Rush: Malaise redux

posted at 2:40 pm on July 31, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

You know, Rush Limbaugh celebrates his 20th anniversary in syndication this week, an amazing accomplishment in any entertainment medium but especially so in radio.  Why has he succeeded so completely?  Perhaps because he can connect the dots, and the dottiness, as he does with Barack Obama’s energy policy as explained yesterday.  Take a listen to Rush’s deconstruction:

LIMBAUGH: This is Obama yesterday at a campaign event in Springfield, Missouri:

OBAMA: All the oil they’re talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups, you could actually save just as much.

LIMBAUGH: This is unbelievable! My friends, this is laughable of course, but it’s stupid! It is stupid! How many of you remember the seventies? When we had these shortages, all through the Jimmy Carter years and we have all these tips, all these tips on how to save gasoline? Avoid jackrabbit starts, keep your tires properly inflated, there’s a list of about ten or twelve these things. I said if I follow each one of these things I’ll have to stop the car every five miles, siphon some fuel out, for all the fuel I’m going to be saving.

This is ridiculous. This is a presidential candidate and he’s talking about keeping your tires inflated and getting regular tune-ups and that would save as much oil as drilling would produce. And this guy is the Democrat presidential nominee. Who has filled his head with this stuff?

This is “malaise” redux.  Rush has been on the air twenty years, but the Democrats seem determined to recycle their policies from thirty years ago.  Revisit with me the infamous Carter speech from April 1977:

The energy crisis has not yet overwhelmed us, but it will if we do not act quickly. It’s a problem that we will not be able to solve in the next few years, and it’s likely to get progressively worse through the rest of this century.

We must not be selfish or timid if we hope to have a decent world for our children and our grandchildren. We simply must balance our demand for energy with our rapidly shrinking resources. By acting now we can control our future instead of letting the future control us. …

Many of these proposals will be unpopular. Some will cause you to put up with inconveniences and to make sacrifices. The most important thing about these proposals is that the alternative may be a national catastrophe. Further delay can affect our strength and our power as a nation.

Our decision about energy will test the character of the American people and the ability of the President and the Congress to govern this Nation. This difficult effort will be the “moral equivalent of war,” except that we will be uniting our efforts to build and not to destroy.

The absurdity here is that while Carter complained about declining production, it was American policies that forced that decline — just as it does today. Ronald Reagan relaxed restrictions and tax penalties on production, and the energy crisis abated. Today, we have at least six Saudi Arabias in oil shale alone, let alone what we can get from ANWR and the OCS — and just like in the Carter era, the Democrats won’t let us get it.

Instead, we hear the same kind of hysterical rhetoric today that we heard in 1977. “National catastrophe” has turned into “global climate catastrophe”, but otherwise the rest of it sounds exactly the same. Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are nothing but Jimmy Carter retreads.

Happy 20th anniversary, Rush. You keep proving why you’re indispensable.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Worse yet, it will take 8-10 years to bring a new nuclear power plant on line. We need to get moving on this NOW.
fogw on July 31, 2008 at 3:22 PM

Obama Energy Solution for new nuclear power plant:

“Drive Slower”

Sir Napsalot on July 31, 2008 at 4:27 PM

Cindy Munford on July 31, 2008 at 4:23 PM

It takes about 24 hours depending on the size of the tanker to empty, but it takes 12 to 18 hours to fill them. You don’t usually see them leave because they are know to leave very early mornings. So it will not interupt other ships services. This is how Alaska works it, I would assume (dpending on maritime rulles, regs and laws) that most of the coastal State do as well, give or take.

I know they don’t look like they move, but they do, it is just a slow process.

upinak on July 31, 2008 at 4:30 PM

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 4:24 PM

Makes sense. It’s funny, because I’ve lived most of my life around the Chesapeake, and big ugly ships are numerous around here, but I never give any thought to shipping on the West Coast. I know it happens, but it’s just not in my mental image. Of course, the only time I spent in Cali was in Monterey, not exactly a shipping town. In any case, my knowledge of shipping is second-hand at best.

Anna on July 31, 2008 at 4:31 PM

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:26 PM

Mathematically it sound correct. However, conservative have had a higher percentage of voter turnout, so a stay at home from a conservative has a larger effect. I think the blacks will vote with a larger % this year, so the impact will be even greater.
No it doesn’t mean that you are a “non-conservative”, it just means you are willing to gamble that the rest of us will keep a Republican in the office, to pave the way for real conservatives to make a better choice next time. If Obama gets elected, wait 8 years, and be in a worse position to turn it around…but then you have heard this before, but it is mainly for others that still are pondering.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 4:32 PM

Can I go way off topic with you and ask if you have the scoop on why Sandy Sullivan lost the election for Secretary of State in 2006?

Sorry, HotAir.

BigD on July 31, 2008 at 4:26 PM

Couple of reasons. First, Jim Doyle is more concerned with politics than he is with getting anything done, which results in the socialist rags masquerading as newspapers reporting that Republicans are to blame for all budget and tax problems, when in fact Doyle times his constant dodging of working with them to hit deadlines. Through all of this, his being in the birthplace of the progressive movement prevents any loud criticism of his irresponsibility, which continues to cement public of opinion of him as something other than a corrupt mincing slimeball. So, republicans continue to have little chance until something really bad happens.

Second is that any republican going up against someone named LaFollette in Madison is doomed.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:33 PM

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:33 PM

Madison, do you see something “bad” on the horizon?

UI can’t talk about my State.. it is in the pooper.

upinak on July 31, 2008 at 4:36 PM

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:26 PM

Ouch. That’s gonna leave a mark.

I’m still waiting for these “McCain or Die” folks to explain how President McSquish, who is going to discredit conservatism for 15-20 years (thanks partly to folks like them insisting that he’s a conservative) with his stupid and costly policies on amnesty and global warmism, is better than sucking it up and letting President Bambi discredit liberalism for 15-20 years and swing the Congress back to Republicans.

And it’ll be easier (but not easy!) to defeat amnesty with President Bambi than with President McSquish. We can undo just about anything else, but amnesty is forever.

