Power Line News

Arcsoldier - 16 May 2008 02:00 PM

Liberalism doesn’t work. Being the Democrat-lite Party doesn’t work.

They elected CONSERVATIVES to those lost Republican Seats. Republicans lost but Conservatives won. Simple.

Al de Chicago - 05 May 2008 09:26 PM

It should be very obvious that the American people are NOT conservative on the whole.  At best 30% could be considered such.  This is proved by the continued existence of the Party of Treason.

Uh sorry buddy take any American Government class and you will know that America is center of right. 30% are conservatives. But a lot are center of right. We never had a MODERN liberal president. Even Carter wasn’t as far left and McGovern, Dukakis and Obama. Only 20% of Americans are Liberals. While the other 50% are Moderates. But clearly we can carry most moderates by looking at Reagan.

And Reagan won more than just the media. Eisenhower landslide. Nixon landslide. Reagan landslide. Bush Snr. landslide.

Reagan was the only MODERN President American wanted a third term of. Thats why they voted for Bush Snr and against Dukakis too. We are a center of right nation. Run that way. Don’t run like a Euro.

Yes, don’t change a thing. There is nothing wrong with your party or message. STAY THE COURSE!

(I’m laughing so hard I’m tearing up over here)

PLEASE keep going down the same road you’re on. PLEASE.

nanosecondinvestments - 15 May 2008 08:12 AM

http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/05/the_loss_in_the_mississippi_sp.php

In other words, they believe that they don’t have to work to keep their base happy. Instead, they can toss a few scraps to conservatives and spend the bulk of their time reaching out the independents and still win elections.

If you want to see how flawed that line of reasoning really is, just take a look at the turnout from the special election in Mississippi’s First Congressional District.



What you’ll note is that there was no surge in the number of Democratic voters. To the contrary, that GOP lost that election because the bottom fell out on the Republican side. The voters are still there, they’re just so dispirited by the lousy performance of the GOP that they couldn’t rouse themselves to go to the polls.

What a frakin awesome graph! Too bad the RNC doesn’t have the IQ to analyze some simple data and realize where they have their performance gap. It’s your old base, you fools! Maybe a guy from Georgia can write a book about how it is a National Party No More, but this time it will be Gingrich!

This is going to be McCain’s graphic if he nominates a liberal lapdog for VP.

horse - 17 May 2008 12:44 PM

nanosecondinvestments - 15 May 2008 08:12 AM

http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/05/the_loss_in_the_mississippi_sp.php

In other words, they believe that they don’t have to work to keep their base happy. Instead, they can toss a few scraps to conservatives and spend the bulk of their time reaching out the independents and still win elections.

If you want to see how flawed that line of reasoning really is, just take a look at the turnout from the special election in Mississippi’s First Congressional District.



What you’ll note is that there was no surge in the number of Democratic voters. To the contrary, that GOP lost that election because the bottom fell out on the Republican side. The voters are still there, they’re just so dispirited by the lousy performance of the GOP that they couldn’t rouse themselves to go to the polls.

What a frakin awesome graph! Too bad the RNC doesn’t have the IQ to analyze some simple data and realize where they have their performance gap. It’s your old base, you fools! Maybe a guy from Georgia can write a book about how it is a National Party No More, but this time it will be Gingrich!

This is going to be McCain’s graphic if he nominates a liberal lapdog for VP.

It’s not just this district race that has issues.  If you look at the statewide Rep turnout for the recent primary held there you will see the entire state turned out about 1/2 the Rep voters than that MS01 did all by itself in 04.

That simply a lot of people telling the state and national party that they need to get back on track.  Put conservative candidates out there and they will win, but keep trying to put people up for office that are left enough to attract the middle ground but end up being to the left of old classic DixieCrats and you will have a big problem.

The GOP is going to be buried this November.  The party has no leadership and stands for nothing.  McCain, the supposed head of the party come November, has no concerns for the party whatsoever, and in fact, has nothing but disdain for the party and for republicans.  He has downright hatred for conservatives.  His is a candidacy of and for himself.  He could care less how many republians, if any, are re-elected this November.  There is very little which differentiates McCain from the democrats.

The left in this country will be stronger than they have ever been in the history of this country after November.  And, I believe they will have a permanent majortiy.  They won’t just be after returning to the Clinton years.  They want a complete abandonement of capitalism and of American predominance in the world. 

