International Cat Speculators Since 2006

Posts tagged ‘Republicans’

An idea to get Conservatism back on track

The Republican party in the US just suffered quite a defeat. But they do have a position as majority in the house from which they can launch something.

I was reading via Instapundit today (or maybe yesterday) that in spite of recent events, in spite of Chicago being dominated by Democrats, in spite of the failures of Stimulus projects, in spite of the clear media cover-ups of Democratic party stumbles, gaffes and scandals, in spite of all the evidence people think it’s the Republican party that is the most corrupt.

So here’s the thing. I have no no doubt whatsoever that the Republican party does contain and tolerate a lot of corruption. Not as much as the Democrats, and it is not as fundamental as it is to the Democratic party, but it does exist. And no right thinking American wants a corrupt government.

At the same time, the Republicans have a big image problem. Trust me, they do. It’s like there’s two groups, Republicans and the people who think Republicans are evil. Very little middle ground. They need to fix this, and the media (who lovingly helped build it) is in no way going to help.

So here’s what I think the Republican led house should do. (I’m not entirely sure this is possible but what the hey, not like anyone’s going to read this!) Establish a house committee/commission to root out corruption. First, staff it with guys like McCain who’s integrity is utterly unimpeachable.

Next, go after the bad eggs in the Republican party itself. Have every member sign a statement saying that they will conduct their politics properly or leave. Then kick out the bad eggs, get them prosecuted if possible and let it be seen that the entire party condemns them as they go. If it loses the entire majority do it. Once the public get the idea that they’re genuine in what they’re doing, even willing to risk their own majority, those seats that are vacant may just be won back anyway.

Backers? Kick them to the curb. Special interests? Tell them to take a hike. Yea, it’s gonna hurt. Yea, it may damage the party in the sort term. But it’s like anything hard – the bigger the pain, the bigger the payoff is down the line.

In the meantime, other proprieties are just going to have to suffer. Let’s face it, the public voted for Obama so they don’t seem to care much about what the Republicans hold dearly do they? It’s just like anything, you have to decide what is really important. And you can be effective at running the country if you’re fat and lazy with a huge beer gut.

And it’s only when it’s very clear that the Republican party is absolutely, completely and utterly clean, so clean that even Chris Matthews is admiring the sparkle, so ruthless with corruption that there is no question that even the top brass would see the door they were found giving favors, then and only then you start on the Democrats.

But by that stage, you probably won’t have to. The public will start turning on them and the media will have to ask why they are not prepared to clean their own house.  Obama will probably finish his term, but his legacy of corruption will mean that everyone will be glad to see him go.

That’s my thinking anyway. I think it’d work in the US.

It’s never work here because we have no conservatives worth a damn in the first place.

Palin may just be the smartest person in the room

Liberals: repeat after me, “Palin may be stupid, but I should check my facts carefully before I say so“.

Yet again, Palin has said something that has been taken as proof of her stupidity, but on close examination has actually proven that she’s better informed than her critics.

I’m beginning to think she’s actually doing this on purpose.

Crazy People, Tea Party and Media Bias

An interesting article on the Tea Party

I love it when enlightened pundits observe that there are “crazy people” at these events. No kidding. Ever been to a Democratic or Republican convention? Plenty of attendees would not pass a CT scan. Ever been to a PTA meeting? There are crazy people in America, on your TV and in your neighborhood. You may even be one of them. Deal with it.

I have a theory that the media finding “crazy people” in a protest is less a function of how crazy the people are and more the bias of the person covering the event. You can always find crazy people.  Code Pink is exclusivly crazy people and I’ve seen them be treated as though they ‘re normal by media even in New Zealand.

Actually, that was before I saw this one:

After a large tea party rally last year in Washington, a reporter asked me whether the Republican Party had secretly organized it. My response was this: obviously not; there are a ton of people here.

Liberal have written serious (well, for liberals anyway) articles claiming that the Tea Party is some sort of “atroturf” organisation (that is, an organisation that’s been orgaised by an interested party that’s pretending to be grassroots). That’s more a reflection of how common astroturfing is among liberals. Unfotunalty for them, they make the assumption that the right gets out just as easily as the left. We don’t.

