[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDfQO5jdjGc[/youtube]
As the organizers of last Sunday’s “Million” Vet March attempt to distance themselves from the political partisanship, one idiot on the right stands out as the poster child for Tea Party crazy:
Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch, a conservative political advocacy group, said the country is “ruled by a president who bows down to Allah,” and “is not a president of ‘we the people.'”
“I call upon all of you to wage a second American nonviolent revolution, to use civil disobedience, and to demand that this president leave town, to get up, to put the Quran down, to get up off his knees, and to figuratively come up with his hands out,” he said.
Larry Klayman is a birther attorney and an idiot. There are legitimate problems with this president (Who is not running for re-election in 2016); and he trots out the “Obama is a Muslim” canard?! As if there is even anything wrong with that (oops…did I leave myself open? Is there some religious test I am unaware about in regards for running for the highest office in the land?).
Can we put this harmful conspiracy to rest already?! The Birther nonsense (started by Democrat Hillary supporters yet perpetuated on the right) and the Muslim-charge only helps President Obama. It doesn’t hurt him. And it makes conservatives look like a bunch of wingnuts.
Where on his presidential itinerary does he make the time to pray 5 times a day, facing Mecca? Is droning Muslims proof-positive that we have a Muslim in the White House? Isn’t the stupid stereotype that Muslims supposedly hate dogs? Don’t eat pork? Don’t drink? Yet President Obama owns a dog, has been seen eating pork and drinking beer; his wife and daughters wear neither hijab, niqab, nor burqa; and the list of un-Islamic things goes on and on…
Yet some crazies on the right insist on labeling him a closet Muslim with as much fervor as birthers insist he is not American-born; or is not a natural-born citizen; and 9/11 Troothers blather on about Building 7…
Personally, I don’t believe religion plays a vital part of President Obama’s personal life- Christian, Islam, or any other. I think his decision to join Reverend Wright’s church was a political calculation. He might have had a 20 year membership; but I don’t think he sat in the Trinity United Church much more than he attends church today as president. I could be wrong, as it’s just speculation on my part.
But in regards to his religious affiliation? It isn’t Islam.
A former fetus, the “wordsmith from nantucket” was born in Phoenix, Arizona in 1968. Adopted at birth, wordsmith grew up a military brat. He achieved his B.A. in English from the University of California, Los Angeles (graduating in the top 97% of his class), where he also competed rings for the UCLA mens gymnastics team. The events of 9/11 woke him from his political slumber and malaise. Currently a personal trainer and gymnastics coach.
The wordsmith has never been to Nantucket.
@retire05:
Retire,
Dr. J came into this post making an observation about how the right “eats its own”. I take it that the only reason to make mention of it in here is due to the fact that this post- by me- is critical of Klayman, who is squatting on my side of the political aisle.
As RT observed on #41:
Then I challenged the viewpoint that the left never “eats its own”. I made mention of Democrats I personally know who hated the “Bushitler” type of slander as disgusting and embarrassing to them.
So you asked in #57:
So I offered you names of lefties who “were on TV shows, news programs, radio shows with a national audience”. So then what did you do? Moved the goal posts in #74:
So what I’m subsequently pointing out is that if I’m being called out for “eating my own” and then being asked for evidence of where the left ever does this to their own, why should the standard be “the ability to create policy for the United States” for lefty examples, when I myself am not an example of one on the right who has the “ability to create policy for the United States”?
Are we all caught up now and clear as a bell?
Anyone else see the sweet irony in this statement? 😀
That failed to address the question. All you did was list Alinsky rules. Reread the challenge.
Where did I say YOU denied it? 😉
I think I’m beginning to understand why you sometimes have such perplexing responses, retire. You aren’t reading my replies within the context of a response to your earlier comments.
You challenged me on my caring what “mainstream Americans” think. Then brought up low information voters. I am pointing out that anyone who wants to win elections should care about the informed and uninformed voters, because a vote is a vote, regardless of who the voter is and what he actually knows. When I said the low info voter can cancel out you (the informed) voter, it’s not me “putting words in your mouth”- it’s using “you” in the figurative sense. Sheesh! What did you say earlier to me and, I think Tom, about “voices in your head”?
Again, I didn’t claim that you did- I’m pointing out that it should matter what influences these low info voters because a number of them lean left and vote left; but might be swayed if they are in that “squishy” center. As you rightly point out, MSM is generally anywhere from left of center, to outright advocates of liberalism (MSNBC). These low info voters love Jon Stewart and Colbert. We shouldn’t make their work any easier in influencing those in the mainstream (including LIVs) by embracing guys like Klayman; or in not “disowning” his remarks (and please don’t rebutt this by indignantly saying, “I never embraced Klayman! Quit putting words in my mouth!”- I’m talking about the Right, in general).
I know some FA visitors and commenters actually do share the belief that “Obama is a Muslim” and have no issue with Klayman saying it. But I think most sane Americans hear that and have the same reaction to it as hearing about Building 7 from 9/11 Troothers. Of course if you’re a Troother yourself, it doesn’t sound like crazy talk, you know?
I haven’t clicked on it yet, either. I seem to remember a previous Pew study on the same, though.
This isn’t quite it. What I’m debating about is the larger context of what Klayman represents and how that influences potential voters and future elections.
I’m sure you and RT can pick some conservatives (who you want to disown as conservative) who say stuff that you absolutely find disagreeable. In some cases, you may perceive what they say as absolutely harmful to the conservative movement and will alienate potential GOP voters. Think 9/11 Troothers (a number of whom seem to gravitate toward Ron Paul). How would you feel if they became part of the face of conservatism?
There aren’t enough committed liberals to win elections. There aren’t enough committed conservatives to win elections. There is no “silent majority of conservatives” in the U.S. (Yes, I know you never stated there was). Numbers matter in elections (Yes, I know you never said they didn’t). What wins elections are the mainstream Americans who occupy that squishy, moderate center.
Yes. I opened my post with
Because the organizers (see, not just myself) wanted to disassociate themselves from the political nature of some of the speakers who turned up, including Klayman who gave the liberal media some fodder to chew on.
Perhaps. Because- and I’ll say it again- some on the right are becoming unhinged, thinking with their emotions and not their heads. The fringe element on the right who are angry all the time and who threaten to kick all the RINOs out, start a 3rd party, sit out the next election, etc. , for these all-or-nothing party purists, Reagan himself would not be Reagan enough; and they will shrink the base and drive us all over the cliff.
