Quotes of the day

posted at 9:15 pm on March 3, 2012 by Allahpundit

“If either [Romney or Santorum] is nominated, conservatives should vote for him. But suppose the accumulation of evidence eventually suggests that the nomination of either would subtract from the long-term project of making conservatism intellectually coherent and politically palatable. If so, there would come a point when, taking stock of reality, conservatives turn their energies to a goal much more attainable than, and not much less important than, electing Romney or Santorum president. It is the goal of retaining control of the House and winning control of the Senate…

“If Republicans do, their committee majorities will serve as fine-mesh filters, removing President Obama’s initiatives from the stream of legislation. Then Republicans can concentrate on what should be the essential conservative project of restoring something like constitutional equipoise between the legislative and executive branches…

“Beginning next January, 51 or more Republican senators, served by the canny Mitch McConnell’s legislative talents, could put sand in the gears of an overbearing and overreaching executive branch. This could restore something resembling the rule of law, as distinct from government by fiats issuing from unaccountable administrative agencies exercising excessive discretion.”

***

“All in all, the conventional wisdom seems compelling. As a card-carrying member of the mainstream media — a group that creates and sustains the conventional wisdom — I’m inclined to accept it. And yet there’s one conspicuous gap in the-election-is-already-over story: the polls. While the Republicans have been destroying each other and embarrassing themselves, the polls for a general election should have shown a collapse in Republican support. They haven’t — at least so far…

“Guesses about the Electoral College lead to the same conclusion. Obama is ahead, but the outcome isn’t certain. Real Clear Politics gives him 227 electoral votes against 181 for the Republican nominee, with 130 in doubt; 270 are needed to win.

“So it’s a puzzle. Logic and most evidence suggest the election is over. But the polls seem to dissent. Could it be that the real story is that Obama’s not a shoo-in even when he should be?

***

RUSH: Now, one thing about this notion that it’s over. George Will says (paraphrased), “We gotta be honest with ourselves. These two guys aren’t gonna beat Obama. Let’s face it. Santorum? Romney? Eh, not gonna happen. But we can stop Obama. We win the Senate; we hold the House.” Just this week Obama met with Democrat governors to discuss ways of getting things done over the heads of Congress. Without using Congress. By dictate, by executive order, by fiat. Here is a man who has already violated the Constitution with this contraception business!…

So while we think, using Civics 101, that Republican majorities in the House and Senate could stop Obama, he doesn’t care what the Constitution tells him he can and can’t do. And he’s going to care even less in a second term when there will be no accountability, no election to win, no base to hold, no independents to worry about. He’s not gonna worry about Congress. He’s not gonna have one care in the world, in a conventional political sense, that would put limits on his desires and behavior. The only thing would be Michelle…

Impeachment? That’s one of the recipes. Anybody think that’s gonna happen? I don’t think so. I also think, as a practical matter, it helps to have a fight over the presidency to ensure victories in the House and Senate. How are these House and Senate victories gonna happen if attitudinally you think you’ve lost the presidential race? What would the consultants say? “The way to win the Senate is to go out and say to the American people, ‘We know that we’re not gonna beat Obama, and therefore we still have to find a way to stop him, and that’s what we need you for!’

***

“But as a tactic, is the thing even possible? History says no. In the 20 presidential elections since 1932, as tallied by The American Presidency Project, the winning candidate’s party has only seen losses in either chamber of Congress nine times, or less than half. Which makes sense, since it’s hard to imagine too many instances where voters would like a presidential candidate enough to elect him, but hate his party so much that they throw out Congressional incumbents. So, Will’s theory is looking pretty shaky.

“But! In six out of those nine instances when the party that won the White House lost Congressional seats were when incumbent presidents won re-election, just like the scenario that Will imagines. It happened to Roosevelt (twice), Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton. So, not bad odds! But here’s where the whole thing falls apart. To win the Senate under Will’s theory Republicans would need to pick up four seats (remember, they need to get to 51, since he’s assuming that Obama’s vice president will still be able to cast any tie-breaking votes)…

“So, for Republicans to pull off the trick Will wants them to try, they would need to buck 80 years of political history, and somehow manufacture a swell of anti-incumbency in the Senate races while letting Obama walk to victory uncontested.”

***

“By every objective measure, the GOP has a reasonable chance to defeat President Obama—probably between 1-in-3 and 1-in-2. Given this opportunity, it would be crazy not to do everything one can to effectuate an outcome so devoutly to be desired. This doesn’t mean falling in line early behind an inevitable nominee or suppressing criticism of the likely nominee. If some of us have tried to expand the presidential field, it’s because we’ve been unconvinced that the current field offers us the best hope of victory. If some of us have resisted Romney inevitability, or an early Romney coronation, it’s because we don’t think that Romney’s nomination — or at least his easy and early nomination — would increase Republican chances of winning the presidency. Others differ on these questions. But whatever differences conservatives have in March about candidates, strategy and tactics should not affect our determination in the fall, when there is a Republican nominee, to turn our energies to defeating President Obama…

“If you think the country’s in decent shape, go for control of Congress. If you think it’s the mid-1990s again, go for control of Congress. If you’re fatalistic about American decline abroad and the end of limited, constitutional government at home, go for control of Congress. If current trends don’t deeply alarm you, or if you think alarm is futile because the rot is too deep, the decline too long-standing, the problems too un-fixable — then, go for control of Congress. Try to limit the damage and slow the collapse.