The Tea party is not crazy. There are more people identifying as “Tea Party” than there are liberals. For the most part, these people have only left their homes and joined protests because they see a serious problem in their society – that it is missing the purpose of it’s very founding.

No, the reason that the Tea party is called crazy (racist, angry, et al) is quite simple.

Liberals don’t understand it when the right stands up and says “no”.

It’s new. They’re scared.

They should be.

Quote of the Day

From Instapundit.

IN LIGHT OF ALL THE DEMANDS THAT CERTAIN PEOPLE WATCH THEIR LANGUAGE, I’m reminded of how many people got their knickers in a twist over Ari Fleischer’s “watch what you say” remarks after 9/11. Fleischer’s remarks were pretty innocuous in context, but you would have thought he was Big Brother with a truncheon from the reaction of . . . well, Paul Krugman, who is now saying much more along those lines than Fleischer ever did. What could be different now? (Thanks to reader Paul Ulrich for the reminder).

Fleischer suggested that extreme retoric wasn’t wize and it was contorted into some sort of big government threat.

Ok, one more.

JAMES TARANTO: Big Lies And Little Ones: Paul Krugman’s Only Example Turns Out To Be Fraudulent. “If the broader claim–that the ‘rhetoric’ of Republican politicians and the nonliberal media was to blame for last Saturday’s act of mass murder–is true, why can’t it be presented without false factual assertions? Krugman’s little lie undermines the big lie he and his newspaper are attempting to purvey.” Plus, Jonathan Alter’s monstrous opportunism. “Alter seems to be lacking in any sense of decency.” And is refudiated by Rahm Emanuel.

See, this is why a conservative like myself has such a vastly different view of the US than anyone on the left. I know for myself that I am on the same wavelength as many of these supposed “hateful” people, so when I see something that doesn’t sound right, I check. And in so many instances they actually turn out to be completely fake or reasonable quotes distorted and taken out of context.

So it’s actually articles like the above which drive me to the right. If your case consists of only one quote, and that quote is fake, you’ve failed.

Sadly, most people think that religious conservatives in the states are bat sh*t crazy and don’t bother. Not that there aren’t crazy people, and that good people don’t occasionally say stupid things (eh, Obama – still bringing that gun?).

As a tangent, I doubt very much this will damage Palin. She became popular through just such a torrent of irrational criticism – in spite of it. Why on earth do those who’s earlier lies failed think that one really big lie will do the trick when thousands of smaller ones failed?

Stupid Quote of the Day

From the Herald.

The irony of a right-wing conservative, who boasts of hunting moose and shooting wolves while campaigning for more oil drilling in Alaska, transforming herself into a nature fan for prime time, has not been lost on environmentalists.

Um, where’s the irony?

She enjoys the outdoors, and wants a few acres of a vast wilderness tapped for it’s energy. There’s not the faintest hint of irony there, unless you’re an extremest environmentalist.

(The report mainly deals with the claim she was fishing closer than allowed to bears. I suspect that that was the point – to make it look like she was to garner more attention.)

Obama Loses House

Well, as we all know, Obama has lot the US House of Representatives.

Now, this is both expected, and bad.

The House and the Senate operate quite differently. The house is elected every 2 years – all of it. The Senate is elected 1/3 ever 2 years, and thanks to the fact that few Democrats were up for re-election that body didn’t change hands.

But the other thing about the House is, it’s where any spending bills must originate. So they hold the purse strings. Also unlike the Senate, the majority rules, sets the agenda. There’s no filibusters in the house.

What this means is that funding can be cut to anything that the Republicans don’t like. They can’t however drive through any laws Obama doesn’t like since he has the veto, which can only be overridden by a 2/3 vote in the Senate which is assuming they get the 60 votes they need to pass it in the first place, which is unlikely.

In other words, if Obama wants to move forward, he has to be the post-partisan president he said he would be, not the hyper-partisan he has been and is.

Speaking of which, Michelle Malkin outlines why Obama might have lost some of his support over the last 2 years.

Just two short years ago, Obama campaigned as the transcendent unifier. “Young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled, Americans have sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of red states and blue states,” he proclaimed. “We have been and always will be the United States of America.”

It’s been an Us vs. Them freefall ever since.

