppose the republicans might be okay with that kind of maneuver, but it might alienate the independents.

How long has it been again since the Republicans controlled Congress and the White House?

re: #119 SixDegrees

Who do you think Hoffman will caucus with?

No one knows.

Are you serious? He's got only two choices. Who do you THINK a fiscal conservative will caucus with??? Try again.

From Think Progress:

Conservative blogger Charles Johnson of the site Little Green Footballs reported yesterday that Doug Hoffman, the Conservative Party candidate in the NY-23 special election, signed a pledge to uphold Glenn Beck’s 9/12 Project principles in Congress.

re: #134 Reginald Perrin

From Think Progress:

Really, I didn't see that yesterday. It certainly sounds like the independent Hoffman is going the way of the far right? Interesting.

Doug Hoffman praises Glenn Beck as his "mentor"

PAT: Every second. What about

HOFFMAN: I have good mentors here.

GLENN: Wait, wait. Wait, wait. Are they mentors that will show –

HOFFMAN: I’m talking about you, Glenn.

GLENN: Oh, okay. I was going to say all right, as long as they are standing out from the shadows. [...]

HOFFMAN: No. Yeah, well, I’m going to keep in touch with people like you so I don’t get infected with that disease.

re: #133 Alan K. Henderson

Are you serious? He's got only two choices. Who do you THINK a fiscal conservative will caucus with??? Try again.

What makes you think he's a fiscal conservative? His record? Oh, wait - he doesn't have one. His stated views on the matter? Oh, wait - he hasn't made any, other than a few nebulous platitudes.

And given the howling emanating from the rabid right over the GOP, there apparently aren't any True Conservatives for him to caucus with there in the first place.

That leaves the Blue Dog Democrats, the only members of Congress who've managed to promote an actual Conservative agenda of late, without whom we'd already have nationalized health care and cap & trade.

You're supporting someone you know nothing at all about, and you have no idea at all how he's going to vote on any issues. Just own it.

re: #76 lawhawk

You're asking the wrong question. Which GOPers in the district were standing up with Scozzafava and which were going for Hoffman, who is on the conservative party ballot.

The lack of support from GOP rank and file in the district doomed her chances, far more than any outside assistance.

Remember, this is a special election, so the usual primary rules are out the window; the state party leaders chose their candidates - Owens on the Democrat side; Scozzafava for the GOP, and Hoffman on the conservative line. Those in the district weren't exactly jumping for joy with Scozzafava, as witnessed by the polling that didn't exactly favor her; Hoffman got out of state GOPers to go for his conservative schtick (Palin, etc.), and Scozzafava and the state GOP needed some to bolster their own candidate. They got Gingrich and Steele.

Even Pataki came in to support Hoffman at the end of the day when the writing was on the wall.

But before everyone writes off the GOP because of the statewide problems with the GOP in NY, bear in mind that if Christie wins in NJ, it's a huge hit to Obama, who has been publicly supporting Corzine (and I'd argue that it's come to the point of being a referendum on Obama because Corzine's negatives are so high and Obama's people are pretty much running the show there - with all of Corzine's money at their disposal). Christie has been endorsed by a whole litany of GOPers, including Palin, Jindal, and Gingrich.

The mess in NY-23 would have been averted had a solid GOPer ran in the first place; the first mistake was the state GOP choosing a candidate who was toying with being a Democrat.

Without the third party and out of state intervention the support would have been there.

re: #137 SixDegrees

Updinged although I don't agree about the blue dogs.

IMHO Card Check enough reason to classify DeDe as NOT even a middle of the road Republican candidate...her husband a union organizer...I live in central NY...NY State very bad wrt to high taxes and unions are a big problem. For years until the last election Dems controlled the Assembly and Repubs the Senate (Dems now have it all). Logrolling "you vote for my project and I will vote for yours" meant and means BIG spending and taxes all around. New Yorkers leaving in droves... Dede part of the Albany crowd, not really much of any kind of Republican (look at her flirtations). I think DC beltway Repubs knew not what they were getting and had buyer's remorse. I don't think Hoffman perfect (who is ? [heh]) but a much better candidate...hanging out with Beck better than Ayers !

re: #132 cliffster

How long has it been again since the Republicans controlled Congress and the White House?

White House - a few months. Congress - never.

"Control" means you get to do with something whatever you want to do with it. The GOP didn't have that degree of power when they held the majority. The minority was allowed to have its way with domestic spending (esp. since some Repubs are fiscal liberals), and especially the lower-court nomination process.

Sometimes it's hard to tell that the GOP had a Congressional majority at all. We got a modest tax cuts and some military spending that a Dem team woudl nto have passed. What else did we get that the Left would not have supported?