“But if you reject such fatalism as a failure of nerve, and such declinism as a failure of understanding — and conservatives should — then do everything you can to win the White House. Perhaps always, but certainly in 2012 — there is no substitute for victory.”

***

“Nothing Will or Erickson says about the weakness of our most likely nominee, or currently second most likely nominee, is anything I haven’t said before in substance. I am not so pessimistic about the general election, however, notwithstanding these weaknesses.

“But neither asks the question whether, if we are so sure to lose with our current top two choices, we should stop playing it safe and swing for the fences.”

***

“‘Sean, George Will ought to have his pundit’s license suspended,’ Buchanan said. ‘When you go for the presidency of the United States, that’s the way to win the House and win the Senate,’ he said. ‘If Obama wins the White House, he could very well hold on to the Senate and really take a lot of seats in the House.’”

***

Via Mediaite. Content warning.


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 3 4 5

Santorum isn’t going to matter because he’s a gay hater.

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 2:47 AM

This is how you do hysteria the right way.

“Hello? Is anybody out there? Please listen! I’m writing to you from the bowels of Ron Paul headquarters. A few of us have been able to make it to the basement. I don’t know how much time we have, so I’m begging you to please elect Ron Paul and avoid our fate! The Christian Reavers broke through our first line of defense yesterday afternoon. They overcame the security guards, disemboweled them in one of their primitive folk rites, and ate their living flesh. I will never forget the screams. We blocked the stairways and shut down the elevators, but they scaled the walls of the building like giant insects and crashed through the windows with their high, alien, and inhuman cries of ‘Hi-diddly-ho, neighbor!’ as they slit the throats of secretaries, editors, and interns in their barbaric rush to destroy.

“Occasionally they would pause in their onslaught to interrogate some terrified victim with questions like, ‘How-diddly-do, friend! Could you point me the way to the godless evolution editor and the soul-corrupting arts and entertainment department? I got me some kill-diddly-dillin’ to do!’

“Only a few escaped the horrors of ritual sacrifice and cannibalism that followed.

“And so it comes to this: I’m writing this Internet blurb through the space-time continuum from the last functioning computer with Internet access at Ron Paul headquarters. I can’t tell you my name or they will find my family. Oh, my precious little girl! Trapped in a world with Christians! They have flooded the building with their Visigoth hordes, committing unspeakable outrages. Rumor has reached us through the transistor radio that Richard Dawkin’s head has been placed on a pikestaff for the sport of crows. Meanwhile, we wretched survivors are trying to get the truth to…

“Wait! They are coming! We cannot get out! They are smashing the doors with something heavy, maybe fire extinguishers. No. It’s something bigger… It’s… AIIIEEEE!… a cave troll and behind it… something horrible! Something made of shadow and flame! Oh, for the love of all that is civilized and enlightened, don’t elect Rick Santorum!”

sharrukin on March 4, 2012 at 2:59 AM

Tulsa’s finest…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 2:53 AM

+ 100..Great song..:)

PS..This one isn’t bad either..:)

PS..We will definitely have to dedicate this to Ms Sandra Fluke!..:P

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 3:00 AM

I see that Lady CV beat me to the punch

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:00 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 2:51 AM

LoLz..Maybe we can dedicate it to Ms Sandra Fluke..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 2:57 AM

fixed..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 3:03 AM

sharrukin on March 4, 2012 at 2:59 AM

I thought, at first, you were angling for the next Resident Evil. Lol.

You want the funk, Dire??

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:05 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:00 AM

Lady CV has been on roll tonight..:)

PS..Good tune..Funk music at it’s best..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 3:05 AM

Bmore didn’t know who Brad Paisley was/is. He must not get out much…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:06 AM

fixed..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 3:03 AM

Keep it up and Kini will hurl a pineapple at ya…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:08 AM

LoLz..Maybe we can dedicate it to MS Sandra Fluke..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 2:57 AM

Bad Dire. Bad-Bad Dire!
:P

Tulsa’s finest…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 2:53 AM

But did they Drop the Bomb on you?
:D

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:09 AM

But did they Drop the Bomb on you?
:D

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:09 AM

Strange, I almost love that song

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:12 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:06 AM

Um…did the Seinfeld crew have some “residual contractual obligations”?

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:12 AM

Shouldn’t you actually be accusing me, Santorum and Thomas Jefferson of wanting to ‘dismember‘ gays? I mean if you are going to get hysterical why not go the whole hog?

sharrukin on March 4, 2012 at 2:42 AM

I didn’t say that, I said you and Santorum want to throw them in prison by outlawing sodomy, which you both have stated you support doing; you in this thread and Santorum on numerous occasions.

Santorum has capped out just like Romney has. They both have the same problem, and Newt is done for because he helped Freddie Mac crash the economy and profited from the destruction of so many jobs, also greatly increasing the speed of generational theft by so many trillions of dollars, not to mention all of the inflation and everything else. Newt played a small but significant role in all of that.

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 3:12 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:09 AM

My sister and I used to mock sing that one in the back seat of our parents’ car on road trips.

Lol. Good times…

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:13 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:05 AM

Thumbs up..Good one..:)

PS..Remember this one??..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 3:13 AM

sharrukin on March 4, 2012 at 2:59 AM

Oh brother… Santorum and his supporters are always going on about their conspiracy theories. It’s so ridiculous. /rolls eyes

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 3:14 AM

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 3:13 AM

I missed that one, but I like it.

