swerme this:
Why is it that, in almost every single endeavor, Liberals are deathly afraid of having to compete and succeed to get 'rewards'?
We can't have testing, we can't actually keep score in kids games, we can't possibly allow the free market to decide what people want to listen to.
YOu don't give a flying you - know - what at a rolling donut about equality of opportunity - you want equality of RESULTS - even if there isn't an equality of talent or success.
|
|
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0607/4738_Page2.html
Interesting that Florida Hispanics are 2:1 against the immigration reform bill, but that is partially due to them mostly being Puerto Rican and Cuban Americans and not particularly into mass immigration from Mexico and Latin America. |
|
I wonder what Cornyn thinks of the Coburn piece.
Maybe Coburn forgot that meeting? |
|
|
my last entry was a joke btw. don't have your wife call me to tell me to be nice... |
|
A great piece by Tom Coburn at NRO. Read the whole thing:
"I opposed Senator McCain in this immigration debate. I believed the policies he advocated were wrong for America and I used every tool at my disposal to defeat his position. However, the way Senator McCain conducted himself represented the essential qualities of leadership the American people deserve.
Senator McCain didn’t speak in generalities. He spoke in specific terms. He didn’t take a position and change his position when he came under withering fire. He didn’t pander. He didn’t equivocate. He didn’t demean his opponents in the Senate or insinuate we harbored base motives or secret prejudices. He was motivated by principle. He believed he was serving his country. He was not inspired by political strategists who foolishly believed they could use this bill to grow the Republican party, and did not lecture his colleagues about why those strategists were smarter and wiser than 80 percent of Americans."
http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=OWQzNTNmMjAxMTMwNmFjNmVlMjhkOTZjNTdhZWI3Y2I=
We need more of this type of leadership. And not snarky attacks by Hugh and Dean while they promote a candidate who is the antithesis of this type of character. |
|
MoJOEses writes:
“Its your side who has attached its hopes and dreams to a medium that the fairness doctrine would apply to.”
Yeah, imagine not realizing that the libs would try to change the rules.
|
|
|
MoJOEses, if all we relied on was talk radio, we wouldn't be here now, would we? |
|
Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Jack Cafferty, Jon Stewart, Paul Krugman, Michael Moore, etc etc ‘say pretty much whatever they want’. But you know the funny thing about a resurrected Fairness Doctrine? It wouldn’t even touch those guys. Nope, they could carry on without any need for balance. In fact, the only political speech that would have to be balanced-out is that of a few conservative voices on radio. How convenient for your side.
|
|
freudian slip? "I'm in what ever hole your hiding in"
you're sick. |
|
John, that's true. Whether he's in a minority leadership position is up to the caucus not to voters. But, the Republican caucus must have seen some reason to appoint him as leader. He's pretty darned good at raising money and he's hit the campaign trail for his fellow Republican candidates, plus he has a reputation as a pretty savvy parlimentarian.
So I think it would take a serious misstep on his part to lose that leadership position. Remember that Lott was defended by most in his caucus at the start of the Strom Thurmond brohaha. It was the outcry from both sides of the blogosphere and then the MSM that finally did him in. That's not going to happen to Mitch simply because he was carrying Dubya's water on this one or he appeared to be. |
|
was a HUGE slap in the face of conservatism. It violated every conservative principle. Heck, the damned thing was written by Ted Kennedy for crying out loud.
ANY Republican who had trouble deciding which way to vote is worthy of contempt. I don't believe that there are no conservatives in KY who can take on McConnell.
Senator McFudge. Senator Gentlemanscholar. They both sound good to me. |
|
gentlemanscholar:
Nice to virtually meet another citizen of the Commonwealth.
I wouldn't be the least surprised to hear that Mitch is the one who first broached the possibility of using the clay pidgeon strategy; he's a master parliamentarian.
I see your point about this being more than a "single issue", and yeah, I agree it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
To me, the most important piece of any immigration reform needs to be security. There was no reason for me to believe that this bill would magically solve that problem........the "solutions" that have been passed before haven't. (Where IS that fence, anyway?)
Having had my daughter just wait 13 weeks for a passport that was (at the time she applied) supposed to take 8, I was more than a bit skeptical that 12 million+ background checks were going to be completed in anywhere approaching 24 hours each.
