Nontroversy of the Day: Dede Scozzafava

Blogosphere • Views: 3,646

People have been emailing, trying to get me to be outraged and upset about Dede Scozzafava.

But I’m starting to just tune out on the Nontroversy of the Day, sorry. There’s only so much wingnut craziness I can be expected to pay attention to.

UPDATE at 10/16/09 6:51:10 pm:

Michelle Malkin, of course, is consumed with outrage at Newt Gingrich and the RINOs in the Republican National Committee: Michelle Malkin � Calling them out: NRCC, RNC & Gingrich back Margaret Sanger Award winner.

Jump to bottom

251 comments
1 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:50:02pm

I'm not seeing the problem. Is it the endorsement from kos?

2 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:51:52pm

It's about Planned Parenthood. This is an anti-choice Nontroversy.

3 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:52:42pm

One of my dear friends called me one day a few years ago, and said that some people in her bible study were having a problem with her. She wasn't sufficiently against gay people.

"Gay people in your church?" I asked.

"No, no one's out at my church. Just gay people."

"Gay people in general? They want you to be opposed to gay people in general?"

"Yes. They want me to talk more about it."

"You need a new bible study," I said, and actually, about a year later she found a new church.

Some people are off their bloody rockers.

4 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:52:47pm

I am not familiar with this. What's it all about?

5 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:53:29pm

Malkin is calling her a radical leftist.

6 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:54:14pm
If you have given to the NRCC, RNC, or Newt Gingrich under the impression that they are using the money to support conservatism, you might want to ask for your money back.

What does michelle malkin know about conservatism? She's a radical.

7 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:55:05pm

Kristol's against her.
[Link: www.weeklystandard.com...]

8 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:55:29pm

re: #5 Flyers1974

Malkin is calling her a radical leftist.

She's a Republican candidate for Congress. Malkin should not keep using that word. I do not think it means what she thinks it means.

9 MandyManners  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:55:50pm

Do those people over there even know who Gingrich is and what The Contract for America was all about?!

10 checked08  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:57:39pm
radical leftist


Going to have no meaning in the next few...years?

11 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:57:47pm

re: #9 MandyManners

Do those people over there even know who Gingrich is and what The Contract for America was all about?!

No. But they know who Margaret Sanger was, although the reasons they say they dislike her are not the real reasons they dislike her.

12 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:58:18pm

re: #10 checked08

Going to have no meaning in the next few...years?

Has no meaning now. Once people started calling Obama a radical socialist, we basically lost the thread.

13 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:58:33pm

re: #2 Charles

It's about Planned Parenthood. This is an anti-choice Nontroversy.

although I am a conservative Reagan Democrat, I can never actually become a republican as long as the Roe v Wade thing is the GOP's top domestic priority. And many Jews around this country that might consider voting republican (particularly females) will never embrace the GOP as long as this issue is so "front burner."

14 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:58:48pm
On October 16th, 2009 at 2:01 pm, cicerokid said:

Someone tell olberdoom this is truely what a mashed up bag of meat with lipstick looks like.

Lovely.

15 MandyManners  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:58:51pm

re: #11 SanFranciscoZionist

No. But they know who Margaret Sanger was, although the reasons they say they dislike her are not the real reasons they dislike her.

What are the real reasons?

16 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:59:04pm

re: #9 MandyManners

Do those people over there even know who Gingrich is and what The Contract for America was all about?!

No and no.

17 KingKenrod  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:59:49pm

She's pro-choice and supports gay marriage. She's conservative on other things.

18 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:00:08pm

re: #8 SanFranciscoZionist

She's a Republican candidate for Congress. Malkin should not keep using that word. I do not think it means what she thinks it means.

If the Malkins/Becks/Limbaughs of the world continue to attack the Republican establishment, I wonder whether the "establishment" will start to fight back instead of pandering.

19 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:00:17pm

re: #15 MandyManners

What are the real reasons?

My guess is - they claim they're against her because she expressed support and admiration for certain eugenicist ideals, but they are against her because of her work founding planned parenthood.

20 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:00:57pm

re: #17 KingKenrod

She's pro-choice and supports gay marriage. She's conservative on other things.

What's not conservative about either of her positions? Goldwater was pro-choice.

21 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:01:35pm

re: #17 KingKenrod

She's pro-choice and supports gay marriage. She's conservative on other things.

In other words, anyone who won't fall in line with the so-con and theocratic agenda is now a RINO.
If you won't kowtow to the religious right, you can't be a republican official. That's the standard the Malkins of the world (and their foaming followers) are setting.

22 akarra  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:01:39pm

It's a total nontroversy, agreed. It looks to be a way to get pro-lifers to feel like they're being kicked around by these evil elites in the Republican party who are indistinguishable from Democrats, and join things like the Club for Decay where paleocons and other assorted conspiracy theorists are.

I'm pro-life but I fully understand that some candidates aren't feasible in certain districts and states, and that being pro-choice doesn't make one unable to govern or part of some grand conspiracy against conservatism or America as a whole.

Oh well. I'm not too worried about certain nontroversies: some of them are only going to play out with certain wingnuts who want to get riled up about anything, and this looks like one of them.

23 jaunte  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:02:08pm

re: #20 Sharmuta

What's not conservative about either of her positions? Goldwater was pro-choice.

AUH2RINO!

24 Rich H  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:02:12pm

I think it was that pro-environment commercial with Newt and Sharpton that got Michelle started.

25 MandyManners  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:02:44pm

re: #19 Guanxi88

My guess is - they claim they're against her because she expressed support and admiration for certain eugenicist ideals, but they are against her because of her work founding planned parenthood.

Wasn't she also racist?

26 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:02:54pm

Does anyone think she has a chance of winning the seat?

27 gulfloafer  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:03:10pm

What's a Dede Scozzafava?

28 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:03:19pm

These people over at malkin's have stolen "conservatism". They're not conservatives. They are other things, and they've latched onto the word. If they want to go RINO hunting, they should start with the mirror.

29 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:03:25pm

re: #25 MandyManners

Wasn't she also racist?

So they say, but I'm not convinced, and it's a stalking horse, anyway, for their opposition to abortion.

30 MandyManners  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:03:31pm

re: #14 Sharmuta

I wonder what that poster thought about BHO's remark about lipstick on a pig.

31 jaunte  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:03:41pm

re: #27 gulfloafer
scozzafava:
Italian: phrasal nickname or occupational name for someone who removed beans from their pods, from scozzare ‘to shell’ + fava ‘bean’.

32 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:03:41pm

re: #7 Guanxi88

Of course he is.

33 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:03:43pm

re: #25 MandyManners

Wasn't she also racist?

margaret sanger was clearly a racist

34 akarra  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:04:00pm

re: #26 Guanxi88

She's been polling pretty well; the candidate from the Club for Decay that is the third contestant is pulling 10% of the vote and hurting her chances, though.

35 MandyManners  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:04:08pm

re: #29 Guanxi88

So they say, but I'm not convinced, and it's a stalking horse, anyway, for their opposition to abortion.

I got a few links from a Lizard about two years ago about her. I'll look.

36 reine.de.tout  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:04:20pm

re: #3 SanFranciscoZionist

One of my dear friends called me one day a few years ago, and said that some people in her bible study were having a problem with her. She wasn't sufficiently against gay people.

"Gay people in your church?" I asked.

"No, no one's out at my church. Just gay people."

"Gay people in general? They want you to be opposed to gay people in general?"

"Yes. They want me to talk more about it."

"You need a new bible study," I said, and actually, about a year later she found a new church.

Some people are off their bloody rockers.

I'm stubborn enough - I would have stayed with that group and tried to change their minds, rather than moving on. 'Course a group like that may have just moved on without her, if she'd tried that.

37 Killgore Trout  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:04:30pm

re: #26 Guanxi88

Does anyone think she has a chance of winning the seat?

I don't think so. The Conservative Party candidate will be a spoiler and split the crazy vote. Dem win!

38 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:04:48pm

Here's RedState making it clear:

Do the RNC, NRCC, and Dede Scozzafava condone eugenics and sterilization of the poor and minorities?


I hate to have to ask the question, but in light of this news broken by Michelle Malkin today, we must.

Scozzafava is the proud recipient of the Margaret Sanger award given by an abortion group in New York.

Margaret Sanger was a noted eugenicist. Though Planned Parenthood, the group Sanger found, denies it, evidence from a variety of sources points out that Sanger was a big supporter of sterilization of minorities.

In 1939, Sanger created the Negro Project, which the left has tried to discredit, but was very much real. Sanger advocated sterilization and abortion for lower income black women.

Me, I completely believe these people are opposed to Planned Parenthood because they're deeply, deeply concerned about minorities and the poor. Yeah.

39 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:04:49pm

re: #30 MandyManners

Feh. Misogyny is "cool" when the shoe's on the other foot.

