Quotes of the day

posted at 8:31 pm on November 10, 2012 by Allahpundit

“He doesn’t have to play to get reelected anymore, which is huge,” said Chicago supporter Jim Slama, who first met Obama in 2001. “It frees him to be who he is.”…

“I’m hopeful,” said Slama. “He’ll try to play to the middle, but he’s got the Tea Party to deal with, and he can take out his baseball bat and wail away and he won’t have to worry about the implications of reelection.”


“Millions of American evangelicals are absolutely shocked by not just the presidential election, but by the entire avalanche of results that came in,” R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, in Louisville, Ky., said in an interview. “It’s not that our message — we think abortion is wrong, we think same-sex marriage is wrong — didn’t get out. It did get out.

“It’s that the entire moral landscape has changed,” he said. “An increasingly secularized America understands our positions, and has rejected them.”…

The evangelical share of the population is both declining and graying, studies show. Large churches like the Southern Baptist Convention and the Assemblies of God, which have provided an organizing base for the Christian right, are losing members.

“In the long run, this means that the Republican constituency is going to be shrinking on the religious end as well as the ethnic end,” said James L. Guth, a professor of political science at Furman University in Greenville, S.C.


This year Democrats’ arguments on values were heard. This was a “values” election as strident as the ones from culture wars past in which Christians marched against subsidies for Mapplethorpe, creationists vied for seats on Kansas school boards, and William Bennett demanded to know where the outrage was. What was different about this year’s culture war is that Republicans lost it

Obama has made a lot of mistakes, but running the country as a business is not one of them. Like Bush before him, he is always stressing how America is the only place where membership in the nation derives not from race, ethnicity, or religion but from belief in an idea.

The bright side of that vision is a beautiful thing, but there is a dark side to it, too. If America is an idea, you can belong to it regardless of your ethnic background. But you cannot belong to it regardless of your beliefs. A tendency to lecture the American public on what they are supposed to believe has become a constant in the president’s oratory. “That’s who we are,” he said in his victory speech on Tuesday. He was talking about the need to help an 8-year-old girl with leukemia, a fairly uncontroversial proposition. But he uses this trope even when talking about the tiniest velleities, usually expanding it to “that’s not who we are as a people.” If there is one disturbing truth that Obama has always understood, it is that a winning American campaign is always about values, is never lukewarm, and is generally a bit scary-looking to foreigners and losers.


In my own state, where the Democrats ran the board on election night, the “Live Free or Die” license plates look very nice when you see them all lined up in the parking lot of the Social Security office. But, in their view of the state and its largesse, there’s nothing very exceptional about Americans, except that they’re the last to get with the program. Barack Obama ran well to the left of Bill Clinton and John Kerry, and has been rewarded for it both by his party’s victory and by the reflex urgings of the usual GOP experts that the Republican party needs to “moderate” its brand.

I have no interest in the traditional straw clutching — oh, it was the weak candidate . . . hard to knock off an incumbent . . . next time we’ll have a better GOTV operation in Colorado . . . I’m always struck, if one chances to be with a GOP insider when a new poll rolls off the wire, that their first reaction is to query whether it’s of “likely” voters or merely “registered” voters. As the consultant class knows, registered voters skew more Democrat than likely voters, and polls of “all adults” skew more Democrat still. Hence the preoccupation with turnout models. In other words, if America had compulsory voting as Australia does, the Republicans would lose every time. In Oz, there’s no turnout model, because everyone turns out. The turnout-model obsession is an implicit acknowledgment of an awkward truth — that, outside the voting booth, the default setting of American society is ever more liberal and statist.


In future, our elections will be like those in Britain or New York. We will be presented with a choice between a statist liberal and an out-there uber-liberal. And with the uber-liberal enjoying the full backing of the media and Hollywood, it’ll by no means be an easy win for the ordinary Mike Bloomberg or David Cameron-style liberal, who will be portrayed as a heartless plutocrat if he happens to come from money, or as a hopeless rube if he happens to come from nowhere…

The school choice movement will be killed off as “draining resources from public education,” which really means it harms a core Democratic interest group, the teachers’ unions. The simple matter of requiring voters to supply I.D. will be forbidden, not because it doesn’t make sense, the voters don’t want it or because it’s unconstitutional, but because it harms Democratic party interests. The two parties will fall all over each other in their efforts to mollify illegal immigrants. The new health-care entitlement will become increasingly onerous and costly, with all discussion limited to how best to “save” it, until one day employers’ efforts to work around it cause a frustrated government to convert it to a full-on single-payer Socialist scheme.

