And by the way: while we’re not getting cocky about 2010…

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com

Premium Left blogad

Left Blog Ad

Permalinks

And by the way: while we’re not getting cocky about 2010…

Written By : TrogloPundit

…let’s make sure we don’t get cocky about 2012, either. No less of a genius than Charles Krauthammer sounded that particular alarm earlier this week, and now Moe Lane writes:

The NAACP has a goal; minimizing the Democratic Party’s losses in 201[0*] (via the use of a smear campaign). Vice President Biden also has a goal; re-electing the President (and, incidentally, himself) in 2012. The two goals are incompatible.

True dat. The more power Republicans attain in 2010, the better Obama’s chances of re-election in 2012. Not that we should avoid attaining more power in 2010, although winning the House back, for example, would rob us of the exquisite comedy of Democrats blaming Republicans – who are so far in the minority even homosexual vegan Aleutians feel bad for them – for their legislative failures.

As much as I’ll miss that, we’ve got to get control of something.

But once November, 2010, has left smiles on conservative and Republican faces nationwide, we should also keep in mind that it was only one battle, with another one getting underway…now.

The TrogloPundit

Christopher_Taylor

I don't think there's any room for being cocky about anything at any time, yet. There's some slight, dim, distant glimmer of hope that maybe the GOP might have a few more conservatives in it to influence the party's direction slight. If the people who are elected hold to their ideals. If they can stay in office, and accomplish anything. But just because Republicans win a lot of seats in congress is no cause for celebration. Two words to remember:

Senator Brown.

President Friedman

The problem that I've seen throughout my life is that conservatives and liberals both tend to give voters much more credit for their decision making abilities than they deserve. There is about a third of the American voting public who give very little thought to their vote (because, quite simply, they've had a shitty education and don't know how to study and think through issues) and just react to whatever is immediately going on in the political world and the economy. They'll vote for Republicans in 2010 because the Dems haven't delivered on their promises of unicorns and rainbows, but then in 2012 they'll go back to voting for whoever promises them more. And even if Republicans win both houses, get the White House back in 2012, and then start a wholesale reduction in the size of government, this “soft middle” of voters will throw them out on their ears the very first time the Dems trot out somebody who has been hurt by these cuts.

In a society with no philosophical depth, there can be no ideological victories. “The death of the left” and “The death of the right” are both fictions, and will remain so for as long as it remains fashionable and reasonable for voters to consider themselves moderates.

Christopher_Taylor

Yeah, you and I both believe strongly in the need for historical and ethical teaching. In a world without virtue, nothing at all matters except what makes you happy and comfortable. That's how the bulk of society goes through their life, and anyone that threatens that – even for good reason – is the enemy.

It is a mistake to think that most people are turning on the Democrats out of any high ideological position or philosophical allegiance to the constitution. They're doing so because their wallet hurts and they are having a tough time. The bulk of the population simply does not give a damn about the fact that the Democrats are violating the constitution; if the economy had turned around they'd be cheering.

Serfer62

Why do you think OHbama will win reelection because the GOP gets congress?
Any conservative bill that gets a veto isn't a gold star for The Won.
Any pardon of the mulitudes of WH officials isn't a game changer.
Vetoing OHbamaCare isn't a vote getter either.
So where the hell do you get this idea that '12 is his?

Christopher_Taylor

I would agree that he's likely better off with GOP opposition in congress as opposed to continued, lunatic radical activism and overspending with Democrats to help him out. Basically with gridlock and at least some effort to slow him down, President Obama looks less extreme and the voting public might back off a bit from its annoyance.

President Obama's chances in 2012 are almost entirely based on who the GOP throws up to challenge him though. Will they put up another unlikable RINO or someone people want to vote for? Will it be another Dole or McCain?
http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

Because all you have to offer is a half-term quitter named Sarah.

TheDickNixon

Palin would do a lot better than Obama. Hell, Joe Biden would be a better POTUS than Barry, and he is a drooling moron.

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

In your wet dreams, tricky dipshit.

