"A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

I'm just saying that there is a good chance none of these guys will be nominated and instead it will be someone else.  Anyone who hitches their wagon to the teabaggers will be a liability once it fades away or crashes.  The winner will most likely be someone who is under the radar or is playing a minor role in things now.  Frist might support Obamacare but might have a conservative take on it.  If health care is the front and center issue, then it would make sense to have him around and easy for him to capitalize on.

Although we're forgetting the true underdog, Ron Paul.

[Stoney Mason]

Definitely there is a chance the Republican nomineee could be someone we aren't targeting at the moment although that would play against recent history. Republicans in modern times have been fairly predictable and targeted in who becomes their nominee. They like to annoit somebody the front runner ahead of time and then have everybody coalesce around them. This doesn't always play out perfectly but that's how they prefer to do it.

[Barry Egan]

I think its important to remember that both T EXP and Phoenix Dark were wrong on virtually every bit of sober analysis they had to offer during the 2008 election. 

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

meh.  not worth it.

[brawndolicious]

He wasn't asking about the legality, just on why people feel entitled to having government-provided fire departments.  Like why it was necessary for American society to survive the 20th century.

It is obvious that you could use that argument to justify government-provided healthcare though.

[Phoenix Dark]

meh.  not worth it.

Haters gonna hate, don't let them get to you man

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Romney over Obama in 2012

[close]

[Mandark]

JD:  Read am nintenho's post.  He gets it.  (It feels really weird writing that).  Point is, you're one of the first to explain to us why health care is just a (batch of goods and) service(s), not a right.  How is fire control different?


T EXP:  Look at the modern history of GOP nominees.  Going back to at least Ford, you're talking the person who was the odds-on favorite a year before the convention, and four of the last five (Reagan, Bush I, Dole, McCain) got nominated after being runner-up in the previous cycle.  The sheer amount of money required basically eliminates any late-entry candidates who aren't billionaires (ask Wes Clark about this).



Triumph:  I think Palin and Huckabee are candidates whose support is deeper than it is broad, like Howard Dean or Pat Buchanan back in the day.  I think Romney's gonna do very well with the professional/managerial/ownership wing of the GOP, and I respect his organizational skills and ambition more than the others.

Plus I think he's got a big institutional advantage that nobody's talking about.  Some GOP primaries are winner-take-all and some are proportional.  Against Huck or Palin, he'd do well in the WTA states (NY, CA, NJ, FL), just as McCain did against him.  It's hard to win when all your opponent's victories get credited as shutouts.

[Mandark]

America's secular saboteurs

By Bill Donohue
President, Catholic League

There are many ways cultural nihilists are busy trying to sabotage America these days: multiculturalism is used as a club to beat down Western civilization in the classroom; sexual libertines seek to upend the cultural order by attacking religion; artists use their artistic freedoms to mock Christianity; Hollywood relentlessly insults people of faith; activist left-wing legal groups try to scrub society free of the public expression of religion; elements in the Democratic party demonstrate an animus against Catholicism; and secular-minded malcontents within Catholicism and Protestantism seek to sabotage their religion from the inside.

Yesterday's radicals wanted to tear down the economic structure of capitalism and replace it with socialism, and eventually communism. Today's radicals are intellectually spent: they want to annihilate American culture, having absolutely nothing to put in its place. In that regard, these moral anarchists are an even bigger menace than the Marxists who came before them.

If societal destruction is the goal, then it makes no sense to waste time by attacking the political or economic structure: the key to any society is its culture, and the heart of any culture is religion. In this society, that means Christianity, the big prize being Catholicism. Which explains why secular saboteurs are waging war against it.

When Jesse Jackson led students at Stanford University in the late 1980s screaming, "Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, Western Culture's Got to Go," it was a way of undermining this nation's Judeo-Christian heritage. When Yale University returned $20 million to Lee Bass in the 1990s because the faculty objected to its being used to expand its Western civilization curriculum--they wanted multiculturalism--it showed the power of radical secularists.

Sexual libertines, from the Marquis de Sade to radical gay activists, have sought to pervert society by acting out on their own perversions. What motivates them most of all is a pathological hatred of Christianity. They know, deep down, that what they are doing is wrong, and they shudder at the dreaded words, "Thou Shalt Not." But they continue with their death-style anyway.

Secular saboteurs have often seized the arts to make a statement. That's why the blasphemous often tracks the obscene: if the goal is to put an artistic dagger into the heart of culture, then it makes sense to use all the ammo available by attacking the sacred. And they are certainly masters of that art. From scatological artistic exhibitions to the latest obscene installation, the charlatans have succeeded in politicizing the arts and denigrating Christianity.

