-
The Inoperative Jay Carney
May 23, 2013 | 134 comments
-
IRS Union Chief Stonewalls
May 21, 2013 | 57 comments
-
Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?
May 20, 2013 | 69 comments
-
The Liberal Union Behind the IRS
May 16, 2013 | 146 comments
-
Cumulus Media: Suicide of a Company?
May 14, 2013 | 64 comments
Political Hay
When Conservatism Is a Second Language
The New Reagans and the enduring principles of conservatism.
And so, another moderate fails.
Governor Romney is a good person, a great business leader.
But, alas, he is also a moderate Republican.
As were Herbert Hoover, Alf Landon, Wendell Willkie, Thomas E. Dewey, Gerald R. Ford, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole and John McCain. Making Mitt Romney a historical asterisk as the tenth moderate GOP nominee (Dewey was nominated twice) to lose the White House.
The exceptions to the rule are Dwight Eisenhower, who won not because he was a moderate but because he was the general-hero of World War II. Richard Nixon campaigned as the moderate he was in 1960 and lost. By 1968 he had won the nomination of a party that had shifted back to its conservative roots and he campaigned accordingly — as he did in 1972. He won narrowly the second time, by a landslide the third. George H.W. Bush ran as the heir to Reagan in 1988 and won. Governing as a moderate he lost — and lost badly in his 1992 re-election effort. George W. Bush ran as a “compassionate conservative” — which is to say a moderate — in 2000 and 2004 and squeaked by the first time thanks to the Supreme Court, winning the second time by a bare 100,000 votes in Ohio.
On Tuesday night, it comes clear, as this is written using the latest Fox News figures, Mitt Romney lost to President Obama by 2,819,339 votes.
And the news ekes out that Moderate Nominee Number 10 Romney received some 3 million Republican votes less than Moderate Nominee Number 9 — John McCain in 2008.
Which is to say, 3 million base GOP voters simply refused to vote for Romney. Doing the available math, that means had those 3 million Republicans voted for Romney he would have, as this is written, a margin of victory in the national popular vote of 180,661. Depending on the state spread, potentially an Electoral College victory as well.
Does the message get through here?
Well, for some in the GOP — no.
The usual call will now go up — just as it did in 1950 from two-time loser Dewey — that to nominate a conservative is to lose. Somehow heedless that it wasn’t Ronald Reagan and his conservatism that lost or almost lost the White House, it was this seemingly endless stream of very nice moderate Republicans.
Reasonable people can be expected to raise the point of just when that old joke attributed to Einstein will come clear. You know the one. That the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. For Republicans, this translates as yet again nominating a moderate who is said to “move to the center,” “can attract women,” “get the youth vote” and “get the minority vote.”
The strategy has failed repeatedly for some 80 years. Say again… 80 years!!!!! And yet there are still those out there who insist on doing the same thing over — and over and over and over — again.
At the heart of the Romney campaign — of two Romney presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012 — was not principle but biography. And as day follows night yet another Democrat was available to take that biography, turn it upside down, inside out and shred it. In a blink the man with the career as a successful businessman became the man in the top hat from the Monopoly game.
There is abroad in the land — and even here in the pages of The American Spectator with my colleague Aaron Goldstein — the notion that “it’s not 1980 anymore.” Ironically, this is only the 2012 version of the argument that was made against Reagan himself in 1980. It wasn’t 1920 anymore, went the reasoning. Reagan was just an old fashioned man out-of-step with the space-age 1980s.
About the Author
Jeffrey Lord is a former Reagan White House political director and author. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (180) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jeffrey Lord
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/08/when-conservatism-is-a-secon
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Aristocat| 11.8.12 @ 6:26AM
Great article, sir. Rafael Cruz for President.
Jack in Wi| 11.8.12 @ 7:19AM
The Blacks used to vote 90% Republican. Hispanics are like most immigrant groups who start out as Democrats but often move to the Republicans. The Republicans have to reach out with sound commonsense programs for low taxes peace ,prosperity, and personal responsibility.
Seek| 11.8.12 @ 11:57AM
Blacks generally voted Republican during Reconstruction only because the candidates for whom they were voting also were black. Black voters, in other words, were demonstrating racial loyalty, not party loyalty. To argue otherwise is to buy into the "party of Lincoln" myth and its corollary nonsense about "liberal racism" (as if Southern Democrats way back, in any meaningful sense, could be called modern liberals).
"Reaching out" to minorities is a phantasm. The GOP needs to reach out to whites. They might actually find out again what it's like to win.
RCV| 11.8.12 @ 11:58AM
That's the attitude that lost the GOP the last two elections, and will make them an ever-declining minority.
gray man| 11.10.12 @ 12:30AM
"Blacks generally voted Republican during Reconstruction only because the candidates for whom they were voting also were black" - nonsense.
Ralph Novy| 11.10.12 @ 10:41PM
Yes, complete nonsense -- if you're being charitable.
I'd say it's a bit more than that -- a reflection of profound historical ignorance or filthy historical revisionism.
biggoofer| 11.8.12 @ 6:48PM
As Rush says, Republican party does not have diversity problem.
Democrats and Republicans have two fundamental differences: Republicans promote success through self-reliance and hard work while Democrats promote compassion through Government dependence.
When something is free, there's always a demand for more of it.
Look at Blacks. Using public housing, urban league projects, and other welfare programs, Democrats have kept the Blacks under their spell. They turn the blind eye to their ghetto rot: black-on-black violence, unwed mothers, sky high school dropout rate. MOST blacks are perfectly fine with these conditions. Those who want to break the cycle of violence and poverty do succeed and integrate into middle-class suburbia.
I don't ever see Blacks turning up for Republicans in my lifetime; especially as long as they are herded by their own race hustlers.
Hispanics: Very hard working, but under educated and typically large families. They can not make it without public assistance: college, healthcare, child welfare. When a section of Americans are addicted to free stuff from the Government, that cycle of dependency is hard to break.
Still, Republicans have a better chance at getting Hispanics under their wings.
Swallow the pride, and provide Hispanic kids with college education support and a path to citizenship. Hard working as they are, these Hispanic kids will be attracted to conservative principles.
Quartermaster| 11.9.12 @ 6:42AM
The facts belie your last sentence.
Ralph Novy| 11.10.12 @ 10:42PM
The facts belie his entire post.
gene| 11.9.12 @ 12:28PM
There are all kinds of Hispanic people. Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Spanish, etc.
However, if I were a Mexican Hispanic, there is not way I would ever vote for an Administration that sold Assault Rifles to Mexican Drug Cartels to slaughter my people.
No way. No how would I ever give them my vote.
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 8:40AM
I understand that this is a Slow Time for guys in this business, but: "If only we had a Better Candidate"? "If only he had been More Conservative"?
The Muslim ran the Most Far Left Campaign this Country has EVER seen, and he got 2 MILLION more Votes than Our Guy. TWO MILLION.
More Welfare. Higher Taxes. Free Abortions. Free Condoms. More Regulations. Punish the Rich. REVENGE!
He ran a Campaign on 4 More Years of Higher Food Prices. Higher Energy Prices. More Bankruptcies. More Foreclosures. More Homelessness and Hopelessness. More people on Food Stamps. More people living at the Poverty Line, and BELOW IT. More people working Part Time Jobs, at Minimum Wage. More Companies getting the Hell Outta Dodge, on the next Boat for China
Less Personal Income. Less Value on your Homes. Less opportunities to get a Good Paying Job. Less Military Readiness. Less Influence around the World. And, less adherence to the Constitution's Seperation of Power, our Laws on the Books, and any Modicum of Civility, and Decorum.
FCK the Catholic Church, and Freedom of Religion!
FCK the Jews, in Israel!
FCK the Rich!
FCK Whitey!
FCK all a Ya'all, who refuse to Bow to my Glory!
We coulda run JESUS CHRIST in this Election, and it wouldn't have made a difference.
Open your Eyes, Jeffery.
The MORLOCKS now Outnumber The ELOI.
Understand?
Alej| 11.8.12 @ 9:53AM
I believe the author posits that 3,000,000 Eloi stayed home and didn't vote.
Unfrigginbelievable.
Unless massive fraud was involved.
RCV| 11.8.12 @ 11:57AM
...ah, it wasn't long before the "massive fraud" mantra began.
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 3:44PM
Let's see.
Republican Poll Watchers physically Removed from Philly Voting Places.
Black Panthers, once again, positioned outside of Voting Places, with Impunity, in Philly.
The NAACP running Voting Places, in Houston.
Posters of Obama INSIDE Voting Places.
You're a real Ccksckr, ya know that?
Of course you do.
CJW| 11.8.12 @ 7:29PM
I read that at the polls where the Rep poll watchers were evicted, the turnout was 90% with a 99.5% vote for Obama. The average turnout in Philly was 60%.
Fidel, Stalin, and the boys would be proud of those numbers.
Ralph Novy| 11.10.12 @ 1:25AM
Find better reading material.
Toinfinityandbeyond| 11.11.12 @ 7:50PM
Hey TLP Tim,
If you don't even know what you are talking about.
Shut your loophole!
Controse| 11.8.12 @ 4:00PM
Nice little rant you got there TLP. In all the post-game analysis did you not notice how many fewer Republican voters than 2008? Can you say "margin of victory."
During the RNC did you miss John Boehner reading the result of a voice vote off the teleprompter immediately after it was taken? Are you at all familiar with Soviet Politburo voting practices? The whole point of a yes vote was to deny grassroots conservative ascendency to control of the Republican Party. The delegates voice voted no. The teleprompter told Boehner to say yes. He did.