So then, there’s still a chance that Dreadnought’s a “progressive troll”, huh?
In my best retire voice impersonation: “Why are you bringing Obama’s leadership capabilities into this?! I never claimed he doesn’t keep his worker bees in tow! Quit putting words in my mouth!” 🙂
You really have a twisted way of playing “connect the dots”, retire. Are you still trying to demean Dreadnought for expressing an opinion, then providing some personal information as to why he shouldn’t be dismissed as a “progressive troll”?
Or maybe he’s simply civil to those who aren’t unhinged on the right.
OMG! 😀 Proving my point, one comment at a time!
The gift…..
😉
@Redteam:
You’re creating a strawman and circumventing my argument.
Polls are always taken with a grain of salt; but it’s funny how polls are much beloved when they support your agenda and beliefs and much poo-poo’ed when they don’t. [and if you were retire, I’d add the disclaimer: I don’t mean “YOU” personally!” 😉 ]
Wordsmith
yes they constantly conspire to keep their controls over the PEOPLE,
JUST THIS WEEK HE SAID TO NOT LISTEN TO RADIOS, NOT LOOK AT BLOGS AND TV, HE MEANT CONSERVATIVES ORIENTED PUBLICATION, BUT HE DID NOT SAY THIS LAST LINE,
AND WHY WOULD HE NEED SO MANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PAID BY THE PEOPLE,
WHICH SOME ARE PAID THE HIGHEST EARNING LIKE HIS TROUP OF LAWYERS, SO MANY TO TAKE THE HARD EARN MONEY FROM THE PEOPLE, WHY DOES THE COVERNMENT NOW
became bigger than the citizens, WHY THE UNIONS CONTROL THAT GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING THE TOP OF IT, WHY ARE THEIR PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ARE PAID MORE THAN THE SUM OF THE CITIZENS,
WHY ARE THE WELFARE PEOPLE GET MORE THAN THE WORKER,
CONSTANT CONSPIRACY TO KEEP POWER YES,
HOW CAN YOU FIGHT IT, THEY HAVE THE MEDIAS WELL PAID AND INFILTRATED SO THEY CAN CONTROL AND CONSPIRE,
THANK GOD FOR FOX NEWS AND ALL OF THEM WHO EXPOSE THEIR UNLAWFULL ACTIONS
TO EDUCATE THE CITIZENS WITH THE TRUTH THE REAL TRUTH,
@Wordsmith:
I spend a half hour trying to respond to you, only having the page refresh and I lost it all. I will not reproduce my comments except to say this:
you are not a person who seems to have your finger on the pulse of the electorate. You seem to want to hold conservatives to the standards set by the left. Your arguments could be those of my neighbor who is a dedicated progressive union member who believes in using any, and all, tactics to beat the Republicans.
You seem fixated on Klayman, never admitting that most Americans could not tell you who he is. You dismiss the fact that the Alinsky method was used by Obama in every campaign he ran, having had to actually face an opponent for the first time when he ran against Hillary Clinton in the 2008 primaries.
You also seem to not understand the purpose of the Tea Party. It is not to dispute the lies told by the left, or defend those on the far right. There is a line at the end of a Will Smith movie, Enemy of the State, where his wife asks him “Who’s watching the watchers?” That was the purpose of the Tea Party. Conservatives sent Republicans to D.C. to watch the Democrats. The Tea Party watches the Republicans.
To quote Ace from Ace of Spades HQ:
Part of the on-going GOP vs. “Tea Party” civil war is an insistence by the GOP that the tea party needs to focus more on Democrats than conservative “purity tests” (one example).
“This illustrates one of the big problems in the current battle, Republicans still don’t get the nature of the insurgency movement. The “tea party” isn’t about going after Democrats, that’s the job of the GOP, conservatives are increasingly focused on policing the GOP.
For too long the GOP has wooed conservatives by talking tough but acting very moderate when elected. I think you can trace it back to George H.W. Bush breaking his “no new taxes” pledge. Conservatives rallied around the elder Bush and put aside their distrust and dislike of him mostly out of respect for Ronald Reagan only to find out Bush the Elder was exactly who conservatives thought he was all along…an old school country club Republican.”
But you seem to want to run around waving your hands demanding that conservatives apologize for the whack jobs in our midst. That is precisely what the left wants you to do. Lesson #1: how to get conservatives on the defensive; make them apologize for things they are not responsible for.
Instead of spending so much time worrying about what Klayman [who?] said, you should worry about what John McCain/Pete King are saying. Can it be any clearer those two have little concern for the “common man” and only care about their own power? Are there those who talk about a 3rd party? You betcha. And why do you find a problem with that? Are you part of the Ann Coulter/Karl Rove faction? Or do you not realize that the GOP, itself, started as a 3rd party and soon displaced the Whigs?
Look, it is pretty simple: being a contributor on a conservative website does not a conservative make. Hence, the example of Rick Moran. And obviously, Dreadnought was not a solid conservative or he would not have left the Tea Party when the “moderates” left. He obviously left with those he had more in common with; moderates, what every that means to him. He claims leadership in the beginning. but if he left because he could not direct those who were involved with him, that is not leadership. Participation perhaps, but not leadership.
Obama was elected not for ONE reason, but for many. His skin tone, his socialist view points, his lack of any actual history, his ability to destroy his opponents using Saul Alinsky methods, his promise to punish the “rich” and redistribute their wealth to the slackers, and the fact that the GOP offered up pathetic candidates, one a Republican in name only and the other a North Eastern squish who ran from his own liberal record as governor when he was no longer holding office and had to prove his conservative bona fides. In both elections, conservatives were offered a liberal and a liberal lite. So they stayed home.
@Tom: Why are you trying so hard to prove that you are an idiot?
@Wordsmith: @Wordsmith: I said:
and you said:
Word, I believe it was you that suggested that we should form our opinions and act upon the opinions of those expressed in Pew (and others) polls. So it wasn’t me that was creating a strawman. I think persons should think and act according to their own, thoughts, beliefs, and convictions, and not based upon what someone with their biased polls tell them that is ‘the right thing to do’. A very simple, clear example. I don’t believe it is right to do a ‘late term abortion’,, ie, suck the brains out of a baby after it’s head is already outside the mother, but if you polled enough people with the beliefs such as we all know Obama has, then, supporting it would be perfectly ok. Well, no matter how many polls I see saying it is ok, it’s not. Strawman or not.
