March 16, 2013

"Scott Walker opens up about White House ambitions."

Headline at Politico. Walker was pushed on the question because he visited Iowa. His response was: "I guess the only thing I’d say is I’m not ruling it out."

He's got to win a second term as governor first (in 2014). Do people hold that against a governor — the anticipation that he's going to go off running for President? Or do they kind of like it? Obviously, his opponents will use it against him. They'll use anything against him.
... Walker would begin the early jockeying of the 2016 race without the buzz of a Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) or mega-fundraising base of a Jeb Bush or New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. He’ll need to work the cattle call and TV talk show circuit hard to win support....
Politico observes that Walker is "a white male at a time when some Republicans think they’re all but doomed if they don’t add some diversity to their ticket in 2016." Walker's response:

“If that happened it would be great, but we’re not the party of silos,” said Walker of having a minority carry the GOP banner. “Any of the reaction, or overreaction, to what happened in November shouldn’t be driven by, ‘There’s a set formula that we’ve got to flip on this issue, flip on that issue, put a couple people on [the ticket] who look differently.”

But Walker, 45, used the question about diversity to note that the Republican challenge isn’t merely that it’s a party dominated by white males.

“It goes to old white guys” he said, adding: “I’m not an old white guy.”
At least I'm not an old white guy.... Walker notes that the Democrats are going to be looking at old faces. He mentions Clinton and Biden and calls them "people from a bygone generation of politics." Being a "fresh face" is a little like being "ethnically a minority," and "Ideas matter more." The GOP, he says, need "someone who’s optimistic, relevant and courageous." Those 3 adjectives sound like his pitch for himself.
“We need to talk about things that people are talking about – not sequesters, not fiscal cliffs, not monthly jobs reports,” said Walker, an argument that has become fashionable in the ranks of GOP governors since last fall’s election results and the drumbeat of stories since about Washington’s gridlocked politics....

Entitlement reform and the long-term debt, for example, should be put in terms grandparents and their grandchildren can understand, he said: how bringing down spending will ultimately improve the economy so future generations may find better job prospects and enjoy a better quality of life.

“Put things in those terms and then I think you make it a moral, not just a fiscal, issue,” he said. “People want to act on it.”

Walker showed little interest in discussing the culture wars and particularly gay marriage, something the governor acknowledges those same future generations feel differently about than their elders.

“I do think it’s generational,” he said about views on gay rights, calling younger Americans “more open and accepting on that issue.”

But he also called its importance among youth “overblown” and said he still opposes same-sex marriage....
Also, Walker spoke at CPAC this morning:
“This president and his allies measure success in government by how many people are dependent on the government. We measure success in government by just the opposite: by how many people are no longer dependent on the government,” Walker said to rousing applause. “Because we understand in this country that the American dream is not to grow up one day and depend on the American government, it’s about empowering people through the dignity of work.”

90 comments:

campy said...

No "all but" about it. Republicans are doomed no matter what they do. "Diversity" can't save them. Nothing can save them.

wyo sis said...

He says the things I want to hear from a politician. But, then, so did Santorum, Ron Paul and Christie at one time.

Shouting Thomas said...

Idiot blabber about gay marriage and diversity is supposed to be important?

The sledge hammer of indoctrination in the school systems was remarkably effective. Wonder if the kids will ever outgrow it?

What a farce! Count me out!

edutcher said...

Oh, yes, it's all hopeless.

Unless you have that Palin/West ticket, we'll have nothing but Democrats until the end of time.

Unless, of course, we do something about vote fraud.

And the fact that Politico is nothing but a cheerleader for the Demos makes no difference, either.

Shouting Thomas said...

As the 2014 and 2016 elections approach we can expect, I'd bet, a tsunami of fake hate crimes, supposedly committed by white men, staged by college diversity employees, phantom KKK sightings, and imaginary homophobic murders.

Sorun said...

When compared with the rest of the world, America has a been a primitive shithole for too long. No more white males!

rhhardin said...

It's death to predicate adjective day.

‘There’s a set formula that we’ve got to flip on this issue, flip on that issue, put a couple people on [the ticket] who look differently.”

Walker showed little interest in discussing the culture wars and particularly gay marriage, something the governor acknowledges those same future generations feel differently about than their elders.