Surely every conservative Republican Party member has his favorite replant Romney quote to repeat to his friends and family when asked why no vote. Mine is "We really should take a look at indexing the minimum wage to inflation" or something to that effect. Now there's an idea to differentiate us from the lib's.
I didn't stay home but I understand those that did.
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 6:53PM
You understand why they stayed home.
Really?
Then you're just as Fcked Up in the head, as they are.
They stayed home.
And, what did they get for their Precious Principles?
4 More Years of this Marxist Muslim, White Hating, Jew Hating, America Hating CCKSCKR, who won't be satisfied until we're a Third World Banana Republic, buried in $20 Trillion in Debt, that our Children, and THEIR CHILDREN, will never be able to pay off.
But YOU understand them.
Fck You.
Ralph Novy| 11.10.12 @ 11:56PM
Go away, TLP -- FAR away.
You're utterly un-American.
Toinfinityandbeyond| 11.11.12 @ 7:51PM
Hey TLP Tim,
If you don't even know what you are talking about.
Shut your loophole!
Toinfinityandbeyond| 11.11.12 @ 7:49PM
Hey TLP Tim,
If you don't even know what you are talking about.
Shut your loophole!
Quartermaster| 11.9.12 @ 6:43AM
The GOP has never been a conservative party, or had any roots there. The party of Lincoln began as a statist party and has remained such throughout its history.
gray man| 11.10.12 @ 12:32AM
nonsense.
Alan Brooks | 11.10.12 @ 1:18AM
The Second Law of Political Thermodynamics:
"politicians tend to go from high quality to low quality unless stopped by a force of much greater mass" (a paraphrase).
You went from Ike in the Postwar period to Romney 60 yrs later.
MelvinNC| 11.8.12 @ 6:37AM
What the Republican Party needs is a Republican leadership pogrom.
The elitist leadership in the Republican party will not pass the baton to rising Conservative Republican stars within the party.
The elitist leadership refuses to admit that their moderate philosophy is destroying the party and in turn the Country.
So therefor in the best interest in Conservatism, this moderate philosophy of reaching across the aisle and rubbing the butt of Democrats in the spirit of bipartisanship must be politically destroyed.
There is no other way. This Republican leadership pogrom must be swift, precise, with no prisoners taken. Then the party can be rebuilt.
mike 3/505| 11.8.12 @ 8:02AM
Pogrom, at first glance, I thought you said "program." Now it makes more sense. A program, implies the folks are teachable. Knowing they are not, as proven by contiuous series of moderate candidates, a pogrom is just what is in order.
Al Adab| 11.8.12 @ 10:20AM
I was heavily criticized about a year ago when I used the term Purge. The moderate, accomodationist GOP will never accept the Conservative Movement as legitimate even though it is only when Conservatives preponderate as in '80 and '94 that the GOP enjoyed success.
pogybait| 11.8.12 @ 12:22PM
Leadership program....How about our current leaders getting a pair and stop accepting the narratives from the left which would be the first step.....instead they act like little choir boys afraid to engage....moderates.....their only currency in life is their jovial ineptitude...
Controse| 11.8.12 @ 4:07PM
Can't be done. The "vote" at the RNC changed the rules to shovel salt on the grass roots at the slightest sign of challenge to the "central committee" or whatever it's called these days. Only top down change will be tolerated.
Let's quit kidding ourselves and form a Constitutional Party. Only those who take their oath to defend the constitution seriously need apply.
Our constitution is our freedom.
aware| 11.8.12 @ 6:52AM
When you advocate Rubio it nullifies everything else in your article. Typical echo chamber, you quote Levin, he cites your latest article.
Charter members of Conservative, Inc., like you Lord, do all you can to maintain an exclusivity of membership, alienate libertarians, Paul supporters, Buchananites, and Paleos, dismiss young voters, and constantly make excuses for defeat, mostly involving blaming anybody except your tight little circle of "true believers".
Now you claim there are "new" Reagans out there and then say Rubio, a moderate if there ever was one, is one such example? Like a bald old guy trying to put the band of his youth back together, you look ridiculous with every Reagan is back article. Even making the absurd try at making Romney a "new" Reagan.
Looking at your predictions of the last few weeks it strikes me that you are wrong more than a weatherman, and like him, you still get to make pronouncements as though you were right.
I can see you and Levin clucking in satisfaction at the brilliance of your arguments but unable to realize those outside your tight circle who agree get smaller and smaller.
Jack in Wi| 11.8.12 @ 7:14AM
aware: Good riddence to Romney and may he take Karl Rove and all his neocons with him. The neocons are like vampires. They love to suck blood and hate the Constitution. Romney destroyed his chances by not reaching out to Ron Paul and all his young supporters. His incompetent warmongering also cost him the election. In no way was he the warmonger he was pretending to be. 70% of the Jews voted for Obama and most of their campign money went to him as well. Can we just give the rabid Zionists the boot as well. They bring nothing to the table and lose far more votes then they bring. Most Jews are far to sane to agree with them.The road back for the Republicans is to push for peace, low taxes, personal responsibilty and the slashing of government and regulations.
gray man| 11.10.12 @ 12:36AM
nonsense.
Ralph Novy| 11.10.12 @ 11:57PM
No, gray man, I think there's more than a grain of truth in what Jack said.
The anti-semitic stuff is bullshit, of course, but ....
Jeff| 11.8.12 @ 9:33AM
Aware....
First, I did NOT cite Romney as a "New Reagan" .
In fact, I compared him to Nelson Rockefeller.
Second, neither Ron Paul or Pat Buchanan were ever able to assemble anything close to a majority inside the GOP or out of it. Ron Paul made a presidential run as a libertarian and got his clock cleaned. He's run for president as a Republican and got his clock cleaned. At some point the reality should set in that his message is 1)anti-conservative in a conservative party (at least on foreign policy) and 2) simply doesn't sell. The facts of his losses - huge losses - speak for themselves.
aware| 11.9.12 @ 5:46AM
Nice selective history lesson, Jeff. If Paul is so inconsequential why the dirty tricks by GOP Establishment, Inc.? Why the rewriting of rules? Even calling in uniformed thugs to deny a voice at state conventions? You Establishment types did the same with Buchanan in the 90s. When you cheat and abuse a segment of your voters how could you expect them to support you?
Paul would have destroyed Obama in the general because unlike the usual suspects of the GOP, there would have been a REAL difference. You "conservatives" would have voted for him, as your support for Romney and McCain proves you'd vote for anything that wasn't Obama, even apparently Leftists who make a name by poking sharp sticks in your eyes .
And he would have won Democrats in droves. The youth vote was his for the asking. The gender gap would not have happened. If you wanted that "landslide" only Paul could give it to you.
What I'm saying is you and the rest of the Conservative, Inc. are out of touch and headed for the sunset. You now are just supporters of the Status Quo, just advocating "new" management. Support for Bush destroyed what little credibility you even had.
It is not "liberalism" that is the enemy, it is Statism. And you "conservatives" are badly infected by it too. Worse, you don't believe that is true. Hence, you won't learn and are doomed to more defeats.
Ralph Novy| 11.11.12 @ 12:03AM
aware:
It's not just that Republicans are ALSO "infected" with "statism." They are the primary proponents of it.
Why the hell do you think dyed-in-the-wool liberals defend the Bill of Rights so fiercely?
We liberals (yes, that's how I'd describe myself) want a decent, caring, cooperative society that cares for the less fortunate, but we're not about to sacrifice a shitload of individual liberties to get it.
Get it?
It still amazes me how self-described "conservatives" claim to be on the side of individual liberty. They NEVER have been. They've virtually ALWAYS supported the state over the individual. Remember the "Warren Supreme Court"? Whose side do you think the majority there was on? Duh.
aware| 11.11.12 @ 1:11PM
It is true that modern conservatism since its inception with Buckley and National(ist) Review in the mid 50s, overtly accepts the State in its quest for "security". After all, when it comes organizing overwhelming force and violence nothing compares to the State. In fact, the only tool the State has is force. They accept the evils that come as a result, especially destruction of liberty.
But liberals are as guilty of accepting the same evils for different reasons. Rather than making the State the god of security as they would, you would have it be the god of philanthropy to bring about that " decent, caring, cooperative society".
A "cooperative" society is not to be had with the State once it has arrived at a certain point on its road to absolutism, which ALL States, no matter what form, systems, or ideological underpinnings, are traveling.
The "Great Society" has destroyed the good society precisely because it is a centrally planned(by "good" people) societal overhaul enforced by the State. Society is a self enforcing mechanism geared for survival. The State interferes with that mechanism to enforce "fairness", which beyond a very few basics is highly disputable. The "basics" being life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Liberals give us the Welfare State which easily matches the Warfare State in abuses, destruction of liberty, and the annihilation of the individual, as well as the aggrandizement of power and the State.
Tom Kyba| 11.8.12 @ 10:50AM
You just won and already you're afraid? What's it like to have no standards?
aware| 11.9.12 @ 5:51AM
How do you figure that I, a committed anti-Statist, have "won"? Or even could have in this (s)election?
Tell me what it's like to have "standards" you're willing to jettison so you can support a proven Statist just because he has an "R" behind his name?
You haven't a clue have you?
