I encourage the reich-wing to follow along in PammalammaDingDong’s footsteps and continue purging all those appeasers in their midst.

When Bush Jr. was Mr. 90% in 2002 and 2003, he was God to these people, a TruConservativ, and Ronald Reagan Reincarnate.

Now that he’s unpopular and everyone hates him precisely because he did nearly everything that all the righties had been promising they would do for a generation…

…suddenly, no, no, oh he’s not a conservative, oh, no, we were, um, just praising him ’cause of 9/11 and team spirit and what not. No, no, we totally didn’t think he was a conservative.

Hello, NEWMAN…

Life must be very difficult for Jonah, what with not understanding logical inference and all.

“The candle burned me! Maybe if I made the flame hotter…”

“I think there’s a good explanation to be made, but it needs to be made.” Jonah Goldberg

Does the LA Times know about this “writing” side gig of his? Sweet merciful crap, that line alone should disqualify him from owning Word on PC or Mac.

The survival instincts are really different between different conservatives. Some have jumped off the boat and , others are claiming that the boat isn’t the USS Conservatism anymore. But the best part is how long it took the rats to decide to go.

I doubt I’ll be able to sleep tonight. I’m going to buy some wine for tomorrow night, skip class, and glue myself to the tube. I’m hoping Obama wins, but I won’t be comfortable until at least three days after the election. I’m so used to bad news. I’ll never get over the PTSD I have from 2000. That fucking election damaged me.

The only peeps Wankee and Doughy Buttpaste and Pamalamadingdong and Malkinent will have to associate with after this election are the hard-core crazies. I suspect they’ll sink into that racist violent swampy morass as though it were a hot bubble bath. The only question is, will any of them be horrified by their new friends, frightened enough to repudiate them? It should be an interesting phenomenon to observe.

I wonder how little Debbie Snackcakes is taking all this. I wonder if I’m brave enough to visit her site to find out. Maybe a bold Sadly staffer will venture over there and report back. (Hint hint) I just have a feeling she might have broken down completely. She didn’t seem to be geared for psychological endurance and fortitude.

I think Jonah uses a lot more words than necessary to explain why the Republican party finds itself in such a hole.

I think he could start, and pretty much end, with the fact that he is what passes for a deep thinker in the party these days.

See? No more verbage or rationalizations required.

george w bush doubleplusgood unperson soonest?

Ooops, I meant “doubleplusungood”, obviously.

Candy said,
“I’ll never get over the PTSD I have from 2000. That fucking election damaged me.”

It damaged the nation, and not just with respect to elections (see ACORN backstab myth being seeded now), but also with respect to poor leadership.

I’m scared that the haters will rise again and more powerful. They’re laying the groundwork for bringing back all these failed ideas again.

Which is why Obama must be successful in his first 100 days, and he must have a reasonably able congress to get things taken care of quickly and efficiently. That will help militate against the rise of the fifth reich.

Notice how Goldberg focuses on Bush and completely ignores the list of questions Douthat presents in his second paragraph quoted.

Good work, Jonah! You really addressed the big challenges facing your party.

Good work, Jonah!

A true intellectual chumpion.

BTW, Glenn “Like Limbaugh But Not as Smart” Blecch had Margaret Gallagher on today to whine about Prop 8. Where do I know her name from?

Centrist Bill Clinton leaves office after eight years with some of the highest approval ratings ever.
Right-winger George Bush LOA8Y with distinctly the lowest.

Wingnut Braintrusters: Must…Turn….Farther….RIGHT.

I’ll never get over the PTSD I have from 2000. That fucking election damaged me.

Right there with you. It really was the perfect parting “Fuck you” from a dying century.

An Obama win, especially a really decisive one, would go a long way toward making me feel better.

Pere- Maggie Gallagher was paid by the White House to editorialize in favor of Bush policies.

The LA Times must be very proud of what the Tribune Company has done for their reputation, re: hiring Pantload.

Peter Beinart he insists that Bush was the most doctrinaire conservative ideologue we’ve ever had, well to the Right of Reagan. Sometimes, when I listen to, say, David Brooks I get the sense he agrees.

Suffice it to say, I disagree with that, strongly.

Ahhh… no, it’s not sufficient. You have to actually present a reasoned argument why you disagree.

I think there’s a good explanation to be made, but it needs to be made.

Just not by you. That would require effort.

I thought it was the hate that kept a true Wolverine like Jonah warm.

I guess all changes when it’s your side that’s dying.

Conservatism can not fail. If a conservative fails, then he wasn’t a true conservative.

