September 8th, 2012

Are Republicans fooling themselves?

I don’t get this Stanley Kurtz column at NRO.

It seems to me he’s making an awful lot of assumptions without illustrating them, and assuming we share them. He says that those who dismiss the Democratic convention as “relatively meaningless” are “fooling themselves,” but he never offers any evidence whatsoever that the convention itself is meaningful or has influenced anything.

He indicates that Republicans don’t seem to be aware of how leftward the nation has gone, but my impression is that they are very aware. And very concerned; I don’t know a single conservative who isn’t. Who’s Kurtz hanging out with? Not the folks at neo-neocon.

Kurtz blames Romney for keeping the gloves on:

Only the Romney campaign can cut through the cultural, educational, and media filters and force a debate over the Obama Democrats’ bogus redefinition of the American dream. The media can ignore what conservatives say, but they still have to cover the candidate. With the exception of his welfare ads, however, the Romney campaign has avoided an assault on Obama’s ideology. Romney’s entirely plausible strategy is to downplay the ideological battle (Ryan nomination notwithstanding).

Again, I must disagree. Why dismiss the Ryan nomination as being of no import? And the very hard-hitting Ryan speech at the convention? Has Kurtz missed where Romney pretty much called Obama a liar? And speeches such as this one?:

At the Republican convention, speaker after speaker talked about the growth of big government under the Democrats. Sure, they didn’t use the “leftist” word for Obama (at least, I don’t recall them doing so), which seems to be one of Kurtz’s beefs. It’s not one of mine; I don’t think that approach would resonate with most Americans who need to be persuaded. But the days of “Obama is a nice guy” are long gone, although on occasion Romney may continue to utter that phrase (which is basically condescending, if you think about it). But “Obama is a nice guy in over his head” is not the theme of the Romney campaign.

I think you’ll see plenty more hard-hitting ads and speeches from Romney/Ryan before Election Day that attack (sometimes more subtly than Kurtz would like) Obama’s ideology. Whether the American public is too far to the left to hear or care remains to be seen.

124 Responses to “Are Republicans fooling themselves?”

  1. Rose Says:

    There have been huge crowds ever since Romney added Ryan to the ticket. Even top dems are now voicing discontent with Obama. There are so many instances where we say, “Wow, this ALONE should show people…” “This ALONE should keep him from being re-elected” – yet his approval remains in double digits.

    How is that possible?

  2. neo-neocon Says:

    Rose: It is possible because so many people are hardly paying attention. Politics is a knee-jerk thing for most people. Most people I know would never vote for a Republican, and they don’t pay much attention to what Republican candidates actually say and do. They let the MSM do their work for them.

    And these are educated, intelligent people. But they think Republicans are evil. I puzzle them; they give me a bit of a pass on evil, but I think they think I’ve gone a little bit nuts and have lost my judgment. As far as I know, they don’t read my blog.

    They represent a huge voting bloc. It is joined by those who would never vote Republican because they are dependent on government largesse and who feel Republicans threaten that, and/or are single-issue voters (abortion, gay rights, etc.).

    There’s also the “birthmark” thing.

    Really, there is only a small percentage of the American electorate that could go either way.

  3. Curtis Says:

    It is hard not to dismiss Stanley Kurtz. His post is the thinking of my alter ego and the possibility of it being true is disturbing. So, I read Neo’s post and settled down.

    Perhaps Stanley has noticed the “bump” Obama has got from the convention. Which is disturbing. Obama shouldn’t be getting a bump, not from that convention, not from that THAT convention. Are you kidding me?

    Perhaps it’s okay to grant that worry to Stanley.

    But he does misread Romney, doesn’t he? As Neo points out, Romney has pretty much called Obama a liar.

    Well, Stanley would counter, he was talking about the strategy. Romney simply must brand Obama for the cultutral Marxist progressive relativist deconstructional pro Muslim big government anti-god populist demagogue that he is.

    Well, as the long adjective string indicates . . . whaaaaat?

    Obama lost ground attacking Romney, the man. Incredibly, he seemed to make it up at the convention by “caring” Huey Long style that every man is a king. This “caring” is what is carrying. Obama. And the Romney strategy attacks that: Do you want to let an incompetent but caring boob ruin America?

    Romney has the right strategy because an attack on policy has support. An attack on the man, uhhh, well, I guess that has support to.

    Scratch that.

    Here’s the bottom line:

    The Romney strategy is more offensive to Obama than exposing the real truth about him. Obama will react and commit more gaffes like “You didn’t build that,” when his competence is challenged. The one person to reveal who Obama really is to the world is Obama.

  4. neo-neocon Says:

    Curtis: I’ll tell you one thing—if Obama wins (perish the thought), the Kurtz narrative, or some variant of it, will be the explanation. But the truth is that we probably won’t know why Obama wins, and whether there was anything that could have succeeded against him. The power of the leftward drift in this country (plus the lack of attention on the part of voters that I mentioned in my comment above) is very very strong. In fact, they are somewhat linked.

  5. Rose Says:

    You’re right. And it is scary.

  6. Don Carlos Says:

    It is worse than scary. I greatly fear it is a fact.
    Time and tide wait for no man. We have an ebbtide that is taking us as flotsam out to sea, and the drowning Dems will pull us down with them.

  7. DirtyJobsGuy Says:

    This is the eternal fear we have of offending people. We listen too much to the opposition and the MSM and lose heart. There are lots of people who are susceptible to the Dems argument that Romney will take away (name the subsidy) from them. But there are people who will see the facts if given a confident candidate. Compare the DNC and RNC speeches. You cannot get away with Clinton’s smooth talk in the debates and he will not be there anyway.

  8. Sheldon Says:

    I’m a Democrat who visited this site for the first time, and it is something of a surprise both sad and amusing how off the mark some of the comments here seem to be. First, Obama actually got a lift from ROMNEY’s convention, even before the Democratic convention, as you can see here:

    http://election.princeton.edu/2012/09/07/the-gop-convention-negative-bounce-a-final-look/

    Second, Obama got a huge lift from the Democratic convention, as you can see from the Gallup numbers, which these past few months have not favored the Democrats, as you can see here:

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/sept-7-polls-find-hints-of-obama-convention-bounce/

    Gallup now has Obama’s approval number at the dangerous (for Republicans) over 50%,

    To those of you who seem shocked that Obama has gotten a lift from “THAT convention,” or who think it inconceivable that Obama’s approvals are high and actually going up, I will quote Ayn Rand: When the facts don’t fit your premises, you need to re-examine your premises. You seem to assume both that the country may have drifted “left” and that Obama is a radical leftist. It seems never to have occurred to anyone here that a) Romney is the most unattractive Republican candidate in modern history; b) that rather than the country moving left, the Republican Party has moved extreme Right, so that Ronald Reagan even by many Republicans’ estimation today couldn’t have been nominated as dog catcher by the Party, let alone President; c) that adding tax cuts for the rich on top of the Bush tax cuts makes no sense whatever, economically, politically, socially, and deficit-wise; d) that because the public likes things like Social Security, which has virtually eliminated poverty among the aged, doesn’t make them “leftist”; and finally e) the “European socialism” that ridiculously seems to obsess Mr. Kurz produces more social mobility today than America itself, which used to lead in this area, and medical-care outcomes comparable or superior to our own and significantly lower cost. In sum, the black-and-white assumptions that seem to characterize conservative thinking today bear very little relation to reality, and may account for the total confusion that seems to characterize some of the comments here.

  9. neo-neocon Says:

    Sheldon: now that you’ve explained it all to us, we bend to your obviously superior wisdom. And of course, all polls are valid–especially the ones that prove what you want them to prove.

    If you do any amount of reading here, you’ll see that I actually know am quite familiar with Democrat and liberal thought. First of all, I was a liberal Democrat for most of my life, many many decades. Secondly, to this day, almost everyone I know is a liberal.

    There are posts on this blog and many others that present a refutation of the points you make. You would disagree with those arguments, as most here would disagree with yours. The pros and cons of each issue could take up several books—and have.

  10. T Says:

    Sheldon,

    It is clear that you are, indeed, a Democrat. There is not an original observation in your entire litany of Democrat talking points. The problem with Dems is that they see anything to any degree of the right of center as extreme. Your collective contention that Reagan couldn’t be nominated dog catcher is risible yet you pose it as though it were a serious thought or concern.

    Dems are simply incapable of recognizing the discord between their big-govt mantra and the founding principles of this nation. Say what you will about the founding fathers, but the one thing they were not in favor of was an intrusive national govt.

    I suggest that you and other regular commenters here read the following essay about “these united States.”

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/these.html

    Sheldon, if you wish to engage in a serious discussion about conservatism v. liberalism there is plenty of logic and opinion at this blog to do so in a meaningful and often profound manner. We welcome well-considered and spirited debate. If, however, your intention is to simply showcase the skills acquired at the Alan Colmes School of Collective Rhetoric and Regurgitation, then there are other sites at which you would better ply your trade.

  11. expat Says:

    Sheldon,
    I don’t really trust the polling data at this point. There is tooo much that can happen between now and election day.

    Are you aware that Germany, which is now at the top of the Euro economies, made major revisions to its social programs under Schröder? Not that Schrödewas totally responsible. He happened to have a few fellow SPD leaders who could add and subtract.

