Quotes of the day

posted at 10:42 pm on December 29, 2011 by Allahpundit

“In an interview with RealClearPolitics on Thursday, Mitt Romney dismissed any possibility that Ron Paul might win the Republican nomination.

“‘Ron Paul’s not going to be our nominee,’ Romney said aboard his campaign bus, en route to a rally in Ames.”

***

“[Romney's] decision to double down in Iowa has heightened the pressure to produce a strong showing just as polls are suggesting a surge by Representative Ron Paul of Texas, whose libertarian message appears to be resonating with many voters. A victory by Mr. Paul on Tuesday would test the ability of Mr. Romney’s advisers to spin a second-place result into a win for him.

“Even Mr. Romney seemed to recognize the futility of that public relations effort, should it come to that. Asked on Wednesday afternoon whether a second-place finish behind Mr. Paul would qualify as a victory, Mr. Romney was quick to answer.

“‘Uh, no,’ he said.”

***

“A Santorum surge, Erickson wrote, means Romney is likely to win the nomination.

“That prospect doesn’t bother King, who pointed to Romney’s ‘exemplary family life’ with his wife of 42 years and five sons. ‘He has more children and fewer vices than I have, so how can I criticize him?’ King said, in what could be viewed as an appeal to social conservatives to come to terms with Romney’s likely success. ‘I could do business with Mitt Romney. I could do business with any of these candidates.’

“Actually, there is one candidate whose foreign policy position troubles King far more than Romney’s waffling on abortion. Ron Paul advocates pulling all American troops out of foreign countries as part of a massive military disengagement. ‘That would be a calamity,’ King said. He also worries that a Paul victory in the Iowa caucuses would diminish the state’s status because the quirky libertarian is so unlikely to win the nomination.”

***

“The Paul candidacy is of course doomed. But the Paul vote won’t die. This vote has been building in the depths of the American political ocean since the spending spree of the second Bush term. These people see the upward spending trend in annual outlays and accumulated commitments not as a ‘problem,’ as the Beltway prefers, but as a threat to their well-being…

“[I]f the former Massachusetts governor doesn’t reach out pretty soon to the Paul-Perry-Bachmann Republican protest voters, he may never get them. The longer he waits, the more pressure will build for a third-party challenge that will cost him the election. That it would be led by a Ron Paul or Donald Trump is irrelevant to why these people would vote third party—or stay home.

“Mr. Romney is going to have to take a risk with some piece of his locked-down strategy—the RomneyCare denial, the ‘middle-class’ ceiling on his tax cut, naming a running mate who could have beaten him in the primaries.”

***

It’s difficult, if not impossible, to imagine a reassuring ‘unity photo’ from the Tampa convention showing Ron Paul joining the other also-rans lifting arms at the podium together with the victor who has beaten them. The more support angry voters provide to Paul protest candidacy the more inconceivable that image becomes, and the more likely the reelection of Obama and Biden.

“By far the best outcome for those who yearn above all to replace the Democrat in the White House would be to witness the rapid, well-deserved fizzle of the Paulian insurgency. This sort of quick collapse remains a distinct possibility—with a disappointing showing in Iowa followed by even more limited support that polls presently predict in the other early primary states. If Paul winds up with less than 10 percent of the national Republican vote, he would merit only an obscure position at the convention, reassuring the broader public that if you refuse to disavow support from open Nazis and unrepentant Ku Kluxers—as Dr. Paul explicitly refuses to do, in interviews recently with The New York Times and four years ago on my radio show—you will find no comfortable home in today’s Republican Party.

“Voters who might feel tempted to express discontent with the status quo by casting a ballot for Ron Paul during primary season still understand that backing him in any third party bid would bring disaster to the conservative cause; in the general election, it’s obvious that a vote for Ron Paul would amount to a vote for Barack Obama.”

***

“Here’s the point that I believe Henninger misses. ‘These people’ who are fuelling the Paul boomlet, and before that the Bachman/Perry/Cain/Gingrich boomlets, are not just the Republican protest vote. Since Obama has no Democrat rivals, there’s no real opportunity for a Democrat protest vote. The only way for Republicans and the unaffiliated middle-of-the-roader who voted for Obama in 2008 to show their opposition to Washington policies is the Republican primary. And who are they? They are the broad middle class who are unemployed or have family members, neighbors and friends who are losing their homes, their jobs and their hope for a better future while Washington lives it up on their dime…

“They are that virtual mob with pitchforks that are desperate to anoint someone as their leader who will help them storm the castle and evict the ogre holed up there. Mitt Romney doesn’t look like the kind of guy who is comfortable handling a pitchfork, but if he’s the last man standing after all the others fail, he’ll be appointed to that role.