It's simple, really. If we can be convinced that our borders are secure and there won't be another cycle of "illegal immigrant numbers reach critical mass, we grant amnesty, rinse, repeat", THEN everyone will be more amenable to creating a way of dealing with our current crop of illegals. I don't think anyone wants to be spiteful; we simply want our laws obeyed and US interests to come first. I don't quite see why the proponents of this bill didn't get that. |
|
The main reason the world/UN didn't want us to go to war.
FOOD FOR OIL scam. They were making big bucks for Saddam. |
|
|
As a follow up to my last post about McConnell -- he has a huge campaign war chest. Since it is unlikely that he will face any serious opposition, KY conservatives should consider redirecting their campaign donations to conservative candidates challenging Lindsey Graham and Chuck Hagel next year. Even if we do not regain the majority in the US Senate in 2008, replacing these two squishes with reliable conservatives will go a long way toward strengthening our position in the Senate. |
|
Given your penchant for inane, obtuse remarks and near total ignorance of history and public policy, you, it seems, would make the perfect right-wing radio host – if you have a nice voice that is.
Now please go away and hire some day laborers. You add no value to any conversation. Take that buffoon, JohnCar, with you. But please leave Kimberlyric: She’s so dumb it’s actually funny to read her comments.
|
|
I too live in KY, and I concur with your assessment about Mitch. I can't think of anyone who could successfully mount a challenge to him in the primaries, and his vote against cloture yesterday deprived any potential rival of the most potent issue that could be used against him.
Nevertheless, his conduct with respect to this immigration bill has left a very bitter taste in my mouth. He worked assiduously behind the scenes with Reid to resurrect the bill and to concoct the procedural means to conduct another jam down. Reid is not smart enough to have come up with the clay pigeon strategy on his own -- and even with the play drawn out for him, he looked quite inept at implementing it. It makes me wonder where he got the idea and whether Mitch played a role in it. Mitch voted with the bill's proponents to bring it back to the floor. So, yes, I'm glad that yesterday he voted with those opposed to the bill against cloture -- although watching on C-Span, it looked to me like he didn't step up until the bill's defeat was evident.
Had he voted for this bill, he would have lost my vote. This bill consisted of far more than a "single" issue to me. It violated just about every principle of conservative governance. But in the end, he listened to his constituents, so unless he pulls off something like this again, I can't see running him out when there's no one capable of taking his place. |
|
Now we will get a backlash of conservative pandering from gutter snipes like McConnell, attempting to dig out from the avalanche of bad will that they have created in the illegal alien festival.
Mitch can GFH. |
|
I believe that, had the vote been closer, McConnell would have supported Bush. The lopsided defeat enabled him to vote the way Kentuckians demanded. He's too much of an establishment Republican and has been in Washington too long (the two seem to go together). A real conservative like Sessions or DeMint, who doesn't blindly follow the Rockefeller Republican establishment, would be excellent as Minority Leader.
Kentucky's like the rest of the South in becoming more Republican, especially in national elections. Four of the six congressmen are Republican. Why not try to get one of the congressmen from more reliably conservative areas in western Kentucky to run against McConnell next year?
|
|
muirgeo said: "I think when you realize that Fox news listeners were far more likely (80%) to believe at least one of the following: clear evidence had been found of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda;"
*** which of course we now know is absolutely true
"W.M.D. had been found in Iraq;"
*** which of course we now know is absolutely true, except not in huge quantities
"world public opinion favored the U.S. going to war with Iraq"
**** why, one asks, whether "world public opinion" has anything to do with America acting in its own interests? Do we have a world government?
"then [sic] NPR listeners (23%) you can see the issue a little more clearly for what it is."
*** LOL! Let's ask some questions of our own:
* how many NPR believe that Bush "lied" about WMD in Iraq? Have they heard Clinton and Gore making the same claim, all theway back to the late 1980's??
* how many NPR listeners believe that Bush was wrong about Saddam attempting to get uranium ore in Africa?
* how many NPR listeners believe that Joe Wilson gave a formal written report to the CIA of his junket to Niger?
* how many NPR listeners believe that Joe Wilson was not utterly discredited by the Senate Intelligence Committee?
* how many NPR listeners believe that Karl Rove and the Bush White House "outed" Valerie Plame in retaliation against Wilson?
