Thelma & Louise Cont. – The Enabler Version

I am enjoying this conversation on the direction of the GOP and where we go from here. Many of you know my position and some disagree so let me come at this from a different angle. In my opinion, the GOP is nothing more than an  enabler at this point. We are enabling Obama to have someone to blame for his failures, and the liberal media is lapping it up. Everyday we try and save liberals from themselves, is another day that Obama can blame us for “obstructing” his wise and benevolent policies, and that perception will not change anytime soon, so why do we continue to do the same thing expecting different results? That is the definition of insanity.

What I think we should do, is clearly state for the record that we vigorously disagree with the policies prescribed by the Democrats and Obama, but that we do realize that elections have consequences so we will stand aside and allow Obama to implement his policies unchallenged. We all know these policies will fail, in fact they already have, so why are we standing in the way? The people who will be hurt the worst are the people who voted for Obama, so let the pain begin. This is also the only way that we can then clearly lay the blame at the feet of the Democrats and the media won’t even be able to cover for them and that just might help usher in a decade of conservative rule.

Count and Rat Haven have suggested that we simply need to control the message, and that another Reagan is what is needed. I somewhat disagree. While I would love to see another Reagan emerge, I believe our problems are deeper this time around. Our problems are not just the economy as they were with Reagan in 1980, our problem is the demonization of wealth and capitalism that is now ingrained in too many people. It’s the economic illiteracy that we must overcome in addition to selling the virtues of a smaller government, and back in 1980, wealth and success were not seen as the evils as they are today. So it is imperative in my opinion that this younger generation, and the growing minority constituency who all voted for the Obama plan, feel the pain of it first hand.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan:

Seriously, we have entirely blown it on getting information to people…and Democrats have done the Big Lie better than ever.

119 thoughts on “Thelma & Louise Cont. – The Enabler Version

  1. neocon01 December 6, 2012 / 7:31 pm


    The people who will be hurt the worst are the people who voted for Obama, so let the pain begin. This is also the only way that we can then clearly lay the blame at the feet of the Democrats and the media won’t even be able to cover for them and that just might help usher in a decade of conservative rule.

    NewsBeast Layoffs Begin (Liberal Newsweek print staffers getting the boot right now!)
    Adweek ^ | 12/6/12 | Lucia Moses

    It’s got to be a sad day at the Newsweek Daily Beast Co., where the layoffs that have been in the offing since the company announced it would fold Newsweek have begun.

    The staff got an email at lunchtime today from editor in chief Tina Brown and CEO Baba Shetty notifying them that editorial staffers would learn if their positions are being eliminated.

    happpy kwanza all you Ubama voters……

  2. Cluster December 6, 2012 / 7:45 pm

    And so it begins:

    HOWARD DEAN: The only problem is — and this is initially going to seem like heresy from a progressive is — the truth is everybody needs to pay more taxes, not just the rich. And it’s a good start. But we’re not going to get out of this deficit problem unless we raise taxes across the board, to go back to what Bill Clinton had and his taxes. And if we don’t do that, the problem is the pressure is going to be on spending even more.

    That didn’t take long did it? Democrats are already laying the ground work to break their pledge of not raising taxes on the middle class and it’s not even inauguration day yet. The ironic thing is is that if we went back to the spending levels of the Clinton Admin, we wouldn’t need to raise taxes, but don’t expect that fact to come out.

    Let’s let the Democrats fail in spectacular fashion without any help from us. Don’t give them an escape valve. It’s the worst thing we could do.

    • 02casper December 6, 2012 / 8:00 pm

      Dean isn’t an elected official or a part of the Obama Administration. While I agree with him, he speaks for himself, not the Democratic party.

    • neocon01 December 6, 2012 / 8:02 pm


      the Fig agrees

      Gingrich to GOP Leaders: ‘Go Over the Cliff’

      Thursday, 06 Dec 2012 10:56 AM
      By Greg McDonald

      Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich says it would be better for Republicans to take that dive off the so-called fiscal cliff on Dec. 31, rather than “cave in” to President Barack Obama on tax increases.

      The Georgia Republican also suggested that GOP leaders in Congress “should be prepared” if necessary to force a government shutdown to get the deep spending cuts they want.

      “I think it’s a huge mistake for House Republicans to cave in and try to find some kind of desperate solution that doesn’t work,” Gingrich told Fox News’ Sean Hannity Wednesday night.

      “There’s no evidence, none, that the president will cut spending. If the president’s not going to cut spending, our choice is simple. You go over a smaller cliff this year or a bigger cliff two or three years from now.”

      Read Latest Breaking News from
      Important: Do You Still Support Obamacare? Vote Here Now!

    • Retired Spook December 7, 2012 / 11:22 am

      Let’s let the Democrats fail in spectacular fashion without any help from us. Don’t give them an escape valve. It’s the worst thing we could do.


      Taking time out from my visit with my daughter and her family to weigh in on this. I’m still in agreement with you, no matter how much pain it results in for both individuals and the GOP. The pain will only be temporary, and to believe otherwise is to take a very static view of things. Besides, regardless of what the GOP does, there’s pain coming, so it’s just becomes a matter of who gets the blame. We finally have an opportunity to show everyone the results of pure, unabashed, unhindered Progressivism. Let’s not waste it.

    • neocon01 December 6, 2012 / 8:04 pm


      • neocon01 December 6, 2012 / 8:09 pm


        spoken like a good little commie……… by reducing their profits even more than administrative costs

        Ahhhhh yes, those EEEEEVIL profits and the greedy bastards who invested THEIR HARD EARNED $$$$ in those companies.

    • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 6, 2012 / 8:18 pm

      Are you stupid or just don’t care cappy?

      Premiums went up, profits went down. Next time – Read before posting, it’ll save you the embarrassment.

      • neocon01 December 6, 2012 / 8:27 pm

        Read before posting, it’ll save you the embarrassment.

        sometimes you just cant fix stupid……… 🙂

      • neocon01 December 6, 2012 / 8:38 pm

        woo hoo

        BREAKING: Michigan to Become Right-to-Work State
        | 12/6/2012 | Jarrett Skorup

        Michigan Governor Rick Snyder said today that a bill will be introduced that would make Michigan the nation’s 24th right-to-work state.

        “When it arrives on my desk, I plan on signing it,” he said.

      • Retired Spook December 7, 2012 / 2:06 pm

        Count, you’re assuming that Casper is easily embarrassed.

    • Cluster December 6, 2012 / 8:39 pm

      No bias there right Casper? But do you kow what “lower overhead costs” translates to Casper? Layoffs.

      More unemployment. Unintended consequences.
      I am starting to really enjoy watching this implosion happen.

      • neocon01 December 6, 2012 / 8:44 pm


        maybe ole caspy’s school will be the next to lower overhead……..I can already think of some dead wood to burn off the books.
        The wailing and gnashing of teeth would be poetic justice.

        But hey 99 weeks of unemployment stimulates the economy according to PigLowsey.

    • dbschmidt December 7, 2012 / 6:29 pm

      Somehow, the largest tax increase in the history of this Republic seems to contradict with “Obamacare saves consumers millions of dollars.” Liberal logic–We have to spend money in order to save money.


      BTW, Casper, most of my references are physical or e-books but I do have a few links. Right after I rebuild this POS Windoze computer again–I will give you a list on links and titles. Might take a little while as I am “hoping” that the rebuild will only take a weekend

  3. Cluster December 6, 2012 / 8:43 pm

    We have another convert: Rand Paul

    SEN. RAND PAUL: I have yet another thought on how we can fix this. Why don’t we let the Democrats pass whatever they want? If they are the party of higher taxes, all the Republicans vote present and let the Democrats raise taxes as high as they want to raise them, let Democrats in the Senate raise taxes, let the president sign it and then make them own the tax increase. And when the economy stalls, when the economy sputters, when people lose their jobs, they know which party to blame, the party of high taxes. Let’s don’t be the party of just almost as high taxes.