And the party with the Presidency loses seats in Congress in the mid-term elections.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 4:36 PM

I am sure that that is a logical explanation but your talking about a place I saw daily and trust me, I have never seen that many ships of any kind including Naval vessels from either of the bases that use that route sitting in the Bay. I was a teenager so there may have been a strike going on that I am unaware of now and wouldn’t have cared about then, I am just saying that it was odd enough for me to notice and remark. After all back then it was all about me.

Cindy Munford on July 31, 2008 at 4:36 PM

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:33 PM

Last question:

How did she come across as a candidate, and as a person?

Just curious and that’s the end of it.

BigD on July 31, 2008 at 4:37 PM

Anna on July 31, 2008 at 4:31 PM

More products move through the Long Beach Harbor then any harbor in the U.S., and the second busiest seaport.
If you open the pic (it is an old one) it shows a white little dome, right hand middle. That is where the Spruce Goose was (inside), and just above that is the Queen Mary.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 4:38 PM

Cindy Munford on July 31, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Cindy I believe you. Most ships, depending on what they are, usually don’t hang out in the bay or area around the port. And the fact you can’t see more then 25 miles on land to the horizon… they are waiting out further then that. 35 to 40 is normal.

upinak on July 31, 2008 at 4:39 PM

We can undo just about anything else, but amnesty is forever.

And the party with the Presidency loses seats in Congress in the mid-term elections.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 4:36 PM

But absolute amnesty is with Obama…that is what confuses me about the anti-McCain, Obama and McCain are not apples to apples, by any stretch.
The energy issue alone tells us that.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 4:40 PM

Madison, do you see something “bad” on the horizon?

upinak on July 31, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Remember when Grey Davis was recalled in California? There was a LOT of rumbling that it would happen to Doyle, especially when more and more illicit campaign contributions started popping up for him, as well as “gifts”. You know, the kind that just got that Stevens nailed?

However, when you just came from the Wisconsin Attorney General’s office, with winners like DUI Peggy Lautenschlager as pals, ya think he might have known the cheat codes to corruption in office?

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:40 PM

I’m a conservative and it is my right to speak up. Just like Reagan, it is also our right to influence the GOP platform to stop our nominee from moving to the left.

A History of Republican Conventions

16 Reagan’s letters after the convention remind supporters of the substantial influence Reagan delegates had on the Republican platform

luckybogey on July 31, 2008 at 4:42 PM

How did she come across as a candidate, and as a person?

Just curious and that’s the end of it.

BigD on July 31, 2008 at 4:37 PM

Damned if I knew. Or anyone in the state. Barely anyone I talked to had heard of her. She couldn’t get a photo or quote in the papers to save her life, and the TV stations considered her prime material for their 3AM newscasts. Thankfully, WIBA AM occasionally brought her up, but obviously it wasn’t enough. Most that I read about her was on a few local blogs, and they never really said much. I couldn’t honestly tell you whether she just didn’t have her heart in it, or whether she got the shaft.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:44 PM

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 4:38 PM

I believe you (cool pic, btw). It’s just my East Coastism talking. Just like I’m more partial to Norfolk than San Diego (man, that base smells something fierce!).

I see ships sitting on the ocean side of the tunnel daily, and outside of Bal’more when visiting family, but never along the shipping routes of the bay. I was just always told that they were waiting for space, though. Usually, there is a steady stream going in and out, very easy and fun to watch from Cape Henry.

Anna on July 31, 2008 at 4:45 PM

When solutions such as drill or build new nuclear plants are proposed and the response from the Democrats is “that will take 10 years to produce any results”, are we to believe that the problem will be gone by then? Jeez… That has to rank as one of the dumbest replies you can imagine but it is repeated over and over…

CC

CapedConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:49 PM

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:40 PM

nice, how utterly depressing.

Anyone wanna take bets on what conservative State is next for FBI raiding politicans?

upinak on July 31, 2008 at 4:50 PM

But absolute amnesty is with Obama…that is what confuses me about the anti-McCain, Obama and McCain are not apples to apples, by any stretch.
The energy issue alone tells us that.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 4:40 PM

Absolute amnesty is with Obama? Not sure I understand. McCain was responsible for the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill. McCain voted to let illegals have Social Security. McCain’s amnesty is as absolute as anybody’s. Look at the company he keeps.

There are differences between Bambi and McCain, of course. Like on energy. But any incremental good McCain will do as compared to Obama pales in comparison to the damage McCain will do to Republicans and conservatives.

And again. We can undo just about anything Bambi can do, or do anything he won’t do. Except amnesty. And we’ll have an easier time defeating amnesty with President Bambi than President McCain.

I’d rather Bambi discredit liberalism than a squish discredit conservatism. Not much potential short-term upside and huge potential long-term downside to President McSquish. More certain potential short-term downside, but a larger potential long-term upside with Bambi.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 4:54 PM

nice, how utterly depressing.

upinak on July 31, 2008 at 4:50 PM

Not really. It’s only a matter of time before the progressive machine implodes. Issues like property taxes, eminent domain by the State, and concealed carry are getting more and more people riled. I’m thinking Paul Ryan can be the keystone to turning the tide of this land.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:56 PM

Anna: I have sailed on the Chesapeake for years and the ships you see south of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge are waiting on a Captain to pilot these ships up to Baltimore and further north. Every ship must be piloted by a certified Captain in the Bay’s waters.

luckybogey on July 31, 2008 at 4:56 PM

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 4:56 PM

As I can see why the people would get upset about their weapons and eminent domain, it makes me wonder. I have only been thru WI never visited and I noticed how crowded it felt in certain communities.

Alaska has a regulation in place for those who have to have eminent domain and they they do an offer and then if refused 3 times, they only give fair market value (which is usually under what it may be worth) before kicking the people out. The regs have been working.. except for a few die hards. Does your State not offer that?

upinak on July 31, 2008 at 5:00 PM

luckybogey on July 31, 2008 at 4:56 PM

Thank you. That makes sense, and now that you say that, I’ve probably come across it somewhere.

Is that for commercial only? Otherwise, I’m in trouble.

