The American Spectator

Mary Louise| 10.5.09 @ 7:56PM

What a wonderful, heartfelt piece.

I obviously don't know you, but your writing here at Amspec reveals a man with a very good mind, more importantly, an expansive, inclusive and fair spirit.

You know Mr. Lord what the establishment wants is not limited government and a heartfelt attachment to the Constitution, they want to be part of a club of power and good living where one never has to really pay the price for the undoing of our Country.

Morevoer, they want perfumed Generals and docile troops. They want our grassroots efforts when they are indispensable, but they never come to our defense. We mean nothing to them. We are their whipping post.

Rush said quite a while back that Republicans really couldn't get the hang of being in power, and I think he's right. He was speaking of the Congress in Republican hands.

It's hard not to bail, it really is.

Call us out when we do something wrong. But have some affection for us too.

The Republican coalition is struggling to find common theme outside of defending the Nation. Democrats don't have that problem because their theme -much larger a domestic theme or scheme, depending on your point of view- has a holisitc outlook and goal. I'm not defending their dreams and schemes; I'm not into a Total Society. I bring it up because that holism provides for a solidarity that forbids them to despise their troops.

I don't think I've expressed myself very well here. I burned my pasta reheating it. My alarm is gonna go off. And it's not my pasta (which stinks) it's my Mother's.

I despise obsequious, ungrateful Republicans.

Mary Louise| 10.5.09 @ 8:01PM

One more thing, Mr. Lord.

Who can we call friend? Who can we call an honest leader? Who?

Hyenas, with their hind quarters paying homage to Satan, as far as the eye can see!

Mary Louise| 10.5.09 @ 8:25PM

McCain sent Gov. Palin out to tap into the Obama/Ayers angst, while remaining offside, conciliatory, protected and self-pleased.

He wasn't worried about Ayers the 'old Terrorist.' No, the terrorism and violence was an old story, he said. What was problematic about the connection was that it showed Obama's poor judgment.

He never came to the good Governor's defense while she was being raked over the coals by Sully and others.

When he tired to finesse the Ayers issue in typical dull-witted style I thought to myself 'you can't vote for this guy; you just can't.' But I did, dragging feet and spirit to the booth.

Never again! Never!

Mary Louise| 10.5.09 @ 9:29PM

Go, Glenn, go! Go, baby, go!

kingsmill| 10.5.09 @ 10:42PM

Mark McKinnon, the chapeau challenged politco, who urged McNasty to unilaterally disarm in the campaign.

vfd| 10.6.09 @ 1:36AM

The news of signing Men's Mid Nike Dunk SB Shoes spreads formally, fan clap and cheer, overjoyed all without exception with the masses of shoes as the legendary superstar of slide Eric Koston, wait, see Koston sign editions of SB fight what like is shoes can. As everyone knows, one shoes from designing to produce, take time consuming quite some time, believe until fund this Eric Koston name P Discount Women's Low Nike Dunk SB Shoes remium low to help luxurious to put out,

Deborah D| 10.6.09 @ 6:24AM

This is political correctness writ large. It is the left's way of shutting conservatives, or anyone else who might disagree with them, down. Don't question the logic behind their arguments with any kind of passion or anger or humor because then you are racist or homophobic or rude or sexist or, or, or. This changes the subject, which is their first intent. Then it shuts you up, which is their second (and more important intent).

Plus, they are humorless. Can't take a joke. Humorless with no common sense, a terrible combination. They might want to learn from William James: "Common sense and a sense of humor are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humor is just common sense, dancing." ~William James

Deborah D| 10.6.09 @ 6:30AM

Found a great quote to add to my post above:

"Nothing is more curious than the almost savage hostility that humor excites in those who lack it." ~George Saintsbury

martin J smith| 10.6.09 @ 7:42AM

This McKinnon person is one of the RINO crowd who I frankly believe are NOT conservatives or Republicans. They represent what I would call a Trojan Horse in the Republican Party. Do they"just want to get along" ? Do they believe in "Bi-partisanship" meaning give in to the Democrats ? What do they believe in ? And more importantly --who are they really ? No matter how you slice it this group lost the last election and now they want to take over the Republican Party ? That is Chutzpah !!!!For people who believe in Freemarket capitalism and strong national identity and security there are two options--fight within the party or outside the party. It could be --now here is the conspiratorial side of me coming in--that George Soros may bankroll this crowd of RINOS or Trojan Horses. You choose which. Surely some powerful forces are behind them.