40 gulfloafer  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:05:03pm

re: #31 jaunte
That was fast!

41 jaunte  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:05:41pm

re: #40 gulfloafer

I thought she had an interesting name.

42 akarra  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:05:47pm

re: #7 Guanxi88

There are times I don't agree with Bill Kristol, and this is one of them. I can see where he's coming from.

43 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:06:04pm

The comments at Michelle Malkin's site are absolutely insane.

44 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:06:07pm

re: #27 gulfloafer

What's a Dede Scozzafava?

You could find out, but you'd have to click a link.

45 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:06:45pm

re: #18 Flyers1974

If the Malkins/Becks/Limbaughs of the world continue to attack the Republican establishment, I wonder whether the "establishment" will start to fight back instead of pandering.

I think the above would be more accurate if "establishment" were replaced with "elected officials." Malkin/Beck/Limbaugh types are a big part of the Republican establishment.

46 gulfloafer  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:07:07pm

re: #41 jaunte

Now that, my friend, is called irony.

47 Jimmah  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:07:20pm

From some rant or other Malkin made on her site:

Then you use their money to try and elect Dede Scozzafava, an ACORN-friendly, union-pandering, tax-and-spend radical Republican.

A moderate in other words. How nontroversial can you get?

48 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:07:27pm

By the way, i received an invitation via my email to visit a blog that had a bunch of former LGFers as members. I browsed it and didn't see any LGF hatred on it. Are any of the blogs formed by former Lizards not stalker-type blogs?

49 reine.de.tout  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:07:29pm

re: #21 iceweasel

In other words, anyone who won't fall in line with the so-con and theocratic agenda is now a RINO.
If you won't kowtow to the religious right, you can't be a republican official. That's the standard the Malkins of the world (and their foaming followers) are setting.

That seems to be about it.

I figure the less government control we have in our lives, then the more free all of us are to be as socially liberal or conservative as we like.

And that freedom is what's important.

50 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:07:55pm

re: #38 iceweasel

Well placed snark! Nicely done!

51 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:08:29pm

Our highest honor, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America Margaret Sanger Award, is presented annually to recognize leadership, excellence, and outstanding contributions to the reproductive health and rights movement.

Well, we can't have any of that in the Republican party. Nope.

[Link: www.plannedparenthood.org...]

52 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:08:55pm

re: #32 Charles

Didn't think Kristol was a bad guy.

53 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:09:00pm

re: #38 iceweasel

Here's RedState making it clear:

Do the RNC, NRCC, and Dede Scozzafava condone eugenics and sterilization of the poor and minorities?

Me, I completely believe these people are opposed to Planned Parenthood because they're deeply, deeply concerned about minorities and the poor. Yeah.

They think this is how they can regain the trust of the African American community -- by ranting about "black genocide."

Sarah Palin's ghostwriter used this tactic too. The cynicism is pretty astounding.

54 Killgore Trout  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:09:52pm

re: #48 _RememberTonyC

They are trying to recruit you to flounce.

55 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:10:47pm

re: #48 _RememberTonyC

By the way, i received an invitation via my email to visit a blog that had a bunch of former LGFers as members. I browsed it and didn't see any LGF hatred on it. Are any of the blogs formed by former Lizards not stalker-type blogs?

It's up to you. If you'd rather hang out at that blog (yes, I know which one you're talking about) you'll lose your LGF account.

56 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:11:21pm

re: #15 MandyManners

What are the real reasons?

Sanger is an iconic figure for reproductive rights, and a Planned Parenthood founder. As a result, anti-abortion activists, among others, have found it necessary to promote, inflate, and generally yell from the rooftops that Sanger was a racist and a eugenicist.

Was she? Yeah. Sanger had all of the popular prejudices of her day, some of which were shared by people not yet commonly attacked by Michelle Malkin. (Oliver Wendell Holmes on sterilization comes to mind.) But the material on Sanger is taken completely out of its social context, and presented as though she was this filthy racist fighting against lovely upstanding conservatives who cared deeply for poor women and their children. This is BS.

I am not a fan of Sanger as a person. However, I am a big fan of Planned Parenthood, and the reproductive rights of women, birth control top of the list. I strongly suspect that the wholesale drive to discredit Sanger has far more to do with a desire to see PP and Roe v. Wade dragged through the mud than any actual moral indignation at a woman who may not deserve all her hero status, but certainly did a hell of a lot to help women.

57 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:11:22pm

re: #43 Charles

The comments at Michelle Malkin's site are absolutely insane.

Nobody goes there for clarity. They go to loose their mental bowels, and we go from morbid curiosity.

58 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:12:00pm

re: #17 KingKenrod

She's pro-choice and supports gay marriage. She's conservative on other things.

Like Ahnold.

59 fifth_of_november  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:12:17pm

So being against the Soc-Con Agenda makes one a "radical leftist"?

By that logic, Barry Goldwater was a radical leftist.

60 Jimmah  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:12:25pm

re: #48 _RememberTonyC

By the way, i received an invitation via my email to visit a blog that had a bunch of former LGFers as members. I browsed it and didn't see any LGF hatred on it. Are any of the blogs formed by former Lizards not stalker-type blogs?

Was it CC? That one tries not to look like a stalker site, while being full of stalkers who are constantly unleashing foul-mouthed diatribes about LGF and it's members on other stalker sites.

61 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:13:01pm

re: #20 Sharmuta

What's not conservative about either of her positions? Goldwater was pro-choice.

Goldwater would have been branded a radical leftist by Michelle Malkin by now if he were still around to throw mud at.

62 jaunte  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:13:19pm

No one on that thread at Malkin's apparently gives anything to the Republicans. No wonder they couldn't keep up with Democratic contributions.

63 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:13:28pm

re: #55 Charles

It's kinda like Derek Jeter asking of it'd be OK if he hung out in the Red Sox locker room and swapped cool stories. What would Steinbrenner's response be?

64 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:13:35pm

NRO sez:

The Fall of Dede Scozzafava


The media is all over the new Siena poll which shows Dede Scozzafava's support collapsing in New York's 23rd Congressional District. This is a special election in November in a district that has elected a Republican since 1871. But party bosses saw fit to nominate a woman who is not only pro-gay marriage and pro-abortion, she has an economic record that has lead the Club For Growth and the American Conservative Union to target her and endorse the Conservative party candidate Doug Hoffman, in spite of Newt Gingrich's endorsement.
65 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:14:16pm

re: #53 Charles

They think this is how they can regain the trust of the African American community -- by ranting about "black genocide."

Sarah Palin's ghostwriter used this tactic too. The cynicism is pretty astounding.

It's also part of their "double-backsies-no take backs!" strategy of calling the left the real racists, while they're the ones who are oh so caring about minorities, and oh so reluctant to 'play the race card'.

In between ranting about their confusion as to why minorities overwhelmingly vote Democratic-- they're just too stupid to see how racist the Dems are.

* Mandatory Disclaimer: Yes, there are racists who are Democrats, just as there are racists everywhere, before people start accusing me of claiming that all republicans are racists or that there are none on the left on anything similarly idiotic.

66 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:14:30pm

re: #63 Irenicum

It's kinda like Derek Jeter asking of it'd be OK if he hung out in the Red Sox locker room and swapped cool stories. What would Steinbrenner's response be?

I'm kind of amazed that people even need to ask these questions.

67 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:14:37pm

re: #56 SanFranciscoZionist

Sanger had all of the popular prejudices of her day, some of which were shared by people not yet commonly attacked by Michelle Malkin.

It's highly ironic that malkin, a contributor to vdare and close friend of peter brimlow, would criticize anyone for racism. Who, exactly, is she to talk?

68 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:14:48pm

re: #25 MandyManners

Wasn't she also racist?

Yes, although not to the foaming-at-the-mouth degree fantasized by some of these folks. I mean, personally I prefer Emma Goldman, who was not a racist at all, and had the good sense to see the Soviet Union for what it was, but I don't think that preference would endear me to Ms. Malkin, somehow.

69 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:15:51pm

re: #27 gulfloafer

What's a Dede Scozzafava?

How do you pronounce Dede Scozzafava? I'm saying DEE-dee Sko-tzah-FAH-va, but I could be wrong.

70 Jimmah  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:16:09pm

Meanwhile, concern mounts over Malkin's emotional well-being:

Youtube Video
71 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:16:49pm

re: #60 Jimmah

Was it CC? That one tries not to look like a stalker site, while being full of stalkers who are constantly unleashing foul-mouthed diatribes about LGF and it's members on other stalker sites.

Good guess ... I guess some folks hide it better than others. It wasn't overt when I checked it out. I won't be flouncing here. LGF means too much to me.

72 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:16:55pm

re: #28 Sharmuta

These people over at malkin's have stolen "conservatism". They're not conservatives. They are other things, and they've latched onto the word. If they want to go RINO hunting, they should start with the mirror.