    Are you aware that many of the medical innovations we all profit from are tried out first in the US before they make their way across the big pond?

    Are you aware that the social security fund has been dipped into to fund all sorts of other goodies?

    Are you aware that our tax policies with regard to corporate taxes on foreign-earned money are worse on our businesses than European tax policies? Or than Germans who inherit a business don’t have to pay inheritance tax if the business continues to operate for 10 years.

    Are you aware that Germany does restrict abortions to (I believe) 16-20 weeks? Or that embrionic stem cell research was not permitted (I believe that is now being reconsidered now that the hype is dying down.)

    Far too many Dems see European social programs as some sort of utopia without understanding the different cultural values that enable them to work or the effects of homogeneous populations. I believe Romney has far better insights into these types of things than Obama.

  12. expat Says:

    Sorry for the typos.

  13. Mr. Frank Says:

    The country has moved left because the Obama economy is so bad that the people are hurting and scared. They want a mommy government. How ironic that increasing poverty, unemployment, disability, and food stamps increases your attractiveness to voters. Pushing freedom and opportunity to hungry people may be a losing proposition. Promising free stuff seems to be a winner to people who think “the rich” are picking up the tab.

    If Obama wins, the people who put him in — minorities, students, and single women– will still be broke and deeper in debt. I’ll take some consolation in that. Reality votes last.

  14. Curtis Says:

    Brother. The ole GOP moved to the extreme narrative. Can’t argue against programmed ideologues. If someone really believe that it is the GOP and not the Democrats who shifted to the extreme, then experience shows they can’t be convinced by the facts.

    The party is over, Sheldon, both for European and American welfare statism. Both are broke. Both are desperate. Both are anti-god and anti-Israel. Both are headed for the trash heap of history.

    I guess, by extension of your false assertions, you are as proud of Obama’s gift of debt to your children as you are of the fraudulent birth certificate he posted, the civil liberties he did not restore but diminished even further through “Patriot Act” legislation, the amount of lobbyist influence and corporate cronyism he promised to reduce but did not, and most tellingly, the lack of transparency replaced with swift and brutal reprisal for any whistleblower. Let’s also mention the corruption in the DOJ and using the IRS as a political weapon. Finally, Romney’s main point, Are you better of than four years ago? Well, how could you be when there’s been no budget for three years and less people working than then. I’m sure there are many exceptions (most likely privileged government workers), but as the general downward flow continues, they will be more and more the exception.

    How’s that square with democracy. Sad and amusing?

  15. Darrell Says:

    I don’t believe the polls although we are close to the tipping point mentioned earlier, This article makes a lot of sense to me:
    http://www.redstate.com/2012/09/06/the-alternative-universe-and-the-media-feedback-loop/

  16. T Says:

    Expat @3:51,

    Thanks for the insights. Your comment “Far too many Dems see European social programs as some sort of utopia . . . ” is only the beginning. Far too many Dems see anything not American as a sort of utopia. If you look carefully at the various liberal interest groups, the only thing they really have in common is an anti-American/anti-Western tendency.

    Curtis @4:02 “Romney’s main point, Are you better of than four years ago? Well, how could you be . . .” unless you are an ensconced govt worker whose paycheck appears like magic every week and who was kept on the govt payroll by Obama’s $5T debt.

    Remember, Sheldon, spin it any way you like, but the bottom line is that Obama’s 4 yr tenure represents 1.6% of our county’s history but represents 33% of our country’s debt (H/T Eric Bolling). As Mr. Frank noted above: “Reality votes last.”

  17. suek Says:

    http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2012/09/fascism-raised-its-ugly-head-at-dnc.html

    And then, in case you miss the link at the end, check this one out:

    http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/07/fascism-defined.html

    Says it all better than I could.

  18. expat Says:

    OT, but I found it another interesting bit from NRO:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/316331/romney-and-obama-debate-science-policy-adam-keiper

    My take: Obama knows nothing of science, but loves to hang around big names (Chu) so he can learn a few words to drop in his speeches. It enhances his cool and smart image.

    Romney may not be a scientist, but he knows you need to do some serious homework before investing other people’s money in project.

  19. Sheldon Says:

    Neo, you sell us both short if you thought I had any expectation of changing anyone’s mind here. Just a couple of points, to you and some of the other commentators. First, it was Republican Jeb Bush who recently said Reagan was too moderate for today’s Republican Party. Live with it, Mr. T. And do you really doubt it? Is there room in today’s party for any of once were a huge number of moderate Republicans, including God help me Richard Nixon, who actually began (among other agencies conservative now hate) the EPA? Finally, do you really believe your CONSERVATIVE talking points are original? Second, where were all you arguers against debt during the Bush administration? Certainly not making the same points with the same “the world is coming to a leftist-caused end of civilization” vehemence. Third, I don’t think of European social programs as a utopia. I am making what I think is a fairly reasonable point: that the reflexive conservative opposition to anything that smacks of European social programs assumes as fact that conservative laissez-faire social structures always deliver the best outcomes. They don’t – not always. My friends, no system does. That’s just reality. Yes, we need to do something about entitlements, particularly the cost of medical care, even if it causes some pain. I and I believe most Americans would much rather trust that task to those who care about those programs and see the very human needs they meet, rather than to someone like Romney and his supporters, who have never known want or despair and who believe – no matter what libertarian philosophy is used to disguise it – that government of the super-rich, by the super-rich, and for the super-rich shall not perish from the earth.

    It was nice visiting with you guys. I think we can agree that epistemic closure is to be avoided on both sides of the political aisle.

  20. thomass Says:

    It is a difficult argument to make. A The country has moved left and B aside from us no one has noticed.

    No, just more people side with the far left and are all for A

  21. Curtis Says:

    Memorandum:

    The U.S. White House

    Government Division

    Cultural Affairs

    Re: Allowed operations.

    The Obama White House requests all citizens to accord good faith and citizenship upon the “Sheldon” House. The Sheldon House has shown excellent powers of memory and understanding of the American Way. While on patrol in the naked wiles of an enemy blog, Sheldon House did engage and destroy the enemy. All combatants are now, thankfully, with Allah’s help, may his name be praised, safely home and in prayer with their asses raised high to heaven. It is Grand High Leader Obama’s favorite position.

    Other Houses are encouraged to patrol under the beneficent gaze and care of our Leader. Houses are advised, of course, to refrain from actual contact with the infidel including any exchange of factual information as the enemy is prone to use facts to their advantage. Remain secure in your gaze upon the Leader.

    Once again, the White House officially recognizes Sheldon House for its valued service.

  22. thomass Says:

    Sheldon.. not left equals extreme right wing

  23. T Says:

    Sheldon,

    “. . . it was Republican Jeb Bush who recently said Reagan was too moderate for today’s Republican Party.” So a single voice a group decision makes? Well then, Bill Clinton said of Obama “A few years ago this guy would be carrying our bags.” So what does that say about the Democrat party? The answer is, in both cases, absolutely nothing. Live with it, Sheldon. Oh, and BTW it’s “T” not “Mr. T.”
    I have neither his wealth nor his celebrity status.

    And what of conservative “talking points?” Expat, above provides a list of actual changes in the German economy and other economic facts. Since when are actual events, (what we conservative characters call facts) “talking points?”

    Curtis asks you about the debt left to our descendants, 1/3 of which accrued under Obama’s watch. That is a fact; where’s the talking point? You mean to say that Obama is NOT responsible for 1/3 of our national debt?

    As I said earlier bring a well reasoned argument and let’s debate, otherwise (and so far) it seems that you’re simply trolling to stir the pot.

  24. Oldflyer Says:

    What Kurtz and others, miss, is that this election depends on a hand full of states.

    Yesterday we heard that Romney had a major ad blitz. But, since we live in California we did not see a single one; and except for the few that run on national programs we won’t.

    I have little confidence in polls. Unless they are heavily weighted to the states that will decide the election, they are generally of little note; and polls in states such as New York, Illinois and California only skew the result.

    Sad, but true.

  25. Sheldon Says:

    I wasn’t going to comment further – as expected, Curtis and his ilk have moved well into more heat than light territory – but I did want pass along as my coda this item on the sources of our current deficit. There have been no objective refutations of it:

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/obama-romney-deficit-debt-chart.php

    I hope the Republicans lose badly in November, so that Republicans are motivated to work with Democrats to help solve our country’s problems. No party has a monopoly on wisdom – no, not even yours – and we all need all the help we can get. I miss libertarians like Milton Friedman, who offered useful conservative approaches for solving common problems. Haven’t seen one of those in a long while. Cheers.

  26. Bilwick Says:

    Sheldon in a nutshell: Me likel statism, so submit quitely.

  27. Curtis Says:

    Take the heat, take it. I’m glad to give it. It’s free. Something that will inspire many.

    THAT, THAT, THAT awe-ful, ugly, demon-inspiring convention. Well, conservatives paid attention and listened closely. We watched the whole sordid thing.

    We are aghast, horrified, that it should have any positive impact, no matter how small. A good man hates evil and hates to see evil prosper or grow. To see a rapist and liars roundly approved enrages us. How amusing that must be for Democrats until we can reclaim power. Then they wouldn’t like that would the? Hunh. Think about that. Hunh. Yeah, you don’t want to, do ya, do ya?

