Quotes of the day

posted at 10:21 pm on August 1, 2013 by Allahpundit

From immigration and national security policies to how far to take the fight against Obamacare — which the Republicans are practically unanimous in hating — major players inside the Republican Party are deeply divided against one another in unusually public fashion

“We have an identity crisis, and you see the identity crisis playing out through all the various fissures,” said Ron Bonjean, a veteran Republican strategist. “It could take several election cycles until we actually come to consensus again. Our party may have to go to the brink of disaster before we pull back and realize what we have to do.”…

“There’s got to be a better way of dealing with the party’s problems than having our better-known leaders out there in open combat,” Galen said. “This could metastasize into — it’s not going to be a war, but it could be an ongoing conflict that makes everything harder for everything.”

***

There’s a reason that Christie and Paul went back and forth (and then back and forth again) at each other. And that reason is simple: It’s good politics for both of them.

For Christie, it affirms his speak-truth-to-power persona while also staking out ground as a natural heir to the Republican party of Ronald Reagan. For Paul, it makes clear that he is a different sort of Republican, one who won’t follow the same old playbook that has kept the party out of the White House for what will end up being at least eight years.

And, it’s far from a zero-sum game for the duo. While Christie and Paul are likely to seek the Republican nomination in 2016, the sort of GOP voter they are going for just isn’t the same. People who liked Paul before this clash will love him now. And those who didn’t, won’t. Same goes for Christie.

While, eventually, they might have to face off against one another in a one-on-one for the nomination, that’s a ways down the road.

***

More than anything else, what the firefight revealed was the extent to which Paul and Christie — two pols who have thrived on the appeal of their raw authenticity — have placed drastically different bets on the future of the Republican Party. And as they approach the start of the long 2016 campaign, both men are so deeply confident that they have the political and ideological high ground, that each can scarcely understand how his adversary could be making such an epic miscalculation…

Over the long haul, any Christie presidential campaign would want to be perceived as tough on defense, a traditional weak point for governors seeking the Oval Office, though several Republicans in Christie’s orbit strenuously played down the notion that his jabs at the Paul cohort were part of a deliberate 2016 strategy.

Paul, meanwhile, knows he must clear the commander-in-chief test as he crafts himself into a national candidate. The libertarian-leaning senator was attacked in his first campaign – back in 2010 – as a national security squish whose devotion to civil liberties was at odds with fighting terrorism…

“I think last December and January was an eye-opening experience for Chris Christie in terms of different elements of the party that he didn’t realize were there,” said [Peter] King.

***

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, couldn’t believe it when he heard that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., adopted the pose of an undecided voter when asked about a hypothetical match-up between Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“Wait, you’re joking right?” Lee asked when told, during a press conference Wednesday evening at the Young Americans for Liberty convention, that McCain told the New Republic that “it’s gonna be a tough choice” if Paul and Clinton win their respective party nominations in 2016…

Paul rejected the “isolationist” tag that McCain applied to him, noting that he supported the invasion of Afghanistan after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

He also took aim at McCain’s foreign policy views. “There are two polar extremes to foreign policy: One is that we’re nowhere, any of the time, and one that we’re everywhere, all the time,” Paul told reporters. “There are people within our caucus, we won’t name any names, who are very close to the ‘everywhere all the time” [position].”

***

[W]hat the suspicious get is not the distinctions between surveillance programs but the sheer accumulation of them: The NSA, IRS, and FDH all blur together as “the government.” The government is in your bookkeeping, in your e-mails, in your prostate. Had George III been that omnipresent, there would be no United States.

But the real reason why there are fewer defenders of their programs than Andy would like is the subject he tackles in his excellent books: the ideological faintheartedness of the United States. In this struggle, our enemies hide in plain sight, but Western governments will not confront them in plain sight…

And, in a broader sense, the national-security Right is a shrinking club because America has proven an ineffectual intervener. In Afghanistan, the Taliban support a bigoted, misogynist sharia state run by theocrats with ties to global terrorism, whereas America and its allies support a bigoted, misogynist sharia state run by duplicitous kleptocrats with ties to druglords and pederasts. That’s not a distinction worth twelve years of blood and treasure, and it has discredited the broader cause and its impositions on the home front. The Taliban will soon enough be back in Kabul, but Americans will be shuffling shoeless through the airports of Cleveland and Des Moines unto the end of time.

***

[T]he Democratic Party can run virtually the same campaign that they ran against Romney in 2012 against Paul in 2016, substituting the former Massachusetts governor’s personal ties to wealth with Paul’s ideological attachment to libertarianism. They will depict Paul’s as a form of “no-government conservatism” on steroids. His opposition to many aspects of how America prosecutes the war on terror – lent bipartisan legitimacy by virtue of their being utilized by both the Bush and Obama administrations – could also become a net negative in a general election. Paul’s mistrust of many aspects of U.S. defense policy may win over some traditionally Democratic young voters while ceding as many adults and seniors to the Democrats. His candidacy would have the added catastrophic effect of surrendering the issue of national security to Democrats for a generation or more.