Immigration has changed the democraphic picture of this country since 1965.  A full 100 million people are now either the children of immigrants or immigrants themselves.  These people are primarily of third world origin, primarily “minority”, and overwhelmingly democrat.  “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” which will be imposed upon this country in early 2009, will, according to conservative Heritage Foundation estimates, bring an additional 65 million people into the country in less than two years.  I think that number is extremely low.  It will be interesting to see how far, wide and deep socialism can grow in the chaos that those people will bring to all our instituions; public schools, healthcare, the environment, crime, neighborhoods; a disaster is coming.

Second, public education has been so dumbed down over the last three decades, that year after year, our schools turn out one crop of individuals after another with little knowlege of American history, American culture, and certainly no knowlege of how free markets and capitalism differentiate this country from the rest of the world.  For pete’s sakes, public education has become so inept, that most universities and colleges must now have remedial reading classes for incoming freshmen.  It isn’t just scholarship football players and basketball players anymore who can’t read past the third grade level when they enter college.

The baby boomers and their children have produced a population indifferent if not out and out hostile to their own country.  They see no problem in simply giving away their heritage and see little if anything in defending, and certainy nothing for which to fight.

In two or three generations, Americans will have witnessed the rise of America and then the fall.

Isn’t McCain simply a case of the Republicans running a Democratic candidate because that’s the only chance they have of winning?

Can’t we finally agree that Conservatism is dead? There are no more Conservatives running for office and the ones that are still in office lose or quit.

Marko - 17 May 2008 08:54 PM

Isn’t McCain simply a case of the Republicans running a Democratic candidate because that’s the only chance they have of winning?

Can’t we finally agree that Conservatism is dead? There are no more Conservatives running for office and the ones that are still in office lose or quit.

Conservatism isn’t dead, it’s just that it is a philosophy of governance that is held by a minority of the population.  As for McCain, he is the nominee who beat out a rather pitiful and inept group of candidates who were his competition.  McCain was nominated by a minority of republican voters in the primaries; independents and moderates drove McCain to the nomination.

I’m curious Marko, do you have any concept of what kind of society your kind will set about creating in 2009 beyond platitudes and bromides?  Do you have something more in mind besides the meaningless and vapid, “hope and change”?  Will you admit to what it is you truly want? 

I’m wondering if you actually believe that raising the taxes for the very few people left in this country who actually pay any income taxes will come anywhere close to paying for all the freebies that Obama is promising; free health care, free college education, fixing social security and medicare, etc.

Not even confiscating the wealth of the “rich” and abandoning the American military in it’s entirety will pay for all your “hope and change”.  Five percent of the people in this country today basically foot the bill for the rest.  Add the massive numbers of unskilled, low income, non tax paying “new Americans” that will come in 2009 and 2010 from “comprehensive immigration reform”, and my guess is the lifeboat called America will capsize.  A minimum of 65 million non taxpaying individuals who will be demanding the same freebies as the current group of malcontents and freeloaders. 

I think that in the end, the monster the left has created will devour the creators.  No policy of the left will reduce gasoline prices, no policy of the left will increase energy supplies, no policy of the left will create meaningful employment, just make work government uselessness, no policy of the left regarding open borders will do anything but continue to harm lower income wages.

It should be interesting to watch as some on the left frantically try and recreate the 1960s before they croak, while the rest of the left frantically seeks to impose socialism and a controlled/command market economy.

It should make for great theatre.

Mick730 - 17 May 2008 09:32 PM

Conservatism isn’t dead, it’s just that it is a philosophy of governance that is held by a minority of the population.

Not necessarily. What one faces is a leftist establishment that controls ‘education’, or lack of same, the media and entertainment, and ballot box stuffing. They probably have infiltrated the GOP, not that such would be so difficult, so that the GOP do not complain about this except during a run for office, if even then. Call them RINOs.

But a lot of people opt out of such ‘pop culture’ and conventional wisdom. A few years ago it was said they all lived in ‘fly-over’ country.

The problem of McCain is that the GOP nominating process was broken, this year. The RINOs control the party, and the nomination process. States which would have reflected the Republican voter were not prominent and up first. Instead, liberals nominated McCain in the face of unmotivated, selfish and lazy competitors for the nomination. There wasn’t a Ronald Reagan among them.