    That the Democratic convention didn’t immediately hit us all like a train wreck, a seven mile chunk of meteor, causes us consternation. A strident clamor for abortion and debt is insane! They shake their fists at God and law at the same time. For this they get a positive bounce? And the conclusion is that the people’s will is sacred and shall prevail. Why then was there a need for a Constitution and a Bill of Rights?

    We, here, write and read and shake our heads and cluck (perhaps we are chickens, maybe we should do more than cluck. Maybe we should buy guns and ammo.) because.we.still.care!

    Don’t pretend to come in good faith Sheldon, to take your swipes and depart in false agreement on an unknown point. Liar, like your Leader, reasonable until there is no need.

    But the people ARE catching on. Even though there may have been an egregious bounce, Obama’s likability in California has plummeted in California in the last three months. Check out the field poll. I won’t provide it for you because like a small child that doesn’t appreciate what must be earned so are Democrats ungrateful for the wealth and support of those who work hard and are being forced to give it to unions, unwed slutty mothers, lazy urbanites and otherwise.

    I’ll tell you, we are sick of it, and if your numbers have increased to over half (god forbid), our less than half is more intelligent and organized. We’re making our thing happen. We’ve have enough of the freak show.

    I’m afraid next time we talk, I’ll be putting you into a work camp.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/the_charlotte_freak_show.html

  28. T Says:

    Sheldon once again reveals his bias and pre-judgements. He signs off with an “I miss Milton Friedman” missive without ever realizing that Friedman is often cited and well respected at this blog along with most of the other members of the Chicago School. But I suspect that this, too, is nothing more than a myth to give his diatribe an veneer of validity; you know, kind of like Obama announcing about how much he supports small business and how important profit is to the American way of life.

    It’s been noted before by smarter people than us, when you try to argue with someone who believes that 2+2 = 5, the argument is lost from the get-go.

  29. Curtis Says:

    I recently saw a dog fight.

    Cute little feisty chihuahua carrying a little dog toy. It was on a nice red leash and pranced about quite delightfully.

    Along come Bobo, your ordinary golden retriever mix with something. I don’t think it’s name was Bobo, but he was just that kind of ordinary good hearted dog, and his name could be Bobo.

    Mister Feisty went wild. Dropped its toy and made a racket unreal compared to its size. Well, Bobo just looked confused . . . at first. When Feisty actually attacked Bobo, Bobo simply snatched Feisty up and shook it.

    Feisty’s manner and fight changed in a moment. He screamed and fled as soon as he was able, leaving fluids on the sidewalk.

    Bobo’s owner patted him on the head and Feisty’s owner’s hugged Feisty tightly. Last I saw, Bobo’s tail was wagging, and he was continuing as before. Feisty continued to be carried.

    You see, Sheldon, you’re trying to invert the situation; you’re trying to act like Bobo, but you’re not Bobo. Bobo doesn’t come into other dog’s territory and poop. You’re Feisty who’s learned to avoid jaw reach.

    You know why. Because you are a coward. You see the self-evident completeness of conservatives and that bugs you. And then, you are afraid of the consequences of a real fight and rely on barks and sparks and an owner rushing in.

    Ain’t no owner here to save you. You’ve barked and ran.

    And left fluids on the sidewalk.

    We’ll clean it up.

  30. expat Says:

    I only hope that when Sheldon sees the Code Pinkers dressed as vaginas that he realizes most of us female commenters want to be considered as whole people with feet that get tired after a long day of standing on them, with hearts that care about the kids who face a dismal future because nobody taught them to read and write, with heads that include functional brains. The problem with the Dems is that they let their most radical supporters set the agenda and those supporters don’t know when to stop. Of course, there are some nutballs on the right, but they don’t have the power now. Most of us just want some common sense from our government and the recognition from the government that we have common sense.

  31. T Says:

    Expat,

    And therein lies the problem. You cannot get common sense from the Democrat party or liberls in general (I don’t mean that as a snark, either). They are religiously linked to both their theories and ideology almost to the point of it being a PATHology.

    The theory can never be wrong, it can only be poorly executed and underfunded. As Obama’s interview w/ Charles Gibson illustrated, he would raise capital gains taxes even at the expense of govt revenue because it’s the fair thing to do. Under Obama’s plan electricity rates would skyrocket (implication: the economy be damned. What’s important is to establish a renewable energy grid regardless of cost or effect on the economy). Both are classic examples of 2+2=5, the economy is in trouble but it is more important to implement ideological policies (of fairness and green energy) than to deal with the economic problem at hand because the problem is NOT economic, it’s “moral”, environmental and distributive.

    I’ve used this metaphor before (simile–like/as?): it’s like taking a car with engine trouble to a mechanic and telling him you want the car repainted and reupholstered to look new because it ran well when it looked new. When you get the car back it still runs poorly. You can’t understand. The car ran well when it was new and now it looks new again. Why isn’t it running like new? You conclude that the problem is that the reupholstery was done with vinyl. Now you send it back to be reupholstered with leather and you’re sure this will do the trick.

    One can never expect common sense from zealots, regardless the source of their zeal. As C. S. Lewis wrote:

    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences.

  32. T Says:

    Curtis,

    Bobo and Feisty. Nicely done.

  33. Curtis Says:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/150743/Obama-Romney.aspx

    The Gallup poll does show a bounce for Obama, but look at the graph over the last few months and it is statistically insignificant.

    You should throw something else into the mix and that is the White House lately threatened Gallup.

    http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/dateline-team-obama-threatens-to-sue-gallop-polling-to-get-them-to-change-their-methodology-to-mak/question-3153333/

    Wait a week or two for more polls and averaging to give a better look. And still, polls are really useless at this point. Remember 1980.

  34. T Says:

    One further comment on the raising of capital gains by Obama. In our world, based upon logic, a healthy economy is a goal and it’s current situation is a problem. We can’t comprehend how anyone can’t recognize this.

    In Obama’s world, however, the economy isn’t the problem. The problem is a playing field that is not perfectly level (fair). It is more important to adjust the level of the playing field than it is to have good ground to play on. This fairness is based upon Obama’s own judgement and personal value system (remember he defined sin as being out of congruence with his own values) so he’s more concerned with leveling a sinful economy than providing a healthy one in which people can take disparate slices of the economic pie. Equally shared poverty is better than unequally shared success.

    That’s not what he says, but it IS what he has revealed.

  35. Curtis Says:

    Where’s the good bread?

    On the afternoon before the Democratic convention began in Charlotte, political messaging guru Frank Luntz convened a focus group in a local office park. He gathered 27 voters, 24 of whom had voted for Obama in 2008. Some were sticking with the president, but a larger number were undecided, and a few had already jumped to Romney. Luntz played some campaign commercials for them.

    The best-received ad was one produced by the anti-Obama conservative group Americans for Prosperity, in which ’08 Obama voters expressed disappointment with his performance in office. “I think he’s a great person; I don’t feel he is the right leader for our country,” said one woman in the ad. “I still believe in hope and change — I just don’t think Obama is the way to go for that,” said another. They reluctantly concluded that Obama has not earned another term in office.

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/york-romneys-message-to-obama-voters-he-let-you-down/article/2507252#.UEvPgrKPVGb

  36. Don Carlos Says:

    T: You surely do not mean to suggest BHO and cronies will share equally in our poverty!

  37. T Says:

    Don Carlos,

    Of course. They will equally share in our poverty just as the Kommisariat in Moscow shopped in the GUM department store for luxuries while the averge citizen stood in line for bread and meat. (/sarc off)

    I am an avowed anti-Communist and an avowed anti-socialist. My acid test is as follows:

    In a govt based upon “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” Leonid Brezhnev had an antique automobile collection. When any socialist/Communist can cogently and convincingly explain precisely why Brezhnev NEEDED an antique auto collection I will end my support of capitalism and take up the hammer and sickle.

    Likewise when Obama & Co. begin to redistribute their wealth then I’ll begin to take them seriously.

  38. parker Says:

    Dear Sheldon,

    You are rather amusing…. “I think we can agree that epistemic closure is to be avoided on both sides of the political aisle.” That is pure ‘high falutin’ babble from a jester longing to make a fool of himself at the court of the Chicago messiah.

    “There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.”*

    The known known that I know with 100% certainty is the Obama deficits and the amounting debt are a known known that can not be sustained. There will be a day of reckoning unless there is a change of course. For you Sheldon the unknown unknowns are countless. So no little Sheldon, ‘we’ can not agree to the dogma you regurgitate.

    Sincerely,
    Parker

    *Rumsfeld

  39. Roy Lofquist Says:

    There is something quite bizarre going on with the polls. The Presidential preference poll has been flat as a pancake for months. Events that in times past have moved it one way or t’other seem to have no effect.

    There are, as I see it, two possible explanations – either the electorate is locked in far, far earlier than ever before or the sampling is defective.

    Occam’s razor points to the latter. I note two things:

    Pew on 5/15 “At Pew Research, the response rate of a typical telephone survey was 36% in 1997 and is just 9% today.”.

    http://www.people-press.org/2012/05/15/assessing-the-representativeness-of-public-opinion-surveys/

    The other is the Wisconsin recall election exit polling. That polling indicated that Walker was losing big which turned out to be very wrong.

    The Wisconsin misstep has been attributed to selection bias. Walker opponents sought out the survey takers far more than supporters.