They may have stolen it or perhaps taken it over, but they have a better claim to conservatism than John McCain or Bob Dole or William Buckley. Conservativism and liberalism, to the extent those words describe the right and left in the US, change over time. The conservative energy today and for the past few years,is overwhemingly behind the Malkins, not the Goldwaters, I would say.

73 Kronocide  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:16:59pm

"I had her liver with scozzafava beans and a nice chianti."

74 Noam Sayin'  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:17:02pm

Scozzawho?

75 MandyManners  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:17:52pm

I couldn't find a thing amongst the 2,485 links.

76 jaunte  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:18:29pm

re: #74 Noam Sayin'
Scozza Weeskie inna leedle tombla.

77 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:18:32pm

re: #71 _RememberTonyC

Good guess ... I guess some folks hide it better than others. It wasn't overt when I checked it out. I won't be flouncing here. LGF means too much to me.

Thanks for that.

It's very telling that they're actively trying to convince people to leave LGF and join their deceptive little site full of stalkers, though.

78 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:18:43pm

re: #67 Sharmuta

It's highly ironic that malkin, a contributor to vdare and close friend of peter brimlow, would criticize anyone for racism. Who, exactly, is she to talk?

she has a million dollar smile and some national cred...that's all it takes...hypocrisy has lost all meaning...file that under the rage, Nazi, racist...

79 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:18:47pm

re: #71 _RememberTonyC

Good to hear!

80 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:19:00pm

re: #66 Charles

I'm kind of amazed that people even need to ask these questions.

Believe it or not, I mostly steer clear of the blog wars. You might be a lot closer to it than I am, which is why I asked the question.

81 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:19:11pm

re: #72 Flyers1974

Not to pimp my own posts, but:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

There are a couple things going on here:

1) We see the usual suspects (black helicopter types) now directing their venom at the current leadership;

2) We see the unstable, unhinged, and just plain weird folk gravitating toward identification of the current leadership as the locus of evil and the source of their problems;

3) We see opposition to the current leadership currently taking on the characteristics and rhetoric of types 1 & 2, above, as these are the loudest, most consistent voices out there. Over time, this radicalizes what should be the loyal opposition and tinges them with the taint of extremism;

4) This radicalization will have unfortunate yet predictable result of making any and all opposition (loyal or otherwise) indistinguishable from the whack-jobs in 1 & 2, above, and will de-legitimize any and all opposition to the current leadership; and

5) This ongoing erosion and de-legitimization of the opposition will fit in perfectly with the narratives of groups 1 & 2, and will further radicalize them.

It's a feedback loop of the worst kind.

82 Killgore Trout  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:19:28pm

re: #77 Charles

Thanks for that.

It's very telling that they're actively trying to convince people to leave LGF and join their deceptive little site full of stalkers, though.

...and they're probably using your safemail feature to do it.

83 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:19:51pm

re: #73 BigPapa

Sick but funny!

84 gulfloafer  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:20:00pm

re:
re: #75 MandyManners
Links are overrated

85 Political Atheist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:20:19pm

re: #72 Flyers1974

"I did not leave the party, the party left me. " Gotta find the origin of that apt summation sometime.

86 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:21:04pm

re: #82 Killgore Trout

...and they're probably using your safemail feature to do it.

You could be right. I will investigate.

87 keithgabryelski  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:21:04pm

re: #10 checked08

Going to have no meaning in the next few...years?

that and "socialist".

either they will have no meaning or people will say "well, them radical leftists aren't too bad, my congresswoman is fiscally conservative, votes for tax cuts, and is on the republican ticket".

88 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:21:08pm

re: #85 Rightwingconspirator

"I did not leave the party, the party left me. " Gotta find the origin of that apt summation sometime.

I thought it was Reagan, but it mighta been Goldwater.

89 Jimmah  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:21:28pm

re: #65 iceweasel

It's also part of their "double-backsies-no take backs!" strategy of calling the left the real racists, while they're the ones who are oh so caring about minorities, and oh so reluctant to 'play the race card'.

In between ranting about their confusion as to why minorities overwhelmingly vote Democratic-- they're just too stupid to see how racist the Dems are.

* Mandatory Disclaimer: Yes, there are racists who are Democrats, just as there are racists everywhere, before people start accusing me of claiming that all republicans are racists or that there are none on the left on anything similarly idiotic.

Take whatever happens to be the case, no matter how obviously so, and simply claim the exact opposite, in a completely shameless fashion. That seems to be the key to so much wingnut commentary these days.

90 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:22:04pm

re: #85 Rightwingconspirator

Reagan if I'm not mistaken.

91 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:23:02pm

re: #90 Irenicum

I see I'm a little slow on my draw tonight!

92 Randall Gross  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:23:14pm

Dede Scozzafava is a Republican candidate who can win in NY, therefor she's unacceptable to the Club for Growth, NY Conservative club, MM, James Dobson and hosts of others. She's the candidate of choice for the local Republicans, but the SOCONs don't believe in state's right when it comes to picking candidates.
The person they are supporting, Hoffman, is a third party non Republican candidate, and backing him will split off enough of the vote to ensure that the Democrat will win.

More at New Majority:
Here
Here
Here

93 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:24:31pm

re: #71 _RememberTonyC

Good guess ... I guess some folks hide it better than others. It wasn't overt when I checked it out. I won't be flouncing here. LGF means too much to me.

They have a formal policy of not bashing LGF publicly, but that blog exists solely to recruit people from here. There is also much crossover between the members of it and members of the Doucheblog.
They also have a separate inner core which communicates via email, circulating the stuff they want to keep off the blog. (hint: that email circle smearing LGF and various people here existed even before they were banned from LGF, and that's why the blog is called what it is: "Correspondence Committee".)

Their whole purpose is to make trouble while seeming to be on the level. They have used names of people still here in order to get them banned, and other people have gone there to discuss their plans for flouncing. The admins wipe this away as quickly as possible-- but it's only because they intend to dupe people away from LGF, people who are unaware of what goes on behind the scenes there.

94 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:24:49pm

re: #81 Guanxi88

Not to pimp my own posts, but:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

There are a couple things going on here:

1) We see the usual suspects (black helicopter types) now directing their venom at the current leadership;

2) We see the unstable, unhinged, and just plain weird folk gravitating toward identification of the current leadership as the locus of evil and the source of their problems;

3) We see opposition to the current leadership currently taking on the characteristics and rhetoric of types 1 & 2, above, as these are the loudest, most consistent voices out there. Over time, this radicalizes what should be the loyal opposition and tinges them with the taint of extremism;

4) This radicalization will have unfortunate yet predictable result of making any and all opposition (loyal or otherwise) indistinguishable from the whack-jobs in 1 & 2, above, and will de-legitimize any and all opposition to the current leadership; and

5) This ongoing erosion and de-legitimization of the opposition will fit in perfectly with the narratives of groups 1 & 2, and will further radicalize them.

It's a feedback loop of the worst kind.

All make sense to me, but the bold portion is dead-on.

95 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:24:58pm

House Republicans may face a ‘civil war’ over Scozzafava bid

The Dems seem to be split on Obamacare and now the Reps are moving that way over this one woman.

Washington really sucks.

96 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:25:01pm

re: #86 Charles

You could be right. I will investigate.


I have a humble little web page/blog that is in my LGF profile. That's how they reached out to me. If you want to avoid that type of thing, you probably need to make our web pages restricted in the same way you do with the lizard lounge threads.

97 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:26:26pm

re: #93 iceweasel

That just blows my mind. I can't imagine having a life that devoid of meaning that this behavior seems even close to normal. Amazing!

98 Canadian Guy  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:26:39pm

re: #88 Guanxi88

Reagan.

99 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:27:20pm

re: #93 iceweasel

They have a formal policy of not bashing LGF publicly, but that blog exists solely to recruit people from here. There is also much crossover between the members of it and members of the Doucheblog.
They also have a separate inner core which communicates via email, circulating the stuff they want to keep off the blog. (hint: that email circle smearing LGF and various people here existed even before they were banned from LGF, and that's why the blog is called what it is: "Correspondence Committee".)

Their whole purpose is to make trouble while seeming to be on the level. They have used names of people still here in order to get them banned, and other people have gone there to discuss their plans for flouncing. The admins wipe this away as quickly as possible-- but it's only because they intend to dupe people away from LGF, people who are unaware of what goes on behind the scenes there.

thanks for the skinny

100 Jimmah  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:27:20pm

re: #93 iceweasel

Their whole purpose is to make trouble while seeming to be on the level.

Absolutely. you could call it the 'gateway' stalker site.

101 Political Atheist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:27:23pm

re: #90 Irenicum

Thats ironic. That would be when he left the Democrats. The Republicans left me, and I voted Reagan. My very first Presidential election.

102 gulfloafer  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:28:59pm

re: #93 iceweasel
Correspondance Committee? Sounds like a communist site to me.

