Brilliant Quote From P. J. O'Rourke...Liberals, the KKK...


Selene

Recommended Posts

"Bill [Clinton] hates them [refugees] and fears them, especially the Cubans. Bill knows the Cubans are crazy. Only crazy people would flee from a country with free medical care, guaranteed employment for life, and first-rate gun control.

The president and his sanctimonious twit of a wife have worked for decades to build a society like this, and here people are taking their lives in their hands to get away from it. ...

Let's face facts about our disgusting political opponents. We've been nice to the liberals for too long. They're thugs.

The liberal dream is to control people, to oppress and exploit them for some "higher" goal.

And how are the liberals ever going to be able to control people brave enough to sail to Florida in a rum carton?

... A civilized society should no more tolerate the presence of a liberal than the presence of a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Indeed, it may be argued that liberalism is worse than the KKK, insofar as Klansman only hate some people while liberals hate them all."

-- P. J. O'Rourke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always really liked PJ O'Rourke.

Carol

liberal

S0, do you wear undies under your KKK robe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Bill [Clinton] hates them [refugees] and fears them, especially the Cubans. Bill knows the Cubans are crazy. Only crazy people would flee from a country with free medical care, guaranteed employment for life, and first-rate gun control.

The president and his sanctimonious twit of a wife have worked for decades to build a society like this, and here people are taking their lives in their hands to get away from it. ...

Let's face facts about our disgusting political opponents. We've been nice to the liberals for too long. They're thugs.

The liberal dream is to control people, to oppress and exploit them for some "higher" goal.

And how are the liberals ever going to be able to control people brave enough to sail to Florida in a rum carton?

... A civilized society should no more tolerate the presence of a liberal than the presence of a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Indeed, it may be argued that liberalism is worse than the KKK, insofar as Klansman only hate some people while liberals hate them all."

-- P. J. O'Rourke

Well, the feckless Romney campaign better get its ass in gear and take off the gloves. This crap about keeping some of Obamacare instead of repealling the whole damn thing and starting over is going to be one of many disasters to come re-electing the Ass-In-Chief.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Bill [Clinton] hates them [refugees] and fears them, especially the Cubans. Bill knows the Cubans are crazy. Only crazy people would flee from a country with free medical care, guaranteed employment for life, and first-rate gun control.

The president and his sanctimonious twit of a wife have worked for decades to build a society like this, and here people are taking their lives in their hands to get away from it. ...

Let's face facts about our disgusting political opponents. We've been nice to the liberals for too long. They're thugs.

The liberal dream is to control people, to oppress and exploit them for some "higher" goal.

And how are the liberals ever going to be able to control people brave enough to sail to Florida in a rum carton?

... A civilized society should no more tolerate the presence of a liberal than the presence of a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Indeed, it may be argued that liberalism is worse than the KKK, insofar as Klansman only hate some people while liberals hate them all."

-- P. J. O'Rourke

Hear! Hear!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brant:

Goody Two Shoes' campaign people are these button down losers and they are well on their way to anointing this marxist in chief for another four years.

Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read an article somewhere that said, Romney's campaign staff does not have enough depth. That is, where Romney relies on one top adviser for major decisions, Obama in 2008 had two or more in each policy area.

Carol:

Much worse than that.

He has lots of advisors. They come from a paradigm model that will not assert conservative and libertarian positions because they are "afraid" of alienating the "moderates," or, the undecideds.

They use the 1964 Goldwater landslide as their paradigm and not the Reagan landslides, or, the 2010 earthquake landslide as their models.

These are the Rockefeller, blue blood, country club, Wall Street Republicans who just want to take the Senate and get their committee ships to loot the public treasury for their crony capitalists.

Adam

Post Script:

PDS's pro bono legal advice is merely part of his CLE accreditation. However, as you know, you should certainly not answer it publicly. So, just answer it in our own secret channel as usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam, lol, info will be supplied at the usual rates, you wild and crazy guy.

Do not faint dead away, but I actually agree with you about the RINOs and the crony capatilism. The slavering lobbysists at the convention were so blatant, there is not even pretence anymore.(Not that the Dems were any different in that respect).