I feel sadly.

MayBee said...

When does all this anti-white people talk become bigotry?

What do children think when they hear that?

machine said...

"Palin/West" ticket....tttthhhhfffffpppptttttt!!!

there goes my coffee....thanks for the chuckles....


campy said...

What do children think when they hear that?

"Think of the Chillllldren!"

somefeller said...

Hopefully he could bring in Wisconsin's electoral votes for the GOP. Paul Ryan sure couldn't!

machine said...

"As Charlie Cook underlines how disproportionately white the GOP has become since redistricting, and as a minority outreach session degenerates into an argument about the virtues of slavery and segregation, National Review actually runs a post about the greatest thing about CPAC this year: the shoe shine"


Nope...no problem at all...carry on.

Shouting Thomas said...

Yes, slavery and segregation are clearly the major problems besetting us today!

Shouting Thomas said...

Race huckstering is quite the racket!

Big money there.

edutcher said...

machine said...

"Palin/West" ticket....tttthhhhfffffpppptttttt!!!

there goes my coffee....thanks for the chuckles...


No, the big joke in tickets is Choom/Shotgun Joe.

Or maybe the "Dream" ticket of Hillary!/Moochelle.

Hey, the could call it the Harpy ticket.

Or the Completely Unaccomplished In Their Combined Lives ticket.

Now that's a laugh.

Unfortunately, it's on all of us.

Especially the mindless automaton.

Bruce Hayden said...

I don't dispair about the Republicans' chances - it is looking more and more like Romeny's biggest problem last year was his failure to excite conservatives, apparently carrying many more independents than McCain, but losing big numbers of conservatives who just didn't bother showing up.

But, Walker's biggest problem is what they were talking about - being a white male. My first bet right now is a Hispanic male, followed by some color of woman, followed by maybe a Black. Hispanic because it is a rapidly growing vulnerable demographic that was key to Obama's win. Two top notch Hispanic males who are some of the most impressive Senators on the GOP side of the isle. I would have given the nod to Rubio because of his slight edge in experience, but Cruz showed what he could do this week, handing DiFi her head in that debate on her gun grabbing bill. Both made the right moves helping Paul with his fillibuster.

With women, it may be Palin's chance - we know that those conservatives wouldn't have stayed home for her. Don't what other women there are who are available and would be competative. Of course, a lot of this depends on what the Dems do here, which means, whether or not Hillary! runs in 2016, and if she does, if she appears to have a serious chance at winning.

As for Blacks - don't have that many well-bloodied blacks on really either side of the isle. West lost, and that can be toxic. Yes, Santorum lost, and that may have contributed to his failing to get the nomination (or, maybe that we was a little nutso). What I mean by well-bloodied is that people who haven't run in vicous elections before seem easy for the leftist MSM to chew up in Presidential campaigns. Think of what happened to Hermann Cain.

bpm4532 said...

Democrats talk diversity, but really practice apartheid, successfully getting followers to self-segregate into interest groups along racial, class and cultural lines (look at any college campus). This allows them to play to each group's fears and self-interests while actually delivering little, claiming it's a long struggle to overcome oppression. Unfortunately, it's the party elite that keep these people in virtual chains for their own enrichment.

bpm4532 said...

The mantra used to be "integration", but now it's "diversity"

edutcher said...

Funny how nobody wants to talk about how it was Choomie who lost the most votes last time.

About 4 to 1.

Phil 3:14 said...

While I didn't spit out my coffee and I rarely if ever agree with machine but I did think "seriously!" about a Palin/West ticket.

Folks if you want a Fox News prime time talk show then watch Fox.

I appreciate Walker's plain spokeness. Garage always talks about his "dead eyes". That would be such a relief from Obama's disapproving chin lift and Uncle Joe's BS grin.

Maguro said...

But, Walker's biggest problem is what they were talking about - being a white male. My first bet right now is a Hispanic male, followed by some color of woman, followed by maybe a Black. Hispanic because it is a rapidly growing vulnerable demographic that was key to Obama's win. Two top notch Hispanic males who are some of the most impressive Senators on the GOP side of the isle. I would have given the nod to Rubio because of his slight edge in experience, but Cruz showed what he could do this week, handing DiFi her head in that debate on her gun grabbing bill. Both made the right moves helping Paul with his fillibuster.