    I believe that the very low participation response per Pew strongly suggests that the same kind of bias is at work in the preference polls. People hang up. I have hung up on at least 10 pollsters in the last couple of months. People who have a stronger emotional commitment to a candidate are more eager to let that be known. People with grim determination are just patiently waiting for November 6.

    Bottom line – it’s a brave new world and the pollsters are totally befuddled. Wish I has more than the price of a beer in my pocket so’s I could place some bets.

  40. rickl Says:

    Anybody who thinks the Republican Party is “extreme right” has outed himself as a leftist.

    The vast majority of conservatives don’t give a shit what Jeb Bush says or thinks. We just wish he would go away.

    And anyone who uses the words “Romney” and “libertarian” in the same sentence is clearly off his meds.

    Thanks for playing, Sheldon.

  41. parker Says:

    Roy Lofquist,

    You are on point to bring up the Badger recall. Walker won the recall by a higher percentage than his original 2010 victory although bogus polling indicated otherwise. And, its important to remember BHO dared not touch down in Wisconsin during the run up to the recall. So goes ‘liberal’ Wisconsin, so goes the union.

    I think the pollsters are befuddled because their methods are biased and a significant percentage of those who voted for the messiah in 2008 will not admit to a pollster that they are not voting for hope and change or forward in 2012.

  42. Roy Lofquist Says:

    Parker,

    I don’t think that pollsters are biased. Disclosure: I was kinda inside that game in a previous life.

    Pollsters try very hard to correct for bias and distortions, but it is devilishly hard to do. They operate on the assumption that past is prologue. They apply statistical analyses to determine trends.

    This works reasonably well in normal times but by design they miss the black swans. The significant change elections in modern times occurred in 1900, 1932, 1952, 1980, 1994 and 2010. Note that they happen roughly a generation apart. These is no reason to believe that things have changed much since 2010.

    Republicans by 8-12%.

  43. NJcon Says:

    Hope for the best. Prepare for the worst.

    I think Stanley Kurtz is psychologically preparing himself for the worst, BUT a little blip in the biased polls – after the DNC convention – for Obama is actually really pathetic.

    This race is still neck n’ neck and THAT means a lot! We’re fighting against a Jackass who put half of America on the dole on purpose, knowing they’d vote for him once they became enslaved, the Leftist media and all the traitors who believe this utopia, unicorn shit.

    Sheez! I hate when Republicans start becoming despondent! I’m in this to win. Don’t let them psych you out.

  44. rickl Says:

    OK, I just read the Stanley Kurtz article, and I pretty much agree with him. I am very, very worried about this election.

    The American electorate has changed. Far too many people assume that freedom is their birthright, without having any idea how they came to be free. It’s possible that our material wealth has made us complacent.

    Thanks to the Communist infiltration of our educational institutions, many Americans do in fact believe that European socialism is superior to the traditional American system.

    Minorities don’t believe in America at all. They have been thoroughly brainwashed by the propaganda that the Constitution was created by white male slaveowners, and can thus be dismissed as a legitimate basis for government. Oh, I know there are some like Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, and Allen West who know better, but they are few and far between.

    Meanwhile, we have thrown open the gates and are importing Third Worlders by the millions. Many Mexican immigrants are not only illiterate in English; they’re also illiterate in Spanish! Most of those people don’t have the slightest knowledge of or interest in America’s founding principles. This is a recipe for national suicide. Both Democrats and Republicans are responsible for this, and neither of them show the slightest concern for the consequences of their immigration policies. It’s now considered inevitable that white people will become a minority in America by the mid-21st Century.

    Since Reagan, there have been no mainstream Republican political figures who can clearly articulate why limited Constitutional government and free-market capitalism are beneficial to us. Oh, they can mouth patriotic platitudes, but that’s about all. Meanwhile, the number of Americans who are utterly dependent on the government keeps steadily growing. And I find it absolutely sickening to see Republicans running on a platform of defending Medicare.

    Romney and Ryan are clearly preferable to Obama, but I have no confidence that they can reverse course. I haven’t heard of any serious plans to actually cut spending and reduce the size and scope of government; only to slow its growth. As I’ve said before, the American Republican Party is starting to resemble European “conservative” parties. None of them seriously challenges the assumptions of the socialist welfare state. England’s Tories merely argue that they can administer the NHS better than Labor.

    I’ve held my tongue up till now, but the “squeee!” factor in many women’s attraction to R&R is disturbingly similar to their reaction to Obama in 2008.

  45. SteveH Says:

    I think polling is oblivious to the Romney landslide coming because it has no way to measure voter enthusiasm and motivation. The very phenomenon that shocked democrats in 2010 and befuddled the prognosticators in Wisconsin.

  46. SteveH Says:

    “”Sheez! I hate when Republicans start becoming despondent! I’m in this to win. Don’t let them psych you out.”"
    NJcon

    Exactly. Anyone who hasn’t figured out at this late date that MSM outlets are playing psyop games with the American people to force fundamental change, just aren’t very observant.

  47. texexec Says:

    If Sheldon wants to understand what truth is to the Democratic party, I invite him to take a look at the voice vote on “God and Jerusalem” at the Democratic convention. The chairman asked THREE times for the voice vote that needed to carry by a 2/3rds margin. Finally, he gave up and declared that the motion passed even though it clearly didn’t.

    The Dems always ask you to believe what they say or your own lying eyes and ears.

  48. Michael Adams Says:

    Evidently Sheldon was not aware that George W Bush lost the support of the Right because of his fiscal profligacy, and for quailing in the terror war. He is generally regarded as something of a Centrist, a fact which we do not abhor but a man with whom we disagree.

    As Expat reminds us, limits to abortion are quite common in Europe, as they also were in the US, four decades ago. Continued opposition is not some new or “radical” shift. It is what many of us have always believed. The idea that the Catholic Church should be compelled by law, or executive fiat, to pay for abortions is quite new, is quite radical.

    We hope that Romney will call Obama on his lies. I must add that we go back and forth on this blog and on others as to whether Obama is too ignorant to be the real power, or not. He may really believe that “the rich” have enough loot to expropriate to pay for all the largess that he wants to dispense, in spite of all evidence to the contrary from the Census and the Treasury department. When we hear “corpseman” twice, and “Austrian,” we wonder. OTOH, he may really understand what he is doing. Most of us have been firmly on both sides of this question. “Knave or fool?” We can find no definitive answer.

  49. texexec Says:

    So a president can’t understand the plight of the poor because he is rich?

    What about FDR? JFK? LBJ? John Kerry? John Edwards? Al Gore?

    Heck…even Jimmy Carter who owned a large peanut farm and Obama who had made millions with his book and his wife Michelle who got a do nothing job for 300K plus a year?

  50. Bob From Virginia Says:

    StevenH, Curtis, et al, I am afraid the election will be an easy Obama victory. There appears to be no way that Romney will take the toss up states necessary to win. Most people do what they always do when confronted with a choice, which means WI and PA will vote Democrat, as will the yuppies who now control recession proof northern Virginia and the happy places of New Hampshire, Colorado and Florida.

    The good news in the tragedy will be that Obama’s mismanagement and insanity may eventually hurt enough of the “gimme” generation so that they will learn wisdom, maybe even that there is a difference between a Presidential election and American Idol. I’ll cry if Obama is re-elected, but mainly I’ll laugh, what other use fools be?

  51. neo-neocon Says:

    rickl: I don’t think you agree with Kurtz unless you think that Romney/Ryan could reverse the leftward slide of the American population by labeling Obama a leftist. That doesn’t even seem to make sense; if the populace has really slid so far left then they would applaud Obama if he was a leftist, not vote against him. Kurtz’s point was not just the leftward slide (I agree with him on that), it was the best approach for dealing with it, as well as his characterization of the Romney/Ryan approach as insufficiently critical of Obama.

  52. Curtis Says:

    BFV:

    So, the consolation prize is a big one?

    I pretty much agree and note, as well, that when Romney does win, by a comfortable margin, the work has just begun. Whether Romney can do a Reagan or not, I don’t know, but Reagan didn’t have the tea party. Romney does. And if Romney can prevent world chaos by the stability of our national economy and defense, great evil will be prevented. It’s a fine and loftly goal and one that involves us all.

  53. Eric Says:

    FDR is a touchstone in American culture, with the likes of Washington and Lincoln, maybe Kennedy. Every American student is taught that FDR is a great President with his greatness defined in 2 parts: combating the Great Depression with the radical government intervention of the New Deal and combating the Nazis and imperial Japanese with the radical foreign intervention of WW2. We are taught the long term changes from the New Deal have all been positive and the bad guys behind the Great Depression who have forever earned our skepticism are financiers and Wall Street traders.

    Given our common American myth of FDR and the New Deal, the vast majority of Americans are predisposed to support the economic changes championed by President Obama and the Democrats in response to our generation’s version of the Great Depression. The notion that the New Deal exacerbated the Great Depression while the economy actually recovered due to the unique circumstance of WW2 spurring production and temporarily wiping out our international industrial competition is a minority-held view.

    Implicitly discrediting FDR’s legacy in order to advance the GOP agenda as the better alternative to combat the current recession is tough to do.

  54. Bob From Virginia Says:

    Curtis wrote “And if Romney can prevent world chaos by the stability of our national economy and defense, great evil will be prevented. It’s a fine and loftly goal and one that involves us all.”

