33 Comments

• 1. extramedium  |  October 11th, 2008 at 4:57 pm

  And life imitates art! Just saw the same thing happen with Richard Petty in the movie “Swing Vote”.

• 2. Talking Points Jr.  |  October 11th, 2008 at 5:03 pm

  Thank God! I was wondering when he was going to endorse McCain.

  This is a tide turner.

  I can sleep easy now.

• 3. Amanda  |  October 11th, 2008 at 5:14 pm

  Tell me again how someone who drives a car in a circle and receives millions of dollars in endorsements does “the work of the United States.” I think I missed one, Mark.

• 4. William Teach  |  October 11th, 2008 at 5:39 pm

  Man, I was supposed to go there today, had to push my vacation off 1 day. Boo hiss!!!!

  Going to try and see either McCain in Wilmington, NC on Monday, or Palin in Richmond same day. Choices, choices.

  Hey, Amanda, how about jessica Beil, Lindsay Lohan, and Vampire endorsing Obama? Whew! What would he do without them?

  Or, how about the all important Roger Waters and Celine Dion endorsements? Wait, are they even American citizens?

  But, hey, good news! The Pirate Party of the USA has endorsed Barry!

  We can go with the all important “washed up long ago” endorsements, such as Joan Baez, Ted Danson, and Mark Hamill.

  Wait, john Cleese? Isn’t he British? Guess he won’t be actually, you know, voting.

  Zoey Deschenal annoys me, though. She has a wonderful smile.

  We could go with Ashley “naked in everything” Judd. Charlize Theron, same. Only thing missing is the Tracy Lords and Ginger Lynn endorsements.

  Meanwhile, Richard Petty is the King of NASCAR, and his endorsement means quite a bit to the folks who love NASCAR and the Southern way of life. You wouldn’t understand.

  http://www.thepiratescove.us/2004/11/16/ye-olde-daile-sillinesse/

• 5. Obama08 :)  |  October 11th, 2008 at 5:59 pm

  He may endorse McCain, but the majority of Americans who do real work are backing Obama.

  Thank God!

• 6. Retired Spook  |  October 11th, 2008 at 5:59 pm

  You wouldn’t understand.

  William, I think that is one of the biggest problems in this country — a failure to understand each other. I simply can’t relate to the mindset that says, “if it feels good, do it”, or the entitlement mentality or the blame-it-on-the-other-guy mentality, or the culture of death mentality. As I said in another thread a couple months ago, I’m just an average guy, who’s served his country, worked hard all my life, been married to the same woman for 42 years and never cheated on her (in fact, I detest cheating, no matter what the situation.) My wife and I are fortunate in that our life of hard work has afforded us a nice house that almost paid for, 2 nice cars and prospects for a long and comfortable retirement. We’re situated such that, no matter who wins next month, we’re somewhat immune from whatever nitwittery they engage in.

  I don’t look as McCain as anything more than a bridge to someone younger and more capable in four years. Like Bush, he’d probably do some things right and some things wrong. One thing I do believe he’d do is engage in a prolific use of the veto pen. IMO, that has been one of, if not Bush’s single biggest mistake.

  Obama, OTOH, could do a tremendous amount of damage to this country. There isn’t one promise Obama has made that, if kept, would make my life better, but then, I don’t generally look to government to make my life better.

• 7. Amanda  |  October 11th, 2008 at 6:39 pm

  William,

  It wasn’t the endorsement I was questioning. If you’d pay attention, it was Mark’s claim that Petty somehow represents the everyday people of America.

  The level of reading comprehension on this site is astounding.

• 8. Retired Spook  |  October 11th, 2008 at 6:45 pm

  If you’d pay attention, it was Mark’s claim that Petty somehow represents the everyday people of America.

  He may not represent YOUR KIND of everyday people, Amanda, but Richard Petty represents more everyday people that you could possible imagine.

• 9. Faceplant  |  October 11th, 2008 at 7:17 pm

  Deleted - off topic.

• 10. Faceplant  |  October 11th, 2008 at 7:20 pm

  “I simply can’t relate to the mindset that says, “if it feels good, do it”, or the entitlement mentality or the blame-it-on-the-other-guy mentality…”

  You’ve got to be joking. Can you tell me one mistake that this administration or Congressional Republicans have taken responsibility for? ONE.