@retire05:
Royal bummer when that happens! 🙁
Sometimes I do remember to draft my reply elsewhere, in the event that happens and when doing a long response.
Maybe.
Or maybe I expect conservatives to hold themselves to a higher standard, regardless of the left.
Lies, deceit, vitriolic hate-spew, distortions, demonization…what kind of values and standards should we set for ourselves? Since when is simple civility passé?
What do you mean by “fixated”?! This is the only post I’ve ever made on him; and how can I stop talking about him when replying to comments about him? 😉
Klayman’s not the only one whose opinions I’ve “disowned” as echoing my conservative voice. I’ve also criticized Pam Geller.
Most high information voting Americans have heard of him. Remember Judicial Watch? Hear of Freedom Watch? “Lawsuit Larry” filed 18 civil lawsuits against the Clinton Administration. Has a regular column for World Nut Daily. Oops! Sorry for the typo. I meant “net”. 😉 I think he might have filed a birther lawsuit. He’s hardly an “unknown” political entity.
Ok, after Googling to learn more myself, I’m surprised you and RT haven’t heard of him; because he sounds like “your kind of conservative”:
In my best retire voice impersonation, “Don’t put words in my mouth!” 😀
I haven’t “dismissed” that possibility. I am asking for specific examples of where it’s been applied and evidence that tactics were done consciously with Alinsky in mind. After all, the rules that Alinsky lists are not unique to just Alinsky. Ridicule, for instance, is part of human nature. And a politician might ridicule someone else for the simple fact that he might be an A-hole. Not because he ever studied Alinsky and is consciously applying the Rules.
Where have I expressed an opinion or a perception of “the” Tea Party?
You might be confusing me with statements made by Dreadnought. Not I.
Or simply listening to voices in your head putting words in my mouth. 😉
Because I’ve never said or implied that the purpose of the Tea Party is to:
😉
That might be part of its current purpose (there are several Tea Party groups/organizations, not all aligned with one another); but what was its original inception? I believe Dreadnought’s recounting to be more precise. Here’s another one:
Wasn’t this because Bush had a Democratically-controlled House and Senate? Had to compromise or not? I believe his mistake was making such a pledge in the first place- don’t make promises you can’t keep.
Did Reagan ever compromise or “act” “moderate”?
If you were at a rally, is there any group that votes as you do (votes right) that you would distance yourself from? What if you had a group of skinheads show up at a conservative rally you were attending and they held up anti-Obama signs that were racist; spoke words that were racist. Would you merely shrug your shoulders and turn a blind eye? Then wonder why anyone should mistakenly lump you in with their opinions expressed at the rally you attended? Since you’re both anti-Obama, do you simply think, “I refuse to ‘eat my own'”?
“So much time”?! 🙂 It was one quick post. My subsequent replies are to do you and others the courtesy of a response. This isn’t something I’m losing sleep over. 🙂
They may be a thorn in the side of conservatives; but I can’t say they “only care about their own power” any more than other politicians. Are Ted Cruz’ motives pure and altruistic? Sacrificial? Or did he make a judgment call to position himself favorably amongst movement activists, with 2016 in mind, caring about increasing “his own power”?
I do have a problem with 3rd parties because it’s a road map to losing future elections. When you talk about “pie in the sky”, this is it for conservative party purists who always threaten to take their ball and go home and sit out elections because they never get their dream candidate nominated. The better strategy is to change the Party from within over the difficulties of building a new party from the ground up.
And that’s why Tea Party candidates have had some success in getting elected to office.
The GOP was never a third party. By the time the Republican Party came to power, they were the opposition party because the Whigs had all but vanished; and I don’t think the Whigs were even on the 1856 presidential ballot:
You wrote:
I find it chutzpah that you can claim Dreadnought not to be a “solid conservative” based upon how you choose to interpret his reasons for “leaving” the Tea Party movement. But this is the typical Inquisition-style mentality of today’s supposed “true” conservatives on a witch-hunt to root out anyone who doesn’t agree with them.
So would the GOP have won in ’08 and ’12 if only we had a “true” conservative on the ballot?
Did more conservatives stay home in ’08 than in ’04? Did more conservatives stay home in ’12 than in ’08?
@Redteam:
I don’t believe I did. 🙂 You’re reading into things.
There are good polls and bad polls; and all should be taken with a grain of salt. But it’s unwise just to outright dismiss them. They can be useful. Which is why both the left and the right like to cite them when they support an agenda they advocate; and are dismissive when they don’t like the flavor of the results.
This is like dismissing any op-ed, any book, any news article, any bit of information that might influence your thought process because you think people “should think and act according to their own, thoughts, beliefs, and convictions, “.
The Pew poll, which I still have not found the time to examine, isn’t something telling you “the right thing to do”; it’s not advocating whether it’s good thing or a bad thing that a certain segment of the population believes Obama is Muslim.
All it is, is data collected that may or may not be an accurate reflection. And using it for information and influence is no different than you reading the pages of a blog, article, newspaper, or book.
And that’s a sort of strawman since you’re injecting a position on this that sort of implies that I am of the belief that because polling data shows a majority of people think one way, I should do the same. That’s not even in the right ballpark to anything I’ve said regarding Tom’s linking to the Pew study.
@Wordsmith:You said:
You completely misunderstood that. I clearly said you should NOT form your belief because of some poll.
And you also said:
Is that your Alinsky tactic rule use of the day? To say Klayman is a nut and because I said I don’t know anything about him, but that he was entitled to freedom of speech. The content of his speech might bear no resemblance to any belief I might have, but then to state: “sounds like your kind of conservative” is clearly an Alinsky tactic to imply that I’m a nut because Klayman is a nut.
Try a different Rule next time.
@Redteam:
Which is a kind of strawman because it draws an assumption that I might be forming opinions based upon polling data, simply because I have the curiosity and interest in researching Tom’s link further. So you’re in a sense attributing to me a belief I never expressed; then knocking it down.
Relax and chill!
His freedom of speech wasn’t the issue; so another pointless strawman to blow down.
I figured since he did something you might find agreement with (his support of family members of the SEAL team members that were killed on the Chinook two years ago, by representing them).
My apologies for offending.
Not everyone is a complete nut on every issue. Even RINOs can sometimes be broken down clocks who are right, maybe twice a day. 😉
So where he may be a nutter on the Obama is a Muslim and not a natural-born citizen case, he might have his head screwed on straight elsewhere.