“We don’t mind the Republicans joining us,” Obama taunted a few weeks ago. “They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.”

“They’re counting on young people staying home and union members staying home and black folks staying home,” the fear-mongering agent of hope and change jeered on the campaign trail last month.

You would think they’d be saying thank you,” he sneered last April, when millions turned out for the nationwide Tax Day tea party protests.

I want them just to get out of the way” and “don’t do a lot of talking,” he scoffed in response to prescient critics of the federal trillion-dollar stimulus boondoggle.

In addition to labeling GOP opponents of his open-borders policies “enemies” who needed to be “punished” by Latino voters, Obama accused them — that is, us — of lacking patriotism. “Those aren’t the kinds of folks who represent our core American values,” he told viewers of the Spanish-language network Univision.

In other words, he’s been a left wing version of Bush with a great voice and a bad attitude. Why on earth the media thought this guy was going to be better than McCain is beyond me.

Just curious

Can anyone point to an example of a Republican who’s gotten this sort of hush-hush treatment?

Now, first, this is not the man made famous with the movie Charlie Wilson’s War, but a Congressman running for reelection in Ohio.  And so far it does not look good.  A few days ago, Big Government produced a copy of the trial brief filed in his divorce and it states that Wilson actually admitted to beating his wife in depositions.  …

Jim Geraghty wonders why there is so little coverage of the story so far.

Is it just my imagination that if something like this came out about a Republican, his career would be over by now?

Reading is such fun!

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has made a funny campaign ad, mocking opponents who criticse the Arizona illegal imigration identification law without having read it.

“Understanding the Sarah Palin effect”

Wintery Knight points out this great column on Sarah Palin.

Among the many delightful characteristics of Sarah Palin is her seemingly unfailing capacity to capture Barack Obama’s angry attention. This week, she criticized his new nuclear policy. Obama responded by saying “I really have no response to that,” which was, I think we’ll all agree, an awkward prelude to his … response. He went on with: “The last I checked, Sarah Palin is not much of an expert on nuclear issues.” Well, colour me huffy.

The last time anyone else checked, neither is Barack Obama. Chicago politics is no richer in seminars on the finer points of nuclear politics than those of Alaska. Nonetheless, adverting to Sarah Palin’s presumed incompetence — not just on nuclear issues, but on anything — will garner automatic applause and smirks of condescending approval from vast swathes of American public opinion.

Of course, the president of the united states is not a professional on almost all most topics he deals with. He has to take advise from experts. So such responses are more than a little rich.

Sarah Palin irritates, agitates, angers and annoys some of the self-appointed finest minds of America to a point long past reason. She has been the target, since the night she walked on stage to speak at a Republican convention, of some of the most savage commentary that the great republic has seen since Richard Nixon.

Some of this could be put down to George W. Bush. I mean, the hateful vitriol directed at him had to go somewhere.

The great difference, of course, is that Nixon earned some of his venom. He practised political hardball. He was a remorseless partisan with an appetite for political vengeance

And he received some he did not earn, by virtue of a personality — secretive, bitter even in success, humourless, cold and anxious — that made him, fairly or otherwise, a target for the cruellest and most unrelenting attacks. But in any event, he was the President. He had been in politics for a full generation. For those determined to hate him, there was a large field to till.

But Palin is not the president, nor has she been. She’s been a presence in American national politics for only about two years. She is a cheerful human being, with a large family, an apparently easy-going and normal husband. She has a personality that would sell corn flakes — if not grow them. What career she had in Alaska, she earned.

Few realise that the first real political battle that Obama had to fight was the Democratic Presidential primary. He won previous elections by having the strongest opponents removed from the ballot.

She’s at home indoors and out, radiates human warmth, seems to have some balance about herself, and has displayed over the last year or so a considerable fortitude under an avalanche of mockery and hatred. For the final stroke of this cameo I should note she is smart — smarter than 90% of the people who make a point of how rock-stupid they know she is.

She talks funny, that means she’s stupid.

But he’s right about the critics – I saw a critical report that described her recent “entrance” into TV… an industry she’s already worked in for many years previously.

