Althouse: "Imperial Japan taught its soldiers that death was preferable to surrender. The tea party’s code is similar..."

July 9, 2014

"Imperial Japan taught its soldiers that death was preferable to surrender. The tea party’s code is similar..."

"Stand firm, regardless of the odds of success or the consequences of failure. I’ve argued before that the struggle between the Republican establishment and the tea party is no longer about ideology — establishment figures have mostly co-opted tea party views — but about temperament."

Dana Milbank compares Chris McDaniel (the tea party candidate who lost a GOP primary to Senator Cochran) to Hiroo Onoda, the last of the WWII holdouts, who kept up his fight until 1974.

90 comments:

Big Mike said...: All of us Republicans deeply appreciate Dana Milbank's efforts to help us with our messaging.; 7/9/14, 12:27 PM
Bob Ellison said...: Milbank really wrote that? I can't tell, because the link won't resolve for me. Possibly WaPo is suffering from something like an Instalanche, though that would be soooo 2002.

Anyway, isn't Dana a girl's name?; 7/9/14, 12:28 PM
PB said...: Really odd how liberals always blame others for the things they themselves to. This irrational, self-loathing behavior continues.; 7/9/14, 12:31 PM
rhhardin said...: The tea party isn't the party with the divine emperor.; 7/9/14, 12:31 PM
YoungHegelian said...: Are we really supposed to believe that Dana Milbank gives a flying fuck at a rolling donut about the electoral fate of Thad Cochran? That the concern for fair representation for the good people of Mississippi consumes his waking moments? If you do, I've got a deed here for the Brooklyn Bridge, and I'll let it go for a song -- a song! --- I tell ya!

I just love how so many lefty pundits find all sorts of affection in their hearts for long-time incumbent Republican dinosaurs just so it gives them an opportunity to spew their bile over the Tea Party. As if, from a liberal viewpoint, there's really a whit of ideological difference between Cochran & McDaniel.; 7/9/14, 12:34 PM
Nonapod said...: establishment figures have mostly co-opted tea party views

This line is something I've read a few times in multiple places. I'm not sure where this myth originated but it's demonstrably false (for the most part anyway).; 7/9/14, 12:34 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: Death is preferable to surrender.

That sounds about right, watching how the Right followed Ted Cruz over the cliff, a few times.

But they're not alone. Newspapers are doing the same thing. As I've pointed out a few times, Ta-Nehisi Coates has proven their claims are bogus - that long-form journalism, or print media, or magazines, etc., are dying - and most current editors, etc., aren't merely not doing their job but may not even understand what it is, or what's important, anymore. And - most importantly - they'd rather let media outlets (and even media genres) die, than accept that, and change.

I know white people are more suicidal than blacks, but this is ridiculous,...; 7/9/14, 12:41 PM
Brando said...: There are times when a strategic retreat or regrouping are preferable to holding one's ground to the death, the classic example being the Germans at Stalingrad.

Picking a strategy that focuses mostly on trying to insult the Democrats--whether it's this impeachment nonsense, refusals to raise the debt limit, or the birth certificate silliness--can't even properly be called "standing and fighting." The wartime equivalent of that would be mooning your enemy as they shot up your position.

I'm all for actual fighting--and using flexible strategies based on changing events and even compromises if it means getting closer to your goals. But in this context it's going to mean winning over more of the public, getting tangible gains (whether it's modest tax reform, entitlement reform, or regulatory changes), and gradually building strength. Throwing red meat to a small sliver of the GOP base may feel good at party gatherings, but it works against these goals.; 7/9/14, 12:42 PM
Ron said...: The next article will be...The 'Divine Wind' of the Tea Party.; 7/9/14, 12:42 PM
DKWalser said...: Milbank is a tool.; 7/9/14, 12:46 PM
Levi Starks said...: Death is certain,
Honor much less so.; 7/9/14, 12:47 PM
Gahrie said...: OK..at what point will people realize that a Leftwing hack like Milbank has no idea what the Tea Party is about, and wouldn't recognize a Tea Partyer if one cut his taxes.; 7/9/14, 12:49 PM
James Pawlak said...: The original "Tea Party" activists provided an alternative model for dealing with tyrants--As exhibited at Lexington and Concord in April, 1775.; 7/9/14, 12:50 PM
Rae said...: That's racist.; 7/9/14, 1:05 PM
Alexander said...: I assume then that we can conclude that Mr. Milbank believes that to be an inferior stratagem?