Of course, some on the right (and I apologize if I pegged you wrong) believe Obama and his WH should be held accountable for the deaths of those Navy SEALs and others. So they’d applaud his representing the family members in this.
@Wordsmith:
As a whole, conservatives DO hold themselves to a higher standard. I don’t see/hear Republicans calling anyone on the left “anarchists, wife beaters, the Taliban, traitors, etc.” yet that seems to come from the left with great frequency. The vitriol coming from the left is over the top and way out of line, yet conservatives do not retaliate. But we do need to start fighting fire with fire, and not just stand there and take it and say “Well, at least we are taking the high ground.” Taking the high ground does no good if you throw away your weapons and ammunition and refuse to fight back.
In 2012, Harry Reid, acting as a mouth piece for the Obama campaign, accused Mitt Romney, without proof, of not having paid his tax liabilities. That, Word, is pure Alinsky. Lobbing an accusation, but not proving the accusation, and then ignoring any questions demanding proof, is Rule #12 in its purest form. Going back to ’08, the Obama campaign, via a reporter, “leaked” that John McCain had had an extra-marital affair, cheating on his wife, Cindy. It was not true, and McCain had to take to the cameras to deny it, but it came from the Obama campaign just as the Obama tried to smear Hillary when Bill Clinton said off camera “They tried to pull the race card on me.” Pure Alinsky on the part of David Axelrod and Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.
Medved is wrong. While weakened, and crippled, the Whigs continued to exist as a national party until it disbanded in 1860. Here is the tip off: ” joined by a few anti-slavery Democrats and former Free Soilers, they launched their new national organization.” Key words being “new national party.”
Just because the Whigs were weakened doesn’t mean that they did not still exist. Some of them even migrated to the “new” American Party who ran Millard Fillmore in the 1856 election.
Why? If a third party can pull candidates that can win, starting with state elections, it could become just as viable as the Republicans did in 1860, years after it was organized. If the majority of Americas become so disillusioned with the current parties that they can no longer hold their noses and vote for the offerings, a 3rd party could become a serious player. Most elections take only a simple majority. In a three-way split, that would be 34%.
And what did Dreadnought do? When the Tea Party (according to him) took up social issues that did not agree with his “moderate” and “socially liberal” viewpoints, he bailed on them. Ironic that you profess your belief in conservatives holding themselves to a higher standard, then accuse me of “Inquisition-style” mentality. That makes you a bit of a hypocrite.
,
Perhaps. In spite of the 8 million increase in eligible voters, both parties saw a decrease in voter participation in 2012 compared to 2008. Democrats lost 4.2% while the Republicans lost 1.2%, percentage points that Republicans could ill afford to lose. As to the comparison between ’04 and ’08: Obama rallied the youth (18-30) vote like no one ever has since JFK and the black vote was a record.
Obama won because he was able to motivate his troops. McCain is hated by most core conservatives (especially after the McCain/Kennedy Shamnesty Bill) and Romney held all the appeal of a day old dead fish.
TED CRUZ did a good job, he reminded THE DEMOCRATS, and the REPUBLICAN THE NUMBER ONE RULE,
THAT IS THE PEOPLE WHO PAY THEIR SALARY, that is the people see their wastefull actions,
that the people are suffering with half jobs because of the DEMOCRATS ENTITELMENTS AND LAWS AFTER LAW SO TO KEEP THEM DEPENDANT ON WELFARE,
TED CRUZ REMINDED THEM THAT THE PEOPLE ARE CHOKING WITH ALL THAT AND CAN ENVISAGE THE ONLY WAY TO TAKE AWAY THE WRONG IMPOSE ON THEM,
TED CRUZ TALK FOR THE PEOPLE, HE KNOWS ALL THAT BECAUSE HE NEVER SURRENDER HIS LOVE FOR AMERICA WHEN HE WAS ELECTED, HE NOW KNOW WHAT ABUSE THE GOVERNMENT HAS DONE,
THEY FALSELY SAY FOR THE GOOD OF THE PEOPLE ON OBAMACARE ,
TED CRUZ TALK TO THE PEOPLE TO KNOW THE PULSE OF THEIR MIND,
AS OPPOSE TO THE PEOPLE MUST CALL THEIR GOVERNMENT REPRESENTANT TO TELL THEIR ANGER ABOUT ANYTHING WRONG,
THAT IS THE OPPOSIT AND THAT IS THE WAY TO BE A GOOD INVOLVE GOVERNMENT ELECTED PERSON, WHO NEVER FORGET THAT HE IS NOTHING WITHOUT THE PEOPLE,
THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT A STATE, BUT A HOUSE FOR THOSE TO SERVE THE PEOPLE,
AND CHERISH AND PROTECT THEIR FREEDOM LIKE PREVIOUSLY RAND PAUL, MIKE LEE, MARCO RUBIO,AND
TED CRUZ SAID BRILLIANTLY,
@retire05:
Name-calling is simply childish and only reflects badly upon the name-caller. I don’t believe Democrats calling Republicans “arsonists” and comparing them to jihadists is what sways voter support from those who are in the middle.
Excellent examples! But it’s still assumption (and not at all without logic) that the Alinsky playbook is consciously being used in all cases.
But they existed as THE third party by the time Republicans rose to power. The Republican Party was the major opposition party to the Democratic Party. They were never “the third party” but the opposition party to the left/right dynamics of American politics- essentially a two party system.
Which was the third party alternative, as irrelevant as the third parties that run today: The Green Party, the Constitution Party, the Libertarian Party…
The majority of former Whigs were now the Republican Party. The Whigs had collapsed and there never was a Republican-Democrat-Whigs 3-way.
Medved again has some of the best arguments as to why third parties don’t work in American politics:
From the earlier Medved link:
The Gormogons:
I think the larger point he was making was that the original Tea Party formation was comprised of people from both the left and the right who did not bring their social issues differences into it; but united on the common ground of runaway spending and taxes; responsible, limited government. Where did Dreadnought express his position on social issues as to be deemed “moderate” and “socially liberal” or otherwise?
I think otherwise.
There is no “silent majority” of conservatives, sitting on their hands. Elections are won and lost by influencing those in the mushy middle.
It was so much more than that.
1-The excitement of seeing the glass ceiling shattered
2-Timing of the financial crisis
3- 8 yrs of Bush-fatigue
True. Yet many of those conservatives still came out for Palin. And held their nose and voted if not for Romney, then against Obama.