103 Randall Gross  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:29:15pm

This same shit is happening in Florida with them backing Rubio over Crist, and it's pretty certain that Rubio cannot win. It's part of the moderate putsch that CFG is conducting right now, and it's all the standard socons and fundies behind it.

104 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:29:25pm

Some context on eugenics from Wikipedia (yes, I know, but this is very broad info)

The modern field and term were first formulated by Sir Francis Galton in 1883, drawing on the recent work of his half-cousin Charles Darwin. At its peak of popularity eugenics was supported by prominent people, including Margaret Sanger, Marie Stopes, H. G. Wells, Woodrow Wilson, Prescott Bush, Theodore Roosevelt, Emile Zola, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, John Harvey Kellogg, Winston Churchill, Linus Pauling and Sidney Webb. Its most infamous proponent and practitioner was however Adolf Hitler who praised and incorporated eugenic ideas in Mein Kampf, and emulated Eugenic legislation for the sterilization of "defectives" that had been pioneered in the United States.

Eugenics was a hideous thing. But it was not something that happened in a vacuum. And ALL of the people now hyperventilating about Planned Parenthood would have bought it hook line and sinker in a previous generation.

105 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:29:35pm

re: #102 gulfloafer

Correspondence Central Committee!

106 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:30:42pm

Correspondence Central Committee Panel (CCCP)

107 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:30:44pm

re: #101 Rightwingconspirator

"The Republicans left me, and I voted Reagan." Not quite sure I get that line?

108 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:30:58pm

re: #102 gulfloafer

Correspondance Committee? Sounds like a communist site to me.

got the 'noids?...booga booga!

109 gulfloafer  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:31:13pm

re: #106 _RememberTonyC

Close enough

110 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:31:14pm

re: #94 Flyers1974

All make sense to me, but the bold portion is dead-on.

Yeah, i think we're in stage 3 now.

111 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:31:51pm

re: #103 Thanos

This same shit is happening in Florida with them backing Rubio over Crist, and it's pretty certain that Rubio cannot win. It's part of the moderate putsch that CFG is conducting right now, and it's all the standard socons and fundies behind it.

The religious right is making a determined effort to grab the reins of GOP power. And at this point, they're succeeding, with lots of help from the right wing blogosphere.

112 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:31:58pm

re: #102 gulfloafer

Correspondance Committee? Sounds like a communist site to me.

Funny, I picture Aunt Bea and all her friends sitting around knitting and gossiping.

113 Gus  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:32:06pm

Reading Malkin's article you would think that Dierdre Scozzafava eats cute puppies for breakfast. Looking through some Project Vote Smart stats I'm seeing a mixed record. Generally getting a 50 percent conservative rating but a lower 30 percent liberal rating. Some examples:

2007-2008 Based on a point system, with points assigned for actions in support of or in opposition to New York National Federation of Independent Business's position, Assembly Member Scozzafava received a rating of 75.

2005 Assembly Member Scozzafava supported the interests of the Conservative Party of New York State 52 percent in 2005. [Dropped to 15 percent in 2008.]

2006 Based on a point system, with points assigned for actions in support of or in opposition to New York City Americans for Democratic Action's position, Assembly Member Scozzafava received a rating of 30.

2008 In 2008 National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund gave Assembly Member Scozzafava a grade of A.

2008 In 2008 New Yorkers Against Gun Violence gave Assembly Member Scozzafava a grade of F, in its scorecard for candidates seeking office in 2008.

All around, her highest ratings are on the pro-gun side. She seems to have a rather mixed record. However, given that she is also pro-choice that will bring out the cat calls of "far leftist!" from the extremist end of the right wing.

Well, the blog minions have received their marching orders from Malkin so we now know the accepted "right wing blogosphere" orthodoxy.

114 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:33:54pm

re: #113 Gus 802

Reading Malkin's article you would think that Dierdre Scozzafava eats cute puppies for breakfast. Looking through some Project Vote Smart stats I'm seeing a mixed record. Generally getting a 50 percent conservative rating but a lower 30 percent liberal rating. Some examples:


All around, her highest ratings are on the pro-gun side. She seems to have a rather mixed record. However, given that she is also pro-choice that will bring out the cat calls of "far leftist!" from the extremist end of the right wing.

Well, the blog minions have received their marching orders from Malkin so we now know the accepted "right wing blogosphere" orthodoxy.

My God. Is she...a moderate?

//hide the children, and lock up the Constant Comment!

115 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:34:13pm

re: #112 NJDhockeyfan

Funny, I picture Aunt Bea and all her friends sitting around knitting and gossiping.

I picture a sort of garden club lecture.

Why don't you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?

116 gulfloafer  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:34:13pm

re: #112 NJDhockeyfan

117 Gus  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:35:09pm

re: #114 SanFranciscoZionist

My God. Is she...a moderate?

//hide the children, and lock up the Constant Comment!

Yeah, moderates, the new Reds.

/Communist!

/

118 Randall Gross  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:35:43pm

re: #113 Gus 802

Reading Malkin's article you would think that Dierdre Scozzafava eats cute puppies for breakfast. Looking through some Project Vote Smart stats I'm seeing a mixed record. Generally getting a 50 percent conservative rating but a lower 30 percent liberal rating. Some examples:

All around, her highest ratings are on the pro-gun side. She seems to have a rather mixed record. However, given that she is also pro-choice that will bring out the cat calls of "far leftist!" from the extremist end of the right wing.

Well, the blog minions have received their marching orders from Malkin so we now know the accepted "right wing blogosphere" orthodoxy.

You need to keep in mind that one of the ratings groups you are quoting above is a third party, and is running Hoffman against her. ( Conservative party of New York)

119 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:35:59pm

re: #117 Gus 802

Yeah, moderates, the new Reds.

/Communist!

/


Sounds like the Joe Lieberman treatment (which was revolting) in reverse.

120 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:36:11pm

re: #111 Charles

The religious right is making a determined effort to grab the reins of GOP power. And at this point, they're succeeding, with lots of help from the right wing blogosphere.

yup...the upcoming elections should give us an idea of their grip...and with funding, some more Beck and another two years of raging TPs, who knows wtf will happen...I am not optimistic for a resurgence of fiscally responsible conservatives...it's sure interesting tho

121 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:36:20pm

Had a very interesting chat with Barrett Brown today about Robert Stacy McCain, by the way.

122 Canadian Guy  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:37:01pm

re: #118 Thanos

I'm easily confused. What???

123 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:37:21pm

re: #97 Irenicum

That just blows my mind. I can't imagine having a life that devoid of meaning that this behavior seems even close to normal. Amazing!

re: #99 albusteve

thanks for the skinny

No problem. I don't think those people are worth talking about or thinking about, but it is important that people know what's really going on there, especially as the members of it are actively seeking to recruit people from here -- and lying to them in order to do it.

The founders will claim they 'don't know why they were banned' or that they were 'banned for no reason'. They're lying.

BTW, their official plan was always to move to a forum soon. This is rubbish, as they could have easily set up a free forum within minutes-- but they wanted to be on an open blog purely to recruit people from here.

I can assure you that when they do start such a forum, it will have locked threads, inaccessible to the average member, labelled something innocuous like "for admin use only"-- and that's where the main LGF bashing and plotting will be happening.

All I can say is, people are strange...

Youtube Video

(sorry albusteve...echo and the bunnymen, not the doors. ) :)

124 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:37:34pm

re: #111 Charles

But the irony of it is if they succeed, they'll make the Repub. party a permanently minority party. That view will never be majority view. Their mandating ideological as well as socon purity will have the exact opposite effect of what they supposedly say they want. I sometimes don't think they even want to win. I think they are actually happier being on the outside yelling and screaming about how bad things are instead of having to wield any legitimate power. Some I'm sure do want to wield power. And that scares me even more. But thankfully, their stupidity is helping in the cause of keeping them out of power. Ah providence!

125 Gus  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:37:50pm

re: #118 Thanos

You need to keep in mind that one of the ratings groups you are quoting above is a third party, and is running Hoffman against her. ( Conservative party of New York)

That would explain the conservative rating drop of 50 percent to 15 percent in a little over a years time.

126 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:37:50pm

re: #119 _RememberTonyC

Sounds like the Joe Lieberman treatment (which was revolting) in reverse.

" the peasants are revolting!"

127 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:37:58pm

re: #67 Sharmuta

It's highly ironic that malkin, a contributor to vdare and close friend of peter brimlow, would criticize anyone for racism. Who, exactly, is she to talk?

Which is ironic in itself, since vdare would ship Malkin to Asia if they could. How unhinged do you have to be to support people who hate you?

128 fizzlogic  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:39:09pm

re: #20 Sharmuta

Evidently you never heard Rush define conservatism:

MP3 Audio
129 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:39:18pm

The irony is that they decided to put this lady out there precisely in order to avoid a divisive primary process. Best laid plans and all that.

