"Last December, as you may know, I suddenly said — also out loud — 'Why aren't the Democratic candidates better? I'm just going to be for Amy Klobuchar.' But I've been worried about Amy.... 'Mr. Hickenlooper, 67, a socially progressive, pro-business Democrat who has called himself an
extreme moderate.' Extreme moderate — I like!... I'm for the radical moderate who wants to bring people together and to get things done. There needs to be someone for those of us who loathe 'the most passionate party activists.'... What other Democratic Party candidate has any wide-ranging business experience and has worked at multiple levels of the
executive side of government? Hickenlooper was mayor of the 19th biggest city (Denver) and governor of the 21st biggest state. That's a lot of executive experience, and he seems to have handled it well. He's worked as an employee in a scientific field, and he's been a successful entrepreneur making the beloved American product, beer."
I wrote on March 4, 2019.
This morning, the news is:
"John Hickenlooper ends 2020 presidential campaign, nods at potential Senate bid" (CNN).
Hickenlooper framed his candidacy around stemming the leftward lurch of the Democratic Party. The two-term Colorado governor was a moderate voice in the primary, making his opposition to democratic socialism-- including Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders' political philosophy -- central to his campaign. But that strategy failed to gain traction...
The process hates us moderates.
Posts
119 comments:
I hear ya, though I don't think it's the process. People really are that crazy.
Chicken Man, all pooped out.
Insert your own expression of sorrow here.
...and stupid.
You're not a moderate, Althouse.
You're a Marxist feminist. You're obsessed with feminist porn of all varieties.
If you were a moderate, you'd be a vocal supporter of Prez Trump.
This is what W. and Obama and Trump have done. No one cares about governors anymore. They are overrated and boring
The "process" has produced many moderates. It's the New Democrats that hate moderates
And Jews, Christian's, working class, whites, men . . .
To paraphrase Godfather, "Come on! Pop had Genco and look what I got! If I had a wartime consiglieri I wouldn't be in this mess!"
Hickenlooper isn't a 'wartime' president. Not in a time when we've got a 'cold-civil war' going on politically and culturally in the nation.
It isn't the process. It's the times. Half the country hates the other half. Get used to it.
Althouse,
You are a moderate Democrat which is not the same as a moderate.
I do not think you are a Marxist. That is Shouting Thomas' obsession.
I'm for the radical moderate who wants to bring people together and to get things done.
The problem with a radical moderate, is that the Authorities would do ANYTHING they could to destroy him. Even If, you found a popular television realtor, that was famous for Miss Universe Pageants; the Authorities would paint him as WORSE THAN HILTER
They would So skew people's minds, that even referring to this radical moderate as one would get people to say; "Him? he's not trying to bring people together and get things done! All HE wants is for people to help him stop illegal immigration!
I do not think you are a Marxist. That is Shouting Thomas' obsession.
All feminism is Marxism.
Grouping women as a class with a grievance against men is Marxism.
Althouse is an openly declared Marxist feminist. She can't stop propagandizing for the New Woman and the New Man.
In general, I really enjoy Althouse's work. Her self-pitying Marxism and daily consumption of drama queen feminist porn is an exception.
We all have our kinks. Most of us have the sense to keep our kinks to ourselves.
In some states Governors don't have much power so don't really run anything. They're more like constitutional monarchs...
If you were a moderate, you'd be a vocal supporter of Prez Trump.
I agree with Francisco. You are trying to find a moderate in the Democrat clown car that you can vote for.
This is not your year. I think it is 1972 again.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;.....
His approach was all wrong. Here's what seems to work:
1 lie about murder
2 falsely claim to be a racial minority
3 propose unconstitutional taxes
4 attack specific private citizens
The idea that Althouse is moderate tells us a lot about the distribution of people in Madison, Wisconsin.
I would not have voted for him in the general, but I thought Hickenlooper was connected to reality. The fact that he cannot get traction (and why he cannot get traction) is a warning to everyone that wants to pay attention about how out of touch the Democrat party has become.
Why aren't the Democratic candidates better?