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:14 AM

If you want to throw gays in prison like Santorum and sharrukin how is that not hate?

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 2:39 AM

Attention: This is a density test. Let’s see exactly how dense FloatingRock is by asking him/her to back up what s/he’s written above.

Ready? Here we go.

So, FloatingRock, you say Rick Santorum “want[s] to throw gays in prison.”

Here’s the question, and if you believe what you say is true, it shouldn’t be difficult at all.

Q: Source?

L.N. Smithee on March 4, 2012 at 3:14 AM

Keep it up and Kini will hurl a pineapple at ya…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:08 AM

I know..I’m working on it..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 3:15 AM

So, FloatingRock, you say Rick Santorum “want[s] to throw gays in prison.”

L.N. Smithee on March 4, 2012 at 3:14 AM

What exactly do you suppose the anti-sodomy laws that Rick Santorum is on the record supporting are all about? Do you think they just pin a triangle to their coat and leave it at that? No, they punish the gay people for engaging in homosexual behavior. You don’t punish people and put them in prison for their private relationships with other consenting adults unless you hate them.

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 3:20 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:14 AM

Give this one a tumble..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 3:21 AM

…If they’re throwing rocks at the neighbors house or hurting them in some other way, then you have a pretext to arrest people in their home, but if they’re engaging in consensual gay sex then you leave them alone. If you break in to somebodies bedroom, put them in handcuffs, haul them off to prison and lock them away, you obviously hate them and want to ruin their lives and make them pay.

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 3:22 AM

My sister and I used to mock sing that one in the back seat of our parents’ car on road trips.

Lol. Good times…

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:13 AM

Yay-ah! Gap band = Good times.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:22 AM

Oh brother… Santorum and his supporters are always going on about their conspiracy theories. It’s so ridiculous. /rolls eyes

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 3:14 AM

I don’t agree with redefining marriage for gays, for Muslim polygamy, or for anybody. I also don’t think that gay sex should be taught in school…of course I also don’t think that hetero sex should be taught in school either. I think folks have been having sex for thousands of years and don’t really need the government to issue an instruction manual about it.

I don’t care what they do, so long as they don’t do it in the street and frighten the horses.

sharrukin on March 4, 2012 at 3:24 AM

sharrukin on March 4, 2012 at 3:24 AM

I think I agree with you on those points, or at least I used to but now I’m having second thoughts, but none of those things you mentioned have anything to do with anti-sodomy laws that I’m aware of.

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 3:26 AM

My sister and I used to mock sing that one in the back seat of our parents’ car on road trips.

Lol. Good times…

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:13 AM

Yay-ah! Gap band = Good times.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:22 AM

Whoops! Fell behind. RedCrow’s now on to the awesomeness that is Parliament/Funkadelic.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:30 AM

Um…did the Seinfeld crew have some “residual contractual obligations”?

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:12 AM

Jason Alexander directed that vid. Paisley said it was the smoothest vid shoot he had ever done…Shatner, Marcia Marcia Marcia

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:34 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:30 AM

Lol. I swear I saw JJ from Good Times in that crowd!

Tried to find a good live, but…

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:38 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:38 AM

Probably Nagin’s favorite song…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:43 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:34 AM

Oh, okay. I didn’t know that, but it was pretty funny–the skit parts, that is.

I didn’t know that Paisley fella, either. Not bad–I’m just not much of a C/W buff.

I’m still sore for the time some Clint guy sold out Ford Field when I was at Comerica Park. The line at the garage where we parked was seven levels deep!!!

(Though, there were an awful mess of hot chicks wearing cowboy hats and tied-up plaid shirts…well, maybe I’m not all that mad.)

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:43 AM

Looks like Mr. Inevitable, is. We’ll see what’s what come Super duper Tuesday…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:43 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:43 AM

Yeah, I was gonna mention it, but I thought it would ruin an otherwise “perfect” thread. Lol.

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:47 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:43 AM

This is how BP hooked his wife, by casting her in his vid…Clint, as in Clint Black?

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:48 AM

Yeah, I was gonna mention it, but I thought it would ruin an otherwise “perfect” thread. Lol.

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:47 AM

I guess the Obsessor is out chasing after red pickups or stalking a Palin thread…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:55 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:48 AM

I take it she is the “lead female” in the vid. Pretty.
I like that the guy’s got a sense of humor.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:51 AM

I like that one.
Kenny’s hair is ridiculous, though. You’ll give me that!

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:55 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:51 AM

This one’s been in the deep, dark recesses of my cavernous skull for several weeks now.

(I’m afraid it might be a tumor.)

Sorry I didn’t type out the words–they’re really good.

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:59 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:55 AM

Lol. WORLD’S LARGEST GEAR CHANGE!

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:00 AM

Will is a crank at this point- his wife worked for Perry and Gingrich, and he is anti-victory like a Ron Paul guy. He really is past his time.

and a retard if he truly thinks that just winning two more senate seats is going to do anything.

it is called “getting noticed in the media by a faux conservative criticizing the GOP”- see Peggy Noonan, the idiot Erick Erickson, PBuchanan and Kathleen Parker for how it is done

not to mention the fact: how exactly does one win the Senate if no one supports the nominee for POTUS?!