    How many of the current electorate are even aware that these are worthy goals or even that such goals exist? Certainly far fewer than are concerned about the sex appeal of the candidates. And it is the latter who are the undecideds in this election. We should brace ourselves for the worse. At least we will have the consolation of knowing Obama’s re-election is the worse and can prepare accordingly.

    I hope you are right and I am wrong about a Romney win but it all comes back to there is something very wrong with the current American electorate.

    Pajamas Media has a good essay on this subject:
    http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2012/08/28/golden-chains-5-ways-americas-wealth-undermines-our-character/

  55. thomass Says:

    Sheldon,

    “it was Republican Jeb Bush who recently said Reagan was too moderate for today’s Republican Party.”

    Yeah, I think those statements are funny… because I kinda like that the old new dealer Reagan became mr conservative and big enemy of the left…. Because he was mostly just against the leftist world view… funny because I have a lot of non conservative opinions and am in the same boat. I just don’t trust leftists and socialists so I’m a conservative with plenty of non conservative opinions. No one has ever tried to throw me out of a conservative group btw. I usually get offered leadership positions after awhile… example; I would like universal healthcare. Just as a non socialist that doesn’t mean code for government take over and forced equality / rationing with government picking who gets what… it just means paying for major medical for people who can’t afford it and become ill (period, full stop).

  56. thomass Says:

    SteveH Says:

    “. Anyone who hasn’t figured out at this late date that MSM outlets are playing psyop games with the American people to force fundamental change, just aren’t very observant.”

    The Obama campaign always plays that card too.

  57. Gary Rosen Says:

    “I wasn’t going to comment further”

    Well, you’re not the first Dem to weasel.

    ” I miss libertarians like Milton Friedman”

    It’s amazing how much libs like dead conservatives – Friedman, Reagan et al. It’s kinda like the anti-Zionist leftists who love all the Jews killed in the Holocaust but can’t quite stomach live ones defending themselves.

  58. Gary Rosen Says:

    By the way, Shelly, who do you think Milt Friedman would be supporting for POTUS in 2012?

  59. Gary Rosen Says:

    “Romney is the most unattractive Republican candidate in modern history”

    That must be why he could only get elected governor in a fanatic right-wing Republican state like Massachusetts.

  60. Curtis Says:

    Superb and excellent point, Eric. See Amity Shlae’s “The Forgotten Man.” Have you read it? She’s making the illiberals nervous.

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/amity-shlaes-strikes-again/

    Dear Bob From Virginia, there be some rightness in thou view:

    http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/09/08/vicious-mob-trashes-motorists-car-in-greenwich-village/

    It is reaching a level of mayhem and chaos beyond denial.

    Maybe we shouldn’t resist calamity. Society has a way a purging itself and we should encourage that purging, no?

    No. The Pilgrims said no and sought a new world. Crazy. As crazy as maybe going to the moon or mars. Or Texas. Wisconsin?

    No no no no no no no no no NO NO! Are you serious? We are winning, not losing. And you want to . . . what? I’m not sure. Give up? Surely not.

    Romney has come from a position of contempt from conservatives and passive shrugs from moderates to where no one really knows who is going to win. It is at the least a game now.

    This is progress. And that is not even considering the Senate is up for grabs, more governships, more local positions, more cultural and educational power, and your little grandsons and granddaughters growing up in an era of unprecedented technological, medical and scientific advances.

    The horizen beckons and where are welooking? Can I say the words bitter, despair, and angry?

    We have a world to steward, to manage, to keep clean, and to love. Imagine a rappochement between the greenies and Christians who basically believe the same thing with regards to taking care of planet earth. Imagine the power of peace in the Mid East once America’s energy dependence is a thing of the past. How about a crushing blow against Iran and not having to worry about those assholes?

    There’s a chance for our destruction but an even greater one for our re-emergence based on the simple fact that what we do works and what we do is freedom, religion, and market instead of government.

    Never before has there been such a challenge. Not like this, not this challenge within the system, this accusing us and attempting to create just one moment when we will bow our heads and accept an unrighteous judgment. That is the only way they can ever win, and that time must come because we must know who we are. We have asked for this test, allowed this test, and need this test for it will temper and harden our spirit to be the leader of the world for many years to come. Given the questions of science and technology, of cloning and manipulation, of control and information, the world needs our leadership to establish whether humanity remains human or becomes something else.

  61. SteveH Says:

    “”It’s amazing how much libs like dead conservatives,”"
    Gary Rosen

    Yes. Those are now reasonable conservatives because they no longer point out the absurdity of liberalism. Plus they never much cared for the cruelness of balanced budgets or people of character either if you just pay attention to progressive revisionist history.

  62. Curtis Says:

    Hypocrisy:

    Antonio what? LA mayor and chair of the DNC. He changed his name from Villar to Villaraigosa. He’s all Latino, or Mexican, or Hispanic, whatever. Same type of lover boy who cheats on his wife. He did. The woman lost her job to protect his career.

    The Obama White House: Pays women less than men. Demands that such inequality should not exist.

    Ted and Jack Kennedy: Muderer and rapist, respectively, of women. Viewed as champion of women rights.

    Debbie Wasserman Schultz: If I said something then I didn’t say it. I am the new women. Hear me lie.

    Bill Clinton: serial rapist and sodamizer. (Google “sodamy” and see if Google provides suggestions.) Bill will let no woman be treated with less than the full respect she deserves. His wife, full of love, is 10,000 miles away and in the arms of a woman.

    Michelle Obama: She worked hard to deprive hospital patients of their right to quality care. Demands health care as a right.

    Sandra Fluke: Rich and privileged and still a recipient of government benefits. Demands that government provide cloned children to happily wedded gays. If the little clonees don’t work out, euthanasia must solve that problem. Sees extensive use for euthanasia.

    Barack Obama: Didn’t mention his middle name, his signature accomplishments of healthcare and Wall Street “reform,” or Trayvon. But it’s all good because he will demand that the rich pay for the poor, the healthy for the sick, the old for the young, the white for the other, and if there is no money left, then there is planetary euthanasia. It’s all our fault anyway for living. Hasn’t he been trying. Give him four more years.

    The media: Rivers of vomit and self adulatory orgasmic fluid flowed over the piles of fast food plastic tray cups filled with inedible organic microwaved oatmeal and fruit. Stumbling to tents and harems filled with gaseous excrement and opiate pain killers, the media gorged on trucked in groupies paid to love them and share in the booze, drugs, and sex. Love that government stipend.

    Truly an ugly and sordid scene. If it is repeated, it will not be under United States sovereignty, but under United Nations sovereignty. That is where the true sex trade flows freely and where the true hate resides.

    Hypocrisy. Love it or end it, but the time of denial is past. You have been conscripted whether you know it or not.

  63. expat Says:

    BobfV,
    Will the northern VA newcomers who left MD because of taxes play a role in the VA vote? Is there any specific campaigning to suggest that a vote for Obama is like a vote for O’Malley, except that with Obama you can’t hop across the Potomac to escape?

  64. T Says:

    Bob from VA,

    I understand your concern about the upcoming. You do seem to forget, however, that in 2008, 47% of the electorate was not buying what Obama was selling even without a lousy track record. Now, Romney only needs to convince 4% of that electorate to swing his way (in the right states , of course).

    AS for PA, I’ve looked at Pa very very carefully. I think PA goes Republican this year, but I don’t expect any landslide. I’m speculating 51-52% or so, but that’s enough. I examined the under vote in PA for the Dem primary and applied it to the 2008 Presidential election. The primary undervote is worth about 513,000 Obama votes in 2008. That almost completely neutralizes Phila where Obama rcvd 574,000 votes. If this trend holds in 2012, it means that the people who won’t vote for Obama create a much steeper hill for the greater Phila area to climb in order to influence the state election results. Add to that Republican enthusiasm, coal-county blue collar workers who will not vote for Obama because of the war on coal and I think PA tilts Red.

    Also remember that Obama loses support two ways, those who vote for Romney, and those who, even if not voting for Romney, will not vote for Obama. Every non-vote for Obama helps Romney just as every vote FOR Romney helps Romney.

  65. Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate's Cove Says:

    [...] neo-neocon wonders if Republicans are fooling themselves…no [...]

  66. physicsguy Says:

    T,

    Your point about the 2008 47% vis-a-vis the new Gallup poll with Obama at 47%, Romney at 43%, is worth repeating. Maybe it’s my own bias, but how could anyone who voted against BHO in 2008, now vote for him??

    I seem to recall that even our hostess was willing give BHO the ooportunity in 2008 to govern from more of the center. How can anyone now believe that his next term would not be even more radical than his first?

    I just can’t believe any poll in which the base of support for Romney is less than 47%. And remember that 47% was voting for McCain!

  67. T Says:

    Physicsguy,

    Thanks for the support. I have been “singing that song” for quite some time because I see from comments that people seem to get discouraged. They take a pro-Obama poll and establish a trend-line from that, but such is unwarranted.

    IMO, the 47% is Romney’s floor. As you say, does anyone really think that any of that 47% will switch to voting for Obama in Nov? I think not.

    I also believe that the polls are not picking up on what’s going on in this country. As I said re: the PA undervote, in the 2012 primary a substantial number of Dems refused to mark Obama’s ballot while voting for down-ticket Dems. I just read an article about Linda McMahon (R) leading her D senate challenger by 3 points; a R senate seat in Connecticut? It may not happen, but the fact that such an idea is getting press coverage without guffaws is a “tell” that there is more going on here than meets the eye.