StanW

Stay classy, Pete!
TheDickNixon

Nixon is ready for you leftists to run on your results. It will be funny watching Dingy Harry be unemployed and Granny Botoxus as minority leader.

The TOTUS will be able to cash in on his one term, thus he won't ever have to get his first private sector job to support the first wookie.

Christopher_Taylor

And all you have is a half term quitter named Obama

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

CROWLEY: I get that point and I understand what you're saying and I think the American people are concerned about the deficit spending. But you all — when Republicans were in charge six of the eight years that President Bush was here, you were Majority Leader at times during that, you spent on a prescription drug bill that was not paid for that is far more expensive than this unemployment bill is. You had two wars, ongoing wars that were not paid for.

So for you now to stand up and say, well, we're for balancing the budget, and, by the way, you've got to pay for these unemployment benefits, it just seems dissonant to the trials of the American people, particularly those without jobs.

StanW

“ You had two wars, ongoing wars that were not paid for.“

You've made this claim before, petey, even going so far as to say that the funding for these wars were kept “off the book”. Are you FINALLY going to provide some proof of your accusations?

Hmmmmmmm?

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

It's well known, Stan, that Bush used supplimentary spending to pay for the wars and keep them off the books.

For example, this article from 2008:

The White House confirmed Wednesday that its new budget next month will not request a full year’s funding for the war in Iraq, leaving the next president and Congress to confront major cost questions soon after taking office in 2009.

The decision reverses the administration’s stance of just a year ago, when President Bush’s budget made a point of spelling out in advance what he thought the costs would be for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for 2008. By comparison, the new budget, to be unveiled Feb. 4, requests only incremental “bridge” funding into 2009 and won’t sustain the military through the full length of the fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, 2009.

In confirming the decision, the White House refused to say precisely how much bridge funding will be requested for Iraq and Afghanistan in the new budget. But Republican and Democratic staffers in Congress predicted it would be between $70 billion and $80 billion — less than half the annual spending in recent years.

StanW

So what you are saying is the President Bush DIDN'T keep the war off the books and allowed the incoming President to set his agenda, rather than be saddled with his Predicessors plan.

I'm sure the things you type sound good in your head, Petey. But by the time they get here, you are just another idiot troll!

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

Stain, you're a wonder at pizza, but otherwise you are a nitwit.

Supplementary financing of wars means they WERE NOT PART OF THE NATIONAL BUDGET. Obama put the wars on the budget, and you hold that against him.

Like I said, you are a nitwit, pizza peddler.
StanW

Not sure why you are so obsessed with Pizza. Is that your dream job, Pete? Would that finally get you out of your mother's basement? Maybe if you had a job like that, you wouldn't have to take out the trash and make your own bed.

So the US government paid for the war, but it was not a part of the national budget? Even though there was money BUDGETED for the war during the Bush Administration?

Hey Pete, you mom says to pick up your toys, and to stop doing that to your G.I. Joe.
Mr. EMT

Right? I just saw obamao's budget list:

Jungle gym for kids $25,000
DVD's for PM BROWN 20 bucks
Vacations, golf trips, dinner parties $2000000
court costs for dismissing requests for my birth certificate $2000000
screwing whitey over with “stimulus” $15000000000000
Screwing whitey over with “auto bail out” $8000000000
Oh paying for that war I'm trying to loose $8000000000

Destroying the constitution and pushing socialism on America? Priceless.

StanW

For those of your playing the RWN Home Game…

Petey has started his post out with the phrase “It's well known…”. This is Liberal Code for “I am going to give you my biased opinion coated in what looks like a valid news story, but I will be providing no proof and no links to back it up. You must accept what I say as truth and not question it or I will simply taunt you again.”
This method of providing proof was pioneered on RWN by D-Vega and is currently in use by most of the Liberals here.
earlgrey133

so we have a new President and congress that has been left a financial nightmare by the Bush administration. Rather than try to right the ship, they use Bushes mistakes to justify several times the amount of spending (for the most part spending).