“In 2008 the people went to the polls before the full impact of the financial melt-down had sunk in. They voted for Mr. HopeN’Change because they thought Obama didn’t really mean it when he promised to fundamentally change America. They though that they were electing a President who would fix the problems and set the country back on its accustomed course. The Three Years of Obama taught them just how wrong they were. HopeN’Change is now replaced by Change it Back. Obama is now viewed with fear and loathing. Those who did not like him now despise him and those who were on the fence are joining the opposition. Many see Obama as the ogre in the castle who has taken America hostage. The middle class is in danger of losing its grip on their part of the American Dream, and this time the mob with pitchforks is for real. That is the real meaning of the Paul vote.”

***

“Rep. Ron Paul’s surge in Iowa has triggered a theoretical question for his rivals this week: given his foreign policy views, would they be willing to support him over President Obama if he were the nominee? Newt Gingrich said ‘no,’ Mitt Romney said ‘yes.’ But it is also a kind of an intriguing gut check question for conservatives on how they balance foreign and domestic policy. Having thought about it over the last few days and debated it on Twitter for a bit last night, I’ve determined that I’d very begrudgingly back Obama in such a matchup.”

***

Via Breitbart TV.


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 4 5

Well, tonight was the first time we talked.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:08 AM

Are you sure about that?

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:12 AM

The call is coming from inside of the house! He is in the attic, GET OUT!

RAGIN CAJUN on December 30, 2011 at 1:15 AM

Well, tonight was the first time we talked.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:08 AM

Are you sure about that?

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:12 AM

I’m sure you don’t stand out as anything significant. Got a link? Jog my memory.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:15 AM

Ugh,I have to interupt by German Kill’n on Call of duty,
to post this “Hopey/Changey,New Election 2012 Image Remake”!

Boy is he pulling out all the stops,it seems Obama is now
PRO-Military!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Talk about a Photo-Op!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
=========================================================

markknoller tweeted:
********************

Moment of silence at USS Arizona Memorial by Pres Obama and CincPac Adm. Robt Willard, raising hand to salute.
**************************************************
http://t.co/s0eljPz6Story metadata:
Submitted 41 mins ago from twitter.com/markknoller by editor

http://www.breakingnews.com/
============================

Photo of the Now Caring for the US Military,might as
well,have a photo-op in Hawiia,brilliant strategy,Broken
BentAxleRod!!
(sarc)

canopfor on December 30, 2011 at 1:16 AM

Tell him what he’s won, Johnny.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:08 AM

You are always the gentleman.

I guess I’ll have to settle for my Burn Notice marathon to see maroons get their can of whoop@$$.

Laura in Maryland on December 30, 2011 at 1:17 AM

Well, tonight was the first time we talked.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:08 AM

Are you sure about that?

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:12 AM

The call is coming from inside of the house! He is in the attic, GET OUT!

RAGIN CAJUN on December 30, 2011 at 1:15 AM

LOL

He is a Paulbot.

sharrukin on December 30, 2011 at 1:17 AM

The call is coming from inside of the house! He is in the attic, GET OUT!

RAGIN CAJUN on December 30, 2011 at 1:15 AM

HA…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:17 AM

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:09 AM

Have a cold and need to go to bed but would be interested at some point in pursuing your line of reasoning as to what you mean by being anti-war?

chemman on December 30, 2011 at 1:17 AM

Well, tonight was the first time we talked.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:08 AM

You may have blocked the last time from your memory. As I recall you got quite upset.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:14 AM

Post your link already. Is this your gotcha moment?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:18 AM

It’s not your math, it’s your devotion to media data when you like it and suspicions of it when you have an anti-war axe to grind.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:06 AM

Well, it certainly seemed that it was the math that upset you so. Now you seem to have switch to some other fancy entirely.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:18 AM

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:06 AM

Good to see you..Hope you had a Merry Christmas with your Daughter..:)

Dire Straits on December 30, 2011 at 1:18 AM

Double Ugh,

Photo-Op Image Linky!

http://twitter.com/#!/markknoller/status/152622659526594561/photo/1

canopfor on December 30, 2011 at 1:19 AM

Well, it certainly seemed that it was the math that upset you so. Now you seem to have switch to some other fancy entirely.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:18 AM

You said more than doubled. They didn’t by requirements and they did even less in actual deployments. My unit sent 30 percent of our support assets home in 09. The ForceCAP is on them again.