Deborah D| 10.6.09 @ 11:53AM

You know, Mr. Smith, I'd never really thought of RINOs as Trojan Horses, but there is some meat in there to chew on.

I think RINOs have a commonality with liberals in their progressive thinking (as McCain's hero was Teddy Roosevelt, who was a progressive). Glenn Beck has focused on the progressive movement from the early 20th Century and it invaded both parties. So, I agree some of the old school politicians have too much of that progressive ideology coarsing through their veins. We truly need the Republican Party to be an opposition party, one that distinguishes itself from progressives/liberals (whatever). The American people deserve that choice.

WestWright| 10.6.09 @ 8:03AM

Kudos to martin J smith & Mary Louise. I agree that there may be a Trojan Horse issue with this crop of Repub Rinos, McCain's hiring of onesuch as McKinnon is a BIG CLUE! Remember how squishy these beta reps became when they almost wrecked the Iraq War and only went against the Amnesty push after we the people raised Holy He__. Thanks Mary Louise your heartfelt concern for this great country reflects my optimism that we will prevail. God Bless you all!

Bob| 10.6.09 @ 10:41AM

Jeffrey, the issue here is how you define racism. If you define it as discrete action, then there are very few "racists". But I submit that you and others in the extreme right wing have changed the meaning of "racism". Here is Webster's definition:

"a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race".

Notice particularly the word "superiority". Also notice that racism does not have to be overt. The act of preferring whites over blacks or Hispanics denotes "superiority". Thus, if your actions attract whites to the detriment of blacks or Hispanics, then it is a form of racism.

Are your actions racist? The way you tell is to look at the result. Answer these questions...

What is the percentage of blacks and Hispanics in the Republican party versus the population?

How many writers for AmSpec are black or Hispanic?

When did you last eat at a "soul food" restaurant? How often do you eat mole or barbacoa?

Do you scoff at people who wear baggy pants as a sign of "gangsters"?

Do you get more tense when you have a large black man behind you?

For you to call McKinnon racist and not recognize your own racism is really quite humorous. Most racism in this country is not overt. I don't believe that you or others mean to be racist, but if you had grown up in a poor black neighborhood like me, you might be more sensitive to the symptoms.

Yes, by the nature of the result, AmSpec is racist -- and so is the Republican party. The fact that RINO's like McKinnon, Powell, and me recognize this is simply reality. The recognition of levels of racism in ALL of us is a precursor to a solution.

The political reality is that the younger generation is far less racist than us as they've grown up with non-white role models and consider hip-hop to be a normal a music form as Beethoven. When they see Republicans rail against this, they see racism. In addition to the young, both blacks and Hispanics are growing segments of the population. This has made the Republican party shrink to only about 21% of voters. Moderate members of the party have become independents and the party is far more radical than any time in modern history. It is a losing path.

Most political realists know this which is why you don't see any Republican political leaders follow the path of Beck or Rush.

So go out and have a discussion of racism with your close black or Hispanic friends who are not Republicans. Don't have any CLOSE black or Hispanic friends? That figures.

Boggled| 10.6.09 @ 11:06AM

Bob you are so full of shite it boggles the mind. Boggles it I tells ya!

martin j smith| 10.6.09 @ 11:39AM

Race baiting is favorite sport of a Democrat.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.6.09 @ 11:45AM

Bob...

"For you to call McKinnon racist "..

Where did I do that? Cite please?

"Are your actions racist? The way you tell is to look at the result. Answer these questions...

What is the percentage of blacks and Hispanics in the Republican party versus the population?

How many writers for AmSpec are black or Hispanic?

When did you last eat at a "soul food" restaurant? How often do you eat mole or barbacoa?

Do you scoff at people who wear baggy pants as a sign of "gangsters"?

Do you get more tense when you have a large black man behind you? "

Since I spent the bulk of my adult life living in a city that was majority black, I had black friends, neighbors, colleagues and have walked very comfortably ahead of what you call "large black men." Why is that a problem? Being a hoodlum is not about color, Bob, and it is curious to see you make that association. The point Bob, is that I don't judge anyone by race. I simply do not care. The point is not how many of X group are in a party - the point is does the party have people in it who share fundamental views on economics, big government, national securtity etc. You want to vet them all by color. I disagree. All of the things you mention above are driven by race....you, as a left-winger on this issue, continue to look at people by color. AmSpec doesn't and never has hired by race. It is irrelevant except to people who think as you do. Do you see Justice Thomas as a black Justice or just a Justice?