AirForceCane on March 4, 2012 at 4:02 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:51 AM

Mel Tillis wrote that…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:03 AM

And I think everyone on this site realizes that if Santorum had just won five states in a row- there would be a headline blog post about his miraculous victory in Washington tonight..

but since it is Romney who has won five in a row- not a peep on this site about it

one thing this election does show is the bias and hypocrisy of websites

AirForceCane on March 4, 2012 at 4:03 AM

AirForceCane on March 4, 2012 at 4:02 AM

Um…Excuse me…You’re a wee bit off-topic.

‘K, thanks.

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:04 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:51 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:55 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:55 AM

Give this a tumble..This is country..:)

Try this one..Is it country??..:)

PS..Just give opinion..There is no right or wrong answers..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:06 AM

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:06 AM

I’d call it country.
Though, one could call it pop with a southern accent.
I kinda like it…(the music and vocals) though, the woman lying all sexy-like in the grass doesn’t hurt.

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:08 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:51 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:55 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:55 AM

Give this a tumble..This is country..:)

Try this one..Is it country??..:)

PS..Just give opinion..There is no right or wrong answers..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:06 AM

Sorry..Fixed it..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:09 AM

AirForceCane on March 4, 2012 at 4:03 AM

You either gave your two-cents and split, are staring at my comment sputtering, or are composing a very rude response to my “un-tagged” jest.

(I’m not sure which one I’m hoping for.)

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:10 AM

If the Republican Party is going to keep swimming around in the muck with their three unpopular candidates while the one candidate in the race that knows Washington from the inside yet has remained uncorrupted all these years, who tried to warn us all for years about the growing housing and debt bubbles, then I don’t think they’re worthy of taking seriously any longer. They say they put the economy first but that’s not true or else they’d be supporting Ron Paul. Republicans seem to have an unspoken litmus test that the candidates must affirm and support the rightness of Bush’s nation-building foreign policy, and promise more of the same even if it’s just empty rhetoric because we’re broke and can’t afford it anymore. The problem is that we now know that aside from bankrupting America, we’re not sure if we’re any better off today than we were before we spent all of those trillions rebuilding our enemies.

Even Rush seems to be admitting that we should get out.

Ron Paul is the only tea party candidate in the race—I mean the original tea party that stood for the opposite of what it does now— that’s why he has the broadest appeal, that’s why most of the GOP media has poisoned the well against him, and yet in spite of that he continues to poll on par with Romney in head to head against Obama, even according to Rasmussen. Imagine if people would actually give him a fair hearing, he could not only beat Romney all he has to do is the same thing again to beat Obama.

But people like Palin and Rush and Levin would need to begrudgingly admit that the worst propaganda against Ron Paul isn’t, in fact, true, and that if people really like his message in spite of their best efforts to persuade them otherwise, then instead of just botching this election and letting Romney win and then lose to Obama, GOP opinion makers need to clear the well. If they don’t and just trust to hope that some miracle will see them through, George Will is right, we’ll most likely have 4 more years of Obama.

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 4:11 AM

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:09 AM

Lol. I don’t know this joke. (I did notice it earlier in this thread.)

I’ve been off the intertubes the last couple days fixing my folks’ car.

Did I miss something?

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:12 AM

Obama as prez = big wins for the GOP in 2014. Real conservatives will get elected to the senate and house. The GOP will have a solid majority which will make the last 2 years of Obama’s 8 years the lamest of lame ducks.

angryed on March 3, 2012 at 10:34 PM

once again proving to be one of the stupidest posters on this site. Dude you never write ANYTHING that is either remotely rational, conservative, honest or insightful. How I pray that Hot Air designs a freaking ignore button because reading your lib troll comments the last month is such a waste of bandwidth!

AirForceCane on March 4, 2012 at 4:14 AM

I guess the Obsessor is out chasing after red pickups or stalking a Palin thread…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 3:55 AM

HaHaaaa!! Husband still mocks me for loving that song by saying: But I see danger…Stranger beware!

Mel Tillis wrote that…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:03 AM

“M-M-Mel”? Wow!! Sorry. That stuttering title is the only Mel Tillis album my black hippie parents had.

Beautiful tune, rendered poignantly by Kenny Rodgers.
:)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 4:15 AM

Did I miss something?

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:12 AM

I make a lot of typos..Well let’s just say I make typos..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:20 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:08 AM

I agree..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:21 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 4:15 AM

I’m afraid you’ve fallen behind again, Lady.

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:59 AM

And, here. For you to sing along.

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:21 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:55 AM

Michelle Wms, been in a few movies and was on ABC’s “According to Jim” as in Belushi…Last one

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:21 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:21 AM
I (actually) (really) like that one. (I especially like the music, but the vocal and lyrics are pretty good, too.)
BTW, it was Clint Black.

Well, folks…
Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:21 AM
Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:21 AM
Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 4:15 AM

I’ll bid you a fond adieu with this.

G’night, folks!