Christie, meanwhile, can make the issue of national defense a net benefit for his campaign. Given the likelihood that the Republican primaries are going to be dominated by libertarian-leaning insurgent candidates, Christie – and the Republican Party as a whole – is going to be forced to embrace a non-interventionist posture and a more reformist policy relating to domestic intelligence gathering programs than the governor might be personally comfortable with. In not going over the libertarian cliff entirely, though, he neutralizes what could be a threat to the GOP’s dominance over senior voters by ceding the issue of a strong national defense to Clinton…

In private, Democrats will concede what the early polls confirm: Christie is the candidate they fear most. Their best hope is that, between now and 2016, Republicans run Christie out of the party. Or, at least, out of the running to become their next presidential nominee. Judging by the conservative blogosphere’s reaction to the Paul-Christie kerfuffle this week, Democrats just may get their wish and another eight years in the White House.

***

The more fundamental GOP divide is over foreign aid and other manifestations of our role as the world’s leading power. The Paulites, pining for the splendid isolation of the 19th century, want to leave the world alone on the assumption that it will then leave us alone.

Which rests on the further assumption that international stability — open sea lanes, free commerce, relative tranquillity — comes naturally, like the air we breathe. If only that were true. Unfortunately, stability is not a matter of grace. It comes about only by Great Power exertion.

In the 19th century, that meant the British navy, behind whose protection the United States thrived. Today, alas, Britannia rules no waves. World order is maintained by American power and American will. Take that away and you don’t get tranquillity. You get chaos.

That’s the Christie-McCain position. They figure that the country doesn’t need two parties of retreat. Paul’s views, more measured and moderate than his fringy father’s, are still in the minority among conservatives, but gathering strength. Which is why Christie’s stroke — defending and thus seizing the party’s more traditional internationalist consensus — was a signal moment in the run-up to the 2016 campaign. The battle lines are drawn.

***

***



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

Don’t Believe A Word – Moore

thatsafactjack on August 2, 2013 at 1:04 AM

every Machiavellian Megalomaniac on down the line…….

williamg on August 2, 2013 at 1:04 AM

You’ve strayed into hyperbole. Are you putting Rubio in the camp of Hitler, Mussolini and Mao?

Really?

Is your doctor available next week?

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 1:08 AM

In the 19th century, that meant the British navy, behind whose protection the United States thrived. Today, alas, Britannia rules no waves. World order is maintained by American power and American will. Take that away [as Paul wants they imply] and you don’t get tranquillity. You get chaos.

The major problem with that is that’s not what Rand Paul says he wants. A strong military, but less idiotic interventionism like in Libya and now perhaps Syria. Peace through strength, not neoconism and us policing the world, or taking side when it’s not our business. For example, Paul, and Palin by the way, says let the Syrian mess sort itself out. Why do get involved in all these civil wars that have nothing to do with us? Christie with the neoons Rubio and McCain want us to get entangled in Syria. No.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 1:09 AM

Schadenfreude on August 2, 2013 at 1:04 AM

Thank you, my friend, sincerely. :)

thatsafactjack on August 2, 2013 at 1:09 AM

Yeah, I figured you did.

Rubio got rolled, but to hear the man speak, his heart is in the right place. He wasn’t politically aware in 1986 and has not learned its lesson. But to condemn a man for wanting to do good, but not knowing when he is being rolled and not fully understanding the issue, if it passes like a fart in the night, I can forgive.

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 12:57 AM

I wouldn’t give Rubio a pass for being too young in 1986. He should do some research and see how one of Reagan’s biggest mistakes backfired. Rubio should know better than to get into bed with Schumer and McCain on amnesty. He’s either doing it to help himself or he’s naive.

Neither is good.

I do like Rubio better than Christie though. At least Rubio is calling for the defunding of obamacare unlike Christie and many other squishes.

In terms of fiscal policy and plans to cut spending: Rank Paul is much better than Rubio.

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:10 AM

Husband is gonna hear George P. Bush speak on Saturday.
I’ve already told him that I will vote AGAINST him in the primary.
I don’t care if it’s only for Texas Land Commissioner-I’m done with dynasties.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 2, 2013 at 1:11 AM

passes like a fart in the night, I can forgive.

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 12:57 AM

…Rubio is too intelligent a man and he needs a lot of kaopectate before he can clean up all the diarrhea he’s left on me… watching some of the boys in his gang…doggie dry humping him!