Everything is cool
Everything's okay
Everything is cool
Everything's okay

-- John Prine

Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims

Murdered?

re: #141 Alan K. Henderson

The 2004 elections were the first time since the McKinley administration that a Republican president was re-elected, and Republicans extended their hold on both houses of Congress. They didn't do anything with their political capital though, save for founder on the reef of Social Security privatization.

re: #93 Bagua

I'm familiar with the name, as are the rest of the 1/100th of one percent of the population with a taste for irrelevant trivia.

I suppose with ten or twenty years of serious effort and publicity, the Modern Whigs may arrive at the dizzying heights of irrelevance as say, Ralph Nader's Green party with its stunning capture of 0.38% of the vote in 2004, and 0.56% in 2008.

Um, Ralph Nader was the Green Party candidate in 1996 and 2000, he ran as an independent in 2004 and 2008. Sorry to let facts get in the way of that awesome point you were making.

re: #141 Alan K. Henderson

Sometimes it's hard to tell that the GOP had a Congressional majority at all. We got a modest tax cuts and some military spending that a Dem team woudl nto have passed. What else did we get that the Left would not have supported?

Bill Frist diagnosing Terry Schivo over the TV and Congress then making a mockery of the judicial process?

Abstinence only sex ed?

The Patriot Act?

re: #143 Ben Hur

Sounds like someone from Lew Rockwell dot com wrote that headline.

re: #143 Ben Hur

Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims

Murdered?

Interesting. They even repeat the claim in the text of the article...

A mosque on Friday dismissed as "utterly preposterous" the FBI's allegations that its murdered leader was part of a radical Islamic group.

Expect to see more of this. As Fox panders more to the Alex Jones/Ron Paul/Glenn Beck crowd they're going to paint law enforcement and the government as oppressive murderers. I don't think the "murder" thing in this article is an accident. It's an intentional editorial decision.

re: #141 Alan K. Henderson

The minority was allowed to have its way with domestic spending (esp. since some Repubs are fiscal liberals), and especially the lower-court nomination process.

So yes - Republicans had majorities in both sides of Congress and the White House right up until oh, 2 years ago. The fact that they didn't have the gumption to get anything done during that time, well that sucks. And that's Bush, more than likely.

re: #143 Ben Hur

Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims

Murdered?

Some of the imam's supporters are trying to say that he didn't have anything to do with what the FBI caught him and his people doing (gun smuggling, among other things), so they're trying to shift the blame for his death to the FBI (even though the "imam" refused to surrender and apparently leveled a weapon at the raid team)...

re: #148 Killgore Trout

Expect to see more of this. As Fox panders more to the Alex Jones/Ron Paul/Glenn Beck crowd they're going to paint law enforcement and the government as oppressive murderers. I don't think the "murder" thing in this article is an accident. It's an intentional editorial decision.

It's the AP.

Though it's effed up that Fox didn't edit in their edition.

re: #146 Conservative Moonbat

Bill Frist diagnosing Terry Schivo over the TV and Congress then making a mockery of the judicial process?

Abstinence only sex ed?

The Patriot Act?

Leaving the Patriot Act aside, you've correctly illuminated where the GOP utterly blew it: when they began embracing the religious right's platform and abandoned Conservatism completely.

That worked out so well that they're trying to make the change permanent. Great idea.

re: #141 Alan K. Henderson

White House - a few months. Congress - never.

"Control" means you get to do with something whatever you want to do with it. The GOP didn't have that degree of power when they held the majority. The minority was allowed to have its way with domestic spending (esp. since some Repubs are fiscal liberals), and especially the lower-court nomination process.

Sometimes it's hard to tell that the GOP had a Congressional majority at all. We got a modest tax cuts and some military spending that a Dem team woudl nto have passed. What else did we get that the Left would not have supported?

I love how this works: when the Republicans are in control of Congress any increases in spending aren't their fault - the lefties are to blame. When the Democrats are in control all spending increases are to be laid at their feet. I guess that's the way you convince yourself that your party is the party of fiscal restraint. Any evidence to the contrary is to be denied/dismissed.

re: #140 livfreeordie

IMHO Card Check enough reason to classify DeDe as NOT even a middle of the road Republican candidate...her husband a union organizer...I live in central NY...NY State very bad wrt to high taxes and unions are a big problem. For years until the last election Dems controlled the Assembly and Repubs the Senate (Dems now have it all). Logrolling "you vote for my project and I will vote for yours" meant and means BIG spending and taxes all around. New Yorkers leaving in droves... Dede part of the Albany crowd, not really much of any kind of Republican (look at her flirtations). I think DC beltway Repubs knew not what they were getting and had buyer's remorse. I don't think Hoffman perfect (who is ? [heh]) but a much better candidate...hanging out with Beck better than Ayers !