What would you think of a CEO that did that? The spending has not been done to help the country it has been done to change the country. Using Bush's presidency to justify what IMHO is criminal theft of the country makes no sense.

How do you justify it? Really?
mightysamurai

It's well known

Ah, of course. The old “everybody knows” defense.
TheDickNixon

Since January 2007 the Democratic Party has controlled the purse strings of the UNited States.
Christopher_Taylor

Supplimentary spending is not off the books, you idiot.

mightysamurai

And even if it somehow was, in what universe can it be claimed that the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars were waged “off the books”? They were loudly and extensively debated in Congress for months. Hell, the decision of whether to fund the Troop Surge alone spent months in debate. How exactly is that “off the books”?

earlgrey133

Stop your complaining. Scott Brown (my least favorite republican) offered a deficit neutral plan to extend unemployment benefits by using leftover stimulus money. Democrats won't vote on that.

Mediumheadboy

Brown's probably my third least favorite; McCain's #2 (in more ways than one!) while Snowe, Collins, and Graham are tied for first.

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

With fools like Mitch in the driver's set for your party, and his utter disregard for the unemployed and his over the top concern for tax cuts for the rich, your party is doomed.

StanW

Pete, why do you keep trying to equate All Taxpayers with “The Rich”? In the Republican plan ALL TAXPAYERS get a tax cut. I understand you think that anyone that makes enough money to pay taxes is rich, but there is a reality outside of the basement of your parents house. Try looking at it.

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

I bet I paid more taxes last year than you did, Stan, because I made more money than you. I am a system manager, 14 years on the job, supporting applications running in a Solaris environment. I work from home and my iPhone 4 should be delivered today. Life is good.

What do you do for a living? Weren't you jobless recently so you had to deliver pizza?

Bush's tax cuts were geared towards the wealthiest people. The only person who doesn't realize this is you, pizza boy.

StanW

Once again with your false bravado, Pete. Do you think any of us actually believe all of your BS claims. They are much like your promise to send us your tax returns to prove your income.

Interesting that you went from a UNIX programmer to a Systems Manager in just a week, Pete. Are you having trouble keeping your lies straight, little boy?

Mediumheadboy

Well, you know, Off's a busy man, what with all those nappies he has to change and everything.
http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

Technically I am in operations, so I do a bit of programming but mostly I administer processes written by programmers, or developers, as we know them.

I don't care what you believe, Stain. Obviously your beliefs are based on a lifetime of willful ignorance. I know what I have, and I'll bet you dollars to donuts I live better than you do, better job, better house, better toys. Write me at passion_follower@yahoo.com and we'll set up a way for you to see. Do you have an iphone 4? I could show you, for free, via the new video chat built into this remarkable device. I have no reservations, except when it comes to personal information.
StanW

OK, so you lied when you said you would send your tax returns, Pete. I understand.

So you were a programmer, then a manager, now you “do a bit of programming”. It is so hard to keep your lies straight, isn't it.

Listen carefully, infant. I think you are lying about every aspect of your life. But even if you are not, I DON'T CARE! Success in life RARELY has anything to do with money or possessions. Your supposed better house and better job and better toys mean NOTHING! And the fact that you work so hard in nearly every post to convince us you have all those things is a sure sign that it is all empty dreams and flase rhetoric.

You think that all that stuff you claim to have give you some sort of credibility here? Sorry, but you lose. Now, go set the tabel for your mom and heat up the Beef-A-Roni. It's supper time!
TheDickNixon

passion follower? So you blow strangers for rent money. And wow, you have a iphone4. Woop de fucking do.

Just admit you don't have the balls to follow through on your offer to email your tax returns. We will understand.
Mr. EMT

I find it difficult to believe you are a techno geek and bragging about having ordered an iphone4 when everyone and their dog is bitching about the problems its having and apple is going to have to recall their product. Plus you claim to be a professional and have an email name like passion flower? LMAO!
Btw, you never did answer my question a week or so ago when you claimed to be a UNIX programmer about how suck your job market is and what the going rate is for one of you dime-a-dozen geeks these days.

earlgrey133

which do you consider more honorable: Collecting unemployment or delivering pizza?