But politically, do you really think that to redouble down on issues like Obama"s Islam-appeasing and the need to to reduce social programs, especially medicare, would be a winning tactic in such a close race?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam, lol, info will be supplied at the usual rates, you wild and crazy guy.

Do not faint dead away, but I actually agree with you about the RINOs and the crony capatilism. The slavering lobbysists at the convention were so blatant, there is not even pretence anymore.(Not that the Dems were any different in that respect).

But politically, do you really think that to redouble down on issues like Obama"s Islam-appeasing and the need to to reduce social programs, especially medicare, would be a winning tactic in such a close race?

Carol:

Interesting that you frame the issue as "reducing social programs."

Reducing the rate of automatic growth is not reducing social programs.

Means testing for all programs is eliminating fraud.

Making work a condition of receiving benefits is a positive use of taxpayer money.

All of these are winning arguments amongst the prime voters.

More later.

Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Bill [Clinton] hates them [refugees] and fears them, especially the Cubans. Bill knows the Cubans are crazy. Only crazy people would flee from a country with free medical care, guaranteed employment for life, and first-rate gun control.

The president and his sanctimonious twit of a wife have worked for decades to build a society like this, and here people are taking their lives in their hands to get away from it. ...

I found this part quoted in PJ O'Roarke's 1995 book "Age and Guile Beat Youth, Innocence, and a Bad Haircut" (I wasn't sure if PJ was trashing Hillary or Michelle).

I think Carol's notes on Romney campaign brass and their top-heavy structure was from Politico, that KKK-suffused place of liberality, their lengthy article "Inside the campaign: how Mitt Romney stumbled" ... if the marxist fiends at Politico really did get access to the executive suite, it amazes me how the knives were out at HQ. This is hard business.

Stuart Stevens, Mitt Romney’s top strategist, knew his candidate’s convention speech needed a memorable mix of loft and grace if he was going to bound out of Tampa with an authentic chance to win the presidency. So Stevens, bypassing the speechwriting staff at the campaign’s Boston headquarters, assigned the sensitive task of drafting it to Peter Wehner, a veteran of the last three Republican White Houses and one of the party’s smarter wordsmiths.

Not a word Wehner wrote was ever spoken.

Stevens junked the entire thing, setting off a chaotic, eight-day scramble that would produce an hour of prime-time problems for Romney, including Clint Eastwood’s meandering monologue to an empty chair.

Romney’s convention stumbles have provoked weeks of public griping and internal sniping about not only Romney but also his mercurial campaign muse, Stevens. Viewed warily by conservatives, known for his impulsiveness and described by a colleague as a “tortured artist,” Stevens has become the leading staff scapegoat for a campaign that suddenly is behind in a race that had been expected to stay neck and neck through Nov. 6.

This article is based on accounts from Romney aides, advisers and friends, most of whom refused to speak on the record because they were recounting private discussions and offering direct criticism of the candidate and his staff, Stevens in particular.

Now, is Stevens an idiot, a panderer, an NWO-Rockefeller, an old-school money maven, a smart operator, or what? It looks like Coach Stevens is fairly nimble. He will absorb the post-election kudos if the long-trend polls are wrong and Romney is headed for victory.

I keep my eyes on Nevada, Ohio, Vermont, Colorado, Michigan, Iowa and Wisconsin. Florida seems still in play, but the rest of the electoral votes are essentially locked up.

Without these eight states decided, Obama could bring in 256 and Romney 191. If Obama takes Florida, it is over. If he loses Florida, but takes some combination of the other states, simple arithmetic tells us how he might do it. This is where the GOP is scrambling and infighting on strategy and tactics.

The election party is going to be quite a night here at OL. I confidently predict teeth-gnashing and rue.

My guess is that Romney's support will erode a wee bit each week in prime constituencies. If he continues to lose ground among Jewish voters, the Latino electorate (especially women) and if his Independent swing base erodes further, it is hard to see just where he will break out in the next fifty-odd days. The Romney message in places like Michigan and Ohio is just not taking hold.