Then screw him. That white cis-male (name notwithstanding) 1-percenter needs to check his privilege; just who is he to be implying that the cultural norms of Imperial Japan are any more or less 'right' than another other set of norms.

As a Cauc-Asian American, I am deeply troubled by this arrogant display of assumed superiority of some un-named but clearly implied Euro-centric culture. I plead for Mr. Milbank to apologize to the Japanese people at once, and to understand that he needs to step out of a conversation that he has no right to be party to.; 7/9/14, 1:05 PM
lgv said...: Why is Milbank using "Imperial" Japan as his comparison? Why not Davey Crockett and the Alamo? Why not King Leonidas and the Persians? Why not the Samurai of feudal Japan? Why not the Jews of Masada?

Nope. Tea party like those evil imperialist Japanese.

Milbank is a racist.; 7/9/14, 1:08 PM
Real American said...: remember how after the tea party candidates were elected to the Senate they refused to negotiate with the White House on the logic that "they won." Oh, wait. That was Obama's opening salvo right after taking office in 2009.; 7/9/14, 1:09 PM
tim in vermont said...: I would apply the scorched earth tactic to Cochran.

Accusing the Tea Party of racist opposition to Obama to turn out Democrats. Of course people are bitter about that. I guess Milbank's suggestion is to "put some ice on it."; 7/9/14, 1:12 PM
Rusty said...: Levi Starks said...
Death is certain,
Honor much less so

Ezackly.; 7/9/14, 1:13 PM
donald said...: He wouldn't recognize me, I'm too hip.

Anybody here know who Paul Cornwell is?
Mo Tucker?

I defy any of you commie cunts to find cooler people.; 7/9/14, 1:14 PM
mikee said...: And if you can name one policy upon which the Democrats willingly sought compromise since November of 2008, I will have a large hat for dinner.; 7/9/14, 1:17 PM
Real American said...: The left will never understand the Tea Party movement because they either don't care to or are too stupid to be able to. The Tea Party wants more restrained and less intrusive smaller government. They are the heirs to the Perot movement. What they propose is not a new idea, but they are actually trying to elect candidates who will stay faithful to that philosophy rather than use it to get elected and then go back to going along to get along when back in Washington. However, the idea that they don't compromise is idiotic, they just want something in the deal.

You know what the left never does? Give up its goals. Did they abandon their goal of nationalized health care after Hillarycare when down? No. They kept trying. Every time you compromise and give them half a loaf, the immediate set out trying to get the other half. The Tea Party thinks the same way and they want politicians to think the same way, but we need to have compromises where we actually get something. When Boehner cuts budget deals spending still increases a ridiculous amount with more regulations and more bureaucracy. They claim to be splitting the loaf, but those who believe in limited government don't get shit in the compromise. Less bad PR for House or Senate republicans isn't what we're looking for, which is why we need more conservatives with spines to hold elected office.

Political victory doesn't always occur in this situations, but you don't stop trying and you better get something in return when you cut a deal.; 7/9/14, 1:18 PM
Bilwick said...: I think the Tea Party's code is that liberty is preferable to an ever-growing, ever-more-increasingly rapacious and liberty-diminishing State. But then I'm not a "liberal" (and by "liberal" I mean of course "tax-happy, coercion-addicted, power-tripping State-fellators"). and not having the Mailed Fist way deep up my rectum helps me think more clearly than the State-cult crowd.; 7/9/14, 1:23 PM
Michael said...: Well, the one thing that we can't argue about is that the sequester brought the country to its knees. Right? Or not?; 7/9/14, 1:26 PM
Ambrose said...: I assume Milbank is aware that Imperial Japan did, in fact, surrender. Unconditionally. There is a bit of a metaphor fail, but a great chance to compare the Tea Party to some bad guys (unlike, say, Churchill who voiced similar views on surrender and meant it).; 7/9/14, 1:27 PM
Michael said...: Then again, there is absolutely nothing, nothing, that Dana Milbank would die for.; 7/9/14, 1:30 PM
Brando said...: "remember how after the tea party candidates were elected to the Senate they refused to negotiate with the White House on the logic that "they won." Oh, wait. That was Obama's opening salvo right after taking office in 2009."

