http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/why-a-rush-limbaugh-listener-thinks-calling-obama-a-magic-negro-is-okay/265335/

all of the 's

11/16/2012 3:46:31 PM

More like the GOLOP's credibility watch! [/wral]

11/16/2012 6:24:17 PM

Here finally is some credibility from an old crone:

11/17/2012 5:02:07 PM

McCain on Face the Nation, killing his credibility one attention whoring press grab at a time.

"I wish the president wouldn't get mad at me" - yeah, because you called him incompetent or a liar on the senate floor. he should totally work with you hand in hand.

and basically saying that Obama has not made any progress in fighting al-Qaeda

what a fuckstick

[Edited on November 18, 2012 at 10:51 AM. Reason : and then Sen Durbin just dismantled McCain with the follow-on]

11/18/2012 10:42:21 AM

^

"The light-footprint policies of this administration just haven't been working."


Translation: bomb, invade, nation build


First of all its questionable how light our footprint has been over the last 4 years. But He is so out of touch, How can you not see that Americans are slowly growing more and more tired this type of hawkishness, its time to retire John.

11/18/2012 10:51:45 AM

yeah, the whole "light footprint" thing was worth a chuckle. McCain clearly wanted us to go into Libya and install a puppet regime. because those always work out so well for us

11/18/2012 10:55:37 AM

yeah, i just lost most of the remaining respect i had for mccain. i would have at least understood him being such a tool in the run-up to the election, but why is he continuing to play the role of partisan hack?

11/18/2012 11:38:29 AM

Quality commentary from the LATimes:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-allen-palin-for-president-20121118,0,1525685.story

Quote :

"The Republican Party has been doing a lot of hand-wringing and finger-pointing since the presidential election. Half the conservative columnists and bloggers say the GOP lost because it overemphasized social issues such as abortion and gay marriage. The other half says the party didn't emphasize them enough. And everyone denounces Project ORCA, the campaign's attempt to turn out voters via technology. But I've got a suggestion for cutting short the GOP angst: Sarah Palin for president in 2016. You think I'm joking? Think again. "

grasping at straws . . . . . .

11/18/2012 1:22:11 PM

She's electable? It's not like she killed McCain's hopes and is even less credible now or anything.

[Edited on November 18, 2012 at 1:40 PM. Reason : and i realize they cite exit polls, but they ignored national polls that included those who stayed h]

11/18/2012 1:28:49 PM

It took me a while to decide if it was satire or not





I don't think it is

Quote :

"Sarah Palin is the new Ronald Reagan: charming and affable and unwilling to back down if she's right. I can't see what's wrong with that. "

[Edited on November 18, 2012 at 1:41 PM. Reason : WUT????]

11/18/2012 1:38:00 PM

The Republicans had a couple good candidates, they just got rid of them pretty early in the nomination. I would have voted for Huntsman; I don't agree with all of his positions but he seems to be much more of a pragmatist than most of the others.

11/18/2012 1:43:50 PM

She's also unwilling to back down when she's wrong.

11/18/2012 3:44:19 PM

Quote :

"The Republicans had a couple good candidates, they just got rid of them pretty early in the nomination."

There were exactly zero primary-viable candidates who would have done better than Romney, without exception, every single one of them was dumber and more extreme than him.

Quote :

"I would have voted for Huntsman; I don't agree with all of his positions but he seems to be much more of a pragmatist than most of the others."

That's exactly why he wasn't primary-viable, he was reasonable.

Republicans are increasingly finding themselves in a position where their most General-electable candidates are the least primary-nominatable. Hint: It's because they're all insane.

[Edited on November 19, 2012 at 11:47 AM. Reason : .]

11/19/2012 11:47:05 AM

They're not all insane, just most of the socially conservative ones, which happens to make up the majority of their base.

11/19/2012 12:17:58 PM

Oh please do run Sarah Palin GOP...that would be the ultimate gift
to Libertarians and Libs...she is the gift of tard that keeps on giving

11/19/2012 12:22:02 PM

Quote :

"They're not all insane, just most of the socially conservative ones, which happens to make up the majority of their base."

This is true. I'd say the GOP is made up of two core constituencies:

1. Crazy, bigoted, racist, sexist, theofascist lunatics

2. Moderate right wingers who are fine appeasing (1) to win elections

11/19/2012 12:58:03 PM

Quote :

"There were exactly zero primary-viable candidates who would have done better than Romney, without exception, every single one of them was dumber and more extreme than him."

I meant good in the sense of credible. Not winnable.

However, I do think Huntsman would have done better than Romney in the general election in a magical world without a primary. He's a better, smarter, more pragmatic Romney.

11/19/2012 1:11:34 PM

Well, that's the rub. He'd definitely do better than Romney among sane, reasonable people, but would the folks who drove the GOP primary vote for Obama's own ambassador to China or just stay home? Hard to say, and I'm not sure in their absence he'd draw enough Democratic defectors to win.

11/19/2012 2:07:03 PM

http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2012/11/19/marco-rubio-claims-social-conservatives-are-being-silenced

Quote :

"Rubio's voice was heard clearly this election cycle when he added it to robocalls for the National Organization for Marriage in three states where marriage equality was on the ballot — Maine, Maryland, and Washington."

Granted 40s isn't young, but it's politics young. Seems like in 2012 at least the younger GOP politicians would start to pick up on the values of the younger voters they want to appeal to? Guess not.

11/19/2012 10:33:55 PM

http://youtu.be/gqco2u34YxA?t=9m41s

11/20/2012 8:57:08 AM

boehner needs to stop tanning

11/20/2012 12:10:04 PM

11/20/2012 3:00:02 PM

Ha Mittens looks awful!

-500 credibility

[Edited on November 20, 2012 at 3:11 PM. Reason : ]

11/20/2012 3:10:39 PM

ha is that really him?

11/20/2012 5:25:28 PM

11/28/2012 6:29:41 PM

11/29/2012 10:39:32 PM

http://www.wral.com/boehner-joins-filibuster-fight-against-democrats/11828047/

11/30/2012 1:57:37 PM

11/30/2012 10:46:30 PM

jesus christ the republicans are still harping on benghazi on face the nation

LIGHT FOOTPRINT

12/2/2012 12:00:13 PM

http://www.politicususa.com/republican-obsession-obstructing-obama-endangering-country.html

Quote :

"The Republican Obsession With Obstructing Obama is Endangering the Country There are signs that some Republicans realize the election was a repudiation of Republicans and their persistent obstructionism and refusal to help all Americans, but the majority are still of the mindset that preventing economic progress will “make President Obama a one-term President.” The Republican hatred of President Obama transcends economic policy and permeates their entire reason for living. The recent statements by some Senate Republicans that they will not confirm anyone the President nominates to replace Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State has nothing to do with the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans and everything to do obstructing President Obama. Their opposition to any Administration proposal is not founded in sound economic or foreign policies, but their insane obsession with preventing the President from working for the American people."

12/2/2012 9:25:31 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/04/House-GOP-leaders-used-secret-criteria-list-in-conservative-purge

Quote :

"HOUSE GOP LEADERS PURGED CONSERVATIVES USING SECRET CRITERIA LIST House Republican leaders used a secret criteria list to decide which conservatives to purge from powerful House committees, Breitbart News has learned. As this time, it appears they will keep the criteria list hidden from the public, too. Spokespeople for members of House GOP leadership have refused to discuss details about the list on the record with press. Because GOP Leadership won't discuss the list, it’s unclear what specific criteria the list contained and how much of a role it played in the conservative purge. It’s also unclear which member of House Republican leadership initiated this process. In remarks to the Heritage Foundation’s Bloggers Briefing on Tuesday, Kansas Republican Rep. Tim Huelskamp confirmed the existence of such a list. “We’ve heard from multiple sources that someone walked in with a list of votes and said if you didn’t reach a particular scorecard of what was considered the right vote – which by the way, in most cases, was not the conservative position – then [they said] ‘we’re going to have to remove you from the committee,’” Huelskamp said. “All that took place behind closed doors, which is again a problem with Washington, D.C. – whether it’s the budget negotiations, whether it’s everything else, it’s usually done behind closed doors," he explained. "I think, as conservatives, this is where we can win: We’ve got to be willing and able to talk about things in public instead of being afraid of actual public scrutiny.” Huelskamp later told Breitbart News he thinks House Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and Whip Kevin McCarthy owe it to the American people to be transparent about this decision making process – and that they should publicly release the list. “In the name of transparency and openness, they most certainly should release the criteria,” Huelskamp said in an email. “Republican leadership promised America a new era of transparency – they should deliver on it.” Huelskamp was one of four conservative Republicans that GOP leadership removed from committees on which they’d have the ability to affect fiscal policy. He and Michigan Republican Rep. Justin Amash were pulled from the House Budget Committee and Reps. David Schweikert of Arizona and Walter Jones of North Carolina got yanked off the House Financial Services Committee. Amash, who joined Huelskamp at the Heritage Foundation event on Tuesday, said nobody in leadership even informed him of the move. “We haven’t even been told officially that I’ve been removed from the Budget Committee,” Amash said. “I’ve had to read it in the newspapers. So, actually, I’ve received not a single call from anyone in leadership. Not a single email. I’ve received no messages about it. I’ve been not told about what committees I will be on, if in fact I have been removed from Budget – which I have to assume is true.” Amash added that, like Republican Study Committee chairman Rep. Jim Jordan, he thinks this type of behavior from GOP leadership is dangerous for the party. “For a party that’s trying to expand its base and make sure that it reaches out to young people and new groups, I think it’s pretty outrageous frankly,” Amash said. “It’s pretty clear I come from a more libertarian wing of the party – this is the growing portion of the Republican Party. And, really, it’s a slap in the face of all young people who are out there thinking about being Republicans, want to be part of this party and are being told ‘well, if you disagree with leadership just a couple times, we’re going to send you home and we’re going to tell you you’re off the committee and you don’t get to participate.’” Amash said, too, that he voted with Budget Committee Republicans “95 percent of the time” over the past two years. “On the 5 percent of disagreements, those were on some big issues at times and I think that we didn’t take a strong enough approach in dealing with our debt – which is why we’re all here,” he said. “It’s not acceptable to have budgets that are unbalanced until the year 2040.”"

12/5/2012 12:27:18 AM

I am loving what is happening right now.

12/5/2012 1:37:13 AM

Quote :

"49% of GOP voters nationally say they think that ACORN stole the election for President Obama"

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/12/republicans-not-handling-election-results-well.html

12/5/2012 10:43:32 AM

I was about to say, I didn't even think ACORN existed anymore.

12/5/2012 11:00:08 AM

Burr (R-NC) voted against it.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-congress/2012/12/dole-makes-appearance-on-senate-floor-151034.htm

Quote :

"“Many of us have visited with veterans, disabled veterans as a matter of fact, in the corridors of the United States Capitol in the last 48 hours,” said Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.). “They have expressed without reservation that their lives would be advanced in the event that we are able to pass this treaty because their treatment in other countries would improve as other countries adopt principles that we have found useful, a practical means of helping the disabled.” Dole, the GOP presidential nominee in 1996 and the vice presidential nominee in 1976, was seriously wounded in World War II. The 89-year-old was hospitalized last week at Walter Reed Army Medical Center for what aides characterized as a “routine procedure,” and even while in the hospital, aides noted that he was still monitoring the Senate floor debate of the disabilities treaty."

12/5/2012 2:31:11 PM

Bob Dole is sad. Bob Dole.

12/5/2012 2:32:59 PM

i do nothing but obstruct. I support guys who got their asses kicked this election. I'm only worth 40k. I have 4 years left in my term

FUCK IT I'MMA GO PROPAGANDA THIS BITCH

Peace,
Jim DeMint

12/6/2012 7:29:29 PM

12/6/2012 10:34:27 PM

So the Heritage Foundation just lost any credibility they might have had?

12/6/2012 11:06:38 PM

when you filibuster your own bill...it's time for you to go

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/07/politics/fiscal-cliff-senate-maneuvering/index.html

[Edited on December 7, 2012 at 7:31 AM. Reason : .]

12/7/2012 7:29:59 AM

Quote :

"So the Heritage Foundation just lost any credibility they might have had?"

Honestly, no. Any credibility they had was already amongst people for whom this will make no difference.

12/7/2012 8:24:01 AM

Quote :

"when you filibuster your own bill...it's time for you to go http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/07/politics/fiscal-cliff-senate-maneuvering/index.html"

Seriously. Mitch McConnell essentially had to fuck himself on the senate floor.

12/7/2012 8:28:27 AM

Quote :

"This week, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor proudly announced the calendar for the new Congress in 2013. Here's the link. Working days for the entire year total 126, leaving 239 days off. This includes virtually the whole month of August, two weeks around Easter/Passover, not a single five-day work week and (God forbid) no weekends."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kenneth-d-ackerman/congress-calendar_b_2219870.html

That would make them part-time workers and ineligible for health and retirement benefits.

12/7/2012 11:56:58 AM

Why is it that the GOP rejected the ADA treaty?

Oh I know why, cuz that would require abroad businesses to spend more money.

12/7/2012 12:19:41 PM

^ I'm assuming you're referring to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) treaty? If so, why is it that you believe the Senate GOP should have supported the treaty?

Here is Richard Burr's statement on why he opposed ratification for anyone who is interested:

http://burr.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=6be50559-9080-26b8-a418-faeea81b828e

Quote :

" Yesterday, I voted against a treaty that would have jeopardized U.S. sovereignty and the ability of American families to make decisions on their own regarding what is best for them and their family members. The stated goal of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) Treaty was to protect the rights of the disabled, but in reality it would have done nothing to strengthen existing laws and protections and would have had the adverse effect of opening up our laws to international inspection and review from countries such as Cuba, China, and Syria among others. America is already a beacon to the rest of the world when it comes to caring for citizens with disabilities, why would we allow nations with such abysmal human rights records to have a say in how we care for our own disabled citizens? I strongly support the rights and protections of disabled American citizens, and I am proud that our nation has concrete and robust laws in place to advance the cause of the disabled. During my time in Congress, I have supported – and participated in authoring – laws and programs that make a real difference in the everyday lives of the disabled, such as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Special Olympics Sport and Empowerment Act, and the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) Act. The United States is a world leader when it comes to care for our disabled citizens, and we do not need to ratify a treaty that jeopardizes our sovereignty to prove that. The best thing we can do is continue to be the gold standard for protecting the rights of those with disabilities and let our example serve to influence other nations to do the right thing as well."

12/7/2012 12:33:16 PM

The only thing Burr cares about is when his next check from the oil lobby will arrive.

12/7/2012 12:51:33 PM

Quote :

""do not need to ratify a treaty that jeopardizes our sovereignty to prove that. The best thing we can do is continue to be the gold standard for protecting the rights of those with disabilities and let our example serve to influence other nations to do the right thing as well.""

It's the standards that WE set for OURSELVES over 20 years ago.
How exactly does it threaten our sovereignty?

12/7/2012 12:59:22 PM

I posted the quote from Richard Burr not to endorse his argument but to provide context for why he opposed the treaty. You had posted earlier that Burr voted against, but gave no reason why.

And I'll restate my earlier question, why is it that you support the treaty and why should the GOP members of the Senate who opposed it voted for ratification instead? I'm amending my question slightly because eight (8) GOP members of the Senate voted in favor of the treaty.

[Edited on December 7, 2012 at 1:29 PM. Reason : .....]

[Edited on December 7, 2012 at 1:29 PM. Reason : ...]

12/7/2012 1:28:35 PM

because they're fear mongering about the UN coming to take over the United States.

because there's nothing in the body of that treaty that would in any way endanger the life of an american or our own sovereignty

because the treaty is basically saying HEY DO WHAT AMERICA DOES ASSHOLES

because by not ratifying it you're basically telling everyone else to go fuck themselves. that you don't give a shit if some poor guy who got disabled in a civil war is discriminated against because he lost his legs fighting people trying to rape his whole village

BECAUSE IT'S A GOD DAMN MORALLY RIGHT AND AN EASY LEADERSHIP POSITION TO TAKE ON THE GLOBAL STAGE

[Edited on December 7, 2012 at 7:54 PM. Reason : .]

12/7/2012 7:54:02 PM

^

12/8/2012 7:43:02 PM