Back when Ann wrote this I wondered what a better Democratic candidate would look like today. JFK? Adlai Stevenson? Scott Walker perhaps? All are literally Hitler now...
George Wallace and Scoop Jackson ran in ‘72.
And don’t forget Ed Muskie and the Canuck letter.
I *hope* it is 1972 all over again.
The democrats need to be beaten so badly they learn that they need to reconnect with the majority of the American electorate.
And for that matter the whig wing of the Republican party also needs to learn some real lessons as well.
Very little of the President's work has to do with feminist matters. I am on the left about social issues, but I hate the pandering about these issues in presidential politics. We should care about national security and the economy and screen out the static. On national security and the economy — topics I blog about only a little and with almost no opinion — I'm pragmatic, moderate, and hoping for competent experts.
Moderate candidates tend to appeal to people who are not actively involved in the real world.
Ann you are a Republican so accept and enjoy.
The Democrats can’t nominate a moderate (no, Slow — “they’ll put you all in chains” — Joe isn’t a moderate, and won’t be nominated). So if you want to vote for a moderate in 2020, it’ll have to be Trump.
Mood of Dems is not be moderate at moment but in the future it will interesting to see how radical moderate Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona does, if she decides to run for President.
Althouse said...
I'm for the radical moderate who wants to bring people together and to get things done. There needs to be someone for those of us who loathe 'the most passionate party activists.
The Democrat strategy right now is to convince people that what speaks within them as their own common sense is racist and hateful, both to control and quiet them.
Hickenlooper just Wiped Out on the tasty wave of anger and hate the Democrats are riding.
The process hates us moderates.
No the Democratic Party hates moderates right now. They were assured it Democrats only for the foreseeable future, then Doom happened in November 2016.
Don't worry they'll come back around. Probably in 2024.
"The process hates us moderates." Nice trolling job. The sign of a true propagandist. In the 60s she was all for radical change , free love , down with the Bible , whoredom and homosexuality , welfare , anti institutions etc. Today having carved out a nice living ( having been very ambitious) and a great pension she is a moderate. As i said, nice trolling job.
On national security and the economy — topics I blog about only a little and with almost no opinion — I'm pragmatic, moderate, and hoping for competent experts.
Trump is a competent expert. His performance on the job proves it.
"In the 60s she was ... down with the Bible ..."
Yes, I was down with the Bible. I read it every day, especially the Sermon on the Mount. I took it very seriously, and I didn't think anyone else did. I didn't think there were any Christians left, not the Christians that Jesus was talking about. I memorized the Sermon on the Mount, and I didn't look for ways to get around the difficult parts.
Don't count the dark horse moderate Amy out just yet.
The democrats need to be beaten so badly they learn that they need to reconnect with the majority of the American electorate.
1972 didn't teach them because they were able to overthrow Nixon. Nixon was a life long politician and craved acceptance and affection. He was hated by Democrats as much as Trump is hated. He was hated for exposing Hiss and for beating Helen Gahagan Douglas, "The Pink Lady." Eisenhower was contemptuous. He made Nixon sing for his supper with the "Checkers speech."
Trump would never have accepted defeat by cheating the way Nixon did in 1960. Watergate gave the Democrats revenge and they proceeded to destroy the economy in 1974 to 1980. Remember "Stagflation?" Probably a lot of you were too young. What taught the Democrats reality was Reagan. They need another lesson.
You were never really a practicing lawyer, Althouse.
Tenure made it possible for you to be so sanctimonious. Your life would have been different if you spent it chasing clients.
What's really curious is that your protected, soft existence has made you all the more bitchy. Maybe that's to be expected.
It's time to start a third party. From a moderate perspective, The Dems are beyond redemption and the GOP is now Trump's party.
A third party shouldn't be the vanity project of a rich billionaire. They best way to start would be to get some dissatisfied moderate Dem and GOP members of Congress to form a new party. It would only take a couple of Senate seats and perhaps a handful of Congressional districts to control the balance of power. They could build from there.
The wise have always said that "social" questions underly everything.
This is true across all cultures, from Confucius to Aquinas.