Apparently Stevens (and the other apex-males of the campaign) read Politico just like me and just like Carol. The newest Romney campaign headline there in that commie snakepit is "Romney abruptly shifts strategy."

Mitt Romney, sensing an opening in the Middle East mess and catching flak from conservatives for giving too little detail about his policy plans, is rolling out a new and broader strategy to make the election a referendum on “status quo versus change,” chief strategist Stuart Stevens told POLITICO.

The shift, which is to include much more emphasis on Romney’s policy prescriptions, means he is scrapping the most basic precept of his campaign. From the time he began contemplating running again after his loss in the 2008 primaries, Romney’s theory of the case has been a relentless and nearly exclusive focus on the listless economy.

But with polls showing Obama for the first time moving clearly ahead in important swing states— most notably, Ohio—Romney advisers concluded they had to make a painful course correction.

Stevens said the economy is likely to remain “the dominant focus” of the campaign. But ads and speeches will focus on a wider array of issues, including foreign policy, the threat from China, debt and the tone in Washington.

If Ohio is a bellwether of heartland America, then polling is dire for the GOP. If the GOP cannot maintain and advance in Nevada and nail down Colorado -- while Ohio goes blue, then I just do not see the numbers adding up for the man with the magic underwear and the nice hair and the lovely family.

America's devolution into Cuban-style KKK-liberal slave camp is almost complete. Run for the borders of the Socialist Hellhole to the north! If it is a good enough redoubt for Jerry Story, it's good enough for you, Adam. With the only conservative government on the continent, Canada and its new refugees can make the final stand against Gog.

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama 256 "locked up"? I doubt it. Regardless of the polls, his supporters have to get out of bed and go vote. Lots of ruck with that. Maybe Romney plans to put them all asleep. Could work, stupid a plan as it would be.

--Brant

a lot can happen and a lot will in the next seven weeks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep my eyes on Nevada, Ohio, Vermont, Colorado, Michigan, Iowa and Wisconsin. Florida seems still in play, but the rest of the electoral votes are essentially locked up.

Without these eight states decided, Obama could bring in 256 and Romney 191. If Obama takes Florida, it is over. If he loses Florida, but takes some combination of the other states, simple arithmetic tells us how he might do it.

Obama 256 "locked up"? I doubt it.

Anybody can do his or her own electoral college arithmetic. Here is one of many electoral vote calculators. I lay out one such 'swing-state' scenario, one of the many winning combinations for Obama (click to go to the interactive map at 270towin.com). In this guess, Romney takes Florida, Vermont, Wisconsin, Colorado and Iowa, giving him the benefit of six weeks' hard campaigning to push down Democrat leads.

EIFd.png

Brant, I agree that lots can happen in seven weeks. But can enough happen in seven weeks that has not already happened in the last thirty weeks? Look at the long procedure from 2008. There were no surges of vote in the last weeks. The trend to Obama established itself by June.

When I speak of long-trend polling, you seem to say "polling aside." That's OK, polling aside, we are finger in the wind, left with a lot of murk and guess and blustery weather -- when we are trying to estimate and factor actual voting behaviour, we do look at reliable indices or signals of likely behaviour. Sondage. Soundings. Opinion surveys. Questions, and the record of the answers over time. The record of voting intentions versus actual votes.

Thus, despite our disquiet (what is 'scientific opinion polling'?), limitations, lures and traps, this is part of sober political analysis. The most reliable indicators are (for me) the stew of long-term polling lines spread out on a wall, broken down by state.

How do you figure in your mind the vote? Who will take Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida? I look forward to seeing other OLers' prognostic numbers. The interactive behind the map above lets us save each guess ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep my eyes on Nevada, Ohio, Vermont, Colorado, Michigan, Iowa and Wisconsin. Florida seems still in play, but the rest of the electoral votes are essentially locked up.

Without these eight states decided, Obama could bring in 256 and Romney 191. If Obama takes Florida, it is over. If he loses Florida, but takes some combination of the other states, simple arithmetic tells us how he might do it.