Anna on July 31, 2008 at 5:01 PM

luckybogey on July 31, 2008 at 4:56 PM

That makes sense also. I guess the conspiracy theories were around in the 70′s also. People were just positive that tankers were being held up to take advantage of possible higher oil prices. My dad did marine salvage in that area. His first job after getting out of the hospital was to get two barges that had broken away from their tugs and stuck on the beach at Chick’s near the then being built Bay Bridge Tunnel.

Cindy Munford on July 31, 2008 at 5:03 PM

Osamabama in October: “If you will change the filters on your furnace and caulk the windows, we will save enough energy to solve this energy crisis.”

Osamabama in December: “Dang, these Chi-town winters are cold.”

davidk on July 31, 2008 at 5:04 PM

Alaska has a regulation in place for those who have to have eminent domain and they they do an offer and then if refused 3 times, they only give fair market value (which is usually under what it may be worth) before kicking the people out. The regs have been working.. except for a few die hards. Does your State not offer that?

upinak on July 31, 2008 at 5:00 PM

I’m not talking about it being claimed by corporations, I’m talking by the State of Wisconsin, particularly Madison. They’ve been either restricting the sale of or seizing parts of the city if the owners have wanted to sell them, on the basis of “historical significance”. While landmark status is rarely used in some cities, it’s liberally (yuk yuk) used in cities like San Francisco and Madison, and absolutely throws property rights out the window.

Recently, in Fitchburg, a suburb of Madison, citizens passed a referendum for construction of a teen center. Sounds great, until you realize that the building is actually going to be located outside of Fitchburg, in the city of Madison. That’s right. Fitchburg citizens will now be paying for a building that is in another district.

And even the Wisconsin State Journal is having problems ignoring it. The powder keg is rummmbling…

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:07 PM

But any incremental good McCain will do as compared to Obama pales in comparison to the damage McCain will do to Republicans and conservatives.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 4:54 PM

mr. pc,

I guess I was under the mistaken impression that the Presidential election was about the direction of the country, not how it inflates or deflates the prestige of the political party.

Pleas enlighten me on where I went wrong.

belad on July 31, 2008 at 5:09 PM

I’d rather Bambi discredit liberalism than a squish discredit conservatism. Not much potential short-term upside and huge potential long-term downside to President McSquish. More certain potential short-term downside, but a larger potential long-term upside with Bambi.
misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 4:54 PM

So you want Obama to be the next president.

I see. Are you going to vote for Obama so your desire becomes true? Or are you going to leave this up to chance by not participating in the election.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:11 PM

So you want Obama to be the next president.

I see. Are you going to vote for Obama so your desire becomes true? Or are you going to leave this up to chance by not participating in the election.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:11 PM

It’s rich how you post pure straw man right after crying that others are straw manning you, straw man.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:14 PM

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:07 PM

Ahh I see. As we have some historical building here, not like Madison. The building here are usually to far gone so they are allowed to sit there and become junk piles. Owners aren’t entitled to anything but paying property taxes.

But out eminent domain is different. Anchorage and surround areas are growing and the roads can’t take the traffic. They is the reason they started offering to move people, houses, etc. Our Glenn Hwy is finally getting widened all the way to downtown. They look like they are going to put a overpass in downtown as well, which is a BAD idea due to the huge fault known to drop 10 ft during large earthquakes.

But can’t help the growing pains. At least they are nicer here then in WI it seems.

upinak on July 31, 2008 at 5:14 PM

Rush doesn’t read Hot Air exclusively as show prep, but he did cite Ed the other day. We’re all mostly friends here.

urbancenturion on July 31, 2008 at 5:23 PM

Note to John McCain:

Item: Next Political Ad

Today, we have at least six Saudi Arabias in oil shale alone, let alone what we can get from ANWR and the OCS — and just like in the Carter era, the Democrats won’t let us get it.

Start Production Immediately………..

Seven Percent Solution on July 31, 2008 at 5:27 PM

It’s rich how you post pure straw man right after crying that others are straw manning you, straw man.
MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:14 PM

I’d rather Bambi discredit liberalism than a squish discredit conservatism. Not much potential short-term upside and huge potential long-term downside to President McSquish. More certain potential short-term downside, but a larger potential long-term upside with Bambi.
misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 4:54 PM

So, he’d rather Obama “discredit liberalism” by being elected president. (In his opinion … somehow. Maybe by magic.) How else would the most liberal senator in 2007 do this, unless he was president. Would he do this by losing?

So if misterpeasea ‘would rather’ Obama do this, is he going to vote for him? Because from his previous comments, he sure isn’t voting for McCain.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:28 PM

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:14 PM

And I didn’t say others. “S” means plural. I said you. Because you did. You made up crap as something that I supposedly said, and I never did.

I copied and pasted, and then asked the question that was the logical next step. If it is not the logical next step, and he’s not going to participate, but he still wants it to happen, then he can clarify this.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:30 PM

The more Obama speaks the better. He is so pathetic and the media fawns and drools – yeah that’s where we are. Hope the democrats are not that stupid because it is just unbelievable why people are still supporting this buffoon. The scary part is he is a real marxist and hope the Americans will wake up before it is too late.

mariloubaker on July 31, 2008 at 5:32 PM

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:30 PM

I paraphrased the same tired points you have made, time after time, and some of it was damn near word for word. Don’t like it? Don’t put it up, or at least find some more sly newspeak.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:33 PM

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:33 PM

And you constantly lie about McCain, saying that he wanted to leave the republican party, twice. This is not true. This is what the democrats claim. This is what McCain denies. And you also claim that McCain is a liberal. And you also claim that McCain will do things in the future that is also not true, because it is your opinion based not on fact, but your rabid hatred of McCain. And you also claim that I call any disagreement with McCain a lie. And that is also not true. I call lies about McCain lies. And it is primarily coming from you. So you wont mind if I troll you constantly in the same way you are trolling me. right? Then if that’s the case, then I hope you enjoy all the times you try to speak here, I am going to do the same thing to you that you did to me. Sounds like fun? Okay then.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:38 PM

I guess I was under the mistaken impression that the Presidential election was about the direction of the country, not how it inflates or deflates the prestige of the political party.

Pleas enlighten me on where I went wrong.

belad on July 31, 2008 at 5:09 PM

It is about the direction of the country, I agree.