If your upper class especially is corrupt, decadent, demoralized, and therefore incompetent, you can achieve nothing.
You cannot consider economic policy and foreign policy matters independently of the state of your own society. It is a question of building on defective foundations.
So, who are these experts you want to appeal to, professor?
The carefully segregated leftist academics who've purged the academy of any dissent from your Marxist feminist, Marxist critical studies, etc.?
We've already seen what they're up to. We voted for Trump accordingly.
"...competent experts..."
And that exists? Where? At what time? Can you be more specific?
The smartest guys in the room? Like Enron?
The best and the brightest? Like Robert McNamara?
A call for experts is a call for centralization.
That is not a moderate stance.
Free people.
Free markets.
So what is a moderate? It seems like everyone has their own ideas about what that even is.
If you were to assume that a moderate is someone who lives pretty much in the middle of some bell curve of political opinion, what would those positions be? It's actually a tougher question to answer since a lot of the polls on the various postions are either unintentionally or (more likely) deliberately misleading.
Take abortion for example. Here's a gallup poll that purports to elucidate the public's opinion on this issue. But it offers only 3 choices:
1.) Legal under all circumstances
2.) Legal only under certain circumstances
3.) Illegal under all circumstances
It indicates that a clear majority of people choose option 2. Of course that's absurdly misleading. "Certain circumstances" covers a huge amount of ground.
So what do you believe is the real moderate position on abortion?
Party politics is either irrelevant of merely a reflection of the underlying social situation. You could recruit "moderate" politicians, but what people could they represent?
More important, what interests would they serve? What you have now is the direct result of institutional decadence, the rot is in the roots, not the flowers.
A third party shouldn't be the vanity project of a rich billionaire.
Trump is a third party. He built it inside the decaying husk of the Republican Party. The remnants of that party are best symbolized by Koch republicans who hope to God that Americans won't catch on to their Open Borders collusion with Democrats.
In 1972 Nixon was the Moderate. Today he would be a Right-wing extremist. McGovern was a left-wing extremist in '72 and got 35%. Today, he would be the "Moderate".
The D's have moved so far to the Left, Biden - who's gotten 100 ratings from liberal groups and the ACLU - is now considered the safe "Establishment" candidate because he has doubts about "free everything" and wants to enforce the immigration laws - a little. The American people want secure borders, and the D's response? "To hell with you, we're getting rid of ICE and enforcement."
The idea that Althouse is moderate tells us a lot about the distribution of people in Madison, Wisconsin.
Are you trying to say that she is a Menshevik in a sea of Bolsheviks?
insert your own expression of sorrow here.
No chicken looper for every pot.
:-(
People listened to the Sermon on the Mount and then went home and lived their lives. I don't think Christianity is that hard. People want to make it more complex and harder than it was meant to be. For the first 1200 years almost no could read the bible unless you were a Priest and knew Latin/Greek. Yet, theologians have written 500 page books on a single chapter. I don't think God had that in mind.
as Nonapod wrote, if these are your choices...
1) ALL
2 Some
3) NOTHING
most people will pick 2, and then; the Authorities can say: See? Polls show people Want our program
As in all things, ignore such "activists".
Their real moment comes only in a state of chaos.
Most of them are insincere. They would not go calmly to the lions.
They exist, for the most part, because its a living.
What you should be interested in is the systems in which they make a living, and what interests control those, and what their goals are.
Michael K at 9:18 AM
Trump would never have accepted defeat by cheating the way Nixon did in 1960.
I assume that the "cheating" here is that Nixon lost the 1960 election because the Democrats cheated -- in particular, in Illinois.
If you can get a copy of Nixon's book Six Crises, you should read his chapter about his loss in that election. You will find that Nixon did not think that he lost the election because of cheating. There surely was cheating, but not enough to change the election's result.
Nixon thought he lost because the political pendulum had swung too far away from the Republicans. He points out that the Republicans had lost disastrously in the 1958 mid-term elections. When Nixon decided to run for President, he knew that he had to overcome the political momentum that was moving in the Democrats' favor.