Face it: liberals who cherry-pick poll questions to "prove" that Fox listeners are ignorant and stupid are not just ignorant and stupid themselves, they are mendacious and lacking in integrity. |
|
Whether or not Mitch keeps his seat next year is up the the KY voters. But there is no good reason he should keep his position as Minority Leader after his part in the amnesty shambles.
|
|
If you feel like you need to, and just can't, then turn on NPR in the evening:
"This is Terry Gross with FRESHHHHH Airrrrrr."
|
|
|
You are correct, IMO. Instead of us simply shouting "out with ______ (fill in the name)" because of one vote that we disagree with (and that we might not completely understand....I think the processes in the senate are probably very , very complicated, and it's possible Mitch had a strategy), we have to look at the record (both public & voting) for each candidate. Then, after careful thought, we should generate a list of those that need to go, and there are some. In fact, I think I will do this at my site for next topic. |
|
|
|
|
Certainly there is some housecleaning in order among the Republicans, but we should pluck off only the bad fruit now. For example, don't take out Kyl or McConnell, especially Kyl. He has been a rock solid conservative. He has earned the benefit of more than a few doubts, even if I was scratching my head at some points on this immigration thing. Let us pick a few that have got to go and leave it at that. There is no need for a bloodbath. |
|
Not impossible, but it would be difficult as Mitch is well thought of here in Kentucky. Some have tagged him as "Louisville Liberal", but I always considered him center-right.
I don't see any serious challenge to his being the Republican candidate from KY next year. |
|
If the far left doesn't make traction in the free market radio industry, maybe that is an indication that the content IS fair already. If not, then who gets to say what is "fair"? The Senate or House? Look, I don't want the Fairness Doctrine on the Television or the Radio. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. If I don't want to listen to leftist tripe, I don't have to. If you don't want to listen to the right, you can turn off the radio or turn the station too.
Now personally, I will seek out a few viewpoints on my own that give me a reality check, but I don't need the government helping me hold my fork. This is a first amendment issue and an infringement on freedom of speech. |
|
New York Times and USA Today editorial pages(and countless others) and then lets talk about presenting both sides!
Their panties are ALL twisted about the SCOTUS rulings(how dare they???!!) and about how the BIGOTS (that'd be you and me) RUINED the Ab-Fab Immigration "Overhaul"
Fairness- okay start with the MSM - or hey just the major papers- and I want EQUAL LINES OF TYPE that present my Conservative Agenda! |
|
A couple of days ago I wrote Mitch encouraging him to kill this bill. The next day he voted no on cloture. Then I wrote to thank him for doing so, albeit noting that I was disappointed that he hadn't been fighting the good fight from the get-go. Then I encouraged him to go to war on the Fairness Doctrine, like he did against McCain-Feingold. Then lo and behold, here's this video with him talking about fighting the (laughably named) Fairness Doctrine. I'm feeling pretty damn omnipotent this morning!
But seriously, Mitch is an extremely smart and savvy guy (who I don't always agree with). It's a tough call with him, because when he's on the right side of an issue, he's exactly the guy you want on your side. He really worked it earlier this year with all war resolution posturing nonsense that went on in the Senate. I know a lot of the politicians here in the state, and I'm not sure if there's anyone who'd be able to beat him in a primary. My representative, Geoff Davis, might be able to, but that would leave an open House seat if Davis ran. Even though his district skews Republican, it's not a gimme, so I'd be a little reluctant to encourage that. The one person I'm reasonably positive could win Davis's open seat in this scenario isn't interested in the job.
Just saying "throw the bums out" doesn't always cut it. Kentucky's been overwhelmingly Democrat for about forever, so when we get someone in a position of power, it's hard fought and we have to guard it jealously. If we toss Mitch out during a primary out of pique over this one issue, we need to be darn sure we have someone strong enough to win in the general election. |
|
|
|
|
The results of the death by bloggers, et al, is going to be far reaching. Now they know we can and will unite on the net, the radio, by fax and phone to tell them "NO" in a resounding voice. This was wonderful but perhaps even more wonderful is the realization by congress of our - the people's - voice. Now we just have to stay motivated and keep on keeping on! |
|
Remember the big flap made by leftists when the Bush Administration tried to bring "fairness" - equal time for conservative views - to the TAXPAYER-funded CPB/PBS/NPR. The Left had a coniption! However, apparently now it's OK to bring "fairness" - equal time for leftist views - to the PRIVATELY-funded market.