Unfortunately, McCain’s direction and Bambi’s direction are not as divergent as I’d like. If the choice is between 4 years of McCain’s Democrat-lite followed by 15-20 years of liberalism run rampant because McCain discredits Republicans and conservatism OR 4 years of Bambi’s socialism followed by 15-20 years of conservative ascendancy because Bambi discredits Democrats and liberalism, what would you choose? The choice seems obvious to me.

And it’s not about the prestige of the political parties, except to the extent that they represent, and advance, the respective political philosophies.

I want liberalism discredited and conservatism advanced.

To the extent that Republicans advance conservatism, I support Republicans. Hell, to the extent that Democrats advance conservatism, I support Democrats; but they don’t.

If the country has to go through 4 years of Bambi liberalism to get 15-20 years of conservatism, that seems like a desirable outcome to me.

If the country has to go through 4 years of McSquish kinda-sorta liberalism blamed on conservatives, leading to 15-20 years of liberalism, I’m wholeheartedly against it.

This based on my opinion that amnesty will have far-reaching negative consequences and that fighting the global warmism hoax is economic suicide, also having far-reachinag negative consequences.

Seems to me that folks voting “McCain or Die” like _man are the ones pushing party over principle. And being short-sighted.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 5:42 PM

4 years of McCain’s Democrat-lite followed by 15-20 years of liberalism run rampant because McCain discredits Republicans and conservatism

This is a fantasy that is without merit.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:44 PM

Cindy & Anna

As far as I understand the regulations, new rules were implemented by DHS after 911 for certain commercial vessels depending on size, tonnage and on board materials. As a documented vessel, I must register my sail boat with the USCG each year in accordance with 5 USC 552(A). I would also assume the same rules (i.e. pilot) apply for commercial vessels entering Norfolk and the Hampton Roads area.

luckybogey on July 31, 2008 at 5:45 PM

Seems to me that folks voting “McCain or Die” like _man are the ones pushing party over principle. And being short-sighted.
misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 5:42 PM

Of course that is not true.

This is also a part of your vivid imagination. And you are (in fact) an “anti-McCain or die” advocate here. What you want is exactly what the democrats want, for McCain to loose. What you are doing in attempting to discredit McCain here is also exactly what the democrats such as MoveOn PAC and websites like the huffington Post and the Daily Kos are doing.

Why is that?

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:47 PM

If the country has to go through 4 years of Bambi liberalism to get 15-20 years of conservatism, that seems like a desirable outcome to me.

If the country has to go through 4 years of McSquish kinda-sorta liberalism blamed on conservatives, leading to 15-20 years of liberalism, I’m wholeheartedly against it.
misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 5:42 PM

So, Obama being the next president is a “desirable outcome to me.” as you say,

So I’ll ask the question again. What are you going to do to accomplish what you desire?

Are you going to vote for Obama? Please, it’s okay, you can tell us the truth.

Or are you just going to constantly harp on McCain on this conservative website in the hopes of convincing enough people to also not vote for McCain, so Obama wins.

It’s okay, you can tell us the truth, we are all conservative here.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:49 PM

This is a fantasy that is without merit.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:44 PM

Well gee, _man, once again your compelling logic and careful marshalling of arguments have proven overwhelmingly persuasive.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 5:50 PM

I’ve seen theories that say that oil and gas are natural products of mother earth and NOT fossil fuels. Don’t know how much I believe this theory BUT how many moons around the gas giants have thick methane atmospheres or lakes of other hydrocarbons? They weren’t produced by prehistoric life.

DerKrieger on July 31, 2008 at 3:19 PM

Exactly. NASA recently announced pools of hydrocarbons on the Saturn moon of Titan. The chances of life ever existing on the Titan moon is exactly zero, so the oil there didn’t come from the dinosaurs. Very doubtful the oil and other raw resources collectively called “fossil fuels” came from dinosaurs either. Science tells us that coal is about a half-billion years old, yet we know that wood can be turned into coal in about a month under the right conditions. I believe the evidence points to the earth making oil in some natural process. If that’s true, then oil is a renewable resource.

Maxx on July 31, 2008 at 5:51 PM

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 5:50 PM

What factual evidence do you have to present to all of us to back up your claim that if McCain is elected, then all of America will suffer 15 to 20 years of liberalism?

In your opinion.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:52 PM

And you constantly lie about McCain, saying that he wanted to leave the republican party, twice. This is not true. This is what the democrats claim.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:38 PM

Democrats claiming something does not mean it is untrue. Can you get your mind around that?

The 2004 allegation McCain responded that it was “not offered”. Specifically that language. And again, coming from someone who claimed he “never supported amnesty”, when he did, which makes him a liar, I’m less inclined to believe him.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:54 PM

Why is that?

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 5:47 PM

Stop accusing people here that you disagree with of being somehow associated with the Obama campaign and liberal sites like MoveOn or Kos, you worthless little creep.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:56 PM

I don’t have the $ to get my car regularly tuned up because the evil Bushnazi hates brown people and people are struggling and Bush lied and Rove fixed the elections and…and…and…

SouthernGent on July 31, 2008 at 6:02 PM

“somehow associated with the Obama campaign”?

That’s an interesting concept. And something that Ididn’t say.

*Very interesting, indeed……*

What I said was “What you want is exactly what the democrats want, for McCain to loose.” Is that a correct assessment? Or is this comment not true. Please tell me.

*Hmm, I find it interesting that Madison”Conservative” is so adament that he is not part of the Obama campaign.*

It’s like the things that make you go Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:04 PM

DerKrieger on July 31, 2008 at 3:19 PM

Maxx on July 31, 2008 at 5:51 PM

Abiogenesis.

Wouldn’t it be nice? (Pet Sounds = Sheer Genius.)

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:04 PM

But any incremental good McCain will do as compared to Obama pales in comparison to the damage McCain will do to Republicans and conservatives.

And again. We can undo just about anything Bambi can do, or do anything he won’t do. Except amnesty. And we’ll have an easier time defeating amnesty with President Bambi than President McCain.

