Erick Erickson:
"As the GOP head to Florida, the literal poster boy for trial lawyers in Florida is endorsing Obama. It is not a surprise. Charlie Crist was Barack Obama’s favorite Republican for the longest time.
They stood shoulder to shoulder in support of the stimulus.
RedState played a great role in helping beat Charlie Crist. Marco Rubio is such an improvement
But I do hope Charlie Crist gets a speaking role at the Democratic National Convention. They could use a refreshing voice such as Crist’s.
See, Charlie Crist has long maintained Todd Akin’s abortion position — no exceptions except life of the mother. Given the Democrats’ extremist “abortion on demand” position, Crist would be a refreshing recalibration for them.
Crist also has an A+ rating from the National Rifle Association. After a month of tragic shootings around the country, I’m sure the Democrats will do all they can to highlight their gun control agenda. Having someone on their platform who actually opposes further gun regulations would offer a more diverse opinion,
Crist has also been a long time opponent of same sex unions. As the Democrats move further and further out of the mainstream on that issue, Charlie Crist could be a great tool for grounding the convention in reality — a reality where no American state has seen its citizens support gay marriage.
Or, it could be that Charlie Crist really is a political cross dresser willing to say or do anything to advance his own agenda.
"Unapologetic pursuit and tracking of patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Showing posts with label Red State. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Red State. Show all posts
August 27, 2012
June 9, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "The Overplayed Hand of an Amateur "
Erick Erickson:
"Someone pointed this out to me in email the other day. I believe it was either Neil Stevens or Dan McLaughlin. The point has been made by others as well.
Barack Obama and his campaign have overplayed their hand in one crucial aspect. They spent years getting their friends in the media to believe and sell them as the most experienced campaign team in the world. Look at the 2008 Primary. The Obama campaign would have you believe they beat Paul Begala and James Carville of Team Clinton. They may have beaten Team Hillary Clinton, but they did not beat Begala-Carville. You’d never know that from all the hype.
The reality is actually far different.
In 2000, Barack Obama tried to pick off Rep. Bobby Rush. He went down in flames in that Democratic Primary.
In 2004, Barack Obama beat Jack Ryan, but only did so after Ryan dropped out. Associates close to Obama were able to dribble out the sordid details of Ryan’s divorce and perversions. Alan Keyes stepped in to fully make a joke of the Illinois Republican Party.
2008, Barack Obama ran against John McCain, a man who suspended his campaign right at the height of election season to do something no one seemed to understand who seemed to covet the Republican nomination for vindication much more than he coveted actually winning the White House. The seat Obama had won in 2006 flipped back to Republican hands.
Between his election and now, Barack Obama had the House and Senate, did nothing to improve the economy, caved in to Republican demands, grandstanded at the Olympics meeting only to see Chicago lose out, campaigned for Democrats in Virgina, Massachusetts, New Jersey and elsewhere only to have them lose, and has routinely overplayed his hand in office.
T
hat is, in fact, Barack Obama’s true pattern behind the hype and myth. He overplays his hand and has his spin machine convince the Washingto Press Corps that it was all intentional and his campaign team are geniuses....." (Read more? Click title)
"Someone pointed this out to me in email the other day. I believe it was either Neil Stevens or Dan McLaughlin. The point has been made by others as well.
Barack Obama and his campaign have overplayed their hand in one crucial aspect. They spent years getting their friends in the media to believe and sell them as the most experienced campaign team in the world. Look at the 2008 Primary. The Obama campaign would have you believe they beat Paul Begala and James Carville of Team Clinton. They may have beaten Team Hillary Clinton, but they did not beat Begala-Carville. You’d never know that from all the hype.
The reality is actually far different.
In 2000, Barack Obama tried to pick off Rep. Bobby Rush. He went down in flames in that Democratic Primary.
In 2004, Barack Obama beat Jack Ryan, but only did so after Ryan dropped out. Associates close to Obama were able to dribble out the sordid details of Ryan’s divorce and perversions. Alan Keyes stepped in to fully make a joke of the Illinois Republican Party.
2008, Barack Obama ran against John McCain, a man who suspended his campaign right at the height of election season to do something no one seemed to understand who seemed to covet the Republican nomination for vindication much more than he coveted actually winning the White House. The seat Obama had won in 2006 flipped back to Republican hands.
Between his election and now, Barack Obama had the House and Senate, did nothing to improve the economy, caved in to Republican demands, grandstanded at the Olympics meeting only to see Chicago lose out, campaigned for Democrats in Virgina, Massachusetts, New Jersey and elsewhere only to have them lose, and has routinely overplayed his hand in office.
T
hat is, in fact, Barack Obama’s true pattern behind the hype and myth. He overplays his hand and has his spin machine convince the Washingto Press Corps that it was all intentional and his campaign team are geniuses....." (Read more? Click title)
May 31, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "The Extraordinary Nature of the Texas Runoff "
Erick Erickson:
"It is hard to overstate just how extraordinary Ted Cruz’s underdog entry into the Texas runoff is and just how the odds are still stacked against him unless conservatives rally quickly with lots of money.
David Dewhurst has been Lt. Governor of Texas for more than a decade. He has massive name ID throughout the state. Ted Cruz started this race with a three or four percent showing in polling.
More so, Dewhurst is a multimillionaire who can write large sums of money to fund his campaign. Ted Cruz cannot. Texas has several of the most expensive media markets in the country and the state is too large to go door to door across the state.
Dewhurst’s political team is Governor Rick Perry’s highly successful (in Texas) political team. I know a number of them and consider them friends. They are formidable.
To the chagrin of Texas tea party activists, Governor Perry himself is backing Lt. Governor Dewhurst publicly.
All the stars aligned for David Dewhurst — a deep well of money to draw from, high existing name id, statewide incumbency, support from the Governor and his winning political team. Still, the tea party rallied behind Ted Cruz and got him into a runoff.
Now, the variables are largely the same. Ted Cruz must raise a ton of cash quickly to compete. He has eight weeks. Media will be ridiculously expensive. He will have some of the biggest guns in Texas firing in his direction....."(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetic pursuit and tracking of patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"It is hard to overstate just how extraordinary Ted Cruz’s underdog entry into the Texas runoff is and just how the odds are still stacked against him unless conservatives rally quickly with lots of money.
David Dewhurst has been Lt. Governor of Texas for more than a decade. He has massive name ID throughout the state. Ted Cruz started this race with a three or four percent showing in polling.
More so, Dewhurst is a multimillionaire who can write large sums of money to fund his campaign. Ted Cruz cannot. Texas has several of the most expensive media markets in the country and the state is too large to go door to door across the state.
Dewhurst’s political team is Governor Rick Perry’s highly successful (in Texas) political team. I know a number of them and consider them friends. They are formidable.
To the chagrin of Texas tea party activists, Governor Perry himself is backing Lt. Governor Dewhurst publicly.