Joellen| 11.8.12 @ 6:52AM
Thank you Mr. Lord, in a response I made earlier, the Constitiution is Color Blind, it is the liberal/democrat party who bases everything on race, sex, & creed. I dont regard Congressman Allen West as a Black man. No, to me he is a HERO who served our country faithfully, is a fiscal and social Tea Party conservative Republican. See, no mention of his color or sex. I still respect Governor Sarah Palin, not because she is a white woman; no, its because she has accomplished all she has by her courage and strenght. The Governor earned every accolade she receives. Again, no mention of her race or sex. I dont object to Obama, because he is black, and I dont base my decisions on how I feel about him because of his faith (or lack of it). I dislike what he is doing to our country both socially & economically. I will openly denounce what he is set out to do to my Church and I will defend my Church when he and his ilk set out to silence it. And this applies to Biden and Pelosi, who call themselves Catholics. See, again, no mention of their color or sex. They have set the battle line, not me, nor my Church.
Joellen| 11.8.12 @ 6:56AM
You see Mr. Lord, the truth is the left is not to use to you, TAS readers, the Tea Party and just good ole Americans who have come and and boldly said this aint happening without a fight. They have been used to people casually going about their lives, trusting these people. And then their eyes were open.
We will continue to be vocal. I will not be part of a Party that has the same platform as the Democrats. I dont want my party to comprimise with them - especially now. I want my Republican Party to be leaders and fight every battle as if the country depends on it. They were elected to do just that and if they cant, then pass the torch on to those like Allen West, Mia Love, Sarah Palin, and all fiscal & social conservatives who adhere to the constitution. See it really is as simple as that - no color, no sex - just an idea that adheres to what our Founding Fathers embraced and fought for.
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 6:56PM
Don't waste your time on him.
He lost touch with the rest of us, a long time ago.
Ralph Novy| 11.11.12 @ 12:05AM
For what it's worth, I don't regard Allen West as a "black man" either.
I regard him as an asshole.
Joellen| 11.8.12 @ 6:57AM
Sorry, that should be "the truth is the, left is not use to you..........
btims86| 11.8.12 @ 7:02AM
Give up the ghost Neocons.......
Ultimately, all the matters is race/ethnicity. Read it and weap. Then tell me again that mass immigration is good.
White 59% Romney
Black 93% Obama
Arab/Muslim 83% Obama
Latino 71% Obama
Asian 73% Obama
C. Vernon Crisler | 11.8.12 @ 8:19AM
"And it is sobering to realize that if he were now President-elect, with the rest of Tuesday's results being the same, he would doubtless already be in motion on "bipartisanship" -- which is to say instantly veering off course to accommodate Harry Reid. The same Harry Reid who expressed scorn at the very thought of seeking compromise with a President Romney."
Conservatives would have had to suffer four years of being stabbed in the back. I guess it's slightly better to be stabbed from the front.
These racial and ethnic numbers are disturbing. Should we do something to stop immigration, not just illegal immigration? If all these groups end up being voters for socialism, maybe it's time we revisited our immigration policies.
GobBluthe| 11.8.12 @ 9:29AM
Youre correct. Those numbers even 8 years ago, would have given Romney the win. For all the crying over too conservative, not conservative enough, the fact is minorities dont vote for the GOP, period regardless of ideology.
Alej| 11.8.12 @ 10:01AM
I've said since the 1970s that America is the only nation in history that gave its culture away cherrfully and willingly. Pat Buchanan, whom I agree with maybe 10% of the time, wrote that we are losing a culture war, primarily because we don't know we're in one... but the other side does very well.
Melt down the part of the Statue of Liberty that calls for huddled masses. And then turn the statue around to face America.
Appleby| 11.8.12 @ 7:05AM
I will no longer support the "Electable" liberals the Republicans throw in my face and tell me are my "only choice" -- as Rocky the Flying Squirrel pointed out, "That trick never works." I will not vote for people chosen for me. I will vote for people I can support, as I did when I was young, and I promise to ignore the people here on TAS who advocate in response that I kill myself.
From this day forward I will support only those whose ideology comports with mine. Period.
PolishKnight| 11.8.12 @ 10:50AM
Appleby, I'm reminded of a line from King of the Hill: "I miss voting for that man" (Ronald Reagan)
Sure, it would be great to vote for Ronald Reagan but even if we had the guy, it's likely he'd lose in today's climate of unwed motherhood, race and gender entitlements, and political cronyism.
What feminism and the so-called civil rights movement achieved was to get black men into jail and white women working 60 hour work weeks to keep up with 40 year mortgages. Yeah, that really worked out for them.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.8.12 @ 7:42AM
Jeffrey, this election was lost by focusing on the "macro economy" that very few really understand.
We should have put up a double barreled shotgun, because as we shall soon find out, that THIS election was about freedom and liberty, and now the liars and theives have the offices.
FOR GOODNESS SAKE, "SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE S" AND RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES HAVE BEEN TOTALLY TRIVIALIZED INTO CONDOM WAVERS.
Yes, I am pro life. I will lay down my life for a mom's desire to keep and nurture her baby.
You need to get over to Thomas Sowel's column about the menue Obama will be serving up.
Batten down the hatches, sir When we as a group say "No Further". Obama has already announced "yes FURTHER" with his new domestic Army of some 200,000 men.
(Evidently guttersnipes who will draw and fire unprovoked on fellow Americans because our honorable US Army will not).
wh| 11.8.12 @ 7:52AM
The roots of Obama victory partially can be trace to the GOP and Conservative leaders abandoning the support for the melting pot , assimilation and their long history to pandering to Multiculturalism
and Multiculturalism is not just about religion or atheism is also about national /cultural, economical identity
People who are very religious but still remains culturally and national identity Latin Americans spite of being third generations American born , they will not embrace the political cultural model
Conservatives need to take account all the whole make up of groups, their traditional culture leaning which includes identity, political , economical and religious view because just focusing in one aspect religious they are missing the target why such groups will continue to empower the candidates transforming America into a failing European model
mjs-pa| 11.8.12 @ 8:06AM
Mr. Lord,
I was hoping you would be so embarrassed by your PA going romney propaganda that you'd hang it up for a while.
Don't you owe your readers and conservatives in general a little more respect than mere shilling for the republican establishment?
John Navratil| 11.8.12 @ 8:25AM
mjs-pa,
I missed the part about shilling for the republican establishment. I must have read right over it. There is no love lost on these pages for the gray beards in the party.
Jeff| 11.8.12 @ 9:38AM
mjs-pa
What I said was that Pennsylvania was in play. Millions of dollars in TV ads surged in here, along with Bill Clinton and Joe Biden. They would never have wasted their time if it wasn't in play, and they certainly wouldn't have spent a fortune here if it was safe for Obama.
As to shilling for the GOP establishment? What planet are you living on? I've been out there repeatedly criticizing the GOP Establishment - and have done so again this morning.
RCV| 11.8.12 @ 11:55AM
If you believe what you just wrote, go back and look at the nonsense you wrote.
aware| 11.10.12 @ 7:33AM
You must have forgotten you were in "criticism of GOP Establishment" mode when you replied to me earlier in typical Establishment denigration of Paul and Buchanan. Old habits are all you have now.
mjs-pa is not the only one who sees you and your echo chamber mates of talk radio as shills. But blaming demographics and crappy candidates is easier than serious self examination.
Fortunately, a Liberty movement is growing with every GOP betrayal and insider jury-rigging that has as little use for you as you do for them. Head over to The Daily Bell or Zero Hedge or LewRockwell and see the future.
Bob K| 11.8.12 @ 10:03AM
PA's vote turnout was down for both parties from the 2008 election. It looks like too many republicans did not get out and vote in this one or it might have made a difference. Gerrymandering kept the House Republicans in office but they lost the Senate race and they lost 3 or 4 state senators and 3 state offices: Atty. General (This is the first time the Atty Gen has been a Democrat since it became an elective office in 1980 or so.); The Treasurer and Auditor General also went democrat. Republicans still control both the PA House and Senate(by a smaller margin) and the Governor's office but Governor Corbett is in trouble next time he runs.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.8.12 @ 1:54PM
Have you seen the article in the Inquirer about the high turnout in some Philadelphia ward's that provided Saddam Hussein-like percentages for Obama?
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 3:47PM
Let's see.
Republican Poll Watchers physically Removed from Philly Voting Places.
Black Panthers, once again, positioned outside of Voting Places, with Impunity, in Philly.
The NAACP running Voting Places, in Houston.
Posters of Obama INSIDE Voting Places.
Welcome to Africa. (pick any country)
Toinfinityandbeyond| 11.11.12 @ 7:52PM
Hey TLP Tim,
If you don't even know what you are talking about.
Shut your loophole!
CJW| 11.8.12 @ 4:21PM
Albert
O received about 69 million votes in 08, and about 60 mil now.
What happened the NINE MILLION VOTERS or NINE MILLION VOTES? One would assume that nine million votes corresponds to nine million voters? This could a contest? What happened? A true Columbo mystery.
JoeS| 11.8.12 @ 8:14AM
Them: I'll give you stuff bought with other people's money. It won't be much, but it will be free.
Us: Work heard, study, take risks and earn your own way. You might make a lot and not be dependent on others. Maybe not.
There you go. Sell that to someone. I chose the second, but how many will?
JayDick| 11.8.12 @ 10:38AM
Except they never point out that it won't be much. They make it sound like they're giving people lots, everything they need and more; bait and switch.
Von Mises Jr| 11.8.12 @ 8:18AM
A perfect example of this is Chris Christie. Because he bullies teachers, he is portrayed as a conservative. He gave a keynote address for Romney, and then stabbed him in the back.