There was a time when Hollywood made reverential movies about Christianity. But those days are long gone. Now they just insult. And when someone finally makes a film that makes Christians proud, he is run out of town. Were it not for Mel Gibson, there would have been no "Passion of the Christ." But for every Harvey Weinstein who likes to bash Catholics, there is always someone else waiting in the wings to do the same.

The ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State harbor an agenda to smash the last vestiges of Christianity in America. Lying about their real motives, they say their fidelity is to the Constitution. But there is nothing in the Constitution that sanctions the censorship of religious speech. From banning nativity scenes to punishing little kids for painting a picture of Jesus, the zealots give Fidel a good run for his money.

Catholics were once the mainstay of the Democratic Party; now the gay activists are in charge. Indeed, practicing Catholics are no longer welcome in leadership roles in the Party: the contempt that pro-life Catholics experience is palpable. The fact that Catholics for Choice, a notoriously anti-Catholic front group funded by the Ford Foundation, has a close relationship with the Democrats says it all.

Secularists within Catholicism and Protestantism are so out of control that it makes one wonder how any serious-minded person would ever accuse these religions of being oppressive. Insubordination of the most flagrant kind is routinely tolerated in a way that would never be countenanced at the New York Times, yet the bad rap always goes to Christians. We're not talking about those pushing for moderate reforms: we're talking about termites eating away from within.

The only way secular saboteurs can be stopped is by an alliance of religious conservatives across faith lines. The good news is that this is already happening. In the fight over gay marriage, the scorecard is 30-0: traditional Catholics, evangelical Protestants, Orthodox Jews, Orthodox Christians, Muslims, and Mormons, along with a big contribution from the Latino and African American communities, have succeeded in throwing a roadblock at this crazy idea.

The culture war is up for grabs. The good news is that religious conservatives continue to breed like rabbits, while secular saboteurs have shut down: they're too busy walking their dogs, going to bathhouses and aborting their kids. Time, it seems, is on the side of the angels.

Tell us how you really feel, Bill.

[AdmiralViscen]

The funny thing is the fast-breeding Christians in this country are the Mexican immigrants

[Brehvolution]

Cry more, Bill. You don't have to be gay to see through the god bullshit.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

meh.  not worth it.

Haters gonna hate, don't let them get to you man

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Romney over Obama in 2012

[close]

Eh, getting pissy and digging through the EB archives to find equally bad predictions from others violates the golden rule of Evilbore.

T EXP:  Look at the modern history of GOP nominees.  Going back to at least Ford, you're talking the person who was the odds-on favorite a year before the convention, and four of the last five (Reagan, Bush I, Dole, McCain) got nominated after being runner-up in the previous cycle.  The sheer amount of money required basically eliminates any late-entry candidates who aren't billionaires (ask Wes Clark about this).

Yeah but what about Giuliani for the 2008 run?  I agree with you about them basically being nominated early on but I have yet to see a leader from the pack emerge.  In the 1970s, from what I gathered, it was pretty much assumed Reagan would go for the Presidency in 1980.  I figured in this post 2008 election, there would be a leader of the opposition, much like Gingrich and Dole when Clinton was in office.  This time, it is news pundits and to a far lesser extent, Huckabee and Bachmann.

[Phoenix Dark]

Too bad those rabbits go AWOL from Bill's side once they hit 16 or 17.

[Oblivion]

Eh, getting pissy and digging through the EB archives to find equally bad predictions from others violates the golden rule of Evilbore.

It does? I thought people do it all there time here.

[Phoenix Dark]

Public option opt-out will be in senate bill
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/reid-public-option-no-silver-bullet-but-strong-consensus-for-opt-out.php?ref=fpa

*daps Reid*

[Brehvolution]

[The Fake Shemp]

Now we can deal with the circus of what states are dumb enough to opt out.

[Robo]

I imagine it'll be the same states that opted out of the stimulus moneys.

[Phoenix Dark]

[Kestastrophe]

I don't know what state-by-state insurance prices look like currently, but there certainly won't be parity if some states reject the public option. It will be interesting to see

[The Fake Shemp]

I imagine it'll be the same states that opted out of the stimulus moneys.

Then we'll have a laugh like seven years from now when folks are using the public option and overall health care is better in those states, leading to mass exodus of the dumbass states stupid enough to opt out.

[Oblivion]

I imagine it'll be the same states that opted out of the stimulus moneys.

