But I must say you demoralize me because if your sentiments carry the day in the republican then it is not party for me. I will not be a part of the destruction of this once great nation, even if we do get to win elections in the process. Someone has to be the adults and make the hard/unpopular but good for our nation decisions.

The last 8 years of repubs going off into
-massive out of control earmarks
-BIGG/Biggest yet government expansion
-Debt Debt Debt
-Corruption
-MORE expanded government regulation
-out right imoralistic foot tappping gay horing & even freeking Foley gay/minor love
-Then the Cherry TRILLION DOLLAR bailout and nationalization of the entire upper echelon of our economy
-And a parting gift of a failed broken lost part of TWO TRILLION in “non-disclosed” government loans ontop of a now 1 TRILLION further Obama Stimulous.

Had nothing to do with the republican collapse. Those above things nothing at all.

Lets Blame instead the few of US who still have principles that we hold to and don’t put payoff prices on. Even better lets just silence the few voices that can explain those principles in terms the gen pop can understand.

Yes I see the brilliance now, lets just continue with our successful great election winning strategy that has been so effective over the last 2 elections. Lets keep trying to be democrat light and not another option that stands polar opposite to Liberals quasi-socialism. Lets all just compete over the 30% of the liberal population’s vote, f*ck the rest of the country like myself they are just knuckle draggers anyway.

I dont know if we should “give up” out principles. But maybe give up keeping loudmouth, arrogant blowhards the keys to the car and letting him drive.

Squid Shark on January 30, 2009 at 11:08 PM

True. Like you, I’ve about had my fill of David Frum.

sethstorm on January 31, 2009 at 12:01 PM

Well at least you have your talking points down.

Where did you receive that doctorate in drivel?

For example Rudy is much more articulate about 80% of the conservative policies even though he is pro-choice than McCain ever was with a 100% pro-life record…….
goat on January 30, 2009 at 11:14 PM

McCain is not 100% pro-life. http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2008/cbarchive_20080822.html

I have been complimented many times and they always embarrass me. I always feel that they have not said enough.
– Mark Twain

MB4 on January 30, 2009 at 11:59 PM

Isn’t that the kind of self sarcasm that Rush uses all the time. Calling himself MahaRushdie, El rushbo , my brilliant plan etc.

The left want to misjudge it as “self-aggrandizing” , and then they Heil Obama..

the_nile on January 31, 2009 at 6:03 AM

Give this man a cigar.
- Mark Twain

He can speak for me, though, if he likes.

I’m all for doing away with loopholes and just having people pay a straight percentage of income in taxes. But until that time comes, utilizing legal loopholes in order to reduce the amount of taxes you pay, and neglecting to pay taxes at all are vastly different from one another.

One obeys the law, the other does not. Therefore, there is no hypocrisy in what Ann(?) said.

Are tax havens illegal? I know failure to pay is.

ddrintn on January 31, 2009 at 12:18 PM

It’s according to you definition of is.

Only as a penalty. Otherwise, I am for the enforcement of the tax law and the removal of end-runs around it.

sethstorm on January 31, 2009 at 11:35 AM

As a penalty for who; the producers?

Looks to me with this porkulus bill that Obama is guaranteeing himself a Jimmy Carter one term, and the rise of a new Reagan in 2012 is inevitable.

These elitists will destroy the GOP, if they haven’t already.

DrStock on January 31, 2009 at 1:28 PM

I love how populism is OK only when attacking smart people.

These elitists will destroy the GOP, if they haven’t already.

Contract on (middle) America.

sethstorm on January 31, 2009 at 12:01 PM

Newt’s Contract With America demonstrated a striking contrast between democrat and republican politicians as the Gingrich led Congress kept their promises while the commie inspired libs never do.

The Obamination is just another fine example of how the libs dash hope against the rocks, and their dedication to no change. :oP

Our choices were slim, but instead of seeking out a better leader, Rush decided to half-heartedly support McCain because he “wasn’t Obama.” He supported the defacto RINO rather than promote a better alternative. In other words, he accepts whatever (R) gets handed to him. If more people had that terrible “party zeal” attitude, Reagan never would have been elected.

Rush would gain more stature in my eyes if he would support the real conservative, not the wealthy (R) who comes close.

TMK on January 31, 2009 at 11:28 AM

It’s not Rush’s fault that we didn’t get a better candidate: the only “real Conservative” in the bunch (and we’re talking before the Florida primary) was Fred Thompson, whom Rush did give some push.
As you know, Fred dropped out about that time, as did Rudy–the next most Conservative candidate (and we know that he had his flaws…)
Rush got behind McCain once he was the nominee not because he liked McCain, as you pointed out, but because the alternative of Zero-bama was intolerable.

Are tax havens illegal? I know failure to pay is.

ddrintn on January 31, 2009 at 12:18 PM

Not necessarily, and probably only a tax attorney could answer that correctly. There are many legal ways to reduce your tax load, for example John Kerry’s wife has her fortune set up in trusts and such where she got away with only paying a 15% federal tax rate, it was all perfectly legal, but strange, considering her husband advocates tax increases. John Edwards filters all his money through S corps and therefore pays almost nothing in payroll taxes (hence the controversy about him saving $600,000 in medicare taxes). My understanding is the Kennedy’s have a very complex structure that saves them plenty of tax money and probably preserved the fortune since none of them do anything to earn real money. And yet everyone one of these people advocate a tax structure that penalizes entrepreneurs and small businesses.

If you’re against high taxation, then it’s not hypocritical of you to take advantage of tax havens, if you advocate high taxes for you fellow citizens yet avoid paying them yourself, then you are a class A hypocrite.

Ann NY on January 31, 2009 at 9:35 AM

You just contradicted yourself there.

sethstorm on January 31, 2009 at 11:25 AM

Are tax havens illegal? I know failure to pay is.

Using tax havens doesn’t magically make it “not avoiding taxes”.

sethstorm on January 31, 2009 at 12:07 PM

What sort of explanation is that? If you are using tax havens and you end up paying less taxes, there’s no magic involved.

How so? Explain.

Ann NY on January 31, 2009 at 12:01 PM

Using tax havens doesn’t magically make it “not avoiding taxes”.

If you’re against high taxation, then it’s not hypocritical of you to take advantage of tax havens, if you advocate high taxes for you fellow citizens yet avoid paying them yourself, then you are a class A hypocrite.

Ann NY on January 31, 2009 at 9:35 AM

You just contradicted yourself there.

sethstorm on January 31, 2009 at 11:25 AM

How so? Explain.

Better go look at the 1994 election cycle, and … … a lot of the credit for the republicans successes.

Contract on (middle) America.

What is good for Rush is bad for the GOP, and what is good for the GOP is bad for Rush.

Better go look at the 1994 election cycle, and how Rush got a lot of the credit for the republicans successes.

See, different strokes for different folks, I love football.

Cindy Munford on January 31, 2009 at 10:13 AM

Now if I was a leftist, that would piss me off and I would force you to see things my way. ;-)