I didn’t expect this would ever happen to my country, and certainly not so fast, but we are now a decadent European social welfare state, sure to be accompanied by European levels of economic stagnation, taxation, welfare rolls, unemployment and perpetually misallocated resources such as subsidies to favored companies. Military irrelevance will soon follow as the staggering costs of the cradle-to-grave socialist state grow exponentially. Iran will soon have nuclear capability, to be followed in short order by its Middle Eastern neighbors, folllowed shortly by widespread proliferation of nuclear arms to terrorist groups.


If we are to lose America as it has been, could we not ask that it be lost to something better than this? Our president, a Narcissus masquerading as a Demosthenes, makes big speeches packed full of little ideas, and he is applauded wildly for it. His, says Marco Rubio, “are tired and old big-government ideas. Ideas that people come to America to get away from. Ideas that threaten to make America more like the rest of the world, instead of helping the world become more like America.” I will vouch for the verity of these words. I have watched how these sorry ideas play out in the real world, and it is not pretty: They make people’s lives worse, and yet simultaneously convince them that any reform will kill them — a fatal combination. Americans should avoid this path sedulously, for that way lies decline…

And yet, he has now won twice. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, to elect such a man once may be regarded as a misfortune, but to elect him twice looks like carelessness. (Or, rather, criminal negligence.) This year, certainly, was not the perfect storm of 2008. Then, novelty and redemption played a role; this time, an insipid bore ran on an openly statist platform and won the day in a country that is supposed to be “center right.” Maybe it no longer is. In 1980, when faced with a set of policies that demonstrably hadn’t worked and a president who wanted to take America leftward, America chose a different path; in 2012, it doubled down. That says a lot about a people. The central problem, then, is not that Obama will be president for the next few years, but that the American people — knowing him — chose to reelect him. Even if this is put down to a failure of Romney’s turnout operation or Hurricane Sandy or Obama’s brilliant targeting, it does not say much for their commitment to classical liberalism that a significant group of Americans stayed away from the fight because they didn’t like Mitt Romney. That this was not a clear-cut repudiation of the president should sound the alarm.


Obama is taking us toward the European way at very the moment that model is collapsing. This may mean total decline, but it may also mean a painful process of cultural reconstitution.

The West was already headed for demographic-economic Armageddon. Even a Romney victory wouldn’t have changed that. The real test will be what happens when the crisis truly hits, sometime in the next decade. Fighting for conservative/classically-liberal solutions until that moment will make all the difference in how America weathers the storm. The Western welfare state as currently constituted cannot survive. It will shortly move from inevitable to impossible.


Thinking about the present day, if conservatives are right and what Walter Russell Mead has called the “blue state model” is indeed collapsing, then the GOP might not be that far away from another moment. At the least, the fact that it did not come in 2012 does not mean it is not coming.

And conservatives should be ready for it. For starters, they should ignore the triumphalists on the left espousing a permanent shift leftward. Nonsense! Yes, conservatives must do a better job of reaching out to Hispanics, but some perspective is necessary. The incumbent president is set to take in millions of fewer votes than he won in 2008. He limped across the finish line by dint of vicious demagoguery, which lowered turnout among white voters who have voted Republican in the past. Put simply, the GOP is still very much in this ballgame.


Now we need a majority in Congress to listen – and they should start by making sure taxes don’t go up on the 98% of Americans making under $250,000 a year starting January 1. This is something we all agree on. Even as we negotiate a broader deficit reduction package, Congress should extend middle-class tax cuts right now. It’s a step that would give millions of families and 97% of small businesses the peace of mind that will lead to new jobs and faster growth. There’s no reason to wait.

We know there will be differences and disagreements in the months to come. That’s part of what makes our political system work. But on Tuesday, you said loud and clear that you won’t tolerate dysfunction, or politicians who see compromise as a dirty word.

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


Comment pages: 1 6 7 8

There are clearly large shifts in the voting population, but there was so much actual fraud, it’s hard to know what it means. The article in headlines talks about a shift then shows a photo of “undocumented workers”. Well, what’s the real word for that? Illegal aliens. Illegal, because their presence here constitutes a crime. There are perfectly legal ways of entering in and remaining in the United States. They chose to pursue illegal ones.

They chose to become criminals.

Acorn has a long history of criminal behavior.

Obama has written about his criminal drug use.

With the Democratic Party embracing criminals, are we surprised that they commit widespread election fraud-140% turnout- to win elections? Things like drug use, or being an illegal alien or committing voter registration fraud or election fraud aren’t “crime” crimes. They’re a necessary means to immpose their views, which of course are the correct views, on those of us too stupid to understand their brilliance.

The media no longer has any interest in printing truth or facts. They printed lie after lie during this election cycle. They have shown no interest in determining why hundreds of Mexicans were killed in Fast and Furious or why an American ambassador was killed. The media are now almost purely a voice for the Democratic Party, a Party which clearly favors criminal behavior.

