tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post6758550901155181898..comments2024-03-28T19:23:37.979-05:00Comments on Althouse: The GOP debate tonight.Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-3453396184838568272012-02-23T12:43:48.551-06:002012-02-23T12:43:48.551-06:00This election will not turn on NCLB. It will turn ...<i>This election will not turn on NCLB. It will turn on health care. Who is in a better position to make the correct argument?</i><br /><br />Someone explain how you imagine this working. I don't see Romney has hobbled in the least. In fact, I think he comes at Obama from the strongest position, as a governor who shares the concern for the uninsured. <br /><br />If Santorum somehow gets the nomination, Obama can say, "You don't care about the poor and the sick and those who are bankrupted by health care bills." <br /><br />If it's Romney, at least he can say, Mr. President, I care as much as you do, and fought for a plan for my own state. You however have built a national monstrosity... and then go into the stronger arguments against it, arguments that you can't throw at Romneycare. <br /><br />The thing about Romneycare's universal mandate is: The universal mandate is ONLY problematic at a federal level, and not because it is bad policy -- it is not bad policy, which is why Heritage, Gingrich and a lot of other conservatives favored it in the 90s. It is bad CONSTITUTIONAL policy, in other words bad precedent. The fact that Romney's legislation imposed it on the state level is nowhere near as problematic. <br /><br />Yes, it's a nuance, and a fact... not a feeeeeeling. So it won't really fly with today's conservatives, who have "evolved" into today's version of feeling-liberals. But in October, hopefully, you'll all feeeeeel better about it, when you see Romney clean Obama's clock in debates.John Stodderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14185881995621265497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-87943753699822450352012-02-23T11:52:13.026-06:002012-02-23T11:52:13.026-06:00machine said...
right rusty...that's why there...machine said...<br />right rusty...that's why there is talk of a brokered convention...because the President is so easy to beat with this gang...<br /><br /><br />Yes he is. His approval is .01 percentage point from where Carter was at this time in his presidency.Rustyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00938263272237104128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-37332071310086070422012-02-23T10:33:14.312-06:002012-02-23T10:33:14.312-06:00Every time someone says "Willard," I thi...Every time someone says "Willard," I think Bill Clinton.<br /><br />Every time someone says "Romney" ... I think they're about to announce that they got brainwashed.Carol_Hermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16629820011087370488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-42504058252799199812012-02-23T10:27:08.913-06:002012-02-23T10:27:08.913-06:00As to a "brokered convention," that mean...<i>As to a "brokered convention," that means "Jeb Bush."</i><br /><br /><a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/291488/where-world-jeb-bush-long-trip-asia-summer-robert-costa" rel="nofollow">Good luck finding him.</a>John Althouse Cohenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11703450281424023177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-5084015477914129772012-02-23T10:26:58.850-06:002012-02-23T10:26:58.850-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.John Althouse Cohenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11703450281424023177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-39768374185604134712012-02-23T10:17:39.193-06:002012-02-23T10:17:39.193-06:00It is simply historical revisionism by Romney supp...It is simply historical revisionism by Romney supporters who count on peoples' ignorance to try to portray Santorum's support for NCLB as anything other than what it was: Getting passed the single most important domestic legislation that the president had campaigned on prior to being elected. <br /><br />Bush campaigned specifically in 2000 on establishing national educational standards and setting up testing metrics at the Fed level. This was extremely popular at least in theory in 2000 across the political spectrum and it is lunacy to expect from the perspective of a decade later that the majority whip would not have supported his president's signature domestic priority at a time when it was popular to do so. <br /><br />It is to Santorum's immense credit that he recognizes the mistake that law was, in hindsight. Would that Romney could show similar maturity regarding health care, which is a current ans pressing issue that Romney continues to be obstinate about.<br /><br />This election will not turn on NCLB. It will turn on health care. Who is in a better position to make the correct argument?trumpetdaddyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00343762437365291738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-27950624494350007342012-02-23T10:09:21.801-06:002012-02-23T10:09:21.801-06:00I should rephrase. I do not think Obamacare is &q...I should rephrase. I do not think Obamacare is "part of a socialist plan to remove unwanted people from society."<br /><br />I do not believe Obama has any such plan.