    • neocon01 December 6, 2012 / 8:49 pm


      the rats leaving the sinking ship USS al Ubama

      Former MEA Local Prez: Union May Lose 40% of Members – Including Him – if Teacher Right to Work Passes

    • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 6, 2012 / 8:55 pm

      Didn’t I pick Rand Paul and Paul Ryan to represent the Senate and House in negotiations?

      I can’t wait to see how the dims blame the consequences of Obamacare on the Republicans. they’re failing (like cappy) to turn this disaster into a success.

      Note the happy headline in cappy’s article?

      Obamacare saves consumers millions of dollars.

      Writes cappy, trumpeting the news that premiums went up, investors lose money, retirement funds lose money, people get laid off and administrative services like customer service and conflict resolution are gone.

      If i didn’t live an a dimocrat gangsters’ paradise I’d be munching the popcorn along with you Cluster.

      • Cluster December 6, 2012 / 9:06 pm


        I hate to be the beneficiary of your states pain, but AZ will reap the rewards from the pain inflicted by Brown and Obama on the The Peoples Republic of CA.

        I sure hope the GOP listens to Rand, this could be fun to watch.

        And you did pick Rand – good call

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 6, 2012 / 9:15 pm

        That explains why you and Mark want the Tax increases in California to go full steam ahead.

        Arizona and Nevada are the beneficiaries of California dimocratic intransigence.

  4. M. Noonan December 6, 2012 / 9:39 pm

    I do consider cashing out the 401k and buying a house in rural Nevada…this way when Bernanke tries to inflate us out of Obama’s mess I’ll have something that will retain its value..

    Mostly, just let them get on with screwing things up. We’ll see if everyone wakes up when the poop really hits the fan.

    • Cluster December 6, 2012 / 9:48 pm

      Real estate never loses in the long term Mark. Buy some land, they’re not making any more of it.

  5. The Return of Rathaven December 7, 2012 / 12:21 pm

    And now for something completly different;

    A union shop foreman walks into a bar next door to the factory and is about to order a drink to celebrate Obama’s victory when he sees a guy close by wearing a Romney for President button and two beers in front of him. He doesn’t have to be an Einstein to know that this guy is a Republican. So, he shouts over to the bartender so loudly that everyone can hear, “Drinks for everyone in here, bartender, but not for the Republican.”

    Soon after the drinks have been handed out, the Republican gives him a big smile, waves at him, then says, “Thank you!” in an equally loud voice. This infuriates the union official. The union captain once again loudly orders drinks for everyone except the Republican.

    As before, this does not seem to bother the Republican. He continues to smile, and again yells, “Thank you!” The union thug once again loudly orders drinks for everyone except the Republican. As before, this does not seem to bother the Republican. He continues to smile, and again yells, “Thank you!” The union guy asks the bartender, “What the hell is the matter with that Republican? I’ve ordered three rounds of drinks for everyone in the bar but him, and all the silly idiot does is smile and thanks me. Is he nuts?”

    “Nope,” replies the bartender. “He owns the place.”

    • Cluster December 7, 2012 / 12:30 pm

      Love it!

    • neocon01 December 7, 2012 / 2:48 pm


      A union shop foreman “teacher” walks into a bar next door to the factory school in casper wyoming and is about to order a drink to celebrate Obama’s victory when he sees a guy close by wearing a Romney for President button and two beers in front of him.

      fixed LOL

  6. Cluster December 7, 2012 / 12:35 pm

    Just an observation – conspicuously absent from this thread are some our liberals. I don’t think they know how to react, or what to say when they realize that they WILL get everything they voted for. I don’t think they ever thought that one through.

    • Retired Spook December 7, 2012 / 1:29 pm

      I absolutely guarantee you they haven’t.

    • neocon01 December 7, 2012 / 2:53 pm

      bmitch ……..

      here is a message for ya


      Govt. borrowing 46 cents of every dollar it spends…

      ‘Welfare Spending Equates to $168 Per Day for Every Household in Poverty’…

      73% of New Jobs Created in Last 5 Months Are in Government…

      SALVATION ARMY Reports Record Number Of Families In Need For Christmas…

  7. J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) December 7, 2012 / 2:04 pm

    Mark’s update to the post encapsulates the problem we face in one short video.

    • neocon01 December 7, 2012 / 3:01 pm


      It funny I used to get into debates with union air craft mechanics……same as the movie.

      do you support gun control?….no
      do you support abortion on demand?…….no
      do you want higher taxes?…
      do you support sodomy & rename marriage?…
      do you support 47% paying no frd taxes?….no
      do you support socialism?……no
      do you support the welfare state?….no
      do you believe in the Christian God?….yes
      do you want to see islam in the US……no

      then WHY are you a donk?

      “they are for the working man”…….O-M-G!!!!!!!

  8. Bob1 December 7, 2012 / 3:04 pm

    When are we going to learn that the “blame” strategy in the “game of popular politics” isn’t going to work for anyone’s benefit? No segment of our society can benefit if it only controls 51% of our population. And Congress will always be in a state of gridlock if its representatives are only interested in getting the support of 51% of the people and serving their specific needs. There is no good lesson to learned by anyone if American’s go off of the “fiscal cliff”. We have to implement a wiser way of doing our civic business in this country if we are going to survive.

    • neocon01 December 7, 2012 / 3:13 pm


      We have to implement a wiser way of doing our civic business in this country if we are going to survive.

      Gee ya tink?

  9. bagni December 7, 2012 / 3:08 pm

    you want another reagan?
    cool…but he will raise taxes

    • neocon01 December 7, 2012 / 3:19 pm

      Obama Remembers Pearl Harbor By Promoting Picture of Himself ^ | December 7, 2012 | Katie Pavlich

      Just this week President Obama celebrated Rosa Parks by publishing a photo of himself on a bus and now the White House can’t even commemorate Pearl Harbor without bringing Obama’s face into the picture. From the White House


      • neocon01 December 8, 2012 / 12:10 pm

        Why aren’t Asian Americans Republican? No one better demonstrates self reliance and personal responsibility than the Asian communities. Have we failed to make that connection?

        ALL the Asians I know are conservative, I know probably 20 very well.
        most own their own businesses,

  10. Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 3:31 pm

    I’m not a very reliable predictor of the future; hell I’m lousy at it. Most of us are; those that claim otherwise find they have to tweak their original contention to comport with events and results or interpret the facts to be something they’re not. It’s human nature, we all want to pretend we’re the first to know. I’m not good at predicting the future but I’m damn spanky at predicting the present and even better at predicting the past. So here’s my prediction of the current situation:

    Giving I, giving up and voting “present” isn’t a strategy, its defeat. Hoping that the coming debacle will be blamed on those pushing for it is sophomoric. At first I thought of Ralphie holding a bar of Lifebuoy between his teeth while fantasizing of the grief his parents will fell when he goes blind from their actions. Then I thought of the guy with the inflatable woman posed in the passenger seat of his car, driving up and down the street in front of his ex-girlfriend’s house.

    I’ll show them!

    America survived and thrived after the New Deal; not because of it, but in spite of it. America survived and thrived after Carter, because that’s what we do. We survived and thrived after Nixon’s Phase II and Johnson’s Great society and even Teddy’s Square Deal. Wilson’s war, Lincoln’s Habeas corpus, Adam’s Alien and Sedition Acts because that’s what we do; we survive and thrive.

    America survived and thrived after 9-11, after the financial meltdown in 2008 and even after Obama was elected.

    So let’s take a dose of reality now. The only course left open to conservatives now is to fight for the best deal we can get to minimize the disaster and maximize our image. The Democrats won the National Election, the people that voted them in to this power may or may not fully understand the consequences, but the American people are not stupid, they are not sheep voting as they are told, they understand much of the issues as it relates to them and they’ve made a decision.

    We (Americans) are schizophrenic when it comes to choosing our leadership, and we defy logic and reason when we vote. We eternally hope for the best and perpetually sooth our disappointment “Next time it will be different” behavior.