I’d rather Bambi discredit liberalism than a squish discredit conservatism. Not much potential short-term upside and huge potential long-term downside to President McSquish. More certain potential short-term downside, but a larger potential long-term upside with Bambi.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 4:54 PM

Once again you are gambling, you are assuming Obama will discredit liberalism, I say he will defend it and increase its power.
Obama plan for amnesty goes further then McCain, but lets just say they are at least the same, a disaster. How is allowing Obama going to help the nation?

And we’ll have an easier time defeating amnesty with President Bambi than President McCain.

This is the philosophical difference between you and I. I think it is easier to defeat amnesty with out man in the office then with Obama, and congress fully entrenched. Once again, it is a gamble, neither one of us knows which is better. However, I will leave you with this. What political strategist has ever said or would ever say, losing a major race, is an advantage because when they mess up we will get it back. If you used your logic in a political strategy meeting, any side of the aisle, they would laugh you out of the room…it just doesn’t make sense to throw away an opportunity to stay in power. Giving the other side the upper hand in the next race does not compute on any level.
To win back a seat takes tremendous effort, so you are essentially giving Obama 8 years…a lot of damage, and without any gain in your “amnesty” plan.
Just a different opinion, I would just like to see some instance where a planned loss a campaign is an advantage.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 6:05 PM

I’m less inclined to believe him.
MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 5:54 PM

Yes, I know, you are less inclined to believe a republican(McCain) and more inclined to believe the democrats(their version of John Kerry’s offer to McCain that he turned down.)

So, tell me something new here. I knew that about you already.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:06 PM

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:04 PM

So you’re not going to answer my question. That’s too bad.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:06 PM

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:04 PM

_man, I don’t think you’re giving yourself enough credit. Your incessant and obnoxious cheerleading do more to turn people off to McCain than I could ever hope to do.

Kinda makes you wonder about where your REAL loyalties lie, hmmmmmmm?

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:07 PM

I would just like to see some instance where a planned loss a campaign is an advantage.
right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 6:05 PM

Advantage? To the other side, yes.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:07 PM

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:07 PM

Oh, I see. You you don’t want people to vote for McCain, you are advocating this here, you won’t answer the question about how you are going to go about making your vision for America (President Obama) true, and you won’t explain how McCain will give us 15 to 20 years of liberalism ….. and I am working for the other side by advocating that we defeat Obama.

Gotta love that logic.

And you constantly use the “_man” to refer to me. I’ve been keeping count. Do you want to know how many it’s been so far? But yeah, this isn’t “harassing” at all.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:11 PM

Yes, I know, you are less inclined to believe a republican(McCain) and more inclined to believe the democrats(their version of John Kerry’s offer to McCain that he turned down.)

So, tell me something new here. I knew that about you already.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:06 PM

No, I’m less inclined to believe a liar, like someone who says they didn’t support something, when they did. Conflate all you like, since your intellectual dishonesty certainly seems capable of it.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 6:14 PM

Instead, we hear the same kind of hysterical rhetoric today that we heard in 1977. “National catastrophe” has turned into “global climate catastrophe”, but otherwise the rest of it sounds exactly the same. Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are nothing but Jimmy Carter retreads.

Happy 20th anniversary, Rush. You keep proving why you’re indispensable.

Two awesome statements simply because they are the truth, and nothing but truth. Very good thread despite the typical anger/hatred spewed by the trolls.

Liberalism has no new ideas, can’t have new ideas. Liberalism is nothing more than failed ideas dressed up with different suits and masks; marketed by a media that is made-up purely by Liberals who have become increasingly visible due to their anger as it relates to their inability to “shape the news” to fit their agenda-ego’s. Liberalism is old and tired no matter how you dress it up; no matter how young, cute, handsome, or charismatic the messenger is.

I’m thankful for Rush Limbaugh. Rush has a gift, and he has shared that gift with millions of us for 20 years now. I’m wishing for another 20 years minimum. I totally understand why Liberals and Democrats hate Rush; he has pulled the mask right off their face, and revealed an ugliness (evil) that most of didn’t know existed. The monopoly Democrats once enjoyed over the brainwash will never again be achieved. Rush (and others that have followed) will continue to educate the people no matter what these creatures throw at him.

Keemo on July 31, 2008 at 6:18 PM

Madison”Conservative”

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:04 PM

I’ll go with the words of a really wise man: “There you go again.”

You haven’t the integrity, intelligence, or a shred of evidence to impugn my political beliefs. The fact that you continue to do so with everyone you disagree with is both laughable and despicable. You have yet to defend your candidate whom to you refuse to listen to criticism about, or else you outright slander anyone who brings factual documented evidence to the table showing he is anything but conservative. You have no place challenging the conservative values of others when you blindly attack those who see the lack of same in your candidate.

You lose. Good day, sir.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 6:20 PM

This is the philosophical difference between you and I. I think it is easier to defeat amnesty with out man in the office then with Obama, and congress fully entrenched. Once again, it is a gamble, neither one of us knows which is better.

Here’s how: With President McCain pushing it, Republicans will be subjected to more pressure to “support the President.” Republicans at the margin will be swayed to vote for amnesty. Even those who don’t actually vote for amnesty will at the very least mute their criticism of it. The more Republicans vote for it, and the less criticism they offer, the more cover they give Democrats from conservative districts to vote for it.

With President Bambi, the Republicans are much more likely to present a united front and attack, attack, attack, giving those Democrats less cover. And we will need Democrats to block amnesty.

However, I will leave you with this. What political strategist has ever said or would ever say, losing a major race, is an advantage because when they mess up we will get it back. If you used your logic in a political strategy meeting, any side of the aisle, they would laugh you out of the room…it just doesn’t make sense to throw away an opportunity to stay in power. Giving the other side the upper hand in the next race does not compute on any level.

I don’t advocate it as a general rule. But these are very special circumstances.

Bambi is an inexperienced elitest socialist without a clue. His chances of screwing up are higher than average. Did Carter give the Democrats an advantage in 1980?

McCain is a squish, and on the very large and well-known issues of global warmism and amnesty, he’s not a squish, he’s a damned liberal. Which means he’s also a liberal on energy, because there is no way to fight global warmism and simultaneously be for cheaper energy. He can talk all he wants, but it’s unprincipled and incoherent.