    Granted none of this is a guarantee of an R win at any level, but IMO there is a game afoot. Let’s not get cocky, though, and keep the goal in mind.

  68. Don Carlos Says:

    Please don’t anyone of us call the anti-Dem states the RED states. I remain convinced this was a MSM ploy, giving the American Left the BLUE.

  69. T Says:

    BTW the article about McMahon indicated that the Dems have the bejeebers scared out of them and were parading her opponent all around the convention to the big money donors. This is not the behavior of a party confident of a win.

    Another “tell.”

  70. T Says:

    FYI here is the article on Linda McMahon (H/T Instapundit):

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444273704577637093417843500.html

  71. T Says:

    On a related note,

    Even Modo is pissed (H/T Hotair):

    What a drag to realize that Hillary was right: big rallies and pretty words don’t always get you where you want to go. Who knew that Eric Cantor wouldn’t instantly swoon at the sound of our voice or the sight of our smile? . . .

    As the president told us, “our destinies are bound together.” So we have to stop holding him back when he’s trying to go “Forward.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/09/opinion/sunday/dowd-playing-now-hail-to-us-chiefs.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

  72. F Says:

    Neo:

    I think it was an absolutely great idea to sneak in a liberal commenter to shake up your blog! It was actually refreshing to read some opinions that were not more of the usual insightful commentary on this blog.

    Sheldon’s comments were sometimes disturbing, but they made me think: if someone who sounds reasonable actually contemplates voting for four more years of Obama, we have our work cut out for us. I had, heretofore, thought Obama supporters were mostly young unmarried women and Occupy types (meaning aged hippies for the most part). Sheldon makes me realize there are some folks out there who can actually put a sentence together and who will support four more years of hype. Of course repeating the “tax cuts for the rich” mantra shows he isn’t sharing a lot of original thinking with us, but at the very least he is not here calling us or our candidate vile names.

    So stick around, Sheldon. Don’t bother repeating the talking points, as they signal a distinct lack of original thought on your part. But otherwise, we need to have our ideas leavened with some countervailing opinion once in a while. And who knows, like Neo, you might have your mind changed. Wouldn’t surprise me: more than a few of us here once thought conservatism was heartless and socialism the wave of the future.

  73. J.J. formerly Jimmy J. Says:

    I’m late to this thread. Sheldon is gone but I feel the need to fisk him anyway.

    a) “Romney is the most unattractive Republican candidate in modern history;”
    Based on what? It’ yours opinion and it will be tested in the election.

    “b) that rather than the country moving left, the Republican Party has moved extreme Right, so that Ronald Reagan even by many Republicans’ estimation today couldn’t have been nominated as dog catcher by the Party, let alone President;”
    Once again that is an opinion. One that could be refuted in detail by citing chapteand verse of Reagan’s policies. There’s not enough room here but here’s the reference:
    http://tinyurl.com/8pt27t

    c) “that adding tax cuts for the rich on top of the Bush tax cuts makes no sense whatever, economically, politically, socially, and deficit-wise;”
    This is a false mantra. Reagan/Ryan do not want to further reduce the taxes of the top earners. They only want to keep them where they are right now. Being against the Obama tax increase on the top earners is cited as being in favor of a tax cut for the evil rich. Just isn’t true.

    d) “that because the public likes things like Social Security, which has virtually eliminated poverty among the aged, doesn’t make them “leftist”;”
    Sheldon cites the idea that Social Security is liked by those receiving it as prima facie evidence that it is impossible to do anything to fix a program that is demonstrably broken and headed for bankruptcy. That conservatives want to do this is, of course, “just plain wrong.” A strawman argument in which he pits “public opinion” against irrefutable evidence that something must be done to fix Social Security.

    e) “the “European socialis” that ridiculously seems to obsess Mr. Kurz produces more social mobility today than America itself, which used to lead in this area, and medical-care outcomes comparable or superior to our own and significantly lower cost.”
    Once again this is an assertion of opinion. Where is the proof? Why are people leaving Great Britain for other parts of the Anglosphere when GB has the NHS and other fabulous social programs? Why are people getting their money out of places like Greece and Spain? Why has the financial crisis dragged on in the EU for going on three years? These are not questions that can be ignored when asserting the superiority of the European social/economic model.

    “In sum, the black-and-white assumptions that seem to characterize conservative thinking today bear very little relation to reality, and may account for the total confusion that seems to characterize some of the comments here.”
    Sheldon sees all thinking contrary to his as “black and white” and not based in reality. His thinking is neither confused nor biased, just superior. He demonstrates quite nicely that he has gotten the memo from on high that the liberal talking points are superior and must be inserted ad nauseum into any discussion until the knuckle-dragging conservatives finally see the light.

    Finally there’s this:
    “Is there room in today’s party for any of once were a huge number of moderate Republicans, including God help me Richard Nixon, who actually began (among other agencies conservative now hate) the EPA?”
    When the EPA began it was a small, minimally powerful agency that seemed a good idea at the time. However, with the passage of the Endangered Species Act (also under Nixon) a weapon was placed in the hands of radical environmental groups that has been as responsible for the shipment of jobs overseas as any other single factor in our economy. Our environment is cleaner now than it was back in the early 1900s, but radical environmentalists push for ever more restrictive regulation that makes manufacturing, agriculture, and the extraction industries inceasingly expensive and at a cost disadvantage to world wide competitors. That’s why conservatives want to rein in the EPA. We like clean air and water as much as the next person. But we also recognize that reducing mercury to insanely tiny levels or designating CO2 (a natural, life-sustaining part of the atmosphere) as a pollutant is the kind of extremism in service of a radical cause that we oppose. It’s bad for the economy and the improvements to the environment are on the extreme margins.

    Sorry to be such a wind bag, but Sheldon got my juices flowing.

  74. physicsguy Says:

    Gallup poll again: they just readjusted the numbers to O 49%, R 44%, Being an experimentalist, I always look for the error bars, which of course NEVER appear on the graphs of the these polls. In the current instance they cite +- 3%. That means, O and R are still tied as the numbers overlap in their error. It may be even more so, if we assume the error cited is 1 standard deviation. Now if O had poll numbers that put him well ahead of R at the 2 sigma level, then I would be impressed. Right now… still a dead heat.

  75. T Says:

    JJ,

    Why apologize. If being late to a thread results in the clear thought and common sense post you offer, then we should all make being late to a thread our number one priority.

  76. LD Jackson Says:

    I’m thinking Mr. Kurtz isn’t quite as knowledgeable about what Mitt Romney needs to be doing as he would like us to believe. I’ll be the first to admit that I have longed for Romney to come out against all things Obama, with guns blazing. I have wanted him to respond more harshly when Harry Reid and Obama have continued harping about his tax returns.

    What has Romney done? He has stayed on message, driving home the fact that the economy stinks and has gotten no better under the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. He is now able to spend the money he had in the bank and has already started to do so. Methinks Mitt Romney is running a smarter campaign than many people are giving him credit for.

    Will it be enough to defeat Obama? We’ll know sometime late on November 6, but I think Romney’s methods have a much better than average chance of doing the trick.

    Just my humble opinion, of course. I could very well be wrong.

  77. expat Says:

    LD,
    I agree, and I think the Dems are spinning furiously to wear down our enthusiasm. Romney has the money to keep up the attack, even if it not a really bloody one yet. If Obama senses that his abortion message isn’t winning, he will continue to make more mistakes and provide our side with more ad fodder.

  78. Occam's Beard Says:

    Gallup poll again: they just readjusted the numbers to O 49%, R 44%, Being an experimentalist, I always look for the error bars,

    Me too, so perhaps I can be of assistance:

    Obama: 49 +- 44%
    Romney: 44 +- 49%.

  79. Occam's Beard Says:

    the Republican Party has moved extreme Right, so that Ronald Reagan even by many Republicans’ estimation today couldn’t have been nominated as dog catcher by the Party, let alone President;

    Rubbish. The Democrat Party has moved to the extreme left.

    A few quotes:

    “A young man who does not have what it takes to perform military service is not likely to have what it takes to make a living. Today’s military rejects include tomorrow’s hard-core unemployed.”

    “The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission.”

    “It is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war.”

    George Patton quotes?

    “Israel was not created in order to disappear – Israel will endure and flourish. It is the child of hope and the home of the brave. It can neither be broken by adversity nor demoralized by success. It carries the shield of democracy and it honors the sword of freedom.”

    A Zionist quote?

    “Communism has never come to power in a country that was not disrupted by war or corruption, or both.”

    A Rush Limbaugh quote?

    “The tax on capital gains directly affects investment decisions, the mobility and flow of risk capital… the ease or difficulty experienced by new ventures in obtaining capital, and thereby the strength and potential for growth in the economy.”

    A Milton Friedman quote?

    Nope. All are JFK quotes. Can you imagine a contemporary Democrat saying any of these things today?

    Didn’t think so.

  80. LD Jackson Says:

    expat,

    I think that is exactly what they are trying to do. Enthusiasm for Mitt Romney was building a little, before he announced Paul Ryan as his running mate. After that, there has been a significant increase in said enthusiasm. The RNC helped even more. The Democrats know what will happen if conservatives really get fired up for Romney/Ryan. It happened in the Congressional elections of 2010 and it could very well happen in November, if we have the turnout we need.