    The time has come for Conservatives to rationally discuss immigration reform among ourselves. Discuss Gay Marriage, abortion, government-run education and foreign affairs. What we are willing to accept and where the line must be ever crossed. We need a plan for addressing issues that’s founded in our beliefs but aware of our position.

    I believe that telling a lie is a sin; it’s wrong, it’s always wrong. I believe that taking credit for another’s accomplishment is wrong, always and forever wrong. I believe that abortion is murder, and welfare is demeaning to the spirit and destructive the family. But I can’t legislate any of this in this climate or with these citizens. I can make my case, deal with the facts as they are not as I wish them to be, and strike the best deal with my fellows as time and reality will allow. To do otherwise is to be trampled by the march of leftism and forgotten as a relic of another day in another time.

    Let them have what they want?

    The financial meltdown in 2008 is what happens when the liberals get what they want.

    The now infamous videos of Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Chris Dodd and the rest poo-pooing the very notion that a banking or credit crises would be the result of Freddie and Fannie malfeasance is equaled only by the recalcitrance of liberals to deal with Social Security in spite of every prediction of insolvency and financial catastrophe coming to fruition. To call attention to the impending calamity was to be labeled a racist, a reactionary and contrivance of big moneyed Interests.

    We’ve pointed out many times that conservative financial principles were the antithesis of the events leading up to the collapse. WE warned that the expansion of the Federal government, increase in spending, ever expanding social programs, war on poverty, war on drugs, welfare state breakdown of familial order, and social responsibility will inevitably lead to financial ruin and a permanent dependent class. We’ve quoted Thatcher, Friedman, Von Missus, Reagan, de Tocqueville, Edmund Burke and William F. “Cancel your own g-damn subscription ” Buckley till our pens ran out of ink.

    We’ve demonstrated repeatedly that liberalism doesn’t work on any level, at any time, in any place throughout its long and dismal history. We’ve written of the sacred and profane, quoted scripture and Stalin; Jesus, Jefferson and Jeffery Dahmer; inductive and deductive, rational and integral.

    And we’re not alone. Many others demonstrated on a daily basis the logic and order to our positions. This has been a center-right country for most of my lifetime, so our beliefs are not those of the fringe; they are and have been the mainstream of public opinion for generations.

    And what has been the result?

    We slouch ever toward Gomorrah.

    That happens because we don’t act rationally slow the progress but insist instead that the progress stop. Are we to become victims of our ideology? Are we slaves to a concept?

    I refuse to accept that. I want the Republicans to fight Obama on the deal he’s offering, offer our vision, compromise where we can, lose gracefully where we must, demand our rights, accept the facts, and live to fight another day. They’ll win some, we’ll win some, and the public will benefit some and the Public lose some.

    But regardless of what deal we strike today America will survive and thrive because … it’s what we do.

    • neocon01 December 7, 2012 / 3:39 pm

      A continuous record of the White House and its administration

      The Obama Administration: Year Four

    • neocon01 December 7, 2012 / 3:50 pm


      the Princess is turning 60 today and youngest son turned 30 on the 2nd.
      Having a big party @ 120 people. A limo for us, her sister from Buffalo and brother from Daytona coming in for a surprise.
      Food, drinks and a DJ……….(a BLACK one- Ooh the horrors) for all who scream about conservative racism….LOL

    • mitchethekid December 7, 2012 / 5:35 pm

      Good for you Count. Although I disagree with some of your comments, I admire your expression of rationality. Especially on this blog. Hope you’re not attacked or marginalized. As you know, in any relationship compromise is not only a positive, it is a requisite. But of all of the problems that conservatives are facing, to focus on their image won’t be of good service unless the propositions change. And I am not talking about fiscal issues, I am talking about the social ones for they are the well-spring of attitudes and ideologies. The first step should be to refute the crazies. The birthers, the science deniers and the theocrats. Embrace the diversity of our nation by shying away from voter disenfranchisement as a way to win elections. The outcome of a few weeks ago proved; as you mentioned, that these methods failed and the conservativism that was promoted was life the bar of Lifeboy that you brought attention to.
      Some thing else that i think should be of great concern is what is contained in the link below. Read some of the letters if you want to gain some insight into the thinking of younger people and why they have rejected the current Republican Party. I am not trying to be offensive or insulting but I thought you expressed your self very well and it’s refreshing to have a calm discussion on this blog with someone who is in touch with reality enough so that they recognize that there is a problem. And having a temper tantrum isn’t a solution. It’s an expression of the problem.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 6:12 pm

        I found this article to be stunning in its cluelessness and fact-deficiency, but a brilliant exposition of gullibility.

        First, to vote for the New Democrat Party and at the same time claim to be a libertarian is such an oxymoron, the emphasis would have to be on the “moron”. Libertarians are about the smallest government possible, about the most expansion of personal liberty possible. To vote for a party which is based on an infinite expansion of federal size, scope and power and to simultaneously assert Libertarianism shows a gross ignorance of both the Left and of the definition of “libertarian”.

        From this point the whole thing lurches into the same old falsehoods spread by the Left, the same old “anti-science” blather, the resurgence of the silly “theocracy” meme, and so on.

        Once again, the objection is to an invented conservative movement, and an invented conservative American, neither of which exist outside the fever swamp of Liberal fantasies.

        When you say “Read some of the letters if you want to gain some insight into the thinking of younger people and why they have rejected the current Republican Party. ” you do make a good point, but I don’t think it is the one you intended. The point you actually make is that these “younger people” are pathetically and even dangerously ignorant.

        I also note the claim that these people are so much better educated. The only way to support this claim is to accept the suggestion that a certain number of years spent in school, and a certain number of degrees, are the same as “education”.

        I could go into detail on the specifics of non-education produced by these “schools” but I will settle for the most obvious—the total lack of the skill of critical thinking. What I see in these supposedly educated younger people is a strange submission of analysis and critical thinking, a surrender of thought process in favor of simply accepting what they are told by popular culture, professors, etc.

        The oddity is that these sadly undereducated, blindly accepting, uncritical, and generally ignorant people are preening in their imagined intellectual, educational and moral superiority.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 6:21 pm

        “Embrace the diversity of our nation by shying away from voter disenfranchisement as a way to win elections.”

        When I read something like this I am reminded of the legal objection to some testimony as “assuming facts not in evidence”.

        Quite simply, there is NO “voter disenfranchisement” attempted by the Republican Party, the conservative movement, the TEA Party, or any other bogey man of the Left.

        This entire trumped-up issue simply does not exist in reality.

        The conservative movement, no matter which name any element of it may be using at any given time, has no interest at all in interfering with the ability of any legitimate, legal, qualified voter to cast his or her vote.


        A person who goes in to vote and finds that a vote has been cast in his name by someone else, who was not required to show proof of identity, has been “disenfranchised”.

        A person who votes but has that vote canceled out by the vote of someone who is not legally qualified to vote, or who has voted more than one time, is “disenfranchised”.

        It is one of the quirks of the our popular culture that the Right is so strenuously trying to DEFEND the rights of the legitimate voter, and protect the integrity of the voting process, while the Left is trying even harder to obstruct the effort to make sure every vote cast is cast by a legal voter, and at the same time the Left is laying claim to the title of defender of the voter. It’s ridiculous.

        But it is what passes for established truth on the Left.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 6:37 pm

        Fair enough, I doubt that anything written by gay ill-informed twenty-somethings will hold any sway over conservatives. It is of benefit to understand what their motivations are but we don’t believe for a minute that some of those skulls full of mush are the ticket to conservative dominance any more than liberals believe that the Alan Jackson fans are suddenly going to listen to Hip Hop if they’re exposed to enough of it.

        Young liberals grow up to be old conservatives if they’re white. Minorities grow up to be liberals and therein is the lesson for conservatives. What is the motivation of liberals that cannot or will not mature in their thinking? At what root level can rational argumentation overcome ingrained ideology.

