GOP in the mood for a Barry Goldwater, a ‘Braveheart’

Rich Lowry of National Review has some early thoughts on the 2012 GOP presidential race:

“Rand Paul’s victory is another sign that there’s a roiling, libertarian revolt within the GOP that is likely to fuel an out-of-nowhere (Howard) Dean-style “Republican-wing of the Republican party” candidate for 2012. The way Dean represented a rejection of Clintonism, this candidate will represent a rejection of Bushism. He may upset the apple cart on foreign policy the way Dean did — perhaps by calling for a pull-out from Afghanistan. He will be hell on Washington and anyone and anything who represents the establishment. It’s going to be a very tough road for an establishment front-runner who is already a little shaky, which is why last night was another warning sign for Romney.”

I think there’s a lot of wisdom in that prediction, and I think others see it as well. Newt Gingrich has been positioning himself for months to play the title role of “Braveheart,” but it’s still an awkward fit in many ways. He has studied his script and memorized the words, but after all his years in Washington he can’t quite pull off the character. Sarah Palin is also positioned — positioned but not really equipped — to try to fill that role if she chooses.

And since such a person by definition would have to be an outsider, you have to think that relative unknowns such as Marco Rubio — now running for the Senate in Florida — have also thought ahead to the possibilities of 2012. There’s lightning out there, and a lot of Republicans are running around with bottles, hoping to catch it.

The notion of revolution is purifying, romantic and intoxicating, and it can pull a lot of people into a movement who otherwise would sit on the sidelines. You can see the Republicans beginning to get caught up in all that, in the excitement of it, and it’s going to be interesting to watch it play out.

Because the truth is, Republicans don’t do chaos very well. It’s not their natural environment. Unlike the unruly Democratic Party, the GOP has operated as a carefully structured hierarchy, with presidential candidates taking their designated turns. But like Lowry, I just don’t see that kind of establishment candidate sweeping the party off its feet this time around. The GOP base wants a candidate it can love.

Lowry cites Howard Dean as an example of such a candidate, and I wouldn’t disagree. But I’d reach farther back into the GOP’s own history and suggest that a more apt model might be Barry Goldwater, whom the party turned to in 1964 in an effort to reclaim its roots after the moderation of the Eisenhower years.

“In your heart, you know he’s right,” they said of Barry at the time. “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice,” he said himself. Read these words from Goldwater’s 1960 book, “The Conscience of a Conservative,” and ponder how they would sound from a podium at the GOP convention in Tampa in 2012, more than 50 years later:

“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is ‘needed’ before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ ‘interests,’ I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.”

The candidate who best distills and communicates that message will be the GOP’s 2012 candidate. And then he or she will probably lose that November, just as Goldwater did.

239 comments Add your comment

Scout

May 20th, 2010
8:53 am

OFF TOPIC COMMENT #1

This was pretty much glossed over by the MSM yesterday ………….

Headline: “Mexican President Knocks Arizona Law From White House Lawn…”

Think about this. To allow a corrupt foreign Head of State the privilege to speak on “our” White House lawn against a sovereign State of our Union that exercised a democratic process is sickening and bordering on treason in my opinion. Obama is supposed to be the President of the United States of America not the United States of Mexico.

Absolutely disgusting.

The Snark

May 20th, 2010
9:00 am

The difference between Goldwater and the current crop of Republican “revolutionaries” is that, in addition to the small government rhetoric about what government should NOT do, he actually felt a sense of responsibility to competently do what government IS supposed to do. The current crop doesn’t care and, in some cases (e.g., Palin), is incompetent to boot.

Gale

May 20th, 2010
9:02 am

Interesting column. I think I would vote for Goldwater if he was running today. I would be happy if Republicans would stick to financial and government conservatism and stay out of the peoples’ private lives.

Southern Comfort

May 20th, 2010
9:03 am

stay out of the peoples’ private lives.

As long as the Religous Right has a say-so in the GOP platform, that’s not gonna happen.

Outhouse GoKart

May 20th, 2010
9:05 am

I think Newton is to fat to ride a horse.

Jay

May 20th, 2010
9:05 am

Snark, I’d add that Goldwater also strongly rejected the mixing of politics and religion that has come to mark the modern Republican Party.

