http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200901/end-of-whiteness

Seems that post-partisan means post-white (liberal) and post-white is supposed to be a good thing. Post partisan seems to mean only “post-white” liberals can discuss race. Seems this is just another PC trap. Will, Brooks, Kristol, Krauthammer, et al are seeking to be labeled good post-white, conservatives.

Seems the author thinks that all whites are “white.”

OTOH, I would direct you to the infamous Stuff that White People Like.

Is the love of golf or coffee more definitively white?

They (liberals) scratch, claw, bite, kick, spit. They win over and over.

Because they have the willing compliance of the MSM to run interfereance and distract from the fact that they have nothing of substance.

One more thing that I’m going to add, and then I’m done with this thread. Liberals, haven’t won “over and over.” They have only one the last two elections, and hadn’t won a Presidential election with a majority since Carter until Obama. That’s not a very good track record for the “scratching, clawing, biting, kicking, and spitting” crew.

No.

You made my point for me. We (conservatives) play nice and put country first. We lose over and over.

Actually, when it’s a true battle of ideas we win, over and over (see Reagan, Gingritch, Bush, the 2002 midterms). It’s when we abandon those ideas that we lose.

They (liberals) scratch, claw, bite, kick, spit. They win over and over.

Because they have the willing compliance of the MSM to run interfereance and distract from the fact that they have nothing of substance. It is going to be real interesting in 5 days when they can no longer be simply against Bush. They scratch, claw, bite, kick and spit because they have no ideas. Now they have to govern. They can’t hide behind “Them eeeeeeevil re-thug-licans” anymore. They own the whole thing and they will have to defend their decisions.

If you want to be an honorable loser, so be it.

When did I say I wanted to lose? All I said was that I don’t want a disasterous Presidency foisted on this country for the sake of political gain.

Do I think Obama is going to be a successful President? No, absolutely not. I think he’ll either be a one-termer, or a very ineffectual two-termer (see Clinton, Bill). Given his Cabinet appointments, he doesn’t represent “Teh Change” that he ran on, but the promised third Clinton term we were going to get with Hillary.

But he’s the President, and that means that he has to run the country. Tearing him down like the Left did to Bush won’t do the country, or conservatism any good. The battle of ideas, the battle that we always win, is how we’ll regain the White House and Congress.

I would rather be a no-so-honorable winner myself.

A safe, secure, and prosperous America is more important to me than scoring political points. But if that’s what you want, then good luck with that. Just don’t come celebrating to me when there’s a crater where Manhattan used to be.

Hollow are the Obami!

Not my best work, but passable.

In 10 years when your income tax rate is 70%, the 20 million illegals are new citizen and you have to wait 3 months to see a doctor thanks to our “FREE” health care system, you can be secure in knowing you didn’t stoop to their level and make yourself feel better.

angryed on January 15, 2009 at 10:02 AM

Are we Brothers?

If, and I said IF your a Woman, I think I love you!

You tell em’, give em’ hell!

+ 3.7 million (same price going for the virgin)

Internet Warrior

You know, I thought that to be a conservative meant putting the country first before any ideological squabbling, that America was far bigger and more important than left vs right. I thought that it was the Left that put ideology before everything else. If I’m wrong, and we’ve been reduced to two sides trying to tear each other down and render each other useless, then we truly are done as a country and an ideal.

crazy_legs on January 14, 2009 at 4:56 PM

You made my point for me. We (conservatives) play nice and put country first. We lose over and over.

They (liberals) scratch, claw, bite, kick, spit. They win over and over.

If you want to be an honorable loser, so be it. I would rather be a no-so-honorable winner myself. But from what I am reading these days, it looks like conservatives, at least in the media would rather be liked by O-bambi than put up a fight.

In 10 years when your income tax rate is 70%, the 20 million illegals are new citizen and you have to wait 3 months to see a doctor thanks to our “FREE” health care system, you can be secure in knowing you didn’t stoop to their level and make yourself feel better.

Don’t kid yourself, this guy is slicker than a greased eel . . . he’d charm and co-op the devil if he thought it would further his Marxist agendas. Relax at your own peril.

rplat on January 14, 2009 at 11:18 AM

Exactly right.

Is Obama a real post-partisan?

No. But he is very clearly a post-intellectual. No smarts needed, these days …

And check this out.

And that is why the conservative movement is dead. From the day Bush was declared winner in FL, the left’s only mission was his destruction. And it worked very well with 2006 and 2008 (and 2010/2012 most likely) seeing unimaginable success for the far left.

What do conservatives do? Wish Obama well and hope he succeeds. With that kind of attitude you better start practicing the terms “Democrat Filibuster Proof Majority” and “Democrat President-Elect”, they will be with us for decades to come.

angryed on January 14, 2009 at 2:58 PM

It only looks dead.