Obama 256 "locked up"? I doubt it.

Anybody can do his or her own electoral college arithmetic. Here is one of many electoral vote calculators. I lay out one such 'swing-state' scenario, one of the many winning combinations for Obama (click to go to the interactive map at 270towin.com). In this guess, Romney takes Florida, Vermont, Wisconsin, Colorado and Iowa, giving him the benefit of six weeks' hard campaigning to push down Democrat leads.

EIFd.png

Brant, I agree that lots can happen in seven weeks. But can enough happen in seven weeks that has not already happened in the last thirty weeks? Look at the long procedure from 2008. There were no surges of vote in the last weeks. The trend to Obama established itself by June.

When I speak of long-trend polling, you seem to say "polling aside." That's OK, polling aside, we are finger in the wind, left with a lot of murk and guess and blustery weather -- when we are trying to estimate and factor actual voting behaviour, we do look at reliable indices or signals of likely behaviour. Sondage. Soundings. Opinion surveys. Questions, and the record of the answers over time. The record of voting intentions versus actual votes.

Thus, despite our disquiet (what is 'scientific opinion polling'?), limitations, lures and traps, this is part of sober political analysis. The most reliable indicators are (for me) the stew of long-term polling lines spread out on a wall, broken down by state.

How do you figure in your mind the vote? Who will take Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida? I look forward to seeing other OLers' prognostic numbers. The interactive behind the map above lets us save each guess ...

I fear a fairly strong blowout in favor of Obama.

Why, you ask? Because Ghs said so about 3-4 weeks back on these very pages (can't find the link right now), and his instincts and erudtion on matters poltical and historical tend to be pretty dead nuts.

That and because Romney seems to have substituted his Mormon suit of clothes for a clown's suit of clothes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America's devolution into Cuban-style KKK-liberal slave camp is almost complete. Run for the borders of the Socialist Hellhole to the north! If it is a good enough redoubt for Jerry Story, it's good enough for you, Adam. With the only conservative government on the continent, Canada and its new refugees can make the final stand against Gog.

Does this mean I won't have to take my hood and robe to two far-apart drycleaners anymore? that uses up so much time! I am sure Harper would fasttrack the immigration process for such obviously worthy residents as Adam.-- in fact I can think of several people we could kick out to make room for him.

Anybody wanna run for Mayor of Toronto?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fear a fairly strong blowout in favor of Obama.

Why, you ask? Because Ghs said so about 3-4 weeks back on these very pages (can't find the link right now), and his instincts and erudtion on matters poltical and historical tend to be pretty dead nuts.

Found it. But, sob, sob, what about me, though? I called it back in March as we faced the final four Rebublican candidates and tanking support among women compared to the Marxist-in-Chief. George and you might just be coming around to my way of thinking.

In 2008, Obama outpolled women strongly enough in places like Colorado to take fresh electoral ground for the Democrats. If the GOP does not forestall this happening again -- outpolling among women -- then similar effects will likely ensue [ . . . ] I do not point any of this in order to do a victory dance for Obama, but to get folks mentally ready for the 2nd Reign of Evul next January, and to make sure that they understand the truly awful opposing candidates left in the race.

Every last one of them faces being crushed by the O-machine in November

George calls it:

Here is another possibility: The American economy could very well collapse within the next few years, regardless of who wins the presidency. And if that happens, the President will get the blame, and his party will have a rough time in future elections.

Btw, I have little doubt that Obama will win, assuming that the economy doesn't collapse within the next few months. I don't even think the election will be all that close. Mark my words.

Carol calls for 'open borders' in the aftermath of the End of America:

I am sure Harper would fasttrack the immigration process for such obviously worthy residents as Adam.-- in fact I can think of several people we could kick out to make room for him.

Tit for tat explulsions? Population transfers? The New Northern Cuba versus Harper's Holiday Camp for Capitalism?