        It also bears mentioning that your admonition regarding temper tantrums falls under the category of What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. We listened to 8 years of irrational Bush Derangement which far exceeded anything my side of the aisle has expressed over the past four years.

        If you want to have a serious discussion start by knocking off the offensive name-calling; the so-called “birthers” are mostly people asking questions we’ve asked of every presidential candidate. Never before has such questions been met with such bile. If you don’t know the answer to the questions; don’t hurl pejoratives at others that likewise don’t know. A skeptic is not a “science denier”. There is far more scientific truth to the skeptic than there is in the entire consensus your governmental bodies can proffer. Theocracy is antithetic to conservatism.

        Diversity is only a goal if it is absolute; disenfranchisement of the erroneous is noble and winning elections is an outcome, not a goal.

        As I stated above, conservatives must decide among ourselves what the ideology is and where we are willing/able to compromise. Liberals who wish to enter the debate may do so by first respecting our right to our beliefs. Some things are evident to conservatives, a power greater than ourselves, humans’ capacity to adapt, and the inherent desire for people everywhere to want what’s best for their children.

        The conservative in America is best advised to read lessons from the motto of Arthur’s Round Table; “Adopt, Adapt, Improve.

      • Cluster December 7, 2012 / 6:40 pm


        I read Mitch’s posted and highlighted the very same line you did:

        Embrace the diversity of our nation by shying away from voter disenfranchisement as a way to win elections.

        You actually said everything I was going to in your two responses, but as usual, more articulately, so let me just say that right before Mitch made his statement about disenfranchisement, he stated that it was important to “refute the crazies” – I thought that was hilarious.

        You made a great point about how bone deep ignorant these younger liberals are, and this disenfranchisement meme is a just a great example of how critical thinking is just lost on them. It’s sad.

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 8:38 pm

        “To vote for a party which is based on an infinite expansion of federal size, scope and power”

        …is not possible because no such party exists. That’s just the false dichotomy you try to force on everybody (and then act surprised when it fails).

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 8:40 pm

        “A person who votes but has that vote canceled out by the vote of someone who is not legally qualified to vote, or who has voted more than one time, is “disenfranchised”.”

        This is completely false. Don’t use the word “disenfranchised” if you don’t know what it means.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 8:58 pm

        ““To vote for a party which is based on an infinite expansion of federal size, scope and power”

        …is not possible because no such party exists..”

        Please explain to us the restraints upon the size, scope and power of the federal government promoted by the Democrat Party and illustrated by its actions

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 9:03 pm

        Definition of DISENFRANCHISE
        : to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote

        Having someone else vote in your name is depriving you of YOUR right to vote.

        Having a vote canceled out by an illegal vote is a de facto deprivation of that voter’s right to have his or her vote counted and measured against other legal votes.

        I see your dependence on snarls and insults has not diminished. It seems to be your defining characteristic.

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 9:17 pm

        Definition of DISENFRANCHISE
        : to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote

        Can you point to the part where it says that a person can be disenfranchised by somebody else voting?

        No, you can’t. Because that’s not what disenfranchisement is. If you have to change the definitions of words to make your argument work, then your argument doesn’t actually work, Amazona. Please try to keep that in mind.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 9:26 pm

        I see you understand that your only argument has to be based on claiming I said what I did not say.

        Clearly your presence here is merely to try to disrupt the blog by constantly haranguing people, attacking and insulting.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 9:28 pm

        Can you address what I actually SAID?

        “Having a vote canceled out by an illegal vote is a de facto deprivation of that voter’s right to have his or her vote counted and measured against other legal votes.”

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 9:29 pm

        You said this, Amazona:

        A person who votes but has that vote canceled out by the vote of someone who is not legally qualified to vote, or who has voted more than one time, is “disenfranchised”.

        If you are coming to regret saying it, that’s understandable because it’s so clearly wrong–and has been proven wrong in this thread. But claiming you never said it is sad, desperate, and only making things worse for you.

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 9:33 pm

        Well, I see you’re already to the point where rather than admit you’re wrong, you’re calling on the moderator to bail you out. So I’ll just sum up by pointing out that the definition of “disenfranchise” that you posted is “to deprive of the right to vote.” If you have voted, then you have not been deprived of the right to vote and therefore have not been disenfranchised. So your argument that you can be disenfranchised when you have voted is proven false.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 9:39 pm

        First address this:

        “Having a vote canceled out by an illegal vote is a de facto deprivation of that voter’s right to have his or her vote counted and measured against other legal votes.”

        Then explain how not being able to have your vote counted and measured against other LEGAL votes is significantly different from not being able to cast it at all, given the identical outcomes of the two slightly different scenarios.

        The fact that you find it necessary to distort and misstate my comment is proof that all you want to do is perturb me and disrupt the blog, and not engage in actual rational discourse.

        Two examples:

        “…… “somebody else voting disenfranchises me!”

        “… conservatives get “disenfranchised” by other people voting. ..”

        Clearly all you want to do is make a lot of noise, insult me, and disrupt the blog.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 9:41 pm

        “….you’re calling on the moderator to bail you out.”


        Looks like that tinfoil hat is a little tight, there, Bubbles.

        I “called on” no one. If you are skirting blog rules don’t blame me.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 9:53 pm

        The practice has been, in prior elections, to evaluate the vote tally and if the decision is made that statistically speaking the uncounted absentee and military votes cast and delivered cannot change the outcome, they would not be counted.

        I assert that this has amounted to a de facto disenfranchisement of these voters. They DID cast votes, but those votes were not considered in the electoral vote count because of a technicality.

        I further assert that the act of voting goes beyond merely pulling a lever or dropping a ballot in a box—it is a process, involving the actual counting of that vote and making it part of a vote tally.

        If the argument is that merely pulling a lever or filling out a ballot fulfills the entire voting process, make it.

        Mine is that the right to vote has to include the inclusion of that vote in the electoral process. If it is not counted, or if it is erased by a fraud of some sort such as having an illegal vote cast which negates it, the result is not having been allowed to participate fully in the voting process, even if the initial step in the process has been accomplished.

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 10:44 pm

        Earlier you were told “Argue a point or do not post. Merely posting attacks and insults will get you deleted and you are already about one post from being permanently removed from the blog. Again.” You chose to test this. So long. //Moderator

    • M. Noonan December 7, 2012 / 6:25 pm


      The job of liberals is to keep getting it wrong and the job of conservatives is to prevent anyone from fixing what the liberals broke. My attitude is actually one of getting conservatives to stop conserving liberalism – because that is all we’ve done since the rise of the modern, conservative movement in the 1950’s. The last time we actually rolled back liberalism was during the 8 years of the Harding/Coolidge Administrations – Hoover, who took over for them, is the actual father of FDR’s New Deal: all FDR did was double and triple down what Hoover did. Reagan did a great deal, but his primary effort was to destroy the USSR, and as a former New Deal Democrat, Reagan didn’t even see the need to fundamentally restructure government – low taxes, a balanced budget and economic prosperity were needed to enable us to afford Big Government, but there was no plan then and is no plan now on the GOP side to completely undo what has been done…and until we get to that attitude, we’ll be doing no more than just preserving liberalism for another day.

      And, so, yes I say let it all go smash – genuine free market, small government people have been warning for decades where all this leads and now its almost here…just a little bit more debt and an acute, fiscal crisis will ensue where there simply won’t be the money for all the stuff…unless government prints it to the point where the US dollar is halved in value from today’s level, which would trigger just as bad an economic crisis.

      The whole concept that the government can provide a benefit is a fraud – a complete lie from start to finish and it is that concept which must die if freedom is to live. If you can think of a way to convince people who are certain that the GOP is at fault for the fiscal cliff that Big Government is the actual problem, then I’m all ears…but outside of that, I think that experience is an excellent (if rather harsh) master…

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 6:46 pm


        Let me make my position monosyllabic.