All things considered, that strategy didn't seem to work out too well for Obama. Sure, he passed some (awful, in my opinion) laws in '09 and '10, but the biggest (the ACA) passed only barely, despite huge majorities in both houses, and the result was big gains for the GOP in the midterms and a presidency that has become incredibly small since then. He now has a GOP that doesn't trust him enough to cut any deals with him, and a public that is one part hard left, one part hard right, and a middle that is disgusted with both.

Imagine if instead he'd steered a firm middle course and compromised with certain GOP members from the beginning (he'd never get a Ted Cruz to work a deal with him, but Graham, McCain, Collins, Murkowski--a lot of GOPers could have compromised). We'd probably have seen better policies--an ACA that wasn't such a mess at least, or a stimulus package that actually could stimulate the economy--and his own political capital would be worth something.

The "no quarter asked, no quarter given" method of politics only works when you already hold all the cards--mass public support and control of the institutions--and even then it can backfire when you fly too close to the sun. The Right needs to understand this too.; 7/9/14, 1:35 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Damn it! I thought this was a post about Thad McCotter. Now that would be interesting!

Garage once told me my photo looked like Milbank's but I don't hold that against him.; 7/9/14, 1:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Just don't compare him to Al Gore in 2000.; 7/9/14, 1:41 PM
traditionalguy said...: Thad used Mississippi tricks and stole the nomination by paying cash to buy run off voters from the Democrats. The primary contest has always been between the RINOs and the Palin conservatives. So the TeaParty has no reason to be surrendering in an ongoing war inside the GOP.; 7/9/14, 1:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Need I remind anyone of a certain failed art student...lover of animals...peculiar mustache?; 7/9/14, 1:43 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: Levi Starks,

"Death is certain,
Honor much less so."

Nah, you're going out without that, too,...; 7/9/14, 1:43 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: James Pawlak,

"The original 'Tea Party' activists provided an alternative model for dealing with tyrants--As exhibited at Lexington and Concord in April, 1775."

Yeah, they were slave traders, also mad England had outlawed slavery.

In light of that, it's funny how today's Tea Party gets called racists,...; 7/9/14, 1:46 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Crack at 12:41 makes some sense (although I disagree with his take on Cruz). Good writing and good reporting sells. We conservatives slam the Times for their bias a lot but what they do well is hire some good reporters who find stories and write well (John Burns, foreign correspondent, comes to mind for one). The WSJ (despite Rupert's wall around it) has proven good writing and honest reporting can grow circulation in the digital age. Fox news proved that cable news can grow and hold an audience by swimming against the current mediocrity and bias in TV reporting.

So while I don't agree with Ta-Nesi's reparations argument, I accede that Crack has identified inconvenient facts that Journ-O-lists don't want to face. Self deception is a strange human tendency and bad business strategy.; 7/9/14, 1:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Igv: Why is Milbank using "Imperial" Japan as his comparison?

Because he still possesses some tiny vestigial sense of shame that keeps him from going for the Nazi Germany analogy.

For now.; 7/9/14, 2:08 PM
Unknown said...: If I had lost to Cochran and could find 8000 double voters I'd do the same thing his challenger is doing. Let Cochran run as a Democrat if he wants those votes. The reason to primary Cochran to begin with was to show that the difference between the parties matters. Whoever wins now, that difference has been shown to be insignificant in DC. The fight for a distinction that matters is the point. If a populist uprising can take some scalps we'll find out whether the difference is real. That chance is the only reason that the fate of a Cochran matters more than the fate of a cockroach.; 7/9/14, 2:14 PM
n.n said...: The real question is how does the Republican establishment survive the war when it loses nearly every battle on the democratic frontier.

There is no question that fundamental corruption has favored Democrat interests. Nature does not favor the timid, even in principle.; 7/9/14, 2:31 PM
Seeing Red said...: So was Pearl Harbor 2010? What young kid knows history anyway?

Besides I thought the Tea Party was dead already? Is he so bereft of ideas to write about that this is the best he can do?; 7/9/14, 2:33 PM
Sigivald said...: Dana Milbank.

Still writing, is he?

Huh.; 7/9/14, 2:40 PM
khesanh0802 said...: Dana has really gone off the rails.; 7/9/14, 2:42 PM
Alexander said...: Crack,

You realize of course that while England outlawed slavery, they drew a distinction between England and its colonial holdings, and the British East Indian Company?

Let me spell it out for you: Slavery was legal in 1773 for the EITC. It was until the 1840's. The property thrown overboard actually belonged to (gasp!) slave owners.

Continue on your normal rants and shouts though - it's what you do best, reality be damned.; 7/9/14, 2:43 PM
SeanF said...: Mike: Crack at 12:41 makes some sense...

Unless [b]I'm[/b] missing something, Crack's 12:41 comment says that old media isn't dying, and its editors are letting it die.; 7/9/14, 2:47 PM
Tank said...: Researching illegal votes is just like flying a plane into an aircraft carrier.; 7/9/14, 2:47 PM
Al&Bea said...: I think that, before you examine Tea party philosophy, you might wish to examine the Alinsky Social Progressive model - "The end justifies ANY means"; 7/9/14, 3:12 PM
traditionalguy said...: If the Tea Party guys are Bushido Japs, then the GOP leaders may use the nuclear option next.; 7/9/14, 3:12 PM
richard mcenroe said...: Apparently Cochran can no longer even find his way around the Senate building without assistance anymore.

http://tinyurl.com/llnng46

Clearly the RNC was right to betray its base and retain his services.; 7/9/14, 3:13 PM
PatHMV said...: The left has a very odd desire to compare many of their fellow Americans to terrorists and other atrocious monsters of history. It's disturbing and irrational, and a sign of exceedingly superficial thinking. It's not enough for them to think themselves right, they have to think themselves irrevocably superior to the neanderthals who dare to disagree with them. And they think THEY are the party of civility.; 7/9/14, 3:21 PM
tim in vermont said...: "Continue on your normal rants and shouts though - it's what you do best, reality be damned."

You're wrong because shut up.; 7/9/14, 3:23 PM
jr565 said...: Whatever else you can say about the Japanese, those bastards could fight. It took us nuking them twice
For them to say uncle. So comparing the tea party to imperial japan in terms of their fighting spirit is not actually an insult.; 7/9/14, 3:43 PM
lonetown said...: What did he write about Al Franken?

No doubt an heroic effort to get the vote out. (felonious or not); 7/9/14, 3:48 PM
jr565 said...: I know the tea partiers like to present themselves as the outsiders and the mainstre repubs as essentially the same as dems, but really the difference between the two is over tactics.
No republican was FOR obamacare. The fight was how to defeat Obamacare. And the Tea Party had a really stupid idea on how to do it, and wouldn't listen to reason. They like liberals assumed that if you oppose the solution to the problem that you don't think there's a problem. No, I just think YOUR solution is stupid.
So in terms of global warming, even if I did believe that it was man made, it doesn't mean that a cockamamie solution that drives out economy off a cliff is re way to go. Similarly withy the tea party and heir assault on Obamacare. I'm with them in spirit but I think tactically they are retarded up till now. They share the same single minded zeal and certainty their own virtue as liberals. And can be as smug.; 7/9/14, 3:51 PM
mishu said...: Yeah, they were slave traders, also mad England had outlawed slavery.

Tell that to the Indians at that time.; 7/9/14, 3:53 PM
hombre said...: Crack: "In light of that, it's funny how today's Tea Party gets called racists,..."

Here's Crack, preparing to tell us how he, personally, has been on the receiving end of Tea Party racism. Or is he preparing to say how he collected Breitbart's $100,000 reward for coming forward with evidence to prove black congressmen's claim of racist treatment by Tea Party protesters were other than lying race-baiting by high profile blacks.; 7/9/14, 3:54 PM
Skeptical Voter said...: One thing that each Milbank column proves is that his mother raised at least one idiot.

He never disappoints. But then he's go so much other competition for Moron Of The Year in Messrs. Cohen, Dionne, Robinson, Blow and Krugman.

Tom Friedman is a special case. A few years back I read the New York Times at lunch every day. Friedman's columns were unusual. If you read the columns over a year's time---and had a good memory-and I do, you would find that ultimately Friedman would contradict himself. If he said Item X was good in January, sometime before December he'd say Item X was bad, horrible etc.

It worked on all issues he wrote about. Friedman is a man who doesn't know his own mind--however in contrast to Milbank, he at least has a mind.; 7/9/14, 4:00 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: The MSM is trying to make McDaniel's election probe all about illegal "black" votes when, in fact, it is all about following the law and rules and determining if any people voted twice.; 7/9/14, 4:07 PM
hombre said...: "... establishment figures have mostly co-opted tea party views."

Establishment Republicans, Milbank and the Democrats for whom he pimps, cannot fathom that "views" are not values. It's that obtuseness created by moral relativism.

From the perspective of the Tea Party, it is the future of the country that is at stake, not the future of the Republican Party.; 7/9/14, 4:09 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: What rh said.; 7/9/14, 4:30 PM
Paul said...: So the concept of never giving up is bad, according to, uh, this Milbank.

Well I guess liberals are quitters, right? And Tea Party folk are not!

GOOD!; 7/9/14, 4:42 PM
HoodlumDoodlum said...: Crack said...
Yeah, they were slave traders, also mad England had outlawed slavery.

Slavery Abolition Act of 1833 in effect in 1776? Jolly good old boy, pip pip and all that.

Damn those white people fighting slavery, don't they know they're the bad guys? They invented it, they're the only ones who practiced it, so of course they don't get any credit for ending it, you know, everywhere they could, for all time.

Statistically shouldn't you have been right about something, if only by accident, at least a few times by now?; 7/9/14, 4:42 PM
paul a'barge said...: Meanwhile, someone is comparing Dana Milbank to the Italian Army during WWII.; 7/9/14, 4:50 PM
Oso Negro said...: Give me liberty or give me death!

Pretty fucking straightforward, no?; 7/9/14, 5:06 PM
Marty Keller said...: Dana Milbank is the Andrew Sullivan of the WaPo: a Johnny One-Note projection machine with a small but Johnny One-Note readership.; 7/9/14, 5:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Kind of funny how dozens of racist signs show up at Tea Party rallies all over the country, and the right insists those individuals don't represent the true feelings of the group as a whole. But Althouse sees two or three signs, out of hundreds, that say something bad about Scott Walker and all the protesters get painted with that same brush.

Showing once again that there is nothing "neutral" about her cruelty.; 7/9/14, 5:31 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: I think that what must be remembered is that over the last almost 50 years, compromising with Dems/Progressives means that they will be back next year asking for the other half. That was, of course, before Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi essentially announced that "we won", ending the debate, and any thought of compromise.

When the goal is a smaller federal government, agreeing to a slightly smaller increase is moving in the wrong direction. When in power, pushing for smaller increases, is a good part of why we are where we are today, with a runaway federal government, and, in particular, its unelected bureaucracy, and an economy still trying to recover after the longest recession in the last 80 years. Made much worse by all those government programs that Republicans compromised on.

Our federal government is in need of massive overhaul. Not only are hundreds of billions of dollars flushed down the toilet and into the pockets of cronies of both parties, but the bureaucracy is now pretty much unaccountable. The type of compromise that Milbank is so enamored with merely puts small Band-aids over the problem, allowing it to continue to fester and grow.; 7/9/14, 6:24 PM
AustinRoth said...: He hasn't done a full Kerry ("Please Courts, only allow a partial recount so I can win, even though I lost"), so the Left should just STFU. They are the biggest election whiners EVER.; 7/9/14, 6:32 PM
John henry said...: Crack said

"Yeah, they were slave traders, also mad England had outlawed slavery."

Could you explain this? I thought England banned slavery in 1836 or so.

I thought it was still legal under English law in the colonies in 1776.

When did England ban slavery in the colonies that are now the US?

John Henry; 7/9/14, 6:36 PM
jr565 said...: Bruce Hayden wrote:
When the goal is a smaller federal government, agreeing to a slightly smaller increase is moving in the wrong direction. When in power, pushing for smaller increases, is a good part of why we are where we are today, with a runaway federal government, and, in particular, its unelected bureaucracy, and an economy still trying to recover after the longest recession in the last 80 years. Made much worse by all those government programs that Republicans compromised on.

Bruce, while I agree with you on the outcome we'd want, I disagree with the Tea Party on how quick to expect change. They are not going to be able to slash govt spending to the degree that tea partiesr want in the time frame they want. That would cause massive upheaval.
Thing more small term things at first like cap spending to existing levels. or, cutting 1 penny from every dollar type proposals. To start with.
Where I think the Tea Party is running into issues is their expectations which are not realistic.
I, frankly would be amazed and heartened if the republican president simply stopped spending increases. Or cut Obamacare.
In any case, those would have to be done first, before more drastic cuts were made. Tea Partiers should be able to deal with the budget realistically. Otherwise they are in for a world of disappointment when even their biggest Tea Party candidate can't get done as much as he hoped.; 7/9/14, 7:43 PM
n.n said...: Milbank is projecting or perhaps displacing his guilty conscience. The analogy fails because the Tea Party is a defensive movement.

The closest analogue to the Imperial Japanese is the left-wing, and the right-wing where their interests overlap or converge. It is this implicit and sometimes explicit conspiracy to change America through loose morals, depopulation and repopulation, devaluing capital and labor, etc., which is committing an imperial breach to change America.; 7/9/14, 8:04 PM
Phil 314 said...: England slave trade ban 1807.; 7/9/14, 9:11 PM
Alexander said...: Okay guys, seriously we need to stop. I dunno if Crack's told you this, but research, logic, and common sense are white privilege. So stop doing it, racists.; 7/9/14, 9:36 PM
Gahrie said...: You know what says all you need to know about the Tea Party movement?

Check out the aftermath of any Lefty protest. The place is literally trashed, with refuse everywhere.

Then check out the aftermath of a Tea Party protest. The surroundings are usually cleaner than before they showed up.; 7/9/14, 9:47 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: Alexander,

"Okay guys, seriously we need to stop. I dunno if Crack's told you this, but research, logic, and common sense are white privilege. So stop doing it, racists."

Yeah - you stand so far above me intellectually:

Somerset v Stewart (1772) 98 ER 499 (aka Somersett's case, or in State Trials v.XX Sommersett v Steuart) is a famous judgment of the English Court of King's Bench in 1772, which held that chattel slavery was unsupported by the common law in England and Wales, though the position elsewhere in the British Empire was left ambiguous.

I misspoke, but that little advantage's just enough for you mental doorstops to act like you won a major battle - such little men. No one able to do a little historical research? Decide I'm an alright guy who might - might - just know what he's talking about? No, of course not.

Racists,...; 7/9/14, 10:22 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: I know so much more about the history of this country, then you do, I'm surprised any of you consider yourselves patriots,...; 7/9/14, 10:23 PM
jaed said...: The headline - "martyrdom" - is interesting in light of the headline on a Richard Cohen (not that one) column a week or two ago: "The Tea Party Would Rather Burn Than Submit to Washington".

Burning. Now martyrdom. What's being suggested by whoever writes headlines at the Washington Post?; 7/9/14, 10:34 PM
Michael K said...: "the birth certificate silliness"

Are you calling Hillary, whose campaign began the "birth certificate silliness," silly ? Shame !; 7/9/14, 10:35 PM
Michael K said...: "Kind of funny how dozens of racist signs show up at Tea Party rallies all over the country, and the right insists those individuals don't represent the true feelings of the group as a whole."

Inga, is that you again ? The lie about Tea Party racist signs is one more bit of evidence that the Tea Party is over the target where the flak is. There are quite a few examples of fake Tea Party signs held by lefties but not many that are true stories. Like to share a few with us ?; 7/9/14, 10:45 PM
zregime said...: Dana Milbank is off the Rez for Soetero right now. I'd call it funny if it weren't so damned pathetic...

You know when one of your loved ones or parents finally makes that turn around the bend and there's this (hasn't helped a fucking bit) relative going, oh, I just think this is terrible and you could have done more, and you're thinking to yourself WHAT?? I was the one who spent the last ten years of my life and my money and now you come into the scene and say THAT?

Dana is that person.; 7/9/14, 10:51 PM
Clyde said...: That Dana, what a gal! She's so well-informed and helpful.

What? You say Dana is a guy? Apparently I'm as well-informed about her/him as s/he is about the Tea Party. I'm not writing for the WaPo, though.; 7/9/14, 11:20 PM
papertiger said...: Say, didn't Dana Milbank swear off using the imagry of war to describe domestic politics after the Gabby Giffords shooting?; 7/9/14, 11:24 PM
Hyphenated American said...: "I know so much more about the history of this country, then you do, I'm surprised any of you consider yourselves patriots,..."

Crack, weren't you the guy who had no idea of the meaning of the term "peculiar institution"? Weren't you the one who forgot that your parents were enslaved by blacks in Africa, and freed by whites in America?; 7/9/14, 11:31 PM
Hyphenated American said...: Give me liberty, or give me death...

How Imperial Japanese....; 7/9/14, 11:32 PM
Trashhauler said...: "Yeah, they were slave traders, also mad England had outlawed slavery."

While New Englanders benefited from the Triangular Trade system, it was unlikely that those who benefited most - ship owners - participated in the Boston Tea Party. It's also very unlikely that the original Tea Partiers were angry about British actions against slavery, since the tea party was in 1773 and the British outlawed the empire's slave trade in 1807 (and abolished slavery in the empire in 1833). By the way, the United States also made the Atlantic slave trade illegal in 1807, though of course, we needed the Civil War to rid us of slavery within the US.; 7/10/14, 12:05 AM
Brando said...: "Are you calling Hillary, whose campaign began the "birth certificate silliness," silly ? Shame !"

Hillary's far worse than silly--she's a conniving cynical crook like her worthless husband. She absolutely was willing to let her campaign use the "birther" crap to try and gain advantage, but the Right never should have picked up the ball and run with it afterwards.

The problem as I see it is when you throw in a lot of nonsense along with the genuine reasons to oppose what Obama's been doing, everyone's going to focus on the nonsense and then assume everything is also nonsense. It's no different from opposing the Iraq War because you believe it's going to be an unnecessary waste of money and lives, but you have to share space with lunatics who think the whole thing was orchestrated by Halliburton and some Jewish conspiracy.

Had the Tea Party focused on specific objections to Obama proposals and galvanizing majority support for their own reforms, we likely would have had no ACA (or a health reform law very different from ACA), ditto for Dodd Frank, and perhaps some tax reform and entitlement reform that would get us on track for a balanced budget. Likely, the GOP would now at least be going into this year's elections with 48 or 49 Senators with a near-guarantee of taking the Senate with some insurance in case of losses in '16. Considering the ages of not just Ruth Ginsberg but more importantly Scalia and Kennedy, this could have significant long-term impact. (Obama put two very young Justices on the Court. Likely they'll be writing opinions into the 2030s).

The Right can't win until it figures out how to make what it believes in appeal to more people across the spectrum. Otherwise its best hope is playing long-run defense as this country slowly grows the entitlement state, tax burdens, and regulatory morass and make us see over 6% unemployment rates as "good news".; 7/10/14, 6:10 AM
Kirk Parker said...: PatHMV,

No, it's a sign that American Civil War II is right around the corner.; 7/10/14, 6:55 AM
Moneyrunner said...: The reaction to Crack’s racist rants at Althouse are revealing. It shows us a lot about Althouse. She allows it because she is a Liberal at heart and in her world, people with high melanin content are pretty much allowed to say anything when it comes to race. It shows a lot about others who comment here. The other commenters are defensive about Crack’s over-the-top racism. It’s the reason why people like Sharpton (and Jackson in his prime) got rich and famous. When you yell at people they have a tendency to back off. The more aggressive person in a fight usually wins; logic has nothing to do with it. And race-baiting isn’t about logic, it’s totally about emotion. Slavery ended in the US 150 years ago, but people who get rich on the issue never let it end. Jim Crow is like slavery? No it isn’t. Segregation is like slavery? No it isn’t. Racial thoughts are like slavery? No they are not. Crack takes it a step further: being a white conservative is like being a slavemaster. Right!!!! I hear Crack’s making good money. White Americans are scared to death of being attacked by loudmouths who yell loudest. The Wall Street Journal assigned their black editorial page columnist to tell the truth about the murderous violence in Chicago. He’s “allowed” although I fully expect him to be denounced as an Uncle Tom. It is, by the way, why Obama is President. He doesn’t yell so he allows white Liberals the opportunity to feel good about themselves without feeling defensive.; 7/10/14, 7:26 AM
Alexander said...: Crack, you didn't "misspeak". Nor was the case 'ambiguous' in any meaningful sense - The East Indian Company openly kept and traded slaves until the 40s.

To borrow a phrase that you and yours love to throw at me and mine, you're just ignorant.; 7/10/14, 7:29 AM
UrbanBard said...: Liberals are fanatics. They have no morals. Nor any shame. They will lie right to your face.

And caring about their feelings helps us how?; 7/10/14, 9:41 AM
Guildofcannonballs said...: "It shows us a lot about Althouse. She allows it..."

The host believes in free expression but not psychopathic stalkers posting numerous times every minute.

Compare Cedarford to Crack.

I've said lots of stupid bigoted shit and I am not censured.; 7/10/14, 10:26 AM
Drago said...: The Crack Emcee: "I know so much more about the history of this country, then you do..."

LOL

Thanks crack.

That's another good one!; 7/10/14, 10:36 AM
The Crack Emcee said...: Somerset was in 1772.

Do I really have to spell this out for you?; 7/10/14, 1:58 PM