And just like with the stimulus, many of them will come crawling back.

[Phoenix Dark]

How many states would be in a position to opt out? IE having a republican dominated congress and a republican governor crazy enough to leave ammunition on the table for his opponent to use next election

The PO goes into effect in 2013 and there will be lots of gov races in 2014 hmmm

[Robo]

I imagine it'll be the same states that opted out of the stimulus moneys.

Then we'll have a laugh like seven years from now when folks are using the public option and overall health care is better in those states, leading to mass exodus of the dumbass states stupid enough to opt out.

Except in spite of all the wah-wahs, none of them opted out.

This case is a little different though, where a certain group stands to lose quite a bit of money with the implementation of a public option.  It'll probably happen somewhere.  My money is on Kenfucky.

[Brehvolution]

Hidden beneath the public option is something many don't realize. The added volume is going to create tens or even hundreds of thousands of well paying jobs benefiting every community's economy.

[brawndolicious]

It's not like the stimulus.  People are a lot more polarized about healtcare, I think it is a lot more likely for a few states to go ahead and opt out for a few years.  A part of me actually kind of wants to see that happen just to see the fallout.

[Human Snorenado]

Me too, and just when I was thinking that South Carolina couldn't possibly become MORE of a backwards hellhole...

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

Hidden beneath the public option is something many don't realize. The added volume is going to create tens or even hundreds of thousands of well paying jobs benefiting every community's economy.

Conservatives don't give a shit about that.

I could see quite a few states opting out and it being a hot button issue for a few governor's races in several other states before the option (or lack of an option) gets solidified.  I don't expect much of a fallout from them because there are already a few shit holes the rest of the US writes off anyway, like Mississippi or Oklahoma.  These places already have the lowest qualities of life; staying back just an inch or two behind where they already are at by denying the public option won't matter.

Once public option produces results, a few years down the line, a future Congress will just make it an option for all states.

[The Fake Shemp]

Bill Kristol says in his monthly Washington Post column that Republicans are going to continue to be unapologetically conservative because not only is it the right thing to do, but it's what the people are demanding!

[Phoenix Dark]

Can't wait for Hoffman to play spoiler in the NY-23 election, helping the democrat to win. There will be so much egg-on-face, from Palin to Gingrich to far fight blogs/Rush etc

[Mandark]

Bill Kristol says in his monthly Washington Post column that Republicans are going to continue to be unapologetically conservative because not only is it the right thing to do, but it's what the people are demanding!

That seems to be the conventional wisdom on the right.

Right after the election, there was a bit of talk from some conservatives about broadening the party's appeal, looking for new approaches, yadda yadda.  There was a moment where the movement's elites could have looked around and thought "We've taken two consecutive beatings, we're as popular as herpes among the fastest-growing demographics, we did a horrible job while in office and now that you mention it, yes, half of us are completely unfit to join civilized society."

There wasn't much navel-gazing, but it stopped almost entirely right around when Glenn Beck started catching on.  There's a blog called The Next Right, dedicated towards forward-looking rightwingishness, which was getting about a half-dozen posts a day this time last year.  Now it's got ten posts for this entire month.

Instead of making changes, they're just going to stick with the old formula and keep telling each other how they need to Get Back To Basics and only lost cause they Abandoned Their Principles.  Good luck with that.

[Phoenix Dark]

So if this were a sport, they'd be trading in Michael Steele for...who exactly

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

Bill Kristol says in his monthly Washington Post column that Republicans are going to continue to be unapologetically conservative because not only is it the right thing to do, but it's what the people are demanding!

That seems to be the conventional wisdom on the right.

Right after the election, there was a bit of talk from some conservatives about broadening the party's appeal, looking for new approaches, yadda yadda.  There was a moment where the movement's elites could have looked around and thought "We've taken two consecutive beatings, we're as popular as herpes among the fastest-growing demographics, we did a horrible job while in office and now that you mention it, yes, half of us are completely unfit to join civilized society."

There wasn't much navel-gazing, but it stopped almost entirely right around when Glenn Beck started catching on.  There's a blog called The Next Right, dedicated towards forward-looking rightwingishness, which was getting about a half-dozen posts a day this time last year.  Now it's got ten posts for this entire month.

Instead of making changes, they're just going to stick with the old formula and keep telling each other how they need to Get Back To Basics and only lost cause they Abandoned Their Principles.  Good luck with that.