I've often said that leftists have no capacity to recognize the irony (or hypocrisy) they generate. |
|
1. 'Clear evidence of links between Saddam's Iraq and Al Qaeda'.---Who cares, Saddam was unfinished business, had Bush41 finished the 1st Gulf War when we had 500K troops, not 130K troops to spare for the OPS, we would not have had to go back, & he may well have been reelected despite his "read my lips,no new taxes" capitulation to the Dems.
2. 'No W.M.D. found in Iraq after 2nd Gulf War'. Who cares, Saddam was unfinished business, a 2X aggressor in the region Vs. Iran and Kuwait, a dictator and killer. Perhaps the D in WMD should not stand for Destruction, but Death, then even the Left would pause before starting silly semantical arguments about whether we should be in Iraq. Saddam dealt in Death. Ask the Iraqi people who by the way tried, convicted and executed Saddam for Mass Murder with and without WMD. & 3. 'World opinion supports invasion of Iraq'. Who cares, Saddam was unfinished business, it was the low point of the Bush43 1st term to entertain notions of approval by the UN or the Axis of Weasels. I say we should inform the Axis of Evil that we are dusting off our warheads and if a US city is attacked, we will turn large tracts of land into glass. MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction worked against the USSR and Iran's Ayatollah sure was not impressed by Carter Cowardice but Reagan Resolve made him blink. |
|
Mitch McConnell is trying to endear himself to those he wants to sell out.
I hope there is someone in Kentucky to remove this opportunist from the public dole. |
|
Compare and Contrast
I recently had a chance to spend some time watching Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani answer tough questions on foreign policy. I will blog more on this later and with more specifics, but here's my takeaway impression:
Mitt Romney has an amazingly orderly mind and an impressive grasp of detail. He also has a serious Garbage In/Garbage Out problem - that is, while his mind processes information in a lucid and logical way, his intake valves lack filters for screening out nonsense. The overwhelming impression that I took away from his presentation was that it was ... silly.
Rudy Giuliani skips lightly over crucial details. His plans are much less worked through than Romney's. But the spirit behind them is exactly right. People say he has no background in foreign policy. I was left wondering whether a lifetime of fighting the Mafia is not exactly the right background for dealing with Islamic terrorism. As he said: the mullahs released the hostages in 1981 because they looked into Ronald Reagan's eyes and saw something they did not see in Jimmy Carter's. I saw that same something in Guiliani's. Whatever his other faults, he is never silly.
A reader adds:
As for the mob and terrorists: they are actually, in temperament, consanguine. The difference between the First World and the Third World is that the men running the Third World would be in the First World’s prisons.
06/28 11:04 AM http://frum.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWQ2NDI0OGVhYjNlMjhiMTJmN2EzNDI3MTYyY2Q5NWU=
|
|
1) clear evidence had been found of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda
(that is actually true, Zaraqawi was given sanctuary and support from Saddam in exchange for Zaraqawi attacking Saddam's Kurdish and Shiite enemies-while al Qaeda considered Saddam a socialist, as a Sunni Arab socialist he was still preferable to Shiite appostates and to the non Arab Kurds);
2) W.M.D. had been found in Iraq
(they were after the 1st Gulf War and only because Saddam's son-in-law told us about them-it caught everyone by surprise when we did not find them again after the 2nd gulf war);
3) world public opinion favored the U.S. going to war with Iraq
(you got me there, most of the world opposed it, still most of the world is usually wrong).
And Krugman is an idiot. |
|
I think when you realize that Fox news listeners were far more likely (80%) to believe at least one of the following: clear evidence had been found of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda; W.M.D. had been found in Iraq; world public opinion favored the U.S. going to war with Iraq then NPR listeners (23%) you can see the issue a little more clearly for what it is. Propaganda has indeed hoodwinked a major number of guillable citizens. Links between a political party, its propaganda and corporate media are dangerously obvious. This is something so classic and so repeated in history I guess some will never learn.
(above paraphrased from Krugmans Op-Ed in the NYT) |
|
Click and Clack are funny. http://www.cartalk.com/
But now with Dean on the radio, we have choice in chowdaheadz accents. And of course we can buy chowdaheadz merchandise. http://www.chowdaheadz.com/jedrwicot.html
I also like the New York Times puzzle editor. So there are two good shows on NPR.
As liberally biased as NPR is (and if there is any doubt of that just wait until Daniel Schorr speaks, the man who makes Dan Rather look fair and balanced--http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=2101143) With the excemption of Schorr, I have to admit NPR is generally better than network evening television news. That is partly to do with radio being a superior medium for news coverage than television, but NPR often does cover stories technically better than CBS and ABC do for their radio segments. I often disagree with NPR's bias, but I do admire their technical presentation skills. They are pretty good at delivering radio news. |
|
1st, ROFL @ "liberal thought." good one. liberals don't think, they listen to totally rad emo music and wear Che t shirts
2nd, commie talk does not work because they already control 99% of media. talk radio is one of a very small number of places one can hear conservative (aka real) thought
cmon, you know better |
|
NPR is not just talk radio. It's "news" and all sorts of eclectic programming. It's so "sophisticated" that college faculty dare not drive their Volvos around town without the requisite NPR bumpersticker. Sure beats publishing!
Anyway, NPR is supported by tax dollars and tax deductible donations, and in no way compares to the free marketplace of ideas available on commercial stations. |
|
|
get these bums out of there |
|
You said:
"the reason that the fairness doctrine will kill TalkRadio is that no one wants to hear liberal tripe."
There are, obviously, a lot of liberals out there -- and plenty who are actively engaged. You may be right that not many people want to listen to a left-wing talk show. But I just think that has to do with incompatibility.
I just don't think liberal sentiments are that congruous with talk radio as we know it.
But NPR has a huge audience -- well bigger than Limbaugh's. And, while NPR gives it the ol' college try to be fair and objective, there's no denying that it's a bastion of liberal thought. |
|
...I'd say that the Fairness Doctrine isn't going anywhere. It would have to get through the House and the House -- by a wide margin -- seems in no mood to be telling radio stations what they can and can't air.
Pence's amendment passed the House 309-115. On one hand, it's shocking that there are 115 elected House members out there who think they should be rationing speech. On the other hand, it goes to show that there's no appetite for this....except among the rigid left.
This is really good news -- it suggests that, even if the next president is a Dem, the FD probably isn't going to be coming back. |
|
He needs to step down as Minority Leader and somebody like DeMint should take his place.
|
|
He got pounded for the mistake that didn't pass. Now he and the other GOPers are sure as heck going to make sure us red meat-eaters know that he'll keep the libs off our backs.
Kimberlyc, JohnCarr etc - I shouldn't engage libs in discussions about economics but the reason that the fairness doctrine will kill TalkRadio is that no one wants to hear liberal tripe. If no one will tune in to hear libtripe, stations will just drop the format altogether. This is what the Dems/libs want. Once again, libs cannot function in a marketplace so they act like monkeys with hammers instead. |
|
|
|
|
|
"What is it the Rightwing is afraid of anyway?"
The other side of the story.
Next to the thought of actually fighting in the wars they champion it's their greatest fear. |
|
|
He 'assured' us that he won't let it happen. Just like he won't try to destroy the nation by shoving partially formed immigration bills down our throats? Why should be trust him? |
|
I will also defend your right to listen to AirAmerica and listen to your heroes Al Franken and Randy Rhodes.
Okay--that was too nasty. There are not too many "fighting words" left, but saying someone likes AirAmerica has got to be some of the few left. |
|
But, it's close to how I feel about the
"Economist" ads that pop up on this site when trying to get to the comments.
However, since those nasty ads are paying for HH's, DB's, and others meals, maybe those ads are too nasty afterall.
On the other hand, I could have been wrong about that!
|
|
Joe, you're not too ugly, just many of your expressed opinions. Hope that caught your attention, eh!
Secondly, can we really trust Senator McConnell as he did waffle quite a bit on the immigration bill. However, he might stay true to his expressed political roots on the "fairness doctrine!"
Also, now that the Senate's idea of how to design a horse got whacked, perhaps the Senate can address securing our land borders. Gee, that might be a tough one unless the male members realize they do need to keep their pairs intact this time around!
|
|
That was a love note from Harry Reid and the Democrats in response to the hornet nest stirred up over this immigration debate. This is not the first time. Harry Reid thought he pulled a fast one with Harriet Miers, until talk radio and bloggers pulled the rug out fron under him on that one too.
Hey, I may disagree with you Christianist, Yankee-loving, metrosexual, racist, xenophobic, anti-amnesty, biased, McCain-hating, Romney-loving, Godless, anti-progressive, mouthbreathing troglodytes, but I will defend your right to get on the radio with Hugh or Medved or Hannity or Rush or Laura or anyone else!
Ok--I was kidding about the name calling, I just threw that in to get you all riled up. |
|