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:11 AM

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 1:08 AM

Rubio is a political opportunist.
He’s not Hitler. He’s not even in the same galaxy as Hitler.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 2, 2013 at 1:12 AM

Where Are You Now – Moore

I bid you all a fond goodnight. It’s been a pleasure, as always.

Live in the moment.

“Keep yourselves where the light is.”

thatsafactjack on August 2, 2013 at 1:12 AM

The western way

Sorry ’bout the ads. just dare to dance the tides I will sail my vessel til the river runs dry.

Fred

jrsrigmvr on August 2, 2013 at 1:13 AM

Nite Jackie

Schadenfreude on August 2, 2013 at 1:14 AM

The major problem with that is that’s not what Rand Paul says he wants. A strong military, but less idiotic interventionism like in Libya and now perhaps Syria. Peace through strength, not neoconism and us policing the world, or taking side when it’s not our business. For example, Paul, and Palin by the way, says let the Syrian mess sort itself out. Why do get involved in all these civil wars that have nothing to do with us? Christie with the neoons Rubio and McCain want us to get entangled in Syria. No.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 1:09 AM

I’m with Rand on what you said above over Rubio and McCain.

The things I don’t like about Rand was I believe he was against sanctioning Iran.

Also didn’t like that he voted to confirm Kerry and the other clowns.

Still would take him over Rubio and Christie though.

Christie is establishment and Rubio can be influenced by them… and he lost me on amnesty.

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:15 AM

passes like a fart in the night, I can forgive.

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 12:57 AM

…Rubio is too intelligent a man and he needs a lot of kaopectate before he can clean up all the diarrhea he’s left on me… watching some of the boys in his gang…doggie dry humping him!

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:11 AM

Nah, Rubio cannot even make a concise argument and if you cannot do that, you cannot lead a bunch of lemmings off the cliff.

HornetSting on August 2, 2013 at 1:15 AM

Someone else challenging Lyndsey Graham. She looks promising.

http://www.nancymace.org/

rrpjr on August 2, 2013 at 1:18 AM

Martin Mull – “Normal”…..

williamg on August 2, 2013 at 1:19 AM

……used to do this song with Chris King – whom I played music with – in the ’70s….

williamg on August 2, 2013 at 1:20 AM

Someone else challenging Lyndsey Graham. She looks promising.

http://www.nancymace.org/

rrpjr on August 2, 2013 at 1:18 AM

At this point, I’d take one of Spark’s pistol shrimp over Miss Lindsey.

HornetSting on August 2, 2013 at 1:21 AM

Oh, and you know the author and the WaPo piece I just quoted in my comment above? The article said that Paul would be weak on defense, and I countered that that is false, Paul says peace through strength, not neocon mindless interventionism as in Libya and Syria like Christie and Rubio and McCain… and Obama.

The author? Charles Krauthammer. That’s the man that said about the Tea Party protests in Aug 2009 over Obamacare ~ “this is out of control and will lead to a backlash.” He’s the one that in 2008 when gas prices spiked said he wants the 55mph speed limit again. Insane, that was always a Democrat speed limit, and we all hated that, and it saved virtually no gas. Krauthammer takes the Dem side too often, and he’s off base with his criticism of Paul on national security.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 1:21 AM

But to condemn a man for wanting to do good, but not knowing when he is being rolled and not fully understanding the issue, if it passes like a fart in the night, I can forgive.

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 12:57 AM

He was too deceptive to be allowed such dispensations.

In any case, he’s not suitable for these offices — not now in our history. We can’t afford naifs. If he hasn’t figured out the Left by now, get off the battlefield. He’s worse than useless.

rrpjr on August 2, 2013 at 1:23 AM

You’ve strayed into hyperbole. Are you putting Rubio in the camp of Hitler, Mussolini and Mao?

Really?

Is your doctor available next week?

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 1:08 AM

While it might have been on a smaller scale – and less successful – what Marco did was all about, and about nothing but – grabbing power for himself…….just like them….but admittedly smaller…

When you consider the impact of this proposal – I am not even sure how much less violent and destructive it was in the final result…….

williamg on August 2, 2013 at 1:24 AM

Someone else challenging Lyndsey Graham. She looks promising.

http://www.nancymace.org/

rrpjr on August 2, 2013 at 1:18 AM

…so…she’s no Shannon Faulkner!…GOOD!

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:24 AM

Oh, and you know the author and the WaPo piece I just quoted in my comment above? The article said that Paul would be weak on defense, and I countered that that is false, Paul says peace through strength, not neocon mindless interventionism as in Libya and Syria like Christie and Rubio and McCain… and Obama.

The author? Charles Krauthammer. That’s the man that said about the Tea Party protests in Aug 2009 over Obamacare ~ “this is out of control and will lead to a backlash.” He’s the one that in 2008 when gas prices spiked said he wants the 55mph speed limit again. Insane, that was always a Democrat speed limit, and we all hated that, and it saved virtually no gas. Krauthammer takes the Dem side too often, and he’s off base with his criticism of Paul on national security.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 1:21 AM

Krauthammer is a joke. A few years ago he said that Palin should leave the room when discussing death panels.