130 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:39:30pm

re: #126 albusteve

" the peasants are revolting!"

some soap and toothpaste will help a lot

131 Canadian Guy  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:40:23pm

Is it just me or this baseball game boring?

132 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:40:46pm

re: #111 Charles

The religious right is making a determined effort to grab the reins of GOP power. And at this point, they're succeeding, with lots of help from the right wing blogosphere.

I would add that they have been making this effort since at least shortly before the 1980 election and have been mostly successful since then(Bush over McCain in 2000) but not always (McCain over Huckabee 2008.) I think it is more noticable because the GOP is having some sustained difficulties at the polls for the first time in a very long time.

133 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:40:51pm

re: #121 Charles

Had a very interesting chat with Barrett Brown today about Robert Stacy McCain, by the way.

Go on. You can't just dangle a hint like that out there and leave us waiting. Whadda ya got?

134 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:41:01pm

re: #123 iceweasel

No problem. I don't think those people are worth talking about or thinking about, but it is important that people know what's really going on there, especially as the members of it are actively seeking to recruit people from here -- and lying to them in order to do it.

The founders will claim they 'don't know why they were banned' or that they were 'banned for no reason'. They're lying.

BTW, their official plan was always to move to a forum soon. This is rubbish, as they could have easily set up a free forum within minutes-- but they wanted to be on an open blog purely to recruit people from here.

I can assure you that when they do start such a forum, it will have locked threads, inaccessible to the average member, labelled something innocuous like "for admin use only"-- and that's where the main LGF bashing and plotting will be happening.

All I can say is, people are strange...

[Video]

(sorry albusteve...echo and the bunnymen, not the doors. ) :)

divorce can be like that ... bitter, ugly, and dishonest.

135 Jimmah  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:41:16pm

re: #106 _RememberTonyC

Correspondence Central Committee Panel (CCCP)

Such propaganda! Go on Tony C - have some fruitcup. It's not poisoned or anything I promise. Just a little old lady and her gentle friends here...go on... try some...///

136 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:41:23pm

re: #123 iceweasel

BTW, just to make clear, I was talking about them not you! I really appreciate your work in exposing them. Keep it up!

137 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:41:33pm

re: #131 Canadian Guy

Is it just me or this baseball game boring?

Then it's a good one. Exciting games are generally bad ones.

138 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:41:49pm

re: #121 Charles

Ooh, this is gonna be goood!

139 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:41:54pm

re: #131 Canadian Guy

Is it just me or this baseball game boring?

it's on in my house, but it's pretty dull.

140 fifth_of_november  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:42:06pm

re: #111 Charles

The religious right is making a determined effort to grab the reins of GOP power. And at this point, they're succeeding, with lots of help from the right wing blogosphere.

There are a lot of people that vote Democrat just because they can't stand the Religious Right. If the GOP dumped the Soc-Cons, they'd steal a TON of votes from the Democrats.

141 Canadian Guy  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:42:20pm

re: #137 Guanxi88

Maybe it's because I'm sober.

142 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:42:25pm

re: #130 _RememberTonyC

some soap and toothpaste will help a lot

I think that joke is spent anyhow...pass the Crest

143 Mr Pancakes  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:42:34pm

re: #123 iceweasel

[Video](sorry albusteve...echo and the bunnymen, not the doors. ) :)

Don't feel too sorry... Ray Manzarek produced and played on that track.

144 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:43:05pm

re: #141 Canadian Guy

Maybe it's because I'm sober.

Not to sound like an automotive mechanic - but there's your problem right there.

145 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:43:16pm

re: #131 Canadian Guy

Who's winning?

146 Randall Gross  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:44:11pm

Smart Money says all of the neo-Coughlinites in NY belong to the Conservative Party of New York... Here's a hint:

On "Face the Nation" (Sunday, March 10, 1996), Buchanan said that if he received the Republican nomination he would form a coalition consisting of the U.S. Taxpayers Party, the Right-to-Life Party, Ross Perot's Reform Party, and New York's Conservative Party, and go on to beat Bill Clinton. In the likely event that he won't get the Republican nod, he could conceivably attempt to build the coalition anyway.

147 Canadian Guy  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:44:20pm

Yankees 4 Angels 1 after 7

One more inning of Sabathia probably then Mo will come in.

148 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:44:27pm

The president of the John Birch Society rants about Newt Gingrich.

Vimeo
149 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:45:17pm

re: #121 Charles

Had a very interesting chat with Barrett Brown today about Robert Stacy McCain, by the way.

Oooh, now this I want to hear about!

150 Political Atheist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:45:39pm

re: #107 Irenicum

When Reagan ran I voted for him for President. Twice. I'm not old enough to have voted for him as Governor. A few years ago I changed my affiliation to none. Ironic he coined a term that described him and the Democrats, as "they left him". He became a Republican. I was a Republican and they left me.

151 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:45:52pm

re: #135 Jimmah

Such propaganda! Go on Tony C - have some fruitcup. It's not poisoned or anything I promise. Just a little old lady and her gentle friends here...go on... try some...///

Arsenic and Old Lace ... 21st Century version?

Youtube Video
152 Randall Gross  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:45:55pm

re: #122 Canadian Guy

The Conservative Party of New York is a poltical party of Conservatives, they are not Republicans, but typically back R's. The exception is when one of their favorites are running, Like Pat Pukecanon.

153 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:46:06pm

re: #148 Charles

Sounds like a right-wing Max Headroom from Brooklyn.

154 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:46:46pm

re: #136 Irenicum

BTW, just to make clear, I was talking about them not you! I really appreciate your work in exposing them. Keep it up!

Aw shucks. *blush*
Lots and lots of people have exposed them. I'm only the messenger, really. But thanks.

155 Four More Tears  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:47:07pm

re: #148 Charles

The president of the John Birch Society rants about Newt Gingrich.


[Video]

Has this party imploded yet?

156 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:47:11pm

re: #147 Canadian Guy

Yankees 4 Angels 1 after 7

One more inning of Sabathia probably then Mo will come in.

"Enter Sandman"

159 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:49:41pm

Please note that Michelle Malkin is right in line with the John Birch Society's position on Newt Gingrich.

Coincidence? We don't think so.

160 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:49:43pm

re: #150 Rightwingconspirator

Thanks for the clarification. You must be just a few years older than me. I voted first in the 84 election. I've always fluctuated back and forth between parties, generally voting for the person more than the party. I've never been satisfied with either one. I was pretty strongly liberal back then, and on some issues still am. But then switched to the GOP back in 2000. So much for that! I guess that's why I'm an independent nowadays.

161 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:49:45pm

re: #155 JasonA

Has this party imploded yet?

no one knows...lots of blather, but we will see next year...the GOP still has alot of muscle if you count the old 'silent majority'...interesting

162 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:50:24pm

And also note that I'm not a fan of Gingrich, either.

163 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:50:27pm

re: #157 TheMatrix31

So glad I'm going drinking tonight. With news and numbers like this, I'm going to fucking need it.

The budget deficit was actually much higher during WWII, as was the national debt.

164 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:50:36pm

re: #140 fifth_of_november

There are a lot of people that vote Democrat just because they can't stand the Religious Right. If the GOP dumped the Soc-Cons, they'd steal a TON of votes from the Democrats.

Maybe, if they had a fiscal plan that entailed more than asserting that they are "fiscally responsible." And assuming such a plan would be enacted and retained. And assuming the SoCons would be willing to give up all they've worked for and still vote GOP.

165 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:50:40pm

re: #141 Canadian Guy

Thanks for the Guinness reminder!

166 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:51:25pm

re: #152 Thanos

The Conservative Party of New York is a poltical party of Conservatives, they are not Republicans, but typically back R's. The exception is when one of their favorites are running, Like Pat Pukecanon.

Oh, those kinds of people. I see.

167 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:51:27pm

re: #163 aagcobb

The budget deficit was actually much higher during WWII, as was the national debt.

Well, we were sorta kinda fighting a planet-wide war while also trying to feed the civilian populations of our allies.

168 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:52:28pm

re: #164 Flyers1974

Maybe, if they had a fiscal plan that entailed more than asserting that they are "fiscally responsible." And assuming such a plan would be enacted and retained. And assuming the SoCons would be willing to give up all they've worked for and still vote GOP.

The problem for their credibility is that they just spent eight years demonstrating that they aren't fiscally responsible.

169 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:52:29pm

re: #162 Charles

And also note that I'm not a fan of Gingrich, either.

But for very different reasons than the John Birch Society's isolationist insanity.

170 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:52:38pm

re: #157 TheMatrix31

So glad I'm going drinking tonight. With news and numbers like this, I'm going to fucking need it.

The federal budget deficit has surged to an all-time high of $1.42 trillion as the recession caused tax revenues to plunge while the government was spending massive amounts to stabilize the financial system and jump-start the economy.