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:26 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:26 AM

LoLz..Later..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:29 AM

Give this a tumble..This is country..:)

Try this one..Is it country??..:)

PS..Just give opinion..There is no right or wrong answers..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:06 AM

Fantastic! Hope for the future, doncha know. What a lovely modern country rhythm. Stark reminder that things like music, art, etc. live on no matter our strife. Beauty and fun is eternal! Thank you Dire for continuously reminding us of that.
:D

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 4:29 AM

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 4:26 AM

People Eating Tasty Animals called, they want the recipe…Oh, and Peta called. They’re ticked that Ackroyd killed the bass before they could…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:32 AM

Dire,

American Honey is a country song…Lady A, not so much

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:33 AM

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 4:11 AM

FR, hasn’t Palin already stated that R’s shouldn’t alienate RPaul’s supporters?…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:34 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 4:29 AM

+ 100..Very well said..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:38 AM

served by the canny Mitch McConnell’s legislative talents

That’s where I stopped reading. What stupidity. Mitch McConnell is a twerp and a loser. If he’s still running the show in the Senate come next year you might as well pack it up and go home. He is about the worst there is (not including the totally insane America-hating dems, of course, who Mitch McConnell spends all of his time trying to be friends with and appease and placate and outright surrender to) though the Weeping Crybaby in the House does help to make the Mitch seem less of a baby, himself.

This GOP leadership absolutely HAS TO GO. They SUCK! They are cowards and idiots.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 4, 2012 at 4:43 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:33 AM

I agree..I think a growing number of so called country bands are starting to go into the Pop category..IMHO..:)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 4:51 AM

I keep composing long posts, and refreshes keep eating them, so I’ll try to make this one short.

This primary has been furiously and hotly contested, but I think that phase will be just about over Tuesday night. There are still a lot of states that have yet to vote, but they will be more formalities than real contests.

I wish we would all be good sports about it…no gloating, no dancing, no whining about how unfair it was that your candidate lost, no parting insults.

Our enemies are in the White House, the Senate, the House, the federal Judiciary, and are scattered among us in business, the media, schools, churches, and all sorts of places. They will show themselves and join the fight soon enough.

The real fight is just beginning, and we will not win if we are occupied fighting among ourselves.

Confutus on March 4, 2012 at 4:55 AM

The real fight is just beginning, and we will not win if we are occupied fighting among ourselves.

Confutus on March 4, 2012 at 4:55 AM

There’s not much you can do when you’re stuck with a good number of Vichy Right idiots as “allies”. Much work should have been done over 2011 (owing to the beating given to the left in 2010) but the GOP leadership intentionally blew every single opportunity to do ant=ything and, instead, took the 2010 election and turned around and surrendered to the Indonesian Imbecile and his lunatic junta. That insane and stupid behavior is what has been casting such a dark pall over this primary. That is where the nasty contentiousness comes in, because we all know that we have idiots and cowards filling the GOP leadership and they can only be counted on to screw everything up and give in, time and again, to the left, no matter what the situation.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 4, 2012 at 4:58 AM

FR, hasn’t Palin already stated that R’s shouldn’t alienate RPaul’s supporters?…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 4:34 AM

True, she hasn’t attacked RP like Rush and Levin have, I included her as an opinion maker who reaches the voters that we need to defeat Romney.

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 4:59 AM

Gotta roll…

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 5:01 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 4:29 AM

I enjoyed the funky videos..It was so cool..Who knows..Maybe next time we can do disco??..:):)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 5:08 AM

Gohawgs on March 4, 2012 at 5:01 AM

I enjoyed the funky videos..It was so cool..Who knows..Maybe next time we can do disco??..:):)

Dire Straits on March 4, 2012 at 5:17 AM

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 3:51 AM

This one’s been in the deep, dark recesses of my cavernous skull for several weeks now.

(I’m afraid it might be a tumor.)

Sorry I didn’t type out the words–they’re really good.

RedCrow on March 4, 2012 at 3:59 AM

Awww man. Didn’t you just jog-dance in place listening to that song right now?

:D

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 4, 2012 at 5:22 AM

PSA

I really have great sympathy for Ms. Fluke and so in order to help her out I want to urge everyone to place at least one (unused) condom in an envelope and send to her at:

Sandra Fluke C/O
Georgetown University Law Center
600 NewJersey Ave., NW,
Washington,DC 20001

Maybe if enough of us respond she can make it through at least the next few months.

Resist We Much on March 4, 2012 at 5:38 AM

What exactly do you suppose the anti-sodomy laws that Rick Santorum is on the record supporting are all about? Do you think they just pin a triangle to their coat and leave it at that? No, they punish the gay people for engaging in homosexual behavior. You don’t punish people and put them in prison for their private relationships with other consenting adults unless you hate them.

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 3:20 AM

…If they’re throwing rocks at the neighbors house or hurting them in some other way, then you have a pretext to arrest people in their home, but if they’re engaging in consensual gay sex then you leave them alone. If you break in to somebodies bedroom, put them in handcuffs, haul them off to prison and lock them away, you obviously hate them and want to ruin their lives and make them pay.

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 3:22 AM

And, as I thought, you’ve failed the density test.

Here’s why: What Santorum — and other legal experts including but not limited to Antonin Scalia — support are not anti-sodomy laws per se, but the concept of states being able to adopt laws pertaining to the moral character of its citizens. They disagree that there is within the Bill of Rights a “right to privacy.” (Video homework: Mark Levin breaks down how leftists — including Planned Parenthood — plotted to enshrine the “right to privacy” into SCOTUS case law.)