He said it’d be pointless for the GOP to fight to defund obamacare.

If you won’t fight over that, what will you ever fight for??

That’s what I think if anyone cares… made about 5 posts and not one response yet :)

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:26 AM

Chrissy: where U R?

Adios: vaya con dios

Fred

jrsrigmvr on August 2, 2013 at 1:26 AM

That’s what I think if anyone cares… made about 5 posts and not one response yet :)

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:26 AM

Kraut hammer is establishment, not a hack like Karl Rove, but like McCain, he too needs to be ousted as a voice for the Republican Party.

HornetSting on August 2, 2013 at 1:31 AM

That’s what I think if anyone cares… made about 5 posts and not one response yet :)

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:26 AM

…you were imparting wisdom…didn’t see a need to respond!

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:32 AM

The problems Republicans have are more associated with Chris Christie than Rand Paul. Christie, when you take away all the fanfare, is Democrat lite. It’s not surprising, coming from New Jersey, but his policies will not help the country, they’ll put us further in debt a little slower. I’ll bet that, when all is said and done, New Jersey will only be better under Christie because the Democrats would have been much worse. Someone needs to check the Democrats spending, and Christie has done that, but not enough to truly save New Jersey.

The liberals are already lining up “their” republican candidate and it’s Christie. They’d love Christie to run because they can beat Democrat lite any day of the week. The people they don’t want to run are Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, or any other conservative, tea party like candidate. You can tell who they don’t want by the press carrying their water for them, telling the world how they can’t win, blah, blah, blah.

bflat879 on August 2, 2013 at 1:34 AM

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 1:08 AM

So that line about “he had everyone else’s best interest at heart” is a load of crap, it’s a lie – it was always about just him getting power – and that lie does not sit well with me. In fact – when you hear someone say it – it’s a red flag that you are about to be “taken for a sucker”.

The LAST President who “had everyone else’s best interest at heart” at ALL, for ANY amount of time was George W. Bush……and that was not the whole time — HOWEVER: He Kept Us Safe, God Bless HIm!

I agree with Ayn Rand on principle in these matters:

Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper’s bell of an approaching looter.
Ayn Rand

williamg on August 2, 2013 at 1:37 AM

you were imparting wisdom…didn’t see a need to respond!

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:32 AM

Thanks, good to know someone is out there listening though :)

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:37 AM

..not one response… :)

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:26 AM

…DUDE!…look at YOUR NAME!…I try to listen to him every day!…if you had the name brayingballessbrayam or noforeskin or libfreeorgan…I might go…heh ?…what?

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:40 AM

The problems Republicans have are more associated with Chris Christie than Rand Paul. Christie, when you take away all the fanfare, is Democrat lite. It’s not surprising, coming from New Jersey, but his policies will not help the country, they’ll put us further in debt a little slower. I’ll bet that, when all is said and done, New Jersey will only be better under Christie because the Democrats would have been much worse. Someone needs to check the Democrats spending, and Christie has done that, but not enough to truly save New Jersey.

The liberals are already lining up “their” republican candidate and it’s Christie. They’d love Christie to run because they can beat Democrat lite any day of the week. The people they don’t want to run are Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, or any other conservative, tea party like candidate. You can tell who they don’t want by the press carrying their water for them, telling the world how they can’t win, blah, blah, blah.

bflat879 on August 2, 2013 at 1:34 AM

Well said. Don’t forget that it wasn’t worth Christie’s time to join 20 something other states to file the lawsuit against obamacare…wouldn’t have costed him anything either!

Now he’s busy implementing the exchanges in NJ while Rand Paul is trying to defund obamacare.

My top choice would be Cruz, we’ll see if he runs. The other day one poster said Paul and Cruz would combine forces to beat the squishes. That it’d be Paul in 2016 and Cruz in 2024.

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:40 AM

I’m with Rand on what you said above over Rubio and McCain.

The things I don’t like about Rand was I believe he was against sanctioning Iran.

Also didn’t like that he voted to confirm Kerry and the other clowns.

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:15 AM

Ok, but this and other links say Paul voted for Iran sanctions: http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/02/07/rand-paul-on-iran-sanctions/
On the other hand there seems to be some confusion on what his position was, but there’s videos of him talking about Iran & sanctions, so we could hear it from the horse’s mouth. And the Kerry thing could be considered more or less of a “routine” vote, but I don’t know.
That main thing that I want is that Paul should vow to keep a technologically superior force, so if we have to get involved, we got what it takes.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 1:44 AM

DUDE!…look at YOUR NAME!…I try to listen to him every day!…if you had the name brayingballessbrayam or noforeskin or libfreeorgan…I might go…heh ?…what?

