« Open Thread | Main | Halloween at the Obama Household »

Sitting on the "COMFY CLIMATE CHANGE COUCH" with Pelosi, told us all we need to know.

30 years in Washington can leave you NEWTERED!

GOOD BYE!

Perhaps you can be Prof. at Notre Dame.

Hey, all you Democrat "progressives" and "moderate" Republicans, have you been getting this funny feeling you can't quite put your finger on? Is it starting to get a little hard to fall asleep? Is there this nagging suspicion deep, deep inside that something is wrong...even though Obama is King and you guys now control the world? Well, let me assure you, that feeling is only going to get stronger. And stronger. YOU ARE GOING TO GET SO STOMPED OVER IN 2010, THERE WON'T BE A BRIDGE HIGH ENOUGH FOR YOU TO JUMP OFF OF.

Let's go for the trifecta: Hoffman, Christie and McDonnell.

The specter of 2010, baby. Be VERY afraid.

And there was much rejoycing. Glad she made some friends. We all could use friends.

Mayhaps she could be Obama's new GOP Relations Czar.

This is as good as the Arlen Spector flush. The NRCC may start paying attention now.

Newt just lost as well.

And we shouldn't see Newt cuddling with another liberal for awhile.. giving us that patronizing, all-knowing, we-need-to-just-work-together smile

This is very heartening. You folks don't realise how much of a voice we actually get. Bring back conservatism! No RINOS!

This may be bigger than it seems...and it seems big. Over the last year I've been SO disheartened. I now understand that was by design. Even though I'm hip to propaganda and how the media works, it seemed like NO one heard our voice.

I think that may have been an illusion. Now that we know we've got their ear, we need to send a case of The Fear into RINO's and liberals. They need to be so afraid, that they'll never talk to another Hollywood "star", never utter the name Mao or Fidel, never feel empowered to "fundamentally change" America ever again. Fear (i.e. their fear of Truth and Liberty). Our greatest weapon against tyranny.

I've been so busy, I didn't even see the news that Gavin Newsome withdrew his candidacy for Governor of California, leaving the Dems without an announced candidate. (Jerry Brown will run, no doubt, but he hasn't made it official yet.)

This is good beyond hope. That pompous freak Newsome was beyond liberal...and even in California, his brand of Commie / "progressive" B.S. wouldn't fly.

We may have turned the corner, America!

Watch the media spin her as a 'moderate' pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage Republican rejected by conservative ideologues, while ignoring her positions on taxes, spending, card check, and her incompetent campaign that included calling the police when a reporter asked her questions about card check and taxes.

Wyatt, Christie is down right now. Scozzfava will still be on the ballot which will likely confuse some voters, and Hoffman is still down 4 pts. McDonnell may very well win Va. As for 2010, the GOP cannot even find a person to challenge Grayson. Right now there are four people, with no name recognition. The moderate Democrats who have occupied their seats for some time are safe, So, while we do expect some tough battles and that is good for all of us, you guys still sit leaderless and split because you are turning on moderates. Personally on the democratic side, the Blue Dogs do give me fits, but they are needed. So, good luck, but going in split is not a winning tactic.

Keep dreamin' Anon. The races ain't over yet. No one saw Scozzafava quitting either, but looky what happened. So go ahead, keep telling everyone "We won, you lost, ha ha". Sounds a lot like whistling past the graveyard to me.

You guys are going to get trounced so bad, it will even make ME feel sorry for you...almost.

You have tried your best to install communism before anyone caught on, and it almost worked. But unfortunately, that pesky free speech got in the way. We got you figured out...at the 11th hour, but better now than later.

As for a leader, you guys STILL don't get it. We need CONSERVATIVES, not a "leader". That's YOUR game. We'll do just fine, thank you. I have a feeling some names are going to emerge that will even FURTHER scare the pants off you. Oh man! I can hear the name-calling already! "Fat idiot! Racist! Homophobe! Bigot! Hate monger!"