Christopher_Taylor

My guess is he thinks collecting unemployment, but he won't have the guts to even answer.

TheDickNixon

You said three weeks ago you'd email your tax returns to prove your statement. Still no email Petey. You are so full of shit Nixon can smell you upwind.

The only job you may have thats above minimum wage is professional astroturfer.

Email your returns to Dick.Nixon.Lives@Gmail.com. Full returns petey. Do it. Or do you not have the balls to?

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

Why bother? You'd see my real name and deny it's me, or you'd see my name crossed out and deny it's my 1040. Cons like you are great at denying reality.

Tell you what, when you get an iPhone 4, we can video chat, and I'll give you the deluxe tour.
TheDickNixon

Another nutless wonder from the left.

No wonder you blow strangers for rent money.
Mr. EMT

Yeah, that is the same defense you morons make for obamao when it comes to proving his citizenship.
Always comes down to “Oh why should I since you wouldn't believe what I say is proof?”
If you had something that is actually undeniable to prove with you would not be in a position to have to defend yourself…
However, you made your own bed.

Mr. EMT

Yeah and I am a leprachaun and I am so rich I give pots of gold away to underpriviledged adults who are still living at home with their parents.
I can no longer give you anymore pots of gold until you find another rainbow. Make sure you ride your unicorn otherwise it doesnt count!

Back on earth…you are pathetic and so damned insecure you try to measure your self wealth against strangers on the internet who see through the smoke you try to blow up our asses.

TheDickNixon

You mean the tax cuts that produced more tax revenue than any other time in history?

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

There is no proof the tax cuts were directly responsible for revenue increases, as you claim.

StanW

Well, except for the fact that tax revenues went up when the tax rates went DOWN, Pete.
TheDickNixon

Sure dufus, it was the fairy fucking godmother that caused that record tax revenue. Still waiting on you to email Nixon your tax returns.
Mr. EMT

Did your brain flee from your ass?
You honestly think that people do not spend more money when they have more to spend?

Mr. EMT

Until you remind the unemployed why they were laid off in the first place.

earlgrey133

I think he defiinitely has a good shot. Republicans may get cocky, and forget why voters gave them another shot. The media could openly blame republicans for anything that goes wrong. Obama won't push anything controversial and will hold amnesty out as a carrot to hispanics. Media will not cover stories about how bad the HCR and Financial bills are affecting the economy.

Meanwhile, who is going to attract votes for republicans? There is something wrong with each of the frontrunners. Huckabee can't win. Romney might, but he has a lot of baggage. Palin has an uphill battle, and if Bristol gets her reality show, Palin should cut her losses and keep doing what she is doing.
http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C3IKAXMRVZNEU5BZKUD7LK6WBA Pete Moss

Republicans are unable to name one painful, specific choice when it comes to balancing the budget:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HLlSfgJQh4&feat…

The party of nothing. No ideas. Just hollow, vague ideas. Give tax breaks to people who don't ask for them, deny unemployment for people in desperate need.

Republican, the party of nothing.

StanW

EVERYONE who pays taxes needs a tax break, Petey. We should not have to beg to keep our own money.

And no one is denying unemployment, that is a lie. We are against extending it further.

At least pretend to keep up, Pete.

Ed Klein on ‘The Amateur: Barack Obama in the White House’

Premium Right Ads

Blogads Right

Previous Features

40 Of The Most Bad-Ass, Masculine, Manly, Alpha Male Quotes Of All Time

Why Men Are Becoming Wimpy, Video Game Playing Slackers Who Don’t Want To Get Married

Horror You Will Never Get Out Of Your Brain Again: Bronies

The 10 Best Obama Ate A Dog Images From Around The Web

User Info

Features

Archives Best of RWN Humor John Hawkins Interviews Quotes Special to RWN