« Ted Kennedy's Cancer is in Remission; Updated: No He Isn't | Main | Government Motors - a preview »

RNC Ad: Obama Card

I saw this ad this morning and applauded afterward for its effectivness at pointing out Obama's massive spending and cronyism. The only thing I think is missing is The One's take over of Chrysler and GM, but it's a great ad nonetheless. The way Obama's logo is used at the end is an especially good zing.

I would like to see the RNC do more of this kind of thing because it needs a cogent message and the party won't go wrong with this one. Fiscal responsibility unites conservatives, libertarians, some moderates, and conservative Democrats against Obama's massive spending and we need that kind of unity with Obama and the Democrats now trying to push tin can CAFE standards, a gargantuan Cap and Trade tax, and a government takeover of health care.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/35746.

Comments (47)

Now that China and Brazil a... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Now that China and Brazil are working together to axe the dollar, we'll be paying credit card level interest rates on our national debt. That will quickly axe all the new spending Obama wants and put the entire nation into financial stress. The only solution will be to print money which will cause inflation and even higher interest rates. Seems Obama's secret plan to turn the U.S. into another banana republic is working

It will surprise me if this... (Below threshold)
Dan Patterson:

It will surprise me if this or any campaign will de-scale the eyes of Obama's adoring fans. Logic and reason have not worked at all, and both the message and the messenger from the opposition have been ignored at best. We are witnessing a grand confidence game - the Emperors's New Clothes with a Ponzi scheme thrown in. And all presented with the zeal of a multi-level marketing 'regional manager' b-s artist.

When all this falls apart, and fall apart it will with a deafening roar, all we will hear is the slightest "tink"; the thunderous boom of that crash will echo across the landscape for generations. America's Mussolini may make the trains run on time and the now-happy welfare class dances merrily to his fiddle, but the nation is running out of fuel to feed that fire. Quickly.

Dan Patterson

I have to admit it is a cle... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

I have to admit it is a clever add. Of course the problem is about 20% of the country will (1)be interested to watch it and (2) agree with it. The rest will laugh at the party of Boss Limbaugh and the mantra of NO.

Great ad, but can they get ... (Below threshold)
Razorgirl:

Great ad, but can they get anyone but FOX to air it?

Clever ad indeed, I've neve... (Below threshold)
jp2:

Clever ad indeed, I've never seen people use the Mastercard angle before!!

The image of Kim waking up and clapping alone to her computer after an ad attacking a puppy is priceless though.

Of course the problem is... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

Of course the problem is about 20% of the country will (1)be interested to watch it and (2) agree with it. The rest will laugh at the party of Boss Limbaugh and the mantra of NO.

Maybe. Or, maybe, when the dollar crashes in a couple of months or a couple of years, and prices skyrocket and stocks tank, the rest will think that there weren't nearly enough people saying "NO" to Barry.

Other than strong membershi... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

Other than strong membership among weekly churchgoers, the GOP is suffering from declining membership among virtually every voter group. Without new ideas, a message and a messenger, the Republican Party is headed down the path of the Whig Party with no good plans to hold many voters they now have, let alone attracting new voters to that party. That's no plan for a comeback or to win elections.

"...the GOP is suffering fr... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"...the GOP is suffering from declining membership..."

Keep telling yourself that Paul. If you want to see the Democratic future....look to Kalifornia.

I heard nearly the same wor... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

I heard nearly the same words on the Today show from one of the folks that runs The Nation, Paul.
Sounds like you get your talking points from the same place

Hello SCSI and GarandFan. I... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

Hello SCSI and GarandFan. I look to the example of those executives at Chrysler and GM who are both at least attempting some new ideas to reinvent and to rescue their companies from decline. Where's the comparable Michael Steele Republican Party rescue plan to turn around the decline of that party? Where's the beef?

Personally I hope Barry and... (Below threshold)

Personally I hope Barry and the rest of the Dumbocrats continue to believe the republican party is dead. Please underestimate the growing resentment in this country; please continue to believe that Americans are okay with high deficits and higher taxes; please coninue to cram the liberal wish list down the throat of Americans and all the republicans will have to do is show up.

Paul Hooson: "I look to ... (Below threshold)

Paul Hooson: "I look to the example of those executives at Chrysler and GM who are both at least attempting some new ideas to reinvent and to rescue their companies from decline."

WHAT???