  81. J.J. formerly Jimmy J. Says:

    Occam’s, nicely done.

  82. Jan of MN Says:

    It’s easy to forget that this website, with its comments, represents the thought of but a sliver of the electorate. There are lots of Republicans who aren’t conservative, and lots of Democrats who are fuzzy liberals and not hard left. I dare say most people who call themselves Democrats don’t perceive where their party is headed, and has been heading for decades. The extreme left has successfully veiled its ultimate goals, and I believe the largest portions of both parties wouldn’t believe it if you laid it all out for them. Is it too late to educate them? I don’t know, but I’m terribly worried.

  83. T Says:

    OB,

    I second JJ, Kudos!

  84. Lizzy Says:

    Late to the thread, so I’ll just add these quiet but probably significant indicators:
    * 2016: Obama’s America 2nd highest grossing political documentary (companion book is #25 in Amazon Top 100)
    *Ed Klein’s “The Amateur” sales are steady (#24 in Amazons Top 100)

    People are researching Obama on their own. Both of these received little attention from the media, and few reviews published were negative (e.g. EW rated 2016 an “F”). The MSM has existed in its bubble for so long, and has lost so much of its audience, that they can no longer accurately interpret what is going on.

  85. Curtis Says:

    These little demoralization tactics are going to become more frequent because that is the war we are fighting. One of spirit against spirit. It is the same Israel is fighting against the Muslims, the UN, pretty much the whole world.

    It is projection, amplification, Indian war whoops. As a matter of fact, I’m getting a memory of a WWII documentary about how effective the use of loud speakers were that broadcasted battle noise. Scared the troops.

    Noise. That’s all that is.

  86. rickl Says:

    Don Carlos Says:
    September 9th, 2012 at 11:17 am

    Please don’t anyone of us call the anti-Dem states the RED states. I remain convinced this was a MSM ploy, giving the American Left the BLUE.

    I agree. This is a classic case of the Left setting the terms of the debate, and redefining words to suit their purposes.

    The MSM will not change, so it is up to us here on the internet to make the change ourselves. Red has traditionally been the color of Communism, so red must henceforth be used to describe Democrat states and blue Republican states.

  87. Occam's Beard Says:

    I suspect the Red/Blue assignment (made circa 1980, IIRC) was made because calling liberal states “Red” hit a little too close to home.

  88. rickl Says:

    It appears that there was no standard color scheme prior to 2000. Different TV networks would use different color schemes in the same election. It only became set in stone after 2000.

    Red states and blue states

  89. Curtis Says:

    “These attitudes have led to the often jocular suggestion that a red state-blue state secession is in order.”

    The often jocular, yes jocular, ha ha haaa.

  90. Curtis Says:

    Why Father’s really matter: Sperm is epigenetic.

    I will hug you hug you hug you love you, Vincent. You are my twin, my brother…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mw1Z2Jlp9Qw

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/09/opinion/sunday/why-fathers-really-matter.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

  91. M of Hollywood Says:

    also LTT – Late to Thread.
    What a joy to read – thank you all. Love the comment that we women have feet and knees and arms and heads, not only vaginas, but loved as well the astuteness of every comment. Neo has attracted quite a collection – far, far more outstanding than can be capured inside the flimsy little lasso Sheldon tosses out, a lasso that probably works well for him with his associates when they speak together about their imagined adversary.
    As for Romney, from my point of view he is the most attractive Republican ever to run because until 2007 I could not listen to a Republican. I only liked Democrats. I was like Sheldon.
    If Sheldon is lucky, brave, and wise, he is creeping back here to continue to read and, like many of us here, he may (just may) begin to see the strength of the arguments of “the other side” when he actually stops to hear them rather than tying them up with a pink ribbon of emotion and superiority. If he is really sharp, he will look up Thomas Sowell to meet a living economist who carries on the light of Milton Friedman. But Sheldon would have to be one in a million to be so fortunate for, like his flock members, he probably fled. I have never known in the past four years a liberal who could stay in a discussion. Flee: they always flee. Always. It is truly phenomenal. It is as if they are constitutionally incapable of actually exercising their minds. They would have been thrown off the steps of Socrates.
    As for what the future holds, let’s hope Milton Freidman had a pipeline to God. I took a workshop from him once and in the lecture that preceded it he was lit up with fire while talking about the spirit that was present in the foundation of this counry. He felt that the spirit so clearly got us going that it can be trusted to keep us going forever, amen. Awomen.
    Love you, guys and gals. Thanks for keeping the fires of the mind kindled and crackling.

  92. M of Hollywood Says:

    counTry :)

  93. Curtis Says:

    F: Neo doesn’t sneak anything or use top down tactics. She is who she is and your comment is reprehensible, you autocrat.

  94. Don Carlos Says:

    The Wiki link above says in part, “On Election Night that year (2000), there was no coordinated effort to code Democratic states blue and Republican states red; the association had gradually emerged.”

    Saying no coordination occurred is not to be taken at face value. We have learned a lot about media coordination in more recent times, as in “Jornolist.”

  95. Occam's Beard Says:

    Saying no coordination occurred is not to be taken at face value. We have learned a lot about media coordination in more recent times, as in “Jornolist.”

    Yep. Wiki asserting that there was no coordination is dispositive that there was. The only harder proof – adamantine in its hardness – would be the NYT making the same assertion.

  96. Occam's Beard Says:

    FWIW, “Sheldon” is a Brit.

  97. Curtis Says:

    a shit

  98. Lizzy Says:

    If you want to read a former Democrat’s (often hilarious) take on why Obama will lose based on last week’s DNC: http://tinyurl.com/8uuehca

    DuJuan left the party after witnessing the 2008 Dem primary shenanigans against his candidate Hilary, and he has the insight of one who has seen how the Democrat party works as an insider.

  99. Curtis Says:

    And you people are horrible, absolutely horrible for not accepting him. This only proves your xeno homo baro atmo demo felo phobias.

    Hang your heads in shame. Put on the cone of shame.

    Or, like everyone else seems to be doing, buy some guns and ammo.

  100. Curtis Says:

    Lizxzy: To all the girls I’ve loved before:

    . . . all these girls would have spit on Obama’s snout. They would have know, would have spotted, immediately, the phony that is Obamy.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGo8WFVbxXI

  101. beverly Says:

    Well, well. Romney is already “clarifying” what he means by “repealing” Obamacare: he means “keeping much of it.” As in, all the parts that are like Romneycare! (see Mass.)

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/romney-keep-parts-obamacare/2012/09/09/id/451193

  102. T Says:

    M of Hollywood,

    I’d be interested in a thumbnail sketch of your change in 2007 especially given your pseudonym which, if true, makes me believe you lived in the belly of the beast. What precipitated it?

  103. Curtis Says:

    Uhhhh, and what would you do with promises? Caring for our parents is wrong, how? The Democrats are right in pointing towards that responsibility and if we don’t keep it, we are savages. If it costs us a more fancy house, better tasting wine, and vacations, then that is good. What did they do for us other than win our freedom and prosperity. We have that duty to them and we need to enshrine it legislation. What are we next to them? We should give it willingly and their gift to us along with God’s blessing will be peace and strength of mind.

  104. Curtis Says:

    Uustice of mustard:

    I want to clear up any possible confusion:

    The power of Republican system is this: They make promises they can keep.

    And their failure: Well, yes, it’s not their fault. They had to keep pace with Democrats promising even MORE!

    People, not corporations, not gov’t., have provided our seniors with retirement. How could gov’t do that? What does gov’t do to make monthly pay checks?

    Please think about this: Who in government works to create a job or service? Is government primary or secondary? If all people everywhere and at everytime depended upon the government, where would the money come from? There is nothing left but government, so I guess government must produce what it used to take? Do you think government can do that? Nickers, you bollocks.

    We all believe in a base line of gov’t services, but those services only become available because there is a surplus given willingly. When it is not given willingly, the surplus vanishes. I must then bend you over table. Bend, beauty.

    And the vanishing middle class, “hammered” according to Cherokee Indian Chiefs, will die as if they have no life of their own.

    If you are following me, I have taken you down a classic path of nothing so that you can find something.

    I used to find a photograph.. .

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzIbyDbmsyg

    and hope I have enough dope until you find me.

  105. beverly Says:

    OT: there was a bit of a riot here in Greenwich Village, NYC, last night: just three blocks from my apartment. Very scary. Thank God I wasn’t out last night by myself.

    The video, which was linked on CBS’s local news, says it all: http://tinyurl.com/bmubv3d
    (Language warning)
    It reminds me of the scenes in LA after the Rodney King trial: though the police got there before they could drag the poor man out of his car. They did smash the windows. Can you imagine being surrounded by hundreds of these goons? How terrifying!

  106. rachel Says:

    Well, well. Romney is already “clarifying” what he means by “repealing” Obamacare: he means “keeping much of it.” As in, all the parts that are like Romneycare! (see Mass.)

    This is a distortion of Romney’s position. Please read this post by Yuval Levin. Nothing Romney said today is new, it’s perfectly consistent with what he’s said throughout his campaign, nothing about it contradicts his commitment to repealing Obamacare, and there’s nothing particularly un-conservative about it.