I will not be charmed, I will not be charmed, I will not be charmed (tapping heels togather).

Who ever said that this crowd of DC insiders signaled post-partisanship? Liberals like Will or Brooks don’t speak for the GOP- at best they can be called pundits.

angryed on January 14, 2009 at 2:58 PM

Wow. Just… wow.

You know, I thought that to be a conservative meant putting the country first before any ideological squabbling, that America was far bigger and more important than left vs right. I thought that it was the Left that put ideology before everything else. If I’m wrong, and we’ve been reduced to two sides trying to tear each other down and render each other useless, then we truly are done as a country and an ideal.

Look, the bottom line is that taking the Left’s tactics isn’t going to work for us. The Left had the willing compliance of the MSM through the whole Bush admin. We’re not going to have that. And frankly, I don’t want to stoop to their gutter level, because we’re going to come out of it smelling like sh*t. Or do you want to start rumors – like a reversal of the Trig Palin crap. Because if that’s the kind of fight we’re going to get into with Obama, please leave me out of it. I’d much rather wage a battle of ideas.

Post-partisan? Or did you mean post-menopausal; because he can play the game but can’t produce the goods?

Done That on January 14, 2009 at 4:08 PM

It’s really postpartum.

Nov. 04 the baby was born.

Now, it’s time to nurse it.

Noted liberal economist Paul Krugman

Comedy gold. How he even has a job is beyond me. Such a pillock.

Obviously, Obama could not push a supply-side-only stimulus package through a heavily Democrat Congress eager for socialist-New Deal giveaways, and the recent bridge collapse in Minnesota shows that some attention to “infrastructure” is needed. But a two-pronged supply-side plus Keynesian stimulus will probably work better than a strict New Deal approach (which prolonged the Depression in FDR’s time), and Democrats in Congress would have a hard time explaining to the voters why they repealed in 2010 tax breaks they passed in 2009.

Is Obama really post-partisan? That remains to be seen, since he isn’t president yet, and talk is cheap, until he has to persuade a Democrat Congress eager for bear to pass a stimulus package including TAX CUTS. But just maybe Obama might have asked Sweet Caroline what her daddy did to stimulate the economy when Obambi was a toddler in Hawaii, and the toddler might have taken her advice.

Reagan, he’s not, but could Obama be the next JFK, not the next FDR or Carter?

Kudlow: Obama Takes Page from Reagan
Conservative economist Larry Kudlow says President-elect Barack Obama’s huge stimulus plan is starting to look less typically Democrat and more like what Republican icon Ronald Reagan enacted as president in the 1980s.

“Ronald Reagan said government was the problem, not the solution. Dealing with a bad recession like this one, the Gipper lowered taxes and domestic spending,” Kudlow writes in his column.

“Obama on the other hand has offered an $800 billion package, with plenty of infrastructure spending that alleges to create three million jobs.”

Yet it’s interesting, he notes, to see just how much the Obama plan has changed since Election Day.

“The size has been roughly constant. But the mix of tax cuts and spending increases is now totally different,” Kudlow says.

Rather than spending $100 billion on tax credits, Obama now is offering $300 billion worth of tax cuts. This includes a tax cut for business, more expensing for small-business investment, and a restoration of the five-year tax-loss carry-back, which will help banks and home developers.

“This might even result in tax refunds for businesses, and might also allow banks to rid themselves of toxic assets, since the losses will now be spread over many years,” said Kudlow.

Kudlow says Obama’s economic have been bragging that the tax-cut package is very pro-growth. “And you know what? I acknowledge it. People like Larry Summers, Austan Goolsbee, Christy Romer, and Tim Geithner are no left-wing, big-government whackos,” Kudlow writes.

The conservative drift of the stimulus plan is not being embraced by some economists, however.

Noted liberal economist Paul Krugman wants a much larger spending component for the stimulus proposal, he writes in his New York Times blog.

“This plan looks too weak,” Krugman warns.

© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

What do conservatives do? Wish Obama well and hope he succeeds. With that kind of attitude you better start practicing the terms “Democrat Filibuster Proof Majority” and “Democrat President-Elect”, they will be with us for decades to come.

angryed on January 14, 2009 at 2:58 PM

Wow.

Country be damned, the citizens be damned, we’ve got a movement to save? Just work to bring down that bastard who hasn’t even been sworn in yet, before he can even make any decisions?

Enjoy.

You don’t want to end up dead, at dawn! I was trained by communist Soldiers.

Entelechy on January 14, 2009 at 3:14 PM

I was trained by ninjas.

In a volcano.