They weren’t/aren’t there.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:20 AM

chemman on December 30, 2011 at 1:12 AM

I didn’t mean to imply you did, sorry about that.

Yeah, I think the deaths were a tragedy. I think the holocaust was a tragedy, etc. But, the question is, could something else have been done? Hitler was obviously dead set on restoring the homeland, so I doubt it. In the case of the Iraqi sanctions? Yes, I believe something else could have been done.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:20 AM

Dire Straits on December 30, 2011 at 1:18 AM

It was (and still is!) fantastic. I taught her how to ice skate this go round. She fell down a few dozen times, but kept trying until she nailed it. What a champ!

Looking forward to the bowl games…!

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:20 AM

Post your link already. Is this your gotcha moment?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:18 AM

Make up your mind. First it was the math, then it was some manner of “devotion” or other and now you want a link. You sure do dance around a lot. Can’t you do a simple search? You will appreciate it more if you do it yourself.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:21 AM

canopfor on December 30, 2011 at 1:19 AM

It’s bad enuf to read about it, a pic just ups the effect many fold…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:21 AM

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:18 AM

Me thinks it is enjoying the dizzying effects of biting fart bubbles in the bathtub.

OkieDoc on December 30, 2011 at 1:22 AM

You said more than doubled.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:20 AM

Yes, that’s what I said. Obama more than doubled the number of troops in that worthless piece of crap from what he inherited from Bush.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:24 AM

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:21 AM

Hawk, I think she’s a bunny boiler. No matter how many times she gets banned, she’ll just keep coming back. AP needs to trade the Ban Hammer for something with silver bullets, holy water, and some garlic.

Laura in Maryland on December 30, 2011 at 1:25 AM

Me thinks it is enjoying the dizzying effects of biting fart bubbles in the bathtub.

OkieDoc on December 30, 2011 at 1:22 AM

The VOE…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:25 AM

Post your link already. Is this your gotcha moment?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:18 AM

Make up your mind. First it was the math, then it was some manner of “devotion” or other and now you want a link. You sure do dance around a lot. Can’t you do a simple search? You will appreciate it more if you do it yourself.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:21 AM

My minds made up. Can you stick with one point?

Your numbers of the deployed are, wrong. Exaggerated. That’s all that happened here. Prove what I said is incorrect.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:25 AM

Me thinks it is enjoying the dizzying effects of biting fart bubbles in the bathtub.

OkieDoc on December 30, 2011 at 1:22 AM

I’m not qualified to address your bathroom fantasies.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

They weren’t/aren’t there.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:20 AM

I did a quick glance over some google hits, and I can see where the confusion lies. Supposedly, as reported by various outlets, we had 34,000 in the theater when Bush left office, and then it was 71,000 (no attribution as to who ordered this) by the time Obama wrung his hands for 6 months in 2009 and sent another 30,000. I don’t know where these number come from. Are there vapor soldier counts?

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Yes, that’s what I said. Obama more than doubled the number of troops in that worthless piece of crap from what he inherited from Bush.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:24 AM

Did you see all those troops when you were there? Or are you quoting your leaders media?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

chemman on December 30, 2011 at 1:17 AM

I’ll keep it brief for you. Hope you get to feeling better!

I subscribe to the Non-agression Principle. Force may only be used in self defense.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

8000 of those troops were added in The Kandahar Bridging agreement too, to reduce the numbers of other coalition soldiers in RC South. That was approved under Bush and was supposed to be executed under Obama. He only delivered 3000 of the Kandahar Bridging forces.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:29 AM

canopfor on December 29, 2011 at 11:29 PM

As a totally tangential side-bar non-sequitur comment: You all like political intriigue? I commend the BBC’s House of Cards, To Play the King, and Final cut series(es) to you. Ian Richardson’s absolutely the most loveable, unctuous politician you will ever know.

Makes Bubba look like a back-country rube.

..er, um.

The War Planner on December 30, 2011 at 1:30 AM

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:25 AM

Nah, growing up in Texas it’s what we realized was wrong with Razorbacks and nerds.

OkieDoc on December 30, 2011 at 1:30 AM

As of Oct 13, 2009 -

http://www.examiner.com/post-partisan-in-national/report-peace-prize-winner-obama-doubles-number-of-troops-afghanistan-since-bush-left-office

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:27 AM

That’s your proof?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:31 AM

Did you see all those troops when you were there? Or are you quoting your leaders media?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Now you have danced over to the absurd “Did you see all those troops when you were there?” like if I didn’t personally see and hand count all of them, they must not have been there. This is the entertainment of an eternity. You are as flighty as a teenage girl.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:32 AM

Nah, growing up in Texas it’s what we realized was wrong with Razorbacks and nerds.