"New ideas"??? Walk down any busy street in any major city and you will see THOUSANDS of "executives" using the EXACT SAME "new ideas" the "executives at Chrysler and GM" are using.

Yup, they're everywhere, with their hands out and signs reading: "Please help" or "Hungry and homeless"...or my personal favorite: "Honestly I just need a drink"
(I've actually given the last group money since they ARE being honest!)

Hello Justrand. Before his ... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

Hello Justrand. Before his scandal and personal disgrace, when Speaker Of The House Newt Gingrich was riding high, he offered up a moderate list of Republican legislation known as The Contract With America that helped to bring in enough new voters to allow the GOP to control both the Senate and Congress during the Bill Clinton years. This brought in new voters and made the party larger. By comparison Rush Limbaugh and many others keep calling for exclusion of moderates and other potential voters.

The GM and Chrysler plans include bringing in new customers and new products. Michael Steele and other Republican leaders need to think in much the same way. Newt Gingrich at least offered their party both a message and messenger, and expanded the Republican Party voter base enough to help them to win elections. The party has to decide whether it wants ideological purity and declining membership numbers or wants to be a real national party able to win elections. There's a huge difference between the two motives. But I know one thing, a business thrives by customers, and seeking to cut the customer base is not good for business. And cutting down voters is not good for winning elections either.

Hey Paul, seems like you a... (Below threshold)
Gianid:

Hey Paul, seems like you are dodging the direct question,,, we're still waiting.

Since libbies claim Dims do a better job of governing, what was the last year that a Dem led Congress actually gave the US a budget surplus?

Just the year, no spin, no lies, etc, what year?

Their "new ideas" (an egreg... (Below threshold)
JB:

Their "new ideas" (an egregious bullshit formulation if I ever saw it) is to get a bailout from Obama who pays off the unions, throw the secured creditholders under the bus and limp along until another bankrupcy or Obama protectionism leading to all out trade war.

"The rest will laugh at the... (Below threshold)
JB:

"The rest will laugh at the party of Boss Limbaugh and the mantra of NO."

Is the "mantra of NO" a Democrat mantra? That would be ironic.

I don't think anybody is going to be laughing same time next year.

An all out trade war we can... (Below threshold)
ExSubNuke:

An all out trade war we can't win with his level of spending.

The sad part? When this all comes crashing down, as it most certainly will, they won't be blamed. The complicit media will probably spin it as "Republicans offered just enough resistance to prevent Obama's plans from working. It's all their fault."

Just you watch.

Paul,Othe... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Paul,

Other than strong membership among weekly churchgoers, the GOP is suffering from declining membership among virtually every voter group.

But of course the democrats are being blindsided as they focus on the current GOP numbers. They are missing the growing "conservative" base particularly among the young who desperately want smaller government and lower taxes. When it comes down to voting for a Republican or a Democrat, they hold their nose and vote Republican, particularly if the GOP gets back to it's conservative fiscal values.

Just a 3.7% shift in the voting would have given McCain the win over Obama even with the tailwind Obama had. In 2012 Obama may be running against a headwind of his own making.

Obama is just a puppet, lik... (Below threshold)
could u help me find obamas birth certificate?:

Obama is just a puppet, like Danny O'Day. His masters in Europe program His teleprompter to spew their new world order diatribe. The U.S. ECONOMY and Dollar is a roadblock to their ambition. The only way to control the masses is for it to fail. Than comes the new monetary system and misery.

In other words, Its all for You Damien!

Great "puppy attack" video.... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

Great "puppy attack" video. :p That card image is really eerie, like the "itcy and scratchy" money that no one will honor. The obvious corporate reference is really disturbing and what D.C. really stands for and what laws separate it from the rest of the country:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVSz3IynjAA

Hello Mac. You need to look... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

Hello Mac. You need to look at the important electoral areas in which the Republican Party has lost significant strength. Look at California for example. This huge state was once narrowly a Republican stronghold in presidential elections and for the governorship as well. It gave both Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan their base to be elected president. However, McCain lost this state by 3 million votes. That's not even within likely range to turn around for the GOP. Further, Obama proved that he could chip away at other traditional Republican bases such as in Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia and Ohio. Further he could have won Arizona as well if McCain had not been the favorite son nominee as well. Obama proved that he could build a broader electoral base to win. If the Republicans have no good state by state plans to field good candidates who are electable, with real plans and real messages, then the party will only get weaker. Look at New England as well. States like New Hampshire and Maine used to be reliably Republican states, but now that's all changed. There are few Republicans elected to the Senate or Congress from that region as well.