It's naive to think that low-income Mexicans and Central Americans are going to vote for white Cubans like Rubio or Cruz out of ethnic solidarity. There's a ton of polling data on US Hispanic voting preferences and it all indicates that Hispanics vote Dem because they like Dem welfare state policies. The GOP nominating a guy with a Spanish surname ain't gonna change that.

In reality, the most politically astute thing the GOP could do with regard to Hispanics is to minimize the number of them by opposing amnesty. But of course the GOP braintrust is just as naive and clueless as you, so that probably won't happen.

Shouting Thomas said...

The GOP braintrust isn't "brainless and clueless."

They despise redneck whites just as much as liberal Democrats and they want to be invited to parties in Georgetown.

wyo sis said...

It's interesting how often the idea of limiting the number of opposition voters comes up. It's as if by taking out the competition we can improve our side's chances. This is a clearly jingoistic, bigoted and hateful approach. It's as if someone painted a target on a map or something.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Slow news day?

Titus said...

Palin/West-LOL.

Hagar said...

There will always be a party opposed to the party "in power."

As for the "Hispanic" population, the GOP would improve its standing a lot if it would just hammer on the meaning of the word "illegal" and insist that this situation must be straightened out somehow, whatever we can work out democratically (small "c").

edutcher said...

Titus said...

Palin/West-LOL.

Better than Choom/Shotgun Joe or the "Dream" ticket of Hillary!/Moochelle.

Those 2 have actually accomplished something with their lives.

And they have real intelligence, not a lot of fawning reporters covering up all their fox paws.

Sorun said...

"It's naive to think that low-income Mexicans and Central Americans are going to vote for white Cubans like Rubio or Cruz out of ethnic solidarity."

I think some will go for language solidarity thing, but if you really want to nail, for example, the immigrant Peruvian vote, you need to nominate a Peruvian-American.

Bruce Hayden said...

It's naive to think that low-income Mexicans and Central Americans are going to vote for white Cubans like Rubio or Cruz out of ethnic solidarity. There's a ton of polling data on US Hispanic voting preferences and it all indicates that Hispanics vote Dem because they like Dem welfare state policies. The GOP nominating a guy with a Spanish surname ain't gonna change that.

A couple of things to point out. First, Cruz took some 35% of the (mostly Mexican) Hispanic vote. Seem to remember GW Bush doing comparable. But, that was much higher than Romney took nationally. My guess is that you may be correct about 1st generation Hispanics, but, they do assimilate much more quickly and thoroughly than do Blacks in our country. And, as maybe evidenced by the new Pope, there is a strong strain of social conservatism throughout much of the Hispanic community. First generation or so may like the welfare benefits, but many are not happy about the Dems' messages on gay marriage and free birth control (and, really, cross-subsidization of abortion).

And, I don't think that you can ignore the effect that hearing a politician speak fluently in their own native language has on a lot of people. Esp. running against someone who doesn't.

Mention of GW Bush reminded me that we are likely to see a Hispanic George Bush in the future. George Prescot Bush (grandson and nephew of the Presidents Bush) has a Mexican mother, is fluent in Spanish, was rated one of the 10 most eligible (and good looking) bachelors in (I think) 2000, and is looking to run for elective office in a state where his uncle of the same name was governor (Texas). Don't expect him to be running for President for another decade or so, but do expect that he has a better chance, ultimately, than does his father. Should be interesting.

edutcher said...

Remember, too, right now things are better in Guadalajara than greater Detroit.

Hagar said...

The "illegals" are not supposed to vote, so it is not their votes the GOP needs to get.

What the GOP needs to get through to our "Hispanic" citizens, is that it is not the word "Hispanic," or variations thereof, that the party chokes on, but the "illegal" thing and its consequences.

garage mahal said...

But, Walker's biggest problem is what they were talking about - being a white male

Walker's biggest problem is that he has nothing to run on, he has zero charisma, and a metric shit ton of baggage.

lemondog said...

What is Abby’s take:

On the need for Truth in government.

That career politicians are the ruin of this country.

That both parties play deadly political games with facts and statistics.

On Scott Walker, the other prospective candidates, the state of the Republican party and its prospects?

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always to be followed by dictatorship.