Jay

May 20th, 2010
9:06 am

Actually OGK, Newt had slimmed down considerably when I saw him a few weeks ago.

Another sign he’s more serious than he’s ever been about a run.

Outhouse GoKart

May 20th, 2010
9:11 am

Ruh roh…thats a bad sign. Newton is an intelligent fellow, however, he doesnt relay the ole “warm & fuzzy”.

Jeff Fryer

May 20th, 2010
9:14 am

Cross referencing the image of Braveheart, (and all that blue warpaint), with face of Newt Gingrich. Throw in the the exotic politics of an elite society at odds with everyone else………

The GOP is looking for a Smurf!

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:14 am

I’m with Gale – if Goldwater (or anyone like him) were running today – I’d vote for them on the simple premise Goldwater had that religion and politics do not belong together and the government does not legislate what is moral.

Compromised Position

May 20th, 2010
9:14 am

Awww! Come on, Jay. Twenty-twelve could be the year. The year of the Maverick. He’s gotta give it one more try. McCain/Palin 2012. That’s the ticket. Immigration Elimination and the return of the $50/hour field jobs to the patriotic citizens of these United States will be the message. Jobs! Good paying jobs! Jobs building up walls, er, um, I mean, fences and patrolling borders.

RW-(the original)

May 20th, 2010
9:14 am

Scout,

Here’s some unsolicited friendly advice. Had you started that comment with something like what we need in 2012 is a candidate that would speak out against the following and then made your very same comment you could have saved one of your “off topic” comments.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:15 am

“Cross referencing the image of Braveheart, (and all that blue warpaint), with face of Newt Gingrich.”

Jeff Fryer,

Ewww. Just ewwww.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:16 am

RW,

It’s so nice of you to try and train the Padawans. May the Force be with you.

Gale

May 20th, 2010
9:16 am

It’s the money, SoCo. We need restricted public funding for campaigns, so we can encourage honest people to run for office. We need stricter rules for lobbyists. We need term limits. Power and greed will not legislate themselves to a weaker position.

RW-(the original)

May 20th, 2010
9:18 am

May the Force Forest be with you.

Bosch,

Hope you don’t mind me changing the sentiment, but that’s where I’m headed. Y’all have a great day.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

May 20th, 2010
9:19 am

Well, I like the way the GOP is going. And there’s more than just Newt and Sarah. Last night I see a innerview of Rand Paul. He wants to get rid of the part of the Civil Rights Act that keeps owners of restaurants and bars from keeping Those People out. There’s gold right there. I could see opening a place called Redneck’s Diner where we could have Ax Handle Night. People would flock to the place. You could make enough to retire right there. I’m sick of walking around pretending it’s OK to have a bunch of people I hate eating and drinking in the same place I do. I reckon it would be OK to hire some of Those People to wash dishes and such, but not be reglar customers.

So it’s real fine the GOP wants to be more Inclusive. They want to bring us rednecks into the fold. The first one of them that says “In your heart you know he’s right” got the whole redneck nation roped up.

Have a good day everybody.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:19 am

RW,

Are you a Druid Werewolf [or Werewolf Druid-- not sure which would come first]? Have a great one as well.

Mr. Right

May 20th, 2010
9:20 am

Talk about mixing politics and religion, did you see what the Dems are doing? Nancy telling the pastors what they need to tell their people,Kerry talking about people of faith helping pass some new gov take over bill and the President really getting into faith based give aways!

Soothsayer

May 20th, 2010
9:21 am

“Rand Paul’s victory is another sign that there’s a roiling, libertarian revolt within the GOP that is likely to fuel an out-of-nowhere (Howard) Dean-style “Republican-wing of the Republican party” candidate for 2012. The way Dean represented a rejection of Clintonism, this candidate will represent a rejection of Bushism. He may upset the apple cart on foreign policy the way Dean did — perhaps by calling for a pull-out from Afghanistan. He will be hell on Washington and anyone and anything who represents the establishment.”

That is until the money starts rolling in. If you think one man is going to stand up to the multinational corporations, I want some of what you’re smoking.