        We fight or we give up.

        We give up, they win.

        If they win, we all lose.

        Things will get worse and the country will look to the Democrats to fix it.

        If you want to curl up in a fetal blob in the Nevada desert, knock yourself out. I predict that every so often you’ll gaze out of your self-imposed exile and wonder when that darned old apocalypse is going to send the masses to you for the excellent leadership you showed during the hardest of times.

        Good luck with that.

      • M. Noonan December 7, 2012 / 7:48 pm


        Well, I’m hardly going to just curl up out here – in fact, working on two books (one with Matt) which will be pretty heavy salvos in the fight…but, seriously, all polling indicates that if the GOP doesn’t give in to Obama, the GOP will be blamed for whatever goes wrong…so, just give Obama what he wants; let him own it. Meanwhile, wait for the smash and while doing that re-cast our positions and start to move in to the blue areas which are going to be hit much the hardest by the crash…

      • dbschmidt December 7, 2012 / 7:58 pm

        Minorities grow up to be liberals and therein is the lesson for conservatives. What is the motivation of liberals that cannot or will not mature in their thinking?

        I do not have an answer to your question; however, before I left Miami the exception would have been the Old School Cubans who lived under Castro. They are hard right conservatives.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 8:43 pm

        I look forward to your next book, I read the last one on Sunday on my Kindle.

        As long as we demonstrate leadership start to finish in these negotiations, as long as we don’t roll over and pout but keep trying to mitigate Obama’s failure, we can be assured the people will turn to us later. If we toss our hands in the air and say a ,i>pox upon thee for thy foolish lout we’ll get only smaller and less relevant when the country needs conservative leadership most.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 8:47 pm


        Cuban-Americans are reliably anti-Castro making them reliably Conservative. Think forward now when Castro(s) are gone, Cuba is open and the common enemy on the left is gone … Cuban Democrats.

        Why aren’t Asian Americans Republican? No one better demonstrates self reliance and personal responsibility than the Asian communities. Have we failed to make that connection?

      • dbschmidt December 7, 2012 / 9:14 pm


        I can already see your point of view in the younger generations of Cubans. My point is that anyone who has truly felt the wrath of any of the Progressive’s systems (Fascism, Marxism, etc.) is hard core against it. Those of us that have seen the America we know head down the ‘Road to Serfdom’ are against it.

        It is the mindless mush of the younger generation (and Liberals/Progressives of all ages) that do not see it. They do not even realize that socialism is only a stepping-stone and not an end point. My real fear is that the old Winston Churchill adage of ““If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain” no longer applies.

      • M. Noonan December 7, 2012 / 11:40 pm


        Thanks, much – the next book will be the new one Matt and I are working on. The book after that will be a solo effort which I actually started in 2010 and likely won’t finish until the end of 2013: I feel confident in asserting that the solo project will, at some point or another, offend every single person on earth…though it will also, at other points, cause every single person on earth to stand up and cheer; these points will be different for each person, depending not so much on point of view but on willingness to consider what I’ve said. We’ll see how it works out.

    • dbschmidt December 7, 2012 / 7:48 pm

      Count, among others,

      I rarely disagree with your point of view; however, that is somewhat I have to do today. Being and actual Libertarian—I am a small Federal (actually all governments) fiscally Conservative person. I believe in the strict construction of the Constitution and the rule of law just as I am sure many others do. As part of these beliefs—most social issues are no business of government. There are 17 enumerated duties. No more~no less.

      In my view of the scale from Left to Right you have Progressives who are One World Order, anti-capitalist borne from the Fabian Society and Frantfurt Schoolers among others who think they are the only ones smart enough to run the world including all production. A little, but not much more to the right are the Democrats (including the “New” Democrats) who are big, centralized government believers who want to control everything but are failing on pushing enough penalties and regulations on everyone production to be considered (or allowed?) entry into the Progressive movement. Somewhat more right are the RINO Republicans as well as the moderates which are the majority of Republicans today. Now lurch quite a bit to the right and you have the Constitutional Republicans and then finally a little farther to the right are the Libertarians. Only two left that are further to the right are anarchists and Genghis Khan (To be honest—sometimes I am accused of being to the right of Khan).

      Social beliefs are the responsibility of that society and not government –I am talking about on the smallest scale possible. Prohibition was rescinded but we still have dry counties here in NC. The “right” to smoke dope and kill yourself in the process was approved in a couple of States but I wonder what will happen when there are more DUI’s due to dope? Nevertheless, there are more DUIs here that involve prescription drugs and dope than alcohol but that is NC issue—not Californians.

      It comes down to the messaging as the video pointed out and one of the better speakers at the RNC reminded us “But we talked about issues — they never used the words Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal. We talked about many issues, like welfare, is it the way of life or hand up? Talked about size of government, how much should it tax families and small businesses? And when we left that lunch, we got in the car and I looked over at Chuck and said, “I’ll be damned. We’re Republicans.” –Susana Martinez. What we are missing, and the video shows, is an enlightened and moral constituency.

      Now, I do agree that what America does best is to overcome obstacles “because it’s what we do” and we will overcome this one in spite of Obama but we do need to let Obama inflict his brand of pain and socialism while educating the general public as to whose policies are responsible. Predictably, President Obama is accusing the Republicans of protecting the rich at the expense of everyone else. And predictably, the Republicans are playing right into his hands. I am tired of hearing about “fairness” and “The rich have to pay their fair share” when no one will tell me what the “fair share” is. Time for a FAIR tax but that is another diatribe. Obama’s policies have left over 20 million people struggling to find work. How is that fair?

      To leave this I will include a question David B. Cohen asked “ If you desperately need a job to support your family, which would you rather have: (a) a job, or (b) the satisfaction of knowing that some rich guy you’ve never met will have to pay more taxes? If you chose (b), I feel sorry for your family — and you probably voted for Obama.”

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 8:16 pm

        db, to your spectrum of political philosophy, left to right, I would place the true voting power of this country—those who vote for the Leftist political system without realizing they are doing so, or making the conscious decision to do so.

        These are the people who elected Obama.

        I doubt that many of them ever sat down and studied the different governing blueprints available to them, and made the conscious decision to vote for a system which is antithetical to that outlined in our Constitution. I doubt that many of them even understand the real choice they made—the choice between the restrictions on the size, scope and power of the federal government represented by the Constitution, and the retention of power and authority by state and local government, and the opposite, which is the shift of most power and authority to the federal government and allowing it to expand far beyond Constitutional restraints.

        Your outline of the degrees of Left and Right is quite good, but what I find scary is that the real decisions are made by people who support a system they do not understand, and would probably not support if they did understand it, because of the success of demagoguery and emotional manipulation by the Left.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 8:34 pm


        Maybe you don’t have to disagree with me after all. I stated (and it’s my belief) that conservatives must decide where the boundaries are, what issues are important and on what lines compromise may be found. Libertarians believe (if I may) that the government has no business in the social issues outside the framework of the Constitution. But they do have a compelling interest in some social issues, from the general welfare clause (as in domestic tranquility and peaceful commerce and not Capital W – Welfare payments) to Interstate commerce to international treaties, the federal government is up to its lips in social issues that you or I find way beyond their Constitutional responsibility or authority.

        The Court has made our position largely irrelevant; now, what do we do about it? Piss and moan like a eunuch, outfit our families in a cabin in rural Illinois and pretend the government can’t do anything about Gay Marriage because it’s not in their job description? Or try to limit the size and scope of that involvement as best we can.

        Like it or not, the issues apart from fiscally conservative small government economic independence and entrepreneurial freedom will continue to dominate the public discourse. We either pick a side or continue to shout at the wind.

      • dbschmidt December 7, 2012 / 8:39 pm


        I am not speaking of restoring a poll tax of any kind but between reading Liberal points of view (Mitch among others), and YouTube videos of things like Jay Leno’s “Jaywalking” segments very similar to the video at the beginning of this post–I think it is time that only those that command the very basic idea of their self-identified political party actually be allowed to vote. Maybe an addition question to see if they are actually following the issues they are going into vote for like”Benghazi. Any idea where it is and what happened there?” Oh, wait we can’t ask that because some three months later there is no official report.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 8:53 pm


        I would add that if they smoke machine made cigars like White Owl and Swisher Sweets they should be disqualified from voting as they’re just too darned classless.

        But, your solution has a downside; there are a number of people (my in-laws) that are just so stupid they vote for whom ever I instruct them to vote. My mother handed me her mail in ballot and told me to fill it out for her. And I have bullied several coworkers into doing something they never did before in their lives; vote.

        Think of the power I’d lose.

      • dbschmidt December 7, 2012 / 8:59 pm


        Well Sir, I am glad we can disagree to agree. I will and always been a fighter but one of the tax increase issue I still believe that we should make it well known what our beliefs are and hand Obama the top 2% increase with nothing else except the areas we believe where cuts should be made. We will get nothing through the Senate with the likes of Reid including a vote on the latest Obama mandate which all non-political wonks will forget by 2014.

        I do like the idea of on this single issue (separated from all others) to vote ‘present’ while constantly trying to inform the public of the expected results. When it happens, Obama and the Dems should own it fully. Lose a battle to hopefully win the war. Pain is a great teacher.

        Now, as it is getting colder and colder here in NC, I have issues with your “like a eunuch” comment every time I have to exit the house or sit on the non-heated throne. Not quite one but some days it could feel like it.

  11. mitchethekid December 7, 2012 / 6:29 pm

    Just what is expected from you Amazona. Nothing but vitriol and resentment. It must be a horrible burden to be so insufferably pedantic and despise entire groups of people just because they think differently. What events in your life caused you to be such a vicious, miserable human being? Aren’t you the one who claims a fetus is a child and yet you disparage the entire foundation of Libertarianism? Keep your morality to yourself Ms. Liberty. The good news, is that these younger people will be around for a lot longer than you so continue with your insults and sanctimony. That’s a sure way to spread a good image of what being a conservative is all about. In your case, it’s being an A hole.

    • Cluster December 7, 2012 / 6:43 pm


      You’re awfully defensive. Amazona simply pointed out the laughable false premise you, Sullivan and a lot of other liberals operate from. It’s not our fault if you decide to abandon independent critical thought in favor of group think, but please don’t lash out at us if we simply point it out.

      • mitchethekid December 7, 2012 / 8:43 pm

        Sullivan IS NOT a liberal. He is a sane, rational conservative. You know nothing about real conservatives. You are a low information radical.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 9:05 pm

        Andrew Sullivan is not conservative; he claims to be one but look at his record; he’s inconsistent on what should be central to fiscal-social-national security conservatism; he endorsed Obama and Ron Paul.

        He was a liberal, had Conservative leanings once-upon-a-time, now he’s just an old hack with no core beliefs.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 9:23 pm

        Let’s take a quick look at the lies in Bubbles’ post:

        … in Florida, the GOP outright admitted that its goal was to suppress voting and that the blather about “voter fraud” was nothing more than a marketing ploy….

        Except this is not what happened. “The GOP” said no such thing, in Florida or anywhere else. suppression and disenfranchisement is wrong, and it certainly shows the weakness of conservatism that it needs to rely on such things to have a chance at electoral victory.

        Yet the statement that voter suppression and disenfranchisement are acts by “conservatism” and also “…shows the weakness of conservatism…” is a lie, as is the statement that “… it (conservatism) needs to rely on such things to have a chance at electoral victory.”

        “….. they attempt to suppress voting…”

        “…they try to suppress voting…”

        And so on. In general, the entire post is nothing more than the process described in the links provided by neo, regarding efforts by the RRL to disrupt conservative blogs by flooding them with lies and attacks and insults.

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 9:26 pm

        Can’t argue against reality, can you, Amazona? That is why you’re failing; you can decide to wave away reality, but it’s much harder to get people to do so en masse. So you’re just going to have to start dealing with reality.

        Argue a point or do not post. Merely posting attacks and insults will get you deleted and you are already about one post from being permanently removed from the blog. Again. //Moderator

    • mitchethekid December 7, 2012 / 6:47 pm

      I’ll add this about voting. What you said is a bald faced lie. There is overwhelming evidence of voter disenfranchisement. Or suppression. Or putting up obstacles to register or any other adjective you want to use. I am not going to stoop to your level and engage you by providing the evidence but between 2000 and 2010 when 650 million votes that were cast, 13 were cases brought forth that were actual fraud. 13. You need look no further than Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania where the Republicans tried to restrict early voting or required new documentation that was never necessary before and the target was people who do not tend to vote for conservatives. This is just another glaring example of the duplicity of the right. You can’t get people to vote for your ideas, so you try to get them not to vote at all. And your refusal to accept this reality; amongst others, is more evidence of why the right is rejected and why I am calling you a liar. Voter fraud is a myth created by the right. Period.

      • Cluster December 7, 2012 / 6:56 pm

        You’re not going to stoop to my level by providing the evidence??

        OK. Of course why would you? Rachel Maddow told you it was true so it must be.

      • Cluster December 7, 2012 / 6:59 pm

        Wait a minute Mitch, I think I know what you mean. Are you talking about this disenfranchisement:

        On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state’s law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is “arbitrary” with “no discernible rational basis.”

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 7:08 pm

        I’ll give you this, you do get facts … all screwed up but you do get them.

        There were 13 credible cases of in-person voter impersonation, that’s not the same as 13 cases of voter fraud.

        There have been thousands of “cases” of fraudulent attempts and documented cases of registration and other types of fraud.

        One is more than enough.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 7:43 pm

        Please provide proof, or even evidence, of legitimately registered voters being denied the right or ability to vote.

        Or of a qualified person being denied the right or ability to register to vote.

        Oh, wait—-providing evidence is now redefined as “stooping” to my “level”. Why, thank you very much, kind sir. It is always gratifying to be acknowledged as one who DOES provide evidence of what I say, and at the same time interesting that you find this to be such negative thing to do. “Stooping” to honesty—an intriguing concept.

        I have to say, that does explain a lot.

        I see you frantically scrambling to try to conflate the whole spectrum of “voter fraud”, which covers so many different categories of interference with the voting process, with “disenfranchisement” but it simply will not fly.

        I also see you responding to a civil post with shrill accusations of me being a “liar”. Thank you for proving, once again, the true nature of your presence here, and confirmation that it is to attack and insult and not to discuss.

      • tiredoflibbs December 7, 2012 / 8:09 pm

        “You can’t get people to vote for your ideas, so you try to get them not to vote at all. ”

        Oh you mean the way Gore squashed the military absentee ballots in Florida. And the DEMOCRATS continue to do every election?

        Asking someone to prove their identity to vote, especially when state offer FREE voter IDs, is not disenfranchisement. No matter how many times you repeat the mindless dumbed down talking point lie, it will never become truth.

        Voter fraud is a myth? Tell that to those who have been dumb enough to get caught and imprisoned. You are such a drone.

      • dbschmidt December 7, 2012 / 8:21 pm

        everything–I am really getting to hate auto-correction.

      • tiredoflibbs December 7, 2012 / 8:23 pm

        ” I am not going to stoop to your level and engage you by providing the evidence ”

        Why would you even start providing FACTS? You never have before. We know it is beyond your capability. You are only capable of regurgitating dumbed down talking points and lies.

        DEMOCRATS have publicly stated that statements like I just wrote are not attacks, since they are true. So no whining.

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 8:49 pm

        “You need look no further than Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania where the Republicans tried to restrict early voting”

        Hell, in Florida, the GOP outright admitted that its goal was to suppress voting and that the blather about “voter fraud” was nothing more than a marketing ploy.

        Now, vote suppression and disenfranchisement is wrong, and it certainly shows the weakness of conservatism that it needs to rely on such things to have a chance at electoral victory. But conservatives take their problem from bad to worse to even worse.

        Bad enough that they attempt to suppress voting. But then they compound their wrongness by telling people not to believe their own experiences, but instead believe disingenuous claims that conservatives aren’t trying to suppress voting. And then they compound that even more by claiming that they’re the victims!

        So they try to suppress voting, tell the targets of those suppression attempts that they aren’t being suppressed, and top it off by falsely claiming that not only are the people whose votes conservatives are trying to suppress not on the receiving end of vote suppression tactics, but conservatives are the real victims via arguments like Amazona’s ludicrous “a person who votes but has that vote canceled out by the vote of someone who is not legally qualified to vote, or who has voted more than one time, is disenfranchised” notion.

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 8:54 pm

        Uh-oh, cluster, looks like you’ve been thoughtlessly passing along discredited talking points again. Do you know what the Ohio lawsuit was about? You don’t appear to, so let’s bring you up to speed: It was not trying to restrict any voters, military or otherwise, but rather enable early voting for all voters.

        In other words, it was doing the exact opposite of what you are (falsely) claiming.

        Republicans were trying to restrict early voting for all non-military voters, though. Do you have any theories as to why they would want to do that?

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 9:11 pm

        “….Florida Republicans pointed out that both men are now at odds with the party. Greer resigned as chairman in 2010 after being accused of stealing money from the Florida Republican Party. Crist ran for the U.S. Senate as an independent candidate in 2010. However, Greer and Crist’s statements were also backed up by GOP consultants, who didn’t wish to be named.

        So two guys ticked off at the GOP, one for being charged with a crime and one for being scorned, smear the GOP, and the only evidence that they are not lying are alleged statements by alleged and evidently self-identified “GOP consultants who, surprise surprise, refuse to be identified.

        So we not only do not know who they are, we don’t know if they are really GOP “consultants” at all, or even if they exist.

        And this is what excites Bubbles.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 9:13 pm

        The Florida GOP admitted voter suppression? Really?

        You mean Jim Greer? The fired Republican who embezzled funds and was arrested based on a complaint sworn out by the Republican party? That Jim Greer says the Republicans had nefarious motives?

        Well, that certainly makes me a believer.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 9:14 pm

        Republicans were not trying to restrict VOTING.

        Again, the semantic games in efforts to imply what is not true.

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 7, 2012 / 9:20 pm

        “the semantic games in efforts to imply what is not true.”

        Like “somebody else voting disenfranchises me!”

        But please, continue yelling at people who have experienced firsthand conservative attempts to suppress their voting that their firsthand experiences are false and that, in fact, conservatives get “disenfranchised” by other people voting. I’m sure that’ll be a real winner for you.

      • Cluster December 7, 2012 / 10:55 pm

        Bubbles is convinced that there is voter suppression because Rachel Maddow told him there was. That’s all the proof he needs and heresy can be considered solid evidence in liberal circles. Just like saying that Obama didn’t try and restrict early military voting and that Sullivan is a rational conservative. That last one is my favorite.

      • thetruthshallsetyoufree2012 December 8, 2012 / 2:28 pm

        A reminder: Earlier you were told “Argue a point or do not post. Merely posting attacks and insults will get you deleted and you are already about one post from being permanently removed from the blog. Again.” You chose to test this. So long. //Moderator

    • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 7:36 pm

      mitche. get a grip. Nothing in my posts even vaguely approaches either vitriol OR resentment. You need a new dictionary, lad.

      Let’s just take a look at what happened here.

      You wrote a calm and civil post. I responded in a calm and civil manner, pointing out errors in your post.

      I did not direct one single critical remark to you. Not one.

      I did point out errors in the link you referenced, and did so without emotion, without name calling, without insults. I merely presented a contradictory perspective. The closest I got an insult was “….an oxymoron, the emphasis would have to be on the “moron”…” and this was in reference to a third party, and then in reference to a statement, not a person.

      Your entire response to my civil posts is a litany of absolute shrill nastiness: You falsely accuse me of exhibiting “vitriol and resentment” and that was before you got warmed up and into your tirade of “insufferably pedantic”, “vicious” and “miserable”, as well as sanctimonious, a bigot who “…..despise(s) entire groups of people just because they think differently….”, and of course your crowning achievement in discourse, calling me “an Ahole.”


      And this temper tantrum even goes so far as to completely misstate what I said, aside from the lie about what I said being insulting, vitriolic, resentful, pedantic, etc.

      You falsely assert that I “…..disparage the entire foundation of Libertarianism…”…What utter nonsense. I disparaged not one single aspect of Libertarianism. I merely pointed out that Libertarianism and Leftism are antithetical to each other, in direct contradiction and opposition to each other. To go from what I said to what you understood me to say, or at least tried to get away with attributing to me, is impossible for a rational and honest mind.

      I believe your response to me is absolute proof that you have no interest at all in engaging in any kind of rational, civil, intellectual discourse. I presented a couple of points which could have been used as starting points for discourse, by someone interested in discourse—-discussion of the definitions of Libertarianism and Leftism, for example. But your choice was to dive right back into the gutter, where you obviously feel most at home.

    • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 7:47 pm

      “Keep your morality to yourself Ms. Liberty”

      Always interesting to see what passes for political discourse on the rabid fringes of the radical Left.

      I like the Ms.Liberty title—thank you.

      “Morality”—-I wonder if this is a tacit admission that there is a moral aspect to protecting the integrity of the voting process, though it also seems to be an objection to morality in general, it being so inconvenient and all to the Left.

      • tiredoflibbs December 7, 2012 / 8:11 pm

        As usual mitchie is clueless. He tries to equate liberty and morality. Why is he against either?

  12. Cluster December 7, 2012 / 6:54 pm

    We fight or we give up.

    We give up, they win.

    If they win, we all lose

    What I am suggesting is not giving up. It’s simply a new strategy to win. Those who voted for Obama need to live, feel and suffer from the policies they were sold in order to fully grasp what liberalism is. As it is, our efforts have only been to soften the blow, and yet all we receive is the blame. That is a losing strategy.

    Winning the war means choosing your battles, and currently this is a battle we shouldn’t be in. Let’s regroup, allow the Democrats to own the day, remind the American people that these are the policies and results they wanted, and wait for them to come crawling back.

    • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 7:00 pm

      Cluster, do you believe that “the people” will look for answers from the group that voted “present”?

      Will they “crawl back” if we show them we could have prevented this but stood by with collective thumbs in collective asses?

      Offer no solutions and no solutions is what we get.

      • Cluster December 7, 2012 / 7:56 pm

        But we have offered solutions. We have put forth plans based on our principles and they are well known and well documented. Those plans and solutions will not change, we just need the electorate to realize that they finally are in need of them.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 8:07 pm

        I think we have to offer solutions, have to offer alternatives to the death spiral of Obamunism. We have to. We have to have coherent alternatives and be able to explain and defend them.

        But if they are rejected out of hand, if we are told to go sit in the back of the bus again, if we are informed that there is no compromise but only capitulation, then I think we have to make the clear, repeated and unambiguous statement that while we disagree in every way with every aspect of the Obama agenda, we also realize that more than half of the nation has voted for it–register our objections and make it clear that the actions are being taken over those objections and that the consequences are owned not only by Obama but by those who voted for him.

        The question is what kinds of compromises are possible without betraying the principles of the legislators and those who elected them.

        For all the posturing about the alleged “rejection of conservative principles ” and so on, the fact is, many millions of Americans voted for those principles, and in many cases succeeded in sending people to Washington to fight for those principles. I find it interesting that those who carry on about “disenfranchisement” of voters find nothing at all wrong with saying, out the other sides of their mouths, that the people who voted for conservative principles and elected people to represent those principles and fight for them should now be abandoned and told their convictions don’t matter.

        I don’t believe our system is supposed to be one in which the political system which loses an election also loses its voice.

      • Count d'Haricots (@Count_dHaricots) December 7, 2012 / 8:27 pm

        Once again Amazona, you and I are in agreement, and once again you stated more succinctly and eloquently than I have been able.

        The conversation must begin regarding where the limits of our compromise will be.

        I’m just upset we have Boehner who demonstrated no Leadership.

        When the inevitable adversities occur, to whom can we point and say, “He (or She) saved you from a much worse fate” ~ “We never gave up, never gave in, never surrendered, never allowed this Nation to succumb to the temptation of the greed for power the opposition demonstrated by their reckless actions. We offered solutions, and We averted the disaster.

      • Cluster December 7, 2012 / 8:34 pm

        I think Paul Ryan has submitted a solution that is sensible and responsible that passed the House yet wasn’t even brought to the floor in the Senate. Furthermore it was ridiculed by many democrats who have yet to offer their own plan. So it’s time now for conservatives to back away for a little while and allow the Democrats to show the American people just exactly what they have in store for them.

        I know it won’t turn out well.

      • Amazona December 7, 2012 / 8:50 pm

        Well, damn on you, Count. I was just getting ready to attack and marginalize you and you had to go and say something nice to me.

        That’s OK—I was having trouble figuring out how to “marginalize” you. I got as far as “I like red convertibles more than I like blue convertibles” but it didn’t really have that vitriolic snap that mitche is so good at sussing out.

        You say “….to whom can we point and say, “He (or She) saved you from a much worse fate” ~ “We never gave up, never gave in, never surrendered, never allowed this Nation to succumb to the temptation of the greed for power the opposition demonstrated by their reckless actions. We offered solutions, and We averted the disaster.“

        This presumes that anyone CAN avert the disaster, and I think that is the point.

        It may very well be that all we can do is stand aside and offer information about what is happening, and be ready to pick up whatever pieces are left.

        It may very well be that all we can do is make sure than no one can come back and complain that we stood by quietly and let it all happen without trying to stop it, and without making enough of an effort to explain why it was such a bad idea.

        It may very well be that conservatives are going to be like the smart guy at the bar who does everything he can to keep his friends from getting falling-down drunk but ends up being able to do nothing but take away their car keys and buy them aspirin for the next morning.

        To carry this analogy a little farther, we would have to be ready to provide, once sobriety returns, the equivalent of a signed document saying “He is TRYING to stop me but I won’t listen. He’s doing everything humanly possible but I am determined to forge ahead and now I am the only one responsible for whatever happens.”

        In this case that would be an abundance of videos, articles, op-ed pieces, interviews, etc. detailing the reasons for seeing the actions of the administration as inevitable failures.

        But we also have to accept the fact that we live in nation where millions of people are so stupid they actually believe the Right was waging a war on women and not only wanted to but could, if they wanted, DENY ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE FOR WOMEN. So stupid they don’t even know the difference between not paying for something and not allowing anyone to have that something. So stupid they don’t even know why we have different tax rates for different kinds of income. So stupid…..but who has time to list the stupidities that have put us in this position. Why do we think any amount of fact will penetrate the minds of people like this?

  13. mitchethekid December 7, 2012 / 10:31 pm

    So long. //Moderator

    • Cluster December 7, 2012 / 10:47 pm

      My goodness Mitch, that was quite the rant. Again, Amazona simply pointed out the false premise from which the article you linked to operated from, and you became unhinged. You really need to control your emotions if you ever want to be taken seriously here.

      Amazona denies that female sexuality is being exploited for political gains – Mitch

      Actually no. I think the Democrats did a really good job of exploiting female sexuality and I think Amazona would agree with me on that. And for the record, I have two college degrees and am under 60.

      Have a nice evening

    • tiredoflibbs December 7, 2012 / 11:17 pm

      Ah, I see mitchie is having another one of his tantrums again. He cannot intelligently state a coherent thought process. He can only regurgitate mindless talking points and lies. So he resorts to Tourette’s Syndrome like behavior.

      Pathetic yet typical.

    • neocon01 December 8, 2012 / 12:07 pm

      BuB ByE Bmitch

  14. Cluster December 7, 2012 / 11:02 pm

    Just another observation – here our liberals have shown up, and instead of accepting the torch of government that we have offered up to them and telling us how and why Obama’s policies will expand prosperity and strengthen America, they instead resort to the childish attacks of yesterday – voter suppression, war on women, blah, blah, blah.

    Liberals have no clue what they are doing and will fail spectacularly. We should allow that to happen unimpeded. Liberals like truthie, Mitch, etc., wouldn’t know what to do if they didn’t have some propped up bogeyman to attack. It’s hilarious.

    • Amazona December 8, 2012 / 10:03 am

      Cluster, I have seen two categories of “Liberal” developing as they have been posting on this blog.

      One is what I call the Pseudo Liberal—the emotion-driven haters like Velma who support and defend, if not the Liberal political system at least the people who represent it, but mostly just have a frantic and desperate need to attack the Other they have been brainwashed into believing are evil, are enemies, etc.

      And one is the activist, the blog vandal whose agenda is quite clearly to disrupt the blog and interfere with conservative discourse. These posters might be politically literate, might understand and support the reality of Leftism, or they might just have deeper and more compelling pathologies which make them useful tools of the Left, but they are clearly more focused, more determined, and more toxic.

      In my years on the blog I have only seen a few, a very few, actual admitted Liberals—James as an example—-who have or at least have been willing to express a coherent political philosophy which is that of the Left. The others are de facto Liberals, emoting all over the place, usually quite messily and noisily but still doing nothing but expressing their FEELINGS without a lick of actual political content.

      But whether these blog trolls know and understand and accept the actual ideology of the Left and are here to defend it, or just have some weird knee jerk antipathy to an invented “conservative” concept they love to hate, they are still locked into nothing more than attack, and mired in the same hatreds that drew them in in the first place.

  15. Jeremiah December 8, 2012 / 12:03 am

    I liked the discussion, ’til Bubbles and Mitch chimed in. They just threw it all off course.

    • Amazona December 8, 2012 / 9:52 am

      Jeremiah, their goal is to throw it off course.

      The Left relies very heavily on suppression of opposing ideas, and the Internet makes this difficult, so they are reduced to employing tactics like the ones we see with mitche and Bubble Boy.

      You can look up the experiences of people like David Horowitz, whose college talks are always met with Leftist efforts to get them canceled, then with efforts to mount boycotts of the talks, then with protests outside the lecture halls trying to intimidate people into changing their minds about attending, and then with heckling of the speeches themselves, and often with overt violence as Leftists storm the stage to interrupt him.

      The messages they are so desperate to stifle? DANGEROUS messages, about the Constitution, and about freedom, and about the reality of the Left.

      The same things have happened on college campuses to other speakers, like Tom Tancredo and Ann Coulter.

      All the minions of the Rabidly Radical Left can do on the Internet is harass, harangue, pester, interrupt, distract, divert, and in general try to disrupt conservative dialogue. I am glad to see the blog recognizing that these people are not actually just private citizens who want, and deserve, a voice in the dialogue, but are actively trying to HALT dialogue.

      Free speech is one of the most feared enemies of the Left, tied with education as the biggest threats to Leftist domination. Knowledge and communication will defeat the Left wherever they are allowed to flourish.

      • Jeremiah December 8, 2012 / 9:31 pm

        Amen, Amazona.

        I agree. Just this past week they stopped Christmas in nursing homes, Christmas songs in school plays, Christmas trees, and a lot of other things that have to do with Christmas.

        Christmas was and is the birth of Truth, and the liberal left can’t have any truth getting out there.

        The left today isn’t fighting people like they had to fight in times such as Jefferson’s and Washington’s…they took their suits off, and went to battle, and the bullets flew, when there was a defiance of their Christian duties and sentiments.

    • Amazona December 10, 2012 / 7:38 pm

      “Do you agree with Newt?”

      Sometimes, though I would recommend a different barber.

Comments are closed.