Too bad you can only shoot that gun once, and face it...you're out of ammo!

This may not be as good as it might first appears for who can say which way Scozzfava's voters will go.

Anonymous (a.k.a. Goatse Wellstoned cowering behind an anonymous comment) doesn't understand conservatives if he thinks we need a cult leader like Obama, like he and his side do.

Wyatt, you are right on point.

It scares me to think of what would have happened to this country if the crypto-Marxists put their plan into action only ten years ago, before the Internet became common.

The freedom of information the Internet provides has allowed for an unprecedented level of communication between concerned Americans, without the need for the drive-by media. Without it, I don't know that the American people would be able to understand what is going on, until it is too late.

A blow struck for trickle up politics! Does anyone know if the precincts will notify the voters that Scuzzyfavabean is no longer running?

I agree with Wyatt's Torch (great handle, I am a huge Ayn Rand fan as well!). Our voice is legion. They are listening even while they pretend not to. I am organizing a 9.12 project here in my town which will be a part of a larger one centered in Naples. There are several other organizations already in existence: Grassroots, Tea Party, and Lee County Patriots. If those are all in my little corner of America, just think what is going on nationwide. Watch out Dems come 2010!

Too funny, Malkin calls Dede a "radical leftist GOP Candidate".

You gotta be pretty flipping far to the right to perceive a moderate Republican as a "radical leftist".

We couldn't possibly make this stuff up, the right's self-satire is brilliant.

Yeah, where would anyone get the idea that a candidate supported by the radical group ACORN could in any way be considered radical... I mean, apart from her support for abortion-on-demand, gay marriage, tax increases, income redistribution, nationalized health care, deficit spending, and card check.

Too funny, Malkin calls Dede a "radical leftist GOP Candidate".
Posted by: Anonymous at October 31, 2009 5:08 PM

anyone who accepts the friggin "sanger award"(for excellence in eugenics presumably) definitely deserves the appellation "radical leftist" on this planet anyways.

Ok, so if Dede is a "radical leftist" what does that make the Democrat??

According to DailyKos, not nearly as liberal as Dede.

Ok, so if Dede is a "radical leftist" what does that make the Democrat??
Posted by: Anonymous at October 31, 2009 5:15 PM

as anyone who has imbibed the drivel promulgated by the msm can tell you, all democrats are "moderates" and everyone agrees with them about everything.

The Democrat is not as liberal as Dede? That makes the Democrat the moderate? Well waddayaknow.

The Democrat is not as liberal as Dede? That makes the Democrat the moderate? Well waddayaknow.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 31, 2009 5:22 PM

the key phrase here is "not as liberal", you presume that there "must" be a "moderate" choice when 3 candidates are available when in fact it's just 2 leftists and 1 rational human being.

LOL weewilly. It sounds to me like Dede did the Repubs a big favor by backing off. I note that Newt has now come on side to endorse Hoffman. I'm sure you are all pleased as punch to get that nod of approval. Too, too funny.

newt, like most liberals, was being expedient by endorsing hoffman, kinda like how obama is waiting for healthcare/elections to be over before making a decision about afganistan, he[newt] just wants the base behind him for his 2012 run, while i'm sure hoffman "appreciates" it, no one believes that his heart was in it especially after getting egg on his face by dede's withdrawal. the only "favor" she did the repubs was "saving face" ahead of a miserable trouncing she was in store for(with them by extension).

First of all, most people consider anyone to the left of them radical, and anyone to the right a wingnut. But the current Democrat party of Obama-Pelosi-Reid is a radical left party.

Eliminating the right to vote on joining a union is a radical left policy.

Nationalized health care is a radical left policy, even if the means to that end are pursued incrementally.

Gutting the military in a time of war is a radical left policy.

Support for gay marriage is a radical left position. (The centrist position, which a vast majority on both sides support, is civil unions.)