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:40 AM

Heh, I hear ya. Sorry for being a drama queen. :)

I’d say The Great One and Beck are the two best on the radio as they both have the guts to tell it how it really is. Levin is my favorite, obviously.

Beck can be really good too… sometimes he’s a bit too preachy for me but I really liked how how called out Rubio after the amnesty push, saying “Rubio is dead to me” for example.

Rush is the man (25 years as America’s Truth Detector yesterday) but he doesn’t always call out the squishes like Levin and Beck do.

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:45 AM

…for the lurker
CRUZ with PALIN
………2 0 1 6

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:46 AM

He was too deceptive to be allowed such dispensations.

In any case, he’s not suitable for these offices — not now in our history. We can’t afford naifs. If he hasn’t figured out the Left by now, get off the battlefield. He’s worse than useless.

rrpjr on August 2, 2013 at 1:23 AM

THIS. Bigtime.

Cleombrotus on August 2, 2013 at 1:52 AM

Howdy all, how’s everyone doing tonight?

uncommon sense on August 2, 2013 at 1:53 AM

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 1:44 AM

That makes me feel better on Rand.

This however scares the heck out of me:

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:53 AM

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:46 AM

Perry for President
Palin for Senator.
*Yeah-I know who your comment was directed to.*

annoyinglittletwerp on August 2, 2013 at 1:54 AM

The liberals are already lining up “their” republican candidate and it’s Christie. They’d love Christie to run because they can beat Democrat lite any day of the week. The people they don’t want to run are Sarah Palin…

bflat879 on August 2, 2013 at 1:34 AM

Exactly like the Dems liked Huntsman so much, and both Chrisite and Hunstman are the biggest pushers of the climate change tripe, aggressively calling their own Republicans “anti-science.”
Btw, climate change is bunk, see my and others comments in this thread (I give several warmist quotes where they explicitly call for their side to lie and make up scary predictions): http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/19/obama-in-berlin-climate-change-is-the-global-threat-of-our-time/comment-page-2/#comment-7099262
It would be great to see Palin run. She stands for a strong, I think like Paul, but she doesn’t want all that neocon interventionism either.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 1:54 AM

He was too deceptive to be allowed such dispensations.

In any case, he’s not suitable for these offices — not now in our history. We can’t afford naifs. If he hasn’t figured out the Left by now, get off the battlefield. He’s worse than useless.

rrpjr on August 2, 2013 at 1:23 AM

THIS. Bigtime.

Cleombrotus on August 2, 2013 at 1:52 AM

I second that.

I would never align with Chuck-U Schumer and McLame on an immigration bill hoping for the best yet I’m not smart enough to run for senator!

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:58 AM

Checking in Folks!! :D

I am busy packing, so tired, gonna be moving soon to me new digs :)

I am fine all you good folks!!

Hiya to:
Jackie
Schad
ALT
Fred
Ken
williamg
CoffeeLover
GG
Sparky
B9
KA2
EG
Bishop
Axe
RWM
Fallon
INC
And everyone I have missed, even you trolls…

God Bless everyone, and we will win this!! :)

Good Night!!

* swoosh *

Scrumpy on August 2, 2013 at 1:58 AM

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 1:46 AM

Perry for President
Palin for Senator.
*Yeah-I know who your comment was directed to.*

annoyinglittletwerp on August 2, 2013 at 1:54 AM

Perry is better than Christie, Rubio, and Ryan.

Yet I wouldn’t make him a top pick due to in state tuition for illegals and the Garadsil mandate.

Top choice: Cruz

Second choice: Rand Paul

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 2:00 AM

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:45 AM

…I was a fan of Beck…and he educated me a great deal on subjects…I had a father who was a history and civics teacher (he came from the Netherlands)…and one thing I appreciated was his “Black History” series…I was astounded by everything I DIDN’T know!….then he edited that piece from Andy Brietbart to distort what he reported about Shirley Sherrod and the farmer from the Agriculture department…I have not paid attention to him since!

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 2:02 AM

“It could take several election cycles until we actually come to consensus again. Our party may have to go to the brink of disaster before we pull back and realize what we have to do.”…

Love this quote, as it won’t have to come to this if the freakin establishment would ignore/insult the tea party and the regular conservatives of the party. I appreciate McCain’s service, and respect what he went through for this country, but the old coot might as well pull an Arlen Specter and change parties now and save the embarrassment later. If he and McConnell are what the republican party represent now, then all is lost.

uncommon sense on August 2, 2013 at 2:02 AM

Scrumpy on August 2, 2013 at 1:58 AM

…they ALL been looking for you!
…(btw…the Gulch is on page 59!)