• 11. js  |  October 11th, 2008 at 7:27 pm

  you should plant your brain with a fish and a kernel of corn faceputz…you might just get something growing with the fish…

• 12. js  |  October 11th, 2008 at 7:29 pm

  bush did say he really didnt do well in the war in iraq till he followed his generals advice…bing!!

  one up.

• 13. Retired Spook  |  October 11th, 2008 at 7:29 pm

  You’ve got to be joking. Can you tell me one mistake that this administration or Congressional Republicans have taken responsibility for? ONE.

  Sorry, Faceplant, you’re asking the wrong person. IMO, the Bush Administration has taken a page out of the Liberal playbook in not owning up to it’s mistakes.

• 14. js  |  October 11th, 2008 at 7:30 pm

  the bush admin took responsibiltiy for the surge, which you and your ilk condemned all to hell till it worked…

  now you want to take credit for it..

  now get that…so funny

  two up

• 15. William Teach  |  October 11th, 2008 at 7:35 pm

  If you’d pay attention, it was Mark’s claim that Petty somehow represents the everyday people of America.

  If you understood the South and middle America, and Richard Petty, you would know that he does represent those values. Good old boy makes good. Lives the America Dream.

  I’m not a NASCAR fan, or a fan of really any car racing. But, I have met Petty many times. His daughter went to ECU, lived near us, and we knew her. He was a hell of a nice guy, down to earth, and so was his daughter.

  You know what you need to do, Amanda? Come on down South, go to one of our State fairs, or a good old firefighters pig pickin’, see how real America lives.

• 16. js  |  October 11th, 2008 at 7:37 pm

  bush took credit for going after al Queda…after 8 long clinton years where al queda had attacked multiple interests across the world, blowing up embassies and our ships…

  something clinton and the DNC called isolated incidents of terrorism…all from al queda..and he refused to take custody of osama bin laden after he was being handed to him on a golden platter…

  three up….

• 17. js  |  October 11th, 2008 at 7:45 pm

  maybe petty picked the GOP candidate for a reason…the DNC tree is rotten to the core…has been since before the GOP freed the slaves…they havent changed…

  the old school is still back there…kennedy…biden…all the hustlers and liars and bs artists that they can coral…

  i mean…think about it…they shut hillary up about billary and his sexual escapades…a woman that was the first lady of the governor of the state of arkansas…and plopped her into New York as a senator…any honest woman would be spelling D-I-V-O-R-C-E for the criminal conduct of billary…but nooooo…not hillary…she dug right in there and took a slice of the shit pie…

  the terrible thing is…they though they were so good…but the back door deals and swindlers and blackmailers…they got one up on the good ole boys from the south….obamassiah…the corrupt politicians from the mob run suberbia of Chicago…a stake al capone ownes…and they want to put him in the oval office….

  what a scam…america…figure it out…its time to wake up and stop playing the idiots for these thieves and liars…this should be the last election for the DNC…we should tar and feather the lot of em and run them back to china and russia because the socialists and commies are effectively running the show now….

• 18. Ricorun  |  October 11th, 2008 at 9:22 pm

  Thank God for Roger Petty. Hopefully he’ll help to offset Ralph Stanley, lol! I love ‘em both. Although truth be told I prefer dirt track races to NASCAR, Nickel Creek in a small venue to Stanley in a large one, and minor league baseball to majors. In short, I like smaller gatherings than large ones. I’d try to blame it on age, but except for truly magical occasions (e.g., my first trip to Yankee Stadium, to Radio City Music Hall, to Fillmore East, and my first Grateful Dead concert) I always have.

  Anyway, in certain respects I am of a similar mind to Spook. In my personal life I am very fiscally conservative. My home is paid for. My truck is paid for. I pay off my credit card bills every month. Even my investments are conservative. I’ve actually made money despite everything. And assuming the state of California, and various municipalities in it don’t seriously melt down, I probably will continue to do so. Unfortunately, that’s not a gimme at this point. Then again, nothing is.

  But unlike Spook, I am divorced. It’s been over 10 years now, but it’s still a sore spot. ‘Nuff said about that. Well, almost.

  At any rate, I admire couples like Spook and his wife, who’ve made it through 42 years – happily, and on their first try. Good for you! How I envy you and the Mrs. At this point (which is to say for quite a while I didn’t) I almost admire even my brother and his wife who, for most of the last 15 years, have exchanged little more intimate than a handshake. Where do you draw the line? On the other hand, assuming you (okay, me) did draw the line, when do you (okay, me) pull the trigger again? My brother can’t draw the line, and I can’t pull the trigger again. Which is better, if either? So much for Catholic guilt, I guess, lol! I might feel better about js’s (#17) contribution if I respected his opinion, but I’m afraid I don’t.