Christie was holding out to the last minute and under much pressure from the TEA Parties across the state to veto a Foreclosure Bill. It would set up a $1B bond issue to buy foreclosed houses and rent them to special needs such as ex-cons, drug addicts and mentally disturbed.
Christie is about to sign an Executive Order labeled a Development and Redevelopment Plan that is Agenda21. It is central planning that result in such folly as the hordes of taxpayer money that was sent to Asbury Park for their boardwalk and beach restoration. Now our taxpayers have had their taxes washed out to sea. But plenty of planners and developers surely got paid well.
Statism, socialism, crony capitalism is the same if Obama picks Kaiser and Solyndra as his crony, or a Republican becomes the benefactor of a crony system.
John Navratil| 11.8.12 @ 8:29AM
Von Mises Jr.
Christie entered the scene as the man who took on Corzine and the teachers unions which got everyone's attention. Since the has had been a decidedly mixed bag with support for cap-and-trade and taking a pass on the Obamacare challenges.
One must remember, a Coulter recently learned, that the enemy of one's enemy is not necessarily one's fricnd.
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 3:50PM
You should try using your Imaginary Edit App.
I'm just sayin.
John Navratil| 11.8.12 @ 8:53PM
TLP,
I'm channelling my imaginary edit app. I NEED it.
Phat fnigers, brane faster than pffat finger.s, eyez read what thye want! phaaap!
SUBVET| 11.8.12 @ 11:06AM
It sounds like the SOS.......what can you do for me.
Al Adab| 11.8.12 @ 8:31AM
As we have noted many times over the last six months or more, the GOP continues to betray the Conservative Movement which is the only way the GOP has enjoyed success. Since its inception The Movement has found itself in opposition to the moderate, accomodationist camp of the party. That faction brings only disapointment and too often electoral failure.
All that said, there is today reason to doubt whether GOP opposition to the Obama agenda can succeed and whether in the future there will be enough of our system of self-government left upon which to rebuild. We have become a European social-welfare State and are likely on the road to Rome.
Nancy in NC| 11.8.12 @ 8:41AM
We will keep losing as long as we allow the other side to define the truth.
How could we expect to repeal ObamaCare with the guy that introduced it in Mass? Romney didn't go there enough and explain what was wrong with ObamaCare. God knows there's plenty of stuff wrong with it. And people will be figuring that out very soon. But have you ever tried to get rid of a government program? It's about like trying to defy gravity.
The problem is much more serious than the GOP and its establishment morons. (Let me never see another Bush, especially Jeb.)
The Tea Party knows and understands the problems. But we have allowed the media to define us as racists, which is anything but truth.
The BASIC problem, IMHO, is the FPN (Federal Propoganda Network) also known as the public education system-from K upward. The teachers from liberal institutes fill our children with nonsense and do everything from the get go to turn our children into victims. Instead of teaching them to think, they teach them to regurgitate crap that wasn't worth knowing in the first place. Few college graduates could pass the curriculum of 8th graders of the 1800s. They don't know Latin, never study the thinkers of the past (except perhaps Plato), learn a rewritten Howard Zinn history, and study at the feet of Frankfurt Institute offspring. Heck, they don't even teach cursive anymore. It's outdated according to the "wiser" heads.
Al Adab| 11.8.12 @ 10:31AM
Allowing the other side to define the terms of the debate has long been a failing of the accomodationist GOP. For example so many bought into the "Bush's fault" litany that it became proverbial even though false. This new economy, the collapse, and recoveryless baseline of today stem directly from the '06 congressional takeover. However, it is now too late given the Nov. 6 results to turn back and systemic reaction will come up short. Only as individauls can we now accomodate, oppose and survive this new Social-welfare State economy. We are a welfare stae and that fact will drive policy into our coming totalitarian, centrally planned future.
Jade12| 11.9.12 @ 10:31AM
Exactly.
Nancy in NC| 11.8.12 @ 8:44AM
I don't have children in public school anymore, but I have grandchildren and I'm paying their mom to home school them. Hopefully she will be able to give them the basics that will ward off the demons of progressives, liberals, and idiots they will surely find in the halls of "higher learning".
There are no sunshine patriots in my crew. We have only begun to fight.
Al Adab| 11.8.12 @ 10:38AM
Nancy:
I have included in my will, a apology letter to my grandchildren. We fought the imposition of the tyranny long and hard. Now it is the new reality and we have relegated our grandchildren to the status of subjects and no longer citizens of their nation. We have saddled them with unfathomable debt and made them servants of The State. Perhaps we did not fight enough or perhaps we simply lost the war. Nonetheless they will pay the price literally and figuritively for our failure. Perhaps we should have forced the issue a generation ago.
Ralph Novy| 11.10.12 @ 10:49PM
Stop fighting and learn to cooperate, Nancy.
Hardcard| 11.8.12 @ 8:53AM
It's the electorate stupid !!!!!
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 9:03AM
Hardcard is right.
There was literally No-one that we could have Run, who could have Won.
NO-ONE.
The number of Takers has overtaken the number of Makers, and the MORLOCKS now outnumber the ELOI.
It's simple Math, really.
SUBVET| 11.8.12 @ 11:08AM
Tim........the numbers don't add up 2008 and now.
Smell a ni**er in the woodpile.
RCV| 11.8.12 @ 11:54AM
You're not only an idiot, but a disgusting one as well.
DRed| 11.8.12 @ 1:14PM
I see it didn't take long for you to prove correct my guess that you people wouldn't learn any lessons from your defeat and instead double down on the stupid. It's fascinating how completely you buy into what you're told by cynical hacks like Jeff Lord. There certainly aren't any racists in the republican party. An ignorant piece of trash like Subvet sees a nigger in the woodpile? Nothing racist there. In fact, RCV is the real racist for pointing out that it's disgusting. Why won't those dumb blacks get off their knees in the ghetto and join up with you fair minded freedom lovers? I have no idea. . .
Jeff| 11.8.12 @ 2:36PM
Ahhhh Dred....Playing the race card per usual.
We've had the discussion.....you guys play the race card and can't stop yourselves. The entire objective is to get people to vote by race.....and you're pros at it. Will you ever learn? After 212 years of this its safe to say: no.
DRed| 11.8.12 @ 2:50PM
Is this a joke? I didn't play the race card. Someone 'smelling a nigger in the woodpile' after Obama's win is most likely a racist. Calling someone out for racist ignorance isn't playing the race card, Jeff. Go stick your head back in the sand and tell us how the Republicans are doing great.
Jeff| 11.8.12 @ 4:12PM
Agreed.
So the point would be...why is that guy a racist but libs who run around assailing Koreans, ginning up Hispanics and Blacks to think racially is any different? What's with the lib support of a group called The Race - La Raza? You're so busy dividing Americans by class and race you have no time for anything else. The Klan yesterday, La Raza today. Both, not coincidentally, big time progressives. George Stephanopoulos is on TV saying the GOP is too old and white....ageist and racist all in one. Yet notice...Old George doesn't give his job up for a young hispanic woman, does he? Hmmmmmm.
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 7:00PM
Nice, but like I said earlier: Way Late To The Party.
Ralph Novy| 11.11.12 @ 12:08AM
"The Klan yesterday, La Raza today. Both, not coincidentally, big time progressives."
You're toast, Lord. You've "jumped the shark."
SUBVET| 11.8.12 @ 2:47PM
AND.........you post like a guy with a paper assho*e
DRed| 11.8.12 @ 2:51PM
And. . .you post like a dimwitted bigot.
SUBVET| 11.8.12 @ 5:58PM
The answer was for your 1/2 brother RCV but you seem to fit the comment non the less....dred.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.8.12 @ 9:25AM
I greatly respect Romney the man, as I think he is a good and decent one. As a candidate, I think he ran an energetic and spirited race, and I don’t have a quarrel with his performance. I think there are flaws in Romney the politician, and the Obama campaign seized upon and exploited these, pointing out his record of “flip flopping” (though I don’t know if many moderates failed to vote for him due to this, as this is the characteristic that defines them). I also the Romney campaign strategy was inadequate in compensating for these weak points.
The challenge ahead that Mr. Lord alludes to in this article is how to harness the principles of conservatism that the largest plurality of Americans identify with consistently to form a winning coalition that resists the attempts to divide it that the Left has been successfully managing in the last two Presidential elections. As the Left has Alinsky to guide their efforts, we need to develop and update a playbook that allows us to maintain our principles and be victorious consistently.
CJW| 11.8.12 @ 10:28AM
Romney ran a good campaign and would have made an excellent president .We needed him to slice and dice the budget. It is out of control.
In hindsight, Mitt should have picked Rubio given that states to win such as Florida, Colorado, Nevada, a Virginia have sizable Hispanic populations.
It is great to have principles to pick Ryan as a true conservative but first you need to win the election. Remember JFK hated LBJ and would not even talk to him. But he knew he needed Texas and some southern states to win. Reagan selected Bush even though Bush had criticized his economic policy as vodoo economics.
Our problem is the numbers given the electoral system. Dems will win California, New York, Illinois, NJ, the left coast,and the midwest-new england. They start the election with about 230 votes. We have to win the battleground states to win. Many of these states have big cities with a large black population that votes over 90% for the Dems thus providing the margin for the Dems to win the state.
Dems are better at politics because they focus on winning regardless of the principles of their candidate. Look at how many voted for Bubba, as admitted by the bloggers here. The Reps, though, will stay home or vote a third party (Johnson got 1 million votes) to prove how principled they are. They voted for Perot in 92 and 96 helping to elect Bubba.
I don't see how nominating Santorum or Bachman or any other conservative candidate would have helped.