All the stars aligned for David Dewhurst — a deep well of money to draw from, high existing name id, statewide incumbency, support from the Governor and his winning political team. Still, the tea party rallied behind Ted Cruz and got him into a runoff.
Now, the variables are largely the same. Ted Cruz must raise a ton of cash quickly to compete. He has eight weeks. Media will be ridiculously expensive. He will have some of the biggest guns in Texas firing in his direction....."(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetic pursuit and tracking of patterns within the news others make since 2010."
May 29, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "One Metric on Impact: SWATting "
Erick Erickson:
"Last week I wrote about the Speedway Bomber and current left-wing activist Brett Kimberlin. In 2011, after writing about Kimberlin, LA County Prosecutor Patrick Frey was rousted out of bed after midnight by the LA County SWAT Team. Someone had called 911 claiming to be Frey saying he’d just murdered his wife.
Sunday night as my family and sister’s family were around the dinner table and playing outside, sheriff’s deputies pulled into my driveway responding to an accidental shooting at my home.
One deputy was in the driveway. Another blocked the end of the driveway with his car. A neighbor tells me another was up the hill from the house.
There was no shooting at my home. Someone called 911, claimed to be at my home, and claimed to witness a shooting at my home.
As the one deputy and I spoke, the other deputy walked up the driveway, positioned himself behind the car in the driveway, and kept his eyes on me and his hand on his gun. My three year old ran between us all thinking it was so cool to have a police car in the driveway with its blue lights flashing.
Luckily, after I had starting writing about Kimberlin, I advised the Sheriff’s Department to be aware this could happen.
It was a prank, but not just any prank. This is a prank left-wing activists are increasingly deploying against those who dissent from their political views. When Barack Obama told his supporters in 2008 to bring guns to knife fights, some of his supporters took him more literally than I assume he intended...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetic pursuit and tracking of patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"Last week I wrote about the Speedway Bomber and current left-wing activist Brett Kimberlin. In 2011, after writing about Kimberlin, LA County Prosecutor Patrick Frey was rousted out of bed after midnight by the LA County SWAT Team. Someone had called 911 claiming to be Frey saying he’d just murdered his wife.
Sunday night as my family and sister’s family were around the dinner table and playing outside, sheriff’s deputies pulled into my driveway responding to an accidental shooting at my home.
One deputy was in the driveway. Another blocked the end of the driveway with his car. A neighbor tells me another was up the hill from the house.
There was no shooting at my home. Someone called 911, claimed to be at my home, and claimed to witness a shooting at my home.
As the one deputy and I spoke, the other deputy walked up the driveway, positioned himself behind the car in the driveway, and kept his eyes on me and his hand on his gun. My three year old ran between us all thinking it was so cool to have a police car in the driveway with its blue lights flashing.
Luckily, after I had starting writing about Kimberlin, I advised the Sheriff’s Department to be aware this could happen.
It was a prank, but not just any prank. This is a prank left-wing activists are increasingly deploying against those who dissent from their political views. When Barack Obama told his supporters in 2008 to bring guns to knife fights, some of his supporters took him more literally than I assume he intended...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetic pursuit and tracking of patterns within the news others make since 2010."
May 17, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "Cleaning Up the GOP Moves to Texas "
Bravo! Bravo! Long live the Kingmaker, Erick Erickson. Somewhere out there with his Red State.
Erick Erickson:
"Late last evening came word that House Republicans intend to keep parts of Obamacare. Even if the United States Supreme Court throws the whole law out, House Republicans intend to resurrect portions of Obamacare. House Republicans publicly say the story is wrong. I’ve talked to several House Republicans who tell me the story is actually on the money and the Republicans now denying it are really playing at semantics.
These House Republicans tell me these denials about the accuracy of the story are equivalent to the House GOP semantically arguing it was living up to its Pledge to Nowhere requirement for $100 billion in cuts that actually amounted to something like $34 billion. Conservatives in the House of Representatives tell me explicitly to go with Politico on this and be very wary of the House GOP Leadership when it comes to repeal.
It is a sad time for the Republican Party. The base must treat its leaders as if they are Soviets — trust but verify their statements. And lately, it is harder and harder to verify their statements. The work of the Tea Party must continue or within a decade I honestly do not believe the GOP will be one political party.
In both Indiana and Nebraska, the Tea Party has continued to make gains. People have flat out rejected the establishment favorites for U.S. Senate – Dick Lugar and Jon Bruning, respectively – in favor of candidates who offer a challenge to the status quo.
Will Texans prove what they’re made of and do the same?
I love Texas. But let’s face it – the Texas congressional delegation is mediocre at best and leaves much to be desired.
Now, Texas has the chance to get it right – by sending Ted Cruz to the U.S. Senate. But will they? Maybe. But we have a lot to do and the Republican Primary in Texas is only 2 weeks from today.
But the payoff would be worth it – this is Texas for crying out loud. We’ve been given the opportunity to replace long time thorn in our side, Kay Bailey Hutchison, with an actual honest-to-goodness conservative. Ted Cruz is that conservative. David Dewhurst is not......"
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetic pursuit and tracking of patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Erick Erickson:
"Late last evening came word that House Republicans intend to keep parts of Obamacare. Even if the United States Supreme Court throws the whole law out, House Republicans intend to resurrect portions of Obamacare. House Republicans publicly say the story is wrong. I’ve talked to several House Republicans who tell me the story is actually on the money and the Republicans now denying it are really playing at semantics.
These House Republicans tell me these denials about the accuracy of the story are equivalent to the House GOP semantically arguing it was living up to its Pledge to Nowhere requirement for $100 billion in cuts that actually amounted to something like $34 billion. Conservatives in the House of Representatives tell me explicitly to go with Politico on this and be very wary of the House GOP Leadership when it comes to repeal.
It is a sad time for the Republican Party. The base must treat its leaders as if they are Soviets — trust but verify their statements. And lately, it is harder and harder to verify their statements. The work of the Tea Party must continue or within a decade I honestly do not believe the GOP will be one political party.
In both Indiana and Nebraska, the Tea Party has continued to make gains. People have flat out rejected the establishment favorites for U.S. Senate – Dick Lugar and Jon Bruning, respectively – in favor of candidates who offer a challenge to the status quo.
Will Texans prove what they’re made of and do the same?
I love Texas. But let’s face it – the Texas congressional delegation is mediocre at best and leaves much to be desired.
Now, Texas has the chance to get it right – by sending Ted Cruz to the U.S. Senate. But will they? Maybe. But we have a lot to do and the Republican Primary in Texas is only 2 weeks from today.
But the payoff would be worth it – this is Texas for crying out loud. We’ve been given the opportunity to replace long time thorn in our side, Kay Bailey Hutchison, with an actual honest-to-goodness conservative. Ted Cruz is that conservative. David Dewhurst is not......"
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetic pursuit and tracking of patterns within the news others make since 2010."
May 10, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "Infographic: The Obama Economy "
The 'Caleb Howe' Diary brings a really interesting Infographic today. Somewhere out there on Red State.