And he’s going to face a Democrat-dominated Congress if he wins. If he was conservative, if he was inclined to fight and not go along and be all bipartisanship-y, it’d be tough.

And again. The party of the Presidency loses seats in the mid-terms. I’d like the Republicans to gain seats.

To win back a seat takes tremendous effort, so you are essentially giving Obama 8 years…a lot of damage, and without any gain in your “amnesty” plan.
Just a different opinion, I would just like to see some instance where a planned loss a campaign is an advantage.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 6:05 PM

Oh come on. What about Carter? No parallels? And no, I’m NOT saying that Bambi will produce the next Reagan. I’m saying he’ll discredit liberalism.

Of course a campaign, or a party, will never plan to lose. I could care less about the campaigns or the parties, except to the extent that they represent liberalism and conservatism. So I can’t agree that losing is ALWAYS bad for a party, and more importantly, a philosophy, especially in the long run.

Did Carter not produce 20+ years of very large gains in conservatism?

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:25 PM

And you constantly use the “_man” to refer to me. I’ve been keeping count. Do you want to know how many it’s been so far? But yeah, this isn’t “harassing” at all.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:11 PM

I gotta tell you, _man, the alternating bullying and whining is giving me whiplash.

I’d be happy to compare your posting history to mine. I don’t recall telling anybody they were “trash,” or telling them to “get the hell out of here” and go to Kos or HuffPo, or screaming and frothing at the mouth about “lying liars who lie about John McCain.”

Pathetic.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:28 PM

Stop it with the flashbacks. I thought I had effectively blocked out the 70s.

Trainwreck on July 31, 2008 at 6:29 PM

‘The fact that you continue to do so with everyone you disagree with’
MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 6:20 PM

Hey, look at that. Another lie. There are a lot of people who ‘disagree with’ who don’t troll me and make an a$$ out of themselves with worthless strawman arguments and lies like you do. Go read this website. Your version of events looks nothing like what is actually going on here. Go ahead, look.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:35 PM

And then, there’s the very important (to me) goal of sending a message to Republicans that folks like John McCain are unacceptable.

Don’t see any other way to accomplish that. Also part of saving conservatism.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:35 PM

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:25 PM

So you are still not going to answer any of my questions such as “Are you going to vote for Obama so your desire becomes true? Or are you going to leave this up to chance by not participating in the election.” Because “you’d rather” have Obama. I asked after you said:

I’d rather Bambi discredit liberalism than a squish discredit conservatism. Not much potential short-term upside and huge potential long-term downside to President McSquish. More certain potential short-term downside, but a larger potential long-term upside with Bambi.
misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 4:54 PM

Or how we’ll have 15 to 20 years of liberalism because of McCain.

Because I’d really like tohear the answers to these two questions.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:39 PM

And then, there’s the very important (to me) goal of sending a message to Republicans that folks like John McCain are unacceptable.
Don’t see any other way to accomplish that. Also part of saving conservatism.
misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:35 PM

You know when that would have been an awesome time to do this? During the republican primary, before McCain got the most votes to get the republican nomination.

Are you also going to be talking about the election, after the election is over, just like you are talking about not picking McCain, after the republican primaries are over?

That was a question. You could answer that. That would be oh so nice if you would.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 6:41 PM

Item: Next Political Ad

Today, we have at least six Saudi Arabias in oil shale alone, let alone what we can get from ANWR and the OCS — and just like in the Carter era, the Democrats won’t let us get it.

Start Production Immediately………..

Seven Percent Solution on July 31, 2008 at 5:27 PM

I like it!

He could also add:

“And those who don’t want to drill need to explain how wind and solar are going to work for our airlines, our merchant marine, and our military.”

landlines on July 31, 2008 at 6:49 PM

1) McCain won’t discredit conservatism because he’s not a constervative. Only conservatives can discredit conservatism–by violating their supposed beliefs. McCain calls himself a ‘moderate’ more often that he refers to himself as a ‘conservative’; he’s not trying to fool anyone here, and couldn’t if he tried

2) Obama is a far left as McGovern, but in 1972 the MSM was ridiculing McGovern’s ideas while now they are either hiding his views or promoting them. Time Mag had a cover with McGovern dressed as Robin Hood in 1972; in 2008 they and NutsWeek have Obama as the Actual Messiah on their
covers

3) Some peopple seem to want a re=play of 1992, when two years of Clinton brought 52-seat switch in the House and 8 in the Senate and Repub majorities. I lived through 93 and 94 and don’t want that again ( except for the Cowboys )
—and besides, Obama is far left enough to make Clinton look like Karl Mundt ( R-SD ) in comparison

Janos Hunyadi on July 31, 2008 at 6:56 PM

I’m still waiting for these “McCain or Die” folks to explain how President McSquish, who is going to discredit conservatism for 15-20 years (thanks partly to folks like them insisting that he’s a conservative) with his stupid and costly policies on amnesty and global warmism, is better than sucking it up and letting President Bambi discredit liberalism for 15-20 years and swing the Congress back to Republicans.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 4:36 PM

I’m not exactly a fan of McCain, but I think I can explain.

Obama is going cede US sovereignty to the United Nations on at least four separate issues, and once it’s ceded, it’s never coming back. We’ll become subject to the UN’s foreign aid requirements, to the World Court, to carbon taxes and other UN taxes, and probably to UN hate crimes legislation. Oh, and don’t be surprised if you see UN troops monitoring US elections.

And that’s on top of yet another round of activist judges, who will perpetuate the Progressive anti-civilization nightmare another 40 years.

What we need is a few years of conservative activism to kick corrupt semi-Republicans out of Congress, and recover the Republican brand name for conservatism. McCain buys us that, probably with a pair of Supreme Court judges (who may or may not be conservatives, but you know precisely what we’ll get from Obama.)

If McCain does not win this election, the Republic is over.

(Unrelated to this topic, please visit my political/cultural blog, “Plumb Bob Blog: Squaring the Culture.” Thanks.)

philwynk on July 31, 2008 at 7:01 PM

Did Carter not produce 20+ years of very large gains in conservatism?