Al Adab| 11.8.12 @ 10:41AM
W:
I noticed yesterday Dr. Occams' adieu to the site. While I understand his decision to shrug, and sympathize and while I recognize there is no longer hope of stemming the tide of tyranny, we must still make our record so that future generations may rediscover the value of liberty for mankind.
CJW| 11.8.12 @ 11:14AM
Al Adab
Absolutely. We must remain and fight. Glad to see you here.
BenghaziGate will be investigated and tie up Obama and his lackeys in hearings. Axelrod is probably at the center of the coverup and lying.
30 of the governors are Republicans, many conservative. We have many young conservative leaders, such as Rubio, Ryan, Jindal, Portman, McDonald and others. The Dems have old Mrs Bubba..
The MSM will finally investigate and report BenghaziGate because that is the only news and game in town.
But the big problem is Obamacare.
Al Adab| 11.8.12 @ 1:39PM
I see also that our friend Grz is back and in good (if somewhat wordy) voice.
If the best we can do is repeat "Carthago delenda est" each and every time we speak, so be it.
Jade12| 11.9.12 @ 10:43AM
Benghazi will go the same route as Fast and Furious NO WHERE.
JayDick| 11.8.12 @ 10:49AM
CJW: You make many good points. I would add that, although Romney ran a pretty good campaign, it could have been much better. He tried to stay mainly high-level, positive, and noble while Obama got down and dirty. Romney seldom countered Obama's false, negative, ads and seldom focused on Obama's shortcomings and lies, which were numerous. In other words, we needed a junk-yard-dog instead of a penthouse pussycat. Romney's campaign should have been much more negative.
There are many things the Republican party can and should do to improve; none of them involve any significant change to it's core principles.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.8.12 @ 11:25AM
CJW;
I concur that a Romney Presidency would have many positive attributes, and there is no doubt it would have been superior to anything that will emanate from a second Obama term. From those candidates who threw their hat in the ring this time around, there is no one that comes to my mind that I could make a case that would definitiely have fared better.
I also think his performance as a candidate was very good, and I was pleased with his selection of Paul Ryan.
I think you are correct that it is a delicate balance any candidate walks between taking his base for granted (I have voted for the Republican presidential candidate nine out of nine times), and making decisions that can expand the base and draw in others, such as you suggest with Rubio (I would have still voted for Romney, and maybe you are correct that some Hispanics on the fence might find appeal with some from mi barrio, and I would also love Ryan as OMB Director in a Republican administration).
Regarding Bubba, though, it is significant to note that he never received a majority of the electorate in both elections; he just received more than the other candidates running. In addition, in spite of the success he had in getting elected, he had none in implementing any second term agenda, as he spent three of four years battling impeachment.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 11.8.12 @ 11:25AM
Given the contrast in the 2012 economy vs. a 1996 economy, it is uncertain that such a strategy would be as successful this time around, but the power of the congressional hearing to expose to the world and country the hazard of giving Democrats the key to the executive branch should not be ignored.
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 4:01PM
Undeniable Fact - Come 2014, King Obama the 1st, will have already torn down any semblance of a Southern Border, and by Decree of his Omnipotence, will Unilatterally Grant Amnesty to everyone Above, and Below the Rio Grande, to Full Citizenship and everything that entails.
And, why wouldn't he?
He has gotten away with Forging Documents to a Federal Judge. Implementing an Illegal Drilling Moratorium. Refusing to Uphold the Laws of the land. Making Recess Appointments, by Unilaterelly giving himself the Power to Determine when the Senate is in Recess. Running High Powered Automatic Weapons to Mexican Drug Lords. An Waging an Illegal War against Libya.
For 4 long years he has been acting out with a "Stop me before I do something Illegal again" sign around his neck, and NOBODY has stopped him.
Does anyone believe that there's ANYONE in this Republican Leadership who will Stop Him, now?
Cause, I don't.
The only way we turn this Monumental Clusterfck around, is AFTER the inevitable Collapse that is right around the corner.
Period.
Jade12| 11.9.12 @ 10:45AM
Agreed TLP.
Toinfinityandbeyond| 11.11.12 @ 7:53PM
Hey TLP Tim,
If you don't even know what you are talking about.
Shut your loophole!
Dawnsearlylight| 11.10.12 @ 2:30PM
"In hindsight, Mitt should have picked Rubio given that states to win such as Florida, Colorado, Nevada, a Virginia have sizable Hispanic populations."
Romney was focused on the economy and jobs. As soon as he picked Ryan, that was crystal clear. Sure, he should have picked Rubio, but Mitt probably thought that would have been pandering. I don't fault him for his high minded ethics, he only came out of retirement because his country needed him. We still do, but I don't believe the country has come to grips with what is about to happen yet. However, they will.
GobBluthe| 11.8.12 @ 9:26AM
First problem is that conservatives have to field a viable nominee in the primaries. They didnt. Second, they have to rally around a nominee, they didnt though for a brief week or so they did rally around Perry before he self immolated.
The problem with the purists is they are purists even choosing among themselves.
stmichrick| 11.8.12 @ 9:31AM
As a candidate, Romney did a pretty good job as a 'second language' conservative. Sarah Palin and Rick Santorum, as native tongue conservatives, did not. There is the message, and there is the messenger. Rarely do we get a candidate (Reagan) who can do both.
For right now, we are outnumbered by a coalition of the unprincipled and the uninformed. Obama successfully found his voters (with entertainment media interviews and the ' first time' sex and cancer murder ads) and we did not.
Anthony| 11.8.12 @ 9:34AM
Romney was not my first nor my second choice in the R primaries. That said, he made a believer out of me.Articulate, intelligent, upbeat, and speaking truth to reality, he and Ryan were superior.
Romney would have made a fantastic president, he would have suprised many conservatives and Ds as well. He truly would have risen to the presidency.
I've come to a horrible conclusion, it's not us folks, it's THEM. Ronald Reagan would have lost to Obozo!
Decades of open boarders who joined forces with pampered elite leftists did us in.
They ignored the follies of the worst president since Carter. With a rationale electorate, not addicted to government or Marxism, Romney would and should have won 70% of the vote!!!
A totally corrupt and dispicable media worked 24/7 for Obozo. They covered up Fast & Furious and Behngazi. They made a big deal of a 2 hour Obozo photo op in New Jersey, which by the way, is still suffering big time.
The one positive note is that since Romney got 2.7M votes less than McCain and Palin, we can now dispense with the bullshit of how terrible Palin was and what a drag she was in 08.
Palin got more votes than Ryan, and that is all you need to know about how addicted to government and how far left the country got under 4 years of Obozo.
The only solution will come after a total breakdown, which is coming real soon.
Alej| 11.8.12 @ 10:18AM
Good points. And after the breakdown, special attention must be paid to immigration, legal and otherwise. 95 % of them do not assimilate. That means they are UN-American.
Pouring dirty water into clean water gives predictable results.
Jade12| 11.9.12 @ 10:47AM
You got it Anthony.
Who Knows?| 11.8.12 @ 10:03AM
You might be jumping the gun.
Read what Podhoretz says today---it will take up to a week to tally all the votes, and when it's a complete and official result, will probably be the same as what McCain got.
Anthony| 11.8.12 @ 10:18AM
So even if that's true, my comment about Palin still stands.
WhiteBikerTrash| 11.8.12 @ 10:12AM
You call them Moderates. Let's use the real term PROGRESSIVES. When faced with the choices of Hard Core Progressives or Progressive light we tend to digress to the hard core. For Mitt to be sold as salvation from Progression was like selling light colored dirt to clean the stains out of the carpet. We knew we were stuck with a Progressive the Republican Party is the Party of Herbert Hoover! Herbert's policies led to FDR Progressive George's led to BHO.
rjh| 11.8.12 @ 10:30AM
I hope you are right. I do not ever want to hear another word from any Bush's RINO mouth.
Paul McGrath| 11.8.12 @ 10:38AM
I agree with Anthony. Romney was the most appealing Republican candidate since Reagan: bright, articulate, energetic, knowledgable, and, yes, conservative. Maybe not as conservative as Reagan, but a zillion times more conservative than Bush. He perhaps should have been more bold in the final debate and in the final week or two, but hindsight is 20/20. Everybody here expected him to win.
I do, however, agree with Mr. Lord in that we must continue to throw true-blue conservatives out there. Perhaps the message must be clearer; perhaps Romney was not specific enough in what he would do.
More than anything, though, I am puzzled by the fact that McCain received more than three million votes than Romney. This just doesn't make any sense.
billwitten| 11.8.12 @ 1:03PM
Here is at least a part of the answer you are looking for: The old-style Constitutional Conservatives REFUSED TO VOTE FOR ROMNEY. The Constitutional Conservatives that backed Ron Paul REFUSED TO VOTE FOR ROMNEY. I was virtually laughed out of my local meeting when I voted for Paul. I voted for Gary Johnson in the end. I won't vote Republican again until I see a real return to Constitutional Conservative values. NO MORE ROMNEYs. NO MORE MCCAINs. NO MORE DOLEs, NO MORE BUSHs. NO MORE FORDs and NO MORE NIXONs. Until then, NO MORE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS. Good luck trying to build a winning coalition without the rock solid conservative base. I predict the progressives at the top of the party get cozy with gays and soften the abortion stance. They will need another loss to realize that Democrat lite doesn't work. People want a choice and we aren't giving it to them.
Anthony| 11.8.12 @ 1:44PM
Well done billwitten, another suicidal R. Are you really Clint in disguise?