Click title.
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Click title.
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
May 9, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "A Terrible, No Good, Awful Night for Barack Obama "
Erick Erickson:
"One initial point to ponder: if the No-H8 campaign tries to fire up in North Carolina as the No-A1 campaign, people will wonder why they are campaigning against steak sauce. Probably won’t happen.
North Carolina did not pass a ban on gay marriage as the media reports. Rather they refused to allow their definition of marriage to be changed. The marriage definition was put into law years ago, but with an onslaught of judicial activists, the voters in North Carolina decided to shut down any further consideration of the issue.
The most fascinating bit of it all is that time and time again gay marriage polls quite well in the United States.
Time and time again, gay marriage proponents go down to defeat at the actual polls. Said one gay marriage proponent on Twitter last night to me, “It will be a happy day when all hate filled Xians are dead.” Xians is “Christians” in Twitter speak. At first I thought it was a Xenu or Thetans reference.
This was a bad night for Barack Obama. Whoever decided to put the Democratic National Convention in North Carolina should be given a lollipop by the GOP for the intense level of comedic schadenfreude we can all now watch. The Democrats will convene in a proudly right to work state whose state Democratic Party is imploding due to a gay sexual harassment scandal, the state itself just voted for marriage by a margin few statewide candidates in North Carolina get, and twenty percent of Democrats voted against Barack Obama in the North Carolina Democratic Primary.
On the bright side, North Carolina is not West Virginia where a felon in federal prison in Texas locked up 40% of the vote in the Democratic Primary against Barack Obama. The Chain Gang looks to be as popular as the Change Gang.
In Indiana, Rickard Mourdock beat Richard Lugar. Lugar is Barack Obama’s favorite Republican Senator. The Washington, DC Gang of 500 — the political reporters who set the tone for political coverage in America — are still crying in their beer as the sun rises that Indiana’s statewide elected Treasurer beat a Republican incumbent who has never been a threat to the liberal agenda the Gang of 500 agrees with...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"One initial point to ponder: if the No-H8 campaign tries to fire up in North Carolina as the No-A1 campaign, people will wonder why they are campaigning against steak sauce. Probably won’t happen.
North Carolina did not pass a ban on gay marriage as the media reports. Rather they refused to allow their definition of marriage to be changed. The marriage definition was put into law years ago, but with an onslaught of judicial activists, the voters in North Carolina decided to shut down any further consideration of the issue.
The most fascinating bit of it all is that time and time again gay marriage polls quite well in the United States.
Time and time again, gay marriage proponents go down to defeat at the actual polls. Said one gay marriage proponent on Twitter last night to me, “It will be a happy day when all hate filled Xians are dead.” Xians is “Christians” in Twitter speak. At first I thought it was a Xenu or Thetans reference.
This was a bad night for Barack Obama. Whoever decided to put the Democratic National Convention in North Carolina should be given a lollipop by the GOP for the intense level of comedic schadenfreude we can all now watch. The Democrats will convene in a proudly right to work state whose state Democratic Party is imploding due to a gay sexual harassment scandal, the state itself just voted for marriage by a margin few statewide candidates in North Carolina get, and twenty percent of Democrats voted against Barack Obama in the North Carolina Democratic Primary.
On the bright side, North Carolina is not West Virginia where a felon in federal prison in Texas locked up 40% of the vote in the Democratic Primary against Barack Obama. The Chain Gang looks to be as popular as the Change Gang.
In Indiana, Rickard Mourdock beat Richard Lugar. Lugar is Barack Obama’s favorite Republican Senator. The Washington, DC Gang of 500 — the political reporters who set the tone for political coverage in America — are still crying in their beer as the sun rises that Indiana’s statewide elected Treasurer beat a Republican incumbent who has never been a threat to the liberal agenda the Gang of 500 agrees with...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
April 27, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "Death of the Moderate . . . Democrat"
Erick Erickson:
"It is worth noting that on Tuesday several moderate Democrats went down in flames in Pennsylvania, continuing a trend that has escalated since 2008. Liberals do not want moderate Democrats in their caucus.
What is most interesting about it from a conservative perspective, however, is how there has not been a ton of coverage about the death of the blue dogs — more dogs dead in Barack Obama and the left’s war on dogs. Had moderate Republicans been defeated, we would have major stories on pretty much every news network and on the front page of every paper in America.
Routinely we hear that Republicans cannot win in New England, despite Republican successes in New England in 2010. Routinely we hear about the GOP driving moderates out of the party. Big tent cliches surround the stories. Rarely does the ongoing purging of the Democratic Party make such news.
In fact, the Democratic Party has become increasingly hostile to moderates, though the media rarely cares to focus on this because the reporters who’d pay attention often are to the left of the moderate Democrats and proclaim their position the center. Those moderate Democrats are, therefore, well outside the mainstream.
I do not lament the decline and fall of the Blue Dog Coalition..." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"It is worth noting that on Tuesday several moderate Democrats went down in flames in Pennsylvania, continuing a trend that has escalated since 2008. Liberals do not want moderate Democrats in their caucus.
What is most interesting about it from a conservative perspective, however, is how there has not been a ton of coverage about the death of the blue dogs — more dogs dead in Barack Obama and the left’s war on dogs. Had moderate Republicans been defeated, we would have major stories on pretty much every news network and on the front page of every paper in America.
Routinely we hear that Republicans cannot win in New England, despite Republican successes in New England in 2010. Routinely we hear about the GOP driving moderates out of the party. Big tent cliches surround the stories. Rarely does the ongoing purging of the Democratic Party make such news.
In fact, the Democratic Party has become increasingly hostile to moderates, though the media rarely cares to focus on this because the reporters who’d pay attention often are to the left of the moderate Democrats and proclaim their position the center. Those moderate Democrats are, therefore, well outside the mainstream.
I do not lament the decline and fall of the Blue Dog Coalition..." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
April 26, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "A Nobody With No Audience Gets Noticed by Mitch McConnell "
If Mitch McConnell's posture on this wasn't so pompous, this story would be laughable.
The blogosphere has grown to far greater power than mainstream media will ever hold again. In the conservative blogger world, there are a few kingmakers. Erick Erickson is one. His blogging platform with 'diary' ability is not only one of the largest communities out there, it is populated by both conservative and democratic politicians of national caliber.
Anyone who brushes aside the power of avatars in commentary, social media and the blogosphere is locked in the past. And probably should stay away from running for public office as they do not stand a chance in this day and age if they are not participating or at minimum, keeping their finger on the pulse.
This response to McConnell's very poorly thought out statement that Erickson has 'no audience' is beautifully responded to by Erick today.
Out there in Red State:
"....I grew up thinking Mitch McConnell was a right wing warrior. It turns out he’s just a typical Washingtonian appropriator who has presided over a massive expansion of the welfare state doing not much more than issuing bold platitudes as he cuts deals to expand government spending and along the way made some major tactical and strategic blunders that groups like ACORN were able to thrive.