The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. Those nations always progress through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith,
from spiritual faith to great courage,
from great courage to liberty,
from liberty to abundance,
from abundance to selfishness,
from selfishness to complacency,
from complacency to dependency,
from dependency back into bondage."

"Attributed to ALEXANDER FRASER TYTLER, LORD WOODHOUSELEE. Unverified." (1748-1813), Scottish historian at Edinburgh University

Mumpsimus said...

It's death to predicate adjective day . . . I feel sadly.

Hopefully you'll feel better soon.

traditionalguy said...

The world awaits a GOP that does not display the deadly false idea that Spanish culture is not white enough for them.

Paco Wové said...

"['Hispanic-Americans'] like the welfare benefits, but many are not happy about the Dems' messages on gay marriage and free birth control"

Maybe not, but I'll bet they really like the benefits, and are willing to put up the the maricons to get them.

Hagar said...

If you are going to run a wide open welfare state with "free" everything on demand, you cannot also at the same time have a come one, come all, open border policy.

The Democrats have some serious cognitive dissonance there.

traditionalguy said...

I met a Portugese gentleman at a Wednesday night supper at a local Episcopal church this week. He was delightful, very intelligent, and we enjoyed our conversation.

After he left early, several members at the table asked me who was the African American man was that I was talking with.

Of course he was a member there...not me. Possibly he was from the "early service" crowd.

But what amazed me was that they had been avoiding him, although his skin complexion was only dusky and he had black hair, like many men with a Spanish/Portugese heritage from an area ruled by Moroccan Moors from 700AD to 1400AD.

The existing GOP seems always ready to play on people's ignorance for votes. I take that as a insult.

Bruce Hayden said...

Something else to keep in mind with Hispanic candiates is that Obama got some white votes because he was (half) black, from people who were doing the politically correct thing. They aren't likely to think - oh, thesee are Cuban Hispanics, not Mexican Hispanics, so they don't count, but rather, "hey, look at me, I am so liberated that I voted for a real Hispanic this time". For those of us who aren't Hispanic, Hispanic is pretty much Hispanic, regardless of whether they are descended from Mexicans, Cubans, Puerto Ricans, etc.

Maguro said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Maguro said...

@Bruce Hayden - In what world can getting 35% of the Hispanic vote in Texas be considered a success? In fact, it's an absolute disaster and points to Texas becoming a Blue state in another 3 or 4 election cycles.

As for GWB, he was perhaps the most pro-Hispanic president ever, spoke Spanish, chummy with Vicente Fox, had Mexican relatives, supported amnesty and helped to create a housing bubble that was benefitting Hispanics immensely in 2004. And yet, after all that, he lost the Hispanic vote by 20 points. I would say that GWB's 40% is the absolute ceiling for the GOP share of the Hispanic vote.

That's the real issue: If the GOP goes all out to pander to Hispanics, maybe they can lose them by 20 points instead of losing by 40 points. This is why supporting amnesty is idiotic for the GOP. Does adding millions of new voters who at bestwill vote against you by 20 points seem like a winning formula?

Paco Wové said...

Trad.Guy - your gibbering seems more incoherent than usual today. In what universe do Episcopalians == GOP?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

He just likes anecdotes, Paco. Don't hate on TradGuy for committing the imaginary sin of calling out conservatives as incredibly fallible. And if you need a scapegoat, blame this guy. He's used to it. He's also had a lot more political success and come up with more useful and intelligent political ideas than you will.

Anglelyne said...

Bruce Hayden: My guess is that you may be correct about 1st generation Hispanics, but, they do assimilate much more quickly and thoroughly than do Blacks in our country.

No, he's correct about the subsequent generations, too. They assimilate very nicely to the Democratic Party/welfare state.

And, as maybe evidenced by the new Pope, there is a strong strain of social conservatism throughout much of the Hispanic community.

How is the new pope evidence for any of this?

There is no "strong strain of social conservatism throughout much of the Hispanic community". Unless by "social conservatism" you mean some as yet un-named and un-defined indicator imagined by Republicans. Certainly not by the usual measures of illegitimacy, abortion rates, school-completion, etc.