The Supreme Court agreed with Santorum’s stance in 1986 when it affirmed Georgia’s sodomy prohibition (Bowers v. Hardwick). So, what happened afterward? Did that begin a roundup of gays in Atlanta, Augusta, Savannah, and Macon? Obviously not. Eventually, the state’s legislature repealed the law. It was seventeen years before the Bowers decision could be challenged because in all that time, nobody had been arrested for sodomy.

Then, one dumbass sheriff’s deputy in Texas who answered a phony report of domestic violence phoned in by a jealous lover re-ignited the fight to ban sodomy laws. Once the doofus discovered that there was no fight between the two men caught in flagrante delicto, he arrested them for just having sex. They were released from jail hours later; no hard time, as you speciously suggest. That became Lawrence v. Texas, and as Justice Scalia warned, declaring Texas’ sodomy ban unconstitutional lays down a path by which all other moral laws may be challenged. Right now, Utah’s polygamy ban — older than the state itself — is being challenged based on Lawrence by the guy in the reality show Sister Wives. And before you laugh about comparisons of gay sex to bestiality, read the latest from Canada, where gays can marry and quoting scripture about homosexuality can result in a fine.

Santorum has been clear about his personal stance on homosexuality as a devout Catholic. He also has been very clear about whether or not as President, he would use Federal power to usurp the rights of states to govern themselves in such matters. In the very same interview in which he made the much-quoted and deliberately interpreted “man on dog” remark, he said directly and plainly that if states decided that they wanted to legalize sodomy, they have that right.

So I would make the argument that with President, or Senator or Congressman or whoever Santorum, I would put it back to where it is, the democratic process. If New York doesn’t want sodomy laws, if the people of New York want abortion, fine. I mean, I wouldn’t agree with it, but that’s their right. But I don’t agree with the Supreme Court coming in.

That’s MY source for saying he doesn’t “want to throw gays in prison.” I’m still waiting for yours.

L.N. Smithee on March 4, 2012 at 6:19 AM

FloatingRock: A long response to your erroneous remarks is in moderation. Watch the space above this post for updates.

L.N. Smithee on March 4, 2012 at 6:22 AM

But people like Palin and Rush and Levin would need to begrudgingly admit that the worst propaganda against Ron Paul isn’t, in fact, true

FloatingRock on March 4, 2012 at 4:11 AM

Why should they “admit” something that there is no basis for believing?

Ron Paul sounds like Bart Simpson when it comes to the Ron Paul newsletters: “I didn’t do it, nobody saw me do it, you can’t prove anything.” With so much on the line, that’s not going to fly.

Why do you think once black people hear all the complexities of the official Paulbot explanations why Paul didn’t either write or read the publications bearing his own name, they’ll believe Paul doesn’t really think black men are “animals”? Despite plenty of evidence to the contrary, you still buy propaganda that Santorum “wants to throw gays in prison” when that’s complete nonsense.

L.N. Smithee on March 4, 2012 at 6:53 AM

Last week they were telling us that if Mitt didn’t win in his home native state of Michigan – a big union state, a heavy evangelical state which he left 47 years ago and where the Democrats organized to get the vote out for Sanctafrothium – then he would have to get out of the race.

We need better pundits.

Mitt Romney is the most qualified, and decent, person to run for the Presidency in 200 years. He will change the face of the Republican Party from stupid and angry to competent and rational.

I can’t wait for the Romney Death Star to be turned on the target rich Obama record. George Will may not know why Obama’s pathetic record will result in him not winning re-election. Romney suffers from no such deficits. Romney will win the Presidency in a landslide.

Basilsbest on March 4, 2012 at 7:01 AM

Last week they were telling us that if Mitt didn’t win in his home native state of Michigan – a big union state, a heavy evangelical state which he left 47 years ago and where the Democrats organized to get the vote out for Sanctafrothium – then he would have to get out of the race.

We need better pundits.

Name one who said Romney “would have to get out of the race.” ONE.

And how sweet of you that you’re adopting Dan Savage’s filthy rhetoric. Do you enjoy talking about excrement when you don’t have to? Seems like it.

L.N. Smithee on March 4, 2012 at 7:55 AM

I’m afraid that George Will has given up a long time ago. He has become nothing less than a puffed-head intellectual who knows very little. He, as talking voice of the GOP elite was instrumental in taking down Sarah Palin, the one credible voice to beat Obama, in order to put up the most unprincipled candidate in decades, the one man whose baggage of credentials are the closest to the Marxist -Oromneycare, pro-aborton -lobbyist games etc., when we need, more than ever,a fighter with the moral high ground,one who will take it to the left,and let the danged indies choose-Marxism or freedom.
George is the epitome of the worthlessness of modern education without a moral base. So much for Oxford and Harvard Law school.

Don L on March 4, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Quote for the day:

“If you’re whining, you’re losing”

http://harndenblog.dailymail.co.uk/2012/03/rick-santorum-says-drudge-report-is-showing-for-mitt-romney-.html

mountainaires on March 4, 2012 at 8:04 AM

What this nation need badly is a second party. The one that goes under the name of GOP/DEMs has turned America into a Socialist, Godless nation.

If anyone of doesn’t yet realize that they are no different than the left -that they don’t intend to reverse Oromneycare or Roe V Wade or anything much the Dems do -it’s about their power too.These key things to them are but voter bait -talk them up but never give away your power by actually fixing or repealing them…

The manner in which the GOP mouthpieces acted as Pravda in taking down Sarah and all of Oromneycare’s competitors tells me that they will not allow the common man to take away their control. That’s why they had to take down Sarah and co. That’s why they hate the tea party. That’s why they put up the biggest unprincipled man in history -Obama lite.