The takeover of the financial, health care, automotive, and energy (through cap and trade) sectors of the economy are all aspects of a radical left agenda.

"Gutting the military"??? Um V the K, Obama moved money around to different priorities but overall he INCREASED military spending.

"Gutting the military"??? Um V the K, Obama moved money around to different priorities but overall he INCREASED military spending.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 31, 2009 5:56 PM

too funny, i don't think v intimated that obama did ANYTHING, he merely stated that that was the "radical leftist position", are you saying that obama is a radical leftist therefore he is wrong about this being a "radical leftist position"? your instincts are correct btw obama IS a radical leftist, which by no means assumes he endorses the entire pantheon of "radical leftist" ideology, but i think he does and this is just a facade of his to give him "credibility" as commander-in-cheif, he really wants to deconstruct the whole military in his heart-of-hearts but give him some time, maybe in his second term(if we survive that long).

i find the instinct to defend obama at the slightest hint of dissent hilarious, especially when it degenerates into CAPS lolz.

Now I'll go back to your first comment:

"most people consider anyone to the left of them radical, and anyone to the right a wingnut"

So by that reasoning the far-right regulars on Moonbattery consider moderate Republicans "radical" and I guess those of us who are REALLY on the left are more and more radical. Simplistic don't you think?

I have no use for terms like "wingnut". I fully understand that my politics are on the left and that there are other people on either side of me who are still left. There's also left of center, center and right of center, then there are gradations of people moving further right.

Moonbattery rightists seem to cling to some kind of purity law. I'm afraid you will eventually discover that "conservative purity" means "always out of power".

Moonbattery rightists seem to cling to some kind of purity law. I'm afraid you will eventually discover that "conservative purity" means "always out of power".
Posted by: Anonymous at October 31, 2009 6:11 PM

this comment is very rich considering the last 8+ years of "centrist" discourse from the left, you want to see what "purity" looks like descend into the fever-swaps of kos/puffho/du and you will become more familiar with it albeit with an increased amount of curses and outright lies than one would find at a "wingnut" site, if the dems can come to power via such disgusting vitriolic means then i see no reason why the right cannot seeing as it actually holds the same opinions as many in the country do, that this is a center-RIGHT(yes CAPS) country i don't think anyone can dispute, and this can only bode well for the future of the "conservative party".

It isn't Newt who'll be running in 2012. It's Newt-Callista. As in "WE are looking at OUR options", "WE are talking to Americans to see if WE are needed to bring the transformation that Americans want," "WE are evaluating whether OUR principles of reform..." ... "and if Americans ask US to run..."

Callista Gingrich in 2012!!

And remember, 2012 is not that long from now. In Newt-time, that's only 37 boring leadership-personal improvement books from now, or 2,633 media appearances to talk about the Five Principles For Changing America Toward Real Reform In The Six Crucial Categories of Life Based On 19 Best-Practices.

LOL, have another drink WeeWilly. 6:03 was a good one.

Moonbattery rightists seem to cling to some kind of purity law. I'm afraid you will eventually discover that "conservative purity" means "always out of power".
Posted by: Anonymous at October 31, 2009 6:11 PM

Purity of thought is a leftist notion; you'll find few conservatives seeking it, or believing such a thing exists.

We on the right believe that politicians claiming to represent us (and asking for our votes) should represent our values and our positions on political issues. It's as simple as that. We will not support candidates running on the Democrat-Lite strategy of being one increment less bad than whatever neoMarxist they're running against. We want real conservative candidates. And if we lose, then we lose. We would rather be a strong, principled minority party and wait our turn than to try to be sort of like Democrats but not as bad. The RINO formula is a recipe for disaster and for multi-decade minority status. And, of course, Democrats know this, which is why they keep prattling on and on and on and on about how conservatives need to get behind their RINOs and ditch their principles, values, and strong ideological candidates. No, we don't actually need to abandon our beliefs. We can be the 40 % of the population we already are, and wait our turn and have something real to offer when people have had their fill of hopey-change. Which may be a lot sooner than you think.