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:25 PM

That is the gamble I was talking about, no sane political mind would ever enter a race, ever state that it would be okay to lose because xyz will happpen. The world does no run like a clock.
The best political minds would always be to gain control, and then work within to change. Your assumption that McCain in power would squelch any real attempt at turning the party conservative, shows you have no faith in the conservative party.
The arguments you make are almost identical to the Perot supporters that gave us 8 years of Clinton.
History (recent) is on my side…you lose, and you lose for 8 years.
You can stay home and hope Obama gets elected, I will hold my nose and do everything to make sure Obama is not our president. That is your choice…Obama or McCain, and to think the two are equal is pure emotion, there is no fact to that.
National security, military, energy, taxes, Social Security, education, states rights, supreme court appointments,they are worlds apart on all of these issues…forget about some of those?
But it has been interesting, I have a feeling if it turns out Obama, you will be regretting it for years…ever run into anyone who voted for Perot?

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:02 PM

I’m saying he’ll discredit liberalism.

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 6:25 PM

BTW, that is an oxymoron…or is it redundant…well let me put it this way, how can you discredit something already in ruin.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:04 PM

Obama is going cede US sovereignty to the United Nations on at least four separate issues, and once it’s ceded, it’s never coming back. We’ll become subject to the UN’s foreign aid requirements, to the World Court, to carbon taxes and other UN taxes, and probably to UN hate crimes legislation. Oh, and don’t be surprised if you see UN troops monitoring US elections.
philwynk on July 31, 2008 at 7:01 PM

I am glad you brought that up. That escaped me completely. He will undoubtedly concede to the U.N.
If they think amnesty is bad, wait until the U.N. stick their nose in our tent…along with their demands of “equality”.
Just a great point, that I have not seen brought up. And a most important one. In 8 years do you think we will ever get out nation back, once it has gone “global”.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:08 PM

Ronald Reagan relaxed restrictions and tax penalties on production, and the energy crisis abated.

Maybe that is referring to some different “energy crisis”, as the “energy crisis” that I so vividly recall, block long lines to get any gas, was the one that happened because of the oil embargo, which ended when the oil embargo ended.

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 7:13 PM

philwynk on July 31, 2008 at 7:01 PM

What an excellent site, I just cruised through and you did a very good job and some excellent editorials.
Ed Morrissey, take a look at this blog. Some excellent writing.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:15 PM

What Mr. McCain almost never mentions are two extraordinary moments in his political past that are at odds with the candidate of the present: His discussions in 2001 with Democrats about leaving the Republican Party, and his conversations in 2004 with Senator John Kerry about becoming Mr. Kerry’s running mate on the Democratic presidential ticket.

“Sen. Clinton has earned great respect for her tenacity and courage. The media often overlooked how compassionately she spoke to the concerns and dreams of millions of Americans, and she deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received.

“As the father of three daughters, I owe her a debt for inspiring millions of women to believe there is no opportunity in this great country beyond their reach. I am proud to call her my friend.”

“[Expletive] you! I know more about this than anyone else in the room,” shouted McCain at Cornyn. McCain helped craft a bill in 2006 that passed the Senate but couldn’t be compromised with a House bill that was much tougher on illegal immigrants.

…former President Bill Clinton had high praise for the man who has clinched the nomination for the other party.

Mr. Clinton said all three major candidates remaining in the race are talented and special people.

He did not go into detail on Sen. Barack Obama, the Illinois Senator still locked in political combat with Sen. Clinton’s wife for the Democratic nomination. Their next battle takes place next month in Pennsylvania.

But McCain, who Mr. Clinton said is a “moderate”, “has given about all you can give for this country without dyin’ for it.”

He said McCain was on the right side of issues like being against torture of enemy combatants and global warming, which “just about crosses the bridge for them (Republicans).

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 7:16 PM

Okay something is wrong with the link

philwynk on July 31, 2008 at 7:01 PM

go back to this and click on his link.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:18 PM

BTW, that is an oxymoron…or is it redundant…well let me put it this way, how can you discredit something already in ruin.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:04 PM

Because many people don’t know it is in ruin, due to the MSM painting it as a rose garden by using doublespeak.

MadisonConservative on July 31, 2008 at 7:18 PM

Our decision about energy will test the character of the American people and the ability of the President and the Congress to govern this Nation. This difficult effort will be the “moral equivalent of war,” except that we will be uniting our efforts to build and not to destroy.

I think we flunked that test.

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 7:19 PM

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 7:16 PM

Troll!!

Lying liar saying lying liar things about Juan McKennedy John McCain!!!

If he is elected, Obama will destroy all life on this planet, and probably even on Mars if there is any life on Mars, and you are going to cause that to happen by saying lying liar things about Juan McKennedy John McCain!!!

Go back to daily kos!!!

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 7:26 PM

No it doesn’t mean that you are a “non-conservative”, it just means you are willing to gamble that the rest of us will keep a Republican in the office, to pave the way for real conservatives to make a better choice next time. If Obama gets elected, wait 8 years, and be in a worse position to turn it around…but then you have heard this before, but it is mainly for others that still are pondering.

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 4:32 PM

Ever since Reagan was elected, all we have been given as a choice of president has been a liberal, so nothing changes.

Johan Klaus on July 31, 2008 at 7:26 PM

luckybogey on July 31, 2008 at 5:45 PM

This all got started with someone asking if the rumor that back during the 70′s gas crisis, for a lack of a better term, there were full tankers not docking, to allow the oil prices to rise even higher. I personally saw an unusal number waiting before the Bay Bridge Tunnel but there may have been many reasons why that was. Several excellent reasons, including yours, were brought up but the sheer numbers are hard to explain. I am thinking a labor strike or something similar but since the question is still being asked I guess I am not the only one that noticed. All in the past, we have new and exciting things to deal with now.