As one who's childhood heroes were JFK,RFK and Martin Luther King I find it interesting that I believe on race now what they believed then - and this somehow is now racist thinking? For some, yes. Not for me. We believe here in a colorblind America. I do not count anyone I meet or with whom I am friends by their color. You do.
That's the difference.

You simply are passionate about judging others by color. We just have to disagree on this one. Race, as JFK said, has no place in American life or law. We judge people here by the content of their character , not the color of their skin, as someone famous once said. Hmmm. Oh yes...that would be MLK. I wonder if he had any black friends?

Deborah D| 10.6.09 @ 12:00PM

Let's remind ourselves about all the screaming and pointing fingers of "you are racist." Political correctness has Marxist roots, so those who are continually proclaiming their political opponents racist, bigot, homophobe, sexist...etc., on slim to no evidence might be interested in where this intent to divide the country via political correctness and multiculturalism came from. Excellent Bill Whittle tutorial here:
http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afte.....ness/2343/

If one really believed in unifying the country, one wouldn't constantly be intentionally trying to divide it on race. Consider this my contribution to a "dialogue on race."

Bob| 10.6.09 @ 2:22PM

Jeffrey... You said:

"For you to call McKinnon racist..
Where did I do that? Cite please?"

Here is the quote from your post:

"But for whatever reason, it is way past time that this McKinnon argument be dispatched. If you preach a doctrine that judges should use race to make rulings from the federal bench (Sotomayor) -- but do it with sweet civility, you are still a racist."

Perhaps you'd like to rationalize your statement? I happen to agree with you that we should be talking about issues -- not race. However, you cannot debate, with any level of intellectual honesty, that the precepts of the extreme right, for some reason, do not appeal to blacks or Hispanics. If they did, Republicans would attract many more of them.

Remember the definition of racism deals with race superiority. AmSpec must believe that whites are superior to blacks or Hispanics or else there would be more of them on the staff. The same goes for the Republican party.

You claim that I judge others by color. In point of fact, I would claim that you and others do that far more than me. Anyone in business or politics utilizes segmentation for analysis -- and you know that. That's what I have done. It seems that you judge people far more by race than me. My argument was that we judge people too much by race which is why AmSpec and the Republican party lacks minority adherents.

So, instead of utilizing race as factor in "judging" McKinnon, why didn't YOU talk about issues? My guess is that race IS an issue for you and that it makes the right wing readers of AmSpec increase their adrenaline levels.

Growing up, my best friends were black and I dated a lot of black girls. Did you since you lived in a mixed neighborhood? I ended up marrying an Hispanic which was difficult for my Jewish parents to accept. I was pulled over by the police on several occasions while driving in my friend's cars without violating the law. This was the 60's in California and I saw racism first hand.

Racism today is a lot less than in the past as our children become more accustomed to other races. Affirmative action, in my opinion, is no longer necessary as socio-economic factors far outweigh race as a discriminatory factor.

Generally, people don't have a perspective on their own racism. This goes for the extreme right and the extreme left. And yes, I do believe that some blacks and Hispanics show signs of racism today -- i.e., they believe they are superior to whites.

But that is why we must concentrate on facts and issues. Time after time, the people at AmSpec disregard factual information because it doesn't align with what they want to believe. For example, as I've shown many times, the fact that tax cuts are not stimulative. There is not a shred of macro analysis normalized for inflation that you can show this correlation.

Our country would be a better place if you and others did not bring race into the agenda. All you are doing is making policies of fiscal discipline, limited government, and individual responsibility harder to sell.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.6.09 @ 4:04PM

Bob...

"Jeffrey... You said:

"For you to call McKinnon racist..
Where did I do that? Cite please?"

Here is the quote from your post:

"But for whatever reason, it is way past time that this McKinnon argument be dispatched. If you preach a doctrine that judges should use race to make rulings from the federal bench (Sotomayor) -- but do it with sweet civility, you are still a racist."

The reference Bob, the "you" in the sentence refers to Sotomayor...not McKinnon. To my knowledge McKinnon is not on record saying a "Wise Latina" would be a better judge than someone of a different race. McKinnon argues its OK to say these things as long as they are said with civility. I disagree.

"...precepts of the extreme right, for some reason, do not appeal to blacks or Hispanics. "

As Jack Kemp used to preach endlessly, people of all colors make choices on self-interest. As long as anyone feels big government is the answer to their problem, they will vote accordingly - black, Hispanic, white, old, young, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish etc etc. For the GOP to play "me too"...which is what you are advocating and what we have consistently done - means we are doomed to failure. Why take second best when you - the voter - can get the real thing from Democrats? You seem not to understand that your approach has been tried ad infinitum and keeps losing.

We are the party of growth. Loading the wagon. They are the party of spending and big government goodies. Unloading the wagon. And you voted for that.

Ammo Guy| 10.6.09 @ 4:38PM

Dear Mr. Lord, I stand in awe of the patience you are exhibiting with Bob - apparently you have to date or marry someone from another race in order to understand how this cruel world works...or attend an Ivy League school. The next time I see RET, I going to tell him to give you a raise.

Bob| 10.6.09 @ 4:37PM

Jeffrey... If you put forth the argument that McKinnon agrees with Sotomayor that race should be a factor, then, de facto, by your logic you are calling him racist. You cannot sidestep the issue through the trick of an indirect reference. But that is beside the point.

You claim that Republicans are the party of growth. Perhaps you can point to data, not ideology or rhetoric, that supports this position. In fact, GDP has grown faster under Democrat Presidents than Republican Presidents.

My approach has not been tried by either party as I don't think there is much of a difference between parties. Our politics are driven by money and reelections. While the rhetoric is different, the actions are not.

If Republicans really wanted to become the party of growth, they'd argue for fiscal responsibility (not tax cuts only) and an end to government incentives whether they be tax incentives or subsidies. Voters rate both Democrats and Republicans much lower than the President. Furthermore, the Republican party is far too close to the religious right. If you want limited government, you should call for individuals to make their own decisions whether it comes to health care, education, abortion, or end of life. Government should only provide for the common defense and regulate (not provide incentives) business. Tax breaks for specific industries should be stopped as well as laws like the CRA that allow businesses to provide loans to people who can't afford them.

If Republicans did this, they might become the party of growth. Right now, they are just religious fanatics who only know how to say no.

Furthermore, Republicans have become the party of dumb putting forth candidates of limited intellectual capacity. As I've said many times, there are intelligent Republicans like Romney -- who was my candidate in the last election. I could not bring myself to vote for an idiot like Palin. I suppose that you thought Palin was qualified to be President. Hmmm....

Jeffrey Lord| 10.6.09 @ 4:56PM

Bob...

"Jeffrey... If you put forth the argument that McKinnon agrees with Sotomayor that race should be a factor, then, de facto, by your logic you are calling him racist. You cannot sidestep the issue through the trick of an indirect reference"

No, Bob. McKinnon argues about civility. This is his schtick. It is Sotomayor who used race as her line of reasoning. There is no "trick" here or confusion. One is night, one is day.

You say: "I could not bring myself to vote for an idiot like Palin. " So you voted for Obama. And bequeathed us all the current mess, led by a guy who's Harvard degree is taken for a sign of capability and leadership. They are not now - or ever - the same. As he is well demonstrating. Harvard should ask for the diploma back, maybe?

Bob| 10.6.09 @ 5:16PM

So, Jeffrey, Obama is responsible for the current mess? Did this severe recession and the initial bailouts occur on his watch? As I said last January, jobs are a lagging indicator and we won't see jobs start to rise again until the beginning of next year. Anyone trained in economics knows that. And Bush and the Republicans didn't grow government? Do you really think McCain would have been any different given the Democrat majorities in both houses?

Yes, Obama has problems -- but it would have been even worse under McCain as he had no understanding of economics. You can't believe the nonsense you're spewing... I thought you were smarter than that.

Now all Republicans are saying that health care is an issue, but they said nothing about that during the last 8 years. I'm glad we're having the discussion about health care. In fact, I would submit that the election of Obama is good for Republicans. We are having the discussion about what the party should stand for, talking about health care as an issue, and determining whether the Republican party should be the party of the religious right or moderates. If Obama succeeds, the country wins. If he fails, we have a more defined Republican party with better candidates and the country also wins.

You make the mistake of basing your rhetoric on ideology rather than results when the actions of both Republicans and Democrats in terms of results and actions are virtually indistinguishable.

Methinks you are too caught up in right wing apparatus like AmSpec and Fox and need to step back and smell the roses.

Jeffrey Lord| 10.6.09 @ 9:17PM

Bob..

"You make the mistake of basing your rhetoric on ideology"

Bob, you are the ideologuesof all ideologues. The problem is you seem not to recognize yourself in the mirror.

jung| 1.17.10 @ 4:45AM

all star shoes
nike shoes outlet