The imbalance for the budget year ended Sept. 30, more than tripled last year's record. The Obama administration projects deficits will total $9.1 trillion over the next decade unless corrective action is taken.

As a portion of the economy, the budget deficit stood at 10 percent, the highest since World War II, according to government data released Friday.

Yikes!

171 Gus  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:52:48pm

re: #148 Charles

The president of the John Birch Society rants about Newt Gingrich.


The John Birch Cult. I see a mention of the CFR conspiracy theories. This almost makes me want to give Newt a second look.

This year will be known as the return of the politics of paranoia.

172 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:52:55pm

re: #164 Flyers1974

Maybe, if they had a fiscal plan that entailed more than asserting that they are "fiscally responsible." And assuming such a plan would be enacted and retained. And assuming the SoCons would be willing to give up all they've worked for and still vote GOP.

Yeah. I'd be a lot more impressed if I was hearing good financial sense.

173 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:53:03pm

re: #159 Charles

Please note that Michelle Malkin is right in line with the John Birch Society's position on Newt Gingrich.

Coincidence? We don't think so.

Question: If we catch the JBS'ers in a conspiracy, do they sort of fold up like this guy?

174 Four More Tears  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:53:42pm

re: #169 Charles

But for very different reasons than the John Birch Society's isolationist insanity.

Heh. Can never put enough distance between yourself and Birch.

175 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:53:56pm

re: #167 Guanxi88

Well, we were sorta kinda fighting a planet-wide war while also trying to feed the civilian populations of our allies.

Very true. And now we are fighting two wars and trying to keep the world from slipping into a second Great Depression.

176 TheMatrix31  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:54:40pm

re: #158 Guanxi88

Have two for me.

I'm so fucking pissed about that news, and so many other things... I might have more.

177 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:54:55pm

re: #168 aagcobb

The problem for their credibility is that they just spent eight years demonstrating that they aren't fiscally responsible.

and BO by comparison puts them to fiscal shame...what's your point?

178 cliffster  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:54:57pm

re: #163 aagcobb

The budget deficit was actually much higher during WWII, as was the national debt.

Can you elaborate? And provide sources?

179 A Man for all Seasons  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:55:34pm

re: #154 iceweasel

Aw shucks. *blush*
Lots and lots of people have exposed them. I'm only the messenger, really. But thanks.


A blush? I'm so going to trash you..*wink*

180 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:55:34pm

re: #168 aagcobb

Precisely! That was part of why I gave up on the GOP being anything close to what they said they were/are. There are individuals around who are better (in both parties), But they're not in leadership positions.

181 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:55:53pm

re: #175 aagcobb

Very true. And now we are fighting two wars and trying to keep the world from slipping into a second Great Depression.

I hardly think the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq can be compared to the fighting in Erupe and Asia in the Big One; similarly, I don't think there's much to compare between trying to keep russia and britain from starving and freezing to death on the one hand, and attempting to stave off a crisis in the international capital markets on the other.

It's a disgrace it's where it is.

182 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:55:55pm

The John Birch Society is making a huge comeback, and their biggest promoters are: Fox News, Ron Paul, and Glenn Beck.

183 TheMatrix31  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:56:05pm

re: #177 albusteve

and BO by comparison puts them to fiscal shame...what's your point?

Seriously.

184 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:56:54pm

re: #177 albusteve

and BO by comparison puts them to fiscal shame...what's your point?

Exactly what I said. When you spend eight years spending like crazy, you aren't very credible when you start preaching fiscal restraint.

185 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:57:26pm

re: #171 Gus 802

The John Birch Cult. I see a mention of the CFR conspiracy theories. This almost makes me want to give Newt a second look.

This year will be known as the return of the politics of paranoia.

Absolutely. I keep telling people to read, or reread, Richard Hofstader's 64 essay the Paranoid Style in American Politics. It's all right there, right down to the return of the Birchers:

The paranoid spokesman sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms—he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization. He constantly lives at a turning point. Like religious millenialists he expresses the anxiety of those who are living through the last days and he is sometimes disposed to set a date fort the apocalypse. (“Time is running out,” said Welch in 1951. “Evidence is piling up on many sides and from many sources that October 1952 is the fatal month when Stalin will attack.”)
As a member of the avant-garde who is capable of perceiving the conspiracy before it is fully obvious to an as yet unaroused public, the paranoid is a militant leader. He does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. Since the enemy is thought of as being totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated—if not from the world, at least from the theatre of operations to which the paranoid directs his attention. This demand for total triumph leads to the formulation of hopelessly unrealistic goals, and since these goals are not even remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the paranoid’s sense of frustration. Even partial success leaves him with the same feeling of powerlessness with which he began, and this in turn only strengthens his awareness of the vast and terrifying quality of the enemy he opposes.

Doesn't this describe Beck, Malkin, et al and their entire fan base?

186 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:57:34pm

re: #168 aagcobb

The problem for their credibility is that they just spent eight years demonstrating that they aren't fiscally responsible.

On the other hand, is "fiscal responsibility" ever truly a partisan matter? Its one thing to write a column or work for a think tank promoting fiscal responsibility, quite another to blow off your constituents when it comes to that not quite necessary local project, etc...

187 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:57:41pm

re: #184 aagcobb

Exactly what I said. When you spend eight years spending like crazy, you aren't very credible when you start preaching fiscal restraint.

This is not a reason, however, to make it worse.

188 TheMatrix31  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:58:34pm

re: #187 Guanxi88

Much worse. MUCH FUCKING WORSE.

189 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:58:40pm

re: #184 aagcobb

Exactly what I said. When you spend eight years spending like crazy, you aren't very credible when you start preaching fiscal restraint.

the difference being we had eight years of economic growth, now we are contracted to the choking point, with cap and trade on the horizon

190 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:59:05pm

re: #187 Guanxi88

This is not a reason, however, to make it worse.

I didn't say it was, I was only commenting on the GOP's lack of credibility on the issue.

191 cliffster  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:59:16pm

re: #184 aagcobb

Exactly what I said. When you spend eight years spending like crazy, you aren't very credible when you start preaching fiscal restraint.

So if you say something stupid, I can saying something 100 times more stupid in response, and it's actually not stupid?

192 _RememberTonyC  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:59:23pm

I'm gonna say goodnight ... have a great weekend everyone.

193 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 7:59:45pm

re: #190 aagcobb

I didn't say it was, I was only commenting on the GOP's lack of credibility on the issue.

Who said they have ANY credibility on it?

194 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:00:29pm

re: #193 Guanxi88

Who said they have ANY credibility on it?

Noone here, I don't think.

195 Gus  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:00:41pm

re: #185 iceweasel

Doesn't this describe Beck, Malkin, et al and their entire fan base?

Almost like a carbon copy. This is the money quote:

The paranoid spokesman sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms—he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization. He constantly lives at a turning point. Like religious millenialists he expresses the anxiety of those who are living through the last days and he is sometimes disposed to set a date fort the apocalypse.

We even have a resurgence of the end-of-times crowd to boot.

196 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:00:58pm

re: #191 cliffster

So if you say something stupid, I can saying something 100 times more stupid in response, and it's actually not stupid?

The issue was GOP credibility on fiscal matters.

197 cliffster  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:01:03pm

re: #190 aagcobb

I didn't say it was, I was only commenting on the GOP's lack of credibility on the issue.

I can't think of a better way to underscore how incredibly stupid it is to have debates be about people instead of ideas.

198 Guanxi88  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:01:21pm

re: #194 aagcobb

Noone here, I don't think.

Then no one has any stake in minimizing the drag on the economy and the possible future catastrophe it represents.

199 albusteve  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:01:38pm

re: #190 aagcobb

I didn't say it was, I was only commenting on the GOP's lack of credibility on the issue.

well pile on amigo...forget Fanny May and Freddie Mack and GOP efforts to bring them under control...forget all about GBs attemps at SS reform...blah blah

200 TheMatrix31  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:01:40pm

Hah, paranoia. Everyone's paranoid nowadays.

201 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:02:03pm

re: #191 cliffster

So if you say something stupid, I can saying something 100 times more stupid in response, and it's actually not stupid?

Or starting a trash can on fire then pouring a tanker full of gasoline on it to try to put it out.

202 Canadian Guy  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:03:27pm

re: #169 Charles

But for very different reasons than the John Birch Society's isolationist insanity.

Oh, so it's because he voted to designate 68 million acres of mineral-rich land in Alaska a protected wilderness sanctuary and his vote to create the federal department of education which was a commie plot.

//

203 cliffster  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:03:28pm

re: #196 Flyers1974

The issue was GOP credibility on fiscal matters.

actually, I believe the conversation started with GOP dumping the religious right.