I just don't see any good Republican plans to field good candidates with a real message to win back areas of the nation that they have given up to the Democrats. The Democrats may be far from perfect, but they at least have effective plans to field good candidates who can win elections while the GOP is largely just giving up entire regions of the nations to the Democrats. Region by region, the Republican Party is in a declining position electorally. Some small ad that only a few GOP faithful will ever see really does nothing towards solving any of those declining electoral goals. Hoping that the Democrats will screwup big time rather than offering better candidates and a better message is a pretty frail hope for a future GOP comeback.

Paul, who cares about polit... (Below threshold)
please could u help me find obamas birth certificate?:

Paul, who cares about politicians and how good they are at sheisting all of us into losing our heritage and Country?

The democrats have already screwed up bigtime..This does not change how I will vote one iota. I will vote for the morally conservative candidate regardless of party titles. That is why I did not vote for McCain. I voted for Palin and would vote again for Her.

Odd, Paul, I only pointed o... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

Odd, Paul, I only pointed out that you sound just like the Nation. Your response to me, even by your standards, is a non-sequitur.

SCI, the left has talking p... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

SCI, the left has talking points and they stick to them. They say Rush is the head of the GOP so in their "minds" it is true. They say we are the party of no, so again they say it is true. No proof of their assertion.

Paul, you advice is bogus. The GOP ran a very moderate liberal leaning candidate. They lost. So your recommendation is bogus.

The GOP will rally. The GOP doesn't have to do anything except continue to let Obama keep going. In three years there will be so much damage, taxes, etc. that the GOP could put Tom Delay of the ticket and win.

Paul, you do obey the talking points. I'll give you that. ww

Paul,Hell... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Paul,

Hello Mac. You need to look at the important electoral areas in which the Republican Party has lost significant strength. Look at California for example.

Yes, look at California. The people of California are learning their lesson about "liberal" spending. "Californians voted down five of the six propositions in a special election Tuesday. More than 60 percent of voters opposed each defeated measure, according to final tallies Wednesday." The only proposition that passed freezes legislators' salaries. The GOP message to the 60 percent of voters who shot down these tax increases is... "Remember the Democrats were sneering at you and calling you teabaggers rather than hearing your objections to their taxing too much, spending too much and barrowing too much."

Obama proved that he could chip away at other traditional Republican bases such as in Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia and Ohio.

I know it's hard for you to believe, but Obama's gains were based on dissatisfaction with Bush and McCain being the wrong candidate when the economy became the number one issue. Obama is not going to be able to run on some undefined theme of hope and change in 2012, in fact, the electorate may be dissatisfied with Obama and democrats in general by 2010 and 2012.

I just don't see any good Republican plans to field good candidates with a real message to win back areas of the nation that they have given up to the Democrats.

By 2012 it may be the only message Republicans need is that they are not Democrats. For Democrats to win in 2010 and especial in 2012 they have to keep terrorists from attacking the U.S., get unemployment down to 5% while keeping inflation and interest rates low. If their healthcare plan is seen as a negative by the 208 million who are happy with their current healthcare, democrats will be running against a strong headwind. None of the machine poultices will do the democrats any good if they can't deliver the goods while keeping America safe.

Should be... machine pol... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Should be... machine politics...

Mac - I think you're right ... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Mac - I think you're right re the 'We're not Democrats' in 2010.

Promise to lower taxes, and the Dems aren't going to have a chance. Promise to drill, and build nuclear power plants - and folks who are looking at ridiculous prices per kilowatt and gallon are going to listen very intently.

Put out a message of being proud of being American, instead of pushing how we should grovel at the feet of the rest of the world and apologize for our sheer existance, and there will be strong support. Sure, existential angst is all the rage, but what does it GET you in the long run?

Promise to repeal the garbage that Obama's been shovelling - and all of a sudden a whole lot of people who were very happy to have voted for Obama won't recall who they coted for in '089, but it wasn't Obama!

Paul Hooson: T... (Below threshold)
PVD:

Paul Hooson:

The party has to decide whether it wants ideological purity and declining membership numbers or wants to be a real national party able to win elections.

If by winning elections you engage in behavior destructive to the future of the nation, I think I would rather lose. Democrats, on the other hand, appear not to suffer that conflict. Obama has gone back on his word repeatedly regarding serious issues of "moral imperative" which now appears to be simple posturing rather than leadership.