Realize this: we are all Demopublicans. We live in a plutocracy (look it up). You’re vote is meaningless because whoever we elect will still be controlled by the Power Elite as always and your vote simply serves to legitimize the illegitimate control of goverment by the same Power Elite.

Citizen of the World

May 20th, 2010
9:21 am

I’d like to think that we can achieve progress without revolution. And, yes, there’s a backlash against big government, but we can’t have big business without big government. Otherwise, we just have more BP oil spill- or Wall Street-type fiascos and no entity big enough to police or punish the perpetrators.

Granted, we need more responsive, more accountable government, and I think one way to get that is through more turnover in the house and senate. Let’s quit reelecting people who don’t get the job done.

But let’s don’t elect people who think there’s no job to do. That’s the problem I have with the tea partiers, who seem to think that these problems would just take care of themselves if the government would but get out of the way. Perhaps they don’t know their history well enough to know that before the government got involved in labor, the environment, finance, etc., there were gross abuses and it was the people who called on their government to do something.

Mr. Right

May 20th, 2010
9:23 am

Forget Newt, bring Sara she scare the crap out of the Libs.

TGT

May 20th, 2010
9:24 am

Petraeus 2012. But will he run?

Southern Comfort

May 20th, 2010
9:25 am

Gale

I don’t think term limits is the problem. If you do away with outside financial temptations, I think there would be a change in the actions of elected officials. That, in turn, would do away with the issues of term limits. However, you’re spot on elsewhere.

That’s why I think the Tea Party has the right idea, but they’re aiming at the wrong target. If they focused their attention on reforming instead of remaking Congress, they may find a broader market. Instead of focusing on government spending, they should argue against spending on Congress first. Once we can get good fiscal stewards in office, I think the rest would kinda take care of itself.

stands for decibels

May 20th, 2010
9:26 am

Just a bit of background to Jay’s piece:

“Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice,” he said himself.

Can’t remember who it was, but I know of someone who was old enough to be a around at the time, who more recently told Barry’s VP running mate’s daughter (the divine Stephanie Miller) that, when he heard Goldwater’s acceptance speech at the convention, his reaction was, “Holy s–t, he’s actually running as Barry Goldwater!”

Gale

May 20th, 2010
9:30 am

Good point about term limits, SoCo. I am sure I sould idealistic, but I would like to see people in government who believe they have a duty to serve the people, not simply line their pockets.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:30 am

TGT,

The days of the Eisenhowers, war generals who are honorable men, running for office, is over. It nice to think that men like Petraeus or Powell would run, but they have better things to do. But, on the other hand, why I have alot of respect for those two I mentioned, I’m not sure they have what it takes to be POTUS like Eisenhower did. Our country has changed alot since the Eisenhower days and I’m not sure that military men have the nuance to deal with many domestic issues.

Jay

May 20th, 2010
9:30 am

“Petraeus 2012. But will he run?”

No, and certainly not in 2012. If nothing else, he would want to avoid the spectre of a general officer resigning to run against a commander in chief whom he served. I doubt he would run in 2016 either, but that’s a more open question.

Richard

May 20th, 2010
9:31 am

Southern Comfort,

For the most part I agree with you, but who is really going to go after financial temptations for Congressmen? The only people that can are the ones receiving the financial perks.

You think Rand Paul is going to be trying to remove lavish perks once hes using them to get free flights around the world?

We’ve learned this from our last two Presidents. No politican changes Washington. Washington changes politicans.

Southern Comfort

May 20th, 2010
9:33 am

Gale

It’s not idealistic in my book. If you don’t shut off the supply of drugs to a drug addict, they can never recover. All we have to do is shut off the drug of choice to politicians which is $$$. It’s not going to be an easy task at all, and I’d hate to see them go thru withdrawl. However, I think that’s exactly what this country needs to right the course. Either do that, or we’ll keep swinging from one extreme to the other.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:33 am

“No politican changes Washington. Washington changes politicans.”

Bumper sticker idea!!! Where are you Paul?

Normal

May 20th, 2010
9:33 am

Gale

May 20th, 2010
9:02 am

Vote for Au H2O? Nah, but I’d vote for another Eisenhower any day…

Scout

May 20th, 2010
9:34 am

OFF TOPIC COMMENT #2

RW-(the original) :

Nope ……….. Jay would get all upset if I was using “trickeration”.