"Natural conservative". Republicans keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means. As far as I can tell it's nothing more than gesture toward a vague idea of "family values", which dumb Republicans are sure Hispanics have more of than gringos, without thinking too hard about exactly what those particular "family values" are, and whether they contribute to, or detract from, the tradtional American ideals of civic life that Republicans claim to respect.

First generation or so may like the welfare benefits, but many are not happy about the Dems' messages on gay marriage and free birth control (and, really, cross-subsidization of abortion).

You can keep "guessing" or theorizing about all this 'til the cows come home, or you could go look up the stats. You're wrong. People who want a strong welfare state may vote against "gay marriage" or whatever as a referendum, but they'll keep right on voting for welfare-state candidates regardless of their stand on that issue. (Hey, Blacks don't like gay marriage either, but that doesn't stop them voting overwhelmingly for Democrats.)

And, I don't think that you can ignore the effect that hearing a politician speak fluently in their own native language has on a lot of people. Esp. running against someone who doesn't.

Yeah. It's called "tribalism". Great. Let's all go tribal. But when the nice Republican hispanophone finishes his nice speech about self-reliance and the evils of the welfare state, the listeners will go right out and vote for the Democrat who promises "fully-funded government services". (In the words of "Hispanic" governor Bill Richardson, when asked what Hispanics voters want most.)

garage mahal said...

I wonder if Republicans always calling hispanics welfare slugs has anything to do with hispanics not voting for them?

Shouting Thomas said...

I wonder if Republicans always calling hispanics welfare slugs has anything to do with hispanics not voting for them?

So, what if they are welfare slugs?

We need two parties representing the welfare slugs?

What's the purpose of that?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

What if Shouting Thomas is trailer trash? Why not get a politician to go up there and call him out on that? What's the worst harm that can be done?

What a dummy. I know of no one else who is so dumb as to think a politician can be so insulting and get anywhere. He is a generation too late and a thousand miles too far northeast.

Shouting Thomas said...

Good for you, Ritmo!

You skipped to the chase this time and went right for the insults and slanders!

I much prefer this to your vain attempts at egg-headery.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

You skipped to the chase this time and went right for the insults and slanders!

The irony of hearing this exit the mouth of a guy who believes that politicians don't make enough use of a term like "welfare slugs" is astounding.

Shouting Thomas said...

There is no irony.

In the American political system, we hope that both sides of a debate will be represented.

If both parties assume the same position, as in fact they do far too often, what choice do the voters have?

"Welfare slugs" is the term garage chose. I haven't advocated it.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

You advocating accepting it as a category whereas Garage seemed to have the presence of mind to understand that insulting attitudes like that don't get elected officials anywhere.

So you are missing the point.

Shouting Thomas said...

The point is that one side believes that Mexican immigrants are a major drag of social services and public welfare.

Seems to be a lot of evidence that this is the case.

The folks who have to pay for this, taxpayers, might well object, and I think they deserve political representation, even if they are in your shit for brains way of looking at things "bigots."

O Ritmo Segundo said...

...even if they are in your shit for brains way of looking at things...

More insults, more anger. More turning what could have been a decent point into evidence of your desperation.

In any event, assuming you can still be bothered to think clearly, exactly what percent of whose budget is spent on "Mexican immigrants" - and I quote you directly as you failed to distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants.

I also note that you lump together every expenditure on them as bad. Does that include the same ordinary services that "real Americans" avail themselves of - such as going to the DMV? How about the major "drag" caused by non-immigrants? Did you even do the math or will the angry bigotry substitute for evidence?

Shouting Thomas said...

There, little Ritmo, you got to do your standard bigot bit.

Obviously, I was speaking of illegals. I'll be sure to spell things out in full for you in the future.

So far, Ritmo the Retard, you might have noticed that I didn't state my opinion. I only stated that, if both parties take the same position on illegals and their impact on social services, that leaves the voters precious little choice.

So far, this has been the unfortunate reality.

Shouting Thomas said...

That machismo and testosterone drive malice you constantly display, Ritmo the Retard, means that you belong on the conservative side.

The source of your fury is your attempt to distort your nature to conform it to the feminist/PC indoctrination you received in college.

SukieTawdry said...

Well, it is indeed a whole new era in American politics when we start talking about the non-electability of white males. But, then, no doubt the news of their demise is highly exaggerated.