Jonah: He was the guy who advocated not limited government but “strong government.”
Consider W’s official White House bio: where he earned a reputation for bipartisanship and as a compassionate conservative who shaped public policy based on the principles of limited government, personal responsibility, strong families, and local control.
or his 2000 debate answer:It may come as a shock for somebody who has been in Washington for so long. But actually limited government can work in the second largest state in the union.

Nobody likes Bush anymore, but the fucking conservative righties have to fucking own up to the fact that he’s their monster. They got their muscular foreign policy. They got their ownership society. Where they didn’t get their deregulation, they got industry friendly regulators instead. They got their trickle down tax cuts. More importantly, they got their “with us or against us” belligerent government that loved to call lefties traitors and terrorist sympathizers. That’s your guy Jonah. Even after four years of incompetent chimpery, that’s the guy you were pushing for in ’04. Own it paste-eater.

I’m with Candy, spending tomorrow evening with wine, the TV and the internets. Only I’m also taking Wed, Thu and Fri off from work. In 2004 I was so devestated by the results of the election that I actually had to call off work Wed. and Thu (the company I work for is chock full of far right religious nuts and I couldn’t face the gloating). I’m planning ahead this time, although hopefully it will be a celebration and not a repeat of weep fest ’04.

That will help militate against the rise of the fifth reich.
you know, I originally read that as ‘filth reich’. That works, too.

and, re 2000: that was when I realized I needed to do more than vote.

This isn’t just the usual left right left right rhythm that all democracies have, this is the kind of swing that sees political movements created, and others destroyed. It’s a generational shift too. The political views of the under 40s are starting to count.

Conservatism as Americans know it, is dead. What emerges in 10 or 20 years time, will look rather different. However, some things will remain true. They will still be defined by what they don’t like, not by the things they support. The things they don’t like, will be whatever Liberals support, minus anything that has such broad support they cannot publicly condemn it.

The racists and the nutjobs will never change. But with a bit of luck, the Overton window will swing far enough to the left that the populist right is separated from those people. In more liberal countries, the ultra-right wing are shunned by mainstream conservatives, and have to form their own half baked political parties. The US has gone so far to the right, there is nobody too psycotic, nobody too racist, nobody too much of a batshit nazi, that they couldn’t find a welcome from the republican party.

So what happens next? The Democrats re-define the political landscape.. And then in due course, the Republicans re-define themselves, based on oposition to whatever changes come. If Obama brings unicorns, rainbows, and free cake.. The republicans are the anti-unicorn party.

Speaking from my experience with the Tories in the UK.. The bad old ideas won’t come back until people FORGET just how awful things were under GWB. So there is something constructive you can do. Whenever somebody gets a rose tinted view of those 8 years, bring them back down to reality. Never forget gitmo. Never forget New orleans. Never forget the second great depression.

“. . . I think it is incumbent upon the New Reformers (or the New Disraelites as I sometime like to say) to explain how what they want to do is different from what Bush tried, and why it will get better results.”

Indeedy. I think it is also incumbent on the Reaganites (who differ in some ineffable way from the New Reformers) to answer Douthat’s questions. They need to demonstrate how traditional Reaganism will solve those problems.

“How do you restrain the welfare state at a time when the entitlements we have are broadly popular, and yet their design puts them on a glide path to insolvency?
Well, it’s true that McCain, the New Reformer doesn’t really address the matter when he proposes taxing health insurance benefits, disincentivizing employers from offering them and relying on the market to prevent the sale of junk insurance to the non-rich. He proposes deep cuts in funding for Medicare while continuing tax relief for millionaires. At least he’s had sense to STFU about privatizing Social Security. So what does traditional Reaganism offer?

How do you respond to the socioeconomic trends – wage stagnation, social immobility, rising health care costs, family breakdown, and so forth – that are slowly undermining support for the Reaganite model of low-tax capitalism?
Very odd how middle-class Americans are not supportive of low-tax for the rich capitalism as their purchasing ability shrinks and shrinks, it’s harder and harder to get ahead, and their jobs go overseas. But there you are. What do you Reaganites have in your basket of goodies to assuage their pain? More tax cuts for the rich??!! Fail. And the same as McCain.

How do you sell socially-conservative ideas to a moderate middle that often perceives social conservatism as intolerant?
Well, I’m not sure McCain’s approach there differs from the traditional Reaganites. To show that conservatives are not intolerant, the conservatives have made the fight against human rights for gays a centerpiece of their strategy in California. And McCain put sarcastic air quotes around the concept of women’s health when making policy about abortion to demonstrate his sympathy for women.

How do you transform an increasingly white party with a history of benefiting from racially-charged issues into a party that can win majorities in an increasingly multiracial America?
Apparently McCain believes that making African Americans welcome to his events by talking down to them, and assuming they’re unaware of the current financial distress of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is the correct approach. Attempting to surpress their vote by any and all means also makes them receptive to Republican ideas. Switching his position from advocating humane immigration policies for Hispanic immigrants to advocating cruel and draconian policies was apparently also supposed to help racial divisions. So what do Reaganites have on offer?