Now see, you “tricked” me into using #2 !!!

Del

May 20th, 2010
9:35 am

“and then he or she will probably lose that November”

Does that mean Obama won’t be running in 012 and if not who would become the Dem’s standard bearer, Howard Dean.

Southern Comfort

May 20th, 2010
9:36 am

Richard

That’s where “We, the People” come into play. Americans fail to realize that, regardless to how much money is donated, that money isn’t worth dogsh*t if they don’t get the votes. Think of the panic and chaos that would consume Congress if, for one primary, not a single vote was cast. We have the power in our hands. Money can persuade votes, but money can’t pull that lever or press that button in the booth, only we can do that.

Scout

May 20th, 2010
9:37 am

Jay:

“Snark, I’d add that Goldwater also strongly rejected the mixing of politics and religion that has come to mark the modern Republican Party.”

………….. and the founding fathers.

“No, and certainly not in 2012. If nothing else, he would want to avoid the spectre of a general officer resigning to run against a commander in chief whom he served.”

………….. are you refering to “private” Obama?

Scout

May 20th, 2010
9:40 am

P.S. to Jay re: your 9:30am

The tide has turned. “Che” Obama will get no more respect from me after that stunt he pulled yesterday. Totally unpatriotic and a sickening represenation of the President of the United States of America.

Goldie

May 20th, 2010
9:40 am

I believe the BP oil spill and its aftermath will determine whether President Obama will be re-elected in 2012.

Dave

May 20th, 2010
9:41 am

My off-topic post #1…

“Jobless claims unexpectedly rise by largest amount in 3 months as labor market struggles”

News like this is always “unexpected” to whoever writes these stories. You’d think they’d stop expecting anything and just report the news.

lovelyliz

May 20th, 2010
9:42 am

Neither Barry Goldwater nor Jesus Christ would have a chance with the GOP of 2010.

Jay

May 20th, 2010
9:46 am

Spare us the melodrama, Scout.

You’ve been calling him Che for weeks and banging the birther drum forever.

Scout

May 20th, 2010
9:47 am

P.S.S. to Jay re: “Petraeus 2012. But will he run?”

I certainly hope not for two reasons:

1) He dated and married the Commandants daughter while at West Point.
2) He became a politician vs. protecting his troops while still a general.

Both of these make him highly suspect …………………..

Richard

May 20th, 2010
9:47 am

Southern Comfort,

Unfortunately we live in the real world.

Let’s say I run for Congress on the platform that I have no political experience (I’ve been saying that candidates should do this for years and Rand Paul apparantly got wind of it). I win in a landslide and some oil company with no concern for the environment pays be $1 million to change the law allowing them to bypass safety regulations. What do you think I’d say? The answer is I’d say absolutely not….

I’d demand at least $5 million.

Unfortunately in the current political landscape politicans are not concerned with doing what’s in the best interest of the nation. They only care about campaign contributions. That’s how political parties promote whackos like Nancy Pelosi and Michelle Bachman. They’re crazy, but crazy sells more than rationality. That’s why both parties are being controlled by their extremists. They simply pull in more revenue for their company (the DNC and RNC).

AmVet

May 20th, 2010
9:48 am

“No politician changes Washington. Washington changes politicians.”

Precisely, Richard.

And that is why I have voted four time in the past five presidential elections for a NON-politician.

Including Ralph Nader, a man who has done more good for the average American consumer, shareholder and taxpayer than all the hyper-corrupt DemRep politicians put together. And who has more great ideas than the entire cast of yutzes who are supposed to represent and protect we the people

(But shhh! To the Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum Party faithful, and their flunkies in the corporate mainstream media, he like Ron Paul or essentially ANY other third party candidate, though they may be brilliant and the entrenched, enthroned pols are mental/moral midgets, is a loon!)

Scout

May 20th, 2010
9:48 am

Sorry Jay ……….. Allowing a foreign despot to slam our country from the lawn of our own White House is UNPATRIOTIC !