Let’s review the record.
In the 1990′s Mitch McConnell, then the Republican manager against the Motor Voter bill, made the brilliant tactical decision to not filibuster the motion to take up the bill. Consequently it passed. ACORN and other left-wing groups were emboldened to do what they’ve done over the past two decades. Yes, people forget that it was Mitch McConnell’s tactical decision to let Motor Voter get to the floor of the Senate despite the warnings of what would happen. Passage of that law made it ever easier to engage in voter registration fraud. McConnell had the votes to stop it from being considered, but once it got to the floor of the Senate everyone knew there were enough wobbly Republicans who would not dare go on record actually opposing it on passage.
In the early 2000′s when McCain-Feingold went through the Senate, McConnell yet again cut out the legs of its opponents telling them not to worry because he’d let the Supreme Court do their dirty work for them and kill it. McConnell lost in the Supreme Court.
Mitch McConnell’s more recent record makes clear he is more interested in being Majority Leader than advancing any sort of conservative principles. It’s all about McConnell.
He is an appropriations cardinal in the Senate who has routinely stymied fiscal conservative efforts to rein in spending by Senators Coburn, DeMint, and even John McCain.
Recall, if you will, Senator McConnell didn’t just vote for the Wall Street bailouts, he rescued it from near defeat by adding earmarks to TARP after it failed in the House.
As I mentioned, in 2010 Mitch McConnell backed Arlen Specter against Pat Toomey, Charlie Crist against Marco Rubio, Robert Bennett against Mike Lee, and Trey Grayson against Rand Paul.
After House GOP made a stand on payroll tax this past winter, McConnell pulled the rug out and cut a deal with Harry Reid that paid for a payroll tax cut with increases to home mortgages. Allen West said he felt betrayed over this.
McConnell personally recruited Senator Roy Blunt to stop conservative Ron Johnson from winning a key leadership spot.
McConnell vowed to block conservatives from forcing votes on full repeal of Obamacare this year, then flipped and said he’d force votes in March when RepealIt.org threatened to run ads for him to resign, He has yet to keep his promise to force votes. McConnell’s loyal lieutenants in the Senate, at the time, explained that forcing full repeal votes on the Democrats would undermine their ability to cut deals with Harry Reid.
Senator McConnell just last week voted with Senate Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee against Paul Ryan’s budget spending levels. Last year McConnell refused to whip support for Ryan’s budget when it came up for a vote in the Senate.
Senator McConnell and his allies frequently say he has to do what he does because they must keep the moderates to be in the majority. Except 2010 gives the lie away. In races conservatives absolutely could win, McConnell sided with the moderates. Behind the scenes, on issues like Obamacare that remain hugely unpopular with the American people, McConnell cuts deals with the Democrats instead of forcing votes.
McConnell is emblematic of all that is wrong with Washington, D.C. He covets power relentlessly and only acts when it is threatened, then only doing so much as to stop the threat without actually leading. Along the way, he has been deeply complicit in putting our Republican in a position of bankruptcy.
I may be a nobody with no audience, but Mitch McConnell is a leader with no spine to lead."
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
The blogosphere has grown to far greater power than mainstream media will ever hold again. In the conservative blogger world, there are a few kingmakers. Erick Erickson is one. His blogging platform with 'diary' ability is not only one of the largest communities out there, it is populated by both conservative and democratic politicians of national caliber.
Anyone who brushes aside the power of avatars in commentary, social media and the blogosphere is locked in the past. And probably should stay away from running for public office as they do not stand a chance in this day and age if they are not participating or at minimum, keeping their finger on the pulse.
This response to McConnell's very poorly thought out statement that Erickson has 'no audience' is beautifully responded to by Erick today.
Out there in Red State:
"....I grew up thinking Mitch McConnell was a right wing warrior. It turns out he’s just a typical Washingtonian appropriator who has presided over a massive expansion of the welfare state doing not much more than issuing bold platitudes as he cuts deals to expand government spending and along the way made some major tactical and strategic blunders that groups like ACORN were able to thrive.
Let’s review the record.
In the 1990′s Mitch McConnell, then the Republican manager against the Motor Voter bill, made the brilliant tactical decision to not filibuster the motion to take up the bill. Consequently it passed. ACORN and other left-wing groups were emboldened to do what they’ve done over the past two decades. Yes, people forget that it was Mitch McConnell’s tactical decision to let Motor Voter get to the floor of the Senate despite the warnings of what would happen. Passage of that law made it ever easier to engage in voter registration fraud. McConnell had the votes to stop it from being considered, but once it got to the floor of the Senate everyone knew there were enough wobbly Republicans who would not dare go on record actually opposing it on passage.
In the early 2000′s when McCain-Feingold went through the Senate, McConnell yet again cut out the legs of its opponents telling them not to worry because he’d let the Supreme Court do their dirty work for them and kill it. McConnell lost in the Supreme Court.
Mitch McConnell’s more recent record makes clear he is more interested in being Majority Leader than advancing any sort of conservative principles. It’s all about McConnell.
He is an appropriations cardinal in the Senate who has routinely stymied fiscal conservative efforts to rein in spending by Senators Coburn, DeMint, and even John McCain.
Recall, if you will, Senator McConnell didn’t just vote for the Wall Street bailouts, he rescued it from near defeat by adding earmarks to TARP after it failed in the House.
As I mentioned, in 2010 Mitch McConnell backed Arlen Specter against Pat Toomey, Charlie Crist against Marco Rubio, Robert Bennett against Mike Lee, and Trey Grayson against Rand Paul.
After House GOP made a stand on payroll tax this past winter, McConnell pulled the rug out and cut a deal with Harry Reid that paid for a payroll tax cut with increases to home mortgages. Allen West said he felt betrayed over this.
McConnell personally recruited Senator Roy Blunt to stop conservative Ron Johnson from winning a key leadership spot.
McConnell vowed to block conservatives from forcing votes on full repeal of Obamacare this year, then flipped and said he’d force votes in March when RepealIt.org threatened to run ads for him to resign, He has yet to keep his promise to force votes. McConnell’s loyal lieutenants in the Senate, at the time, explained that forcing full repeal votes on the Democrats would undermine their ability to cut deals with Harry Reid.
Senator McConnell just last week voted with Senate Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee against Paul Ryan’s budget spending levels. Last year McConnell refused to whip support for Ryan’s budget when it came up for a vote in the Senate.
Senator McConnell and his allies frequently say he has to do what he does because they must keep the moderates to be in the majority. Except 2010 gives the lie away. In races conservatives absolutely could win, McConnell sided with the moderates. Behind the scenes, on issues like Obamacare that remain hugely unpopular with the American people, McConnell cuts deals with the Democrats instead of forcing votes.
McConnell is emblematic of all that is wrong with Washington, D.C. He covets power relentlessly and only acts when it is threatened, then only doing so much as to stop the threat without actually leading. Along the way, he has been deeply complicit in putting our Republican in a position of bankruptcy.
I may be a nobody with no audience, but Mitch McConnell is a leader with no spine to lead."
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
April 20, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "The Palin-Bolling Proposal To Lower Gas Prices"
Brian Darling:
"Conservatives need to do a better job of explaining how they would lower gas prices. More drilling is a great piece of the pie, but there needs to be more. Governor Sarah Palin and Eric Bolling, Fox News host of of The Five, have put together a comprehensive plan to lower gas prices and they mapped out the details in the video below:
"Conservatives need to do a better job of explaining how they would lower gas prices. More drilling is a great piece of the pie, but there needs to be more. Governor Sarah Palin and Eric Bolling, Fox News host of of The Five, have put together a comprehensive plan to lower gas prices and they mapped out the details in the video below:
April 13, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "Elitism"
Erick Erickson:
"Move past Hilary Rosen’s remarks if you can. The amazing speed at which Democrats sought to distance themselves from her remarks suggests they know that in all the talk about Romney’s problem with women, they have their own.
After Hilary Rosen’s remarks, a number of leftwing pundits came out seemingly upset that Hilary did not go as far as they would have wanted her to. In so doing, these pundits, activists, and politicos have raised up the raw stench of elitism. Luckily, few smelled it because it was drifting in from MSNBC.
Nonetheless, there were people like Joan Walsh of the far left rag Salon. She thought it perfectly okay to pronounce on Hardball yesterday that of course working women have it harder than stay at home moms. Of course they do you women battling breast cancer and suffering from MS while raising five boys without nannies and cooks and maids contrary to what the left has been claiming is, was, and forever more shall be the case with Ann Romney. Never mind that Mitt and Ann Romney gave away their inherited fortune to build their own lives and fortune.
There there is Chris Hayes, also of MSNBC and the even further left than Salon The Nation. He said if Republicans really think that stay at home moms are workers, then they should be paid a wage. Seriously.
It went down hill from there. The most striking thing is the overwhelming presumption from so many on the left who waded into the waters who think only the wealthy can be stay at home moms. As a matter of fact, I know scores of stay at home moms and not a single one’s husband gets them into the 1%, let alone the top 10% for most.
The myopic view of not just stay at home mothers as rich socialites with nannies, but of women in general too, highlights the problem for the Democrats. They talk about the GOP as the party of the rich when they are increasingly a party of the elite. Many of them look on stay at home moms as inferior or second class.
Consider Christy Hayes of MSNBC and the Nation who openly wonders if it can really be considered work if they are not getting a salary....." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"Move past Hilary Rosen’s remarks if you can. The amazing speed at which Democrats sought to distance themselves from her remarks suggests they know that in all the talk about Romney’s problem with women, they have their own.
After Hilary Rosen’s remarks, a number of leftwing pundits came out seemingly upset that Hilary did not go as far as they would have wanted her to. In so doing, these pundits, activists, and politicos have raised up the raw stench of elitism. Luckily, few smelled it because it was drifting in from MSNBC.
Nonetheless, there were people like Joan Walsh of the far left rag Salon. She thought it perfectly okay to pronounce on Hardball yesterday that of course working women have it harder than stay at home moms. Of course they do you women battling breast cancer and suffering from MS while raising five boys without nannies and cooks and maids contrary to what the left has been claiming is, was, and forever more shall be the case with Ann Romney. Never mind that Mitt and Ann Romney gave away their inherited fortune to build their own lives and fortune.
There there is Chris Hayes, also of MSNBC and the even further left than Salon The Nation. He said if Republicans really think that stay at home moms are workers, then they should be paid a wage. Seriously.
It went down hill from there. The most striking thing is the overwhelming presumption from so many on the left who waded into the waters who think only the wealthy can be stay at home moms. As a matter of fact, I know scores of stay at home moms and not a single one’s husband gets them into the 1%, let alone the top 10% for most.
The myopic view of not just stay at home mothers as rich socialites with nannies, but of women in general too, highlights the problem for the Democrats. They talk about the GOP as the party of the rich when they are increasingly a party of the elite. Many of them look on stay at home moms as inferior or second class.
Consider Christy Hayes of MSNBC and the Nation who openly wonders if it can really be considered work if they are not getting a salary....." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
April 11, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "It Was Inevitable. Now Bring on President Both Ways "
Erick Erickson:
"Mitt Romney’s campaign has used a money advantage to shut out the competition. As I said when he won Ohio, Romney will be the nominee.
The way forward for Romney depends on the economy. For the longest time I did not think he had much of a shot against the President, but as I’ve said several times recently, the economy seems to be struggling, which gives Romney an opening.
Between a struggling economy and a President who wants to have it both ways in rhetoric and in practice wants to side with those hostile to the idea of American exceptionalism, Romney has an opening if he’ll aggressively take it.
If I may be so bold, I think the greatest thing Karl Rove or Reince Priebus or Mitt Romney or any outside group could do right now is introduce the American Public to what I’ve started doing on my radio show: recounting the amazing adventures of President Both Ways..." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"Mitt Romney’s campaign has used a money advantage to shut out the competition. As I said when he won Ohio, Romney will be the nominee.
The way forward for Romney depends on the economy. For the longest time I did not think he had much of a shot against the President, but as I’ve said several times recently, the economy seems to be struggling, which gives Romney an opening.
Between a struggling economy and a President who wants to have it both ways in rhetoric and in practice wants to side with those hostile to the idea of American exceptionalism, Romney has an opening if he’ll aggressively take it.
If I may be so bold, I think the greatest thing Karl Rove or Reince Priebus or Mitt Romney or any outside group could do right now is introduce the American Public to what I’ve started doing on my radio show: recounting the amazing adventures of President Both Ways..." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
March 26, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "And Now for a Postal Bailout "
Daniel Horowitz:
"It’s another week in Washington, and it’s yet another bailout. This time, taxpayers will be tapped for another $41 billion to subsidize the healthcare retirement benefits of postal workers – benefits that are quite scarce in the private sector.
Democrats have a serious problem with creative destruction and advancements in technology. For self-described progressives, they are quite regressive when it comes to efficiency in markets and use of technology. They exhibit nostalgia for 14th century energy technology and 20th century banking technology. Hence, they don’t care too much for market progression. In concerted drives to hold back the tide of technology, they are quick to offer a helping hand to a dying industry. One such industry is the mail delivery.
It’s no secret that the United States Postal Service is on its way out. The transition to electronic communication, in conjunction with the success of private mail carriers, has dramatically reduced the demand for their service. Consequently, they no longer generate enough revenue to function as a self-sufficient entity, particularly when it comes to paying employee retirement benefits. In recent years, the USPS has patched the annual losses with borrowed money from the Treasury. However, it is now in such dire straits that it’s expected to hit the $15 billion borrowing cap later this year. It needs extra taxpayer cash to fill in the gaps.
