Delving into a presidential candidate's record and criticizing him vigorously is crucifixion?
How about the way we failed — back in 2008 — to delve into Obama's record and failed to criticize him?
Here's a clue: Get yourself perceived as The Messiah and the good people of the United States of America will refrain from crucifying you.
January 30, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
221 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 221 of 221Ann - "How about the way we failed — back in 2008 — to delve into Obama's record and failed to criticize him?"
Yeah, we heard literally nothing about President Obama until the very day he was elected.
Nothing, nada...no vettng, no articles no debates no books. The Clinton campaign said nothing about him. McCain and his little Princess never even mentioned the guy.
Absolutely nothing.
He just said, "Hey, elect me."
And that's what we did.
*Can we assume this means Ann is either drunk or just plain stupid?
This is what drives me nuts right now. The arguments with the Gingrich-lovers here is reminding me so much of argument I've been having with Obama-lovers in 2009-10. I don't know or care if your favored little insult, RINO, applies to Medved or not. The link was designed to share a statistic with you. Someone said, McCain...squishy...conservatives stayed home. The statistic indicates it's a myth. The response? The guy who cited the statistic is a RINO!
So fucking what?
Don't you see how you're exactly like those who discount factual news if it happens to appear on Fox?
I withdraw my prediction of Obama's defeat. Your favored kamikaze candidate and your overall desire to exclude supporters who don't meet standards that are often based far more on feeling than fact... all of that is going to guarantee Obama's victory.
You assholes. Enjoy your purity. Enjoy your RINO-free environment. It's small and powerless, but hey, everyone feeeeeels good about themselves so it's okay.
No conservative with a functioning brain voted for Obama in 08.
I don't think there are Gingrich-lovers, either--he married all of them.
"The tea party arose when an African/American Muslim, born in Kenya, was elected president and the yahoos couldn't cope w/reality. Gasp!
Indeed, he's not one of us, so let's throw a temper tantrum.
It's that basic ~ carry on."
The tea party arose as a response to the unfettered growth of government even before a scrubbed black liberation theologian was anointed by the sycophantic MSM as president.
Indeed, he's SAID he's not one of us, let's not forget his politics of division, and effort to find someone not ashamed of the very people, whites too, that cast a ballot for him.
It's really quite simple, the man's intent is to 'change' America into a balkanized group of states, going as far as SUING Arizona, as a reckless political calculation designed to further his own cynical agenda ~ as you were.
//fixed.
wv - funkind
DT2012 - we're dealing with a 2 pronged problem. One is Obama is a racial hustler and two, he's a communist.
I gather you would rather see gay marriage banned and abortion outlawed than the debt reduced, government shrunk and Obamacare repealed.
If you want ObamneyCar repealed, Willard's just the man for the job. If anyone can dismantle that mess, it's the guy who built it!
You assholes. Enjoy your purity. Enjoy your RINO-free environment. It's small and powerless, but hey, everyone feeeeeels good about themselves so it's okay.
Willard doesn't approve this message.
Please assholes, vote for Willard. Willard is not a RINO. Unless that's what you want. Then he's a RINO.
But if you don't want a RINO, Willard is definitely 100% non-RINO.
Willard is fabulous because he's a winner who can win.
Remember assholes, please vote for Willard and enjoy your purity. Thank you.
One is Obama is a racial hustler and two, he's a communist.
Willard is not and has never been a communist. That's what I call consistency.
Just heard some very interesting Wisconsin recall related news from one of my ace sources. Sorry, but I can't tell you.
At least AP spills about his K-Street shenanigans. Boo.
Stoddard, I share your frustration. But for what it's worth, I've noticed a slight abatement in Newtbot vs. Romneybot acrimony in the last few days, at least in the blogs I read. The back-and-forth strikes me as (slightly) less knee-jerk, slightly more reasonable.
Don't get me wrong, it's still vicious, horrible, ugly out there, people are still fighting like dogs for their candidates, and you've got diehards (&/or drama queens &/or mobys) threatening not to vote. But I think some realism, or resignation-- e.g. due to polling, and more light being shed on both candidates' records-- is setting in.
And I think Palin's second pro-Newt salvo has somewhat backfired, even among Newt supporters. It's one thing to feel indignant about what you consider unfair attacks on your preferred candidate; it's another to hysterically claim Romney's utterly ordinary (for a primary) hardball tactics are "Stalinist" and "Alinskyist" and that your candidate is being "crucified". A warrior doesn't whine, and that's what it's starting to sound like. So the calls for jihad against The Establishment (at least on behalf of Newt qua martyr) have lost some of their zeal.
I think, more and more, both sides are reaching a consensus: both candidates are flawed and disappointing and not ideal. One side is more bothered by one candidate's flaws, the other side by the other's. Same thing with each candidate's assets. Both sides acknowledge it's not black and white; in the end, we will have to live with the grey. And I think, more and more, people are reaching a state of acceptance, and are ready to move on to the next stage of the game.
When I feel most frustrated, I try to feel empathy instead. I know how I feel about Newt. If the anti-Romneys feel as much or more distaste for Romney than I feel about Newt (as misguided as I think them to be; as misguided as they think me to be)-- to put myself in their shoes-- I can only imagine what they feel now.
I gather that pretty much every primary ever going back to the beginning of time has been a bloody, bruising, ugly affair. Maybe 2012 is extraordinary in that regard-- but it probably only feels that way because we're living through it. It's internecine warfare among us right now, and egos are at stake. But I truly believe, when some of these primary passions die down, and we get into the general election, ABO will bring (the vast majority of) us together.
The tea party arose when an African/American Muslim, born in Kenya, was elected president and the yahoos couldn't cope w/reality. Gasp!
The cartoon that's running in your head, it's loonytoons, right?
Sarah has long passed her "sell by" date.
But we'll always have Paris.
hmm, another newt thread over 200 posts. ok, ok, it's mostly Althouse conservatives whining about Obama, as per usual.
Re: the "we" issue - you are doing with "blame" exactly what was done with high risk credit housing debt. (It's not *my* mistake, or my group's mistake, it's OUR mistake. All of us.)
It's not a highly ethical practice.
Friedersdorf: No matter whether Palin is thinking about her country, her party, or herself, she has made a huge strategic error by supporting [Gingrich's] bid for the nomination.
Peter Hoh, thanks for that link-- very interesting. I don't do Facebook, and I've been wondering what the reaction of Palin fans & Tea Partiers has been to Palin's Gingrich boosting. This article is just what I was looking for.
It's really heartening to see that many of them have not been fooled by Newt and see him as I do-- as a hypocrite cynically appropriating Tea Party rhetoric (and leftist rhetoric, and whatever rhetoric suits him at the time), posing as an anti-establishment martyr.
I wonder if more not-Romney voters will crystallize around Santorum now instead, or if it's too late for that.
For my part, I can remember being summarily dismissed with a tweet "house cleaning" (or "cleaning house") the summer before last [2010]. And even though I emailed privately to apologize, tried to fix it, wanted so much to find a bridge, none of that could be accepted. In fact, I didn't get a response.
Well, so it goes. That's how that worked out. How that sort of thing works out. So it went. So it goes.
Color me cynical, now, very much more than I was even just half a decade ago, and--believe you me!--not just in terms of electoral partisan politics.
wv: glych
Yes!!!!!
The conclusion that incident--coupled with some others--made me come to is that I owe almost no one on line anything at all.
Roberto said...
Yeah, we heard literally nothing about President Obama until the very day he was elected.
Nothing, nada...no vettng, no articles no debates no books
Yes! Because that is what Ann was arguing!
And you were like so successful in swatting it all down!
"2 : to destroy the power of : mortify
3 a : to treat cruelly : torment
b : pillory
— cru·ci·fi·er noun
Examples of CRUCIFY
They crucified her in the newspapers for having an affair."
From Merriam-Webster
Yeah that Palin sure has problems with words, their power, and how to use them.
That's why Palin could never be a best-selling author, except she is.
FL Republican here. Palin is a circus act but her general point about Newt is correct. Romney's closing ad was the Brokaw-NBC News clip from 1997 about the ethics charge. This caused me to vote for Gingrich.
I remember Gingrich's speakership. He was erratic and egotistical, but he was also taking ALL the heavy fire from the Left for the success of 1994, all while dragging a liberal President toward a balanced budget. It was the high tide of Reaganism. The trumped-up ethics charge was a Democratic smear to try to stop the man who was working them over.
For Romney to choose this as his closing attack tells me that he doesn't understand the conservative movement or what went down in the mid-90's. Gingrich has been out of office since December 1998...how did Washington Republicans perform on fiscal issues after his departure?
Palin has latched onto a basic truth. The "go along to get along" crowd hates Newt and loves Romney. This is not to say Gingrich isn't a walking train wreck. He is. But if anyone can explain to me what the conservative movement will get from a 50-48 squeaker Romney victory (best-case scenario at this point), I'm all ears. The Supreme Court appointments, fine. That's big. Anything else?
Post a Comment