Don L on March 4, 2012 at 8:12 AM

sharrukin on March 4, 2012 at 2:59 AM

The funniest satyrical thing I’ve seen in years.

Don L on March 4, 2012 at 8:22 AM

Too bad Dr. Paul is too old to win. He’s just too old.

Bmore on March 4, 2012 at 8:45 AM

Looks like a little soul train action last night. Dire how did you miss this one? You know the GOP will betray us. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ckxb6Mn-as4

Bmore on March 4, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Drive the Liberals mad, let them know Andrew’s spirit lives on in us! Get your “Breitbart Is Here” T-Shirt here.

Flora Duh on March 4, 2012 at 9:08 AM

“So while we think, using Civics 101, that Republican majorities in the House and Senate could stop Obama, he doesn’t care what the Constitution tells him he can and can’t do. And he’s going to care even less in a second term when there will be no accountability, no election to win, no base to hold, no independents to worry about. He’s not gonna worry about Congress. He’s not gonna have one care in the world, in a conventional political sense, that would put limits on his desires and behavior.” el Rushbo

Yup.
America’s Dear Leader has already repeatedly demonstrated that he doesn’t give a flyin’ flock about the Constitution or the LAW, or legal precedent – upon which Leftists drool.
ØbaMaØ has the power of the Diktat. It’s what he an his anti-American pals have dreamed of for oh so long: A Leftist, Stalinesque clone.

~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on March 4, 2012 at 11:11 AM

I know George Will got a lot of flack for saying that, but he’s absolutely right. People don’t like Obama. His poll numbers are worse than George W. Bush’s were at the end of his first term. I say let him stay in office while we control the other houses and see how low we can make those numbers go. Just like the BOOOOOOOSH bogeyman that Democrats had plenty of time to build a case against, so can Republicans do the same to an abject failure of a President, as opposed to replacing him with one that damages conservatism in the eyes of the unwashed. Independents won’t like Santorum’s social conservatism, and will be more likely to back Democrats in a midterm, and Democrats will LOVE Romney’s willingness to *ahem*… “see things from a liberal point-of-view.” They’ll still slander him at every turn and drag his poll numbers down while he cuts deals with them, which is a win-win for liberals. Either way, we’d be handing them a 4-year Presidency unless the economy completely reverses course, which is unlikely given that Romney and Santorum have failed to address the economy adequately in this election cycle.

In short, we should let Barack Obama stay in his treasured Oval Office. The voting public needs to be reminded what happens when you elect Democrats, and giving him enough rope to hang himself (RAAAAAAACIST) will ensure the media is doing damage control 24/7, which keeps them out of conservatives’ hair. Then again, his Oval Office might be less of a perk and more of a prison if it’s the only place in Washington where liberals are congregating. Concentrating on retaining the House and taking the Senate is a wonderful political idea. Nancy Pelosi wanted to play the long-term political game with bum-rushing Obamacare through her enemy’s defenses; conservatives should oblige her.

mintycrys on March 4, 2012 at 11:15 AM

The funniest satyrical thing I’ve seen in years.

Don L on March 4, 2012 at 8:22 AM

Not mine in the original form. I stole it and adapted it for the occasion.

sharrukin on March 4, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Mitt Romney is going to win this thing.

He will be an excellent president.

bluegill on March 3, 2012 at 9:36 PM

No such thing as an “excellent” president in this era. Presidents will always be mediocre because excellent people don’t run for president – it is not worth the hassle and they know it and their egos don’t require it.

It is the frothy pond scum that rises to the surface.

AttaBoyLuther on March 4, 2012 at 1:58 PM

George Will was wrong when he claimed Ronald Reagan could never win. George will is wrong again today with this absurd claim.

George has degraded into the absurdity of constant appearances on a democratic operative propaganda hour. Who can even watch this show?

Nothing to see here, move along.

Freddy on March 4, 2012 at 2:20 PM

mintycrys on March 4, 2012 at 11:15 AM

I’ve never been a big fan of the ‘Win By Losing’ strategy. Seems to me you lose by losing and to argue otherwise is a rationalization for failure.

I say fight, resist with every fiber of our being this horrid transformation of our country into yet another failed authoritarian superstate, and you cannot ask anyone to fight for or against something or someone, no matter how noble or worthwhile that something or someone is, if they’re not fighting to win.

George Will is a tool, little better than Frum or Noonan or Parker or Buckley or Brooks or Powell. They’re quislings and fools and will be remembered as such when the smoke clears a few years or decades from now.

troyriser_gopftw on March 4, 2012 at 3:18 PM

served by the canny Mitch McConnell’s legislative talents

george will isn’t a conservative and shouldn’t be giving conservatives advice. I have fears about all 3 of the republican candidates but will vote for the nominee. The fear I have about santorum, after hearing him be an apologist for do-nothing professional politican congressional republicans for two years on the bennett show on Fridays is that on the first day of a santorum presidency boehner and mcconnell will be in the Oval Office with their feet on the desk smoking cigars and planning the same moves we got from a republican congress and bush. Bigger government and more attempts to win over the looters to the republican side.

peacenprosperity on March 4, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Maybe if enough of us respond she can make it through at least the next few months.