Cindy Munford on July 31, 2008 at 7:27 PM

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 7:16 PM

When you span three decades, you make thousands of decisions, and make hundreds of friends…on a different level then the “enemy”.
Hatch wrote a love song to Kennedy…
what you are doing is “Googling” to support your position…fine, but it doesn’t change that if Obama gets elected we lose so much. Social Security, millitary and what was just broached, the U.N. and “bending over” to foreign powers.
You worry that he thinks highly of Peolosi as an individual…ever work side by side with her? Or side by side with Hillary? Ever spend time talking about their family or kids with them? As Senators they see so much more then we do. We see sound bites, they see people. Their are many stories of bitter political rivals, who share their house and family with each other…Mary Matlin and who?
The dems are not alway the “enemy”, just on opposite sides of many issues. Now Obama, he is an enemy (a Marxist, with Ayers and his pastor).
I have seen your dozen quotes dozen of times…a dozen actions over 24 years…

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:28 PM

Ever since Reagan was elected, all we have been given as a choice of president has been a liberal, so nothing changes.

Johan Klaus on July 31, 2008 at 7:26 PM

Well then, stop complaining, if you have a better choice let’s hear it and then we accept or deny.
Names please?

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:30 PM

Well then, stop complaining, if you have a better choice let’s hear it and then we accept or deny.
Names please?

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:30 PM

1) Find a phone book.
2) Close your eyes.
3) Open it up at random (the phone book, not one of your eyes).
4) Run your fingers around one of the open pages.
5) Hold that finger steady.
6) Open your eyes.
7) Read name.

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 7:39 PM

Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson instead of Bob Dole, George Bush 1&2, and John McCain.

Johan Klaus on July 31, 2008 at 7:42 PM

Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson instead of Bob Dole, George Bush 1&2, and John McCain.

Johan Klaus on July 31, 2008 at 7:42 PM

We have a winner!

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 7:47 PM

Although I did kind of like Bob Dole. He became a “stand up” guy later on.

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 7:48 PM

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 7:39 PM

That’s what I thought, whining but no solution…thanks

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:55 PM

Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson instead of Bob Dole, George Bush 1&2, and John McCain.

Johan Klaus on July 31, 2008 at 7:42 PM

And how did Tom do in the poles
How did Hunter (one of my favorites) do in the poles
How did, well we know how Thompson did, he never woke up from his nap.
So you gave me three losers who had their shot…
So now give me three winners…
You see in politics you just can’t have the “right” ideas, you have to be able to actually win the nomination.
I was hoping you would have come up with three that could win…

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:59 PM

That’s what I thought, whining but no solution…thanks

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:55 PM

That’s what I thought, you can lead a McMule to water but you can’t make him drink, and once again you have confirmed it.…thanks

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 8:01 PM

And how did Tom do in the poles
How did Hunter (one of my favorites) do in the poles

right2bright on July 31, 2008 at 7:59 PM

Isn’t Tancredo Italian and Hunter, maybe English? I think it was Ford who liberated Poland.

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 8:04 PM

Although I did kind of like Bob Dole. He became a “stand up” guy later on.
MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 7:48 PM

I’d weep for joy if we could suddenly have Bob Dole as the nominee now.

As to solution: the big one is to change the stupid primary system where (mostly) states that do not have many conservatives in them, and many of them allowing crossover voters, get to, in effect, limit the choices of the voters of the later states. By the time I got to vote, McCain was the ONLY Republican Presidential candidate still actually running.

And if anyone says that the solution is to move to an early primary state if it means so much to me, as they did when we discussed this several times previously, let me save time and call you a dum-bass right now.

It is, admittedly too late now to prevent a 2008 disaster. Only an act of God can help us now. The entire political system has been so completely FUBARed with this election cycle,that I don’t see much chance of it getting better… ever.

Maybe, just maybe, if Obama gets in and makes an absolute mess it will force the ‘The Powers that Be’ to try to fix things, but if we conservatives reward repeated RNC idiocy by electing McCain, their bad behavior will be reinforced, not corrected.

They (the RNC) weren’t bright enough to grasp the lesson of 2006. If they are capable of learning at all, getting smacked upside the head really hard in 2008 MIGHT get their attention. I don’t have much expectation that they are capable of learning, but it is my only hope.

LegendHasIt on July 31, 2008 at 8:21 PM

MB4 on July 31, 2008 at 7:26 PM

Funny. I do this like once or twice, and you people do this about 20 times just in the last week alone.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 8:22 PM

So did misterpeasea answer my question yet? I don’t see it.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 8:23 PM

As to solution: the big one is to change the stupid primary system where (mostly) states that do not have many conservatives in them, and many of them allowing crossover voters, get to, in effect, limit the choices of the voters of the later states. By the time I got to vote, McCain was the ONLY Republican Presidential candidate still actually running.

LegendHasIt on July 31, 2008 at 8:21 PM

Exactly.

Anna on July 31, 2008 at 8:25 PM

This is 1976 all over again, very depressing. Although I won’t cry will watching Ronnie lose the nomination like I did back then. I thought then that neither guy (Carter or Ford) could do much damage. Fat lot I knew and Carter is the gift that keeps on giving.

Cindy Munford on July 31, 2008 at 8:50 PM

Well, well. Look who’s a bunch of LYING LIARS WHO LIE ABOUT JOHN MCCAIN AND ARE SECRET OBAMA OPERATIVES AND WANT THE SAME THINGS AS MOVEON.ORG AND THE DEMOCRATS AND SHOULD GO ON OVER TO KOS OR HUFFPO WITH THE REST OF THE TRASH AND WHO SHOULD REALIZE THAT THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY IS OVER AND GET OVER IT AND SUPPORT JOHN MCCAIN BECAUSE HE IS SO A CONSERVATIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Few House Republicans have contributed to Sen. John McCain since he clinched the Republican nomination at the end of February…

Only 21 House Republicans have given to McCain from their personal campaign accounts since he became the presumptive GOP nominee four and a half months ago…

McCain has clashed throughout his career with House Republicans on issues ranging from immigration to campaign finance reform to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. A survey by The Hill in June found more than a dozen House Republicans who refused to endorse McCain, even though he will be the party’s standard-bearer this fall…

Who’da thunk it? All but 21 House Republicans are secret Obama operatives and LYING LIARS WHO LIE ABOUT JOHN MCCAIN!!!!!!

misterpeasea on July 31, 2008 at 9:42 PM

And it will be 40 times before the week is out.

wise_man on July 31, 2008 at 9:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3