If the GOP wants the Latino vote, it will have to abandon its standing as a party of values and individual responsibility. The out-of-wedlock birth rate in the Latin community approaches 50 percent. Latinos counter that by claiming that when one of their niñas becomes pregnant, her madre, abuelas, tías and hermanas step up to help raise the bebé. And that may very well be, but they still avail themselves of the vast array of public assistance offered.

The minority population wants a strong social welfare state. Even Asians who do not themselves access welfare in any significant numbers support it. (And Asian academics and other leaders in their community have been working overtime to convince them that they are, indeed, disadvantaged minorities subjugated by the white man.) Also, Asian youth stand solidly behind abortion rights, SSM and the other progressive social mores of our time.

Cruz, Rubio, Jindal et al claim no pandering will be required, that minority voters will gravitate naturally to the GOP if conservative values are plainly articulated. That, of course, is horseshit. An enormous amount of pandering will be required and for every minority vote gained, how many white conservative votes will be lost?

I hope black Americans have enjoyed their brief time in the sun. The prevailing winds in the Democratic party now blow from south of the border. Black voters have allowed themselves to become marginalized and are taken entirely for granted, no pandering required. Since they elected a black president, their cities have become greater wastelands, their schools greater sinkholes and their unemployment numbers have soared. And since Democrats know they have 90 percent of the black vote in their pockets, it will only get worse. You can't help but feel badly for them (death to predicate adjective day).

O Ritmo Segundo said...

There, little Ritmo, you got to do your standard bigot bit.

You spoke of "Mexican immigrants" - writ large - and pre-emptively got defensive by pissily declaring that those who resent them shouldn't be thought of as bigots. So yeah, I thought you were being slippery by describing thoughts you'd like to claim, but realize that there might be a backlash for claiming. That backlash is your problem.

Obviously, I was speaking of illegals. I'll be sure to spell things out in full for you in the future.

It's called using accurate language. Leave the mind-reading to those who live in a hive-mind.

So far, Ritmo the Retard, you might have noticed that I didn't state my opinion. I only stated that, if both parties take the same position on illegals and their impact on social services, that leaves the voters precious little choice.

Again, you can be as slippery as you want with your own opinion, but it seems clear that you'd like to defend those with an opinion that carries some consequences - as well as some responsibility. So either you're their lawyer, or you use them as a foil for your own, poorly considered sympathies.

In any event, you still haven't addressed the whole math thing. If someone's opposed to certain expenditures, a rational voting public might want to hear what the COST of those expenditures are, and how they compare. You avoided doing this twice, now. Why?

So far, this has been the unfortunate reality.

Give more evidence, more numbers, more calm-headed reasoning and then we'll have a better idea what's "reality" and what is just another assertion without evidence. Or as we "egg-heads" call it, "bias". Or "prejudice".

Or "ignorance".

O Ritmo Segundo said...

That machismo and testosterone drive malice you constantly display, Ritmo the Retard, means that you belong on the conservative side.

I'm not sure what I'm trying to "conserve", other than the planet and civilization, but I'd sure hope that any side wanting to claim me would have more to offer than testosterone in a bottle.

Shouting Thomas said...

You'll be a conservative in 10 years, little Ritmo.

You'll get tired of hero of the oppressed bullshit you're playing out.

No, I'm not going to play games with you. Since there is no political representation on either side that opposes the open borders, amnesty agenda, what would be the point?

There is no debate possible.

The "bigot" bullshit you've bought into has shut down any effective political opposition. Once again, you're a pawn of the official indoctrination and ideology. Some day, if you have any intelligence at all, you might escape the straightjacket.

You might use your ability to manipulate language in a conscious way, and notice that the effect of the "bigot" tirade is that both parties are increasingly becoming indistinguishable.

Of course, could be that you're happy with that. Maybe you have a future as an apparatchik. There's certainly a future there.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

That was about as incoherent as your drivel gets.

You say I'm going to be a conservative in 10 years, AND an apparatchik. Ok, so I guess you're saying that conservatives are apparatchiks. Good to know and a good reason not to be one.

No, I'm not going to play games with you. Since there is no political representation on either side that opposes the open borders, amnesty agenda, what would be the point?

There is no debate possible.