If the USPS were a private entity, it would trim its workforce and operations to the amount of revenue they can produce until they are eventually forced to go out of business. That’s how creative destruction and supply and demand work in the real world. That is not how it works in Washington...." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"It’s another week in Washington, and it’s yet another bailout. This time, taxpayers will be tapped for another $41 billion to subsidize the healthcare retirement benefits of postal workers – benefits that are quite scarce in the private sector.
Democrats have a serious problem with creative destruction and advancements in technology. For self-described progressives, they are quite regressive when it comes to efficiency in markets and use of technology. They exhibit nostalgia for 14th century energy technology and 20th century banking technology. Hence, they don’t care too much for market progression. In concerted drives to hold back the tide of technology, they are quick to offer a helping hand to a dying industry. One such industry is the mail delivery.
It’s no secret that the United States Postal Service is on its way out. The transition to electronic communication, in conjunction with the success of private mail carriers, has dramatically reduced the demand for their service. Consequently, they no longer generate enough revenue to function as a self-sufficient entity, particularly when it comes to paying employee retirement benefits. In recent years, the USPS has patched the annual losses with borrowed money from the Treasury. However, it is now in such dire straits that it’s expected to hit the $15 billion borrowing cap later this year. It needs extra taxpayer cash to fill in the gaps.
If the USPS were a private entity, it would trim its workforce and operations to the amount of revenue they can produce until they are eventually forced to go out of business. That’s how creative destruction and supply and demand work in the real world. That is not how it works in Washington...." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
March 21, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "The Nominee"
Big, big statement from Erick Erickson on Red State.
Not an endorsement but more of a disappointed acceptance?
Most likely and sure sounds like it.
But then again, we all know we really need Rick Perry and have been in that state of disappointed acceptance for months now.
Photo credit Red State:
Not an endorsement but more of a disappointed acceptance?
Most likely and sure sounds like it.
But then again, we all know we really need Rick Perry and have been in that state of disappointed acceptance for months now.
Photo credit Red State:
March 7, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "The Nominee "
Erick Erickson:
"Many political analysts compare 2012′s Republican Presidential cycle to the Democrats’ go of it in 2008. Barack Obama deployed a delegate strategy while Hillary Clinton went for big state wins. It worked to Barack Obama’s favor. This year, it works for Romney.
Both took a while and had some ups and downs, but ultimately Barack Obama prevailed. After Ohio came in tonight, it is clear Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee if Newt Gingrich stays in the race. Gingrich is now only serving as a spoiler to Santorum.
The big difference between 2008 and 2012 is that in 2008, David beat Goliath. The base of the party rallied to the David who took out the machine no one thought could be taken out. In 2012, Goliath is beating David and no one ever really cheers for Goliath.
Barring a rapid Gingrich exit from the race — he cannot win outright given the states remaining, including Texas — which would suddenly reset the Santorum coalition for a one on one match against Romney, Mitt Romney is the nominee. Frankly, even if Gingrich exits, Romney will still most likely be the nominee.
He will be the nominee having lost the South, Appalachia, evangelicals, conservatives, and blue collar voters.
He will go into the general election deeply distrusted by his own base while having to woo independent voters. This is not a dazzling position to be in to beat an incumbent President.
Were I Mitt Romney I’d be wondering how I spent 5.5 times as much money as Rick Santorum and barely won Ohio...." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"Many political analysts compare 2012′s Republican Presidential cycle to the Democrats’ go of it in 2008. Barack Obama deployed a delegate strategy while Hillary Clinton went for big state wins. It worked to Barack Obama’s favor. This year, it works for Romney.
Both took a while and had some ups and downs, but ultimately Barack Obama prevailed. After Ohio came in tonight, it is clear Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee if Newt Gingrich stays in the race. Gingrich is now only serving as a spoiler to Santorum.
The big difference between 2008 and 2012 is that in 2008, David beat Goliath. The base of the party rallied to the David who took out the machine no one thought could be taken out. In 2012, Goliath is beating David and no one ever really cheers for Goliath.
Barring a rapid Gingrich exit from the race — he cannot win outright given the states remaining, including Texas — which would suddenly reset the Santorum coalition for a one on one match against Romney, Mitt Romney is the nominee. Frankly, even if Gingrich exits, Romney will still most likely be the nominee.
He will be the nominee having lost the South, Appalachia, evangelicals, conservatives, and blue collar voters.
He will go into the general election deeply distrusted by his own base while having to woo independent voters. This is not a dazzling position to be in to beat an incumbent President.
Were I Mitt Romney I’d be wondering how I spent 5.5 times as much money as Rick Santorum and barely won Ohio...." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
February 29, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Red State "Deja Vu All Over Again "
Erick Erickson:
"I have, for the longest time, been convinced that the Republican candidates have a very slim chance of beating Barack Obama without a struggling economy. And while I still think it is true, I think the Democrats have handed the GOP a gift that could be turned into victory if the GOP plays its cards well.
We are entering deja vu all over again.
On September 12, 2009, Janet Hook wrote in the Los Angeles Times that “[s]ome Republicans worry that the healthcare debate is reinforcing an unflattering image of them as the ‘Party of No.’” Bob Inglis (R-SC), who would go down to defeat in a primary at the hands of the tea party in 2010, gave voice to many
Republican leaders at the time when he said, “People are upset, but they expect leaders to remain calm and find solutions. . . . If you don’t have a plan about how to lead, why would anyone give you the majority?”
By the end of the year it was taken as objective fact. Being the “Party of No” would kill the GOP in 2010.
On television objective analysts, Democratic partisans, reporters, and “Republican leaders on background” all spoke of pending disaster for a Republican Party that refused to work with Barack Obama and said “no” to everything.
On February 15, 2010, Chris Cillizza in the Washington Post wrote of Fred Malek, an aide to President Nixon and big Republican donor starting a group called “American Action.” In an interview with the Washington Post, Malek openly fretted, “We are a center-right-majority nation, but we are not getting through to the American public and we are becoming increasingly defined as a party of ‘no’.”..."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"I have, for the longest time, been convinced that the Republican candidates have a very slim chance of beating Barack Obama without a struggling economy. And while I still think it is true, I think the Democrats have handed the GOP a gift that could be turned into victory if the GOP plays its cards well.
We are entering deja vu all over again.
On September 12, 2009, Janet Hook wrote in the Los Angeles Times that “[s]ome Republicans worry that the healthcare debate is reinforcing an unflattering image of them as the ‘Party of No.’” Bob Inglis (R-SC), who would go down to defeat in a primary at the hands of the tea party in 2010, gave voice to many
Republican leaders at the time when he said, “People are upset, but they expect leaders to remain calm and find solutions. . . . If you don’t have a plan about how to lead, why would anyone give you the majority?”
By the end of the year it was taken as objective fact. Being the “Party of No” would kill the GOP in 2010.
On television objective analysts, Democratic partisans, reporters, and “Republican leaders on background” all spoke of pending disaster for a Republican Party that refused to work with Barack Obama and said “no” to everything.