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 2:04 AM

oops, wouldn’t ignore, not would.

uncommon sense on August 2, 2013 at 2:05 AM

Exactly like the Dems liked Huntsman so much, and both Chrisite and Hunstman are the biggest pushers of the climate change tripe, aggressively calling their own Republicans “anti-science.”
Btw, climate change is bunk, see my and others comments in this thread (I give several warmist quotes where they explicitly call for their side to lie and make up scary predictions): http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/19/obama-in-berlin-climate-change-is-the-global-threat-of-our-time/comment-page-2/#comment-7099262
It would be great to see Palin run. She stands for a strong, I think like Paul, but she doesn’t want all that neocon interventionism either.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 1:54 A

Someone else did a nice comparison of Christie to Rand on global warming:

Christie saying how it’s real and we need to do something.

Paul: Calling it into question due to climategate.

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 2:10 AM

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 1:53 AM

Allright, I just started readingyour link, and we get this:

I got to 18:10 of Rand Paul’s foreign policy speech and had enough. He started out saying that he is no neoconservative. Really? Don’t believe in Adam Smith economics, the Founders, Tocqueville or American Exceptionalsim? Is that about right Rand? Cause that’s what a neocon is.

Now that may be a 20th century “dictionary” definition, but we all know what a neocon is, and it’s not that. So I immediately think that the author has some agenda.
Anyway, after a lot of verbiage where I skim and see that the author is saying Islam and China is dangerous, I agree, but granted I’m skimming yet I don’t see much anything about Rand Paul. It concludes with:
“To sum up: Rand Paul is just another version of Ron Paul. Listen carefully to his rhetoric; he is echoing his dad’s views.”
I didn’t see the evidence for that in a skim. Rand Paul is mentioned just at the beginning at the end as I quote above. My impression is that Rand, unlike Ron, has been adamant that he wants a strong powerful military.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 2:14 AM

By the way, LevinFan, perhaps I’m wrong about your link, so correct me if possible.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 2:16 AM

Scrumpy on August 2, 2013 at 1:58 AM

, , , , , , , , (those are tears)…since 7-22! (:->)
(:->)
(:->)

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 2:16 AM

Is anyone else outraged at the amount of non-stop attention in the sports media and selective outrage over Riley Cooper’s use of the N word at the Chesney concert?

I’m not condoning it but they’re acting like he’s the worst person ever!

What about Alec Baldwin? He called a reporter an effing queen. Yet hardly anyone mentions it and he STILL has the stupid Capitol One commercials!

So are black more important than gays with this selective moral outrage??

And what Roddy White did was much worse..saying the Zimmerman jurors should kill themselves. After some Twitter backlash it’s now forgotten. Yet we’ll hear about the “racist” Cooper all year and White will be given a pass.

White’s comments were driven by pure racism as he obviously didn’t pay ANY attention to the facts of the case!

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 2:21 AM

Someone else did a nice comparison of Christie to Rand on global warming:

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 2:10 AM

Ok, I’ve drudged up my comment from a previous thread:

Contrast Rand Paul and Christie on global warming:

Chris Christie: “Climate change is real. When you have over 90 percent of the world’s scientists who have studied this stating that climate change is occurring and that humans play a contributing role it’s time to defer to the experts.”

Rand Paul: “[Scientists] are making up their facts to fit their conclusions. They’ve already caught them doing this.”

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 2:23 AM

anotherJoe:

1. Guess you were the poster I was referring to in comparing Paul to Christie on global warming: good job :).

2. Yeah, paleocon is no usually used that way so it can throw you off a bit. The other was mostly responding to Paul’s Heritage Foundation speech earlier this year.

3. This stood out to me that Paul wants to draw down our bases around the world..is that true?
Drawing down our forces and bases?

Now you’re talking like your dad who also hasn’t a clue of what he’s talking about either. Those bases allow us to forward deploy into any region. They are a deterrent to China, and North Korea. Why do you think North Korea never crossed the 38th Parallel again? Those bases serve as a strike platform against any foe. They are a refueling stop for aircraft and troops. Ever try to load a C-130 or a helicopter, and then fly long distance w/o refueling Rand? Of course not. I say again, you haven’t a clue.

http://therightscoop.com/rand-paul-is-a-chip-off-the-old-paleocon-block/

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 2:36 AM

anotherJoe:

I hope Rand is better and believes in a strong military unlike his dad.

However I’m suspicious of him. I fear that some of his dad’s crazy ideas have affected him and lately that Rand has been carefully crafting his words and telling us what we want to hear.

I hope I’m wrong.

At this point even though I can’t stand him due to his Blame America First garbage I’d vote for the old kook Ron Paul over Christie!

That’s how fed up I am with current gop leadership!

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 2:39 AM

3. This stood out to me that Paul wants to draw down our bases around the world..is that true?
Drawing down our forces and bases?