Debates accept RATIONAL evaluation. Any of the things you raise could be discussed rationally, but you pre-emptively declare reasoned examination and evidence to be a "game". Ok, well so is competitive emoting, venting and entertainment. Also a game.

Only you can only do one of those things. Voters, however, might be more capable than that.

Your brain might be too small to perceive anything beyond roles, indoctrination and ideology. The mere fact that you can't even mention the word "reason", let alone describe what it means or how to use it, shows how irrational you are.

Yes, there is no need for a party to represent the irrational or the insane. If your thinking is typical for the Republican voter, then it's good to know that the party in question can't stand for anything unique.

You are a poor thinker who is simply incapable of thinking for yourself, and you know it. You know it so plainly that your only defense is to project it at anyone smarter or at least, more rational, than you.

You simply aren't capable of being reasoned with, and the pols have grown tired of the losing proposition of placating the insane.

Enjoy.

Shouting Thomas said...

Ritmo the Retard, you might want to consider where this fake hate crime, fake homophobic murder, phantom KKK thing is headed.

You're going to tell the hucksters you're "one of the good ones."

Might work. Might not.

So far, parroting the "bigot" hysteria seems to be working for you. You appear to be a pasty faced, hetero white boy to me. You might not be so lucky in the future.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Irrational.

And being repetitively irrational is not helping you.

Shouting Thomas said...

Ritmo the Retard, where did you get the notion that I looking for your approval?

You're a dumb kid, suffering from the inability to slake off your college indoctrination.

I'm being somewhat generous in trying to help you, but you're so fucking dumb it's practially hopeless.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Pathetic.

Shouting Thomas said...

Well, I'm making a good faith effort to help you pull your head out of your ass, Ritmo the Retard.

But the indoctrination has made you impenetrably stupid.

Give me some help. The student has to make some effort.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I'm making a good faith effort to help you pull your head out of your ass, Ritmo the Retard.

This self-contradictory statement is inherently in bad faith. Thomas proves that he doesn't have a clue what a "good faith" comment even is with this statement.

Shouting Thomas said...

Sometimes, Ritmo the Retard, the old, wiser man must bear the unhappy burden of spanking the dumb kid.

I'm doing my best for you, but as I said, you're one of the more impenetrable blockheads I've ever encountered.

You should get married and have kids. It would cure about 75 percent of the stupidity.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

You're just an arrogant asshole with a chip on his shoulder, who resents - among a lot of other things - those with college educations, and can't stand to lack all the things that others have. It's nothing new. Tale as old as time. All you have is your resentment, your hate, your ignorance and your condescension.

You don't have a coherent view on anything. As I said, the only stance you've ever taken is the pee-pee dance stance performed by two-year olds needing to relieve themselves.

Behold Shouting Thomas' alma mater.

Shouting Thomas said...

My alma maters are the University of Illinois and New York University, little Ritmo.

I keep trying, but the indoctrination has reduced you to the level of an imbecile.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I keep trying, but the indoctrination has reduced you to the level of an imbecile.

So according to you, anyone who doesn't agree that Mexican immigrants are the drag on society that you view them as is an "imbecile", "blockhead", "impenetrably stupid" or a "shit for brains".

Is that seriously what I'm supposed to agree to in order to be thought of as acceptable by you?

Shouting Thomas said...

You see how impenetrable you are, Ritmo?

I still haven't stated an opinion on what the effect of Mexican immigration might be.

What I have said is that this "bigot" strategy you've fallen for has effectively forced one side out of the political arena completely.

It doesn't seem to have occurred to you that that strategy might one day rebound to punish you. You're kinda dense.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I still haven't stated an opinion on what the effect of Mexican immigration might be.

Because you don't CARE what it (the effect of that immigration) is.

Your only objective is to spread sympathy for those who, unlike you, actually have the balls to say that they presume it's bad.

You are a coward, IOW. You are afraid of thinking through the consequences of your easy peasy judgments.

But others see through it. Look at what guys like Shouting Thomas are doing for the Republicans.

Pretty bad-ass, huh?

Paco Wové said...

(Scene: Hospital room, U. W. Medical School. Bedside; camera looks up at DOCTOR and NURSE. DOCTOR is disheveled, unshaven; NURSE gazes anxiously at both DOCTOR and the bed.)

NURSE: Is it... too late, Doctor? Can this thread be saved?