OkieDoc on December 30, 2011 at 1:30 AM

Growing up in tejas and now living in Oklahoma…’splains much…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:33 AM

Do you have some ROn Paul video I’m supposed to be offered now? One that explains it better than you can?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:06 AM

ROTFLMAO. That one will leave a mark.

platypus on December 30, 2011 at 1:34 AM

Now you have danced over to the absurd “Did you see all those troops when you were there?” like if I didn’t personally see and hand count all of them, they must not have been there. This is the entertainment of an eternity. You are as flighty as a teenage girl.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:32 AM

No, I cited facts on weekly troop numbers I saw during nightly CONOPs and Command and Staffs that said we didn’t have the numbers the president said he sent. You cited a freaking two years old article that doesn’t even support the numbers you claimed on this thread.

What?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:34 AM

That’s your proof?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:31 AM

I told you that you would appreciate it more if you made the effort to find it yourself. I was certainly right. Why don’t you check with the Pentagon or do you think I have infiltrated them too?

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:34 AM

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:29 AM

I had a feeling that any additional troops in Afghanistan after Bush left office were already agreed-to deployments, because Obama was sweating bullets to send an additional 30,000.

The article Carthoris linked to was the most unbalanced chowder I’ve seen since the Lancet “studies”.

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:35 AM

You cited a freaking two years old article that doesn’t even support the numbers you claimed on this thread.

What?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:34 AM

It said doubled and as it was “old” it likely didn’t catch the top.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:36 AM

Carthoris

Have you or any family member ever seen an RPG fired at a helicopter?…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:37 AM

Do you have some ROn Paul video I’m supposed to be offered now? One that explains it better than you can?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:06 AM

ROTFLMAO. That one will leave a mark.

platypus on December 30, 2011 at 1:34 AM

It may leave a mark, but not on me.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:37 AM

The only exception if Ron Paul. I cannot fathom just how crazy and hate-filled a person must be to support that wack-job.

Laura in Maryland on December 30, 2011 at 1:12 AM

How does supporting Paul make me hate-filled, out of curiosity?

I’ll also note that I take exception to the crazy remark as well.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:39 AM

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:33 AM

Jealous? BTW, you guys don’t really marry your first cousins, do you?

OkieDoc on December 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:34 AM

It said doubled and as it was “old” it likely didn’t catch the top.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:36 AM

Then why did you even use it? Cite something different then. Wiki has closer to what you claim. Use that.

The numbers still weren’t there though.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:41 AM

Soldiers on the ground or pilots in the air only see their segment of the theater so their view of the overall conflict is not a good gauge. But they certainly do know when material and support equipment are entering their area. A person I know was told only a week before the actual move out of the Peche River Valley. His entire unit, including the local Afghan civilians, knew weeks before the official announcement because of all the material being moved.

If Obama doubled the amount of troops in $hitholistan, the support for that increase would have been arriving in the area well before the actual troops arrive. A pilot would be able to speak credibly on the subject if he/she was posted in a main hub that the gear traveled through.

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 1:42 AM

How does supporting Paul make me hate-filled, out of curiosity?

I’ll also note that I take exception to the crazy remark as well.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:39 AM

Do you give him a pass for the newsletters?

LevinFan on December 30, 2011 at 1:43 AM

I subscribe to the Non-agression Principle. Force may only be used in self defense.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

Well, that explains it – you’re a member of the pussyposse. Of course, you could be a member of the fabulous posse.

It’s one or the other.

platypus on December 30, 2011 at 1:43 AM

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 1:42 AM

I thought you were in Iowa with promachus trying to draft Palin.

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:44 AM

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Are you saying I wouldn’t be aware of actual troop numbers?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:44 AM

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:20 AM

That is priceless..I am so glad..:)

PS..Looking foward to the Bowl Games myself..:)

Dire Straits on December 30, 2011 at 1:45 AM

Now you have danced over to the absurd “Did you see all those troops when you were there?” like if I didn’t personally see and hand count all of them, they must not have been there. This is the entertainment of an eternity. You are as flighty as a teenage girl.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 1:32 AM

Well, let’s see:

Hawk was actually there and he’s a stand-up dude. Even when we disagree he’s very polite about him. He’s a far better statesman than I.