The religious right seems to be making some attempts.  Going from the articles, a few groups seem to be aiming at bringing Hispanic Catholics into the religious right fold and acknowledging that there needs to be some kind of change to the energy policies we have now:

http://www.cc.org/olcampaign/america039s_path_progress

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/10/23/a-new-voice-for-comprehensive-immigration-reform-religious-conservatives.html

The teabaggers are apparently the ones relying on kamikaze missions.

[HyperZoneWasAwesome]

So if this were a sport, they'd be trading in Michael Steele for...who exactly

future second round draft picks, just to unload his contract really.

[The Fake Shemp]

Well, Lieberman fucked everyone's chances for universal heathcare. Good jon, you big dumb Jew.

[Dickie Dee]

Well, Lieberman fucked everyone's chances for universal heathcare. Good jon, you big dumb Jew.

FFFFFUUUUUUUU

[Human Snorenado]

Jesus Christ, THIS IS WHY WE WANTED HIM BITCH SLAPPED AND STRIPPED OF HIS COMMITTEE CHAIRMANSHIP AFTER CAMPAIGNING FOR MCCAIN YOU STUPID FUCKING DEMS

YEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH

[Mandark]

It's still up in the air what parts of the process Lieberman's going to vote against.  I remember he voted for cloture for the bankruptcy bill but against the bill itself, and that was a mostly Republican piece of legislation.

Remember when he was running against Ned Lamont?  Remember how everyone said that if you just put the war aside he was such a good, solid liberal on domestic policy?

Triumph:  He'd still be able to pull this crap without his subcommittee chair.  He'd probably do it a lot more if he were sulking from a perceived slight.  That said, they gotta line up behind a challenger in '12.

[Human Snorenado]

Jesus Christ, someone needs to announce NOW that they're running against him so he'll start voting more in line with the party.  That's what Specter did after Sestak started attacking him from the left and said he was going to primary him.

Lamont- announce now while everyone hates him and let's do some polling.

[AdmiralViscen]

Unbelievable.

[FlameOfCallandor]

This is what I imagine you guys sound like when you circle jerk each other in this thread.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[youtube=560,345]ZZsPtnB1uxo[/youtube]

[close]

 

[Mandark]

Quit leeching off us, FoC, and pay for your own damn firefighters.

[FlameOfCallandor]

lol u mad?

[Dickie Dee]

fucking moochers...

[Phoenix Dark]

Posting it again

Note that [lieberman] says he would vote to proceed to the bill -- just not to move to final passage. There will be several turning points:

1. Cloture vote cutting off debate on the motion to proceed to the health care bill (60 votes);

2. Motion to proceed to the bill (50 votes, may be waived if we get cloture);

3. Amendments to modify the public option piece, e.g. to a trigger (likely requiring 60 votes);

4. Cloture vote to end debate on the bill and move to final passage (60 votes); and

5. Final passage of the bill (50 votes).

Lieberman says that he'll vote with Leadership through #1 and #2. If the other 59 Dems do so as well, that gets the Senate on to the bill. Once the Senate's on the bill, it will likely take 60 votes to water down the opt-out, #3 above. And those efforts will occur under the threat by Lieberman, and perhaps others, to deny 60 votes for #4.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/10/gaming_out_joes_threat.php?ref=mp

Lincoln sounds iffy as well. And the GOP is pouncing

At a press conference this afternoon, McDonnell compared the idea to another tortured line that cost a Democrat an election. "We all recall Senator Kerry's strained way in the 2004 campaign of explaining why he voted for it before he voted against it," McConnell said. "And I think it is perfectly clear that most Americans will treat the vote to get on the bill as a vote on the substance of the bill."

"So our view is that cloture on the motion to proceed to the bill is a vote to endorse a half a trillion dollars in Medicare cuts, $400 billion in new taxes, and higher insurance -- health insurance premiums for everyone else," McConnell continued.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/mcconnell-says-a-vote-for-cloture-is-a-vote-for-health-care-reform.php?ref=tn

They seem to think it's still August when no one knew what the public option was.

[Mandark]

So if this were a sport, they'd be trading in Michael Steele for...who exactly

That would just be scapegoating the manager.

The GOP's a team that had a good run, but did it by trading away their draft picks and killing their cap space over the next few years.  They can cut bait now and start rebuilding, clearing space and trying to make themselves a more attractive destination for free agents, or they can keep telling themselves that their formula has worked in the past, and give everyone on their team extensions.

Also, you can't expect to win in any real sport with a roster full of white guys.