DOCTOR: (Pauses, sighs.) No. It's just too late. The infections -- they run too deep, and ... they just ran rampant. They fed on each other, becoming more destructive. They burned through like a wildfire, consuming everything. I've never seen anything like it..! (pauses, strikes hand against bedframe in frustration.) God DAMN it! Another one lost to Sudden Thread Death!

(Blackout)

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shouting Thomas said...

Ritmo the Retard goes ballistic again and bravely fights the good fight against slavery!

Wow!

Erika said...

Two things:

1. Scott Walker did not graduate college. That would be an impediment in the minds of many.

2. Wikipedia, I am disappoint. The very first sentence of the entry on Walker reads: "Scott Kevin Walker (born November 2, 1967) is a Koch family funded American politician and a member of the Republican Party who currently serves as the 45th Governor of Wisconsin." There's a flag at the top of the article showing that its neutrality is disputed, with a date of June 2012. Way to be on top of it, guys.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Yeah, I know! It's a pretty good fight to wage - the fight against defending slavery.


Good thing that today's Republicans are too disjointed to even do that anymore!

Shouting Thomas said...

Nice to know that you're fighting the good fight of 1861!

Ritmo the Retard, you are one brave motherfucker!

You're always good for a laugh.

Shouting Thomas said...

And, Ritmo the Retard, where did you get the idea that I care about or represent the Republican Party?

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Nice to know that you're fighting the good fight of 1861!

It's certainly better than fighting to recognize slavery as a good and underappreciated thing.

You care about privilege, and the fact that you don't have as much of it as you think you're entitled to. You are also an irrational idiot, whose sole ideological priority is figuring out whom to condescend to next.

Which makes you a natural fit for the discombobulated Republican Party.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

And you also said earlier that I should aspire to evolve into the "manly" conservative that you think I really am.

Stop trying to hide your true self - as embarrassing as it is to everyone else.

Shouting Thomas said...

Jesus, Ritmo the Retard,

You are even a more horrifically dumb fuck than I thought.

Your stupidity is fathomless and eternal!

Shouting Thomas said...

Monty Python stupid!

Ritmo the Retard, your stupidity is so monumental that I've got to admire it.

You are a hero of stupidity.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

I'm sensing a theme here. If anyone would admire stupidity it would be you.

Why not just admit that you have nothing to say, and can't stand the fact that just being older, more obstinate and less capable of appreciating and understanding the world is all you've got. And that you need to use that as a way to feel that you're somehow better than others.

Tell us about your pharmaceutical research, Thomas.

Shouting Thomas said...

You wearing your stove pipe hat and beard, Abe?

Man, if only it was 1861, you'd show those bastards, wouldn't you, Ritmo the Retard.

If only!

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Hey, you're the one who thinks the slavery defenders aren't being shown enough respect, right? And that their ideological kin today need a party to represent them.

Yep. This is why you feel like such a loser when it comes to any public issue.

Now tell me how your old age and the wisdom you've failed to accumulate in attaining it makes you better than me.

And then tell me about your awesome contributions to pharmaceutical discovery and computer programming.


Shouting Thomas said...

Ritmo the Retard, you've descended into a level of stupidity even deeper than I am able to satirize.

How much deeper can you go?

Does your sheer awfulness ever disgust you?

You're such an awful little turd, and you seem to revel in it.

O Ritmo Segundo said...

Oh, I can test the depths of every ability you've got.

But you do have something about which you can feel proud. If early-onset senility and licking one's own balls were an Olympic sport, you'd be in the running for at least a bronze medal.

Shouting Thomas said...

Ritmo the Retard, congratulations!

I love it when you stop with the pretense of halo wearing and you just bare your teeth and growl like a stupid junkyard dog.

That's you!

Keep it up!

O Ritmo Segundo said...

As I said, if early-onset senility and licking one's own balls were an Olympic sport, you'd be in the running for at least a bronze medal.

That's better than a junkyard dog can come up with. A junkyard dog would just tear you apart physically, which you can relate to. But my insults of your stupid arrogance are creative and funny.

As someone who pretends he has the talent to be a musician of any ability, you should respect that. Actually, I'm sure you do.

I'd ask you to kindly go away now and call it a day but that will only encourage the weird stalker in you.