You, on the other hand, are coming off as a total d-bag. BTW, I did a search and I can’t find any Hotair posts that contain both your screenname and hawk’s. So either you have a different name, you’re confusing hawk with someone else, or you’re lying.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 1:45 AM

OkieDoc on December 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM

Nope and nope…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:45 AM

I subscribe to the Non-agression Principle. Force may only be used in self defense.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:26 AM

The filter is playing god again.

That explains it. You’re either a member of the fabulous posse or the pu$$ yposse.

platypus on December 30, 2011 at 1:45 AM

Jealous? BTW, you guys don’t really marry your first cousins, do you?

OkieDoc on December 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM

You are a Loser!..:)

Dire Straits on December 30, 2011 at 1:46 AM

LevinFan on December 30, 2011 at 1:43 AM

You bet! I also sent xeroxed copies of previous issues!

So, the newsletters is what that’s based on, I take it? Because I’m not interested in getting into that discussion. It’s been hashed out enough here.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:47 AM

How does supporting Paul make me hate-filled, out of curiosity?

I’ll also note that I take exception to the crazy remark as well.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:39 AM

On its own? It doesn’t. Guilt by association is a nasty little thing.

However, from personal experience, most of his fans have some serious peccadilloes. Bircherism, ‘anti-Zionism,’ straight up white supremacy, etc.

However, I don’t accuse people of holding those beliefs simply because they support Herr Doktor. I wait for the mask to come off. If it never does, well, good for them. They’re the rare Paulian with no absurd beliefs.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 1:47 AM

I thought you were in Iowa with promachus trying to draft Palin.

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:44 AM

I was going to, but Romney may not need her to split the vote any longer.

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 1:48 AM

BTW, you guys don’t really marry your first cousins, do you?

OkieDoc on December 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM

Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:49 AM

BTW, I did a search and I can’t find any Hotair posts that contain both your screenname and hawk’s. So either you have a different name, you’re confusing hawk with someone else, or you’re lying.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 1:45 AM

What do you think you’re doing? You’re not supposed to actually check these things out.

That takes all the fun out of drinking while pounding your junk keyboard.

platypus on December 30, 2011 at 1:50 AM

Romney may not need her to split the vote any longer.

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 1:48 AM

I think Mitt has got it in the bag at this point. That poll putting him at 45/29 among Independents seals the deal.

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:50 AM

The filter is playing god again.

That explains it. You’re either a member of the fabulous posse or the pu$$ yposse.

platypus on December 30, 2011 at 1:45 AM

I actually agree. I rarely if ever agree with striking first. But I also don’t believe in fighting fair/giving it back equally.

Come at us with a peashooter, we come back with two ****ing howitzers. That’s the only way people ever learn.

Like a Skinner Box, it takes pain to learn.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 1:50 AM

Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:49 AM

Says Ms. Pac-12…

Did you see any of the Baylor/WA game tonite?…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:50 AM

God, you’re even worse now than when you were Crr6.

You couldn’t finish an argument then and you still suck at it. Funny, you weren’t banned but you’re too embarrassed to comment under your old name. I would be too if I were hanging on to this notion that Obama wasn’t the worse president in US history.

And BTW, if you think that was “quite upset” you really do live in a world of unicorns where liberal presidents and liberal media don’t lie.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:50 AM

You bet! I also sent xeroxed copies of previous issues!

So, the newsletters is what that’s based on, I take it? Because I’m not interested in getting into that discussion. It’s been hashed out enough here.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 1:47 AM

They are filled with hate and bigotry. First RuPaul said he didn’t write them and suddenly now he wrote some of it, but only the good parts.

This while making millions off of them.

IT’s just like Obama saying he didn’t hear anything vile remarks while sitting in that chruch for 20 years, actually it’s worse since RuPaul made so much money off it.

But yeah, I wouldn’t want to address it either.

LevinFan on December 30, 2011 at 1:51 AM

Iranian nukes and Chinese assistance as they install bases in the Persian Gulf that can choke off the oil supply. Chinese bases along the coast of Sudan and increasing cooperation by Saudi Arabia due to the growing presence of China in the middle east. Growing Chinese influence in South Africa as they expand their presence in Angola and the granting of basing rights at Simonstown. That allows China to control the south atlantic sea lanes.

What would Ron Paul do to stop this?

sharrukin on December 29, 2011 at 11:27 PM

You’re just wrong.

Your interventionist foreign policy is what’s making a calamity more likely.