Resist We Much on March 4, 2012 at 5:38 AM

From the little I’ve learned about this chic I suspect at some point it will be revealed that she is a lesbian so the condoms will be a waste of money.

peacenprosperity on March 4, 2012 at 3:27 PM

I’ve never been a big fan of the ‘Win By Losing’ strategy. Seems to me you lose by losing and to argue otherwise is a rationalization for failure.

I say fight, resist with every fiber of our being this horrid transformation of our country into yet another failed authoritarian superstate, and you cannot ask anyone to fight for or against something or someone, no matter how noble or worthwhile that something or someone is, if they’re not fighting to win.

George Will is a tool, little better than Frum or Noonan or Parker or Buckley or Brooks or Powell. They’re quislings and fools and will be remembered as such when the smoke clears a few years or decades from now.

troyriser_gopftw on March 4, 2012 at 3:18 PM

This isn’t “win by losing,” it’s acknowledging that the more we look like we’re fighting to elect people that we don’t like, the more pathetic it makes us look if we lose, with Santorum, at least. People dislike Obama but they also dislike Santorum. I think Romney would definitely win, but then we’d have Romney as a President, and the media would stomp his robot nuts into oblivion and slander conservatives for their hypocrisy, by their election of a man who basically created the template for the thing that conservatives spent the better part of a year railing against with the utmost passion.

A politician as bad as Obama comes along once in a blue moon. He’s SO BAD that it’s more advantageous to conservatives to let him stay in the Oval Office and be the figurehead for the liberal movement that Democrats will have to spend the last two years of second term distancing themselves from so they can run another candidate in 2016 than it is to replace him with a Republican. The only real power he would have in the event of GOP majorities in both the House and Senate is the ability to appoint Supreme Court Justices, but with majorities in the House and Senate, the GOP could block ANY nomination to the left of John Roberts. On top of that, his ego won’t allow him to cut deals to save his future legacy. It simply won’t. And if he does, conservatives win, liberals will rage, and the media will try to paint Obama as the great uniter, which they’ve been doing anyway.

Point is, we had a rare chance to thrash a poor incumbent with a terrible record, and we pissed it all away. We failed to maintain the momentum from 2010 by allowing a bunch of political opportunists whose platform consisted of “I want to be President,” not unlike the current inhabitant of the White House. We should cut our losses and focus on the rest of Congress before it really starts to look like we truly believe that the current crop of candidates are the best and brightest we can put forward.

I’m being an Eeyore again. But the best case scenarios where Republicans win (Santorum throwing aside his social conservatism for fiscal conservatism and fixing problems instead of demagoguing them on moral issues or Romney treating conservatism with something other than contempt) don’t look likely to happen at all. Letting Obama give Independents a reason to vote Republican for many years to come is a welcome third option if we can limit the damage he does by controlling Congress.

mintycrys on March 4, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I’m being an Eeyore again. But the best case scenarios where Republicans win (Santorum throwing aside his social conservatism for fiscal conservatism and fixing problems instead of demagoguing them on moral issues or Romney treating conservatism with something other than contempt) don’t look likely to happen at all. Letting Obama give Independents a reason to vote Republican for many years to come is a welcome third option if we can limit the damage he does by controlling Congress.

mintycrys on March 4, 2012 at 3:43 PM

You’re essentially complaining about the seeming mediocrity of the Republican primary field. Okay, but if you take a ride in the way-back machine, you’ll see that Reagan, for example, wasn’t embraced as a substantive candidate when he made his first bid for national office. He was dismissed as a former mid-level movie star who was considered a middling Governor of California–and he lost the nomination to GOP President by appointment Gerald Ford, who was a capable politician (and great American) but certainly not a great campaigner.

I’m not saying Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich are Reagans-in-waiting or flowers waiting to bloom. I’m saying each of them possesses certain strengths that demonstrate a potential for national leadership–and I write that knowing full well each also has character defects and political deficiencies–Romney’s unwillingness to take risks, Santorum’s lack of impulse control, Gingrich’s grandiosity and propensity to exaggerate and dissemble–that tend to cancel out those strengths. Truth is, they had the guts to run, to put it on the line, very much unlike, say, Palin or Christie or Daniels or fill in the frigging blank with the name of your favorite never-ran.

We run with what we’ve got. Of those three, I think Romney has it in him to beat President Obama and the Chicago Machine. However, whoever wins the GOP primary gets my vote in the general election. Winning is winning, and there is no consolation prize.

troyriser_gopftw on March 4, 2012 at 4:19 PM

Rush is dead on with this one.

jnelchef on March 4, 2012 at 5:16 PM

I’m really not interested in anything Rush has to say anymore.

JPeterman on March 3, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Despite the fact that he is COMPLETELY correct in questioning how a 30 year old, supposed law student at a $40,000+ per year law school, can be bankrupting herself by spending over $1000 per year on birth control?

Well, unless she is doing the professors for her grades.

He’s right. You’re wrong.

Siddhartha Vicious on March 4, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Geez, did not even realize that this yesterday’s thread.

That’s me, a day late and a dullard short.

Siddhartha Vicious on March 4, 2012 at 6:06 PM

George Wills – what a moron. How does an idiot like this get on TV? I sure would like to know. Like they used to say on SNL a long time ago – George, you dumb ignorant b!tch.

rjulio on March 5, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5