I love this line of Douthat’s:

“How do you sell socially-conservative ideas to a moderate middle that often perceives social conservatism as intolerant?”

If I may attempt a shorter: How do you package hate?

Or a longer: Given that socially-conservative ideas embed xenophobia and homophobia into a strict religious framework embraced only by a fringe population, how do we convince everybody else to go along with us?

Whee! Limbaugh is finishing out his next-to-last show before the election with a Obama’s Greatest Hits – Rev. Wright, Michelle Obama’s “proud for the first time” comment, the whole shit-bang.

He and Beck have been such class acts today. Kinda figured that’d be the case.

Pere- Maggie Gallagher was paid by the White House to editorialize in favor of Bush policies.

But in her day job she’s a profession opponent of gay marriage. If you pay any attention to the same-sex marriage debate you’ll have heard from her a thousand times. She supposedly represents the “reasoned and non-bigoted” anti-gay side of things. Something like “an army of one” in that regard…

Also, +1 to Marco. That closer is so quintessentially Jonah: “I have a vague hunch that some sort of argument could be cobbled together but I’m too lazy busy to do it myself.”

Ah, yes, I remeber when Dough Bob Load Pants was railing against W, the anti-conservative, back in 2004 and even earlier.

Back in the spring of 2006, when the stank of Kristina/Schiavo was forcing Bush’s numbers down, down, down, wingnuts with reasonable foresight tried this crap- Bush wasn’t a conservative, Bush was never a conservative, the real problem was that Washington didn’t actually have true conservative leadership, so don’t blame us, blame the liberals, vote GOP in the midterms and Mittens/Ghouliani in two years, etc.

Didn’t work then, won’t work now.

The racists and the nutjobs will never change. But with a bit of luck, the Overton window will swing far enough to the left that the populist right is separated from those people. In more liberal countries, the ultra-right wing are shunned by mainstream conservatives, and have to form their own half baked political parties. The US has gone so far to the right, there is nobody too psycotic, nobody too racist, nobody too much of a batshit nazi, that they couldn’t find a welcome from the republican party.

So here’s one thing I was thinking about this morning: in our two-party system, there is nowhere for the moderate Republicans to go when the wingnuts start their purges. They’ll wind up Democrats, and they’ll actually drag the Democratic party further from our ideals. The “Obama Democrats” will resist real reform. Our discourse will not change: we’ll see Republicans like Eric Cantor matched up in public dialogs with Democrats like Chuck Hagel. Seriously.

The media will love it. The Democrats will complete their transformation into the center-right party of “real America”, and Broder will retire happy.

We’ve lost.

We’ve lost.

By isolating the wingnuts into forming their own party with absolutely no moderation to it?

Yeah, I don’t think I’d mind that, even with the Broder centrism. I could have lived with a President Gore, thanks.

Most Americans’ contempt for Bush is non-ideological. They just think, rightly, that his presidency has been a giant cock-up. But the reason they have transferred that contempt to McCain is because they think, rightly again, that cock-ups of this kind are endemic to a philosophy of limited government. If you believe that government shouldn’t be doing one thing or the other, you are not likely to make government better at doing those things.

Here’s a question for Doughbob. What would the hypothetical President Conservatavius Maximus have done differently from Booshy, Jr? Come on jackass, you’re arguing that Bush ain’t a conservative – well put up or shut up, what decsisions has Teh Deciderer decided that were anti-conservative? Think about this before you answer, because I’m pretty damned sure that for anything you can name, I can show you a post where you or one of your esteemed Children of the Corner was backing it with great enthusiasm.

The only peeps Wankee and Doughy Buttpaste and Pamalamadingdong and Malkinent will have to associate with after this election are the hard-core crazies. I suspect they’ll sink into that racist violent swampy morass as though it were a hot bubble bath. The only question is, will any of them be horrified by their new friends, frightened enough to repudiate them? It should be an interesting phenomenon to observe.

Ladies and gentlemen, The Fall of the Pantload of Usher.

By isolating the wingnuts into forming their own party with absolutely no moderation to it?

My point is that the wingnuts won’t form their own party: they’ll be the Republicans. Since we’re in a two-party system, even if they have no political power, their claim on that party will prevent us from having any rational discourse.

Yeah, I don’t think I’d mind that, even with the Broder centrism. I could have lived with a President Gore, thanks.

And I’m with you there… I’m not generally a pessimist about compromise and cooperation.