It’s not so much the “youth” vote as it is the minority vote:
GOP support among 18-29 year old voters actually went up sharply from 2008—from 32% to 37%:
In exit polls, 34% of voters identified themselves as “conservative” in both ’04 and ’08. Just as many conservatives voted for McCain as did for Bush. Actually, if going by percentage, then more who identified themselves as conservative came out to vote in ’08 (44,627,000) than in ’04 (41,571,000). Not less.
In 2012, 35% identified themselves as conservative.
Where McCain lost traction that Bush had won, is in winning over moderates (down from 45% to 39% support). Romney also lost the support of moderates to Obama.
It’s a right-wing fantasy to believe that we’d win the general election if only we ran a more conservative candidate. Yet how is it that the more conservative candidate fails to win even in his own primary?
Elections are won and lost not by which candidate can steer hard to the right or hard to the left. Elections are won by winning the support of moderates (of which 44% of the electorate identify themselves).
@Wordsmith:
Members of Seal Team Six, same as all military accept risk with their job. Just because a military operation doesn’t go as planned doesn’t reflect directly on the CinC unless he personally made some order that caused the operation to not succeed. I have no knowledge of Klayman’s opinion on that or on any other issue and don’t have a clue as to whether we might agree on any issues. I’m not a fan of his.
We’ve talked past each other about the Pew Poll. I respect no polls. All I’m familiar with have an agenda. Now if it agrees with my agenda, I would likely ‘like’ the poll results more, and vice versa. But that wouldn’t make the poll correct, just because I liked it. Even the polls(voting) that are conducted on election days are not accurate. Too many crooks in the world.
I have a simple test. For those that wonder about Obama’s faith.
1. List all quotes by Obama that refer to the Holy Bible.
2. List all quotes by Obama that refer to the Holy Quran.
The answers to the above questions should resolve the issue.
REDTEAM
HIS MUSLIM GOLD RING WITH THE KORAN WORDS ON IT,
DOES GIVE THE ANSWER,
@ilovebeeswarzone:The “Koran words on it” may indeed be Arabic. But the language is that of Mordor which I will not utter here. In the common tongue it says, “One ring to rule them all. One ring to find them. One ring to bring them all and in the darkness, bind them.”
@Wordsmith:
Bwahahahahaha 🙂
Wordsmith
IT’S scaryer than i expected, WHEN THE DARKNESS IS INCRUSTED ON A GOLD RING,
WHO IS MORDOR ?
@ilovebeeswarzone: Sorry bees. It’s a bad hobbit of mine to joke on such serious matters as the mystery of Obama’s gold ring and his recitation of biblical vs. Quranic text.
I dare not say more because the Eye of the NSA is everywhere!
Stay calm and carry on, though….
Wordsmith
google gave me a few of a witchcraft dark lord ruler of mordor,
the witch king send his army to take minas and tirist during the war of the ring
SAURON DARK LORD OF THE BLACK LAND AND DEFACTO
MORDOR BROUGHT EVIL AND PAIN, HE INSTALLED HIS OWN CONSTITUTION OF THE SECOND DAWN,
THE RING IS OF GOLD 9 RING , HE WAS A BLACK BELCHING INFERNO OF CONFLICT AND PAIN,
DID YOU KNOW THAT OBAMA WAS BROUGHT BY HIS GRANDMOTHER INTO BLACK MAGIC SESSION
IN AFRICA, SHE WAS AN ADEPT OF BLACK MAGIC, IN THERE
SO I WAS NOT SURPRISE TO READ A WItCHCRAFT STORY
MAYBE ORIGINATED FROM AFRICA
@Redteam:
I’ll simplify it more, there are no quotes by Obama referring to the Holy Bible, there are plenty of the other. But, then I’m sure that’s the norm. I’m sure most religious quotes by Christians are from the Quran.
@ilovebeeswarzone: *Palmtofaceslap*
@Redteam: As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I don’t believe religion figures significantly in President Obama’s personal life. He identifies as Christian, but might be fair-weathered and not a regular, devout, church-goer. If he were a devout Muslim, why would he hide that?
Are you serious about your religious test?! It baffles the mind that you’d use his public statements as a politician, where he’s spoken on the topic of Islam in a similar vein to how George W. Bush has had to speak on it.
Where is the evidence that President Obama faces Mecca on a prayer rug 5 times a day? You can’t argue down a good conspiracy theory though, I suppose, no matter how much evidence points to the contrary (or lack of evidence and logic to his being Muslim).
Unless of course, you mean to imply that President Obama is Muslim in the “metaphoric” sense. *Snicker*
@Wordsmith:
I said he faces Mecca 5 times a day? really? Nope, I just said that he, as all Christians, does his religious quotes from the Quran. I’ve been a Christian forever, and I don’t think I could make a single quote from the Quran, and don’t want to be able to. While I realize it’s apparently the ‘in thing’, I think I will stay with the Holy Bible for my quote material. But, then, I’m not a Muslim. Not that I’m implying that anyone else is, just seems a mite curious. ….. right?
@Redteam:
Did I say you did? Really? 😉
Glad I didn’t elaborate on that with more questions on his “Muslimness” (or lack thereof….)
You and I both know quite a number of non-Muslims on this very blog who can quote their favorite passages from the Quran.
We can dig up a number of quotes from Bush regarding Islam and the Quran that is made in a similar spirit and context to when Obama mentions Islam and Muslims…and the Quran.
Redteam
A SOME YEARS AGO HE RECIEVE A TOP GUY FROM THE MUSLIM COUNTRIES,
AND HE TOLD HIM : I AM MUSLIM ALSO,
IT WAS REPEATED BY A CLOSE PERSON WHO HEARD IT TOO,
HE DID TRY TO MUZLE CHRISTIANITY, ON DIFFERENT CIRCONSTANCES, EVEN IN THE WAR ZONE WITH MILITARY,
REMEMBER WHEN HE TRY TO FORCE CATHOLICS TO GIVE ABORTION PILLS, THE CARDINAL EXPOSED HIM ON IT.
AT THE DNC, DO YOU WANT TO HAVE GOD IN THE DEBATE?
THE ARABLEAGUE SHOUTING NO AGAIN DO YOU WANT TO HAVE GOD IN THE DISCUSSION? THE ARABS LEAGUE SHOUTING LOUDER NO OH OH
THEY LOST, BUT WHAT THIS TREND STARTED FOR AMERICANS CHRISTIANS NEXT DEBATES,
THINK VERY SERIOUSLY, THIS IS NOT A JOKE TO THINK OF ANYMORE, IT’S FOR REAL. AND DANGEROUS.