Even with the change in demographics to favoring single motherhood, and distance from religion, it’s more likely the takeover of a new form of organized crime-the Democratic Party with its widespread endorsement of multiple forms of criminal behavior and total control of the media machine which is changing the country.

talkingpoints on November 11, 2012 at 10:24 AM

This is crazy. Every time I come here, or click open a news site, I see another headline to some article claiming that Romney and the GOP lost some big demographic of voters, mostly I keep seeing how they lost the women’s vote and the young vote. Bull&*^%. He lost the non-white vote, that’s it, nothing else, and he lost it BIG, period. When the non-white vote is taken out Romney won in all other demographics, he won the 18-29 year olds and every other age group, and YES, take out the non-white vote and he won amongst women voters by 14 percentage points, a margin we normally consider a landslide.

redhead on November 11, 2012 at 10:20 AM

But blacks aren’t being racist when they vote for Obama.

talkingpoints on November 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM

John Courtney Murray, perhaps the leading Catholic political theorist of the last century, wrote that it is quite impossible for a society to operate “without some spiritual bond of unity,” without “some concept of a doctrine that is sacred.”

workingclass artist on November 11, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Well, duh. I forget who said it, maybe Franklin, maybe Madison –

The Constitution only works with a just and moral people. It is completely unsuited for any other.

People like nathor, bradky and some others are just as much of a part of the problem as your average fool on the street who believes a President can eliminate abortion, or that Mormonism is a dangerous cult.

I am hardly what one would consider a Christian in the traditional sense. I favor abortion, oppose gay marriage, oppose drug legalization (decriminalization, OK).

But I do know basic truism such as John Murray has here.

Whatever is happening to America is inevitable, and, barring some great spiritual awakening, unstoppable.

You cannot convince the nathors, the bradkys, the boomer_sooners or the rest of these clowns that social liberalism is no different than fiscal liberalism. They both cost money. Hence we are doomed to eventual slavery.

Just to recap Mr Tyler:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage ”

Lanceman on November 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

The next winner candidate for the Progs will be a Muslim convert, handicaped, transgender, illegal, hispanic, “female”, Haavaad graduate lawyer who claimed to be Arapaho Indian on her college applications.
Of course, the circumstances of all her qualifications will be hidden from the public.
“Her” previous occupation was Windmill Farmer. She made millions selling power and American Eagle feathers at her New Mexico casino.
Prior to her candidacy, the Supreme Court ruled that only lack of breathing would disqualify a candidate from the ballot.
Welcome to Utopia.

dirtengineer on November 11, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Lanceman on November 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

I’d say we are at number seven careening full speed to number eight.

Cindy Munford on November 11, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Lanceman on November 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Hate to say it, kinda like not wanting to really really see whats’ what…

When reality hits it’s a M’Fer…

America picked this SOS over morality…

There is truism and truth, and then there is this, “There are none so blind as do not see.”

I think as a whole even amongst ourselves as professing Conservatives, we are almost as divided as any group could be.

Can we even come together?

Not from what I have read here over the past few years…

We have to overcome ourselves first…

I have too much in my head to get it all down.

Maybe I should just keep quiet too… :-)

Scrumpy on November 11, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Lanceman on November 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM

You make me laugh every time with your overblown drama. Bondage? really. Try getting the name right at least. Tytler not Tyler, and then you may want to do a little fact checking on who said your quotation.

The famous Fatal Sequence quotation, sometimes known as the Tytler cycle, is

“The historical cycle seems to be: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more.”

Its earliest confirmed use is by Henning Webb Prentis, Jr., President of the Armstrong Cork Company. It was during a speech entitled “Industrial Management in a Republic,” delivered in the grand ballroom of the Waldorf Astoria at New York during the 250th meeting of the National Conference Board on March 18, 1943.

Prentis did not use the “fatal sequence” quotation in conjunction with the “why democracies fail” quotation. But they have later published together and both attributed to Tytler, as in the queries column of American Notes & Queries in April 1979. Nobody can find any work by Tytler with the Fatal Sequence quotation, and it appears to be original to Prentis.[14]

Bradky on November 11, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Okay,I realize a number of you have likely moved to new threads, but I have a few things to say about some things said here.

First, full blown amnesty may not be inevitable, but some sort of path to legal residence is. According to the exit polls, a full 60% of Americans support a path to citizenship. It’s hard to see how you keep something from happening when sixty percent of Americans want it. So some form of amnesty is inevitable, if people on our side get ahead of the issue however, its possible it could be enacted on terms equitable to our concerns.

For example, a phased in amnesty might be workable. Just, an example.