Iran is threatening to shut the straights of hermuz down in RESPONSE TO OUR SANCTIONS. So here we have a clear example of sanctions leading to an even greater conflict and a greater danger for war.

So no, you’re just wrong on this.

Iran would only desire to choke off the oil supply if we’re a threat to them and the current interventionist actions and war propaganda from the United States is only serving to MAKE WAR MORE LIKELY which is a calamity.

“Nukes Don’t Kill People, People Do”.

fatlibertarianinokc on December 30, 2011 at 1:51 AM

Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:49 AM

Now that there’s downright funny – and it don’t matter who you are.

platypus on December 30, 2011 at 1:53 AM

Did you see any of the Baylor/WA game tonite?…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:50 AM

Naw, I’m busy occupying Boston. Looks like it was a bloodthirsty shoot-out.

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:53 AM

csdevens, if you were referring to me thanks, but I didn’t just see material being moved. Like I said above, I’d attended a nightly set of briefing where that information on troop levels was put out.

How is your Screaming Eagle doing?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:54 AM

God, you’re even worse now than when you were Crr6.

You couldn’t finish an argument then and you still suck at it. Funny, you weren’t banned but you’re too embarrassed to comment under your old name. I would be too if I were hanging on to this notion that Obama wasn’t the worse president in US history.

And BTW, if you think that was “quite upset” you really do live in a world of unicorns where liberal presidents and liberal media don’t lie.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:50 AM

Nah, crr was a tool, but he had some intellectual firepower. This new putz is a lightweight.

I miss PR/crr and co, they actually made you work. You can’t sharpen a knife blade on silly putty, y’know?

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 1:55 AM

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:53 AM

It was, 59 first half points followed by 64 in the 2nd half…Say hello to Liz Warren…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:55 AM

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 1:55 AM

Wait wait wait, what? Was crr6 banned?

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:57 AM

fatlibertarianinokc on December 30, 2011 at 1:51 AM

Man these news guy. Utter BS.

I will admit, their sheer numbers are taking a troll on me.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:57 AM

Are you saying I wouldn’t be aware of actual troop numbers?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:44 AM

I am saying scuttlebutt isn’t reliable. Material buildup is.

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 1:57 AM

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 1:55 AM

“She” just told me she was Crr6.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:57 AM

It was, 59 first half points followed by 64 in the 2nd half…

Gohawgs on December 30, 2011 at 1:55 AM

Wow. Epic defensive fail.

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:58 AM

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 1:57 AM

The briefings … are most reliable.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:58 AM

That poll putting him at 45/29 among Independents seals the deal.

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:50 AM

Not sure, but his entire game plan was to win the indies.

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 1:59 AM

Iranian nukes and Chinese assistance as they install bases in the Persian Gulf that can choke off the oil supply. Chinese bases along the coast of Sudan and increasing cooperation by Saudi Arabia due to the growing presence of China in the middle east. Growing Chinese influence in South Africa as they expand their presence in Angola and the granting of basing rights at Simonstown. That allows China to control the south atlantic sea lanes.

What would Ron Paul do to stop this?

sharrukin on December 29, 2011 at 11:27 PM

You’re just wrong.

What would Ron Paul do to stop this?

Your interventionist foreign policy is what’s making a calamity more likely.

Chamberlain thought the same thing which is why he gave Adolf Hitler Czechoslovakia. Eventually he learned and stood with Poland when Germany moved against them. He learned from experience but Ron Paul doesn’t seem to.

Iran would only desire to choke off the oil supply if we’re a threat to them and the current interventionist actions and war propaganda from the United States is only serving to MAKE WAR MORE LIKELY which is a calamity.

I am sure thats true. If they can gain control of the Persian Gulf without a fight they would leap at the chance. That is what Hitler did with the Saar, Austria, the Sudetenland and finally Czechoslovakia. Problem is that it never ends.

“Nukes Don’t Kill People, People Do”.

fatlibertarianinokc on December 30, 2011 at 1:51 AM

Thats right. You got something right! People aren’t nice and they tend to do mean things and some of them are in charge of whole nations.

If I may quote a learned scholar…

Lady, people aren’t chocolates. Do you know what they are, mostly? Bastards. Bastard-coated bastards with bastard filling; but I don’t find them half as annoying as I find naïve, bubble-headed optimists who walk around vomiting sunshine.

sharrukin on December 30, 2011 at 2:01 AM

The briefings … are most reliable.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:58 AM

You are told what they want you to know. And that isn’t necessarily the truth all of the time. Especially in a war that has been politicized to the extent this one has been. Obama plays games with the numbers and he is the CinC. You have to believe what he tells you. I don’t trust him. What do you see as far as support gear coming in? Do you see every bit of material coming into the country? If so, does it confirm what you are told?