She, by rights, should be queen of the feminists. All that self-reliance, her takeover of Alaska politics, the rocket ride to a Vice-Presidential ticket, a public career she blends with her family life– these seem gold-standard credentials for a real feminist. But official feminism derides herewith an unspeakable intensity. Her early critics were not beyond the inane claim that she was somehow not really a woman.

It was grimly amusing to watch the left, who had just labeled opponents to Hillary in various evil terms, suddenly deciding that “just being a woman” wasn’t enough for political support.

Read the whole thing.


Saw this report today.

A 70-year-old Nashville man was accused of ramming his sport utility vehicle several times into the back of a vehicle that had a Obama/Biden bumper sticker.

Harry K Weisiger, a retiree, made obscene gestures and pointed at the campaign sticker for United States President Barack Obama and running mate Joe Biden before he smashed into schoolteacher Mark Duren’s car, police said. Weisiger has been charged with reckless endangerment, leaving the scene of the accident and refusing to take a field sobriety test.

The incident appears to be among the overheated US partisan political atmosphere, including death threats sent to members of Congress and their families who supported the recent health care reform bill.

Hm, thinks I. I seem to recall something like that on LGF back in the day.

Sure enough.

TAMPA – Politics has always been divisive, splitting families and turning friend against friend.

This week, though, a Tampa woman learned that simple Bush-Cheney bumper sticker can bring trouble, if not danger, from a total stranger.

Police say Michelle Fernandez, 35, was chased for miles Tuesday by an irate 31-year-old Tampa man who cursed at her as he held up an anti-Bush sign and tried to run her off the road.

His sign, about the size of a business letter, read:

Never Forget Bush’s Illegal Oil War Murdered Thousands in Iraq.

In her frantic nine-minute call Tuesday to a 911 dispatcher, Fernandez said it was the Bush Cheney ’04 bumper sticker on her green Ford Expedition that set the other driver off.

“I was just almost run off the road by a man,” she told the dispatcher at 5:14 p.m. She was taking her son, 10, and daughter, 3, to a ballfield.

“He just ran me off because I have a Bush bumper sticker in my car. He had some type of – he drove up next to me with – he had a sign on it like hanging from his – from the passenger window, that said something about the war in Iraq. . . . I’m shaking like a leaf.”

Durkin said Winkler started following Fernandez at the intersection of Columbus Drive and Armenia Avenue shortly after 5 p.m.

“He told our officers that he just got mad at her, so he went after her,” Durkin said.

As Fernandez drove south on Armenia, the other driver pulled alongside her in his black 1996 Nissan, beeping his horn and “flailing his arms,” according to a police report.

He held the antiwar sign up to his passenger-side window, she said, following her along busy streets in south and west Tampa and veering into her path, forcing her to swerve to avoid a collision. She pleaded with the dispatcher for help and tried to get away by running through stop signs and changing directions.

“Oh, now he’s following me! I’m gonna get back on Kennedy now. I don’t know what to do!” she told the dispatcher, her voice rising.

At one point the man pulled his car in front of Fernandez’s, got out and started running toward her, Fernandez told police.

“He just pulled over next to me, he’s stopping the car, it’s ridiculous, this man!” she said. “He’s running after my car. Oh my goodness, he’s a fanatic, he’s in the middle of the street!”

She drove along Arrawana Avenue and Habana Street, then back onto Kennedy Boulevard, but she couldn’t shake him, Durkin said.

“He’s trying to hurt us. Look at this, what a moron,” she said. “Look at him! . . . Idiot!”

The dispatcher told Fernandez to drive to the Tampa police office near Raymond James Stadium, but she drove instead to the ballfield where she had been headed with her children before the chase. She met with a police officer and carefully described the Nissan and its tag number, Durkin said.

Officers traced the tag to Winkler, went to his home within an hour and arrested him.

“This could have been tragic, for her and her children and for other people on the road as this was going on,” Durkin said. “But she did all the right things. She showed remarkable poise, she didn’t engage him. She called us.”

There’s also a report of U.S. Air Force colonel vandalising cars with Bush bumper stickers.

Like I keep saying, there are idiots on the fringe of both sides – and I say again to the left:

Let’s stop pretending there aren’t.

Oh, and the illustrations are the first Google images search results for the respective tickets. Speaks volumes really.

Tag Cloud