I can understand your position to a degree. I will take a solid Democrat over a Blue Dog any day. But, I am also pragmatic. If the Blue Dog can win where the solid Democrat can't, I'll hold my nose and go with the Blue Dog.

Until Dede pulled out the polls were putting Hoffman and Owens neck and neck. In other words, it was the moderate Republican who was splitting the Republican vote in a solid Republican district. Dede did you a favor.

Might not agree with her past voting record, but that was classy....stepping down to keep from splitting the vote. Hope to God the RNC starts paying attention!

It's a bit different with conservatives. Liberals and Democrats are basically the same group of people, just two different labels. Liberals are those who the Democratic Party represents. Democrats are those who operationalize the belief system of liberals. The same cannot really be said of conservatives and Republicans. The most one could say is that conservatives are people who Republicans expect to show up at the polls to do their duty, and the Republican Party is a political operation that occasionally represents libertarians and social conservatives, but mostly serves as a vehicle for people who are not Democrats to get elected occasionally. So it's not the same. Liberals will hold their nose and vote for the Blue Dog, because that helps their party (ie. them) hold on to political power. Conservatives do not want RINOs to win, because that distances conservatives from political power by filling up the political space with people who do not share their beliefs. It's different. Hence, NY23.

What was significant about Scozzafava was that her positions were made clear.

When sensible people understand liberalisms, they run away screaming.

Dede looked like she had been crying. It sucks to be unloved.

I previously favoured Owens in this race. But given current polling, I'd place this at 55% for Hoffman and 45% for Owens. Still a bit too early to celebrate though, the election's not for two days yet.

Also, far too early to be calling the 2010 race just yet. I saw many on the Democratic side practically holding eulogies for the Republican Party not even six months ago, now look at them! I'd say we're probably going to see a messy, bitter election with gains and losses on both sides, but it's too early to tell who will end up making the most net gains.

Dede has endorsed Owens.

For the Democrats this is a win-win election. The district is strongly Republican so it means nothing if they lose. If they win, it becomes a huge slap in the face for the Conservatives and will call into question their entire strategy of opposing moderate Republicans.

Will Newt flip yet again and now support Owens? If polls indicate Owens could take it, he just might since he has no love for the conservative right.

Sheesh...this broad looks more like a pelican than a human. Oh wait, I get it now, dead people voting, illegal aliens voting and now pelicans running.
Got it.

"Dede has endorsed Owens."

Yah-whoops! Looks like I spoke too soon. I hereby rescind my description of her action as "classy".

Anon just doesn't get it. Dede is a leftist "Progressive" Democrat. The fact that she can run (and be endorsed) as a Republican says a lot about Republican leadership.

They are so lost, so utterly devoid of principles that they'll do anything to try and appeal to what they perceive as the shifting political tides.

It's time for conservatives to stand up as one. Anon thinks this means "purity". Wrong. It means "Principles". Having a core. Standing on what you believe in. If it means losing some of the "bigness" of the tent, so be it. In the end, if a conservative stands on a solid foundation of principles and does not waver, the landslide in his favor will make California sliding into the ocean (which wouldn't be all bad...and I live here) look like runoff from your garden sprinkler.

cialis [url="http://www.chrisgiddensrmt.com/cialis.html"]cialis[/url] http://www.chrisgiddensrmt.com/cialis.html :P accutane [url="http://www.captainsquartersusvi.com/accutane.htm"]accutane[/url] http://www.captainsquartersusvi.com/accutane.htm %PPP

ambien [url="http://www.captainsquartersusvi.com/ambien.htm"]ambien[/url] http://www.captainsquartersusvi.com/ambien.htm vwa valium [url="http://www.chrisgiddensrmt.com/valium.html"]valium[/url] http://www.chrisgiddensrmt.com/valium.html 8-]