[FlameOfCallandor]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/123854/Conservatives-Maintain-Edge-Top-Ideological-Group.aspx#

Conservatives continue to outnumber moderates and liberals in the American populace in 2009, confirming a finding that Gallup first noted in June. Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This marks a shift from 2005 through 2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/10/27/gallups-conservatives-and-libertarians/

Combining the responses to those two questions, Gallup found the ideological breakdown of the public shown below. With these two broad questions, Gallup consistently finds about 20 percent of respondents to be libertarian.

Evilbore am Cry. 

[Brehvolution]

36 + 20 >40

Article is misleading.

[FlameOfCallandor]

Liberals think moderates=liberals!! 

2010 and 2012 are going to be such glorious year. Can't wait to taste your butt hurt tears.

[Brehvolution]

Liberals think moderates=liberals!! 

2010 and 2012 are going to be such glorious year. Can't wait to taste your butt hurt tears.

No, the article says that conservatives are outnumbering moderates and liberals but only when you split them up. My point is non conservatives still outnumber conservatives.

BTW, it will be your tears being shed. The GOP has shown itself as the monster in the room. Continue voting against your own interests FOC, you've been brainwashed to what you are told. you can go galt anytime. What's holding you back?

[FlameOfCallandor]

Continue voting against your own interests FOC, you've been brainwashed to what you are told.

I'm a sheeple! When will michael more wake me up!! Oh the horror!

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[close]

[Human Snorenado]

Liberals think moderates=liberals!! 

2010 and 2012 are going to be such glorious year. Can't wait to taste your butt hurt tears.

Yet in poll after poll, Republican party identification is lower than it's ever been. 

[FlameOfCallandor]

Liberals think moderates=liberals!! 

2010 and 2012 are going to be such glorious year. Can't wait to taste your butt hurt tears.

Yet in poll after poll, Republican party identification is lower than it's ever been. 

Which would mean there is a problem with the party and not the ideology.

[Dickie Dee]

Liberals think moderates=liberals!! 

2010 and 2012 are going to be such glorious year. Can't wait to taste your butt hurt tears.

Let's go down the issues bullet point by bullet point and see just how "moderate " these "moderates " really are.

[Human Snorenado]

Liberals think moderates=liberals!! 

2010 and 2012 are going to be such glorious year. Can't wait to taste your butt hurt tears.

Yet in poll after poll, Republican party identification is lower than it's ever been. 

Which would mean there is a problem with the party and not the ideology.

I wonder how the roughly 3/5 of America who want a public option across almost all of the reputable polls convince themselves that it's a conservative position, then.

[AdmiralViscen]

Liberals think moderates=liberals!! 

2010 and 2012 are going to be such glorious year. Can't wait to taste your butt hurt tears.

Yet in poll after poll, Republican party identification is lower than it's ever been. 

Which would mean there is a problem with the party and not the ideology.

I wonder how the roughly 3/5 of America who want a public option across almost all of the reputable polls convince themselves that it's a conservative position, then.

More than 3/4ths support it if it's triggered or only available to low income people. Weird!

[FlameOfCallandor]

Where are you guys getting these statistics from? Huffington post?

[AdmiralViscen]

I believe the most recent public option poll was from ABC/Washington Post



Here's an older one from Survey USA
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=5ba17aa2-f1b9-4445-a6b8-62b9d1ba8693

In any health care proposal, how important do you feel it is to give people a choice of both a public plan administered by the federal government and a private plan for their health insurance--extremely important, quite important, not that important, or not at all important?

58% extremely important
19% quite important
22% combined unimportant

[FlameOfCallandor]

It's not that cut and dry.
http://www.gallup.com/tag/Healthcare.aspx

The finding comes from a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted Oct. 16-19. In addition to the 39% of Americans still on the fence, 25% say they have already decided to support the final bill while a slightly larger number, 33%, say they will oppose it.

Compared with last month, Americans have become more likely to say the costs their family pays for healthcare will get worse if a healthcare bill passes. Forty-nine percent of Americans say this, up from 42% in September. Meanwhile, the percentage who expect their costs to improve is unchanged.

Americans are more likely to say that their own healthcare costs, coverage, insurance requirements, and quality of care will get worse than get better if a healthcare bill passes this year.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

"Libertarian" is just a buzzword for an independent.

If 23% of voters truly were Libertarians in 2008, the Libertarian Party would get more than 0.4% of the popular vote last year.  Ron Paul would have received more than single digit results in many of the state primaries.

I would also say that moderates = liberals these days.  The GOP is doing their very best to push themselves as far to the right as possible.

[The Fake Shemp]

T EXP annihilated FlameOfCallandor, but what else is new.