The Pink Flamingo dislikes people who are intellectually dishonest. How do you explain the fact that the more NORMAL GOP candidates are the ones who appear to be winning? Perhaps it quite ironic that the tea parties appear to be a reflection of Jim DeMint, who is in deep do-do with the rank and file in the US Senate.
“…“Jim DeMint isn’t the most effective legislator, so he has to gain power by driving headlines. His Achilles’ heel is everyone saying, ‘no comment,’” a Republican said….”
It is quite obvious that DeMint has no interest in actually governing. He is in it for the power and for the attention. One of the Dems who is doing a write in against him, Tom Clements, has a rather interesting 30 second spot against him. It will hit SC markets on Monday.
According to an article in Roll Call, one aide remarked:
“…And so, Republicans said, they are essentially left with only one option: ignoring DeMint and hoping the lack of attention is punishment enough.
“It’s like a piece of fruit. If you leave it on the counter long enough, it will spoil and go rotten on its own. I feel like that’s what’s going to happen with Jim DeMint,” a GOP aide said….”
John Avlon wrote:
“...Tonight, political eyes will shift to Delaware where Senate candidates Christine O’Donnell and Chris Coons are meeting for their first debate. With control of the senate lagging by one or two seats according to the Election Oracle, and polls showing the non-witch 18 points down, Republicans should be cursing the purge of centrist Congressman Mike Castle, who was expected to win the race easily.
But the lesson seems to have been lost on some conservatives who point instead to the competitiveness of far-right candidates like Sharron Angle as proof of the success of their burning-down-the-big-tent, RINO-hunting strategy. The reality, however, is that centrist Republican candidates are winning races in states where far-right conservatives are otherwise struggling. And it’s happening despite the fact that these centrist GOP candidates are largely ignored by the media and conservative activists alike because they don’t conform to the national narrative….All of which brings us back to Delaware. The same CNN polls that show O’Donnell losing 55 to 39 to Chris Coons, show Mike Castle beating Coons by that same margin were he the nominee. That swing vote—and quite possibly control of the senate—is the cost of nominating an extreme, unqualified candidate in closed partisan primary.
RINO hunting the centrist Republican tradition out of existence is not only unwise in the long run—it would cripple the GOP from gaining key seats in this election cycle….”
Anne Applebaum went after the anti-intellectual bias the Tea Partiers and their promoters display. She stresses exactly what The Pink Flamingo has been saying for months. Republicans have not behaved this way. Why start now? It is rather like stupid is as stupid does.
“…Perhaps it’s not surprising that this issue has tied conservative intellectuals in knots, particularly those at the National Review (a magazine whose masthead used to feature my husband, and for which I used to occasionally write). On the one hand, the magazine was founded by an old-style elitist, William F. Buckley, and plenty of Ivy Leaguers have written for its pages. On the other hand, the editors feel obligated to support Sarah Palin and Ginni Thomas’s inarticulate and wide ranging broadsides against “the elite” – all of the elite, which by definition includes themselves. So anxious is Goldberg to dismiss the idea that a part of the Right is “anti-education” that he actually attributes arguments to me that I never made. I never mention envy, for example, but he attacks my “theory of envy” as “not merely wrong but actually silly.” He also goes on, nonsensically, about liberals who are “bossing people around.” What, conservatives never boss anyone around? They never think they know best? Nor does he seem to realize what the consequences of this burst of anti-elitist rhetoric are likely to be. A generation ago, the Republican Party had the lead among educated voters. George Bush senior easily defeated Michael Dukakis among college graduates. In a remarkably short period of time, that advantage has nearly vanished. Doesn’t the Republican party want them back again?…”
In other words, what good does it to gain a few bellyaching tea partiers if the GOP loses its soul?
AGENDA OF BIAS
It was only a matter of time before the losertarian minions of idiocy, duplicity, and intellectual dishonesty find a way to denigrate Republicans by destroying the ACU which measures the “worth” of a conservative.
Yes, you are reading this piece of idiocy correct.
The intellectually dishonest like Jack Hunter can’t have it both ways. He must destroy the ACU because he doesn’t like the fact that their numbers are consistent over the years. He doesn’t like the fact that Lindsey Graham is one of the most conservative men in Washington. You see, Jack Hunter is a hater. He lates Lindsey Graham. End of story.
He is the perfect Tea Party “Patriot”.
THE INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY OF JACK HUNTER
THE FINE MESS
Remember the old Laurel & Hardy: Another fine mess you’ve gotten us into? There are NOT as many TPers as previously claimed. They are wealthy, white, and enjoy hearing themselves complain, according to a study on voting habits. I do hate agreeing with a Ron Paul Bot, but I think just about the same thing about these people. If they care so much, why are they just now starting to complain?
“…”Analysis of the findings from around the net also underscores what we’ve long argued,” blogger Brad Friedman opined. “[The] Tea Baggers don’t actually give a damn about ‘the deficit’ or even the Constitution. If they did, they wouldn’t have waited until after Republicans lost the elections in 2008 to start marching and decrying the deficit explosion (and supposed concerns about Constitutional rights) brought about under the previous Administration. They would have been out marching along with the real Tea Partiers, those who supported Ron Paul as long ago as 2007, and his concerns about unbridled deficit spending and the trampling of Constitutional rights during the eight years of the Bush Administration.”…”
In Politics Daily, Matt Lewis created a list of things the TPers should not be doing. I think he read The Pink Flamingo’s mind.
From Bipartisan Rules:
“…It’s bitterly disappointing to observe conservatism’s steep descent. I’m thoroughly convinced that, as Lindsay Graham has noted, Ronald Reagan would have a tough time winning a Republican primary in 2010.
It is also incredible to watch the Democratic Party slip even deeper into irrelevance by governing so ineffectually and being so out of step with the times. As we’ve said before, Barack Obama will probably be a one-term president, and before he can do any more damage, the GOP will almost certainly re-take control of the House this fall.
The good news? There are still a few responsible adults in the Republican Party, such as George WIll, Peggy Noonan, Ross Douthat — and one of them — Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels — might well be the nominee in 2012….”
Outside the Beltway:
“…I will readily allow that the Tea Party movement has been of some significance to this point in time and will continue to have salience going into 2010 (and perhaps 2012), but to claim that it has “fundamentally altered American politics” is utter nonsense, insofar as to date all that it has done is affect a handful of GOP nomination processes to date. This is interesting, to be sure. It may also mean various behavioral changes by the GOP in the short-to-medium term, but it is a far cry from a fundamental alteration of much of anything…”
From Palmetto Morning:
“NATIONAL LENS — NOT SO FAST — Countless stories and hours of cable television have been filled with analysis describing this year’s elections as tantamount to an anti-incumbent wave. But as the primaries come to a close, it’s clear that instead of throwing the bums out, voters have let the vast majority of incumbents move on to the general election. Through Tuesday’s primaries, more than 98 percent of House and Senate incumbents seeking re-election won their primaries. Still, it’s worth noting that the number of incumbents who failed to win renomination — seven — is more than in recent cycles.”
David Frum has this headline:
Peggy Noonan wrote:
“…One difference so far between the Tea Party and the great wave of conservatives that elected Ronald Reagan in 1980 is that latter was a true coalition—not only North and South, East and West but right-wingers, intellectuals who were former leftists, and former Democrats. When they won presidential landslides in 1980, ’84 and ’88, they brought the center with them. That in the end is how you win. Will the center join arms or work with the Tea Party? That’s a great question of 2012….”
The David Frum Rebuttal:
WHERE THE PROBLEM IS:
The real problem is the fact that in 2006, the Far Right Talkers helped to create the Dem Majority.
In 2006, right wing talker Laura Ingraham suggested to her audience that they vote for Blue Dog “Conservative” Dems to teach the nasty GOP a lesson. Well, her listeners did, and we were blessed with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. In an interview on Larry King, Ingraham said the following:
“...INGRAHAM: Well, I think one thing we’re seeing, Larry, is that the Democrats who are in these interesting races, whether it’s Casey in Pennsylvania or Harold Ford Jr. in Tennessee, or even James Webb in Virginia, all these Democrats are running fairly conservative campaigns. I mean, we had Harold Ford Jr. talking about how “I’m the guy who loves Jesus and loves guns,” last weekend. You have Casey who is pro-life and Webb, former Reagan administration official.
So, the Democrats who I think are perhaps on the verge of doing something amazing for the Democrat [sic] Party, are actually, you know, looking fairly conservative — and, I don’t know what that says about the future of the Democrat [sic] Party — but, as a conservative, I think Ronald Reagan is up there smiling down on us right now saying that, all things considered, conservatism isn’t doing so bad….”
From Media Matters,
On November 8, 2006 Rush Limbaugh said the following:
“...LIMBAUGH: [Hoover Institute senior fellow] Thomas Sowell put this very well. He said the latest example of election fraud is actually what the Democrats did; they nominated a bunch of moderate and conservative Democrats for the express purpose of electing a far-left Democrat [sic] leadership.
The Democrats, if you’re looking for good [inaudible], Democrats could not win this election being liberals. They could not have won the House being liberals, maybe in some parts of the country, but I mean, all these — all the Democrats flexing their muscles and feeling good about this have to admit here that liberalism didn’t win anything yesterday; Republicanism lost. Conservatism was nowhere to be found other than on the Democrat [sic] side of the aisle…”
Yep, it’s a fine mess the extreme right managed to get us into. Next time you look at Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and even Barack Obama, just think about the contributions people like Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham made to their cause. While you are at it, just think about the fact that the GOP had a great chance to re-take the Senate. With Giggles running in Deleware, it ain’t a gonna happen.
That’s the tea parties for you!
I wonder if they will last as long as Ross Perot did?