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 2:03 AM

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 1:55 AM

I thought crr6 was a gal. Wasn’t she in law school?

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 2:05 AM

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:50 AM

I don’t know, as much as Romney is betting on a win in Iowa, it would be fun to see the results of a Romney loss there now. As he said in the quotes in this post, he wouldn’t be able to spin a second place finish. Especially not now.

And none of the polls are showing a clear Romney victory in IA. PPP will be doing a poll this weekend, the results will be telling.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 2:05 AM

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 1:42 AM

Are you saying I wouldn’t be aware of actual troop numbers?

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:44 AM

Well, if that’s not what he is saying, then it is what he should be saying.

http://tinyurl.com/435fu5t

Now be sure to ‘click’ the little thingy to see the graph. It sure looks like it peaked at around 100,000, and is still about there, up from what looks like even less than 40,000 if anything from when Obama took office, so that would be more than double, actually about 2 and 1/2 fold, or even more.

You should by all rights really feel very foolish now, but if it is any consolation to you, no more foolish than I feel after wasting time with going over simple arithmetic, especially having to take the extra trouble to go around hotgas link filters.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 2:06 AM

sharrukin on December 30, 2011 at 2:01 AM

Well said. I just may have to steal this. Thank you :)

LevinFan on December 30, 2011 at 2:06 AM

LevinFan on December 30, 2011 at 1:51 AM

I’m not interested in talking about it because it’s been hashed and rehashed multiple times here. I’ve said my piece on it, everybody else has said theirs.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 2:06 AM

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 2:06 AM

Another old report. Come on Girl.

With 30 percent reduction due to ForceCAPs I don’t feel silly at all. You should feel silly for citing all the other garbage first and making a joke of your claims.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 2:11 AM

I don’t know, as much as Romney is betting on a win in Iowa, it would be fun to see the results of a Romney loss there now.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 2:05 AM

I’m still watching the horse race rather dispassionately. For months Romney had written-off Iowa completely as a loss, now he’s suddenly in the running. If Paul wins Iowa, or even places, the media will do their usual hatchet job. This may be decided in South Carolina, but I suspect it will be Super Tuesday that crowns the winner.

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 2:12 AM

I thought crr6 was a gal. Wasn’t she in law school?

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 2:05 AM

Well, if she was, she was a lesbian. She had a few comments about certain girls being hot. I think the whole ‘crr is a chick’ thing was a misconception that he/she never bothered to clear up. Either way, I can just call crr an ‘it’ if it makes it easier. :)

“She” just told me she was Crr6.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:57 AM

No effing way that crr could link to those troop numbers and not also use a lame ‘HTH’ gag. It was its signature line. It would be like Joey Lawrence not saying “Woah!” on an episode of Blossom. So I’m calling heavy Bravo Sierra on that claim.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 2:12 AM

I’m not interested in talking about it because it’s been hashed and rehashed multiple times here. I’ve said my piece on it, everybody else has said theirs.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 2:06 AM

More like you don’t want to lose the argument because there is no defense for it.

The respectable thing to do would be to stop supporting the bigot but perhaps you agree with him?

LevinFan on December 30, 2011 at 2:12 AM

Lady, people aren’t chocolates. Do you know what they are, mostly? Bastards. Bastard-coated bastards with bastard filling; but I don’t find them half as annoying as I find naïve, bubble-headed optimists who walk around vomiting sunshine.

sharrukin on December 30, 2011 at 2:01 AM

Ah, Dr. Cox. I miss that show. I mean, not the last season, but before that.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 2:13 AM

Ah, Dr. Cox. I miss that show. I mean, not the last season, but before that.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 2:13 AM

Never actually seen the show. Was it worth watching?

sharrukin on December 30, 2011 at 2:14 AM

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 2:06 AM

I think an abundance of caution should be exercised when it comes to troop numbers etc. This war has been politicized to the extent that Obama will massage the numbers to fit his political needs. If a pilot who has been in the area tells you he doesn’t see the numbers cited in the paper, it would be wise to consider it worthy to explore. The one thing Obama cannot hide is the support material coming into country. It takes an awful lot of gear to support 1000,000 troops.

Remember though, that it takes a number of support troops for each combat soldier. I thought it was 8 to 1. But don’t quote me on that.