<br /><br />But I do believe, once Obamacare is in place, it is quite easy for that to happen down the road.<br /><br />Socialism doesn't always end in mass slaughter, but it's happened in enough places for us to know better.Saint Croixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17876368500159112781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-68842647415997604712012-02-23T09:59:33.803-06:002012-02-23T09:59:33.803-06:00that was really long, sorry.that was really long, sorry.Saint Croixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17876368500159112781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-50185252624741824462012-02-23T09:59:01.359-06:002012-02-23T09:59:01.359-06:00By the way, Newt used the "infanticide" ...By the way, Newt used the "infanticide" word last night.<br /><br />To big cheers.<br /><br />All four of our guys are pro-lifers.<br /><br />W tried to nominate a mystery nominee to the Supreme Court.<br /><br />Had to scuttle it.<br /><br />After O'Connor, and Kennedy, and Souter, that's not happening again.<br /><br /><i><b>Roe v. Wade</b></i> is like Obamacare.<br /><br />Part of a socialist plan to remove unwanted people from society.<br /><br />What is so ugly about this ideology is that so-called right-wingers have been utterly complicit.<br /><br />For instance, Justice Scalia in his <b><i>Casey</i></b> dissent writes this:<br /><br /><i>Thus, whatever answer Roe came up with after conducting its "balancing" is bound to be wrong, unless it is correct that the human fetus is in some critical sense merely potentially human. There is of course no way to determine that as a legal matter; it is in fact a value judgment. Some societies have considered newborn children not yet human, or the incompetent elderly no longer so.</i><br /><br />Yes, but we’re talking about our society, which has an equal protection clause, and a due process clause. Is Justice Scalia suggesting that Oregon can murder newborns, or Massachusetts can send the “incompetent elderly” off to the gas chamber? It’s a rather bizarre reading of our equal protection clause, to put it mildly. <br /><br />One would think, after slavery and the Holocaust, that our unelected jurists would concede that any and all human beings are people. Instead the Court seems to assume that nobody is a person until the Court says they are. Thus the Court recognizes Africans are people (the Civil War resolved that) and Jews are people (World War II resolved that). Is that the legal standard, you only achieve personhood after a war resolves the issue? One might ask if that attitude might not lead to war. <br /> <br />Of course, babies will never fight a war. Perhaps that’s why we will never recognize the humanity of babies, because they will always be weak and vulnerable. If we want to kill them, they will die. Is that the legal standard our unelected judges want to impose? What is the standard?<br /><br />Note that when Scalia talks about his classes of people-that-might-not-be-people, he speaks of the weak and helpless, the newborns and the “incompetent elderly.” In other words, he is speaking of the non-viables. Apparently, Justice Scalia has found something useful out of the Court’s abortion jurisprudence--he is only recognizing autonomous people as people. He is accepting Plato’s rule, as it were.<br /><br />I disagree. Babies are people. The incompetent elderly are people. Anybody who is a human being is a person. It is immoral and quite illegal for our unelected branch to start defining some human beings as outside our laws. All people are entitled to the equal protection of the laws. We know this because this is what the Constitution specifically says.<br /><br />A baby is a person. Thus a state must make sure that abortion is not sanctioning a homicide. You might do this by applying the state’s death statutes to the issue. This is a value judgment a state makes in regard to what constitutes a human death. And as such it is a rule that applies to all the people in that state. <br /><br />What a state cannot do is classify a group of people as outside the law and say “our death statutes do not apply to you because we are defining you as a commodity.” Roe v. Wade has caused an uproar precisely because humanity has been denied. <br /><br />What Scalia knows, what we all know, is that words are not defined by the powerful. Words are not defined by nine Supreme Court Justices sitting in a room. The all-powerful Justices do not actually get to decide what words mean. Words are defined by us, by ordinary people, by common usage, by dictionaries. And “person” is an easy word to define. You do not have to be an Ivy League jurist to know what a person is. First graders know what a person is. A person is a live human being.Saint Croixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17876368500159112781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-84604600032551570162012-02-23T09:47:14.370-06:002012-02-23T09:47:14.370-06:00Santorum's support of Arlen Specter came up. ...Santorum's support of Arlen Specter came up. That was my reason for rejecting Santorum as a useless weasel long ago.rhhardinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06901742898653890646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-89780605838732664902012-02-23T09:34:03.549-06:002012-02-23T09:34:03.549-06:00Does Romney really think in this day-and-age that ...