On February 15, 2010, Chris Cillizza in the Washington Post wrote of Fred Malek, an aide to President Nixon and big Republican donor starting a group called “American Action.” In an interview with the Washington Post, Malek openly fretted, “We are a center-right-majority nation, but we are not getting through to the American public and we are becoming increasingly defined as a party of ‘no’.”..."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
February 16, 2012
SandBox Comments: Red State "The Competitive Disadvantage of Principle "
Erick Erickson:
"If you have not read it, this is a fascinating article in the New York Times. The crux of the article is the title — even critics of the safety net increasingly depend on it.
The article profiles a number of people who take advantage of the federal social safety net and are increasingly resentful of it. The solutions on fixing it vary. The angry, for some, may or may not be misplaced. The article reads as a Rorschach test on your ideology — liberals will read it and find the people hypocritical. Conservatives will read it and find it all maddening.
The key paragraphs of the whole article comes toward the beginning:
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
"If you have not read it, this is a fascinating article in the New York Times. The crux of the article is the title — even critics of the safety net increasingly depend on it.
The article profiles a number of people who take advantage of the federal social safety net and are increasingly resentful of it. The solutions on fixing it vary. The angry, for some, may or may not be misplaced. The article reads as a Rorschach test on your ideology — liberals will read it and find the people hypocritical. Conservatives will read it and find it all maddening.
The key paragraphs of the whole article comes toward the beginning:
"The government safety net was created to keep Americans from abject poverty, but the poorest households no longer receive a majority of government benefits. A secondary mission has gradually become primary: maintaining the middle class from childhood through retirement. The share of benefits flowing to the least affluent households, the bottom fifth, has declined from 54 percent in 1979 to 36 percent in 2007, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis published last year.
And as more middle-class families … land in the safety net …, anger at the government has increased alongside. Many people say they are angry because the government is wasting money and giving money to people who do not deserve it. But more than that, they say they want to reduce the role of government in their own lives. They are frustrated that they need help, feel guilty for taking it and resent the government for providing it. They say they want less help for themselves; less help in caring for relatives; less assistance when they reach old age. [Emphasis added]"In other words, the United States is increasingly taxing the middle class to subsidize the middle class. All the talk about the poor and what the safety net is designed to do for the poor overlooks that the government has taken it upon itself to keep the middle class from falling into the poorer classes of society....."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
January 16, 2012
SandBox Comments: RedState/shinglejim "Capitalism – Texas Style "
Beautifully done, very well said.
'shinglejim':
"We’ve been treated to a great deal of angst in the past week as some on our side have questioned Romney’s work at Bain capital. It’s been described as an assault on capitalism, one of the foundations of conservatism. If you listen to the arguments made from those complaining, you’d believe that leveraged buyouts and layoffs are the cornerstone of capitalism and to question them is to question one’s conservative bona fides.
Capitalism is more than leveraged buyouts and private equity investments. Capitalism is the free exchange of goods for a profit, the ability to accumulate capital and private property rights. Its entrepreneurship and competition and all they do to create a healthy economy. A few companies are changing the way people view capitalism and its happening in that laboratory of innovation known as Texas. The leaders of these companies believe capitalism doesn’t have to be a zero sum game with one winner and one loser. This belief that capitalism maximizes the value for all stakeholders rather than a select few is catching Texas by store. Its this view that should be compared to Romney’s record at Bain and I believe that is exactly what Perry is trying to do.
I’ve spent my entire fifteen year career in business. I’ve participated in mergers, acquisitions, reorganizations and refinancing transactions. My view has always been that the shareholders and investors of a company are the ones putting their money at risk; therefore they rightfully deserve the rewards. That is the beauty of capitalism and thats what makes America great. I still agree with that premise, but today I approach it from a different perspective. The reason for the change you ask? A few months ago, I was treated to the most vigorous defense of capitalism I’ve ever heard. Surprisingly, it didn’t come from Limbaugh or Kudlow or anybody from the Republican Party. In fact it came from noted Libertarian John Mackey, founder of Whole Foods in Austin, Texas.
I grew up a Rush baby, but I’ve never heard Rush defend capitalism as eloquently as Mackey did that day.
He spoke of competition, entrepreneurship and private property rights. He aimed both barrels at unionization and over-regulation and blew them away. He spoke of capitalism as one of the factors key to ending Communism, how it has improved the life of everyday Americans and spoke of what it can bring in the future as it creates wealth for those around the world. He had both conservatives and liberals eating it up. It was truly amazing.
Mackey defines capitalism as creating value for all stakeholders...."
(Read more? You should, it's a great piece. Click title. Comment to discuss)
'shinglejim':
"We’ve been treated to a great deal of angst in the past week as some on our side have questioned Romney’s work at Bain capital. It’s been described as an assault on capitalism, one of the foundations of conservatism. If you listen to the arguments made from those complaining, you’d believe that leveraged buyouts and layoffs are the cornerstone of capitalism and to question them is to question one’s conservative bona fides.
Capitalism is more than leveraged buyouts and private equity investments. Capitalism is the free exchange of goods for a profit, the ability to accumulate capital and private property rights. Its entrepreneurship and competition and all they do to create a healthy economy. A few companies are changing the way people view capitalism and its happening in that laboratory of innovation known as Texas. The leaders of these companies believe capitalism doesn’t have to be a zero sum game with one winner and one loser. This belief that capitalism maximizes the value for all stakeholders rather than a select few is catching Texas by store. Its this view that should be compared to Romney’s record at Bain and I believe that is exactly what Perry is trying to do.
I’ve spent my entire fifteen year career in business. I’ve participated in mergers, acquisitions, reorganizations and refinancing transactions. My view has always been that the shareholders and investors of a company are the ones putting their money at risk; therefore they rightfully deserve the rewards. That is the beauty of capitalism and thats what makes America great. I still agree with that premise, but today I approach it from a different perspective. The reason for the change you ask? A few months ago, I was treated to the most vigorous defense of capitalism I’ve ever heard. Surprisingly, it didn’t come from Limbaugh or Kudlow or anybody from the Republican Party. In fact it came from noted Libertarian John Mackey, founder of Whole Foods in Austin, Texas.
I grew up a Rush baby, but I’ve never heard Rush defend capitalism as eloquently as Mackey did that day.
He spoke of competition, entrepreneurship and private property rights. He aimed both barrels at unionization and over-regulation and blew them away. He spoke of capitalism as one of the factors key to ending Communism, how it has improved the life of everyday Americans and spoke of what it can bring in the future as it creates wealth for those around the world. He had both conservatives and liberals eating it up. It was truly amazing.
Mackey defines capitalism as creating value for all stakeholders...."
(Read more? You should, it's a great piece. Click title. Comment to discuss)
January 12, 2012
SandBox Comments: Red State/Cole Grayson "I Am a Real Democrat, Therefore I Now Vote Republican"
A must read classic. By 'colegrayson'. Off RedState. We have now tossed this piece up a number of times since it came out on September 8, 2011.