Pam geller’s got your back, bees. 😉
Bees,
What’s your theory on why he keeps droning al Qaeda HVTs?
Wordsmith
palmtofaceslap
how funny,
back to you,
@Wordsmith: I admire your patience and sense of humor. What else can ya do? lol
@Wordsmith:
So what price has Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Allen Grayson and the rest of the Democrats paid for their out-of-line comments? You already admit that those comments have no affect on the voter that is in the middle.
And I said Alinsky playbook is used in ALL cases where?
You might want to rethink that statement. “by the time the Republicans rose to power” says it all.
And so the rest of your entry is basically a bunch of cut and paste from Michael Medved. Are you trying to drive traffic to him? You seem to put a lot of stock into what he says, but frankly, if I am interested in Medved’s opinions, I can find my way to his articles on my own.
Word, when you have to add “I think” to clarify someone else’s statement, that means you are trying to form your opinion of what Dreadnought said by what you “think” he meant. Doesn’t fly.
That is your right. But I will promise you this; as long as the GOP offers up mushy middle and left leaning candidates like Dole, McCain and Romney, the GOP will continue to lose presidential elections. Why should someone who is a centrist vote for Liberal Lite when they can vote for the real deal? And don’t confuse the increase in Independents with the fact that the nation is still a center right nation of mostly conservatives, both financially, and socially.
Sure there is. It is those “silent majority” of conservatives that go to work everyday, pay their bills, care for their children out of their own wallet and don’t depend on the government for anything more that what is Constitutionally mandated, that are silent because neither party represents them anymore. They used to be called the “common man” and are now called the “silent majority” because they are too busy being responsible adults to march on D.C. or pitch tents in some park, carrying a placard.
But not in great enough numbers. I just showed you the voting numbers were down. And you just claimed it was the middle that determined elections and the middle did not care for Sarah Palin. So which is it?
It doesn’t matter what voters view themselves as. What matters is how they vote. McCain in ’08 took over 2 million fewer votes than Bush in ’04. Obama took 10 million more than John Kerry. Romney took 1.1 million fewer votes than Bush in ’04.
Now, please, if you intend to respond to me again, ditch the Medved cut and paste.
Wordsmith
the theory is he is sending secret messages promisses with the drones,
@Wordsmith:
I don’t believe you can. But, quotes ‘regarding Islam” is not quite the same as quoting the Quran.
“As the Holy Quran tells us: Be conscious of God and speak always the truth” Quote from Obama.
Now give me ANY quote from George W. Bush where he refers to the “Holy Quran” and quotes from it.
I did find one time that he referred to the Holy Quran, but he was only quoting what someone else said about it, (ie, “According to Muslim teachings, God first revealed His word in the Holy Qur’an to the prophet, Muhammad,” he himself did not refer to it as the Holy Quran. In all the speeches I could find that Bush referred to Muslims etc, he never quoted the Quran itself.
I just don’t think the case can be made that GW Bush’s feelings about Islam is equal to Obama’s.
Wordsmith
so you finaly told us a bit more about LARRY KLAYMAN,
he is not a nut, far from it, and he went there on the barricades to suport the VETERANS,
HE HAS SHOWN HIS HIGH RESPECT TO MILITARY BY TAKING THEIR SIDES ABOUT THE HELYCOPTER GUN DOWN, HE GOT INVOLVED THE BEST HE KNEW HOW, AND SPOKE AT THE BARRICADE AGAIN,
TO EXPOSE THE TERRIBLE UNJUST TREATEMENT OF THE VETERANS HE SPOKE AS AN ANGRY CITIZEN WOULD DO AT THE SIGHT OF THOSE VETERAN BEING PUT TO SHAME BY THE CLOSING OF THEIR DEDICATED TO THEM LAND THEY COME TO REMINISCE THE ONES WHO DIED FOR THE FREEDOM
OF ANGRY LEADERS WANTING TO PUNISH AND HURT
LARRY KLAYMAN IS A BRAVE and dared the leadership for what they have done to the VETERANS,
no one has a right to insult him, he has demonstrate what is the courage to speak,
he told the politicians: I AM MAD AS HELL AND I WON’T TAKE IT ANYMORE,
Wordsmith
PAM GELLER IS A PATRIOT,
TAKE GOOD CARE OF THE PATRIOTS,
THEY WILL BE THERE TO SAVE YOUR ASS SOMEDAY,
bye
@ilovebeeswarzone:
Look out everyone! bees is in the warzone!
@retire05:
I think they do have an effect on voters in the middle and that most Americans are turned off by negative attack ads, name-calling, mudslinging, etc.
What I do agree with, is that some of these stories do not get the airplay they richly deserve because there is bias in the media.
Ok, fine. 🙂 Let’s take out the word “all”. Let’s highlight the word consciously. Waiting on the evidence. Not denying that Alinsky might be at play. But what you’re showing me are examples of tactics that can be described from the Rules; not that they are following “the Rules”. Alinsky rules are not unique unto Alinsky. Are we clear yet?
Ok, let me put it this way: The Republican Party replaced the Whigs. They were never rivals. The GOP never had to compete with the Whigs for power. That party had already collapsed and was no longer a political force of consequence. There was no challenging for power.
Well, you’re welcome. Some conservatives could use a little help in finding their way. 😉
It’s easier to quote Medved as he is pretty thorough in covering the whole history and fascination of third parties and why they fail in American politics. His book on the “10 Big Lies About America” covers third parties in one chapter. I figured I was doing you a favor by satiating your intellectual curiosity in linking to his articles. 😉
You think so? 😉
I believe you faulted me earlier for writing “imo”.
Will you take umbrage now for my insertion of “believe”? 😀
How do you explain Bush in ’00 running on “compassionate conservatism” and ’04?
Primaries provide an opportunity for you to get your conservative dream candidate on the ticket. in ’08, McCain was not the favored Party Establishment candidate. Remember when it was “anyone but McCain”? He did not start out as the front runner; and in January of ’08, his campaign was broke and was not receiving support from the major GOP contributors.
You’re presuming that a centrist is already left-leaning. A center-left moderate might; but he and blue dog Democrats might just as readily vote for someone center-right who does not look like a crazy fringe conservative ideologue. Just as some center-right conservatives might vote for Democrats.
I believe that quite a number of those who fancy themselves independent voters are actually conservatives.
It actually sounds like you are describing mainstream American moderates in the mushy middle. 🙂
Voting numbers in ’12 were down more for Obama supporters who elected him in ’08 than for Romney; Romney dreew more conservative voters than any previous Republican candidate. In exit polls, 35% described themselves as “conservative” compared to 28% who pulled the lever for Reagan in ’80. In ’80, 24 million conservativves mobilized; in ’04, 42 million; in 2012, 45 million. So who sat out? The handful of angry all-or-nothing conservatives who would rather lose an election and call it “standing on principle”?
The conservative base was highly energized by Palin on the ticket. Don’t you remember? But she and McCain lost the votes of moderates to Obama who campaigned as a moderate-left-centrist. Through the course of the general election campaign, Palin- fairly and unfairly- was damaged by the liberal “lamestream” media.
And 2.8 million less than McCain in ’08. 57.1 million. And how many votes less than in ’08 did Obama receive in ’12? 69.4 million voted for Obama in ’08 and in 2012, 59.8 million.
Question is, how many of those less votes for McCain and Romney is on account of voters who identify themselves as conservative purists who couldn’t bother holding their noses and so sat out the election?
McCain and Romney did not lose because they weren’t “conservative enough”. They lost on account of other factors at play.
Sounds like Medved’s analysis hit a nerve.
Thanks for letting me know that if you want to read Medved, you know how to look up his articles yourself. Very helpful.
If you don’t have his book, “10 Big Lies About America”, I have the book and audio files. I’d be more than happy to send you mp3s of the audio. Like I said, a whole fascinating chapter on the history of third party races. 🙂
@Redteam:
What?! Where are the sword verses, dammit! “Truth”?! Why isn’t he quoting something or other about Taqiyyah?! He’s lying!
Extracted from an old post:
No, of course they aren’t equal. Their life experiences are vastly different. I get the sense that President Obama is not highly religious; tends to use religion and his connection to Islam in his youth wherever and whenever it serves him politically (as well as deny or minimize his early connection to Islam when it suits him).
President Bush, on the other hand, is a man of deep faith; and a respect for all faiths.
–George W. Bush, 2009
Collection of quotes where President Bush talks favorably of Islam:
President Obama:
President Obama to Oklahoma tornado survivors:
@Wordsmith: It’s late, so I’ll wait until tomorrow to respond. Until then, why don’t you try to find one single quote from the Holy Bible by Obama.
*Palmtofaceforeheadslap*
Can anyone point me in the direction of the nearest brick wall, please?
Goodnight, RT. Sleep well tonight. 🙂
Wordsmith
you mistaken my comment about LARRY KLAYMAN
at the end I type that he was angry about the sight of the VETERANS against the barricades
he spoke about it IN HIS OWN WORDS ,
IT SAID, I AM MAD AS HELL AND I WON’T TAKE IT ANYMORE,THIS LAST LINE IS WHAT IT MEANT,
YOU DISTORTED IT TO WHAT YOU WANTED IT TO BE,
@ilovebeeswarzone: I apologize, bees! I should have read your comment more carefully.
@Wordsmith:
Also in this speech:
Wordsmith
it”s okay, I also make errors,
THANK YOU FOR THE COPIED ON BOTH PRESIDENT’S WORDS,
THAT TOOK A LOT OF YOUR TIME AND IT’S TO BE ALSO NOTICE,
BUT KNOWING YOU , IT’S ALWAYS WHAT YOU DO HERE,
BRING THE BEST OF YOU, NO MATTER THE TIME SPENT,
BYE
Families suspect SEAL Team 6 crash was inside job on worst day in Afghanistan:
6 more pages, if you click the link.
Families suspect SEAL Team 6 crash was inside job on worst day in Afghanistan:
6 more pages, if you click the link.
Wordsmith
from FOX NEWS, TODAY, A FILM MAKER PRODUCE A FILM CALL JIHAD IN AMERICA,
HE TALK ABOUT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD INFILTRATION IN AMERICA,
they are aiming at destroying from within IN ALL KIND OF WAYS THEY CAN,
YOU KNOW, i was suspecting them since quite a while, when i start to notice the planes accidents all different sizes and shape in all different parts of the USA, AND THE EXPLOSIONS AROUND AND THE FIRES OF GRAND MAGNITUDE KILLING THE FIREFIGHTERS,
I THINK THE PRESIDENT BUSH WAS UNAWARE OF THE EVIL INTENT OF THOSE,
WHEN HE MADE HIS SPEECHES TO SHOW THEIR PEACEFUL INTENT,
AND WHEN HE ALLOWED THEM TO COME BY NOW 8 MILLIONS HELP BY A WILLING OBAMA
WHEN HE TOOK OFFICE ORDERING THE BORDER TROOPERS TO LET THEM ILLEGALS IN FREELY,
SOMETHING VERY WRONG IS GOING ON AND THEY ALREADY ARE IN THE LEADERSHIP OF THIS
OVER TOLERANT AMERICA, WHERE THE MILITARY ARE KILLED OR WOUNDED ABROAD UNABLE
TO APPLY THE REAL RULE OF ENGAGMNT SUITED FOR THOSE KIND OF ENNEMY,
BY ORDER OF THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF TO NOT SHOOT IF THEY PUT DOWN THEIR WEAPONS,
BUT REGARDLESS OF THEIR EIDS BURRYED UNDER THE GROUND WHERE MILITARY WALK,
TO THEIR DEATH OR DISMEMBERD,
AMERICA IS FONCTIONNING FROM THE BOTTOM UP, SINCE THIS ADMINISTRATION IS ON TOP,
THERE IS THE TRAGEDY,
WHERE THE USA USE TO BE FONCTIONNING FROM THE TOP BEST, IT DID WORK AND THE PEOPLE WHERE FREE TO CREATE AND MAKE MONEY FOR THEMSELVES, NOT FOR SPREADIN WEALTH BY FORCE FROM THE GOVERNMENT WHO PROFITE FROM THEM,
DON’T FORGET THAT THE POOR SURVIVED BEFORE OBAMA AND BETTER,
@Wordsmith:
So you “think” again? What proof do you have that anything negative said by the left has ever come back to bite them at the voting booth? Hell, Alan Greyson was reelected and he is a certified fruit cake.
Mud has been slung in presidential elections since the Adams/Jefferson race. Andrew Jackson’s wife was publically called a whore by a journalist who supported Jackson’s opponent. It is part of our history. Yet you seem to think it has some impact (you did not say what impact) on those in the mushy middle but offer no valid proof of that. You simply “think”.
Moving the bar again, Word? Let’s see; you have managed to post a lot in the last two days, showing that you know how to type. Are you “consciously” using the method you were taught when you first learned how to type, or has it simply become, due to practice, second nature? I doubt, considering how much you have entered in the last couple of days that you use the “hunt and peck” system of typing. Once something become second nature, as in typing, or driving a vehicle, it is no longer a “conscious” decision to put your fingers in the proper place on the key board, as taught, or to turn the key in the ignition before you try to put the vehicle in gear. It has become second nature to you and you are not aware of what that typing teacher/driver’s ed/parent taught you.
What you are wanting is for me to prove that every leftist that has ever used Alinsky tactics thought “Hey, I’m going to use Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals in this instance.” I don’t have to see air to know it exists.
Did I? Perhaps. Show me where.
I don’t believe “power” was the issue. You seem to, once again, want to change the bar.
Bush was certainly more right wing than Clinton, or Al Gore who was his opponent. And he certainly is more right wing than either John McCain or Mitt Romney. But Bush was also a “progressive” with his “compassionate conservatism” stich. He was, and remains, a “big” government kinda fellow. If he was conservative, it was only in foreign policy and his willingness to take on radical Islam.
So you are telling me that Mitt Romney took fewer votes in 2012 than John McCain took in 2008 and John McCain garnered only 57.1 million votes? Where do you get your election results?
Bush – 2004 – 62,039,572
McCain – 2008 – 59,950,323 (2 million less)
Romney – 2012 – 60,932,235n (1 million less)
http://uselectionatlas.org
Please explain the math you used to claim that Romney took 2.8 million fewer votes than John McCain.
Obama – 2008 – 69,499,428
Obama – 2012 – 65,917,257 (3.5 million fewer votes, not the 8.6 you claim)
same source
I don’t know. Why don’t you ask your hero, the former speech writer and staffer for Democrats, Michael Medved, since you seem to think he has all the answers.
I don’t discount other factors. But the truth is that neither McCain, or Romney, motivated the conservative base. And they could have run the most fantastic campaigns in the history of the national elections, but with out the excitement and motivation of core conservatives, they were going to lose. And lose they did.
Didn’t hit a nerve. Frankly, I couldn’t care less about Medved. He’s just another left coast left winger that hopped on the conservative bandwagon when it was advantageous to do so. Perhaps that is why his radio show concentrates so heavily on having Democrats as guests. Frankly, I distrust anything that comes out of the Left Coast.
I prefer Washington, Jefferson (although not my favorite), Madison and Monroe, with Mark Levin and other Constitutionalists thrown in for good measure.
You would be better served reading The Federalist Papers, along with the Anti-Federalist Papers.
And, by your following entries, it seems that you, and Dreadnought, have the same task; to simply post the musings of others. All Dreadnought does at Lucianne is link to the work of others, just as you do.
Great challenges retire! I’ll try and respond later tonight. Listening to Medved on my way to work.
Have a great day! 🙂
You mean…you don’t?! 😀
By golly, you’re right! I guess I wasn’t thinking after all!
Voters often express how they hate negative ads and negative politics; yet they nevertheless have proven effective in influencing voters.
Point conceded!
Yup! 🙂
More like moving the bar back to where it was. Just trying to help out your comprehension of what my point is. 🙂
Er….okaaaaay. What rabbit hole are you taking this conversation down, now?!
As I stated earlier, simply because you ID something as fitting the description of one of the Rules, doesn’t mean they’re consciously following the Alinsky playbook. Ridiculing someone is a common human tactic.
You do this constantly; although in your case, you are an Alinskyite follower who consciously loves applying the Rules….I think. 😉
Recall:
That one hurt my feelings. 🙁 Very Alinsky of you. 🙂
Or move it back. 🙂
Gee…ya think? 😉
Hmmm….iyo? Think or know? What qualifies you to judge who is and who isn’t a conservative? To label others RINO?
As frustrating as McCain is, doesn’t he vote more often than not with conservatives? His ACU rating in 2010 was 89.7, making him one of the most conservative members of the Senate that year. In 2006, it was 82.3%. I suppose Party purists expect 100% and deem anyone else a RINO (“KICK THEM ALL OUT!!!“, they shrill!). If you can’t trust an objective record of legislative voting record, what do you trust? Emotions?
McCain, Romney,and Bush may not be the kind of conservative “True conservatives” and the base like, but they are conservatives.
What do you make of government growth under Reagan?
Is Bush not also a social conservative?
In what ways is President Obama similar to Bush in “taking” on radical Islam? And in what ways do they differ?
Can’t remember where I got the numbers but the sourcing was most likely dated. Thanks for correcting me on it!
Touchy, touchy….Was Reagan ever a former Democrat?
Wow! Thanks for that wonderful suggestion. I went with it, just to humor you. 🙂 Why didn’t I think of doing that in the first place? Here’s Medved:
I believe (is it okay for me to use the word “believe” without being Alinsky’ed for it?) Palin generated a lot of excitement and energy amongst movement conservatives who were otherwise appalled by McCain’s nomination. Core conservatives were motivated by “Obama is destroying America” if not “Rah Rah Romney”. Romney ran a lousy campaign and the 47% quote hurt him significantly with moderates.
🙂 Our hero and cultural crusader, Michael Medved 🙂 writes:
Because the east coast swings so overwhelmingly to the right? 😀
Why do you suppose Medved has on so many Democrats as guests and callers? Why does he invite on so many liberals?
Those are awesome! 🙂 But I thought we were talking about apples, here? :/
Golly…I tried to search for where Medved might address this point, but couldn’t find any entries.
Well, earlier you went off on a tangent complimenting me on my beautiful, excessive, typing style. Now I’m faulted for blockquoting others. There’s no pleasing you! 🙁
Yeah, I never do my own original cartoons for Sunday Funnies. Just cut-and-paste. 🙁
Blockquoting are my favorite types of posts, retire! I’m sorry I don’t have more time on my hands as a non-professional blogger to feed you original writing. Just think of my blogposts where I link to the brilliant writings of others, interesting news items of the day, as the finger pointing to the moon. You’re welcome! 🙂 After all, there are many types of blogposts and not all have to be an original essay.
Medved’s on in one hour!!!! Can hardly wait to hear what he has to say!
Have a great day retire, in this, the greatest nation on God’s green earth!