204 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:03:40pm

re: #182 Charles

I remember when I was quite young in NYC reading different political newspapers from the full spectrum, far left to far right. Commie stuff, Bircher stuff, even the old antisemitic standby Spotlight. They all intrigued me as to their conspiratorial way of seeing the world. Even though their politics was on the surface far apart, their way of thinking was identical. The world was being run by some dark nefarious cabal and their group had the inside knowledge that explained everything. Every cult of every type has always had this trademark style of thinking. It's truly scary that we're seeing a mainstreaming of this very type of thinking into our political process. Truly frightening.

205 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:04:30pm

The issue above was whether the GOP would score lots of Dem/Ind. votes if they dumped the SoCons - presumably for fiscal policy reasons. That is why the question of GOP credibility came up. Why bother switching if all is arguably equal.

206 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:05:02pm

re: #185 iceweasel

I've been meaning to get that book for years. It's about time I finally read it. It's certainly timely material!

207 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:05:50pm

re: #195 Gus 802

We even have a resurgence of the end-of-times crowd to boot.

Absolutely. I'm dead serious in saying that if people can read only one essay to explain what has happened to people on the right (the people now watching Beck, Malkin, etc, I mean, not the sane right) and what is happening with the GOP leadership and the rightwing blogosphere-- -- it should be this essay. It also becomes clear that this style only went underground and we've been seeing a recrudesence of it.

Charles and other have noted that the party of personal responsibility has turned into the party of perpetual crying and victimhood, and that syndrome is delineated there as well.

This is good too:

The enemy is clearly delineated: he is a perfect model of malice, a kind of amoral superman—sinister, ubiquitous, powerful, cruel, sensual, luxury-loving. Unlike the rest of us, the enemy is not caught in the toils of the vast mechanism of history, himself a victim of his past, his desires, his limitations. He wills, indeed he manufactures, the mechanism of history, or tries to deflect the normal course of history in an evil way. He makes crises, starts runs on banks, causes depressions, manufactures disasters, and then enjoys and profits from the misery he has produced. The paranoid’s interpretation of history is distinctly personal: decisive events are not taken as part of the stream of history, but as the consequences of someone’s will. Very often the enemy is held to possess some especially effective source of power: he controls the press; he has unlimited funds; he has a new secret for influencing the mind (brainwashing); he has a special technique for seduction

Doesn't this sound like the unhinged rants against "progressives" , "the left", and Obama, by sufferers of ODS?

208 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:06:21pm

re: #203 cliffster

actually, I believe the conversation started with GOP dumping the religious right.

You are correct. The next question would be, would the GOP gain Dem/Ind. votes as a result, presumably for reasons of fiscal policy. And I say no, if all is equal on that ground.

209 iceweasel  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:07:12pm

re: #206 Irenicum

I've been meaning to get that book for years. It's about time I finally read it. It's certainly timely material!

This link will give you the harper's essay for free. I haven't read his book myself, just this essay.

[Link: karws.gso.uri.edu...]

210 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:07:15pm

re: #178 cliffster

Can you elaborate? And provide sources?

During WWII the deficit was 30.3% of GDP in 1943 compared to 10% now. The national debt was 113% of GDP in 1945, compared to 81.7% now.

211 Political Atheist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:08:48pm

re: #208 Flyers1974

A chart I saw recently showed more indy voters than either party. A large segment has stepped away from a party, but had no where to switch to. A huge swing vote could precede a big shift. I wonder if this is what a new party scenario starts like.

212 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:09:49pm

re: #209 iceweasel

Wow, thanks!

213 Charles Johnson  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:09:59pm

Another ugly post at Hot Air by white supremacist Robert Stacy McCain:

[Link: hotair.com...]

214 jaunte  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:12:12pm

re: #209 iceweasel

From your link:
I see according to a footnote at the end of Hofstadter's essay one of Goldwater's consultants was another student of 'political philosophers.'

In his recent book, How to Win an Election, Stephen C. Shadegg cites a statement attributed to Mao Tse-tung: “Give me just two or three men in a village and I will take the village.” Shadegg comments: “ In the Goldwater campaigns of 1952 and 1958 and in all other campaigns where I have served as consultant I have followed the advice of Mao Tse-tung.” “I would suggest,” writes senator Goldwater in Why Not Victory? “that we analyze and copy the strategy of the enemy; theirs has worked and ours has not.


[Link: karws.gso.uri.edu...]

215 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:14:02pm

This is a good explanation of the project that is considered to expose Margaret Sanger's racism.

216 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:14:49pm

re: #211 Rightwingconspirator

A chart I saw recently showed more indy voters than either party. A large segment has stepped away from a party, but had no where to switch to. A huge swing vote could precede a big shift. I wonder if this is what a new party scenario starts like.

I'm going to guess no - because I don't know what a third party would stand for. I doubt doubt the chart or that a large segment has stepped away from the parties - for example, who is really in love with the Democratic Party these days. But I think those indy voters don't have a clear idea of what they want. If there was some tangible thing that a lot of people clearly wanted, the market would decide, so to speak. I'd say those indy voters don't like the games and deals and greed that are an inevitable part of the system or any system.

217 JamesWI  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:16:08pm

The far right wants to think that it was only anti-George W. Bush sentiment that is the reason for why the Democrats are in control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency. They completely ignore the good strategy that actually created that result. In 2006, anti-W sentiment certainly played a role, but the reason they won as many seats as they did is because they ran the "Blue Dogs," people who might not vote liberal every time, but are liberal enough to please Democrats and conservative enough to woo moderate republicans.

In 2008, Obama ran not on an "I hate W and conservatives" platform, but as a pragmatist who would listen to both sides.

Anyone think the Republicans are going to make a similar pitch to moderates in the upcoming elections? . . . yeah, I thought not. Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Michelle Malkin are doing their best to ensure 20 years of Democrat-only government.

218 Irenicum  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:16:25pm

Well, gotta read stuff for school gang! In the words of the mad scientist to Bugs Bunny, nighty night!

219 jaunte  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:16:54pm

re: #213 Charles

It's hard to understand what he's talking about.
Isn't he supposed to be a writer?

220 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:16:58pm

re: #216 Flyers1974

I'm going to guess no - because I don't know what a third party would stand for. I doubt doubt the chart or that a large segment has stepped away from the parties - for example, who is really in love with the Democratic Party these days. But I think those indy voters don't have a clear idea of what they want. If there was some tangible thing that a lot of people clearly wanted, the market would decide, so to speak. I'd say those indy voters don't like the games and deals and greed that are an inevitable part of the system or any system.

Except maybe in Iceland or Greenland or someplace like that.

221 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:17:29pm

Yankees win game 1.

222 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:17:36pm

re: #219 jaunte

It's hard to understand what he's talking about.
Isn't he supposed to be a writer?

To which there are witnesses.

223 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:19:42pm

re: #219 jaunte

It's hard to understand what he's talking about.
Isn't he supposed to be a writer?

His style, what I've seen of it, is extremely choppy. He assumes that all readers know what is on his mind, and provides odd quotes, but little background.

224 bratwurst  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:20:11pm

re: #221 NJDhockeyfan

Hate hearing "New York, New York" playing on the PA...but have to tip my cap to Sabathia.

225 Kragar  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:20:12pm

I'm sorry, but what exactly is there to be outraged about here? I seem to be missing it.

226 Mich-again  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:23:42pm

More to not like about her.. The devil woman sponsored a tax increase bill.

BILL NO A08477

SAME AS Same as S 5579, S54313, S44313, S65074
SPONSOR Scozzafava
Amd S1210, Tax L

TITLE OF BILL:
An act
to amend the tax law, in relation to extending the authorization granted
to the county of Lewis to impose an additional three-quarters of one
percent of sales and compensating use taxes


Batten down the hatches matey!

227 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:23:57pm

re: #225 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I'm sorry, but what exactly is there to be outraged about here? I seem to be missing it.

Dede Scozzafava is in cahoots with Planned Parenthood as part of a seventy year project to exterminate black people in America.

This may be a close second for Worst. Genocide. Ever.

//in other news, Newt Gingrich is trying to destroy conservatism

228 Canadian Guy  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:27:28pm

R S McCain once again uses 10,000 words to deny nothing.

229 Political Atheist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:28:25pm

re: #216 Flyers1974

I propose they know what they want at least in big picture terms, but these desires are at odds with the apparent options-Democrats or Republicans or ineffectual 3rd parties. Yes, their past patience for the deals and greed you mention has evaporated. Spent like a sailor on leave spends his pay. If you are right as is more likely than a big new party breakout-What will bring the indy back into a party? That would be the question.

230 Kragar  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:28:28pm

re: #227 SanFranciscoZionist

Dede Scozzafava is in cahoots with Planned Parenthood as part of a seventy year project to exterminate black people in America.

This may be a close second for Worst. Genocide. Ever.

//in other news, Newt Gingrich is trying to destroy conservatism

AHHH!