Second, the insistence that we’ll never ever ever ever EVER be able to win Hispanics, is in essence admission that we are done as a political party. If Hispanics continue to vote for democrats at 70% margins, then its only a matter of time before its mathematically impossible for Republicans to win elections. Yes, Hispanic immigration has slowed dramatically with the economy tanking, but the population is still growing at a faster rate than Caucasians and becoming more politically active.

The thing is however, we “can,” win Hispanic votes. Texas politicians regularly manage to get 40% of the Hispanic vote, even in recent years after the immigration reform debate. They’ve done this by continually reaching out the to the community for over a decade, giving them little things that they want, and by running Hispanic candidates in various races, a most recent example being Ted Cruz.

Additionally, something we have to keep in mind, is that a large part of our difficulty with Hispanic voters, is due to the simple fact that they are predominantly lower income. Our party has always had problem with lower income voters, so Hispanics are not in any way unique in this respect. Eventually, the Hispanic population in the united states will trend towards the middle class, if we start courting them now, then when that happens its easy to see them becoming a swing demographic, which our country desperately needs right now.

The way I see it, if we start now, then it wouldn’t be unreasonable to expect to take 40% of the Hispanic vote by 2012, and to re-establish our advantage among Cuban Americans, which would put Florida back into our column for Presidential elections. 40% is a figure we’ve managed to hit before, not even that long ago in fact.

The difference, I think, is that we first have to stop spitting on the idea of winning Hispanic voters. I wish we had another 3-4 election cycles to address the problem too, but we don’t, the issue faces us now.

Also, once again, I want to reiterate. While some path to citizenship is likely inevitable, that doesn’t mean I’m on board with amnesty, or at least blanket amnesty. The issues must be addressed in some manner before it can be seriously considered.

Finally, if we do figure out some way to deal with these issues, then we should allow Marko Rubio to be the one to introduce the legislation, and get his name on it. At this point, he’s the most likely 2016 nominee, so if this is going to happen then we should squeeze it for all its worth.

Again though, big if.

WolvenOne on November 11, 2012 at 1:59 PM

Bradky on November 11, 2012 at 12:49 PM

I know who the guy is, dumbass. Watching television and typing sometimes are incompatible, you goddamned a$$hole. But then, you are HA’s original troll.

You’re like any number of punks here and elsewhere who catch a typo and somehow that’s supposed to negate the whole post.

And ‘bondage’ in that context, does not mean what you think I think it means. Diminished quality of life, lower standard of living, anything that makes my freedom to maintain is a type of bondage.

But then, you always were a pretentious piece of crap.

Lanceman on November 11, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Lanceman on November 11, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Look like you are the ignoramus. Big difference between a typo and not even recognizing you are quoting the wrong person. (hazards of people who see something on the internet and immediately ascribe truth to source and legitimacy IF it is something they agree with)
Go back to school and ponder over the meaning of critical thinking skills. Or stick to anonymous internet postings and carry the self delusion to greater heights….

Bradky on November 11, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Bradky on November 11, 2012 at 2:30 PM

You really are quite the supercilious little prig and pretentious azzhole, aren’t you?
But then, that’s normal for leftoid drones.

Solaratov on November 11, 2012 at 3:48 PM

When you’re trying to persuade other people to your side you need to treat them with the utmost respect, you don’t go around making sarcastic jokes and expect them to “get” it.

tkyang99 on November 11, 2012 at 3:07 AM

That must be why the paulbots and truecons insult and demean anyone who disagrees with them, and call them communists, etc.

Solaratov on November 11, 2012 at 3:56 PM

There’s nothing new under the sun. We all know that. America has always been changing but it was changing within the rubric of a shared Judeo Christian sense of right and wrong. And of a shared respect for our founders. That is gone and it went in a relatively short time starting in the 1960’s. Throw in the Ted Kennedy engineered immigration changes favoring third world and Latino populations…Well goodbye America…Hola Detroit-Tijuanaville.

bluesdoc70 on November 11, 2012 at 5:57 PM

Bradky on November 11, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Totally uncalled for, have you never made an error in keying?

Cindy Munford on November 11, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Read my reply in full. http://hotair.com/archives/2012/11/10/quotes-of-the-day-1195/comment-page-8/#comment-6500593

And keep in mind prior to my reply he said

People like nathor, bradky and some others are just as much of a part of the problem as your average fool on the street who believes a President can eliminate abortion, or that Mormonism is a dangerous cult.

I’ll be civil with people who are civil in return but I’m not going to take face shots without returning them.
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn’t read the opening comments from him or I.

Bradky on November 11, 2012 at 8:06 PM

The marriage of conservatives and liberals is over.
Totally irreconcilable differences.
It’s time to divide the possessions, find new homes and start a new life, each to their own liking.
Find a way to do it peacefully.

justltl on November 12, 2012 at 12:36 AM

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8