Little known fact about Republican John McHugh:

Employee Free Choice Act
H.R. 1696:
109th Congress

To amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes.

Small sample of the 215 co-sponsors:

John McHugh [R-NY23]
Cynthia McKinney [D-GA4]
Michael McNulty [D-NY21]
Martin Meehan [D-MA5]
Kendrick Meek [D-FL17]
Gregory Meeks [D-NY6]

This bill was introduced on April 19, 2005.

Didn't seem to affect his re-election in 2006 where he beat Robert J. Johnson 63% to 37% and again in 2008 where McHugh beat Michael P. Oot 65% TO 35%.

re: #144 The Sanity Inspector

The 2004 elections were the first time since the McKinley administration that a Republican president was re-elected, and Republicans extended their hold on both houses of Congress. They didn't do anything with their political capital though, save for founder on the reef of Social Security privatization.

But 2004 happened. And until 2 years ago, Republicans had majorities in Congress, and the White House. But we're ready to say that the Republican Party is in the shitter?

re: #148 Killgore Trout

Expect to see more of this. As Fox panders more to the Alex Jones/Ron Paul/Glenn Beck crowd they're going to paint law enforcement and the government as oppressive murderers. I don't think the "murder" thing in this article is an accident. It's an intentional editorial decision.

Hey Killgore! Could be so. Although, as I read that snippet:

A mosque on Friday dismissed as "utterly preposterous" the FBI's allegations that its murdered leader was part of a radical Islamic group.

it starts to look like the sloppy writing we've come to expect from journalists who've had the benefit of American education over the last twenty or more years.

First, how can a "mosque" dismiss anything? How about "A representative of the mosque dismissed" - getting the "on Friday" out of there and writing a crisp sentence. I'd bet that the "murdered leader" was part of the dismissal, and the writer was just too damn lazy to write a coherent paragraph.

re: #155 cliffster

But 2004 happened. And until 2 years ago, Republicans had majorities in Congress, and the White House. But we're ready to say that the Republican Party is in the shitter?

That's how they tackled tort reform -- with congressional majorities and holding the White House.

//

How about that DHS memo?
Soldier arrested over explosives in Tenn. field

An Army Special Forces soldier has been arrested following the discovery of about 100 pounds of explosives outside his Tennessee home.

Federal and military officials searched his home early Monday morning after a pair of hunters found the C-4 plastic explosive in a field by the house outside Clarksville. The house is near Fort Campbell, a sprawling Army post on the Tennessee-Kentucky border where the soldier is based.
...
Another Fort Campbell soldier was arrested in October and charged with selling four stolen hand grenades and a stolen anti-tank rocket to an undercover officer in Tennessee.

Prosecutors said the transaction with Pfc. Joshua Bartlett Etherton, a 101st Airborne Division soldier, was arranged after police in the small town of Paris received a tip, but they would not say who he believed was the buyer.

re: #143 Ben Hur

Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims

Murdered?

"President Obama, the black infidel, snuck up behind him and then shot him in the back, I saw the whole thing." -Osama Bin Laden

re: #153 3kids3dogs

I love how this works: when the Republicans are in control of Congress any increases in spending aren't their fault - the lefties are to blame. When the Democrats are in control all spending increases are to be laid at their feet. I guess that's the way you convince yourself that your party is the party of fiscal restraint. Any evidence to the contrary is to be denied/dismissed.

There are a number of fiscal conservatives that are well aware it is our party's hypocrisy on fiscal responsibility that is to blame for quite a bit of the mess we're in, so please put down the braod brush. Thanks.

Broad. PIMF.

re: #155 cliffster

But 2004 happened. And until 2 years ago, Republicans had majorities in Congress, and the White House. But we're ready to say that the Republican Party is in the shitter?

I'm not quite ready to say that - yet. But if I see the religious right gaining ground in the government, I will do whatever I can to stop them, including casting votes with the aim of reducing the power of whatever party they attach themselves to.

re: #155 cliffster

But 2004 happened. And until 2 years ago, Republicans had majorities in Congress, and the White House. But we're ready to say that the Republican Party is in the shitter?

Oh c'mon, cliff...you've seen the stories here about the GOP pandering more and more to the Paulian/nativist/kook fringe ever since the election. If the GOP was a ship, it'd be the Titanic heading towards the iceberg...and few are on watch willing and able to warn of the danger ahead.

re: #151 Ben Hur

It's the AP.

Though it's effed up that Fox didn't edit in their edition.

I don't see an AP article with that headline. Looks like it's all FOX results...
"Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims"

The right sidebar has an ad by the RNCC which shows Pelosi's face.

And there's one that says:

"Don't let public schools teach homosexual marriage,

listen to the shocking NPR story,

listen and donate now.

GAAA!

re: #160 Sharmuta

There are a number of fiscal conservatives that are well aware it is our party's hypocrisy on fiscal responsibility that is to blame for quite a bit of the mess we're in, so please put down the braod brush. Thanks.

I don't believe I was painting with a broad brush. I didn't say all Republicans or Conservatives. I was responding to a particular poster and his comments.

re: #164 Killgore Trout

I don't see an AP article with that headline. Looks like it's all FOX results...
"Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims"

Fox is just getting the best of both worlds: without diminisheing the threat of Islamic terror, they are beefing up the lurking image of "Black Helicopters" killing indiscriminately.

re: #164 Killgore Trout

I don't see an AP article with that headline. Looks like it's all FOX results...
"Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims"

It's all FOX. Even the counterjihad blogs complaining are linking to Fox's version of the AP article. AP hasn't posted the same version. All of those results lead back to Fox.

re: #153 3kids3dogs

I love how this works: when the Republicans are in control of Congress any increases in spending aren't their fault - the lefties are to blame. When the Democrats are in control all spending increases are to be laid at their feet. I guess that's the way you convince yourself that your party is the party of fiscal restraint. Any evidence to the contrary is to be denied/dismissed.

And you've never heard any conservative complaining about Bush and the amount of money he was farting away, on schemes like TARP?

Or are you just being hyperbolic?

re: #80 Walter L. Newton

No. the 2 party system is terminal. Voters run away from it and sit out elections.

The two parties gerrymander safe districts and run the country as their private club.

I'm not running away.

re: #163 talon_262

Oh c'mon, cliff...you've seen the stories here about the GOP pandering more and more to the Paulian/nativist/kook fringe ever since the election. If the GOP was a ship, it'd be the Titanic heading towards the iceberg...and few are on watch willing and able to warn of the danger ahead.

Of course I've seen the stories. And of course it's a big problem. Remember though - the story-selection process for LGF is very tuned in to this problem, and beats it like a drum. Liberals are more than happy to let people say that the Republican party is defined by the far-right bloggers. The people that have been voting R consistently haven't changed though, just because of the internet technology explosion.

re: #165 Ojoe

The right sidebar has an ad by the RNCC which shows Pelosi's face.

And there's one that says:

"Don't let public schools teach homosexual marriage,

listen to the shocking NPR story,

listen and donate now.

GAAA!

While Pelosi's face may be a reason to go homosexual for many men, I'll only be worried about this when they start teaching about homosexual intimacy in the public schools.
/

re: #168 Killgore Trout

The Fox headline is based on the writers/editors of the story basically cribbing the imam's followers' claims that he was murdered. Nothing more. Nothing less.

It's lazy editors who allowed usage of an inflammatory headline that doesn't reflect the facts as they are - which is that the imam was engaged in bad business and refused to follow the law enforcement directives to put down his weapon.

re: #166 3kids3dogs

I don't believe I was painting with a broad brush. I didn't say all Republicans or Conservatives. I was responding to a particular poster and his comments.

You did use a broad brush. And if you have spent any time on LGF, you will know that almost all the conservative here has complained about the lack of fiscal constraint that we have seen over the last number of years.

Disingenuous.

re: #153 3kids3dogs

I love how this works: when the Republicans are in control of Congress any increases in spending aren't their fault - the lefties are to blame. When the Democrats are in control all spending increases are to be laid at their feet. I guess that's the way you convince yourself that your party is the party of fiscal restraint. Any evidence to the contrary is to be denied/dismissed.

[*cough*]medicare prescription coverage[*cough*]

re: #174 Walter L. Newton

You did use a broad brush. And if you have spent any time on LGF, you will know that almost all the conservative here has complained about the lack of fiscal constraint that we have seen over the last number of years.

Disingenuous.

Are we really down to just one?

re: #166 3kids3dogs

I don't believe I was painting with a broad brush. I didn't say all Republicans or Conservatives. I was responding to a particular poster and his comments.

And that person mentioned fiscally liberal republicans. They're a long standing problem, actually:

It is in the area of spending that the Republican Party's performance, in its seven years of power, has been most disappointing.

-Barry Goldwater

Paulians are still at it over the GOP photo web page. This one is using an image of the tank confrontation at Tiananmen Square.

[Link: our.gop.com...]

re: #174 Walter L. Newton

You did use a broad brush. And if you have spent any time on LGF, you will know that almost all the conservative here has complained about the lack of fiscal constraint that we have seen over the last number of years.

Disingenuous.

It's been awhile since I bitched about Bush's complete lack of sack in going after his #1 2004 campaign promise - Social Security reform.

It really pisses me off that Bush & GOP completely caved on SS reform. What a bunch of jackasses.

There, I feel better.

"Oh yes we can secede."

[Link: our.gop.com...]

re: #76 lawhawk
e
Not saying you're wrong about Scozzafava being a less than stellar GOP candidate, was just wondering what happened to party loyalty here. As an independent (New York State "blank" registration), the biggest lesson I got from my Tammany Hall parents was that once the party backed a candidate for a position, they never wavered with their support-scandals excepted of course. My feeling is that Dede was the chosen one for NY-23, and they should have stuck with her.

re: #179 cliffster

It's been awhile since I bitched about Bush's complete lack of sack in going after his #1 2004 campaign promise - Social Security reform.

It really pisses me off that Bush & GOP completely caved on SS reform. What a bunch of jackasses.

There, I feel better.

And I would say most of the conservatives here (and a lot of them across the country) has complained about the rampant spending that Bush engaged in.

But it is intellectually easier for 3kids3dogs to simply paint all conservatives as the problem. When you do that, you don't have to use any critical thinking skills.

Makes it really easy.

re: #73 Walter L. Newton

Well, yes, I know a good number of black conservatives in the Denver area, but I'm not going to give you their address.
//

They all live at the same address? Are they an extended family, or a bunch of broke college kids?

/

re: #164 Killgore Trout

I don't see an AP article with that headline. Looks like it's all FOX results...
"Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims"

Right you are.

I did a search with "slain" and a search with "murdered."

Fox:

DETROIT — A mosque on Friday dismissed as "utterly preposterous" the FBI's allegations that its murdered leader was part of a radical Islamic group.

Yahoo:

DETROIT – A mosque on Friday dismissed as "utterly preposterous" the FBI's allegations that its slain leader was part of a radical Islamic group.

re: #169 Walter L. Newton

And you've never heard any conservative complaining about Bush and the amount of money he was farting away, on schemes like TARP?

Or are you just being hyperbolic?

I obviously didn't make myself clear but I didn't say ALL conservatives did what that poster was doing. I said "you" and not "they" or "conservatives" or anything else that I thought would be construed as meaning all.

On a related note, I will say that the majority of the complaints that I saw on the right came after Bush had pretty much attained lame duck status. Please note that I'm not saying that these criticisms didn't exist. I'm only noting that I didn't see many before then.

re: #183 SanFranciscoZionist

They all live at the same address? Are they an extended family, or a bunch of broke college kids?

/

Broke college kids aren't conservatives. It's not until they graduate and their hard-earned money starts getting taxed away that they become conservatives!

re: #137 SixDegrees

He is running against higher taxes and higher spending. (Check his campaign site - not sure if Charles wants anyone linking that here.) Fiscal liberals don't do that. His former and remaining opponents didn't - although Scozz's support for taxes was too much even for the DCCC.

Charles, what issues do you think the GOP should regard as non-negotiable? I cited three (support for significant tax and spending control, non-infatuation with ACORN). I'll add opposition to card check; the absolute must of defending ballot secrecy should be a no-brainer. I'll also add enforcing immigration laws to the list; if a candidate wants looser immigration laws that's one thing, but supporting nonenforcement of existing laws is a slap to due process.

(On that note I really wish we had a government that would address the root issue - Mexico's lack of economic and other freedoms vital to a thriving economy. How could we urge our neighbor to the south toward advancing economic liberty?)

re: #94 Alan K. Henderson

What is more important, party unity, or getting the party to back the correct issues? We can't fix our biggest problem - the economy - if we run candidates who want to do the things that will break it further.

Quite concour! This applies to both parties, BTW.

re: #185 3kids3dogs

I obviously didn't make myself clear but I didn't say ALL conservatives did what that poster was doing. I said "you" and not "they" or "conservatives" or anything else that I thought would be construed as meaning all.

On a related note, I will say that the majority of the complaints that I saw on the right came after Bush had pretty much attained lame duck status. Please note that I'm not saying that these criticisms didn't exist. I'm only noting that I didn't see many before then.

You wouldn't if you weren't paying attention. A lot of the conservatives were. Sorry you missed it.

re: #87 DaddyG

Hispanics are not monolithic about immigration reform.

Yep, but many would be dumb to ignore the vile rhetoric that will be used.

A loyal republican would take being thrown under a bus as well as all those loyal democrats did when Obama did it.

re: #173 lawhawk

The Fox headline is based on the writers/editors of the story basically cribbing the imam's followers' claims that he was murdered. Nothing more. Nothing less.

It's lazy editors who allowed usage of an inflammatory headline that doesn't reflect the facts as they are - which is that the imam was engaged in bad business and refused to follow the law enforcement directives to put down his weapon.

Should've put Murdered in quotes.

re: #191 Buck

A loyal republican would take being thrown under a bus as well as all those loyal democrats did when Obama did it.

I don't recall the Democrats ever backing a Socialist candidate because their own candidate was "not liberal enough"...

re: #174 Walter L. Newton

You did use a broad brush. And if you have spent any time on LGF, you will know that almost all the conservative here has complained about the lack of fiscal constraint that we have seen over the last number of years.

Disingenuous.

Maybe you can quote the words that you feel are painting with a broad brush so that I can better understand your point of view. I did not say that that is what all conservatives do.

re: #184 Ben Hur

Also search AP's site for the headline "Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims"

There were no matches for your search

I have no doubt it's a AP article but it looks like "murder" only appears in the Fox Version.

re: #193 ralphieboy

I don't recall the Democrats ever backing a Socialist candidate because their own candidate was "not liberal enough"...

One word... Lieberman

re: #191 Buck

A loyal republican would take being thrown under a bus as well as all those loyal democrats did when Obama did it.

Which wasn't all that well, in many cases.

The real difference, though, is that the current Administration had alternatives to offer in their place. In Scozzafava's case, the GOP has no alternative; Hoffman belongs to another party. There is now no GOP candidate running in the 23rd District.

You really need to make sure you've got other passengers before you start tossing what turns out to be the only one under the bus.

re: #175 SixDegrees

[*cough*]medicare prescription coverage[*cough*]

[*cough*]$32 Trillion in new spending/$0 Trillion in new revenue[*cough*]

re: #182 Walter L. Newton

And I would say most of the conservatives here (and a lot of them across the country) has complained about the rampant spending that Bush engaged in.

But it is intellectually easier for 3kids3dogs to simply paint all conservatives as the problem. When you do that, you don't have to use any critical thinking skills.

Makes it really easy.

Maybe you can show me where I painted all conservatives as the problem.

re: #192 Ben Hur

Should've put Murdered in quotes.

No, they put in in there for a purpose: the implication is that "even when the FBI is doing its job, it is still suspect".

Which is to lend support to their point of view that all America needs is Patriots with guns to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. (Obama counting as one of the former, not the latter, of course...)

re: #155 cliffster

But 2004 happened. And until 2 years ago, Republicans had majorities in Congress, and the White House. But we're ready to say that the Republican Party is in the shitter?

Sic transit gloria mundi...

re: #193 ralphieboy

I don't recall the Democrats ever backing a Socialist candidate because their own candidate was "not liberal enough"...

The advantage Democrats have is that our left-wing fringe has never really regarded itself as a group of Democrats, and when they detach to support someone else, they themselves jump ship. (See also: Ralph Nader)

The right-wing fringe regards the Republican party as its property. The Republicans call the right-wing fringe 'the base'. It's much harder to disconnect.

re: #201 The Sanity Inspector

Sic transit gloria mundi...

Gloria was thrown under the bus on Monday?

The "broad brush" metaphor is very popular today. Fine by me, I like that metaphor anyways.

re: #204 cliffster

The "broad brush" metaphor is very popular today. Fine by me, I like that metaphor anyways.

I prefer spray paint...

re: #145 goddamnedfrank

Um, Ralph Nader was the Green Party candidate in 1996 and 2000, he ran as an independent in 2004 and 2008. Sorry to let facts get in the way of that awesome point you were making.

Thank you for the correction, much obliged.

It would seem by the results of

re: #200 ralphieboy

No, they put in in there for a purpose: the implication is that "even when the FBI is doing its job, it is still suspect".

Which is to lend support to their point of view that all America needs is Patriots with guns to defend America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. (Obama counting as one of the former, not the latter, of course...)

I agree. If it was AP's original wording the article would appear on other sites. FOX is the only one posting that article with that headline.

re: #196 Buck
After Lieberman lost the Dem primany, his party wasn't obliged to support him any longer. That many of them (including Obama) did, speaks volumes to his preceived value at the time, and their subsequent feelings of betrayal since then.

re: #195 Killgore Trout

Also search AP's site for the headline "Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims"

I have no doubt it's a AP article but it looks like "murder" only appears in the Fox Version.

Have to agree.

re: #200 ralphieboy

That's a stretch for me.

re: #194 3kids3dogs

Maybe you can quote the words that you feel are painting with a broad brush so that I can better understand your point of view. I did not say that that is what all conservatives do.