  So much for my personal situation. More generally though, my personal and familial dilemmas, as well as my breadth of interpersonal interactions, have helped me to appreciate the plights of others — and to curb my judgements therein. I’ve been all over the place in my life. I’ve been up financially, and down financially (at times to the point where I really did consider catsup as a vegetable). I’ve had very good friends, even lovers, who have been black at times, and Hispanic at others, despite the fact that everything else being equal I prefer blondes, lol! I’ve lived in some very intimately integrated neighborhoods as well as those which have been the most lily white. I’ve seen some of the best and some of the worst human behavior has to offer.

  Yeah I know, I sound like Dickens in “The Tale of Two Cities”. It was the best of times and the worst of times, and all that. But I think my varied experiences have helped me to appreciate, however imperfectly, the fundamental commonalities of the American experience. No matter who they are, people want to care. They want to think they have an even shot at success. Most of them don’t want special privileges, but they do want fairness.

  Unfortunately, the meaning of “fairness” is too often assumed without being objectively defined. It seems to me that if the GOP wants to make inroads into minority demographics, they have to successfully do that — i.e., objectively define “fairness” in a way that really is both fair and understandable to the targeted minority demographics. So far they haven’t done that. And because they haven’t they have become even more what Ken Mehlman (the former chief of the RNC in 2006) said they were becoming: the party of white people.

  You might say the NASCAR party. To the extent that it’s true, good luck with it.

• 19. neocon  |  October 11th, 2008 at 9:50 pm

  Rico,

  One of the first things you should have ever learned is that life is not fair, never has been, never will be, and you can’t legislate it.

  But it begs the question: what is fair?

  Also, you speak of the different neighborhoods you’ve lived in, from integrated to lily white (which I consider a racist comment). Having lived in TX, AZ and NV I have lived in many different neighborhoods myself and one in particular area in Houston, I was only the white person in sight, yet I found very good people and not so good people. To me, “integrated” shouldn;t infer skin color, rather character.

  Isn’t that where MLK wanted us to go?

• 20. Danish Artist  |  October 11th, 2008 at 10:13 pm

  “You’ve got to be joking. Can you tell me one mistake that this administration or Congressional Republicans have taken responsibility for? ONE.”

  They probably won’t since they have been acting like liberals for most of the past 8 years spending money like drunken sailors (or liberals), corruption, etc etc.

  Liberals and their programs never own up to the failures that they have created. The proof is in the programs that are in trouble - you know - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, FEMA, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, etc etc etc.

  But Richard Petty, while making millions, is far from the nouveau riche elitists of the liberal Democrats. He is more in touch with Americans who actually worked themselves up the ladder. And not like liberals, who have everything handed to them because of their race (government appointments and set asides) or connections and relationships to other politicians who help bring them in and help them up (sort of like Obama).

• 21. Ricorun  |  October 11th, 2008 at 11:08 pm

  neocon: Rico, One of the first things you should have ever learned is that life is not fair, never has been, never will be, and you can’t legislate it.

  That’s definitely a lesson I learned. And you certainly can’t legislate it, nor should it be. But what you suggest speaks most directly to equality of outcome. I certainly don’t advocate any such thing. To do so in the extreme is socialism in the extreme. On the other hand, I STRONGLY advocate equality of opportunity. Not to do so in the extreme is undemocratic, and un-American, in the extreme.

  neocon, you asked, begging the question: “what is fair?” I ask you to think about that — what is fair? Heretofore the answer from the GOP is… the status quo. To me, that’s a self-defeating answer, because the status quo keeps changing. If the GOP wants to continue to exist as a viable party, they are going to have come up with something better than that. Frankly, I hope they do — or some other party does — because I don’t relish a one-party state.

• 22. neocon  |  October 11th, 2008 at 11:25 pm

  Rico,

  Fair, is a democratic society wherein government does not create obstacles and stays out the affairs of individuals and business’s. As Reagan once so brilliantly stated, “dependence on government should never be used to create a political constituency”

  I’d say that America is more than fair as evidenced by Obama rising to the position he currently occupies, albeit with little experience and accomplishments. Where else could that happen? And the GOP was largely responsible for creating that environment. Would you like to revisit the Democratic Party and the civil rights movement?

  People have to create their own fairness, by hard work. There often times, is no substitute.