Likewise, his call for fiscal responsibility would carry more weight if his actions did not directly contradict his mouth. Remember, this is a candidate that promises a net reduction in the deficit. Not once but repeatedly.

He has demonstrated no actual regard for what is in the best interests of the country (you can not reconcile a quadrupling of the deficit with calls for fiscal responsibility0 that is legal, if immoral, theft of my grandchildren's assets.

But that's okay because he "won".

And with this, you're just wrong:

But I know one thing, a business thrives by customers, and seeking to cut the customer base is not good for business.

I cut my customer base by 50 percent this year. Revenues are up 14 percent and income is up almost 30 percent. It's an application of Pareto's Principle - the 80/20 rule. It's generally accepted in many businesses of various sizes.


Equally confusing is the effort to equate the body politic to a consumer base. The purpose of a republic was to prevent the desires of the populace to over rule good government. the people of California have vote themselves a very large mess when they continually voted yes on every inane proposition that came along and neglected the future cost of funding. It's the reason I left the state in 2002.

Now that Obama is doing it on a national scale, I'm out of places to flee to. But I will find every legal means to protect my income and my company and, if the marginal rates get too high, will be prefectly content to reduce my workload.


Mac, I certainly agree that... (Below threshold)
Paul Hooson:

Mac, I certainly agree that Democrats are expected to produce results on the economy and reducing unemployment, otherwise they face some voter erosion in 2010 and beyond if Republicans appear as an acceptable alternative. That requires quality candidates acceptable enough to vote for. The problem in some states like Oregon is that few quality candidates have been run by Republicans for statewide offices in more years, leaving only the Democrats as the shoo-in choice. It is candidate quality erosion like this that has badly hurt the Republican Party in so many states, turning them Blue. Oregon was once a reliable Republican state.

Part of the Republican Party problem is that they are having a problem recruiting quality candidates in some states because the party has become less of a national party in recent years. That makes the party much less competitive in many areas and much more difficult to win state or national elections.

In Oregon, for example two of the most recent failed Republican candidates who lost bids for governor include a former Democratic legislator who was a George McGovern delegate in 1972 who switched parties and an antitax advocate who was sued for racketeering in court before. Candidates like that can't win statewide elections.

Paul,Many people i... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Paul,

Many people in democratic strongholds are "emotional" voters and support candidates who promise to solve social and environmental issues that have strong emotional content, but all on credit. However, most of these voters are not self sacrificing. They support high taxes as long as someone else pays them. They support environmental regulations as long as they don't impact their lifestyle. They oppose torture and war as long as they are safe from attack. They oppose sound energy plans as long as they have all the energy they need. Unfortunately, reality is starting to raise it's ugly head and the days of Obama's unicorn pipedream are coming to an end as the economy continues to tank. As reality tramples on their lifestyle voters will be looking for candidates who offer solutions based on sound principles. When they're ready to live a financially principled life, they'll find good Republican candidates in the race.

Fixing the economy and keeping America safe are do or die issues for Democrats. It's a good time to be a Republican.

"Part of the Republican ... (Below threshold)
Oyster:

"Part of the Republican Party problem is that they are having a problem recruiting quality candidates in some states because the party has become less of a national party in recent years."

Hello Paul. I'd posit that many won't run because of the savaging their personal lives and family suffer at the hands of an unprincipled media, hate-filled leftists and a Democrat ruling class pouring gasoline on the fire.

Goodbye, Paul.

OysterI'd posit an... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

Oyster

I'd posit another reason. They don't run because they have no ideas and know that they can't win.

I"m always amazed Republicans lay the blame for their losses everywhere but upon themselves which of course makes your party even more unappealing than it already is to 79% of the country. But hey, keep on blaming and not taking responsibility for your own losses and you'll keep on being losers.

As for "hate filled" folks try reading a few of the comments posted yesterday on this website. Of course, that would mean you'd have to take some responsibility for your own side. I won't hold my breath......

UD, wrong, as usual. If you... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

UD, wrong, as usual. If you were honest, you wouldn't have made the statement that "...lay the blame for their losses everywhere but upon themselves." We immediately knew why we lost. We ran a moderate and a large chunk of the conservative base wouldn't vote. Simple. The party compromised and that was their mistake. ww

A large chunk of the conser... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

A large chunk of the conservative base is what % of the Republican party willie? Lets just for fun say it's 100%. 100% of 21% is? Why 21% willie. Extremists from the right, i.e. right wing conservatives don't appeal to anyone but themselves. That's why you lost and will continue to lose as the party of Boss Limbaugh.

And you ought not to be taking me to task. It's Oyster who gave the litany of excuses, which makes you folks sound like the Party of Limbaugh, the Party of NO and NO Ideas and Whiners Incorporated.

But as i said, keep on pushing the philosophy of the (maybe) 21%ers and see how long you wander around in the wilderness.

UnD: You sound angry and I... (Below threshold)
pvd:

UnD: You sound angry and I'm not sure I understand why. Are you disappointed that the Republicans are being forced back to core principles? Are unhappy that they continue to lose? Are you a sore winner that would like the other side to roll over and play dead?

I'm always curious why a sworn enemy (and politcally you are exactly that) wants to "help" me.

I'll take the "21%" and whoever else would like to stop the fiscal insanity and see you in 2010 and 2012.

You can have the party of division, diversion and financial recklessness Democratic Party.

I like my chances.

pvdI'm far from an... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

pvd

I'm far from angry. I'm both confused and amused.

I'm confused because of comments like Oyster's that lay the blame for Republican losses everywhere but on the Republican principles, values, promises, ideas and programs. From my perspective the reason is the current Republican party has none. No answers. No suggestions. No proposals. Just a mantra of "we're not conservative enough." I wish you good luck with argument in view of the steadily shrinking membership of the party.

I'm amused because I can't help think of a what used to be a core conservative talking point and principle - personal responsibility. Yet I continual read the kind of stuff Oyster says about the fault laying outside. Then she makes the point about "hate filled" folks from the left while yesterdays blog on Ted Kennedy was filled with more hate than anything else.

It's the hypocrisy that amuses me. The notion that somehow Republicans are pure and above nasty politics. Did you folks pay any attention the Bush's 8 years?

Finally, the other thing that amuses me is the strain that runs through these blogs that somehow anyone other than a conservative is unable to make critical decisions based on knowledge, research and life experience. Somehow all we do is make "emotional" decisions. This is why you often read crap from some of you about the "planation mentality" of african-americans - as if that group as a whole has no ability to think for themselves. Ever wonder why the base of the Republican party is essential white Anglo-Saxons and so little people of color are attracted to it?

( AND NO ww et al., I'm not accusing anyone of racism.)

UD, I agree you are confuse... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

UD, I agree you are confused and I bet it is a rather constant feeling with you.

Conservatives are conservatives first, party second.

The GOP ran a moderate/liberal candidate and the GOP lost because the conservative base did not fully participate.

Conservatives believe a person should take advantage of opportunities presented and work hard to better your situation.

Conservatives take what we think is best for the country first and foremost.

Conservatives want nothing to do with fraud or any other character issue that is repulsive. Not weakness, but character.

Liberals are the opposite.

UD,I am sure you are happy Cheney's poll numbers for approval are rising.

Finally, I find most of your comments the same tired old tripe your party leaders say and you obediantly parrot. I don't think liberals have an original thought. ww

UD,Ever w... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

UD,

Ever wonder why the base of the Republican party is essential white Anglo-Saxons and so little people of color are attracted to it?

Good question and one you should think about as well. It seems to me that, while the demographic is changing, it's that most employers are white Anglo-Saxons. They are Republicans because business owners don't like government interference and taxes, both of which have increased dramatically over the years. It's hard enough to compete in business and then also have to comply with growing numbers of regulations or outright extortion by the Obama administration.

Like I said, that demographic is changing and as it does so will the Republican base. The tanking economy is demonstrating to more and more voters that keeping the business climate healthy is a national priority and either we have to downsize our lifestyle or downsize our government. Just as they discovered in California, a growing number of people want smaller government and lower taxes. The party of spend too much, tax too much, and barrow too much is the party that's out of step with that growing trend.

Mac LorryI'd sure ... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

Mac Lorry

I'd sure like to see some references to back up your statement that "most employers" are Republican. I find that hard to believe since so few people identify themselves as Republican.

Your whole premise is based on that statement so please show me what it is that you base it on. And also your premise has to have a conclusion that there are few minority business owners. care to back that up also?

I tell you also I have to laugh often when you folks start bitching about the party of spend." Where the hell where you the 8 years prior to now? Cooking a hypocrisy stew I suppose.

ww:

As per usual you make absolutely no sense.

UnD: Actually, many of us ... (Below threshold)
pvd:

UnD: Actually, many of us were complaining about excessive spending during the Bush years. And the Clinton years. Etc.

The premise that there are few minority business owners is one that is used by the Government in its Women & Minority Business regulations.

Majority of business owners republican? Might be. Somebody is making up for the 90 percent African American vote, the 65 percent Hispanic vote and the womens vote. Please note that all those are considered by the US Government to be under-represented in business ownership.

And you do realize that the most recent stats indicate that the Republican party is polling 32 percent? Not 21 percent?

UD,My statement th... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

UD,

My statement that most business owners are white Anglo-Saxons is a conclusion form known facts. First, whites are the majority, or at least were not long ago. Second, if minorities are over represented in the demographic of business owners, then discrimination against people of color, as you call them, is a myth. The Republican party has been called the party of big business by Democrats, and being you're a Democrat I don't think you'll dispute that the Republican party is pro-business.

Anyone can repeat facts and link to them, but what do the facts tell us? I draw conclusions from facts. If you want to dispute my conclusions you'll have to dispute either my reasoning or the facts I based my reasoning on. The old "you can't back up your statement with a link" only works on the blue side of this blog. On this side people actually think for themselves.

I tell you also I have to laugh often when you folks start bitching about the party of spend." Where the hell where you the 8 years prior to now? Cooking a hypocrisy stew I suppose.

Lots of stuff makes you laugh, but it's only because you're not a deep thinker. If it's ok for Obama to do something because Bush did it then either Obama is as bad as Bush or Bush was not wrong. Which is it?

mac: I app... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

mac:


I appreciate your unique insight to my thinking abilities. I notice that's a trait of today's conservative bloggers. That is, you somehow have the notion that you folks are the only ones who think about anything. Hence the frequent references by some bloggers here to blacks as people with "plantation mentalities." What an ignorant, arrogant insult to people who don't particularly identify with the values and principles of right wing.

I would suggest that the intellectual arrogance of today's conservatives may be one of he reasons the Republican Party is losing folks who identify themselves as such. The once party of the "big tent" has become the party of we know we have all the answers and if you don't like them, get out because there's no room for debate or change.

Your reasoning that you don't have to support your conclusions with facts is further evidence of the "I know I'm right so bugger off" mentality.

As for the Bush did it so I'm doing it attribution to Obama, it's absurd on its face. Interesting that you ignored the point about where were you conservative folks and where was your Party f when Bush and 6 years of Republican congressional control were spending us over the cliff? The silence is deafening, so to speak.

UD,I appr... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

UD,

I appreciate your unique insight to my thinking abilities.

It's not unique nor really much of an insight. The lack of logic in your posts is obvious and blatant.

I would suggest that the intellectual arrogance of today's conservatives may be one of he reasons the Republican Party is losing folks who identify themselves as such.

Who cares what you think about the Republican Party? Your motives are clear as you invent denigrating reasons you think apply to the Republican party.

Your reasoning that you don't have to support your conclusions with facts is further evidence of the "I know I'm right so bugger off" mentality.

This is a classic example of the spin you and other progressives are known for. Nowhere did I say I didn't need to support my conclusions with facts, that's just your spin. The truth is that I gave you the facts I based my conclusion on and you didn't dispute a one of them. You remind me of liar Lee from the blue side.

As for the Bush did it so I'm doing it attribution to Obama, it's absurd on its face.

That just a dodge shadow thinkers use when they find that they have put themselves in a logical trap. You can't claim something Bush did is bad when Obama is doing even more of it without the implication that Obama is as bad as Bush. The only option is to say that what Obama is doing isn't bad, which means it wasn't bad when Bush did it. Your spin won't work here. Which is it?

Interesting that you ignored the point about where were you conservative folks and where was your Party f when Bush and 6 years of Republican congressional control were spending us over the cliff?

Well if you really believed that Republicans were spending us over the cliff you democrats should have been having Tea Parties and protesting taxes and spending. I don't recall seeing any.

If you really believed that Republicans spent us over the cliff then explain why Obama's even greater spending is ok? And do you support Obama's spending?

MacYour entire com... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

Mac

Your entire comment supports my points about conservative arrogance. Thank you, you continue to prove why the Republican party is on the road to irrelevance.

You don't have a clue about logic and reason though you throw the words around grandly to fashion illogical, unsupported, arrogant and pompous answers. I like it though because you're a poster child of that irrelevance referred to by me.

To attempt to compare the Bush/Republican approved spending to Obama's is again, absurd. Different reasons, different choices. Deception vs. transparency, a war of choice vs. inherited financial disaster. As someone recently said, you can put lipstick on a pig but you still have Bush and his unmitigated disasters.

Do I support Obama's spending. Most of it I do. But lets just for once hear some alternatives from the other side. What solutions does the Republican party offer to deal with the crisis? Oh, I forgot, cut taxes. Besides cutting taxes that is.

UD,Your e... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

UD,

Your entire comment supports my points about conservative arrogance. Thank you, you continue to prove why the Republican party is on the road to irrelevance.

But of course it doesn't take much intellect to make such a statement, which continues to prove you don't have much intellect.

You don't have a clue about logic and reason though you throw the words around grandly to fashion illogical, unsupported, arrogant and pompous answers. I like it though because you're a poster child of that irrelevance referred to by me.

If that were true then you could use logic and reason to refute my arguments rather than just more of your mindless bloviating.

Different reasons, different choices. Deception vs. transparency, a war of choice vs. inherited financial disaster.

If you knew anything about the subject you would know that ultimately both Bush and Obama are spending to protect the nation. Bush inherited 9/11 thanks to the inaction of Clinton both in stopping terrorists and in resolving the Iraq issue. The financial disaster has the democrats fingerprints all over it. It was Bush in his 2001 budget plan who first warned about the coming disaster and asked congress to act. It's a mater of public record. Bush didn't push the issue as he was responding to 9/11, which became the top priority issue.

Do I support Obama's spending. Most of it I do. But lets just for once hear some alternatives from the other side. What solutions does the Republican party offer to deal with the crisis? Oh, I forgot, cut taxes. Besides cutting taxes that is.

Another phony issue by another phony. The republicans offered a detailed stimulus plan that spent half as much and would have created twice as many jobs in half the time, but it was ignored by democrats. Same for the budge the democrats past with record amounts of pork making the stupid argument that it was last year's business. The republicans offered a fully detailed budget without all the wasteful spending, but it was ignored by democrats. If the republicans are the party of no then democrats are the party of BS.

If you want to consider yourself a deep thinker rather then just another liberal BSer, then consider the following. If the tax rate is zero then tax revenues are zero. If the tax rate is 100% then tax revenues are still zero because there's no economy. Obviously, there must be an optimal tax rate or rage of rates that generates the most tax revenue. If the current tax rate is below that optimal rate then raising taxes will increase tax revenues. Likewise, if the current tax rate is above that optimal rate then lower taxes will increase tax revenues. So, UD, tell me what the optimal tax rate or rage of rates is for generating the most tax revenues. If you can't answer that then tell my how you could figure it out. If you can't do either then tell my why you think increasing the tax rate will increase tax revenues. If you can't do any of those three then tell my why you think reducing the tax rate will decrease tax revenues. If you can't do any of the above then your scorn for cutting taxes is based on ignorance and BS as usual.

MacSee there you g... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

Mac

See there you go, proving my point once again:...." just another liberal BSer...."

When you take your nose out of the air you might think about bending over and sticking your head up your ass.


There are some seriously pompous, arrogant asses around here, and I imagine you'd be in the top of the class. Now I know I'm not up to your thinking standards and all that, and for that I am eternally grateful.

You are the perfect example of the state of your political philosophy and the Republican party today. Enjoy your meanderings in the wilderness.

And the Republican budget plan consisted of what?

And if your going to live up to those superior intellectual credentials your so positive you have it's time to stop with the excuse for Bush's war of choice that Clinton was also responsible for 9/11/. That makes no sense and couldn't be more illogical. The Iraq war was Boy George's war of choice whether he has penis envy of his father (probably the most reasonable reason) or for some other reason, it's his. His lies, his fabrications, his exaggerations, his mismanagement, his torture, his failure to ask for responsible payment, his keeping the cost out of the budget. So spare me the Clinton meme please.

Talk to l me after you get your head out of your ass and your nose parallel to the ground. Meanwhile drink lots of water and watch out for wild animals as you continue to wander in the wilderness with Boss Limbaugh et al.
depp=true

UD, If you can't ... (Below threshold)

UD,

If you can't use better language in disagreeing with Mac, keep it to yourself.
Your denigration of anyone using the word
penis from now on is going to get you whacked.
Now how big of a shovel do you want.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy