Are you being sarcastic here?
Yes, please.
While Steve MB doesn’t need (nor even want) my input, I’ll pipe up anyway.
Why do you think what you’ve bolded is sarcastic?
It sounds like that. If for instance someone had substitued Limbaugh’s name for Maddow everybody would be certain he’s being sarcastic.
I’m sure it’ll be in the primary. All those folks who are still praying for a “Republican civil war” need to keep in mind that they aren’t the only ones who noticed the NY 23 race and took lessons away from it.
Substituting random names in place of another is going to alter the context, to be sure.
Well, it’s good that you ask for clarification.
Let’s assume that he was not being sarcastic. Now what?
Than well… :smack:
This may come as a shock, but countries are not assigned to continents according to their social services.
One of these things is not like the other…
Either of those, without the other, would be doomed to permanently marginal, not-even-minority status, just like the Libertarians and the Greens and the Constitution Party are now (and those are the three biggest third parties in America). If you don’t like that, support proportional representation.
You’re wrong!
When I moved from Southern California to Phoenix, one of the biggest culture shocks I had was how anti-illegal immigration this state is. There is none of the turning a blind-eye because the economy depends on them - in fact there was a wave of reporting illegal immigrants from legal out of work Maricopans (Phoenix is in Maricopa County) trying to pick up day laborer jobs. And thats the rub right? You can’t sell the idea that illegal immigration is cool because they do the jobs you won’t do when a state has over 10% unemployment.
Add to that the Sherriff Joe keeps focusing on the fact that he is enforcing the law and charactizes the fact that the illegal immigrants and the people shielding them are breaking the law. He is enough of a personality to drown out the idiots that equate anti-illegal immigration = racism. Here is Arizona we don’t care if you’re Mexican as long as you’re here legally.
Mark Levin is absolutely correct. McCain got the maverick title from the media who thought it was “brave” for him to buck his own party. Compare that with how the media treated a Dem that did the same (Leiberman). McCain is not a conservative and, if this type of republican is supported JUST to keep the seat from possibly going democrat then the conservatives will get what they deserve. Remember Arlen Specter?
Good Lord, in what way is John Mccain not a conservative? If Mccain is not a conservative, then neither was Ronald Reagan.
What did the media do to Joe Lieberman, by the way?
Hayworth was at NC State when I was there - he was a complete blowhard even back in college so being a politician or radio show host is the perfect job for him.
So the right needs to hold off until he finishes his first term before bad-mouthing him? When is he a fair target?
Bush was hit immediately with the “stolen election” label that dogged him through his entire presidency. As abhorrent as it is to say, 9/11 removed some of the doubt about his legitimacy and people rallied behind him. When he pushed the Iraq invasion (something that should not have been a surprise considering his actions immediately after entering office http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,999306,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,999307,00.html) he returned to being a poser and fraud.
Mind you, I understand that Obama is in a unique position. The Republicans have been excusing bad behavior, turning a blind eye or being defensive when it came to Bush’s policies. Now, after years of supporting him, even tacitly, they have a target to lash out at in revenge. And it helps that Obama has been portrayed as a mix of Jesus, Superman and Denzel Washington. To see someone so well loved and lauded be taken down a few pegs is refreshing. Look at how much glee people get when they hear about the wealthy being more heavily taxed or executives losing their jobs.
Before he came into office Obama had been a media darling. In October 2006Time was already asking if he could be the next president.
In 2008 he was on half of their covers.
For the first half of 2009 he was on the cover 7 times.
In comparison, Bush was on their cover10 times in 2000, 3 times in 2001, twice in 2002 and 3 times in 2003.
Republicans have been taking a beating for years and want to start punching back. And some of them will go over the top with their rhetoric which is wrong. But Obama is a fair target. As soon as he announced that he was running, he was immediately open for criticism. Bush was hit hard about his “party hearty” youth during the campaign while Obama’s forays into drugs were dismissed as youthful indiscretions and valuable lessons learned. While Bush has been portrayed as a mental midget, he was on par with the other candidates, Goreand Kerry. We still don’t know how Obamadid.
If he can’t stand the heat…
I don’t support such a party right now but if either one of the current Big Two collapses there will be space to do so.
John McCain is not a spineless semi-liberal Specter was.
That Palin pick was pretty spineless.
What did Spector do that was spineless? It seems to me that it takes a little bit of balls for a pro-choice Jew to hang in there with the GOP as long as Spector did.
He was as liberal as Lieberman or the other Rust Belt Democrats. He was a RINO.
He was nominated for national office by the Republican Party and won his election. He caucused with the Republicans and generally voted with them. He was, by definition, a Republican.
You might call him a conservative in name only, but the RINO appellation that Rush and company have been tarring people with is silly.
People are acting surprised that the Republicans are attempting to block everything Obama does, but they shouldn’t be. Anyone with the gall to agree with the Democrats occasionally is getting drummed out of the party.