"...I had the distinct pleasure of watching the GOP candidates debate, and I learned something shocking. They are not, despite the New York Times propaganda, crazy. They are diverse, intelligent constructs of a party that allows for free thought, unlike dogmatic liberalism I now renounce. But fair warning, I am Pro God, which by liberal definition means I force Him into the faces of others. I am against 12 year olds signing off on their own abortions, which means I despise women. I believe Herman Cain agrees with my beliefs on minority empowerment, so he too must be a racist. Even the now wilted specter of Michelle Bachmann, successfully castrated by a viciously sexist question in the previous debate, was not any sort of boogeywoman. What we had was an intelligent thoughtful exchange of ideas. Some of these ideas may not work, and others have merit. Cain’s thoughts on taxation I found intriguing but impractical, but hey, at least it was an idea. A freaking idea. But wait, other ideas reared their head as well. Ideas like using military drones to track illegals, (Governor Perry) support of a guest worker program (Speaker Gingrich) and of course there was Mitt. Poor Mitt. He would have been a great 60′s Republican.
Today he would be better off as a Democrat. But he is a good fella and a smart man, so he has a place. Just not in the White House.
As many of you know I am an ardent Perry supporter. He did well. Not great, but for first time out, pretty well. He was attacked constantly and held his own, and he never wavered on his beliefs. We do need straight talk; no it is not realistic to assume today’s youth will have Social Security, by definition a Ponzi Scheme. Should we reform it? Sure. Will Rick destroy it? Of course not. And you know that. He just wanted to make a point about unfunded entitlements. But sometimes the truth is a despised enemy of the power. He will err on the side of saving lives, his words, and I believe him. Lil’ Old Ladies won’t starve and children won’t freeze. But with the Excuse Maker in Chief? Who knows about the man who would quote the Koran and refer to it as Holy but mock the Bible and accuse Christians of being bitter. Where lacks Jesus, lacks love and where lacks love, lacks conscience. The same people who advocate the murder of 8 month old babies are not the same people who will truly fight for health care, or good jobs.
This I do know. I know that my whole life I have believed in the power of our people...."
(Read more? Click title. Comment to discuss)
"...I had the distinct pleasure of watching the GOP candidates debate, and I learned something shocking. They are not, despite the New York Times propaganda, crazy. They are diverse, intelligent constructs of a party that allows for free thought, unlike dogmatic liberalism I now renounce. But fair warning, I am Pro God, which by liberal definition means I force Him into the faces of others. I am against 12 year olds signing off on their own abortions, which means I despise women. I believe Herman Cain agrees with my beliefs on minority empowerment, so he too must be a racist. Even the now wilted specter of Michelle Bachmann, successfully castrated by a viciously sexist question in the previous debate, was not any sort of boogeywoman. What we had was an intelligent thoughtful exchange of ideas. Some of these ideas may not work, and others have merit. Cain’s thoughts on taxation I found intriguing but impractical, but hey, at least it was an idea. A freaking idea. But wait, other ideas reared their head as well. Ideas like using military drones to track illegals, (Governor Perry) support of a guest worker program (Speaker Gingrich) and of course there was Mitt. Poor Mitt. He would have been a great 60′s Republican.
Today he would be better off as a Democrat. But he is a good fella and a smart man, so he has a place. Just not in the White House.
As many of you know I am an ardent Perry supporter. He did well. Not great, but for first time out, pretty well. He was attacked constantly and held his own, and he never wavered on his beliefs. We do need straight talk; no it is not realistic to assume today’s youth will have Social Security, by definition a Ponzi Scheme. Should we reform it? Sure. Will Rick destroy it? Of course not. And you know that. He just wanted to make a point about unfunded entitlements. But sometimes the truth is a despised enemy of the power. He will err on the side of saving lives, his words, and I believe him. Lil’ Old Ladies won’t starve and children won’t freeze. But with the Excuse Maker in Chief? Who knows about the man who would quote the Koran and refer to it as Holy but mock the Bible and accuse Christians of being bitter. Where lacks Jesus, lacks love and where lacks love, lacks conscience. The same people who advocate the murder of 8 month old babies are not the same people who will truly fight for health care, or good jobs.
This I do know. I know that my whole life I have believed in the power of our people...."
(colegrayson diary)
(Read more? Click title. Comment to discuss)
December 16, 2011
SandBox Comments: Red State "Barack Obama Throws Bill Clinton Under the Bus "
Erick Erickson:
"Historically when the left takes power in a country they begin to rewrite their history. Barack Obama, a quintessential leftist, has started doing that in the run up to his re-election. In his speech in Kansas last week, Obama claimed that at no time in our history had we ever spurred economic growth and prosperity by cutting taxes and deregulating.
He conveniently had to overlook John F. Kennedy’s tax cutting in the 1960′s. But more importantly and more relevantly, he had to ignore the Reagan Revolution of the 1980′s that brought about an explosion of economic growth. As Newt Gingrich pointed out yesterday, in one month in 1983 the Reagan Recovery generated more than one million new jobs.
Barack Obama and the Left must dismiss and gloss over this point. They must fixate on income inequality. They must fixate on poverty. Never mind that all levels of society saw benefit from the Reagan Revolution. While it was not equal, the overwhelming number of Americans alive at the time saw their standard of living go up.
The left would respond by arguing that it went up too much for some and not enough for others.
What they are actually saying is that they’d rather it had not gone up at all then to see some get even richer. While, as Reagan noted, the right measures the success of a welfare program by how many people are able to get off it, the left measures the success of welfare programs by how many people get on it.
And so it is that Barack Obama has to throw Bill Clinton under the bus to make his case for re-election...."
(Read more? Click title. Comment to discuss)
"Historically when the left takes power in a country they begin to rewrite their history. Barack Obama, a quintessential leftist, has started doing that in the run up to his re-election. In his speech in Kansas last week, Obama claimed that at no time in our history had we ever spurred economic growth and prosperity by cutting taxes and deregulating.
He conveniently had to overlook John F. Kennedy’s tax cutting in the 1960′s. But more importantly and more relevantly, he had to ignore the Reagan Revolution of the 1980′s that brought about an explosion of economic growth. As Newt Gingrich pointed out yesterday, in one month in 1983 the Reagan Recovery generated more than one million new jobs.
Barack Obama and the Left must dismiss and gloss over this point. They must fixate on income inequality. They must fixate on poverty. Never mind that all levels of society saw benefit from the Reagan Revolution. While it was not equal, the overwhelming number of Americans alive at the time saw their standard of living go up.
The left would respond by arguing that it went up too much for some and not enough for others.
What they are actually saying is that they’d rather it had not gone up at all then to see some get even richer. While, as Reagan noted, the right measures the success of a welfare program by how many people are able to get off it, the left measures the success of welfare programs by how many people get on it.
And so it is that Barack Obama has to throw Bill Clinton under the bus to make his case for re-election...."
(Read more? Click title. Comment to discuss)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)