The GOP voters are still there. They’ve just been told that they are no longer welcome in the ‘big tent’. That’s now been reserved, it seems, exclusively for libs. And no GOP nominee is going to win an election asking Dems and Dem-Indys to vote for him instead of the Dem. A man running with such expectations is a man who is literally - unelectable (and a man who is fairly stupid, as well).

We’ve got another Bob Dole, this year, who at least at this point seems slightly more motivated than BDBD ever was. But it’s still a replay of Ford-Carter. And that’s a lousy choice.

Thanks the RINOs in power for it. And there’s only one cure - DUMP McCAIN! It has to be done, at the convention. Or else the GOP loses. This was clear, even last year. It was clear to myself, and a few others, even on this and other forums, earlier this year. And predictably the McCainiacs rose to the man’s defense. Where are they now?

Mick730 - 17 May 2008 09:32 PM

McCain was nominated by a minority of republican voters in the primaries; independents and moderates drove McCain to the nomination.

That’s right. Quite a minority of Republican voters. In fact, you could say Republicans were irrelevant in selecting the Presidential nominee of the GOP in 2008.

The process got broken, though a lot led up to it over the years. It was coming. And now it’s here. And there’s just one solution. No McCain. Nominate a Republican instead. EVERYONE can see this. Everyone knows this. But everyone in power, or with the ability to do this at the convention, seem to be lazy themselves, indifferent, ‘fat n happy’ and willing to let the ship sink because it’s too much trouble to put down the pork chop and keep the pumps bailing, or even try to steady the ship. But, we’ll see. It’s obvious what needs to be done. But I just don’t see anyone stepping up as an adult. For another metaphor then, kiddies are running around, screaming, carrying on. And there’s no adult in the room. And not likely to be.

Mick730 - 17 May 2008 09:32 PM

I think that in the end, the monster the left has created will devour the creators.

Never happen. Clinton and Carter historically compete for the title of worst US President. But Obama will set the bar for most dangerous.

Too many already are ‘survivors’, the 2/3rds who didn’t favor independence in the late 1700s. They go along and get along with whoever is in power. It’s not a class thing. It’s small merchants, and wealthy trust funders. It’s the poor and the class-action lottery winner both. It’s not class, it’s character. And these folks vote. They get out to vote. Add in some well-placed ‘boxes of ballots in the hallway’, a few millions ‘provisional’ ballots, and you’ve got the future.

The only thing to give this country a fighting chance - let the GOP nominate a Republican. The voters remain. The issues still remain. The idea of American freedom and opportunity remains, even again if just being ‘flown over’. But the voters are there. Sure, some might say the Dem will split, and so a GOP split makes the perfect opportunity for a third party - this year. And many might vote Barr, or some write-in. But it’s still a two-party system. And this is not the year that the Dem will make good on their promise to defect. The party isn’t pushing them out. But the GOP is pushing out its voters. That’s a huge difference between the parties, and one that Noonan sort of understands in her latest column.

Marko - 17 May 2008 08:54 PM

Isn’t McCain simply a case of the Republicans running a Democratic candidate because that’s the only chance they have of winning?

Can’t we finally agree that Conservatism is dead? There are no more Conservatives running for office and the ones that are still in office lose or quit.

Read the graph, conservatives just aren’t voting, probably because they don’t have a candidate. Your liberal wishful thinking dies with data, kind of like global warming, taxing the rich, etc…

Mick730 - 17 May 2008 09:32 PM

Marko - 17 May 2008 08:54 PM

Isn’t McCain simply a case of the Republicans running a Democratic candidate because that’s the only chance they have of winning?

Can’t we finally agree that Conservatism is dead? There are no more Conservatives running for office and the ones that are still in office lose or quit.

Conservatism isn’t dead, it’s just that it is a philosophy of governance that is held by a minority of the population. As for McCain, he is the nominee who beat out a rather pitiful and inept group of candidates who were his competition. McCain was nominated by a minority of republican voters in the primaries; independents and moderates drove McCain to the nomination.

I’m curious Marko, do you have any concept of what kind of society your kind will set about creating in 2009 beyond platitudes and bromides? Do you have something more in mind besides the meaningless and vapid, “hope and change”? Will you admit to what it is you truly want?

I’m wondering if you actually believe that raising the taxes for the very few people left in this country who actually pay any income taxes will come anywhere close to paying for all the freebies that Obama is promising; free health care, free college education, fixing social security and medicare, etc.

Not even confiscating the wealth of the “rich” and abandoning the American military in it’s entirety will pay for all your “hope and change”. Five percent of the people in this country today basically foot the bill for the rest. Add the massive numbers of unskilled, low income, non tax paying “new Americans” that will come in 2009 and 2010 from “comprehensive immigration reform”, and my guess is the lifeboat called America will capsize. A minimum of 65 million non taxpaying individuals who will be demanding the same freebies as the current group of malcontents and freeloaders.

I think that in the end, the monster the left has created will devour the creators. No policy of the left will reduce gasoline prices, no policy of the left will increase energy supplies, no policy of the left will create meaningful employment, just make work government uselessness, no policy of the left regarding open borders will do anything but continue to harm lower income wages.

It should be interesting to watch as some on the left frantically try and recreate the 1960s before they croak, while the rest of the left frantically seeks to impose socialism and a controlled/command market economy.

It should make for great theatre.

Your post contains so many inaccuracies and Right wing spin that I don’t have the energy to correct it all. Suffice to say that you know perfectly well that your news sources aren’t going to paint an honest picture of Liberalism or Obama. Don’t believe your own side’s spin.

Let’s just say… You had your shot for the last 8 years. And “your shot” left the majority of the country eager for change. What we had was a failure. Let Obama have his 8 years and see what happens. I feel confident that simply by AVOIDING UNNECESSARY WARS we can saver enough money to pay for any number of initiatives the country sorely needs. Far too much of every tax dollar goes to the DoD or DoD related debt. We spend more than the next 15-20 counties combined. Great if you’re an arms manufacturer.

I don’t believe there is a perfect candidate, but I do believe that Obama can do a much better job than Bush has or McCain could.

Another Republican president is what frightens America. Not the doom and gloom spin you hear from the RNC spoon fed to Fox and Rush every day.

For example

“Five percent of the people in this country today basically foot the bill for the rest.”

Citation, links, please…

WHERE YOUR INCOME TAX
MONEY REALLY GOES

Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion
NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion

HOW THESE FIGURES WERE DETERMINED

Current military” includes Dept. of Defense ($653 billion), the military portion from other departments ($150 billion), and an additional $162 billion to supplement the Budget’s misleading and vast underestimate of only $38 billion for the “war on terror.” “Past military” represents veterans’ benefits plus 80% of the interest on the debt.*

These figures are from an analysis of detailed tables in the “Analytical Perspectives” book of the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009. The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 15, 2008, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget. The government practice of combining trust and federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller.

U.S. military spending – Dept. of Defense plus nuclear weapons (in $billions) – is equal to the military spending of the next 15 countries combined.

These numbers show military expenditures for each country. Some say that U.S. military spending will naturally be higher because it has the highest Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of any country. The United States accounts for 47 percent of the world’s total military spending, however the U.S.’s share of the world’s GDP is about 21 percent. Also note that of the top 15 countries shown, at least 12 are considered allies of the U.S. The U.S. outspends Iran and North Korea by a ratio of 72 to one.

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

Everyone could get a NICE FAT tax cut of we only spent 20 times as much as all our enemies do on defense.

Marko - 18 May 2008 11:03 AM

Everyone could get a NICE FAT tax cut of we only spent 20 times as much as all our enemies do on defense.

Way to avoid the question Marko.  I’m not a supporter or defender of George Bush. Nor of John McCain. So your justification, or your explanation of what it is you people want to do to the country by just saying Bush screwed up, so therefore what harm can it do for Obama to have at it for 8 years, just doesn’t work, unless one is a partisan democrat.  I have a serious problem with electing a man president, who appears to be at the least, a closet racist and more likely than not, a marxist.  When Obama says he doesn’t care if his tax policies will reduce revenues to the federal government, as he did in the debate a few weeks ago regarding capital gains taxes, I have serious questions about the man’s understanding of the undeniable fact that free market capitalism is what has always differentiated this country from the rest of the world.  A resume whose high point before his short stint in the US Senate, where he has done nothing other than run for POTUS, being that of a “community activist”, does not give me a great deal of comfort.

I am also not an advocate of America being the world’s policeman.  So your charts on defense spending have no impact on my beliefs whatsoever.  I am fully certain that there is a tremendous amount of waste involved in our defense spending.  I also believe that we should withdraw our troops from Korea and from Europe.  South Korea and the European Union are both capable of defending themselves, if they choose to do so.  The situation in South Korea is particularly offensive to me, as the 38,000 US troops there are meant to be a sacrificial lamb in the event of a North Korean attack so as to guarantee our involvement once again on the Korean Peninsula. 

I am also not a supporter of a permanent central command responsible for much of northeast Africa and southwestern to central asia.

One of the keys to smaller defense spending is for this country to become less dependent on foreign energy souces.  However, the democrats talk about the “pain at the pump”, but in actuality, they have always advocated higher gasoline prices.  The whole ethanol fiasaco is their doing.  THe democrats are opposed to nuclear energy, to using our own sources of oil until meaningful alternatives can be developed.

My guess Marko is I am more a critic of defense spending than you and more of an environmentalist than you.  However, my problem with the democrats and liberals in general is your lack of a connection to reality.  Liberals consistently write off their failures by excusing them due to your original good intentions.  Ethanol is a perfect example.  Public Housing is another one.  Forced school busing.  THe list is long.

However all of this discussion does not address the question of what it is you people want to do to this country in 2009 and beyond.  What specifics do liberals offer about high gasoline prices, since liberal elites have advocated higher gasoline prices for years?  What specifics do liberals offer that will move this country towards energy independence sometime in the forseeable future?

Is it your belief, that free medical care and a free college education can be provided for all simply by raising taxes on the small percentage of Americans who actually pay taxes anymore?  When the bottom 60% of income earners in this country pay only .6% of the federal income tax bill, I don’t see how that possibly adds up.  For example, repealing the “bush tax cuts”, will only provide the federal government with an additional 40 billion dollars per year, and that assumes no impact on incentive and the economy from higher taxes.  40 billion is pocket change compared with the list of federal spending projects that Obama is talking about.

Before creating yet another massive, and probably the most massive entitlement in the country’s history, “universal health care”, don’t you think that we should first solve the social security and medicare crisis?  Or is that too much to ask?

Again, I am not a Bush supporter nor a McCain supporter.  But I’m looking for specifics, and I can never find a liberal who can give me any.

For example, indulge me yet another.  It is now widely accepted that there are more than 20 million illegal aliens in this country today, and that number increaes each and every day.  “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”, promises to make most, if not all of these people legal, and at the same time, allows for the permanent entry and legalization of all of the immediate family members of each of these 20 million people.  The Heritage Foundation estimates this number to be 65 million individuals.  Since our tax structure is set up the way it is, these 65 million people will not be contribuing in any meaningful way to the operation of the federal government.  Yet, they would be instantly eligible for “universal health care”, free education, as well as a free college education under Obama. 

Can you tell me who is going to pay for the freebies for these folks?  You cannot honestly think that the 15% of us who are paying for everything can just pony up for 65 million more do you?

And leaving money aside, where will all the doctors and other health care professionals come from in short order to give all these people “universal health care”?

And the environment?  Will none of these 65 million people be users of energy?  Of gasoline? 

Can you see where I’m going with all of this?  It’s fine to promise the sun and the moon to gullible voters, but again, where is the connection to reality?

Marco puts up bogus data with only looking at a sliver of the federal budget.

Hey kid where are all those entitlement programs you kinda left out.

This is an old stupid trick that has been tried before.

Guess I will have to go dig the data out again to show how little the part he showed is of the real spending.

Just one quick example.

look at the very link marko gets his crap from an antiwar site which explains why his data is so dazed and confused and just plain wrong.

Sort of like him.

LOL Marko, I know the www site that deceptive lying pie chart comes from, it doesn’t include all of our money going to government for entitlements and mandatory spending. Defense spending as a % of total funds going to federal programs has steadily decreased over the decades, not to mention as a % of GDP. It is the one area of government spending that actually is relevant to the role of the federal government. It is what has kept

Once again, liberal lies and wishful thinking die when faced with all of the data. You need to look at all of the money going to the federal bureaucracy and where and how it is spent. We the people can control all of it if we wish. We are not ruled by your judges.