/I'm not really sure why we're yelling but

AHHH-AAAHHH!

231 Sharmuta  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:29:44pm

re: #228 Canadian Guy

R S McCain once again uses 10,000 words to deny nothing.

The neo-confederate's answer to fjordman.

232 A Man for all Seasons  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:30:08pm

re: #227 SanFranciscoZionist

Dede Scozzafava is in cahoots with Planned Parenthood as part of a seventy year project to exterminate black people in America.

This may be a close second for Worst. Genocide. Ever.

//in other news, Newt Gingrich is trying to destroy conservatism

What up sister? Hope today finds you well..
This is hard to believe..But my Company is sending me to Singapore for a job..I'm jacked...I have never been to Asia.. It's like I need to call the rosetta 800 number..Wink.OK I'm in a good mood ..Don't judge me!
/

233 Mich-again  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:31:02pm

re: #213 Charles

From his own site..

Tea Party people unite! You have nothing to lose but those clueless idiots in the GOP establishment!

The schism is drawing near.

234 Mich-again  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:32:04pm

re: #231 Sharmuta

The neo-confederate's answer to fjordman.

Have they ever been seen together?

235 Canadian Guy  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:32:52pm

He also says for the one millionth time in the last 3 weeks that the best policy is to remain silent on the allegations. Good job of saying nothing there.

236 jaunte  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:33:44pm

re: #231 Sharmuta

There are only ten comments under that post, and three are from RS McCain.

237 Canadian Guy  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:37:01pm

re: #236 jaunte

It's part of his silence campaign.

238 Flyers1974  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:38:04pm

re: #229 Rightwingconspirator

I propose they know what they want at least in big picture terms, but these desires are at odds with the apparent options-Democrats or Republicans or ineffectual 3rd parties. Yes, their past patience for the deals and greed you mention has evaporated. Spent like a sailor on leave spends his pay. If you are right as is more likely than a big new party breakout-What will bring the indy back into a party? That would be the question.

On a kind of related note, anyone who wants a third party should hate Ross Perot. Unless I'm mistaken, 1992 was the only time in modern US politics where a third party had a real chance and Perot's nuttiness gave the idea of a third party a really bad image (the GOP sabotaged my daughter's wedding, we don't need to put money in advertising, etc...) I think what will bring the Indys back is one parties relative success or failure. Right now the GOP is failing and the Dems, while not failing, aren't exactly a success either. At least that's what I imagine a lot of Indys think.

239 Nanook37  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:42:38pm

re: #124 Irenicum

But the irony of it is if they succeed, they'll make the Repub. party a permanently minority party. That view will never be majority view. Their mandating ideological as well as socon purity will have the exact opposite effect of what they supposedly say they want. I sometimes don't think they even want to win. I think they are actually happier being on the outside yelling and screaming about how bad things are instead of having to wield any legitimate power. Some I'm sure do want to wield power. And that scares me even more. But thankfully, their stupidity is helping in the cause of keeping them out of power. Ah providence!

The thing is the people who are pushing this agenda (Beck, Malkin, Rush, etc..) makes loads more money when the people they back are out of power and they can attract a large group (but small portion of the country) to buy their BS and books, and newsletters, and special websites, etc...

240 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:44:34pm

re: #232 HoosierHoops

What up sister? Hope today finds you well..
This is hard to believe..But my Company is sending me to Singapore for a job..I'm jacked...I have never been to Asia.. It's like I need to call the rosetta 800 number..Wink.OK I'm in a good mood ..Don't judge me!
/

Ooooh. Have a good time!

241 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:47:50pm

re: #238 Flyers1974

On a kind of related note, anyone who wants a third party should hate Ross Perot. Unless I'm mistaken, 1992 was the only time in modern US politics where a third party had a real chance and Perot's nuttiness gave the idea of a third party a really bad image (the GOP sabotaged my daughter's wedding, we don't need to put money in advertising, etc...) I think what will bring the Indys back is one parties relative success or failure. Right now the GOP is failing and the Dems, while not failing, aren't exactly a success either. At least that's what I imagine a lot of Indys think.

A lot of my too-left-for-the-Dems friends were very interested in the Green Party. For a while, they were doing really well. They ran candidates for mayor, small local things, and built. People were saying they'd get a lot of mayors, start running people for State congresses, and slowly build.

Then they turned into a sort of vanity presidential platform for any hard-left nutjob with influence. Most of my friends lost interest at that point.

242 Mich-again  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:48:43pm

To build a 3rd party, you have to start at the House. The Presidency is all but virtually impossible. A plurality of electoral votes in a 3-way election isn't enough to win, you need a majority. If there is no candidate with a majority of electoral votes then the election moves to the House where each State's house delegation gets one vote, regardless of the total number of Representatives in that State and a majority election is required again. If they can't decide the VP gets to act as President till they do.

Any 3rd party run for the Presidency is doomed from the start.

243 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:48:56pm

re: #238 Flyers1974

On a kind of related note, anyone who wants a third party should hate Ross Perot. Unless I'm mistaken, 1992 was the only time in modern US politics where a third party had a real chance and Perot's nuttiness gave the idea of a third party a really bad image (the GOP sabotaged my daughter's wedding, we don't need to put money in advertising, etc...) I think what will bring the Indys back is one parties relative success or failure. Right now the GOP is failing and the Dems, while not failing, aren't exactly a success either. At least that's what I imagine a lot of Indys think.

Third parties in the US primarily serve as incubators for new ideas. If they resonate, one of the major parties will coopt it. Thanks to Perot, the federal government temporarily adopted fiscal restraint as policy, and by the end of the nineties we were actually running federal government surpluses. Then Bush was elected, and pay as you go was abandoned in order to fund his tax cuts and the new medicare prescription drug benefit.

244 Gus  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:51:28pm

re: #207 iceweasel

Doesn't this sound like the unhinged rants against "progressives" , "the left", and Obama, by sufferers of ODS?

Not to long ago as you know the political insult of the day was to call a fellow politician a liberal. The L-word as it became known was to be avoided and it was common to hear it used by leading political figures like Newt Gingrich.

Those were simpler times and since last year they have expanded their vocabulary to include Marxist, Trotskyite, Stalinist, Maoist, commie, communist, etc. The spectrum has widened to include these rather opposite leftist ideas including those that were once categorized as "mere" liberals."

Funny you know because I never actually met a Trotskyite. I did know a woman once whose father was a Trotskyite "leader" of sorts and resided in New York City.

That's part of what we're seeing today. Have a voting record indicating a pro-choice stance and instead of being see as a liberal in this atmosphere one is now categorized foolishly as a "Maoist Stalinist eugenicist loving Sanger reader worse than Hitler!"

245 A Man for all Seasons  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 8:52:50pm

re: #240 SanFranciscoZionist

Ooooh. Have a good time!

Well in about about 60 days.I am so blogging from Asia...I'm excited about reporting about the food...
/Real Chinese food.. Jeez...It will be great...This is going to be fun

246 aagcobb  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 9:01:46pm

re: #245 HoosierHoops

HH, how was Hoosier Hysteria? Big Blue Madness was a blast tonight-getting a first look at the talent Calipari has assembled to bring the Cats back to greatness!

247 TDG2112  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 9:04:14pm

re: #90 Irenicum

It was Regan. When I watched Powell throw his support behind Obama on the Sunday morning shows, that was all I could think of. Regan was very concise. Powell was instead precise.

248 meeshlr  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 9:13:16pm

re: #21 iceweasel

In other words, anyone who won't fall in line with the so-con and theocratic agenda is now a RINO.
If you won't kowtow to the religious right, you can't be a republican official. That's the standard the Malkins of the world (and their foaming followers) are setting.

I guess that makes me a RINO.

Do you think they'll add a new check box on the voter registration card?

249 watching you tiny alien kittens are  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 9:18:18pm

So, instead of backing a candidate who could win they instead want to back one that is in third place.

Sure, makes perfect sense if your a loony So-Con issue voter I guess. After all if you can't get every one of your issues represented "correctly" then it is better to not to have any of them represented at all, right?

///

250 Dark_Falcon  Fri, Oct 16, 2009 9:21:33pm

re: #249 ausador

So, instead of backing a candidate who could win they instead want to back one that is in third place.

Sure, makes perfect sense if your a loony So-Con issue voter I guess. After all if you can't get every one of your issues represented "correctly" then it is better to not to have any of them represented at all, right?

///

Those socons only care about purity, without regard for reality. I support Scozzafava, because she's as good as we can get.

251 iceweasel  Sat, Oct 17, 2009 2:56:24am

re: #248 meeshlr

I guess that makes me a RINO.

Do you think they'll add a new check box on the voter registration card?

Yes, it's called "Independent".

/Join us!


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Once Praised, the Settlement to Help Sickened BP Oil Spill Workers Leaves Most With Nearly Nothing When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 64 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
4 days ago
Views: 165 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1