It's a cinch, Carol. I do advise not reading from Politico, though, when you go visit Adam in his jumpsuit at the Refugee Welcome Centre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mother Jones thinks it has slung a hook into Mitt Romney, obtaining video/audio from a fund-raiser earlier this year:

http://www.motherjon...vate-fundraiser

Here was Romney raw and unplugged—sort of unscripted. With this crowd of fellow millionaires, he apparently felt free to utter what he really believes and would never dare say out in the open. He displayed a high degree of disgust for nearly half of his fellow citizens, lumping all Obama voters into a mass of shiftless moochers who don't contribute much, if anything, to society, and he indicated that he viewed the election as a battle between strivers (such as himself and the donors before him) and parasitic free-riders who lack character, fortitude, and initiative. Yet Romney explained to his patrons that he could not speak such harsh words about Obama in public, lest he insult those independent voters who sided with Obama in 2008 and whom he desperately needs in this election. These were sentiments not to be shared with the voters; it was inside information, available only to the select few who had paid for the privilege of experiencing the real Romney.

It might be good but not new news to OLers that the Guv thinks the forty-seven percent polls show favouring Obama are shiftless moochers. Romney sounds like a reasonable-ish, if rich, Objectivist. It's not our job to worry about those people. He is talkiing about the people behind the polls.

"All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what …These are people who pay no income tax. ... [M]y job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fascinating.... that sounds like the real Mitt, businesslike, a little impatient, as if he's giving orders in a staff meeting that's running late.

But from what I have read there are very few independent voters left...are they worth wooing? Maybe Adam is right and to hit the Stop Spending/Stop Taxing buttons would be more effective in swaying voters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks:

This is a simple election. If they[the Republicans] had a candidate who had a set of balls, this would be a landslide.

Essentially, this is a flat fucking turnout election. Base vs. base. No one in the "moderate" camp wants to vote. None of the idiot children who swallowed his sludge four (4) years ago could give a shit. They, are literally, back in mommy's basement, with a ton of debt, and at best, a minimum wage job.

Almost a million women are without work in the O'bama depression.

The real unemployment rate is close to 19.00 percent.

Everyone knows this.

Gas is going up. Food is going up. All of the peripherals are going up.

If Romney had a single living political brain cell in his pretty little head, he would hammer this incompetent and take him head on.

Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep my eyes on Nevada, Ohio, Vermont, Colorado, Michigan, Iowa and Wisconsin. Florida seems still in play, but the rest of the electoral votes are essentially locked up.

Without these eight states decided, Obama could bring in 256 and Romney 191. If Obama takes Florida, it is over. If he loses Florida, but takes some combination of the other states, simple arithmetic tells us how he might do it.

Obama 256 "locked up"? I doubt it.

Anybody can do his or her own electoral college arithmetic. Here is one of many electoral vote calculators. I lay out one such 'swing-state' scenario, one of the many winning combinations for Obama (click to go to the interactive map at 270towin.com). In this guess, Romney takes Florida, Vermont, Wisconsin, Colorado and Iowa, giving him the benefit of six weeks' hard campaigning to push down Democrat leads.

EIFd.png

Brant, I agree that lots can happen in seven weeks. But can enough happen in seven weeks that has not already happened in the last thirty weeks? Look at the long procedure from 2008. There were no surges of vote in the last weeks. The trend to Obama established itself by June.

When I speak of long-trend polling, you seem to say "polling aside." That's OK, polling aside, we are finger in the wind, left with a lot of murk and guess and blustery weather -- when we are trying to estimate and factor actual voting behaviour, we do look at reliable indices or signals of likely behaviour. Sondage. Soundings. Opinion surveys. Questions, and the record of the answers over time. The record of voting intentions versus actual votes.

Thus, despite our disquiet (what is 'scientific opinion polling'?), limitations, lures and traps, this is part of sober political analysis. The most reliable indicators are (for me) the stew of long-term polling lines spread out on a wall, broken down by state.

How do you figure in your mind the vote? Who will take Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida? I look forward to seeing other OLers' prognostic numbers. The interactive behind the map above lets us save each guess ...

I see PA, VA and NV as possible for Romney. Maybe even OH.

--Brant

some of your blue states do seem soft--not the red states--it's who gets most of their supporters to the polls

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now