LevinFan on August 2, 2013 at 2:36 AM

I’m not getting that he wants to close our bases around the world. This rt article is titled Rand Paul wants US to keep foreign military bases open: http://rt.com/usa/paul-bases-us-military-171/
Here the article is titled Rand Paul Wants to Close Some of the 900 US Military Bases on the Planet: http://www.dailypaul.com/280517/rand-paul-wants-to-close-some-of-the-900-us-military-bases-on-the-planet
He wants to close some of the bases. Well, that’s probably ok. I think he’ll be fine on the military. He might take us home from Afganistan, though O is going to do that anyway.
I kind of wish we’d go over there with megaforces and do the Taliban in, but it doesn’t look like we have the will for that. Oh well. And it probably wouldn’t work anyways. The moment we were gone the nuts would just come roaring back.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 2:54 AM

Rubio got rolled,

Not again … Don’t you ever get tired of trotting this dumb sh!t out?

but to hear the man speak, his heart is in the right place.

No, it isn’t. Rubio is a treasonous little worm. That is what he wants to be, tries to be, and succeeds at being.

He wasn’t politically aware in 1986 and has not learned its lesson.

More laughs! Was he not politically aware in 2006-2008, the last time the treasonous sh!tweasels in the GOP tried to give aid and comfort to invaders and led to a political death sentence for them? Was that treasonous little worm aware during those years??

But to condemn a man for wanting to do good, but not knowing when he is being rolled and not fully understanding the issue, if it passes like a fart in the night, I can forgive.

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 12:57 AM

Just stop it, already. It’s annoying and stupid. You know that Rubio’s a back-stabbing traitor who wants nothing but to destroy the Rule of Law so that his illegal amigos can have their names put on the title of this nation, for whatever stupid reason a traitor would do such a thing. Rubio doesn’t even seem to give a sh!t about other illegals since all he ever talks about are hispanic illegals and how much they deserve our surrender to their invasion. Other illegals .. who knows? Rubio seems to think all illegals are hispanic and are owed another citizenship to add to their collections. He’s a dirtball working for criminal invaders.

Rubio is a slimy, traitorous sack of sh!t and he wasn’t “rolled” by anyone, so just cut this idiocy out.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 2, 2013 at 2:56 AM

Rubio is a slimy, traitorous sack of sh!t and he wasn’t “rolled” by anyone, so just cut this idiocy out.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 2, 2013 at 2:56 AM

I have to agree with this. The document is not that hard to read or search, using acrobat reader, so he has no valid excuse. He only cares about the amnesty.

DC is at war with the rest of the country people.

Oh, and good morning, everyone.

dogsoldier on August 2, 2013 at 6:00 AM

it is sad that the lsm would rather talk about this instead of the bombshell in benghazi…pathetic

if this benghazi thing happened under a gop watch, the 24/7 outrage would be enormous…

hate the double standard….

crickets this am…absolute crickets

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 6:26 AM

on the other hand….just say no to christie…stay in jersey…

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 6:26 AM

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 6:26 AM

Why is the Benghazi story a bombshell? I thought we knew there were dozens of CIA agents there on the ground on September 11?

esr1951 on August 2, 2013 at 6:28 AM

esr1951 on August 2, 2013 at 6:28 AM

WE knew about it, thankfully Tapper reported on it now despite the rest of the cnn crew saying bupkis…the liv at the airport would have seen it…

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 6:35 AM

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 6:35 AM

Thanks!

esr1951 on August 2, 2013 at 6:37 AM

Good Morning, Patriots! Has Benghazigate Just Blown Wide Open? My take.

kingsjester on August 2, 2013 at 6:45 AM

daily cruz rant….

mika loving dr k’s article re: no gov’t shutdown…

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 6:46 AM

kingsjester on August 2, 2013 at 6:45 AM

great take KJ
:)

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 6:52 AM

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 6:52 AM

Thank you, ma’am!

kingsjester on August 2, 2013 at 6:56 AM

crickets still on benghazi, the big talk is gop infighting and congress complaining about obamacare to dear leader and he’s going to make sure they are ok…

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 7:12 AM

sunday shows
immigration & obamacare & GOP infighting

what you won’t hear on Sunday-Benghazi or IRS

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 7:13 AM

gregory-NSA & the future of GOP on the next MTP

yeah, benghazi and irs are getting swept under the rug

good job protecting dear leader there lsm
/

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 7:18 AM

i should say they are protecting Hillary now…

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 7:21 AM

cmsinaz on August 2, 2013 at 7:21 AM

Exactly.

kingsjester on August 2, 2013 at 7:23 AM

I’ve got a teenager.
Nothing scares me.

annoyinglittletwerp on August 2, 2013 at 12:12 AM

My teenager scares me.