"Republicans are in control of Congress any increases in spending aren't their fault - the lefties are to blame. When the Democrats are in control all spending increases are to be laid at their feet. I guess that's the way you convince yourself that your party is the party of fiscal restraint.

Every bolded word above implies all inclusive, every Republican. It certainly doesn't read as if you are talking about a certain faction of the Republicans... does it?

re: #206 Bagua

HTMl is not my friend...

Thank you for the correction, much obliged.

It would seem by the results of less that 1% that he was an irrelevance. which does make my point.

re: #190 andres

Yep, but many would be dumb to ignore the vile rhetoric that will be used.

Welcome, hatchling.

re: #210 Walter L. Newton

"Republicans are in control of Congress any increases in spending aren't their fault - the lefties are to blame. When the Democrats are in control all spending increases are to be laid at their feet. I guess that's the way you convince yourself that your party is the party of fiscal restraint.

Every bolded word above implies all inclusive, every Republican. It certainly doesn't read as if you are talking about a certain faction of the Republicans... does it?

Squabbling over individual syllables will commence in 3...2...1...

re: #207 Killgore Trout

Here, you can have this back. I only had a sip, and look what happened.

re: #210 Walter L. Newton

Depends on what your definition of your, is.

re: #213 SixDegrees

Squabbling over individual syllables will commence in 3...2...1...

His statement was broad-brushed and all inclusive. It gets tedious when one has to point out every little example of that... but I guess sometimes it has to be done...

Reading IS comprehension.

Hoffman Praises Glenn Beck As His ‘Mentor’

Charles is mentioned several time in the article as well.

PAT: Every second. What about

HOFFMAN: I have good mentors here.

GLENN: Wait, wait. Wait, wait. Are they mentors that will show –

HOFFMAN: I’m talking about you, Glenn.

GLENN: Oh, okay. I was going to say all right, as long as they are standing out from the shadows. [...]

HOFFMAN: No. Yeah, well, I’m going to keep in touch with people like you so I don’t get infected with that disease.

re: #215 cliffster

Depends on what your definition of your, is.

You're getting Clintonian.

Bush would insist that his deficit did not come from excessive spending, but from his tax cuts...

re: #164 Killgore Trout

I don't see an AP article with that headline. Looks like it's all FOX results...
"Murdered Imam's Followers Deny FBI Radical Claims"

Probe asked in FBI's slaying of radical imam

A noted critic of Detroit police abuse is calling for an independent investigation into the shooting death last week of a Muslim leader.

Ron Scott, head of the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality, said today he is concerned about the killing of Luqman Ameen Abdullah, an imam who headed Masjid Al-Haqq mosque in Detroit.

Abdullah was shot dead by FBI agents Wednesday in Dearborn after he allegedly fired at a police dog, killing it.

Abdullah and his followers are suspected of federal crimes and described as Islamic extremists in a criminal complaint.

“We’re concerned about the excessive force,” Scott said today. “We want to see an independent investigation.”

The family said Abdullah was shot 18 times, while the medical examiner’s office would only say he was shot multiple times. Andrew Arena, special agent in charge of the Detroit FBI office, said agents acted appropriately.

Scott said the shooting “leaves more questions than answers.”

re: #210 Walter L. Newton

"Republicans are in control of Congress any increases in spending aren't their fault - the lefties are to blame. When the Democrats are in control all spending increases are to be laid at their feet. I guess that's the way you convince yourself that your party is the party of fiscal restraint.

Every bolded word above implies all inclusive, every Republican. It certainly doesn't read as if you are talking about a certain faction of the Republicans... does it?

This part of the quote was referring to what I thought that poster was doing:

Republicans are in control of Congress any increases in spending aren't their fault - the lefties are to blame. When the Democrats are in control all spending increases are to be laid at their feet.

I was responding to a particular poster. I did not say that all Republicans or Conservatives do that. I thought that would be clear when I wrote the next part of the quote:

I guess that's the way you convince yourself that your party is the party of fiscal restraint.

I obviously didn't make myself clear but I think you are mischaracterizing the intent of my post.

I was playing with my icon and discovered I've passed up 6000 posts. Should I get my Lizard tatoo now?

re: #220 Alouette

Probe asked in FBI's slaying of radical imam

It's not Fox, but Detroit Free Press, a local source.

re: #210 Walter L. Newton

re: #221 3kids3dogs

*snore zzz*

re: #214 Ben Hur

No one liked that one, eh?

Been saving it a long time. :(

re: #222 DaddyG

I was playing with my icon and discovered I've passed up 6000 posts. Should I get my Lizard tatoo now?