  Rico, you need to stop thinking that you’re the smartest person in the room and start challenging your own positions.

• 23. Ricorun  |  October 12th, 2008 at 3:06 am

  neocon: Fair, is a democratic society wherein government does not create obstacles and stays out the affairs of individuals and business’s. As Reagan once so brilliantly stated, “dependence on government should never be used to create a political constituency”

  Where is Dasein when you need him? The fact is, I don’t deal so much in “fairness” or in “equanimity” as much as “efficiency”. As much as I appreciate distinctions between fiscal policy, tax policy, and economic policy, I do believe that an efficient overall policy incorporates all of them. One of these days I’ll write a book about my ideas, which would probably be, at best, as widely read as “Caucus of Corruption”.

  By the way, what happened to noagenda.org?

  I’d say that America is more than fair as evidenced by Obama rising to the position he currently occupies, albeit with little experience and accomplishments. Where else could that happen?

  Nowhere. That’s a very important point. But “more than fair”? How do you mean that? Said in a more specific way, how many top tier, state-wide level positions (i.e., federal Senators or governors) are held by minorities?

  If you exclude white women here’s what you’d come up with…

  despite the fact that black voters constitute approx 13% of the electorate overall, there are currently two black governors (2%), only one of which was elected (Deval Patrick of MA), and only one sitting Senator (or half black): Barack Obama. There are currently three Hispanic Senators: Ken Salazar of CO, Mel Martinez of FL, and Bob Menendez of NJ, and one Hispanic governor: Bill Richardson. That’s 3% of Senators, and 2% of governors. Hispanics currently represent approx 23% of the electorate. In terms of Asian Americans, Bobby Jindahl is the only governor. And let me just say, that’s a really big deal! I love Louisiana for a variety of reasons — the music, the food, the bayous, the river, the diversity of folks — it’s a wondrous place. But for generations it’s also been a political cesspool. Bobby Jindahl is a breath of fresh air. I can’t say I agree with all his positions on all the issues, but I truly hope he continues to make a BIG impression on politics in Louisiana. Heaven knows they need it. Okay, back on topic… there are no other Asian governors besides Jindahl, and only two Senators - Daniel Inouye and Daniel Akaka. I may have gotten the spelling wrong, but they are both Senators from Hawaii.

  And the GOP was largely responsible for creating that environment. Would you like to revisit the Democratic Party and the civil rights movement?

  What an interesting comment. By all means, let’s revisit the civil rights movement. Perhaps we both may be surprised. Would that be a bad thing? Personally, I don’t think so.

  People have to create their own fairness, by hard work. There often times, is no substitute.

  Arguably, that is the battleground for the GOP. Said in another way, if the GOP can’t sell the “fairness” message that you suggest in any sort of meaningful way, they will remain the minority party — and ever more so. Quite frankly, that’s the fundamental problem with the GOP as currently construed — they can’t effectively answer that “fairness” question.

  Rico, you need to stop thinking that you’re the smartest person in the room and start challenging your own positions.

  What a crock. I mean come on… I don’t swear, I don’t threaten anyone, I have tried very hard not to trade on anything beyond the facts and logic of the arguments I present, or others present. In fact, I have tried very hard to diminish whatever credentials I might have, precisely because I want my message to stand on its own as much as possible. The fact is (as far as I know, at least), I have never, ever presumed that I am “the smartest person in the room”. Consequently, if you have been left with that impression, I suggest I have proved it purely on the strength of my argument rather than the strength of my personality. If so, thank you very much. I’m very flattered — in a non-personal way, of course, lol!

• 24. What?  |  October 12th, 2008 at 4:51 am

  Danish Artist writes,
  “They probably won’t since they have been acting like liberals for most of the past 8 years spending money like drunken sailors (or liberals), corruption, etc etc. ”

  So it has come to this? You openly admit your party blew it and you defend them by saying they simply acted like liberals.

  Want to know something? Reagan increased the deficit and government grew under him. Was he a liberal?
  Wake up. Conservatives have never followed their motto of smaller government. They have always expanded government and spent us into deficits. They merely did so by lowering taxes.

  As for all those “liberal” programs you listed, they are programs that have been overseen by both parties. Any of their faults are a result of both parties failures.

• 25. What?  |  October 12th, 2008 at 5:26 am

  Neocon writes:
  “Fair, is a democratic society wherein government does not create obstacles and stays out the affairs of individuals and business’s.”

  First, that is a bizarre idea of fairness. You are saying fairness is not trying to give people equal opportunity. You are saying fairness is simply allowing a person to use every advantage he has whether earned or unearned and to not impose any burden on them.

  Second, “obstacle” is a vague term. What is an obstacle? Is requiring a business to carry workers’ comp insurance and obstacle? What about health and safety regulations? Environmental regulations? Minimum wage laws? Zoning? Anti-discrimination laws? Any form of licensing?

  Really, your definition says nothing useful.

  Reagan’s quote is cynical because it assumes the only reason anyone enacts programs aimed to help those in need is that they are doing so out of selfish motives. By stamping this message with his approval REagan allowed you the moral license to criticize the poor and any effort to help them as the work of self-interested politicians.

  Conservatives here profess a strange brand of patriotism. They love their country because it does not ask them or require them to provide for anyone other than themselves. As long as they, like Reagan, wave the flag they are free to turn their backs on their countrymen and the nation’s well-being.

• 26. Danish Artist  |  October 12th, 2008 at 5:38 am

  What?

  Then you openly admit to Liberal Democrat failures?

  Hard to believe, you spew nothing but lib talking points and Obama “savior of the world” slogans.

  That is the difference between mindless liberals and free thinking conservatives. We free thinking conservatives will put blame where it is due while you on the other hand keep toeing the line never once wavering from the party.

  However, in this case, liberals are not the ones to control government at any cost. Newt Gingrich did make an good conservative effort at smaller gov’t, only to be thwarted by the liberal administration. McCain has always voted against bigger government. Obama, Pelosi and Reid surely will not and have publicly stated it.

  Yes, most Republicans have practiced liberal policy for the past eight years - I am willing to admit it, however you will not criticize the liberals for doing the same and Obama can count on your vote come November.

  Reagan? The House controls the appropriations - yes Reagan signed the bills, but that was the only way to give the necessary tax cuts to bring us out of the misery given to us by the Carter administration - double digit inflation, unemployment, interest rates, a weak military, etc etc, etc.

  you may now continue to be the mindless fool that you are.

• 27. neocon  |  October 12th, 2008 at 9:11 am

  Rico: “What an interesting comment. By all means, let’s revisit the civil rights movement. Perhaps we both may be surprised. Would that be a bad thing? Personally, I don’t think so”

  The following is an interesting list compiled previously by another poster of whom I can’t remember, but I think it demonstrates what many liberals fail to acknowledge.

  June 12, 1929 First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country

  August 17, 1937 Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation

  June 24, 1940 Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it

  October 20, 1942 60 prominent African-Americans issue Durham Manifesto, calling on southern Democrats to abolish their all-white primaries

  April 3, 1944 U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Texas Democratic Party’s “whites only” primary election system

  August 8, 1945 Republicans condemn Harry Truman’s surprise use of the atomic bomb in Japan. The whining and criticism goes on for years. It begins two days after the Hiroshima bombing, when former Republican President Herbert Hoover writes to a friend that “[t]he use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul.”

  February 18, 1946 Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools

  July 11, 1952 Republican Party platform condemns “duplicity and insincerity” of Democrats in racial matters

  September 30, 1953 Earl Warren, California’s three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education

  December 8, 1953 Eisenhower administration Asst. Attorney General Lee Rankin argues for plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education

  May 17, 1954 Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education

  November 25, 1955 Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel

  March 12, 1956 Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation

  June 5, 1956 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law

  October 19, 1956 On campaign trail, Vice President Richard Nixon vows: “American boys and girls shall sit, side by side, at any school – public or private – with no regard paid to the color of their skin. Segregation, discrimination, and prejudice have no place in America”

  November 6, 1956 African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President

  September 9, 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act

  September 24, 1957 Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools

  June 23, 1958 President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights

  February 4, 1959 President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats

  May 6, 1960 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats

  July 27, 1960 At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform

  What?

  Without getting into the cumbersome minutae of obviously needed regulation, my point was the less government the better. When people of all stripes are allowed to achieve their highest personal and “legal” financial potential in whatever field they choose, the capatilist economic engine is at it’s best. However, people actually have to get out of bed and work to realize that success and that is where many people fail.

• 28. Eddie Woodhall  |  October 12th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

  Petty supports McCain.

  Shocking!

• 29. Amanda  |  October 12th, 2008 at 3:49 pm

  William,

  Just so we’re clear here, I live in Iowa. That’d be middle America, in case there’s no map nearby. I’m not some big-city, coast-living latte-sipper, okay? I go to my state fair every year. My dad pitches horseshoes in it. I have a good grasp on how “real America” lives. And the people here in Iowa aren’t going to let Richard Petty OR John McCain represent their values next month.

• 30. Ricorun  |  October 12th, 2008 at 4:03 pm

  neocon: July 27, 1960 At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform

  The essential question is… what happened after July 27, 1960? There’s 48 years missing from your narrative. FWIW though, I agree with you about the epochs you’ve documented. The GOP needs to reflect on them and offer something.

  The old saw is that Democrats are inclined to offer feel good policies rather than do good policies. And in many cases I agree with that. The trouble is, the GOP hasn’t offered much of an alternative.

• 31. What?  |  October 12th, 2008 at 5:40 pm

  Neocon,
  Hang your hat on something, here. Do all those regulations I listed count as obstacles to a person achieving his potential or are they regulations you agree should exist?

  No one is for obtrusive regulation. The problem is defining what that obtrusive regulation is. Please give me your definition of what an obstacle is. Then I will know what your definition of fair is. Otherwise you are basically giving me a slogan disconnected from any real plan of implementation.

• 32. Faceplant  |  October 12th, 2008 at 5:54 pm

  “What?

  “Then you openly admit to Liberal Democrat failures?”

  Democrats have been a bunch of spineless wimps. They totally share the blame for enabling all of Bush’s most disasterous, and dangerous policies (domestic spying, secret prisons, torture).

  “Hard to believe, you spew nothing but lib talking points and Obama “savior of the world” slogans.”

  I await your citing of a single time I ever said anything of the sort. Have fun tracking that quote down.

  “That is the difference between mindless liberals and free thinking conservatives. We free thinking conservatives will put blame where it is due while you on the other hand keep toeing the line never once wavering from the party.”

  Okay, since you seem to know SOOOOO much about me, why don’t you tell me what my policy positions are.

  “However, in this case, liberals are not the ones to control government at any cost. Newt Gingrich did make an good conservative effort at smaller gov’t, only to be thwarted by the liberal administration.”

  Given that I don’t believe small government is inherently good, why would I criticize liberals for thwarting Gingrich?

  “Yes, most Republicans have practiced liberal policy for the past eight years - I am willing to admit it, however you will not criticize the liberals for doing the same and Obama can count on your vote come November.”

  Why would I criticize liberals for carrying out policies that I believe are good for the country?

  You do realize how ridiculous you sound right. I’m some hyperpartisan guy that only toes the party line because I don’t support the same policies you do. Isn’t that the definition of YOU being a rabid partisan?

  Now, since you haven’t answered the question at all, I will ask it again.

  When has this administration, or Republicans in congress ever taken responsibility for any mistakes they have made? Can’t you name just one?

• 33. What?  |  October 12th, 2008 at 6:00 pm

  Danish,
  What can I say, Reagan increased the deficit. He had the line item veto. He could have eliminated any parts of the bill he did not like and still signed it into law. Your hero spent more than he had.

  Of course I admit that Social Security and Medicaid are in bad shape. Everyone know this. That doesn’t mean they are complete failures. It means they need to be fixed. Both Republican and Democrats have failed to do this. It is not one party’s fault that these programs are in danger.
  Also, how can you call a program that keeps 40% of Americans out of abject poverty a failure?

  As for McCain voting against bigger govenment, that is only half true. He votes for less regulation which we can see now was a big mistake. He also only votes against earmarks, a smaller portion of the budget. He never strikes at social security and defense, the two major spending areas. If he did, he would not be your current nominee. He would be selling cars in Arizona.

  Why would I criticize someone for being liberal when I myself am a believer in programs like social security and medicaid?
  Also, the difference between what your party did and what I would do is that your party lowered taxes while continuing to spend. I would not spend more than I have. If the countrey wants healthcare it will pay for it with higher taxes.

  Danish, this is my favorite:
  “That is the difference between mindless liberals and free thinking conservatives. We free thinking conservatives will put blame where it is due while you on the other hand keep toeing the line never once wavering from the party.”

  No, you don’t. The blame for the current crisis on your party because you have to. Your party has been in power. You also try to save the ideology while attacking those who implemented it. The current crisis was not a result of REpublicans acting liberal. It was a result of de-regulation, a very conservative policy.
  You see? It is a failure of your conservative belief in deregulation that caused this crisis.