It’s just that I fully expect in the next four years to see the Democratic point of view represented by the likes of Chuck Hagel and David Frum.

Ladies and gentlemen, The Fall of the Pantload of Usher.

“For the love of God, Montressor!” said Goldberg, and shook his bells as the last brick was mortared into place.

(Oh, look. I’m being one of those EVIL VIOLENT LIBERALS. I’m so ashamed.)

“the most leftwing president (sic.) in — at least — a generation.”

Jacktards at his own magazine have said that about every Democratic presidential candidate for the last couple of decades. Well, Obama isn’t actually “the most leftwing president” yet, so perhaps they said it more grammatically, but the same basic idea.

It’s far too much to expect from him to know actual history, but at least he should show some passing acquaintance with his own rag’s solipsistic version thereof. I’d love to know who he thinks is more liberal than Obama. Is Carter more than a generation back? Or are we talking Adlai Stevenson here?

For the history challenged, this latest socialism flapdoodle is about repealing some tax cuts that a bunch of mainstream Republicans — including MacKayne — were against in the first place, and putting in some tax cuts that Bush was in favor of (Cheney wouldn’t let him — seriously). The country has shifted perceptibly to the right in just the last 8 years. Remember 9/11, Doughboy, and how it changed everything?

Does he really think the Democratic party has been getting more and more left-wing for a generation? Going all the way back to the Reagan revolution? Wasn’t the revolution about liberalism already running amok? So how far back does this liberal streak go? And how bad does Ronald Reagan suck that he couldn’t stop this mad march of liberalism?

In short, he’s really pissing on the graves of Ronald Reagan and the Americans that died on 9/11. He’s saying Reagan was a failure and 9/11 didn’t change anything. Way to carry water for the cause, piehole.

So here’s one thing I was thinking about this morning: in our two-party system, there is nowhere for the moderate Republicans to go when the wingnuts start their purges. They’ll wind up Democrats, and they’ll actually drag the Democratic party further from our ideals. The “Obama Democrats” will resist real reform. Our discourse will not change: we’ll see Republicans like Eric Cantor matched up in public dialogs with Democrats like Chuck Hagel. Seriously.

The media will love it. The Democrats will complete their transformation into the center-right party of “real America”, and Broder will retire happy.

We’ve lost.

Don’t you see? Don’t you see? We’re going to be out of power for a generation, friend, the Democrats will fall to the Republicans at long last and we will never find purchase there as we had before Carter, but you know what matters?

We leave.

Once the DNC has gotten what it wants and the last straggling Republican has joined the fold, we’re splitsville. The intellectual heirs of Reid and Pelosi will be all too pleased to be rid of us radical threats to partnership with business; what’s already in many ways undistinguishable from a Christian Democratic party will become one in all but name, and America will have a major political party actually representing the political left.

We defenestrate Overton, live through twenty years of boring center-rightists praising their boldness and vision for keeping the resurgent unions from getting too radical, spend a few decades enduring a ‘politically incorrect’ majority to whom that phrase means unapologetic brusqueness instead of gleeful inhumanity, and we win the fucker.

The kids, in the way we think of Roosevelt, will imagine that Obama was our first great statesman.

But he won’t be our first President. Not by a damn sight.

I’ve got champagne chilling in the fridge. I hope that’s not bad luck.

What really needs to be out in the open is that the Republicans have only been able to move the Overton window this far over the course of decades. Not only can the window be moved back entirely in four or eight years, it would be political suicide for the Democratic party to try.

Give us time, and moderation, and we can get back to where “centrist” doesn’t mean moderate republican.

But, unfortunately for us, the Democratic party is made up of people who have a hard time with compromise and have never been good at incrementalism.

I just returned from a drive around the neighborhood. Granted that my neighborhood is probably one of the leftiest lefty neighborhoods in all of Ioway, the Obama to McCain yard sign ratio still seems to have an extremely liberal bias. Three McCain signs total. One of them you can’t count, though, because it has been altered from McCain/Palin to McCain/Stalin with an application of silver spray paint. Since this sign has been like this for weeks now, I think it’s deliberate, not vandalism. It’s also practically next door to one of the other two McCain signs, so I suspect it’s a jab at the Rethugs. Opposed to the McCain signs, every block had an Obama yard sign every three houses or so.

Obama has about a 14 pt lead over McCain in Iowa, so it seems about right when you think about it. If McStalin can’t get the rural vote, how is he going to show at all in Teh People’s Republic of Des Moines? Ah, it is so sweet!

In 2004 I was so devestated by the results of the election that I actually had to call off work Wed. and Thu (the company I work for is chock full of far right religious nuts and I couldn’t face the gloating).