You've "passed up" 6000 posts?

re: #224 cliffster

re: #221 3kids3dogs

*snore zzz*

Give me a big kiss, you cuddly curd you.

re: #225 Ben Hur

No one liked that one, eh?

Been saving it a long time. :(

In a jar?

re: #222 DaddyG

I was playing with my icon and discovered I've passed up 6000 posts. Should I get my Lizard tatoo now?

Playing with it in public?

re: #222 DaddyG

I was playing with my icon and discovered I've passed up 6000 posts. Should I get my Lizard tatoo now?

Quit playing with your icon, your palms will get scaly.

re: #216 Walter L. Newton

His statement was broad-brushed and all inclusive. It gets tedious when one has to point out every little example of that... but I guess sometimes it has to be done...

Reading IS comprehension.

That might be true is I said something like:

I love when Republicans do etc.

Or

Ever notice how conservatives do etc.

But I did nothing of the sort.

Comprehension indeed.

re: #146 Conservative Moonbat

Congressional "activity" over Schiavo was a lot of windbaggery and no action. There should have been multiple independent diagnoses.

On spending - we know that the people who claim to be spending conservatives were a minority in the House and Senate, and that they veered from that platform in sufficient numbers. There are two possibilities: a) their claims were bogus, or b) they appeased the spending liberals so they could "get stuff done." I believe most cases fell along the lines of b)

I'm skeptical about the idea that the Dems are inherently at odds with the laws comprising the USA PATRIOT Act. (I said skeptical, not cynical.) They're at odds with the President that signed it into law, so it's not easy to tell how they would have reacted to similar laws if Clinton had supported them. If I were a think tank egghead, I'd look to see how the pols reacted to similar laws in the past.

re: #225 Ben Hur

You can keep your unicorn semen...thanks anyway...

re: #228 ausador

In a jar?

HAHAHAHAHAH!

re: #228 ausador

In a jar?

In bed.

OT:

Britons least concerned about climate change

Britain now polls the lowest of 12 countries surveyed with just 15% saying Climate Change was one of their biggest concerns, just below the US at 18%.

It is an interesting contrast that the scientific consensus has become more concerned about AGW while the voters have become less concerned.

I thought dentistry was their least concern!

LOL!

/kidding!

re: #226 Naso Tang

re: #229 Walter L. Newton

re: #230 CyanSnowHawk

I really opened myself up for that didn't I? :-D

re: #238 DaddyG

re: #229 Walter L. Newton

re: #230 CyanSnowHawk

I really opened myself up for that didn't I? :-D

YEP!

re: #184 Ben Hur

Right you are.

I did a search with "slain" and a search with "murdered."

Fox:

DETROIT — A mosque on Friday dismissed as "utterly preposterous" the FBI's allegations that its murdered leader was part of a radical Islamic group.

Yahoo:

DETROIT – A mosque on Friday dismissed as "utterly preposterous" the FBI's allegations that its slain leader was part of a radical Islamic group.

Do you think FOX would have done this if there would have been a Republican president?

re: #223 Alouette

The current headline at your link is "Probe asked in FBI's slaying of extremist Imam".

re: #240 bloodstar

Do you think FOX would have done this if there would have been a Republican president?

I don't know.

We'll know in 3 years if it happens again.

The endorsement by Scozzo (besides illustrating the old ' hell hath no fury ' meme ) merely confirms that she actually is the poster child for Republicans In Name Only.
(Not using the RINO anagram here... for some reason,...maybe because it's been overused... it's become a hoot-inducing term).

Radical Islam vs Black Helicopters, who does Fox see as the biggest threat?

re: #244 ralphieboy

Radical Islam vs Black Helicopters, who does Fox see as the biggest threat?

Acorn.

re: #222 DaddyG

Hey you have more up dings than comments too! Nice.

re: #244 ralphieboy

You wanna know what's threatening? Radical islamists flying black helicopters... that's threatening...
///

Tossing acorns at the populace.

re: #225 Ben Hur

No one liked that one, eh?

Been saving it a long time. :(

Don't eff with the lizardoids' precious bodily fluids, please.

re: #243 tradewind

The endorsement by Scozzo (besides illustrating the old ' hell hath no fury ' meme ) merely confirms that she actually is the poster child for Republicans In Name Only.
(Not using the RINO anagram here... for some reason,...maybe because it's been overused... it's become a hoot-inducing term).

What did you expect her to do?

re: #244 ralphieboy

Black President? Oh sorry Helicopters...

re: #242 Ben Hur

I don't know.

We'll know in 3 years if it happens again.

Roger that.

And I understand that media makes subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) word choices to influence the readers perception of an article. but that's really stretching things to use the term murder without some sort of supporting evidence.