JohnnyReb

May 20th, 2010
9:48 am

Jay, your right and wrong. Conservatives are not so much rejecting Bush as seeking someone to counter Obama’s agenda. You are correct on us needing a Goldwater, but again wrong on us loosing. We could run McCain again and beat Obama. You are underestimating the opposition to what Obama has and intends to do. It will not stand.

Soothsayer

May 20th, 2010
9:48 am

Dow off 216 points and falling The multinational corporations are running out of people to lay off, bogus accounting trickery, ginned up sales numbers. Reality is beginning to set in now that China has stopped spending its sovereign wealth building “ghost cities.” Maybe if the multinationals start suffering a little we will see some real change in the failed neoliberalism (look it up) model.

Scout

May 20th, 2010
9:50 am

Jay:

It’s actually “Che/Karl/Capo/Private/Jimmy” Obama

Ward

May 20th, 2010
9:50 am

Yeah, Lyndon Johnson and his escalation of the Vietnam War and the never-ending War On Poverty were such huge successes. Goldwater was a visionary, but the Kennedy-worshipping media painted his as a crazy extremist. Same as it ever was.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:53 am

Reb,

“We could run McCain again and beat Obama.”

Nah. He’s too old – he came across as an old crotchety type back in ‘08 and it would just be worse now. You guys need some new blood, but the batch you got is all crazy wingnut types.

stands for decibels

May 20th, 2010
9:53 am

Speaking of The Corner (of Doughy and Pantload), any of you GOP stalwarts here signed up for the big National Review Post-Election Cruise, advertised over at that Lowery page Jay’s linked?

If so, be sure to come back with a full report. We’ll want to know what K-Lo, Jonah and Turd Blossom are really like when they let their hair down.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:54 am

Reb,

Oh, and good morning to you. :-)

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:56 am

Reb,

Just had a thought – if you meant Megan McCain instead of her “get off my lawn old man wondering around in boxers, t-shirt and bath robe swinging his cane” dad – you might be on to something.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
9:56 am

Oh, another thought – I don’t think Megan’s old enough yet.

RB from Gwinnett

May 20th, 2010
10:01 am

Did I miss all the whining and complaining about the 1,000th casualty in Afg yesterday, or do those milestones only matter when there is an R in office? Can’t even find mention of in on AJC.com.

Maybe Jay’s working on that story for his afternoon post?…..

stands for decibels

May 20th, 2010
10:02 am

Bosch, Meghan McCain, b. October 23, 1984.

Can’t be Preznit until the 2020 election cycle.

Mick

May 20th, 2010
10:03 am

Scout
So, the mexican president is a despot?

AmVet

May 20th, 2010
10:06 am

Yes, by today’s’ horrific standards the Republican Goldwater looks pretty good, but only because virtually everybody in that party now is a complete loser.

But before we all begin a great Barry Hug, remember a few things.

He voted against the censure of the scumbag McCarthy.

He opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1968. (He told an audience of Atlanta Republicans that “we’re not going to get the negro vote as a block in 1964 and 1968, so we ought to go hunting where the ducks are”.) Accordingly, he won ONLY Arizona and 5 states here in the Moron Belt. Can you say landslide defeat?

A visionary? Yes, if one considers this statement reflective of the backwater dorks today that control the GOP: “sometimes I think this country would be better off if we could just saw off the Eastern Seaboard and let it float out to sea”.

But BY FAR his biggest mistake was spotlighting Ronnie and giving his nascent political career a jump-start.

An outcome that of course, severely damaged the Republic…

Compromised Position

May 20th, 2010
10:06 am

The tide has turned. “Che” Obama will get no more respect from me after that stunt he pulled yesterday. Totally unpatriotic and a sickening represenation of the President of the United States of America.

I’d like to see what you considered as “respectful” before you go touting your newfound disrespect for Obama.

DT

May 20th, 2010
10:07 am

Interesting words by Senator Goldwater. JFK’s administration hoped and prayed that they’d run against Goldwater as they didn’t believe him to be very smart (and, of course, they thought themselves geniuses). Mr. Goldwater’s words (his 1964 nomination speech is a great one as well) in 1960 that are excerpted are far more applicable today than then (even liberals of 1960 would be appalled at the level of government intervention in every facet of people’s lives today and the nanny state we have created).

eddy

May 20th, 2010
10:08 am

ABO..Anybody But Obama in 2012! What an administration he’s cabled together…Holder is the authority on Arizona law But has not read it; same for Napolitano but both are experts as to what it says and how it will be implemented. Then we have the doofus apologizing to the Chinese for the Az law…and of course our President is bowing, kneeling and kissing the rings of anyone who’ll let him to apologize for everything the US did, did not do but was considering and is thinking about but has not yet done. In the vernacular of the Obama administration, illegal is NOT really illegal and a muslim terrorist is not really a muslim terrorist but a muslim freedom fighter. So in 2012, ABO and begin the repeal of these mindless laws (PS..he hasn’t read the healthcare bill either) and replace this America-hater with someone worthy of the title of the President of the United States ( note…these are the United States of America and not the colonies of Mexico). Throw all of the current bums out of congress and the White House….especially Obama and his administration.

jesus & muhammad luv tickle fights

May 20th, 2010
10:10 am

Sending young Americans to fight a pre-emptive War of choice to satisfy your Oedipus complex is UNPATRIOTIC!

AmVet

May 20th, 2010
10:11 am

RB @10:01, so are you celebrating or lamenting that fact?

Or is it that you are still decrying both quagmires like you have from the beginning?

Somebody pass me barf bag please…

USinUK

May 20th, 2010
10:14 am

Scout

May 20th, 2010
10:16 am

Mick:

Yep.

“Soon after Vicente Fox took office as president, Calderón was appointed director of Banobras, a state-owned development bank. He was accused by political opponets of commiting abuse during his tenure, by using a legal process to borrow between three and five million pesos (the amount varies according to the source) to pay for his home acquisition at Las Águilas, a high-class neighborhood in Mexico City. After political accusations over the matter arose, he stopped and instead went about the acquisition through different means.”

” One of the chief accusations made by his political opponents centered on the loan made while serving as state-owned development bank director (see Political career), an alleged involvement in organizing a bank-rescue fund to prevent solvency problems during the PRI-regime (Fobaproa) and granting contracts to a embattled software company founded by his brother-in-law during Calderón’s eight-month tenure as Secretary of Energy (Hildebrando).”

Add to that the fact that he has not closed the borders on his end or stopped the drug trafficking and …………….. you have it! Corrupt !

USinUK

May 20th, 2010
10:18 am

Scout – please name an American president who has stopped the drug trafficking in this country …

AmVet

May 20th, 2010
10:18 am

Besides had Barry gotten elected, we’d all possibly be dead now anyway, with such rational calmness as, “Let’s lob one into the men’s room at the Kremlin.”

To which LBJ painted him as dangerous by countering Goldwater’s slogan “In your heart, you know he’s right” with the line “In your guts, you know he’s nuts,”

No wonder Reagan turned out to be such a deadly chickenhawk…

Scout

May 20th, 2010
10:20 am

Compromised Postion:

If you have been on here for a long time you should know.

P.S. I have added a new nickname ……….. “Jose”

“Che/Karl/Capo/Private/Jimmy/Jose” Obama

Now, would you like to debate his unpatriotic actions yesterday in allowing the President of Mexico to slam one of our States and our democratic process?

Dave

May 20th, 2010
10:21 am

Off-topic post #2 (has more to do with something ctucker mentioned in her blog yesterday that (paraphrasing) “Medicare is doing a bang-up job”)

Texas doctors opting out of Medicare at alarming rate

“Texas doctors are opting out of Medicare at alarming rates, frustrated by reimbursement cuts they say make participation in government-funded care of seniors unaffordable.

Two years after a survey found nearly half of Texas doctors weren’t taking some new Medicare patients, new data shows 100 to 200 a year are now ending all involvement with the program. Before 2007, the number of doctors opting out averaged less than a handful a year.

“This new data shows the Medicare system is beginning to implode,” said Dr. Susan Bailey, president of the Texas Medical Association. “If Congress doesn’t fix Medicare soon, there’ll be more and more doctors dropping out and Congress’ promise to provide medical care to seniors will be broken.” ”

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7009807.html

AmVet

May 20th, 2010
10:21 am

Jay! Scout is going off -topic again!!! (j/k, doing my Dusty tattle tale imitation.)

“Scout – please name an American president who has stopped the drug trafficking in this country …”

Pick me! I know!

Ronald Reagan (and Eddie Meese) secured victory (GOP style) in both their War on Drugs and their War on Pornography!

TM

May 20th, 2010
10:22 am

Good old Barry told it like it was.

Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism

Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Hubert Humphrey talks so fast that listening to him is like trying to read Playboy magazine with your wife turning the pages.

I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass.

If everybody in this town connected with politics had to leave town because of chasing women and drinking, you would have no government.

It’s a great country, where anybody can grow up to be president… except me.

The income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government

You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight

Where is the politician who has not promised to fight to the death for lower taxes- and who has not proceeded to vote for the very spending projects that make tax cuts impossible?

joan

May 20th, 2010
10:22 am

The culture in Washington is corrupting, and the politicians can give themselves raises and benefits galore. The lure is staggering. We need an uprising to require congress to telecommute to work, living in their own homes and districts and living the lives of their constituents. Anything other than that causes the ivory tower type thinking they regularly indulge in. They are the personification of narcissistic behaviour and elitism. Unfortunately not many of them merit the title of intellectual or honest.

Scout

May 20th, 2010
10:22 am

USinUK:

We certainly make a better effort than Mexico does. And don’t forget the “hard stuff” comes from there. It’s “their” job to keep it out of our country just as they should keep their “people” from entering our country illegally. That’s what good neighbors do …………… or is it o.k. if someone off the street just comes into your house and goes to sleep on one of your beds ?

USinUK

May 20th, 2010
10:23 am

“P.S. I have added a new nickname ……….. “Jose””

what’s wrong with Jose Feliciano?

Soothsayer

May 20th, 2010
10:23 am

Dow off 279 points Oil briefly falls below $68

USinUK

May 20th, 2010
10:24 am

“And don’t forget the “hard stuff” comes from there.”

ah. no. the “hard stuff” doesn’t come from Mexico. the “hard stuff” comes from Afghanistan.

“It’s “their” job to keep it out of our country just as they should keep their “people” from entering our country illegally”

buddy – you claim to be such a capitalist, yet you seem to have forgotten the basic law of SUPPLY AND DEMAND.

Normal

May 20th, 2010
10:24 am

Y’all,
Let’s just say to ourselves, Scout is just narrowly focused, and empathy challenged, and nod our heads solemnly.

Scout

May 20th, 2010
10:24 am

AmVet :

Nope. I posted my two “off-topic comments” and now I’m not initiating …………. just answering other posters questions. If Jay wants to add that it’s up to him.

Outhouse GoKart

May 20th, 2010
10:25 am

Did anyone else see the YouTube video of The Goron giving the graduation speech? @@ posted is last night in the previous thread.

It is hilarious and worth a look.

Scout

May 20th, 2010
10:25 am

Normal :

Or ignore my posts or debate.

Soothsayer

May 20th, 2010
10:25 am

Dow off 313 Call you broker!

Scout

May 20th, 2010
10:26 am

Just “Jose” is more inclusive ……………. :o

Scout

May 20th, 2010
10:26 am

“Barry” Goldwater …………. “Barry” Soweto !

Outhouse GoKart

May 20th, 2010
10:26 am

“Dow off 279 points Oil briefly falls below $68″

My capital reserves are goin to #%!@

Lettuce hope its the ole “sell in May and go away” action.

Scout

May 20th, 2010
10:27 am

Excuse me: “Barry” Soetoro

JohnnyReb

May 20th, 2010
10:28 am

Bosch, good morning, and yes you are correct, McCain, the man, is too old. But I made my point. No to running his daughter regardless of her age – she is a progressive even if she claims to be a Republican.

I think what some of you guys call wingnuts are not that. I am not a Newt supporter, but he makes some very good points. Jay may be on to something with Rubio, he could catch fire the way Obama did.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
10:28 am

USinUK,

Landon Donovan bending over…..just wrong.

Dave

May 20th, 2010
10:30 am

“Stocks Fall Sharply as Jobless Claims Jump”

I thought Barry’s “laser-like focus” on jobs and job creation was supposed to stop that….

Dave

May 20th, 2010
10:32 am

“Oil briefly falls below $68″

Although that’s good news, expecially with the summer driving season coming up.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
10:32 am

Reb,

Rubio shot himself in the foot – cut off his nose to spite his face – by aligning with those of the Earl Grey persuasion — or the Orange Pekoe Brigade as jewcowboy likes to refer to them. He may win locally with all the other old folks wondering around Boca in their boxers and bathrobes, but not nationally. In my opinion, of course.

AmVet

May 20th, 2010
10:33 am

So the terms progressive and Republican are mutually exclusive?

Hmmm….

pro·gres·sive –adjective

1. favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, esp. in political matters: a progressive mayor.
2. making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.
3. characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
10:34 am

Oh and Reb (geez I keep thinking of things after hitting submit) – you thinking that Megan McCain is progressive is part of what is holding the GOP back – you refuse anyone who doesn’t think hook line and sinker with yourself and anyone with new ideas you dismiss as liberal or progressive because they don’t think like you. It’s really unbecoming.

Southern Comfort

May 20th, 2010
10:35 am

Richard

I agree with what you’re saying, but I see things differently. As in your example, if you win that election based on your not being a politician and accept that money, you then become a politician. What I’m advocating is to remove that person from office. If you do it enough times, people will eventually get the idea that Americans will not tolerate prostitutes in office. Either do that or get enough rookie congresspersons in office to push thru an ethics bill that would do away with outside financial influence.

As I said, the Tea Party’s spirit is justified. I just think they’re aiming at the wrong target. By eliminating the one party, they will leave the other party open to $$$ influence. The target should be aimed at removing outside $$ from the election process. The election process can only be hijacked by outside money if we sit and let it happen.

My solution is simple, but it would not work without 100% participation. If you have two candidates in a primary and both are bought and paid for by deep-pocketed interests, then don’t vote for either in the primary. If there are no votes, then neither has a leg to stand on as far as support. They can spend all the money they have, but no votes = no office. If you have one of the two that hasn’t been bought, vote for that person. Let him know that he’ll be removed swiftly and without a second thought as soon as he starts down that path of becoming a political prostitute.

stands for decibels

May 20th, 2010
10:35 am

RB @ 10.01 there was a pretty good (if utterly off-topic) point you could have made, had you only resisted the urge to be an opportunist.

Put another way—referring to the mourning over lost lives as “whining and complaining,” directly impugning the motives of people you don’t know who are expressing justifiable shared grief? RB, I do suspect your momma raised you better than that.

Knowitall

May 20th, 2010
10:37 am

Paul Ryan for President!

Bosch

May 20th, 2010
10:38 am

“Americans will not tolerate prostitutes in office”

Another bumper sticker idea – Paul, Paul, Paul!!!

Del

May 20th, 2010
10:38 am

Enter your comments here

Mick

May 20th, 2010
10:41 am

Scout

OK – I’m following what you are saying but it does not describe a despot:
1.a king or other ruler with absolute, unlimited power; autocrat.
2.any tyrant or oppressor.

This is one issue where there is no compromise, seal the border, use the military if need be. Gust worker passes – OK. This issue is a winner for any politician that wants to end illegal immigration.

Normal

May 20th, 2010
10:44 am

Scout

May 20th, 2010
10:25 am
Normal :

Or ignore my posts or debate.

Scout,
You have made it abundantly clear that you dislike President Obama, but with the “Jose” barb, you also show your displeasure with Hispanics.
Hatred and bigotry are emotional and therefore not debatable topics. So I guess my only choice is to ignore.

BTW
I’m not very happy with President Obama either, but I won’t call him names.

md

May 20th, 2010
10:44 am

Novel idea – get a president in 2012 that will tell someone such as Calderon that we will work on cleaning up our house right after he cleans up his. Calderon is “playing” Barry. Funny how Mexico’s southern border is tight as a drum, yet the northern one remains virtually wide open.

Time to put someone back in the WH that has some kahunas – anybody but wimpy Barry. The majority of people in this country support the AZ law, yet Barry once again thumbs his nose at the populace.