Nixon almost won, but he was not able to win. He tells the story in that chapter of his book.
I like Delaney. He's not only moderate. He's balding. It's chilling that guys like Delaney and Hickenlooper can't even break 2% in the polls. They seem to be liberals with sanity as Koch used to describe himself, but they can't generate interest or enthusiasm among the Democratic base in Hollywood and the newsrooms. I think Delaney should try cross dressing.
Nixon did not think that he lost the election because of cheating.
Read Teddy White's book, "The Making of the President 1960." Willam Rogers was Ike's Attorney General. He told Nixon that he had enough evidence of vote fraud in Chicago and Texas to challenge the election. Nixon declined "for the good of the country." Nixon was rationalizing.
The process doesn't hate moderates. That same process generated Romney and McCain and GWBush, on the republican side.
The democratic party, for quite a few cycles, has hated moderates.
Ann has decided to not vote for Trump, I believe, and it will be fascinating to watch how she rationalizes her final non-Trump decision.
@Althouse, on women’s issues you are an extremist. On economic and foreign policy issues you are a know-nothing, trying to imagine yourself as a moderate.
Here, we have special interest groups that lobby the 2 main parties (or Uniparty if you prefer) for access and action.
In other countries, the special interest groups are the other political parties.
The process hates us [left side] moderates.
It's not the process, there just aren't very many of you. Plus most of the candidates presenting as moderate - like Klobuchar - are not moderate either.
Don't count the dark horse moderate Amy out just yet.
In order to find "moderate" Dem candidates we have to pretend support for ending air travel and providing income to people who don't want to work is "moderate". This is before understanding the architect of the Green New Deal admitted it is a fig leaf justification for restructuring the economy according to far left preferences subordinating business and consumers to the whims of apparatchiks.
Maybe this does count as moderation among Dems but to normals it most certainly is not. Left wingers believe if they claim she's a moderate long enough the facts will be ignored.
Hickenlooper was the only credible moderate (although he supported the Green New Deal before he was against it) and he was so lonely he decided to go back to his brewhouse.
The last moderate Democrat that I saw in a Presidential field was Joe Lieberman, that was 2004. He was savaged by his own party for his pragmatism.
The idea that Hickelooper is a moderate is only possible if you are so far to the left that you consider today's crop of socialist and socialist-leaning non-entities center-left. They aren't. They're pandering to the fringes of the party. The lunatics are running the asylum, the party apparatchiks were able to force their "centrist" choice in Hillary last election with a fair amount of dirty tricks. I don't think that's going to work this time, and we're going to have McGovern, redux. the Democrat party is going to be soul-searching for a long time.
If you can get a copy of Nixon's book Six Crises, you should read his chapter about his loss in that election. You will find that Nixon did not think that he lost the election because of cheating. There surely was cheating, but not enough to change the election's result.
I think Nixon is showing some class. He knew that the election was stolen but there was no way he could prove it. He didn't want to go down in history as a sore loser. He got his revenge in '68 but blew with the silly Watergate shenanigans.
If you have any doubts that the 1960 election was stolen, read Caro's Johnson biography. He detail how Johnson stole Texas for Kennedy in 1960.
In other countries special interests exist, just the same, and they affect all parties. Spanish politics usually turn on corruption scandals, and the same interests buy off politicians of the left and right for the same reasons.
The biggest difference between them and the US is scale. US politics matters enormously more, or rather the US State does. Hence the stakes are enormous. Hence corruption is worse - at the top; the middle-bottom retains discipline as a result of the inertia of that often discounted matter of culture.
Biden got hairplugs because he knows America will never vote another bald guy into the White House. Ike was the last one. Also, no more beards or mustaches.
Michael K at 9:40 AM
Willam Rogers ... told Nixon that he had enough evidence of vote fraud in Chicago and Texas to challenge the election.
Sure, Nixon had enough evidence to challenge the election. However, the main reason he did not do so was that he did not think he lost because of cheating in those two locations.
He addresses that issue in his book, and he is clear about that opinion.
Nixon lost in 1960 because he was an idiot. There was no reason to debate JFK. There was no reason to visit "all 50 states". There was no reason not to use Ike. There was no reason to pick Lodge (who helped him nowhere) as VP.
He should have won in 1960, but he made too many dumb mistakes.
Looking back 60 years the policy differences between Nixon and JFK seem minor. So, its a good thing JFK won, if only for putting to be the lie that "Americans wouldn't make a Catholic President". The was always false, because Al Smith would've won in 1932, if he'd been nominated.
To be elected the Democratic candidate has to hold onto the strong majority of numerous, smaller identity groups. What moderate positions appeal, nay do not incense, all of the following:
Gay
Black
Hispanic
Trans
Working class whites
Teachers unions
Suburban housewives
Muslims
Jews
And on and on.
Nope, you have to throw bones in six or seven directions at once, offer impossibly large Christmas gift lists (so large that groups A says, "I don't care if B gets a bicycle, I GOT A PONY!")and paint the opposition as the Bogyman.
Ann, just another typical Sermon on the Mount atheist.
When was the last time you went to church?
When was the last time you prayed?
Do you believe in the divinity of Christ?
When was the last time you read the Bible outside of the sermon on the mount.
Are you in a Bible study group?
Do you believe in Salvation?
Do you tithe? Forget about tithing, do you give money to a Christian endeavors.
Do you believe you are a sinner?
Did you baptize your sons?
Did you read the complete Bible to your sons
Do you believe that you are to look upward instead of constantly peering into the basement?
Do you believe a women should be a virgin before she gets married?
You see Ann those are the real hard parts of Christianity, not your pick and choose method.
"I am now, because of my age and my steadfast lack of faith, at least a bishop in my own religion".
"No chicken looper for every pot. "
But since he's from CO, there is pot for chicken looper!
"I'm for the radical moderate who wants to bring people together and to get things done."
Radically moderate "things." Nice political philosophy you got there.
Anyway, what would you consider the radically moderate approach to border security, to countering China, to deregulation, to SCOTUS appointments, to spending and debt?
If you want a "moderate" outcome, shouldn't you want a standoff between left and right?
Isn't a "radical moderate" the kind of ideology that would split the baby in two, the kind of person who would bring us peace in our time via a treaty with Hitler, or build the wall, but only 4 feet high?
It's another one of many things in our culture that sounds good, but upon serious reflection, is not designed to solve problems, but rather to avoid hard choices while making us feel good about the proposal and those doing the proposing - you know, us smart, good, and fair people of good will.
rcocean at 9:59 AM
Nixon lost in 1960 because he was an idiot. ... he made too many dumb mistakes.
Nixon points out in his book Six Crises that in the 1958 mid-term elections, the Republicans lost 48 seats in the House and 13 seats in the Senate. The Democrats had a lot of political momentum going for them.
Nevertheless, Nixon almost beat Kennedy.
Largely because of Nixon's efforts, the Republicans won back 20 House seats and one Senate seat in the 1960 elections.
"hoping for competent experts"
Ah, yes, experts. The road to serfdom is paved with expertise.
Of course, the cult of expertise is at the core of progressivism, but since the political question is always about what's to be done, and expertise by itself can never answer that question, it is utterly meaningless as a political position. Of course, the progressives knew what had to be done, so the appeal to expertise was just a means for gaining power.
There was no reason to debate JFK. There was no reason to visit "all 50 states".
Good points but vote fraud still won the election.
The Kennedy team was going to drop Lyndon in 1964 but fate intervened and we are still living with the consequences.
I think by her tone, temperament and healthy value system, Althouse is a political moderate.
But I strongly disagree with ST that her feminist leanings make her a de facto Marxist.
In fact, I go the other way. I say the Althouse commitment to the free exchange of ideas and truth in political advertising pushes her to operate practically as a moderate Republican.
In fact, I would take her over every single #neverTrumper and most other Republicans.
Just by reporting the facts of the bogus leftwing protests against Governor Walker, she (and Meade) helped incrementally turn Wisconsin red.
Moreover, she has thoroughly debunked: (1) Trump's "grab 'em by the pussy" comment and (2)
Trump's "Charlotteville Nazi's are great' comment.
No moderate Dem or moderate GOP or even Conservative GOP has done the 3 above things in the political arena.
In 1972 Nixon was the Moderate. Today he would be a Right-wing extremist.
Nixon was a somewhat liberal Republican who gave us the EPA and enhanced Affirmative Action, among other liberal causes. The main issue the Democrats had with Nixon was his strong anti-Communism. Many leading Dems flirted with the Russian Communists in those days.
Nixon himself was reported as saying (before he ran for Congress) that he was not sure if he was a Democrat or a Republican. Their Communist sympathies turned him into a Republican.
The process hates us moderates.
Moderate Dems are like Charlie Brown trying to kick a football held by The Squad.
The number of times they play before realizing the game is never going their way is totally up to them.
Nixon threw the jabs, and Reagan came in with the big overhand right to destroy the Soviet Union.
Both men are heroes. (Myself, I'm more of a Reagan guy.)
Nixon was NOT a "Somewhat liberal Republican" - however liberal he may have been in some areas, he was nowhere near as Liberal as Rockefeller or Chuck Percy or George Romney. That's why Nixon got nominated twice as POTUS R Candidate. he was conservative enough for the Right wing, not too conservative for the Liberal Rockefeller wing.
Mittens gets his liberal goofiness from his father. Along with the arrogance and dishonesty. Nixon couldn't stand Romney - he made him his HUD Secretary and got tired of Romney's Grandstanding and racial moralism - very fast.
@Bay Area Guy.
Yes, I agree.
Althouse’s uncensored platform produces results that I believe surprise her.
She does very well at the things you’ve mentioned. I’m appreciative of that side of Althouse, too.
I agree with ST@ 11:05.
"I'm for the radical moderate who wants to bring people together and to get things done."
What things exactly? How? Everybody wants to change the world, but as soon as you state your positions on the issues of the day you lose your "moderate" tag. There is no such thing as a moderate anymore. If there ever was. Trump was as close as we could have gotten to that if the left hadn't have kneecapped him.
Kumbaya is not a solution. It is and has always been nothing more than wishful thinking. Hippie thinking.
Womp, womp!
Nixon doesn't get enough credit for his efforts to destabilize the Soviets.
Think back to 1950, when Nixon became Senator from Cali: At that time, Stalin runs the Soviet Union and Mao runs China. That's a lotta Commie terror. If those assholes unite, the West has heap big problems.
The Korean War was their first big united effort -- Truman (last good Democrat prez) and Ike stand tall and we thwart the Norks.
Fast forward 20 years when Nixon is Prez: a big schism has developed between the Soviets and China. Nixon chooses the weaker China, pushes the wedge between them and splits them apart. Opening China caused tectonic shifts in the Soviet empire.
In 1972, China was a backwards hellhole, and the Soviets were on the ascent. Nobody predicted that Nixon's gambit would lead to the break-up of the Soviets 20 years later, and a semi-capitalist (but still flawed), less dangerous China.
Speaking of moderate Democrats what did they do to that Starbucks guy? He loved to run his mouth and yet...nothing...
Hence corruption is worse - at the top; the middle-bottom retains discipline as a result of the inertia of that often discounted matter of culture.
Yes, the level of the FBI where my daughter has been for 25 years is honest. When she told me that she would NOT vote for Hillary in September 2016, I knew the FBI grapevine had the facts on Hillary. My daughter was a natural Hillary voter; left leaning on politics, government employee for 20 plus years and a lawyer. I am convinced that Comey held that infamous July 2016 press conference to head off an agent revolt on Hillary. The rot was at the top, Where it always is.
Nixon doesn't get enough credit for his efforts to destabilize the Soviets.
I agree but the Chinese figured out how to buy politicians like Clinton and the indulgence of China went on until Trump.
Michael K said, "Nixon was rationalizing."
Read Teddy White's book Breach of Faith - The Fall of Richard Nixon. Nixon knew no challenge to the election would deny Kennedy the presidency. He also knew there had been cheating on the Republican side. Nixon was practical.
White was poetic. He believed Nixon's lesson from the 1960 campaign was that votes count. Watergate and the other illicit operations of the Nixon Administration and re-election campaign derived from that lesson -- an effort to harvest, one way or the other, every single vote, including the last unnecessary vote in the 1972 election, the greatest landslide in US history.
"I agree but the Chinese figured out how to buy politicians like Clinton and the indulgence of China went on until Trump."
Yeah, I agree. The Chicoms aren't saints by any stretch. Neither is Putin and the Russians.
But the trend lines from Stalin/Mao have (fortunately) gone in the right direction -- thanks in large part to American Cold Warriors.
"White was poetic. He believed Nixon's lesson from the 1960 campaign was that votes count."
I buy this. But whoever convinced George Wallace to run 3rd Party in 1968 took away a lotta Dem votes that probably woulda gone to Humphrey, thus denying Nixon the win.
This counterfactual is not definitive though.
As I wrote months ago, by the time you reach Iowa, the field will be a lot smaller than it was in March- the Democrats have the debates and the rules for getting into them to winnow the field.
No but i subscribe to pillsburys view, that chinas current policy is to seek vengeance on the west
Watergate probably detracted from the strategy.
Watergate and the other illicit operations of the Nixon Administration and re-election campaign derived from that lesson -
John Dean was probably behind the Watergate breakin. Maureen was the target of Democrats, or so he feared.
If you want to learn the level of corruption in Texas, read Caro's biography of Johnson, "Means of Ascent,." volume.
it was mentioned in 1973, but as an oversight,
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25757-goldwater-cia-lbj-and-hunt-in-the-1964-electiion/
outfits like intertel, headed by fmr puzzle palace?? and kennedy confidante, walter Sheridan, conducted rather systemic surveillance,
Will anybody be writing byekus? I stopped reading Best of the Web at WSJ when James Taranto left.
With a name like Hickenlooper, he had to be good.
He wasn't.
It's time to start a third party. From a moderate perspective, The Dems are beyond redemption and the GOP is now Trump's party.
As I've said before, Trump is simply Ross Perot with a better looking wife.
Just what would a third party do better or differently than Trump right now? Put out nicer tweets?
John Dean was probably behind the Watergate breakin. Maureen was the target of Democrats, or so he feared.
Yes, that's what we learned from Silent Coup.
But, Dean was not the mastermind behind the entire Plumbers' operation, which had 4 or 5 other Breakins and was run by non-Ex CiA Hunt for a much bigger set of patrons than 1 lowly, weasel Dean.
Nixon was NOT a "Somewhat liberal Republican" - however liberal he may have been in some areas, he was nowhere near as Liberal as Rockefeller or Chuck Percy or George Romney.
I agree that he was nowhere near as liberal as Chuck Percy (my former Senator) or Nelson Rockefeller.
That is why I used the modifier somewhat.
I'm for the radical moderate who wants to bring people together and to get things done.
Get what done?
"We need to get things done. Here's a thing. Let's do it."
(You mean, things like Obamacare? People - "moderate" pols of both parties - *came together* and got that done, eh? Good and hard.)
Thanks for the Inquisition, Otto. It was damned Christlike of you.
No one expects the Otto inquisition. Even when its on ottomatic.
"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye;
and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
The bible as killjoy.
Since we're on religion, I loved the Babylon Bee headline:
"Pope Says He Will Address Sex Abuse Scandal Once He's Finished Talking About Climate Change"
One of the more entertaining side-lights of U.S. culture in my lifetime has been watching secular, non-believing types pull the ol' more-Christ-y-than-thou shtick on actual, believing Christians. (In these latter days non-Christians, not just secular types from Christian backgrounds, have been piling in on the game, which enhances the entertainment value.)
For a secular prog to whip out the SotM is sooooo predictable, and therefore funny when it happens. (NTTAWW the SotM.) 50/50 Matthew 7:1/the SotM.
The Hostess posted: "Yes, I was down with the Bible. I read it every day, especially the Sermon on the Mount. I took it very seriously, and I didn't think anyone else did. I didn't think there were any Christians left, not the Christians that Jesus was talking about. I memorized the Sermon on the Mount, and I didn't look for ways to get around the difficult parts."
I am curious, when did you decide, then, to be okay with killing babies in the womb?
Serious question. Sounds like you're a buffet Christian (if you are a Christian in any sense).
I admit I am. I am a sinner. But it seems I am getting better.
THEOLDMAN
"If you want to learn the level of corruption in Texas, read Caro's biography of Johnson, "Means of Ascent,." volume."
I would like to read the biography of Johnson. But, even without reading it, I'm sure at corruption and manipulation Nixon was a wussy wannabe compared to Johnson.
Funny thing is, Johnson and Nixon were, on paper, the most qualified men to be president, probably since Washington. Both served in the House, the Senate, and were vice-presidents. Nixon had served in the Navy. I think Johnson was some sort of Federal bureaucrat. Yet the two them had the most troubled presidencies since the latter part of the 19th century.
well they were in office, at a time of a whole confluence of events, not only Vietnam, but the cultural revolution, that arose out of the challenging of key institutions, the cold civil war that is still being fought today, lbj had been avoiding Vietnam since 1953, but like Banquo's ghost he couldn't shake it, of course he had little knowledge of the motivation of the enemy, and even less interest to find out,
Nixon had a little more understanding, hence he tried to adapt templar's Malayan strategy to Vietnam, but Malayan guerillas didn't have a double sanctuary like Cambodia and laos for instance,
Sorry Ann I am a sinner. And you being the "true" Christian are going to pray for me.
Notice another chapter out of the atheist playbook is the Inquistion. So she went from being a "real" Christian to cleverly associating me and all Christians with the Inquistion ( note her capitalization). Wait till she brings out the other standard Atheist shtick - some Christians were slave owners,therefore all Christians are for slavery.
So 1960s.
The concept of sin is so hard for supposedly smart people to grasp and accept. Arrogance?
"The process hates us moderates."
Only the early process hates moderates. The late process is the "let's try to make it work" phase of the process, where the love of the moderate is rediscovered and cultivated. After the process comes the divorce.
PLEASE READ PLEASE READ
Hi, yes its real just got my blank atm card,from MR GEORGE. he is really good at what he is doing. met some people but they ran away with my money but mr george sent me the card two days ago through courier service in my country. The card programmed for only money withdraws without being noticed and can also be used for free online purchases of any kind. The application process is so simple, i have tried mine with the closest ATM machine close to me, to my greatest surprise It worked like magic. I was able to withdraw up to $3000 daily, i dont have to worry about getting a loan anymore.This ATM has really change my life. If you want to contact them.
Here is the email address georgewilder402@gmail.com
Dean was not the mastermind behind the entire Plumbers' operation,
Another good book to read is Pat Buchanan's "Nixon's White Wars." He says he was asked to take over the plumbers and dodged it.
Pat was far more conservative than Nixon. He loved Agnew and said it broke his heart when he learned Agnew was still taking cash bribes as VP. For what ?
Biden got hairplugs because he knows America will never vote another bald guy into the White House. Ike was the last one.
Point of information: Adlai Stevenson, Ike’s opponent in both elections, was also bald.
moderates have no place in the Democrat Party, the emblem of "crazy people walkin' 'round with blood in their eyes, and all she wants to do is dance..."
Shouting Thomas wrote:
"If you were a moderate, you'd be a vocal supporter of Prez Trump."
Which made me think, "How cool would a Prez Trump Pez dispenser be?"
Does Pez have the balls?
Moderate about what?
The border?
Abortion?
Reparations?
Foreign policy?
Trade?
Unfortunately, politics is about parties making decisions.
You can't opt out from the party part or the decision part. You can only choose to opt out out.
Optics aside, Trump is arguably far more moderate than anyone in the arena.
How cool would a Prez Trump Pez dispenser be?"
They're out there, thought not mass produced. The candies should look like building bricks. Or gold bricks.
Post a Comment