Nutstuyu on August 2, 2013 at 8:55 AM

then he edited that piece from Andy Brietbart to distort what he reported about Shirley Sherrod and the farmer from the Agriculture department…I have not paid attention to him since!

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 2:02 AM

Right on. Likewise. He couldn’t stand that Breitbart was eclipsing him. Petty and egocentric. All Breitbart wanted was for everyone to do well in the larger war.

rrpjr on August 2, 2013 at 9:04 AM

Given the fact that the number of “expected” conservative white voters didn’t show up for Romney last year,it flies in the face of reality for Christie to think that by attacking a considerable portion of the conservative community he could win either the nomination, or the general.Amazing how some of these GOP hopefuls have so quickly destroyed their chances.Although I did wind up voting for McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012 ,and every Republican since I started voting in 1968,I will either stay home or vote third party if the GOP nominates anyone who supports amnesty,the legalization of drugs,abortion,gay marriage,budget compromises which either raise taxes,do not reduce the deficit,or do not include a balanced budget amendment,or an interventionist foreign policy(with the exception of self-defense or the defense of our allies).These issues are deal breakers for memand I do not consider anyone who supports them to be a conservative in the first place.So I guess if the GOP doesn’t nominate Ted Cruz in 2016,I will be writing in his name instead of voting Republican.And in 2014 I will vote Democrat for the first time in my life if Lindsey Graham wins his primary.

redware on August 2, 2013 at 9:11 AM

Check out the Frontier Lab’s study on disaffiliation from the GOP of those who once identified themselves as Republicans.

http://thefrontierlab.org/switching-behavior

Trends are looking bad for the GOP if it stays on the RINO course. Romney was the augury. I think what we’re seeing here is a kind of political/pathological death spiral. I honestly don’t think Christie can refrain from these attacks. It’s compulsive. RINOs are exhibiting behavior patterns imitative of Leftism, the final morbid stages of their capitulation.

rrpjr on August 2, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Good Morning, Patriots! Has Benghazigate Just Blown Wide Open? My take.

kingsjester on August 2, 2013 at 6:45 AM

…I had to really control myself several times…to not *spit* at my screen…while reading some of that!

KOOLAID2 on August 2, 2013 at 9:45 AM

But to condemn a man for wanting to do good, but not knowing when he is being rolled and not fully understanding the issue, if it passes like a fart in the night, I can forgive.

John the Libertarian on August 2, 2013 at 12:57 AM

So, you’re saying that Rubio was/is “just naive” about the whole immigration thing – and was being “used” by a bunch of nefarious old guys?

And just what makes you believe that Rubio will mature by 2016? He’s had since 1986 to see the effects of amnesty – yet he’s still “just naive” about it. (Is that why he said one thing on English TV and the opposite on Telemundo?)

Perhaps he needs another 27 years to “fully understand the issue” – and learn how to keep from being rolled. Maybe in 2044.

Solaratov on August 2, 2013 at 9:58 AM

I got to 18:10 of Rand Paul’s foreign policy speech and had enough. He started out saying that he is no neoconservative. Really? Don’t believe in Adam Smith economics, the Founders, Tocqueville or American Exceptionalsim? Is that about right Rand? Cause that’s what a neocon is.

Now that may be a 20th century “dictionary” definition, but we all know what a neocon is, and it’s not that.

anotherJoe on August 2, 2013 at 2:14 AM

Do tell. And just what is the real definition of “neocon”…according to the TruCon Keepers of the Ultimate Truth?

Solaratov on August 2, 2013 at 10:14 AM

Dozens of CIA ops on ground during Benghazi hit…
‘Running arms-smuggling team when consulate was attacked’…
GOP Rep: Obama admin hiding survivors, changing their names…

Bmore on August 2, 2013 at 10:35 AM

Bmore on August 2, 2013 at 10:35 AM

Think about this: A President of the United States, in the process of arming Islamic Terrorists, to bring about a takeover of countries run by Muslim Moderates, becomes responsible for the death of his own Ambassador and 3 other Americans, plus the wounding of 7 others.

And, that is just the tip of the possible treason. If this is all tue, that means that our Administration was working hand-in-hand with sworn enemies of the United States of America to topple foreign governments and surround our greatest ally, Israel.

It positively boggles the mind…and fills it with revulsion.

And, libby thinks it is “hilarious”.

kingsjester on August 2, 2013 at 11:13 AM

Yep, libby is in fear. The most enjoyable part on the CNN thread for me was how the trolls appeared as if on cue. Watching them squirm is fun. ; ) They are truly worried.

Bmore on August 2, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Have a lovely weekend my friends! I’ll be on my boat if you need me. ; ) Might actually have a no rain Saturday. Yay!

Bmore on August 2, 2013 at 1:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4