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 2:15 AM

Wait wait wait, what? Was crr6 banned?

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 1:57 AM

Nah, just stopped commenting. I like to think that the cognitive dissonance of claiming Obama was a super-genius while he runs one of the most incompetent administrations ever finally caught up with him/her, and his/her head actually exploded from the strain.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 2:16 AM

Either way, I can just call crr an ‘it’ if it makes it easier. :)

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 2:12 AM

Naw. It doesn’t matter.

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 2:16 AM

Never actually seen the show. Was it worth watching?

sharrukin on December 30, 2011 at 2:14 AM

Usually, if you like that brand of humor. The Janitor, at least, is always good for a belly laugh. It’s pretty formulaic, though, but that doesn’t bother me as much as it does some other people.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 2:17 AM

BTW, I did a search and I can’t find any Hotair posts that contain both your screenname and hawk’s. So either you have a different name, you’re confusing hawk with someone else, or you’re lying.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 1:45 AM

You really should read a little Arthur Conan Doyle sometime.

By a man’s finger-nails, by his coat-sleeve, by his boots, by his trouser-knees, by the callosities of his forefinger and thumb, by his expression, by his shirt-cuff — By each of these things a man’s calling is plainly revealed. That all united should fail to enlighten the competent inquirer in any case is almost inconceivable.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 2:18 AM

Remember though, that it takes a number of support troops for each combat soldier. I thought it was 8 to 1. But don’t quote me on that.

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 2:15 AM

The rule of thumb used to be 5 to 1, but with all the contractors now doing jobs that troops used to do, it should be less.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 2:20 AM

thought crr6 was a gal. Wasn’t she in law school?

csdeven on December 30, 2011 at 2:05 AM

Well, if she was, she was a lesbian. She had a few comments about certain girls being hot. I think the whole ‘crr is a chick’ thing was a misconception that he/she never bothered to clear up. Either way, I can just call crr an ‘it’ if it makes it easier. :)

I dunno, Crr6 once told me anal sex hurt, so you just have to wonder. I try not to get into those details.

“She” just told me she was Crr6.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 1:57 AM

No effing way that crr could link to those troop numbers and not also use a lame ‘HTH’ gag. It was its signature line. It would be like Joey Lawrence not saying “Woah!” on an episode of Blossom. So I’m calling heavy Bravo Sierra on that claim.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 2:12 AM

Maybe it was just hinting to get a rise. Who knows and really, who cares? I do not think Crr6 was banned though. For all of her liberal nonsense and insults, she was very careful not to cross any lines.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 2:21 AM

his/her head actually exploded from the strain.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 2:16 AM

Self-exile. So sad.

John the Libertarian on December 30, 2011 at 2:21 AM

BTW, csdeven, be sure to bash a gibot or 2 for me on occasion.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 2:22 AM

LevinFan on December 30, 2011 at 2:12 AM

See, and there’s the kind of nonsense I was trying to avoid.

I don’t call Santorum supporters bigots or homophobic. I don’t call Bachmann supporters crazy. I don’t call Perry supporters stupid. I don’t call Gingrich supporters dirty snakes. I guess an honest, intelligent debate is too difficult…

I looked at the newsletters, compared it to his other writings, votes, speeches. They don’t line up. And considering there’s far more material saying Paul isn’t a racist than is a racist, I’m going with he isn’t. Even with the newsletter trash, he’s still better than the rest on civil liberties.

gyrmnix on December 30, 2011 at 2:23 AM

You really should read a little Arthur Conan Doyle sometime.

By a man’s finger-nails, by his coat-sleeve, by his boots, by his trouser-knees, by the callosities of his forefinger and thumb, by his expression, by his shirt-cuff — By each of these things a man’s calling is plainly revealed. That all united should fail to enlighten the competent inquirer in any case is almost inconceivable.

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 2:18 AM

Yeah, sorry, I don’t index every single poster’s individual attributes enough to do the full Holmesian deduction on them. Especially since you can’t gauge tone on the internet, so you’re literally only going by writing style.

As far as it pertains to the main suspect, crr, you don’t write anything like him. I don’t actually care who you are, though. You’re relatively obnoxious and belligerent, so that narrows it down to about, eh, 1,000 posters/ex-posters.

Good Solid B-Plus on December 30, 2011 at 2:23 AM

Carthoris on December 30, 2011 at 2:18 AM

I’m familiar with Doyle. Great quote. Much better than Twain.

hawkdriver on December 30, 2011 at 2:24 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5