Yep, you and you ilk sure showed them and the country!!
After 4 more years of Obozo it won't matter much who we put up. The patient will have already expired. Job well done, moron.
billwitten| 11.8.12 @ 4:42PM
No, I am a Libertarian now, f***head. Called the Conservative bluff and found out it wasn't a bluff. Yep, that's gonna leave a mark. You and your ilk should have thought of that before you nominated another liberal for president.
Don't act like we didn't warn you and, seriously folks, stop acting so suprised. Romney was a freaking JOKE. He could EASILY have switched parties and run as a Democrat. Why don't you libs go back to the dems and let us have our party back?
Jade12| 11.9.12 @ 10:51AM
We will also have less and less freedom.
billwitten| 11.9.12 @ 5:25PM
If the liberals in the Republican party would expend the same level of effort fighting the Demonicrats as they expend fighting the conservatives within the party we would all be in better shape but that is not where we are. Right? You guys keep pushing and pushing and you play hardball with the guys on your side of the aisle and then want to blame us when we decide to play by the same rules? Screw you guys. You should have thought about the potential effect when you decided to declare war on the Paul supporters and the rest of the conservatives in the party. You are the ones who wouldn't play by the rules. Then again, what else can one expect from a bunch of stinking liberals that think politics is like football?
Dawnsearlylight| 11.10.12 @ 2:37PM
"More than anything, though, I am puzzled by the fact that McCain received more than three million votes than Romney. This just doesn't make any sense."
People heard Romney, saw thousands of people turn out for him in the final days while Obama only got 2800 and dems didn't show up even WITH Springsteen so they assumed Romney was going to win anyway so they didn't vote, just settled in front of their TVs to watch him win. Then they couldn't believe it. There are a lot of conservatives out there who sure wish they had voted!
PolishKnight| 11.8.12 @ 10:48AM
Richard Nixon signed off on the marriage penalty which punished two parent working families (the backbone of the Republican party) and rewarded unwed motherhood with head of household status. Families that shack up are provided further incentives.
I'm reminded of the TARP bill where Obama required companies to pay back the money or their CEO's would lose their multi-million dollar bonuses and WHALA! The CEO's made sure the money was paid back. At that moment, I almost wanted to vote for the guy myself.
So Romney and Republican elites and even many here look the other way at H1B visas, illegal immigration, etc. and treat working class men and families like dirt because it's "good for business" and then when election day comes, why don't the working class whites and men of Pennsylvania and Ohio show up? GUESS WHY! Oh, and go through "binders full of women and minorities" to pander to them. Good luck on getting them to show up!
Bob K| 11.8.12 @ 5:25PM
Amen to that, PN!
The Republican candidate lost this time because he ignored the "Reagan Democrats." He didn't want to be associated with the "bitter clingers" who Obama talked about in his speech in that epicene enclave of San Francisco!
Who Knows?| 11.8.12 @ 11:03AM
Did’ja hear? We had an election a couple of days ago.
Each of the 300 million or so Americans must have got this news by now. From just born babies who aren’t “in the game” yet, to about to die oldsters who are about to “leave the game”, there is a gamut of reactions they had.
Obviously, over half of them don’t care much---a large minority doesn’t vote. Ah, but then there are the people who care enough to----what?
Life goes on.
Hard beans must be soaked overnight, and then cooked for around an hour, in order to soften them up and make then edible.
Human beings eat hard beans thus made “soft”.
In the idea realm, there are also foods for thought. Here, the eating CAN resemble breathing, but it needn’t.
Each person has ALREADY been soaked for their lifetime in the prevailing “water”, to wit the beliefs and ideas regnant in their own social circle of knee jerking naifs
Maybe we can think of the election season as cooking, for those who are willing to have their minds made up for them.
I’ll say it again---the MSM is in charge.
They are the essence of peer pressure, and to be a survivor means---don’t rock the boat! Go along with the crowd!
Who Knows?| 11.8.12 @ 11:04AM
People voted.
Each voter is a puppet who only THINKS they have free will, and face choices with an open mind, but in fact they are ALREADY soaked and cooked!
WHO did this to them?
There IS a hierarchy of humans, who run the idea kitchen, and the MSM is the dictator of the chefs. Too many chefs ruin the dish!
So, by default there is ALWAYS ALREADY the ruling class of information dispensers, the info status quo, from which the majority of individuals consume.
Free to choose. Live free or die. Poppycock phrases!
Of course, there are always radicals---to the roots, people!---like me, who realize it’s better to switch, AND fight. So, it’s possible to keep growing, to continue to “eat” as much information as possible, instead of accepting the stunted growth of the masses.
School’s out! No need to learn anything new!
NOT true.
So, I evolve into a vegan from a well-trained meat eating “monkey”. It is thus possible for anyone to change.
What about the MSM, then, and a mass breakout from their political monopoly---which manifests in so many lost souls voting Democratic?
Note---MSM includes ALL “media”, such as Hollywood, academia, MTV, etc.
Who Knows?| 11.8.12 @ 11:05AM
America has continued to be successfully invaded by enemies, who want to end her freedom loving experiment. Obama is just the champion of the enemies within, and his actions are blatantly aiding enemies without, as well.
Freedom lovers must become as ruthless as the MSM!
Lee Atwater was just an indication of what’s needed. Ann Coulter is a pious pussycat, and Mark Steyn a harmless goofball, compared to what is needed.
The time has come, long ago, actually, to act like Chris Matthews, in his face, but even more righteously.
Awake patriots realize the existential crisis that’s unfolding, aided and abetted---indeed, inculcated---by the MSM.
Well, a crisis is an opportunity. There is a wide open field, almost a vacuum, within which truth tellers can smack down the MSM.
Ah, but who will rise up to call them on their nugatory act?
Toinfinityandbeyond| 11.11.12 @ 7:57PM
You have to ask yourself this first.
Why is MSM "MSN?"
Why do FOX have no friend media?
It's because FOX is the only crazy lonely clown.
KittyAmerica| 11.8.12 @ 11:15AM
I agree with TLP.
We could run Reagan or George Washington himself and we will lose. We are outnumbered and it began in 1965 when we began importing people who have nothing in common with our values, traditions, heroes, or religion. Even our heroes names are removed from schools and renamed Caesar Chavez and Malcolm X.
Blogger daily kenn wrote that Tuesday was not an election but a funeral. Modern liberalism has triumphed. Pat Buchanan warned us.
I will continue to fight for what is right and will never give up but I am not a fool.
TLP| 11.8.12 @ 4:02PM
Good Kitty.
Toinfinityandbeyond| 11.11.12 @ 8:01PM
KittyAmerica
lol
The USofA is for white, black, brown, yellow and all.
Whitie America is white people's fantasy.
Caesar Chavez and Malcolm X are heros.
It seems like the USofA is not white's America no more.
lol
Slacker| 11.8.12 @ 11:19AM
How strange to see all this rationalization coming from people who really thought Romney was going to win. People can rationalize just about anything I guess.
billwitten| 11.8.12 @ 11:43AM
It would be nice if some folks would name the RINOs that are responsible for the selection of Romney and McCain. Who are the folks pulling the strings here that need to have their strings pulled? We need to SHUT THESE FOLKS DOWN. Name names! Shine bright lights on the Democrats in the Republican party that continuously set us up for failure. Let's start making a list! We know some of them:Rove, the Bushs, etc. but we need a solid list of these folks so that they can be made ineffective. It is time to go to battle inside the party and root these progressives in Republican clothing out. Identify the Paul-haters, etc. that need to be ridden out on a rail. We can do it locally but we need someone to take the heads off the folks (not literally, of course...? Right? Right.) at the top if we are going to be effective.
Tom of the Missouri| 11.8.12 @ 11:44AM
I am 100% with Jeffery Lord. What other choice is there? Become a Democrat light? As Jeffery clearly explains. Being Democrat light does not work, plus how can one give up their principles. I prefer sell our principles and in this last election that was not really tried. Ted Cruz for example knows how to do it. He has shown how it can defeat better funded and supported moderates even in Hispanic Texas. Live free or die is a motto I prefer.
JayDick| 11.8.12 @ 12:32PM
I agree. In a campaign, it is also possible to focus on some principles more than others. Romney was right to focus on economic principles, but he did not emphasize Obama's lies and failures enough.
Also, from the time Obama was inaugurated, he said Republican policies caused the recession. Republicans never countered that lie and it hurt Romney in 2012.
RCV| 11.8.12 @ 11:52AM
No self-reflection, Mr. Lord, about all the nonsense you posted the month before the election?
Jack London| 11.8.12 @ 4:31PM
Jeffrey still thinks the Dems are a Nazi party, I'm sure. Just wait to see a reprise in a week or two.
TeaPartyNow| 11.8.12 @ 12:28PM
I said today in a post on forbes as myself, Libertyinfinite, that what Romney did on abortion was the political equivalent of opening up his veins & letting liberalism pour salt in them.
Mitt Romney put making abortion illegal in his presidential platform. Which opened him up to scrutiny from every liberal USA.
But he shut down Chick-Fil-A. & he played moderate, & refused to fight for a pro life nation.
& you guys all hated me when I tried to tell you. I had to change my name.
I only hope that this ends a moderate republicans chances for support by the right for a while.
Long enough to end abortions, welfare, & the liberal agenda. Re-establish America under Liberty in the souls of the free.
& then we'll slowly sink back down into today. Despotic rule, & our only function is to aid it.
Back & forth. Liberty is infinite. But if no one listens, then tyranny might as well be too.
Anthony| 11.8.12 @ 1:31PM
In your haste to make your point Mr.Lord, you end up talking like a fool.
Say what you will about R moderates, but to engage in hyperbole by saying George W. Bush was first elected thanks to the Supreme Court is utter leftwing bullshit. How many times must that tin foil hat carnard be disspelled?
And Bush kicked Kerry's ass the second time around and got over 64 M votes total. He beat Kerry by over 8 % points if memory serves.
Can't you make your point without sounding like an idiot?
Fiscal| 11.8.12 @ 1:40PM
Are you guys kidding? Romney won the REPUBLICAN primary. It wasn't even close. You guys seem to think that most Republicans are actually conservative. They aren't -- they are moderates. Only those who watch Fox News and AmSpec think that all Republicans are like them. If you want to move far to the conservative right, the only outcome is that the party will be smaller and the number of independents will grow -- as it has for the last decade. Your argument is just dumb. In this country, the majority wins -- and they are not far right conservatives. They are moderates and independents that want more fiscal conservatism and less religion in your face.
RCV| 11.8.12 @ 2:14PM
Spot on, Mr. Fiscal.
John Navratil| 11.8.12 @ 3:00PM
Fiscal,
Actually speaking, this conservative KNOWS the Republicans are not like me. I quit the Party in 1991 after the supposed conservative party gave us the largest tax increase in history. I refuse to donate to them until they begin acting like conservatives, again. I may be dead first. However, I'll take any and all of those moderates you describe. They sound like me.
Fiscal| 11.8.12 @ 3:23PM
Over the years, Cato has done research on this issue. The vast majority of the electorate is fiscally conservative and socially moderate, yet neither party will embrace them. We could classify them (and me) as libertarian moderates. Campaigns on both sides move to the center in the general election to convince them.
Jack London| 11.8.12 @ 4:29PM
"fiscally conservative and socially moderate"
These are of course incompatible, which is why, thank goodness, we see the good nature of most Americans opting for more fairness and humanity. And in any case, fiscal conservatism won't get us out of the current mess, but adopting some of it might have stopped us getting into it.
John Navratil| 11.8.12 @ 9:02PM
Fiscal,
A Libertarian is an anarchist with property rights - an oxymoron. Socially moderate, to me, means you mind your business and I mind mine. I couldn't give two hoots in hell what goes on in your bedroom, but it matters what goes on in mine. That said, I do not accept that others should attach a responsibility to me for their social behaviour.
If you can't keep your legs together, deal with it yourself.
E B | 11.8.12 @ 2:56PM
Thanks for your opinions. I'd be very interested to hear why you think Romney got fewer votes than McCain. Some people say groundwork. Others (evangelicals, acutally) say many evangelicals stayed home because Romney is Mormon. It's not like Romney is more "moderate" than McCain, after all. So why the difference?
www.conservativemormonmom.blogspot.com
Fiscal| 11.8.12 @ 3:26PM
McCain was a patriotic war hero. Romney was a businessman from "Wall Street" (in Boston). A lot of seniors who were patriotic Democrats crossed lines to vote for McCain (like my in-laws).
nathan| 11.8.12 @ 3:24PM
Pray for wisdom. What it means here . . .
For Christians:
The past year many of you spent time "evangelizing" politically. You spoke to your friends/family/coworkers/strangers about the election. Where you might have shown hesitation to talk about your faith in God (do your friends/coworkers even know you're a Christian?) such hesitation was absent where it came to "evangelizing" about THE ELECTION.
The election is over. I remind Christians again, that Paul never discussed politics with the unsaved. He preached the gospel of Christ everywhere he went and that alone.
"Go into the world and preach the gospel." That is the prime directive for Christians. Bring others home with you not get your favorite candidate elected. 100 years from now, where you/they spend eternity is all that will matter. And for Christians, this is not your home. If your "evangelizing" for MR this past year got in the way of your evagelizing the lost, your priorities were misplaced. It's time to get them back in order.
Anthony| 11.8.12 @ 3:30PM
Republicans can win every election going forward with ease. It's simple, just get rid of every lefty in the MSM and replace them with conservatives. Volia, victories as far as the eye can see!!
Thom| 11.8.12 @ 3:47PM
I suspect a meaningful portion of principled conservatives (value voters per say) have lost faith with repeated elections where their choices were death by hanging, death by firing squad and death by electrocution. On the flip side I don't think the pragmatic management teams of the Republicrat Party can grasp that managing our fall from grace is not the same as stopping and reversing it.
I've said this before in different ways but management is not leadership. I'm surrounded by managers, specifically MBAs (Management by Arseholes). None of them could inspire men to follow them into battle ...
The Republican birth was in a crusade of enormous gross incompetence and misallocation of resources in a contest where they couldn't lose if they simply kept showing up and ran the Confederates out of ammo. With far more men and material over four years the North lost more men killed and wounded than the Confederates they outnumbered 3:1 in uniformed men. The one sided material nature of the Civil War escapes Lincoln worshipers to this day and the "mismanaged" nature of the Union efforts carries forward even today in political battles because Republicrats still see leadership as just a chapter in management book.
Thom| 11.8.12 @ 3:49PM
As I remember, about 9 Republicans ran for the President in the primaries and the one who won never got a majority of the votes against two or more "conservatives". I'm sure Mitt is a good manager without qualification. He managed a good election loss. The Presidency is not about management; it is about leadership.
When the Republican Party Management team understands that maybe they will also be able to let go of the worship of a ghost from the past that ties their hands.
We either are a Constitutional Republic or we are not. I think the jury is in on that question.
Bob K| 11.8.12 @ 5:50PM
I watched Romney's concession speech and I got the impression that he was relieved that he did not win. I don't know why I did and I still have that impression.
Maybe, as a business man, he subconsciously knew that if he had to continue the policies of moderation and me-too-ism nothing could be done that would reverse our country's gadarene rush over the fiscal cliff led by the socialist and liberal swine of the democrat media and party!
He is a wealthy man, he can always move to that gated community of Bermuda to live with that great liberal republican, Mayor Bloomberg of New York City.
Dawnsearlylight| 11.10.12 @ 2:50PM
"I watched Romney's concession speech and I got the impression that he was relieved that he did not win. I don't know why I did and I still have that impression."
I got the impression that he knew he could go back to his life and his family and not have to endure the demonization he knew was coming. Fine, the country said they wanted four more years of what we got the first time, I think Romney felt as George Bush did the last two years of his second term: Sit back and let the country have what they said they wanted. Of course, that has lead to our current fiscal situation, but Romney was not sad nor defeated. As soon as I saw that, I felt a lot better about this. We will be fine anyway, but the ones I worry about are the unemployed who want to work and the workers who will soon be unemployed.
frenchdavisdesign| 11.8.12 @ 5:27PM
You are so right. The Republican establishment is already beating the drums for Jeb Bush to be our next candidate. They will never learn. They cannot give up their power. Not surprised that Romney could not pull off a win and that millions of Republicans did not vote at all. almost 60% of Republicans consistantly voted against him in the primaries. conservatism wins locally every time it is tried.
Paul McGrath| 11.8.12 @ 5:54PM
Well who in the world do you think would have stood a better chance of beating Obama? Gingrich? Santorum? PAUL? God almighty, this talk is appalling to me. You did not vote for Romney because he was not conservative enough?
Do you by any chance think he might have been more conservative than Obama?
The problem is not that Romney was not conservative enough, the problem is that too many Republicans who call themselves conservative--three million I guess--are selfish swine. Because you didn't get your way, whatever that might have been, you have allowed this horrible human being Obama four more years in the White House.
I can't believe this. I can't believe it.
Who of this last year's Republicans would you have wanted to run for president, Frenchdavis. Who?
Bob K| 11.8.12 @ 6:20PM
Paul,
It's not just the Republicans who did not vote for Romney (and French Davis does not say he was one of them).
Romney did not get any of the Reagan Democrats who helped make the 2010 Republican Congressional election wins possible and the subsequent redistricting of all those states. That redistricting after those wins ensured that the Republicans still control the House of Representatives. The Republican Party can't win without those people. That is why the party needs people running for office who appeal to Reagan Democrats, aka, Obama's "bitter clingers." They won't get them if the Republican party leaders keep listening to people who want Jeb Bush to run for President. And that is a fact!
And, for the record, I voted for Romney.
Ralph Novy| 11.8.12 @ 10:44PM
Hello, Paul.
This should be an epiphanic moment for you.
Do you not see now how shallow and selfish and dishonest the current crop of "conservatives" in the U.S. are? That the only thing they wish to "conserve" is their own personal wealth?
Yeah.
One wishes to give one's neighbors the benefit of the doubt, but .....
Jade12| 11.9.12 @ 11:03AM
So taking from others who have earned it and giving to those who have not is ok with you?
And what happens when the money runs out?
Ralph Novy| 11.10.12 @ 1:33AM
No, Jade, it's taking from those who've used others to accumulate wealth then denied that they had any help and "hoarded" it. That wealth is then put back into the general economy.
And no-one seems to be seriously proposing the 90% tax brackets of 50 years ago; merely 35% or so. So innovative, entrepreneurial risk-takers are more than adequately compensated for their efforts.
Dawnsearlylight| 11.10.12 @ 2:52PM
"No, Jade, it's taking from those who've used others to accumulate wealth then denied that they had any help and "hoarded" it. That wealth is then put back into the general economy."
Right, where it will fund the government for one month. Then what do we do? Please.
Ralph Novy| 11.11.12 @ 2:25AM
You have no idea how much wealth the wealthy have hoarded, do you, Dawn?
It's many, many trillions.
abennett4| 11.11.12 @ 7:10AM
So a few republicans didn't vote! Even if they did they Romney might have won the popular vote and still lost the electoral. A lot of Democrats didn't vote either. Obama's vision is just more appealing and the Republican's vision is fading as the white establishment is becoming less and less a factor. Unless Reublicans jettison their far-right views on guns, race, climate change, abortion, healthcare, taxes, foreign policy and the like, they are done with as a party. And all their efforts at voter suppression clearly backfired! As it should have.
RandyH| 11.8.12 @ 7:00PM
kudos on an excellent article, should be required reading for every Republican.
Rhoetus| 11.8.12 @ 7:23PM
National Review was on the Romney bandwagon from the beginning. I think that Mitt is a decent man and more accomplished then the Bushes and had hope that he would return to Reagan's legacy, being that he chose Paul Ryan was a good sign. I don't think that we can blame the loss on anything other than the unpredictable choices made by voters. The Propaganda Media of Obama was a big factor in framing the issues & most Americans are misinformed and have accepted government intervention in all aspects of our lives.
Paul McGrath| 11.8.12 @ 7:43PM
Good point. The left's propaganda machine is huge, and includes, of course, all of the usual suspects.
Most people unfortunately don't pay much attention. Young women, for example, may hear about the Republican "war on women" or hear about some debate regarding contreception, and there it floats around, in the back of their mind. It sounds kind of silly, but they are not giving it a lot of thought.
Then they hear that a Republican candidate for senator has discussed "legitimate" rape and that a woman's body would reject a child under those circumstances, and then she hears that yet another Republican senator stated that a woman should bear the child of her rapist because it is God's will. Suddenly, this vague notion of a war on women takes shape in her mind.
Republicans really have to quit being so stupid.
Dawnsearlylight| 11.10.12 @ 2:59PM
"National Review was on the Romney bandwagon from the beginning. I think that Mitt is a decent man and more accomplished then the Bushes and had hope that he would return to Reagan's legacy, being that he chose Paul Ryan was a good sign. I don't think that we can blame the loss on anything other than the unpredictable choices made by voters. The Propaganda Media of Obama was a big factor in framing the issues & most Americans are misinformed and have accepted government intervention in all aspects of our lives."
I agree 1000%, Rhoetis. Post of the week!
Jardino| 11.8.12 @ 8:09PM
During the Republican presidential primary, was there any debate about the Consitution? Is the conservative interpretation of separation of church and state ready for prime time TV? Are conservatives ready to explain to the voters which amendments are wrong and why?
Section 8 empowers the Federal government to regulate commerce, tax, borrow money, and to promote science, the useful arts and the general welfare. This sounds liberal.
The men who signed the Constitution did not agree on everything, and they compromised. The Federalist papers show disagreement.
Thus, we have the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution. Will Obama nominate two more justices in the next four years? He appointed the first Hispanic to the Supreme Court during his first term. Will he appoint an openly gay man, an Asian or Muslim next?
What if the Tea Party could pick a Supreme Court justice? I doubt Michele Bachmann could pass the Congressional hearings, so they would have to look for someone better. Are Tea Party interpretations of the Constitution objective? Congress woud have to decide.
Most conservatives do not know that Reagan increased the Social Security tax. At the time, Reagan was hailed as making Social Security solvent until 2040.
I was curious about what I'd find at this site and American Thinker. Unless you are a Native American, your ancestors were immigrants. Look how well you turned out! The USA is the most cultually diverse country on the planet. Why not celibrate that?
Alej| 11.8.12 @ 9:33PM
Because "multicultural society" is a GROSS oxymoron.
Northern Europeans created the most wonderful country in the history of the world.
Parasites from elsewhere have finally destroyed that.
Ralph Novy| 11.8.12 @ 9:38PM
Aryan asshole!
Go get trampled in a reindeer stampede, you imbecile.
Ralph Novy| 11.8.12 @ 10:39PM
By the way, what country were you referring to?
Finland?
Sweden?
Norway?
... you know, all those "hyper-socialist" countries.
LOL
Ralph Novy| 11.8.12 @ 9:35PM
Goldwater said "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice."
I would say "Moderation in the face of desperate need is no virtue."
Kingofthenet| 11.8.12 @ 10:07PM
I once read an article from an editor at a major newspaper and paraphrasing him he said, It's hard to hire Conservatives to work for the paper, you have to lower your standards of what is expected of journalists to do so. He wasn't saying Conservatives were stupid or even sloppy, but that their 'Prism' they see the world through won't allow them to write honestly and more important TRUTHFULLY. It's like they can't help themselves, it's subconscious. Further it wasn't like the Liberals his paper employed didn't sometimes slant writing, but at least they had the Professionalism to cherry-pick REAL and TRUTHFUL facts, and would NOT use discredited or whole cloth untruths in defense of Liberalism.
Paul McGrath| 11.8.12 @ 10:39PM
Prism, Shithead?
On September 1, 2012, under the blog post titled, "Michelle Malkin is a Racist Like Me," by Quin Hillyer, Kingofthenet wrote this:
Kingofthenet| 9.1.12 @ 1:38PM
Michelle practices YELLOW Journalism, I would say the SLANT to her work is obvious. I would not pay even 5 dollar, for her 'work' because it never leaves me with a HAPPY ENDING.
Ralph Novy| 11.8.12 @ 10:34PM
I couldn't agree more that worthwhile principles outlast governments/regimes.
But how about THIS principle: Do unto others ...
THAT principle seems to have been forgotten by "conservative traditionalists."
Until self-described conservatives reacquaint themselves with that principle, embrace it, and develop policies to further it, they're rightfully consigned to the shithole of history.
Jade12| 11.9.12 @ 11:08AM
Really Ralph well the conservatives are not in power are they? So lets see what shape the country will be in after 4 more years of liberal rule.
Ralph Novy| 11.10.12 @ 1:38AM
Well, they're certainly not OUT of power, Jade.
They still hold the House, and there are lots of conservative judges out there. And, most of all, Obama is not a liberal; he's a moderate, at best.
So the next four years are certainly not going be one's of unalloyed "liberal rule."
Wish they would. Perhaps we'd be done with the "drug war," foreign interventionism, obscene subsidies to parasitic corporations, etc.
Paul McGrath| 11.8.12 @ 10:37PM
On September 1, 2012, under the blog post titled, "Michelle Malkin is a Racist Like Me," by Quin Hillyer, Kingofthenet wrote this:
Kingofthenet| 9.1.12 @ 1:38PM
Michelle practices YELLOW Journalism, I would say the SLANT to her work is obvious. I would not pay even 5 dollar, for her 'work' because it never leaves me with a HAPPY ENDING.
ArturoMabb| 11.9.12 @ 1:01AM
And the news ekes out that Moderate Nominee www.abercrombieporto.com/homme-blouson-c-27.html Number 10 Romney received some 3 million Republican votes less than Moderate Nominee Number 9
Jade12| 11.9.12 @ 10:26AM
The govt that gives can also take away.
They have traded freedom for slavery. Only the wise can see this.
MaryTudor| 11.10.12 @ 12:00PM
"Liberals are now running this country -- and they are responsible for the results."
I think you are being foolishly optimistic here, sir. A liberal has been running things for four years, yet 50% of voters exit-polled blamed George W. Bush for the economy. The liberal view appeals to two groups--those who are deeply convinced of their intellectual superiority who wish to impose their views on the world, and the much larger group of people who really, really want something for nothing and have been convinced they DESERVE to be given everything in life and the ONLY reason they are not as rich as Mitt Romney is someone is deliberately holding them back, therefore the world owes them a living.
Politics Debunked | 11.10.12 @ 3:15PM
A major reason Obama won: People didn't realize how much he lied. Many liberal newspapers reported his claim he will "pay down our debt".. and never printed anything questioning it. He constantly repeated the lie, contradicted by his own budget document. The anti-Obama media likely didn't bother pointing out his lie because they thought it was obvious.. but it wasn't to many people it appears.
Obama claimed at the Democratic National Convention on Sept. 6th, 2012: "I'll use the money we're no longer spending on war to pay down our debt".
Yet the White House site contains his 2013 budget proposal with a table showing his planned national debt at the end of each year through 2022. It adds at least $900 billion to the debt every year, $9.6 trillion over a decade.
If a CEO lied about his company's finances to get people to buy stock, the public would cry "fraud! send him to jail!". Should we trust someone to run our government that we wouldn't trust to run a company? This isn't a one time gaffe, he has repeated it from the State of the Union in January, through dozens of speeches into October and a campaign commercial.
For details about this, or to see the issue described in an amusing cartoon&video; mashup of Obama's own words, see the new site: http://PoliticsDebunked.com
abennett4| 11.11.12 @ 6:55AM
Are you crazy - Romney a moderate? Republicans are the ones who cant's do math. Look at George Will, Dick Morris, Karl Rove and all those Fair & Balanced jokers' predictions in this election. And it's only going to get worst for you guys at the percentages of minorities, single women and young people go up. The republican party has nothing to offer them except tokenism.
Mick Lee| 11.16.12 @ 9:14AM
"George H.W. Bush ran as the heir to Reagan in 1988 and won. Governing as a moderate he lost -- and lost badly in his 1992 re-election effort"
Maybe we old farts should teach a little history that the day when George H. W. Bush broke his "no new taxes" promise the phones for donations to the Republican Party went silent.
Should the Party backtrack on its principle, the phones would not go silent. They would ring with people wanting their money back