I was unable to watch the network news on TV or read the newspaper – I actually cancelled my subscription – for about three months after the 1994 midterms. I couldn’t take the schadenfreude-drenched Clinton-savaging wingnut letters to the editor. If things go as well tomorrow as I’m beginning to dare to hope that they will, I am going to enjoy every sweet second of my schadenfreude banquet over the coming months, and on inauguration day, my schadenfreude cup shall runneth over.

Bush as moderate???

Perfect! Just keep thinking that, Jonah. Just keep thinking that the American people haven’t repudiated the failures of the right wing…

Obama has about a 14 pt lead over McCain in Iowa, so it seems about right when you think about it. If McStalin can’t get the rural vote, how is he going to show at all in Teh People’s Republic of Des Moines? Ah, it is so sweet!

The Official Story there is that McCain essentially ignored Iowa (and thinks ethanol is worthless, which – aheh, uh, heh) and Obama worked his ass off barnstorming through it – what was normally a relatively close state wound up swinging hard in Obama’s favor and sticking for the whole race.

It’d have gone for Obama if, God have mercy, the half week of horror during which the media’s concerted efforts of will to ignore any cognitive dissonance about El POW Panamaniano and der Fuhrer Ich Willst To Ficken had never ended – or at least that’s the impression I get.

Are people more enthusiastic about the Dems in and of themselves there? This seems the case in Nevada – besides a few big crowds in nowherevilles where the great-grandchildren of miners wear cowboy hats, nobody among the Republicans give a shit about either candidate and are simply freaking out about the political/demographic changes slipping out of their fingers.

With all due respect, I think you are all talking shit. The wingnuts don’t necessarily own the Republican party. They will do whilst the republicans are spending their 40 days in the wilderness, but they won’t be allowed to remain in control when the party is an asset again. In a 2 party system, the opposition party is a valuable thing, especially after the incumbent has been in power for some time. Given 20 or so years, and plenty of people will be willing to vote for “not the incumbent”. The 2 party system is too entrenched for third parties to be electable. Third parties are for protest votes. Changing that takes longer than taking control of the opposition party and waiting for the incumbent to fuck things up.

If the wingnuts remain in control of the republican party, the USA will have a 1 party system. This can stand for a while, but eventually things will get back to the 2 party norm. The moderate republicans are not going to go creating a new political party, and start building it up from the ground. No, they are going to take control of the republican party, re-brand it, and find a candidate that reminds people of barry back in 08. They will start talking about hope, and things like that. Eventually it will work. Giving the electorate a pepsi/coke kind of choice ensures a 50:50 chance of winning.

The rejected wingnuts will divide on ideological lines. The religious nutters will go back to being a social force, instead of a political one. They just won’t get involved in politics so much. The racists may form their own shitty party that everyone laughs at, and the economic conservatives will simply attach themselves like leeches to whatever party holds power.

Wow, John and Alec, I feel so unwelcome all of a sudden. I’m changing my registration after the election but if I’m not welcome in the Democratic party, which, by the way seems to support what I believe in……

Really, I hope you guys are kidding…. at least a little.

How much fatter (of head and corpus) do you think Jabba, the Goldberg can grow?

shorter jonah: i don’t think you’re happy enough. that’s right! I’ll teach you to be happy! i’ll teach your grandmother to suck eggs!

I’m not welcome in the Democratic party

Please look up the definition of “concern troll” before trying to continue with this angle on this crowd.

alec: Yeah, Iowa was actually quite blue even before the caucuses. Since 2006 we’ve been majority Dem in both houses of the state leg and 3 of our 5 Reps are Dem with a Dem governor – and, of course, our senators are since time immemorial Tom Harkin (considered by wingnuts to be a raving communist) and Grassley, a Rethug but not a lunatic and currently endearing himself to me by investigating the tax-free status of fundagelical pastors. (I think Grassley has an eye to a comfortable status working with an Obama administration.

John Edwards was second place in the Iowa caucuses (I was an Edwards supporter myself.) Bush squeaked Iowa in 2004 but Gore won in 2000 and Clinton in 92 & 96. Taken altogether the Obama win was not all that surprising*, especially considering the absolutely amazing organization he put together here and the way they kept their hand in.

*Except to wingnuts and pundits. It was oh so delicious to watch all the pundits’ heads go asplodey over Obama’s Heartland win!

We’re going to have a huge majority of Dems in the state leg next session. We’re might even manage to get rid of the “right to work” law. Now if we become the next state to legalize gay marriage we’ll be Mass of the Midwest. If we could just get rid of Steve King, I’d be happy, but I think he’s going to win with his inbred constituency. But Latham might actually lose his seat. I’m hoping for coattails on that one.

My point is that the wingnuts won’t form their own party: they’ll be the Republicans. Since we’re in a two-party system, even if they have no political power, their claim on that party will prevent us from having any rational discourse.

If the repubs go 28% for a couple of rounds, the Dems can split and we can have a DLC/conservative/center party and a progressive party, either of which will still beat the whackaloons. Well, progressive for us–probably still center left by outside standards. You know the Dems can’t stay agreeable forever.

Really, I hope you guys are kidding…. at least a little.

I have to admit I’m not sure if you are kidding.

The meta gets kind of thick around here sometimes.

Sockpuppet:

I agree with you, and not Alec. The wingnuts will own the Republican party for at most one more presidential election, after which they will start to moderate. It’ll take some time for Obama Republicans to return to the Republican party, but any notion of peeling off a “real” liberal party in the meantime is just Naderism.

And Opie, while somebody like Chuck Hagel is a fine, respectable person, any party which accomodates both him and Russ Feingold is meaningless.

We need to hope that Obama’s bipartisanship is one which actually achieves laudable goals, rather than just picks the midpoints. We need to hope that Obama uses the bully pulpit to acknowledge and validate our perspective, even if the end results are less than we could hope. That’s the kind of centrism that might allow people to actually publicly discuss our issues, instead of just sweeping them away.

Simba,

No, I’m not a concern troll, but thanks for making me feel even more welcome. I realize that concern trolls have caused a lot of problems, and have pointed to a couple of them myself. My comments were directed to John and Alec’s posts regarding Republicans changing parties, and actually everyone else has been very welcoming to us.

Really, my husband and I are still registered Republicans until after tomorrow; we haven’t voted Republican for many years now and have decided that the Democratic Party represents our views much better than the Republicans. I’m against Prop 8, voting for Obama and Loretta Sanchez. Can’t hardly be more out of line with the Republican party view than that.

If you have any real doubts about whether I’m a concern troll, take a quick look at my blog.

Jonah actually thinks Bush was too liberal–too compassionate and not conservative enough–because he supported letting in cheap labor for Big Business and expanding the size of government to steal more money. Jonah is far too stupid to see that his bought-and-paid-for opinion is irrelevent, except when the elite need liberals to blame.

Ann Althouse—is that you?

Sounds as if Jonah has realised that his job for the next few electoral cycles will consist of reassuring his readership with emollient words. “The voters may have turned against you this time, but take heart, and keep paying me, for voters are fickle flibbertigibbets, who know nothing of their own best interests. See — they voted, twice, for that moron Bush! What do they know?!”

John: Exactly. Naderism isn’t just an affliction suffered by the left. Look at the Ron Paul bullshit. That is the future of the American ultra far right. Cults of personality, cheap stunts for media attention, and LOTS of noise.. But not a fucking hope in hell of winning anything.

Don’t get me wrong though. Just kicking them out of mainstream politics does NOT take all their influence away, or make them harmless. They will simply go back to the pulpit and the KKK rally, and make life difficult for their fellow countrymen on a social level. More domestic terrorism to come, and assorted acts of violence, intimidation, and displays of hatred calculated to make people feel unsafe.

Wingnuts simply account for too much of the US population to ever be completely ignored. Sadly No will continue to provide an important public service by keeping attention on just how slimy they are.

John,
I despise Russ Feingold and his ilk. He’s just one little tiny part of the big fat reason we’re leaving the party. I suddenly realized that I haven’t voted for a Republican for a major office since 1980, and I voted for Anderson in that election. I kept waiting for the party to come to its senses as I slowly came to mine. My political beliefs have changed as I’ve gotten older, maybe more than the ideals of the Republican party have.

Had to look up the term “meta” to be sure it meant what I thought it meant.

Wow, Simba, just wow.

For one thing, I’m better looking than that bitch.

Jeanne

Hey, if you got the reference, then it looks like I’ve already misjudged you. So, I stand corrected.

I despise Russ Feingold and his ilk. He’s just one little tiny part of the big fat reason we’re leaving the party.

…isn’t Feingold a Democrat?

Maybe she means Chuck Hagel? Moderate Republican from the Midwest….? I dunno.

John, I couldn’t agree more with this statement of yours.

“We need to hope that Obama’s bipartisanship is one which actually achieves laudable goals, rather than just picks the midpoints. We need to hope that Obama uses the bully pulpit to acknowledge and validate our perspective, even if the end results are less than we could hope. That’s the kind of centrism that might allow people to actually publicly discuss our issues, instead of just sweeping them away.”

In 2006 when the Democrats took back control of the House and Senate I was elated. I thought, “Now, things will change, and W and Cheney will no longer be able to get away with all of their …..etc (It’s a really long rant and I’d bet you have a similar one in your head).” I have to say that I have been disappointed that the majority seems to be still accomodating the far right, that it’s still business as usual. I’m all for bipartisanship, but there’s a limit.

Shorter shorter Doughpants: The blame for our failure rests on everyone but us.

It’s a really long rant and I’d bet you have a similar one in your head.

In fact, I’d imagine the one in my head is identical. There’s a good reason I call the current Congress the Craven Cavin’ 110th.

John brought up Hagel. I had to look him up to be sure I knew exactly who he was. Wikipedia (yes, I know, really) says he’s a moderate Republican but I wonder whose definition of moderate they used.

And oh shit. I got Feingold and Hagel completely backwards. Sorry. I haven’t paid a huge amount of attention to senators from other states unless they’ve rattled my chain. Like Tancredo, and Stevens in Alaska, and that moron Coburn in Oklahoma. I could go on.

Is that picture of the guy at the top of the page, is that really Jonah Goldberg? I mean, not photoshopped, other than what he’s holding in his hand?

I think I just vomited a little in my mouth.

Simba,
I became aware of that creature Althouse when she went batshit about the photograph of the young woman posing with Bill Clinton. After seeing what she and her followers said and did, I think she should be banned from the party. Is she really a Democrat?

Or is it time for me to go take my meds? I know it’s time for Ann to take hers, but still…..

Jeanne: Yes, that really is Jonah. It is one of the most flattering photos of him. Also, congratulations on having the courage to examine your prior assumptions and change your political identity.

That’s Jonah, in all his Doughy glory, opiejeanne.

How much fatter (of head and corpus) do you think Jabba, the Goldberg can grow?

Remember, there’s going to be a blood bath on the right. I think he’ll discover the joy of cannibalism.

Well of course Jonah thinks that Bush is a moderate!

The fucktard thinks that fascists are liberal, fercryinoutloud!

Just contemplate how far you have to go off the right edge of the political spectrum to make a comparison like that.

How did he get WAY out there, hanging over empty space like Wile E. Coyote (“Sooper Jeenius!”), you ask?

Well, you head north from Oxnard, mostly along the coast, take a hard right turn to downtown LA, then dive into the tar-pits and descend to the 9th circle of hell, where you take another right (of course) into the 8th dimension. Give the babbling zombie Alan Keyes the secret password, and TAH DA! You’re in JonahLand. It’s sort of like the Fantasyland part of Disneyland, but instead of Goofy, you’ve got DoughBob LoadPants. Operated by the Three Stooges, don’t forget to stay for the Electric Torture Parade and Pie Fight.

Is that picture of the guy at the top of the page, is that really Jonah Goldberg? I mean, not photoshopped, other than what he’s holding in his hand?

I think I just vomited a little in my mouth.

OK, that will go pretty far in getting you accepted around here. Now just start in about him needing a sandwich….

And being from Wisconsin, thank you for correcting yourself about Feingold. One of my heroes, AND I get to vote for him!!

You know, it’s been a long road. I kept voting for Democrats and kept hoping the moderates in the Republican party would take charge again, etc. That was half of it. the other half was my younger self gradually growing up and becoming more compassionate; realizing that people are not always responsible for the bad luck that falls on them, that sometimes no matter how responsible you are you may need the safety nets we have, and more.

None of my kids is a Republican, they’re all registered Democrats from the time they were old enough to vote, and not out of rebellion. If parents really do influence their kids’ voting patterns it must mean I’ve been a closet Democrat for a lot longer than I thought.

*blushing at my boneheaded mistake*

And that man does NOT need a sandwich.

Snarki, hey! I live there too, behind the Orange Curtain. The fireworks sound like WWIII every night.

How did he get WAY out there, hanging over empty space like Wile E. Coyote (”Sooper Jeenius!”), you ask?

Someone shot him off with an ACME rocket?

opiejeanne,

I’m pretty good friends with Amo Houghton.

Back in 1999, he started a moderate Republican PAC (Mainstreet Partnership, something like that). He folded shop after 2006, selling it off to some other wide-eyed idealist.

That wasn’t you, was it?

“How do you sell socially-conservative ideas to a moderate middle that often perceives social conservatism as intolerant?”

If I may attempt a shorter: How do you package hate?

More:

How do you solve a problem like the Dough Pants?
How do you catch a cloud and pin it down?
How do you find a word that means the Dough Pants?
A flibbertijibbet! A will-o’-the wisp! A clown!

If parents really do influence their kids’ voting patterns it must mean I’ve been a closet Democrat for a lot longer than I thought.

Heh. My mother’s a former Democrat who switched parties around the time she turned 40 (between Reagan’s first and second terms). We’ve been arguing about politics ever since Bush-Dukakis.

I appear to be alone in my immediate circle of friends in that I haven’t inherited my parents’ politics along with my DNA. Then again, since my 40th birthday is still a couple of years away, I suppose the jury is still technically “out”.

But only technically. I mean, good God.

actor 212, no, that wasn’t me.

In 1999 I was living near SF and running a very small costuming business (I was the only employee) and most of my political activity was showing up to vote. I did have regular arguments with the locals, but I lived in Castro Valley, a place so far right that Orange County looks like a kind and gentle place.

Dreamweasel, I’m 58. My husband is 61. We’re a little old to be rebelling against our parents, although this weekend I did have to remind my 90-year-old father that he didn’t have the right to yell at me about my politics.

He already voted. He was realy upset because he’d checked the “wrong” box for Proposition 2. I told him the chickies would thank him for his vote. Just made him madder. heh.

actor 212, I meant to add that by 2006 I had just about finished arguing with myself and was coming to my senses about the odds of the moderate, pro-choice, anti-war, Republicans…….. wow. That’s got to be a really small group of people.

How do you solve a problem like the Dough Pants?
How do you catch a cloud and pin it down?

To me he will always be the Great Boyg.

I’ve seen those pursed lips before. Hmm….

Oh, yes. On the back of my cat.

No, I’m not a concern troll, but thanks for making me feel even more welcome. I realize that concern trolls have caused a lot of problems, and have pointed to a couple of them myself. My comments were directed to John and Alec’s posts regarding Republicans changing parties, and actually everyone else has been very welcoming to us.

Really, my husband and I are still registered Republicans until after tomorrow; we haven’t voted Republican for many years now and have decided that the Democratic Party represents our views much better than the Republicans. I’m against Prop 8, voting for Obama and Loretta Sanchez. Can’t hardly be more out of line with the Republican party view than that.

The Republican party, I think I have to specify, is pretty damn far from most Republicans voting right now. Obama and the Democratic mainstream are actual conservatives – they look at the social, political, and economic problems facing the country and seek to solve them efficiently and deliberately with as little disruption of the social order as possible, where the left seeks more rapid and radical change to remove the root of those problems.

The Republican voter’s stance is conservative. The Republican Party’s stance is denialist. Ignore the problems, shout at people who point it out, use it to mainstream the Leaders’ ridiculous grudges and policies.

As a leftist, I can imagine coexisting with someone whose solution to the current economic crisis is to gently shore up the middle class and develop a safety net capable of preventing any further deterioriation of society. This would not be my solution, but I can live with it. I cannot live, and neither can anyone else live, with someone whose solution to the current economic crisis is ethnic slurs.

I think the Democratic Party is better suited for voters like you than for me. For right now, it’s the only party for either of us.

And as for pro-choice Republicans: unfortunately, the current fashion in the GOP is to impose the Party’s will on the public whether you agree with it or not. This has always struck me particularly as a profound perversion: my parents, like Joe Biden, were raised Catholic and consider abortion a tragedy, but the idea of imposing a choice that grave on anyone is mind-boggling to them. They first voted in 1984; they’ve never seen a moderate, pro-choice anti-war Republican running for national office.

Oh, yes. On the back of my cat.
I can only hope that the cat consented to this.

Dragon-King said: Children of the Corner

Oh gosh, wish I’d thought of that!

No punishment is too harsh for a man who uses the word “disincentivizing” without a blush.

Yikes, cowalker, sorry – I saw ‘disincentivizing’ and thought it was Jonah. Many apologies for the offensive comment.

Alison, hanging her head in shame.

Smut Clyde said,
November 4, 2008 at 1:30

Oh, yes. On the back of my cat.
I can only hope that the cat consented to this.

Bleeargh. Oh, Smut, I don’t think my cats would consent to those lips being anywhere near them.

I feel faint.

Btw IBD/TIPP poll today shows Obama up by 5 . I’m sure Gateway Pundit will offer his thoughts on this .

Meanwhile McCain odds keep going down on betting sites Betfair and Intrade .

I see that GP has commented upon it . That is to say he takes solace in the ‘fact” that more than 9 percent are still undecided and oh yes they are all going to McCain .

Douthat: “by failing the way it did the Bush Administration may have cut the ground out from under my own ideas before I’d even figured out exactly what they were.”

Isn’t such a person blogging sort of on a par with teaching a bear to ride a bicycle (i.e. absurd & sort of cruel)?

If you’re not sure what your own ideas are, perhaps you just plain don’t have any.

Bleeargh. Oh, Smut, I don’t think my cats would consent to those lips being anywhere near them.
Just for your cats:
http://www.foureyesjokeshop.com/ProductImages/cat_butt_gum.jpg