<i>Does Romney really think in this day-and-age that people don't understand the legislative process and what being the majority whip for the president's party means when the president's main legislative priority comes to a vote?</i><br /><br />Question – if President Bush had had a change of heart on abortion and wanted Congress to pass a bill expanding access to abortion (e.g. repeal the Hatch Act for example), do you think Rick Santorum as Majority Whip would have worked to make sure that Republicans got in line to vote for that kind of a bill?<br /><br /><br />I don’t want to make this a “social conservative versus fiscal conservative” issue (I think most people who identify themselves as conservatives would consider themselves to be both and I think our strongest candidate is going to be someone who is both) but I think we all know that the excuse “I was the Whip and he was the President” would not be invoked if Santorum were asked to do something that went against his conscience on a social issue like abortion or civil marriage. Santorum would have rightfully stood up to his President on an issue like that and possibly even stepped down as Whip because it would have been a matter of fundamental principle for him. I think that the fact that he chose not to do that when it came to controlling spending and was went along with and supported the spending binge that cost Republicans control of Congress tells us where his heart is and voters are going to consider it.<br /><br /><br />Like it or not, there is no ideal candidate. If we select Romney, he will have to deal with Commonwealth Care. If we select Santorum, he will have to deal with his complicity in the behavior that was so unpopular that it cost Republicans control of Congress. I’m concerned with both repealing Obamacare and reigning in spending but I think that the latter is where Obama is going to be more vulnerable this fall (particularly with signs that we could bow through the debt ceiling before this fall’s election). It’s also easier to tie Washington’s fiscal irresponsibility to the state of the economy in voters’ minds and think we should go with the candidate who is best posed to make that argument and IMO that’s Romney.Thorley Winstonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17262423151559851671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-51355249233490700062012-02-23T09:25:58.847-06:002012-02-23T09:25:58.847-06:00It seems to me this was Santorum's debate to w...It seems to me this was Santorum's debate to win, and since he didn't win, he was the biggest loser.<br /><br />Credit to the others for lowering expectations.MadisonManhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01212179466758420208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-6390554365869659562012-02-23T09:25:05.456-06:002012-02-23T09:25:05.456-06:00Hey Lem, thanks.
Here are some books by Amar. He...Hey Lem, thanks.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Akhil-Reed-Amar/e/B001IYZLQ0/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_1" rel="nofollow">Here</a> are some books by Amar. He's a professor of law at Yale, but he writes so ordinary people can understand what he's saying. He's the Hugo Black of our day.Saint Croixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17876368500159112781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-16546906454499154162012-02-23T08:54:57.874-06:002012-02-23T08:54:57.874-06:00Nothing about last night changed anything about th...Nothing about last night changed anything about the dynamic of the race. It will still be a close-run thing on Tuesday with Romney most likely winning a narrow victory in Michigan after outspending Santorum by a ridiculous margin. <br /><br />This will of course be trumpeted to the heavens by Romney supporters, and everyone else will still not be sold on him because the rest of us know that he won't be able to out-spend Obama at all, let alone by orders of magnitude.<br /><br />Santorum may still win Michigan for a variety of reasons that last night's snoozefest doesn't change. His support hasn't been driven by money or positive traditional media, but rather by the candidate utilizing social networks and hard personal campaign work. Lots of blue-collar Catholics in Michigan.<br /><br />I am constantly amazed by how stupid Romney and Paul both think the average voter is. Although in the Paul case, his voters may be living down to his contemptuous view of their savvy. <br /><br />Does Romney really think in this day-and-age that people don't understand the legislative process and what being the majority whip for the president's party means when the president's main legislative priority comes to a vote? Or how earmarks work after 15 years of publicity about them? Or how state gov'ts, which have to balance their budgets, do it by sucking up Federal dollars to avoid raising state taxes?<br /><br />Does he really think we are so stupid as to fall for jr high-school level bumper-sticker rhetoric about these issues? Yes, he does. Which is among the reasons he is only at 25-30% even after 6 yrs of running for president. <br /><br />And Paul, what a fake, to use his word. Yeah, Mr. Consistent consistently wheels-and-deals to get pork for the home folks stuffed into bills that are going to pass overwhelmingly anyway, so he can get the credit for "opposing big gov't" all while bringing home the bacon to his district. <br /><br />Oh, and the "neo-conservatives" want to send us to war all the time. Why don't you just say "Jews," Ron? We all know what the codewords among the neo-nazi crowd really mean. <br /><br />I'll be curious to see what the TV ratings for the debate were. I can't imagine they were particularly good, even in AZ & MI.trumpetdaddyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00343762437365291738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-34411994337919811172012-02-23T08:43:36.540-06:002012-02-23T08:43:36.540-06:00So The Audience Booed? (I'll Gladly Boo The Au...<a href="http://www.themachoresponse.com/crackMC/wordpress/?p=10886" rel="nofollow">So The Audience Booed? (I'll Gladly Boo The Audience,...)</a>The Crack Emceehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08366101526773588864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-37132930306761260002012-02-23T08:22:54.956-06:002012-02-23T08:22:54.956-06:00right rusty...that's why there is talk of a br...right rusty...that's why there is talk of a brokered convention...because the President is so easy to beat with this gang...machinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15770538128023770615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-33796840678257916872012-02-23T08:13:19.156-06:002012-02-23T08:13:19.156-06:00Of course, Obama/Biden will demolish them. But, th...Of course, Obama/Biden will demolish them. But, that is another story..<br /><br /><br />With what? "I blame Bush" and "I killed BenLaden." aren't going to take them very far.<br /><br />All any one of the GOP slate need to do up until November is not get caught with an underage boy or girl.<br />A crack addled Bangkok prostitute could beat Obama/Biden. Speaking of which you should field Hillary. At least she has half a brain.Rustyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00938263272237104128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-88419041551000152412012-02-23T08:08:44.391-06:002012-02-23T08:08:44.391-06:00What Muns said.What Muns said.Humperdinkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08765464624483404218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-27062203695062355462012-02-23T08:07:37.433-06:002012-02-23T08:07:37.433-06:00I'll repeat -- There is only one long-term sus...I'll repeat -- There is only one long-term sustainable political position in America:<br /><br />a) Solid on defense and security<br /><br />b) Fiscally conservative, moving towards smaller and less-intrusive government<br /><br />c) Socially, more or less libertarian<br /><br />As a bonus, LEGISLATORS, especially Senators, do not generally have the skill set to be effective executives. McCain, Biden, Gore, H Clinton, Dole, etc. etc.<br /><br />Especially when advanced to such positions via affirmative action or white guilt, as the current President makes depressingly clear.Bart Hall (Kansas, USA)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06060627788809034719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-75617153602778378982012-02-23T07:57:52.464-06:002012-02-23T07:57:52.464-06:00...and President Obama wins another debate without......and President Obama wins another debate without having to show up...machinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15770538128023770615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-61763516300812323442012-02-23T07:53:20.531-06:002012-02-23T07:53:20.531-06:00I tend to agree with what Saint Croix said.I tend to agree with what Saint Croix said.Lem the artificially intelligent https://www.blogger.com/profile/03569712564034666751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-15232091092037450362012-02-23T07:47:52.176-06:002012-02-23T07:47:52.176-06:00This place needs to ban drunks.This place needs to ban drunks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-5808552024083744042012-02-23T07:01:20.808-06:002012-02-23T07:01:20.808-06:00Santorum self-destructed, and it was pretty much h...<i>Santorum self-destructed, and it was pretty much his own doing. </i><br /><br />The shifting alliances did Rick in last night. <br /><br />Ron Paul clearly sees Santorum as the anti-libertarian candidate and was helping Romney go after the Senator. Newt came to Rick's defense a few times, but half-heartedly. Unfortunately for Santorum, non-Romney voters have all the loyalty of stray cats. Newt's reversion to above-it-all statesman was jarring but possibly effective.Writ Smallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17956452269460626177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-55844131102080017202012-02-23T06:57:37.705-06:002012-02-23T06:57:37.705-06:00Willard was magnificent, as usual. I particularly ...Willard was magnificent, as usual. I particularly liked his tie. :)I ♥ Willardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16836727315666369088noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-51729290347540952232012-02-23T06:36:33.040-06:002012-02-23T06:36:33.040-06:00Issues are what matter. Nothing else.
Experience,...<i>Issues are what matter. Nothing else.</i><br /><br />Experience, electability and character don’t figure into it?Writ Smallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17956452269460626177noreply@blogger.com