    As Levin points out, the big hullaballo made over his remarks is in part due to journalistic conflations, confusions, and ignorance. Read the whole thing, but here’s a relevant excerpt:

    Mitt Romney hasn’t offered much detail about his version, but what he said today was no more or less than what he has said before and it suggests exactly this approach. The fact that this was treated as earth-shattering news suggests first of all that many political reporters just haven’t bothered to look at what proposals Romney has offered, and second (not surprisingly) that they’ve fallen for the Democratic line about Obamacare.
     
    That line involves, first of all, the notion that Obamacare is simply the definition of health-care reform, and that to oppose it means to not want to solve the problems with our system. Reporters are therefore surprised anytime a Republican expresses the desire to solve those problems, and they assume that means he must want to keep Obamacare. They have no idea, for instance, that numerous Republicans in recent years have backed proposals (like this one) that would be likely to get us much closer to universal coverage than Obamacare (which after all CBO says will leave 30 million people uninsured) at far lower cost.
     
    And this line involves, secondly, the notion that the little things Obamacare has started to do (including constraining the exclusion of pre-existing conditions by insurance companies) are the essence of Obamacare, so that to oppose Obamacare is just to oppose these.

    I would add (since this fits in not only with theme of this post by neo, but also the theme at Instapundit and pjmedia today on the Dem campaign of “demoralization”), that I suspect a lot of the angry commentary on this today is moby concern trolling (“see, Romney = Obama!”)– again, an attempt to demoralize the Republican base. Let’s take care not to buy into it.

  107. neo-neocon Says:

    beverly: I see you fell right into the MSM trap.

    See what Rachel said, above. Read the article and note what he actually said. Most Republicans have long advocated certain basic elements that would have been part of their health insurance reform bill: private sector, availability of catastrophic insurance, portability, and coverage for pre-existing conditions, to name some of the most important ones. Romney is merely reiterating this sort of thing. But the headline refers to it as keeping parts of Obamacare—and even inplies that that’s a quote from Romney, which it is not—in order to stir up anti-Romney feeling in Republicans and conservatives who hate Obamacare.

    Clever, no?

  108. M of Hollywood Says:

    T: the thumbnail sketch is the same as happened to DuJuan that Lizzie linked to: http://tinyurl.com/8uuehca What a link. What a song.
    As with that DuJuan, it was the 2007 Democrat party nomination process. I watched it like a hawk. I found it downright sad and stupid. So sad and stupid that it seemed corrupt. I think the key thing now is that the “Hillary piece” is missing. I do not mean that she is or would have been “the answer.” No. But I could not see that then. Now, unfortunately, there is nothing to prompt people who are knee-jerk Democrats as I was and presumably as DuJuan was to SEE what their process consists of. Read his piece. Interesting.
    Bill Clinton said back then that both parties’ nomination votes are about emotion, whereas the general election is about ideas. I thought that was an interesting observation. But that may have shifted to this 2012 general election being about a strong combo of ideas and emotion about those ideas, all of which is now focussed on these two tall men. Which one will win? God help us.

  109. RandomThoughts Says:

    Poor Sheldon. If he wanted his “wisdom” to be recognized, he came to the wrong place.

    I do appreciate the way he stimulated discussion though, in much the same way burnt toast motivates the opening of windows so that fresh air can fill a room.

    Expat, you made my day with:

    …most of us female commenters want to be considered as whole people with feet that get tired after a long day of standing on them, with hearts that care about the kids who face a dismal future because nobody taught them to read and write, with heads that include functional brains…Most of us just want some common sense from our government and the recognition from the government that we have common sense.

    AMEN!

  110. davisbr Says:

    Neo? – I didn’t pay enough attention to your blog during the last presidential election (sorry, my main focus was elsewhere, though I’ve been reading you for a decade or so), but did you attract obvious operatives then, too?

    …I’ve never really seen outright disinformation here before by an unknown troll …is that then, going to be the modus operandi of the Obama campaign? – Leave no stone unturned in depressing the Republican turnout?

    LOL.

    Wowser, Neo, you’re being targeted. Isn’t that just special (in my best Church Lady voice).

    You’ve either arrived …or they are really, really desperate.

  111. Nolanimrod Says:

    The media can ignore what conservatives say, but they still have to cover the candidate

    And they will. A lot of fall gardens are going unfertilized this year.

  112. SteveH Says:

    About the only thing democrats have left in their arsenal is the high level of success in recent years of tying their positions to pop culture and fashionable thought. Which means they’ve basically recruited foot soldiers to their side that are very suseptible to the trendiness and the inevitable old hat nature of all fashion ideas.

    The cracks in this facade are developing and the collapse will come suprisingly fast. I’m betting we’re about to watch the bulk of it unfold in the next 60 days.

    Democrats know this and it’s why they are desperate to paint Romney and Ryan as unhip and uncool. It’s all they have.

  113. expat Says:

    SteveH,

    And lying on your bed in your parents’ home staring up at a fading Obama poster is cool. Somehow we have to get the young to think about the reality of life.

    On the other hand, I just saw a piece on Today about girls entering college who are spending thousands for classes about adjusting to college life, including how to get in to sororities. I got a hug and kiss from my parents before they drove off and left me to unpack my clothes and desk lamp (What? No fridge or microwave?). The Obama generation is so insulated from any real life experiences that it is disgusting.

  114. T Says:

    Expat,

    Clothes, desklamp — you forgot the alarm clock.

  115. T Says:

    davisbr wrote “You’ve either arrived …or they are really, really desperate.”

    Just remember, if you’re getting flack then it means you’re over the target (aka living in their heads rent-free)!

  116. Don Carlos Says:

    beverly:
    I too saw the Greenwich mob video. What struck me was that the mobsters, in their seeming hundreds, were all in their early 20s, both sexes, black and white. Obamavoters all, raised on rap, violence and sex. Clockwork Orange writ large.

  117. T Says:

    And furthermore, when one begins to feel discouraged, remember the University of Colorado model which predicts a big Romney win and has correctly predicted all presidential elections since 1980.

    Forgot about that didn’t we—the MSM kind of hoped you would.

    http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/23/university-of-colorado-prediction-model-points-to-big-romney-win

  118. T Says:

    and see Rich Lowry:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/316400/horsest-rich-lowry

    the money quote:

    I hope our friends realize that all these media analysts out there are Democrats WHO WANT US TO LOSE. And the more Washington DC controls our economy, the more important inside-the-beltway publications are and the more money they make. The 202 area code is dominated by people who will make more money if Obama is reelected, so it’s not just an ideological thumb they’re putting on the scale for him, it’s a business interest.

  119. neo-neocon Says:

    davisbr: it’s happened before that various liberal and/or leftist trolls or troll-like commenters have come here for a while. They vary in their m.o.’s. Many are probably on their own, just for their amusement, and some are perhaps paid. It’s been going on for much of the time I’ve been blogging.

    One theory I have is that the name “neocon” attracts a lot of them. They were particularly active when the blog was still at Blogger, because my ability to ban people wasn’t as strong. I don’t ban them ordinarily unless they become abusive, insulting, or especially annoying and repetitive in moving the goalposts and other sophistry like that.

  120. Curtis Says:

    Very nice point, T. The Colorado doesn’t predict a landslide like Reagan in 80 or FDR in 36, but if it does come true, it will be a good starting point to reclaiming our country culturally and socially.

  121. davisbr Says:

    @neo-neocon (09.10.2012 at 1:08 pm)

    TY.

    …it’s just that I’ve never seen anything quite as obvious as the “sheldon” poster before, here.

    >>One theory I have is that the name “neocon” attracts a lot of them.

    LOL: actually (and digging waay back in memory) I think that may have been why I, too, initially clicked through (from some now forgotten bloglink) to Neo-Neocon (reasoning that, with a name like that, it had to be a worthwhile read …and it was, and has been).

    I remember I was also enchanted with the apple-in-front-of-the-face pix: sooo NYCie-ish literati-ish.

    Hey! – Those touches work!

    …of course, with me (as previously mentioned), it was definitely “…come for the politics, stay for the dance”.

  122. Don Carlos Says:

    More on Red v Blue:
    The morality quiz by Haidt et al. provided by a link Neo previously posted has a section on crime and punishment; the results are in bar graphs with “conservatives” in Red, “liberals” in Blue.
    Coincidence? I think not.

  123. Curtis Says:

    http://www.dickmorris.com/obama-thugs-rough-up-gallup-for-polls-they-dont-like/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

    Another reason why Obama won’t throw Holder under the bus.

  124. Curtis Says:

    I can understand Kurtz’es worry about strategy, but not his helping the emerging narrative meant to prove Romney is losing. You can see it. Based on a couple distorted polls and opinions that Romney and Ryan gave “weak” interview answers, the “conventional wisdom” is that Romney is losing.

    http://thepage.time.com/2012/09/10/the-troubles/

    And Kurtz helps that by joining in the herd and giving way to despair. Despair asserts the doubt and denies the true self, the self created in God’s image and which can only emerge through a fight asserting truth over doubt and the true self’s will over the accuser. And that is all Obama and his theology is. Accusation.

    The boneheads had better get on board and stop complaining and worrying. We all need to create the enthusiasm by becoming convinced Romney can win, will win, and we can help him win.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>



About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.
Read More >>








Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge