Another Take on Mitch Daniels

This from Dustin. After saying he thinks Daniels is a great leader, he writes:

And I think a more sane appraisal of him would require someone to stop worrying about his private marital problems from YEARS ago and consider how he dealt with public unions, or dealt with democrats in his state legislature, or how he dealt with regulations and businesses.

Mitch has earned respect of people who care about those issues because he is a freaking awesome leader. Scott Walker and Chris Christie style leadership.

But when it comes to national politics, I think he simply shows too much humility. It's like WWE or Nascar, and he's more of an actual accomplished Governor. We get the government we deserve, and if we aren't even thinking about a man's real accomplishments while calling him a weak pansy because he is nice to his wife, I think that's just freaking pathetic, and we deserve 4 more years of Obama.

It will take some backbone to beat Obama. Not being afraid of a little flack for someone's honest decency in their private live is a good place to start. If Mitch isn't the nominee, that's fine with me. I have an open mind either way, but the fear I see in people about Mitch seems weaker than anything Mitch ever showed.

This is the point I was making, sort of.

What is often taken as "toughness" -- surface bluster -- is not in fact toughness. Toughness often exhibits itself as quietness -- and loud brashness is actually often not toughness, but overcompensation due to fear.

And similarly, sure, we might say that "ditch the bitch" is the tougher response. Actually, it's just the more obvious response. And I think it's more obvious because most of us see ourselves in that situation acting out of hurt and vengeance (both justified, by the way!).

But does not forgiving a wrong take more toughness than taking self-pleasing pleasure in payback?

I'm a fan of payback and I will blame no one for saying "Man, I'd want payback in that situation." You bet you would. So would I. So would anyone.

So, in fact, would Mitch Daniels, I'm thinking.

But what I was trying to suggest in my post (obliquely) is that we often confuse good behavior with bad behavior and bad behavior with good.

And you don't have to be a fan of Sun Tzu to recognize that sometimes strength is quiet, not loud, and sometimes the greatest strength is not self-satisfaction, but self-denial.

One other point Dustin makes: I wrote just about the flashy, sexy, interesting news about Mitch Daniels. Of course I did not go into his record. In this respect I'm just as bad as the media: It is easier to do the quick, gut-reaction sexy stuff than the wonky substance stuff.

I would apologize but, like Mitt Romney, there's one problem with that: I'm not really sorry. It's the nature of the thing; we're all limited. If I apologized for that kind of post it would be false because that would imply I intend to do better in the future, and I specifically do not so intend.

But Mitch Daniels is a substantial guy and he's taken on a lot of problems in a quiet way -- not a loud way -- and he's succeeded in imposing his will in that quiet way.

Is that weakness?

Or is that a guy who just doesn't need to strut?

You don't need to strut if you just keep quietly winning. Boys strut around their victories; men go about quietly reassuring the people they just beat, because, in exhibiting modesty, it makes it easier to beat them again later.


That said, yes, I continue to be befuddled by Mitch Daniels' various political instincts.

Actually "befuddled" is a euphemism. If I were befuddled I might think there was some upside to some of these decisions; I just might not be smart enough to see it.

In fact I'm not befuddled; I'm decidedly critical.

And while I believe what I wrote about Mitch Daniels and how true strength may exhibit itself quietly -- I also know you Give The People What They Want, as the Kinks said, and over-subtle is a one-way-ticket to SnoozersVille, Population: You Lose.

Whatever Mitch Daniels might think of fire and red meat, it's what the customers want, and the customers are always right.

Posted by: Ace at 04:22 PM



Comments

1 On the other hand, the NYTs is kind of pushing him lately....

So....no.

Posted by: Kasper Hauser at May 13, 2011 04:23 PM (HqpV0)

2 Whatever Mitch Daniels might think of fire and red meat, it's what the customers want, and the customers are always right.
Yes, and that's why he's not running.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 13, 2011 04:28 PM (sbV1u)

3 As I have said before I will vote for a can of wolf brand chili against Obama

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at May 13, 2011 04:28 PM (R6BwO)

4 Before I make a decision on Daniels, I'd like to see his position on all the issues.

Posted by: Dr Spank at May 13, 2011 04:29 PM (1fB+3)

5 GOP: in 2012, we'll be offering Mitch the VAT Daniels, Mitt Romneycare and Elmer Gantrybee
Dems: Chairman Maobama, of course.
Me:anybody havea linkto the formsfor renunciation of citizenship?

Posted by: glowing blue meat at May 13, 2011 04:29 PM (K/USr)

6 You can let the NYT tell you what to think; I do my own thinking.

I meant to write about this when Rush Limbaugh dumbly said it:

If you simply take the idiotic position that you must do the exact opposite of what the media tells you, you have given up your thinking to the MSM.

Yes, you have.

They can make you take whatever position they want, Bugs Bunny "It's rabbit season" style.

I don't not give a shit what the NYT says one way or another. We have our own brains. we can make our own determinations about the record, without having to subcontract our thinking out to the liberal media.

Posted by: Ace at May 13, 2011 04:29 PM (nj1bB)

7 Admitting you're not prepared to debate Obama on foreign policy is essentially hoisting a white flag, is it not?

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 04:30 PM (Xm1aB)

8 He doesn't have to scream Obama sucks...he just won't even just say it.

Posted by: beedubya at May 13, 2011 04:30 PM (AnTyA)

9 Good for him if he could live with it. I couldn't. Then again, I didn't have kids with that gutterslut.

If he wants to protect his family, and I think he does, he'll take a pass on a presidential run.

But more importantly, what do curious' friends in the ex-Special Forces financial adviser with psoriasis community from New York have to say about it?

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 13, 2011 04:30 PM (TATbF)

10 Palin / Bolton 2012!

Scare the liberals in the US w/ Palin, scare the America-haters overseas w/ Bolton.

If the enemies of this country are going to choose the GOP dream ticket, let's give 'em their nightmare choice.

Posted by: Kortezzi at May 13, 2011 04:31 PM (zAZNI)

11 >>>Admitting you're not prepared to debate Obama on foreign policy is essentially hoisting a white flag, is it not?

Oh yeah, that was his latest gaffe.

If this is honesty, let us please have less honesty. I am prepared to vote for a slightly less virtuous man.

Posted by: Ace at May 13, 2011 04:31 PM (nj1bB)

12 This is good. Playing nice talk with Obama won't work this time around. Daniels has done a great deal in Indiana, and he ought to capitalize on it instead of going "aw, shucks, I cahnt debate Obama right now."

Posted by: George Orwell at May 13, 2011 04:32 PM (+vkOU)

13 At least Daniels hasn't killed a bunny for looking at him wrong like the Hukster, so he's got that going for him.

Posted by: Dr Spank at May 13, 2011 04:32 PM (1fB+3)

14 If you can't take on your wife, you can't take on Obama.

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 04:33 PM (+sBB4)

15 And the NYT is not "boosting" him. It's admitting what can't be denied: He's smart and he gets the job done.

Posted by: Ace at May 13, 2011 04:33 PM (nj1bB)

16 My problem is not that his wife walked over this guys its that the left/media will.

He made a great governor of a conservative state. When you are US president you also have California, NY, and DC, fraudulent media, violent marxist academia, brutal union thugs etc. all spiraling out of control. When I have a pack of rabid animals in my yard I don't need someone who makes a great pet owner I need f*ckin animal control!

That's why I am a fan of open borders, I want that pack of wild dogs to kill that other pack of rabid dogs. Wild>Rabid. Its a shit choice I know, but the hour is late.

Posted by: Shiggz at May 13, 2011 04:33 PM (mLAWK)

17 I don't know about that Cherry.

I think I'd prefer taking on Obama to my wittle wifey.

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 04:33 PM (Xm1aB)

18 awww stop picking on poor curious.

I missed this whole contretemps... what happened?

Posted by: Ace at May 13, 2011 04:33 PM (nj1bB)

19 Your last paragraph covers what is a strength often overlooked in this "look at me" age.

Posted by: Museisluse at May 13, 2011 04:34 PM (a8aqn)

20 Politics 101: If your opponentshave to reject their only core beliefs to attack you, you win.
So Mitch is OK vs. liberals/liberal media. Everyone else, who knows?
Compare him to the NJ gov on conservative issues + electability and see where you come down.
There is no one in the current GOP field who stands out. Which means I'm waiting, again, for a safe candidate on whom I will project my values: like everyone did with W, and McCain.

Posted by: CJ at May 13, 2011 04:34 PM (9KqcB)

21 You're getting there, Ace, you're getting there. And I'm proud of you. Someday when the Mitch bandwagon is rolling down the interstate, you can yell at standerbys, "Hey, come on up. Join us who knew from the beginning."

And I'll never breath a word.

Posted by: MaxMBJ at May 13, 2011 04:34 PM (6SIms)

22 So soon after the Huck thread it's difficult to find any enthusiasm for Daniels bashing. He could upgrade to a solid C+ if he picked Cain for VP.

Posted by: Bob Saget at May 13, 2011 04:35 PM (F/4zf)

23 Mitch Daniels aside, it seems like in general (and maybe because I only discuss politics with blog people), we've become the Party of Spaulding.

I want a hamburger, a hotdog, a milkshake...

Well, we're so busy want, want, wanting, we can't see that in the end we're going to get nothing. And then we'll be told to like it.

Just my take anyway.

Posted by: laceyunderalls RINO Trash Committee Chair, Cincinnati Chapter at May 13, 2011 04:36 PM (pLTLS)

24 Quiet strength. Hmmm, ok sure I've known a few men like that. Not many but I have known a few. Impressive, I suppose, to not give into your baser instinct and when you have been treated poorly.
Let me tell you something else that is a true fact of life, however. We get the treatment that we tolerate. If you allow someone to treat you like shit, guess what? Don't be surprised when they keep doing it.
I'm not sugesting that he should have shot her. I am only saying that what you might attribute to "quiet strength" might just be an unfortuante lack ofassertiveness. Maybe he's a rock, I don't know. Maybe I'm just jaded and cynical. Or maybe he's a pusswhipped dumbass. Let's ask the Honey Badger.


Posted by: Sgt. Fury at May 13, 2011 04:36 PM (u2k3g)

25

nooooooooooo!

Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 13, 2011 04:36 PM (UOM48)

26 #26 comment fail.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 13, 2011 04:36 PM (UOM48)

27
Curious is guilty of not thinking like everyone else.

Burn her!!!

Posted by: cui bono, soothsayer? at May 13, 2011 04:36 PM (uFokq)

28 Oh, and EVERYBODY:

It's primary season after the GOP just ran the biggest wet end since Bob Dole. And we got our asses handed to us.

So button your fuckin' chinstrap. EVERY potential nominee needs to be scrutinized from every angle. Once we have a nominee, I'll support him.

Until then, FUCK your guy, whoever he is. You prove to me why he deserves to be the nominee. And you better make it good, because thid "best of a bad lot" shit isn't cutting it.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 13, 2011 04:36 PM (+61wI)

29
And before anyone says curious became insulting, she took a lot of shit, too. Nasty shit.


Posted by: cui bono, soothsayer? at May 13, 2011 04:37 PM (uFokq)

30 "
Admitting you're not prepared to debate Obama on foreign policy is essentially hoisting a white flag, is it not?

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 04:30 PM (Xm1aB)"
Scares me too. Mitch's foreign policy is a huge potential problem.But like I said, I just have an open mind about him. Let's see if he shows up at the debates with an intelligent view on foreign policy. The fact is that he's a governor right now, so he's less free to write op eds about issues like Pakistan and India. He clearly takes the issue seriously enough to not pretend to be an expert if he isn't, but we do need to have a president who is ready for a messy world. I think Obama is leaving us with a lot of serious problems, too. Now isn't the time to shortchange the issue.So often I think Daniels shows a fundamental lack of skill as a politician, despite being an actually gifted administrator and leader. His 'truce' language seems wise to me, but the way he explained it completely failed to get his point across.And it's not like Ace is wrong to say "

If this is honesty, let us please have less honesty. I am prepared to vote for a slightly less virtuous man."
You have to have swagger.Someone asked Palin how she knew she was ready for a VP slot, and her answer was that she just has to be because that's what it takes to win. She's got a point. We need someone with Palin's confidence and Daniels's experience, and that person doesn't exist, so we're left trying to decide if we pick a great president or a great politician who has a better shot of being president.I would ask that people keep an open mind about Daniels, Palin, Cain, and the guys who haven't announced yet, and see what they offer us in the debates.

Posted by: Dustin at May 13, 2011 04:38 PM (Q3nWV)

31 18
awww stop picking on poor curious.





I missed this whole contretemps... what happened?

Posted by: Ace at May 13, 2011 04:33 PM (nj1bB)
Paging dumb_blonde and Y-not

Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 13, 2011 04:38 PM (UOM48)

32 If you simply take the idiotic position that you must do the exact
opposite of what the media tells you, you have given up your thinking
to the MSM.


I agree that if you adopt that severe of a knee-jerk response, you are making a mistake.

But I do not think it is foolish to consider why the MFM would prefer one Republican candidate over another. Doesn't that make you at least a little suspicious?

And don't we have a rather poor track record with (primary) candidates who have had warm relations with the MFM; who enjoy laudable MFM titles like "maverick" and "straight talk express;" only to have that love miraculously disappear once the nomination is secured?


Posted by: angler at May 13, 2011 04:38 PM (SwjAj)

33 If you can't take on your wife, you can't take on Obama.
Posted by: Cherry ð at May 13, 2011 04:33 PM (+sBB4)
And you certainly can't take on Obama's wife.

Posted by: yinzer at May 13, 2011 04:39 PM (/Mla1)

34 That said, yes, I continue to be befuddled by Mitch Daniels' various political instincts.


A perpetual question for someone choosing to run for national office; will what sold Mitch Daniels to Indiana, sell him to the entire country? Time will tell.

Posted by: George Orwell at May 13, 2011 04:39 PM (+vkOU)

35 I was writing a post, then I realized I didn't even care enough to finish my thought. This is what Mitch Daniels inspires. That's dreadfully unexciting.

Posted by: shillelagh at May 13, 2011 04:39 PM (Oz4Bj)

36 So, we give the coke snorting JEF cipher a pass, and now we have to dissect the white guy?

Rules or no rules, game on, but both sides are playing by the same rules.

Posted by: MarkD at May 13, 2011 04:39 PM (6CLxP)

37 Aww. Come on you guys. The guys in Manhattan and DC like him.

Posted by: Rich Lowry's combover at May 13, 2011 04:39 PM (/COcn)

38 "So button your fuckin' chinstrap. EVERY potential
nominee needs to be scrutinized from every angle. Once we have a
nominee, I'll support him.





Until then, FUCK your guy, whoever he is. You prove to me why he
deserves to be the nominee. And you better make it good, because thid
"best of a bad lot" shit isn't cutting it.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 13, 2011 04:36 PM (+61wI)"
Fair point, but there's two sides to that coin. Rudy, Fred, and Mitt had problems that we 'vetted' them out of the nomination for, and that's why we were left with Mccain. I can't stand Mitt, but he would have been a better nominee than Mccain, IMO. Probably a better president too, which is not high praise.We need to have the spine to nominate someone who isn't perfect.

Posted by: Dustin at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (Q3nWV)

39 Whatever Mitch Daniels might think of fire and red meat, it's what the customers want, and the customers are always right.
True.

But more and more, all I'm seeing from the "customers" are a bunch of people who just want to quit. Nobody is good enough; nobody will ever be good enough; we've got to torpedo absolutely everybody on our side with a chance of going somewhere because ___________. If they have to turn their own self-proclaimed principles on their ear to do that, then no prob. And these people will be the loudest complainers when they get the second term of Obama they're helping to set up.

Losing has become a way of life for such people. It's all they know; it's all they expect, and they've brought themselves to a point where they actually find virtue in losing. Maybe that's why they made an unaccomplished quitter their political hero.

Ironic, to hear this kind of bitching about Mitch Daniels' marital situation from a vast collection of battered wives.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (FYCiJ)

40 18
awww stop picking on poor curious.





I missed this whole contretemps... what happened?

Posted by: Ace at May 13, 2011 04:33 PM (nj1bB)
Last week, the binLden photos- she pulled the "Only New Yorkers have moral authority to make that call", then doubled down, became essentially incoherent, said blondes were dumb bitches, was turning in a Moron to the FBI. Returned to a later thread, acting like nothing happened, with EXTREMELY conservative coherent prose, then reverted, then whined that that we are meaner than a liberal blog and attack her for having an opinion. Check today's top headline comments.

Posted by: Museisluse at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (a8aqn)

41 37
So, we give the coke snorting JEF cipher a pass, and now we have to dissect the white guy?

What's your problem?

Posted by: MFM at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (UOM48)

42 If Daniels was willing to play it straight and picked a VP with some teeth... I could reluctantly vote for that. It would be a messy struggle just to break even and still just delays the real fight off another round.

Posted by: Shiggz at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (mLAWK)

43 I could vote for Mitch in the primaries.
He's seems more appealing to me than Pawlenty, and I've already decided I'm not voting for Romney, Santorum, Huckabee or Ron Paul.

So it's entirely possible he'll get my vote. He has a stellar record as governor.
Unfortunately our presidential contests are in part popularity contests. So he needs to get good at politics if he wants to have a chance.

Posted by: Ben at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (wuv1c)

44 29, Thread Killer.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (Jq4xH)

45 Rich Lowry's combover

I scoff at the inferior tonsure.

Posted by: the fabulous hair of Mike Pence at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (+vkOU)

46 perhaps the republicans should do a ben franklin on their choices. I mean first craft everything about BO and his administration that is not so good. All of it, even the little stuff. Then make a second list of republican candidates (the varsity) and the junior varsity (those who debated the other night on fox) and figure out who can best handle all those issues and succeed.

I liked christie telling someone it was "none of their business" when they asked a nosy question he didn't want to answer. I wish palin had said that to catty and then again when she was at the white house correspondents dinner and was asked another equally dumb question. Problem is, dems are raised the ends justifies the means and it's ok to be rude for their particular cause. Republcians always get a check in "plays well with others". They like that check and continue doing it and it always hurts them cause dems count on the fact that they always play nice.

Republicans need a bad boy/bad girl type with a donald trump directness and a personality that will get things done.

Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (k1rwm)

47 6 You can let the NYT tell you what to think; I do my own thinking. I meant to write about this when Rush Limbaugh dumbly said it: If you simply take the idiotic position that you must do the exact opposite of what the media tells you, you have given up your thinking to the MSM. Yes, you have. They can make you take whatever position they want, Bugs Bunny "It's rabbit season" style. I don't not give a shit what the NYT says one way or another. We have our own brains. we can make our own determinations about the record, without having to subcontract our thinking out to the liberal media.
Posted by: Ace at May 13, 2011 04:29 PM (nj1bB)
That's a bit of a position I'm in. I'm not going to discount a candidate because of attacks they're receiving in the news. I also should not be willing to dismiss a candidate just because the MBM is saying "Oh yes this guy would be a good candidate for the Republicans."
That said it certainly might give me pause. And be a little bit more critical of the guy. Afterall as you said ace, these are the guys who proceed to tell us what Republicans think,and if asked to actually hear what a Republican thinks they say "no"

Posted by: buzzion at May 13, 2011 04:40 PM (oVQFe)

48 Daniels even makes John F'n Kerry look like a worldbeater.

Posted by: IE Con at May 13, 2011 04:41 PM (/COcn)

49 Pamela Gellerwrote a peicewhere shecritisizedDaniels big time!just sayin.....

Posted by: Krazy Kat at May 13, 2011 04:41 PM (oNphh)

50 >>>Quiet strength. Hmmm, ok sure I've known a few men like that. Not
many but I have known a few. Impressive, I suppose, to not give into
your baser instinct and when you have been treated poorly.

Let me tell you something else that is a true fact of life, however.
We get the treatment that we tolerate. If you allow someone to treat you
like shit, guess what? Don't be surprised when they keep doing it.

And what has Mitch Daniels gotten since then? A happy, rebuilt marriage with a mother around to raise his four (FOUR!) daughters who desperately needed her, massive professional success, an unassailable reputation built upon across-the-board encomiums from true-blue conservatives to grudgingly respectful liberals, and a genuine record of political accomplishment.
If what you say is true, it would seem like he's been quietly teaching people around him the right lessons.
Look, I obviously like Daniels a lot, but like others around here I'm also a bit wigged-out by his 'modesty' gaffes: he needs to secure that shit quickly and be a bit more cocky. Less self-effacing, please. (In fact, right now my problems with this aspect of his record lead me to prefer Tim Pawlenty ever-so-slightly: Pawlenty may be a small guy but behind that friendly face of his he's a working-class hockey bruiser and it comes across in his interviews.)

Posted by: Jeff B. at May 13, 2011 04:42 PM (NjYDy)

51 Daniels just seems to have a strange way of convincing people to support him. And by that I mean a way that doesn't.

Posted by: SlaveDog at May 13, 2011 04:42 PM (9fDAi)

52 >>>Posted by: cui bono, soothsayer? at May 13, 2011 04:36 PM (uFokq)

You've mellowed a bit lately, soothsayer.

I gotta say, I like it a lot. Still funny, less dickish.

Posted by: Jeff B. at May 13, 2011 04:43 PM (NjYDy)

53

Normal
0




false
false
false

EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE













MicrosoftInternetExplorer4



























































































































































/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}



awww stop picking on poor curious.



I missed this whole contretemps... what happened?



Um, not to be an ass but you sound like Obama and 'cops acted stupidly' without
knowing the facts.She picked and picked until there was no more blood coming out of that scab.
IMHO, girl trolls apparently get a pass because they have girl parts.
And that's fucking ridiculous. If you play here, you have to learn to have thicker skin.

Posted by: laceyunderalls RINO Trash Committee Chair, Cincinnati Chapter at May 13, 2011 04:44 PM (pLTLS)

54 You CAN wait for your wife to green-light a presidential run. In fact, I suspect it would be mandatory.
You CAN'T tell the world you're waiting for Mommy to give you permission.

Posted by: Truman North at May 13, 2011 04:44 PM (+gfwN)

55 Dear Reader won precisely because he was a blank slate (and the MBM fellated him so much he probably doesn't have a dick any more). But we are now looking for substance as an antidote to the vacuum tubeless steak we have now. The political environment has changed, permanently I hope.

Mitch is at least someone I could work up some enthusiasm for, as an agent of change for limited government. I could give a rat's ass about his personal life. How could that be worse than the current coke snorting Marxist in Chief? Gimme a break.

Posted by: GnuBreed at May 13, 2011 04:45 PM (ENKCw)

56 You can already see the Dems tweet: bowing to foreign leaders or waiting for wifey's approval, which is worse?

Posted by: IE Con at May 13, 2011 04:45 PM (/COcn)

57 I'm ok with Danials, the little bit I know of him. I need to know more. I didn't care for his Condi Rice would make a good VP comment. Somewhere on the ticket or in the cabinet I want John Bolton. It's been a long time since I have seen someone with such a no nonesense America First attitude.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 04:45 PM (Jq4xH)

58 Mitch Daniels is Tim Pawlenty without the good looks and electrifying personality.

Posted by: Truman North at May 13, 2011 04:46 PM (+gfwN)

59 I think these midwest-nice candidates really need to frickin' go to Trump School a little.

Posted by: Ace at May 13, 2011 04:46 PM (nj1bB)

60 Mitch and Mike, Mike and Mitch....

And now a commercial break...

Boobehs!

Now back to your regulary scheduled programing.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes, running for prez so you don't have to at May 13, 2011 04:46 PM (IXLvN)

61 She picked and picked until there was no more blood coming out of that scab.
IMHO, girl trolls apparently get a pass because they have girl parts.
And that's fucking ridiculous. If you play here, you have to learn to have thicker skin.


Posted by: laceyunderalls RINO Trash Committee Chair, Cincinnati Chapter at May 13, 2011 04:44 PM (pLTLS)

again I ask, did I do that, or is it one poster's interpretation of what they wanted to believe I was doing. I finally after being told I was stupid, snapped back at dumb blond....and I'm not apologizing for that, she wholly deserved it. I held back. If you want to keep "the narrative" that best suits you guys what are you accomplishing. Do you want me to leave the blog, is that your angle. I don't go to the overnight thread except to post an article that I hope vic will see and re post the next day early cause the ONT gals have their little click and I wanted them to realize I wasn't a threat. So what is your point?

Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 04:47 PM (k1rwm)

62 IMHO, girl trolls apparently get a pass because they have girl parts.

And that's fucking ridiculous. If you play here, you have to learn to have thicker skin.

Plus, Ace is a New Yorker, too. With his new snotty-ass capital "A", dig?

Forget it, lacey. It's Hymietown.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 13, 2011 04:47 PM (TATbF)

63 Let me tell you something else that is a true fact of life, however. We get the treatment that we tolerate. If you allow someone to treat you like shit, guess what? Don't be surprised when they keep doing it.I'm not sugesting that he should have shot her. I am only saying that what you might attribute to "quiet strength" might just be an unfortuante lack of assertiveness. Maybe he's a rock, I don't know. Maybe I'm just jaded and cynical. Or maybe he's a pusswhipped dumbass. Let's ask the Honey Badger.Posted by: Sgt. Fury at May 13, 2011 04:36 PM (u2k3g)

Yep. Now maybe Daniels is just filled to the gills with 'quiet strength' that we can't appreciate, but until I see unequivocal evidence of this my null hypothesis is that he's a wimp.

Posted by: Mætenloch at May 13, 2011 04:47 PM (pAlYe)

64 58 No serious candidate would tip their hand on a VP choice so early. Besides how many electoral votes does Condi Rice bring?

Posted by: IE Con at May 13, 2011 04:47 PM (/COcn)

65 Posted by: laceyunderalls RINO Trash Committee Chair, Cincinnati Chapter at May 13, 2011 04:44 PM (pLTLS)

Guess I showed up just in time. *tilts back in chair, hands behind head*

Posted by: Papa Editor at May 13, 2011 04:47 PM (Zs83Q)

66 A 13 year old girl with one game of Risk as a resume should be able to take down Odumdum on foreign policy.
I get that Daniels is the meticulous type that gets confidence from tons of prep, and governors don't do foreign policy, but I had to double check that when I first heard it.

"Probably Not" is the column that he shot to the top of after giving that response.
That was the weakest of sauces for the potential leader of a superpower, if in fact we still are when Commander Death Star is done.

Posted by: ontherocks at May 13, 2011 04:47 PM (HBqDo)

67 #59

Pawlenty has an "electrifying personality?"

I never noticed that.

Like the guy, I just don't have that phrase pop into my mind when thinking of him.

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 04:47 PM (Xm1aB)

68 What the fuck? Nobody gives a shit about his marriage. We don't want him because he is Bush III and McCain II combined. He'll bend over forwards to please Democrats in yet another stupid, stupid, awesomely stupid attempt at reaching across to those who want you, and your kind, dead.

This fuckhead fucknut from BigPharma was at OMB when Medicare D was passed. He looks like he's already been embalmed.

Other than that, I'm keeping an open mind.

Posted by: Randall Hoven at May 13, 2011 04:48 PM (AI5dd)

69 Tanned, very well rested and .....


.......zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZzzzz.

Posted by: Teh Fred at May 13, 2011 04:48 PM (CYoZS)

70 I remember the best President of the last century as a man of humility and self-effacement. Ronald Reagan.

Posted by: Mike at May 13, 2011 04:48 PM (2e6Dn)

71 There's actually a good reason for bluster and bravado, at least in sports, it raises your testosterone.

Cool science factoid -- visiting teams have lower testosterone levels, which cause lower performance. Visiting teams try to combat this by psyching themselves up.

The evo psych explanation is that this is the equivalent of wandering into another tribes territory when out hunting. Your body reacts by trying to make you meek so you don't start a fight and get killed. Head down, shoulders tucked, small and unthreatening.

As right-wingers we are constantly in enemy territory -- which is why we actually need bluster and bravado. It bucks you up, gets you testosterone flowing and ready for a fight. Low testosterone makes you want to give up before the fight even starts and just slink back to your couch.

Posted by: Clubber Lang at May 13, 2011 04:48 PM (QcFbt)

72 again I ask, did I do that, or is it one poster's interpretation of what they wanted to believe I was doing. I finally after being told I was stupid, snapped back at dumb blond....and I'm not apologizing for that, she wholly deserved it. I held back. If you want to keep "the narrative" that best suits you guys what are you accomplishing. Do you want me to leave the blog, is that your angle. I don't go to the overnight thread except to post an article that I hope vic will see and re post the next day early cause the ONT gals have their little click and I wanted them to realize I wasn't a threat. So what is your point?
Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 04:47 PM (k1rwm)
How is calling someone a selfish bitch not calling them selfish curious?

Posted by: buzzion at May 13, 2011 04:48 PM (oVQFe)

73 Forget it, lacey. It's Hymietown.

HEY, LOOK, NEOCON JOOOS!!!

Posted by: THE CAPS LOCK BUTTON at May 13, 2011 04:48 PM (+vkOU)

74 Posted by: Jeff B. at May 13, 2011 04:42 PM (NjYDy
I'm not saying he sucks or is wrong for wanting to repair his marriage and take care of his four kids. That is admirable and there are few men, I am sure, who could/would make that effort.
You don't need to be father of the year to beat JEF in the election. You do need to be one tough son of a bitch because the MFM is, at this very moment, sharpening their knives in preparation. You thought they slapped down the race card before? You ain't seen shit yet.
Maybe he'd be up for it. His pass on debating the JEF on foreign policy is not blowing my skirt up.

Posted by: Sgt. Fury at May 13, 2011 04:49 PM (u2k3g)

75 All this talk of personalities and style in a presidential candidate is gettin' me dander up. While I understand the need to present a viable candidate to counter thedestruction that The Vapid One© has wrought, I still haven't seen one outline what we all know clearly needs to be done.
Stuff like repealing ObamaCar and the student loan takeover andthe Wall Street regulationbill, opening up drilling, drastically reducing the debt immediately, a wholesale review of every government agency, and all the other stuff.
Without singling him out as my favorite (which he isn't yet, I'm just using him as an example), Herman Cain comes the closest tooutlining a coherent plan to get us back on track. We need a candidate with all the public bona fides like a good hair and a decent personality, but I still maintain that the proper position onsubstantive issues will do more for a candidate this election cycle than sex appeal.
I'm still waiting...

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at May 13, 2011 04:49 PM (d0Tfm)

76 Oh and at this point I think she's qunituple-downed on her idiocy

Posted by: buzzion at May 13, 2011 04:50 PM (oVQFe)

77 This is what amuses me - the shrieking populists among us who are slamming the shit out of Daniels due to his rather clumsy political instincts seem to be a lot of the same people who generally hate politicians and want an "ordinary Joe" type candidate. Soooooo.....you hate slick politicians who would do anything for a vote. Until you find a candidate lacking in smooth political acumen, and then he's a clown.

It's not a big deal, I just find it funny.

Posted by: radar at May 13, 2011 04:50 PM (v5PQS)

78 71
I remember the best President of the last century as a man of humility and self-effacement. Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan would be drummed out of the party as a RINO today.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at May 13, 2011 04:50 PM (FYCiJ)

79 I'm looking forward to hearing more from Cain. I like what I've heard so far.

Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 13, 2011 04:51 PM (UOM48)

80 Hey, I play bass and my old band had a song called "Have You Ever Been to Bum School?"
Am I eligible?

Posted by: Dr. Varno at May 13, 2011 04:51 PM (QMtmy)

81 68 #59 Pawlenty has an "electrifying personality?" I never noticed that. Like the guy, I just don't have that phrase pop into my mind when thinking of him.

Exactly!!

Posted by: Truman North at May 13, 2011 04:52 PM (+gfwN)

82 I've said several times on here that I don't like daniels, however, he is bowing to the reality of the world these days. I know lots of couples, both professionals, he's a lawyer or a doctor, she's a doctor or a lawyer (although never two lawyers, that never works but ironically two doctors does work) anyway, every guy has to now think about his wife and her career before he makes a move. Wall Street firms began running into the "no thanks I don't want the promotion as my wife's career is here in NY and I'd rather not uproot the kids and force her to reestablish somewhere else syndrome" So what is different about daniels and christie and ryan and any other modern sensitve male who realizes he's not in the marriage alone, there is the wife and kids to consider and the wife's career now?

So in that respect this decision on daniels' part will be slightly appealing to all professional women who see marriage very differently from some of the soccer moms or as hillary put it "I'm not staying home baking cookies".

Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 04:52 PM (k1rwm)

83 >>So what is your point? Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 04:47 PM (k1rwm) Not threatening anyone with FBI responses to posts that offend you would seem to be a reasonable request.

Posted by: ontherocks at May 13, 2011 04:52 PM (HBqDo)

84 #79

I keep hearing this or reading it here and other places.

With all respect, that's just horseshit.

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 04:52 PM (Xm1aB)

85 It's not his marital problems from years ago that bother me it's his dithering. You don't win the most coveted office in all of politics by hemming and hawwing and stepping on your dick.

I don't want Mr. Humble going up against Obama. I want someone who is going to go balls to the wall all in.

Run or don't run but make a damn decision.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 13, 2011 04:53 PM (TMB3S)

86 Ronald Reagan would be drummed out of the party as a RINO today.

Are you effin' kidding me? The party is nothing but RINOs.



Posted by: Teh Fred at May 13, 2011 04:53 PM (CYoZS)

87 /sock off

Posted by: Joe Mama at May 13, 2011 04:53 PM (CYoZS)

88 I remember the best President of the last century as a man of humility and self-effacement. Ronald Reagan.


Posted by: Mike at May 13, 2011 04:48 PM (2e6Dn)
But his campaign was in trouble until he shouted down the moderator at a debate in New Hampshire."I paid for this microphone, Mr Green!"

Posted by: Oldcat at May 13, 2011 04:53 PM (z1N6a)

89 Posted by: ontherocks at May 13, 2011 04:52 PM (HBqDo)

the post was border line threatening.

Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 04:53 PM (k1rwm)

90 85, I agree, the whole Bold colors thing and actual conservatism not preached but accomplished kills that.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 04:54 PM (Jq4xH)

91 Whoever the Republican nominee is, he/she will be declared the reincarnation of Hitler within 15 minutes by the MBM. Before the acceptance speech. Idi Amin and Pol Pot will probably be favorably compared shortly thereafter.

Posted by: GnuBreed at May 13, 2011 04:54 PM (ENKCw)

92 Sorry, but he can't win.

Posted by: dagny at May 13, 2011 04:54 PM (/kRxM)

93 Not threatening anyone with FBI responses to posts that offend you would seem to be a reasonable request.

I'm offended!!

Posted by: Truman North at May 13, 2011 04:54 PM (+gfwN)

94 "71
I remember the best President of the last century as a man of humility and self-effacement. Ronald Reagan."

Dutch knew when to throw down, though. He was a geniunely nice guy, but he could brawl when he had to. I'm generally amenable to Daniels, but it would be nice to see him show some fire.

Posted by: radar at May 13, 2011 04:55 PM (v5PQS)

95 I'm done with supporting a candidate because he/ she is the nominee/ is not the Democrat.

That is precisely the nonsense that got us into the mess we're in.

If someone wants my vote, they need to earn it and have the solid chops to back up their claim on the office. Period.

Our brave new House of Representatives was the last straw for me. What has Boehner done, other than cave on everything then bitch at us for not praising his weepy ass for fucking us?

No more. If it ain't a good candidate, I'm staying home. They don't have to be perfect, I don't have to agree with them on everything, and this isn't a purity test. I only ask that earn the office they're asking for and hold their ground.

For anyone who says that staying home supports Obama, or any of the other arguments; my counter is that voting for the best of the bad offer the same result. Again, case in point: Boehner.

Posted by: Damiano at May 13, 2011 04:55 PM (3nrx7)

96 #86

Thank you. You're exactly right. After McCain finished preparing Obama's entrance to the White House, we're not in any mood to nominate a slacker this time around.

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 04:55 PM (Xm1aB)

97 Do you want me to leave the blog, is that your angle. I don't go to
the overnight thread except to post an article that I hope vic will see
and re post the next day early cause the ONT gals have their little
click and I wanted them to realize I wasn't a threat

Click? *click click click* What the fuck? Who are we - Jets or Sharks?

Look at you playing your teeny tiny violin over there.

You owe a WHOLE lot of people an apology for calling them "selfish" (let alone bitches) for wanting to see those pictures.

I don't give a fuck what you do. You've proven yourself to be a troll and as such you'll be treated as one.

Posted by: laceyunderalls RINO Trash Committee Chair, Cincinnati Chapter at May 13, 2011 04:55 PM (pLTLS)

98 Just came across an article that says Mitch was Bush's budget director. Hmm....the MSM will have a field day with that. Just sayin'.


Posted by: derised1 at May 13, 2011 04:56 PM (xI4NA)

99 I'm voting for Jack Daniels.
Twice.

Posted by: Joe Mama at May 13, 2011 04:56 PM (CYoZS)

100 Daniels looks weird like he has a bunch of personality disorders. We need someone who has their shit together. Bush's speech impediment's got real old real fast.

Posted by: Krazy Kat at May 13, 2011 04:56 PM (oNphh)

101 Mitch Daniels can't win because of his shitty hair.
There, I said it.
These things fucking matter.

Posted by: Truman North at May 13, 2011 04:57 PM (+gfwN)

102 90
Posted by: ontherocks at May 13, 2011 04:52 PM (HBqDo)the post was border line threatening.


Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 04:53 PM (k1rwm)
Oh, it was not- or are you in the Manhattan phone directory as "curious"? Don't be such a drama queen.

Posted by: Museisluse at May 13, 2011 04:58 PM (a8aqn)

103 The first, second, and 3rd requirements are to be a fighter.

"I'll have to check with my wife"

"Obama trumps me on foreign policy"

I'm stumped.

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 04:58 PM (+sBB4)

104 96
+100

Posted by: Joe Mama at May 13, 2011 04:58 PM (CYoZS)

105 #102

Rick Perry has good hair.

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 04:58 PM (Xm1aB)

106

>>Posted by: Truman North at May 13, 2011 04:54 PM (+gfwN)That's a little steeper up the curve for little girls than I'm telling mommy.Flailing around in the deep end in the deep end of the pool is one thing, that was off the charts




































Posted by: ontherocks at May 13, 2011 04:59 PM (HBqDo)

107 Curious, you have to get out of NYC more often. The rest of the country is just not like that nor do they want to be.

Posted by: dagny at May 13, 2011 04:59 PM (/kRxM)

108 I fault Mitch for his handling of his fleebaggers because I believe his statements emboldened the Democrats - even in other states - and made Walker's job harder. Walker is no Chris Christie stylistically (which is probably what you want for Wisconsinites, but not for NJers) but he still bitch-slapped his Democrats and we all knew it. And they knew it. And that was good.

Daniels mishandled his legislature on both sides of the aisle, actually. His apologists can say what they want but Daniels was pissed at the GOP legislators and let it show by criticizing them while going light on the fleebaggers.

My governor (Herbert) has a very red legislature who wanted to slash the budget on all sorts of things. Herbert didn't agree with that, but he managed to not give the media fodder to suggest there was a big rift in the GOP.

His political skills suggest that he's myopic, unable to see the larger impact of what he says. It was obvious to Daniels that his education agenda should be the top priority, ergo he felt it should be obvious to his legislators (the GOP ones) and he got pissy about it. Similarly, it was obvious to him that Indiana - which if you look on the map is the natural partner for Chicago, not NYC - should be in the Eastern timezone and follow DST, ergo it had to be that way. (Look at the Indiana timezone map now for some amusement.)


Having said that, I've given up on Romney coming to his senses so for now Mitch is my top guy. But I still contend he's not leaderly. That worries me some in terms of his ability to govern and it worries me a lot when it comes to campaigning for POTUS, even at the primary stage. He strikes me as oddly divisive. I think it will take a skilled politician to unite the Party going into the general and I don't think he has those skills.

Posted by: Y-not at May 13, 2011 04:59 PM (pW2o8)

109 91 the post was border line threatening.
Welcome to the fucking club honey. I 've heard you better watch it Oldsailor or some such bullshit, I've been called names, Garret did a number on me over some Trump arguement we were in. Guess what. It's over, move on, so fucking what. You keep playing wounded water buffalo the lions will attack. Suck it up butter cup. Post like it never happened and pretty soon it will have never happened. I'm sorry but I like you, I don't want you to leave. But at the same time if your not happy make changes.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 05:01 PM (Jq4xH)

110 And just to help remind curious: It was not your opinion that the photos should not be shown that was the problem.
It was your opinion that only New York has the moral authority to decide the issue.
It was your opinion that only New York was hurt by 9/11.
It was your opinion that only New Yorkers remember 9/11
And we're all selfish if we don't agree with you.

Posted by: buzzion at May 13, 2011 05:01 PM (oVQFe)

111 >>>I'm looking forward to hearing more from Cain. I like what I've heard so far.

You liked the part about imposing an unconstitutional (and un-American, and immoral) religious test for appointment to public office? My god, it was like watching a man slit his own throat on live TV.

Even if he hadn't committed suicide with that gaffe, I still cannot in good conscience vote for anyone who never held elected office. This is the fucking Presidency, not a Congressional seat. We're already dealing with the awful consequences of what happens when you elect an unseasoned, inexperienced guy to the highest job in the land merely because he's black and says nice things. Try arguing to America that we should do it again, except this time with a guy that's got EVEN LESS practical experience in government!

Posted by: Jeff B. at May 13, 2011 05:01 PM (NjYDy)

112 What if Daniels covered the fire and red meat angle with his VP pick? Is there anyone out there that would compensate for Daniels' alleged weaknesses?





curious - it's clique, m'kay? Not at all like the NYC click thing you got going on, right?

Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at May 13, 2011 05:02 PM (LFiVW)

113 Toughness is not the willingness to be brutal or judgmental. It's especially not a readiness to inflict punishment for an offense. Toughness is the ability to absorb punishment and keep going; that is all. And Mitch Daniels seems to have it.

Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at May 13, 2011 05:02 PM (FeYbR)

114 I'm looking forward to hearing more from Cain. I like what I've heard so far.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 13, 2011 04:51 PM (UOM4

Agree. Although he needs to start talking about a few social issues. Abortion? Affirmativeaction? The education system? Maybe he has and I've just not seen or heard it yet.

Posted by: Soona at May 13, 2011 05:02 PM (4HYWk)

115 I don't remember voting for Boehner.
Vote for whomever you want in the primaries. Shit, vote for Ron Paul, I don't care but don't vote for Obama by staying home.
If we keep letting democrats vote in our primaries then stay at home when we don't like the outcome then we might as wellbuy some mao jackets and publish dreams of my father with a red leather cover.

Posted by: dagny at May 13, 2011 05:03 PM (/kRxM)

116 ,,,it's what the customers want, and the customers are always right.

Who does Mitch Daniels consider to be the customer? Who's he appealing to?

Posted by: John P. Squibob at May 13, 2011 05:03 PM (/U/Mr)

117 First, Superman.

Now, Daniels is a panzy ass.

What kind of Fri the 13th is this?

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 05:04 PM (+sBB4)

118

And you don't have to be a fan of Sun Tzu to recognize that sometimes
strength is quiet, not loud, and sometimes the greatest strength is not
self-satisfaction, but self-denial.


HERETIC!!!!!!!!1!1!111!

(go ron paul)

Posted by: zombie Ayn Rand at May 13, 2011 05:04 PM (UaxA0)

119 What the fuck? Nobody gives a shit about his marriage.
Gottadisagree. While his marriage issues won't be a big deal to informed voters, fact is, far too many voters don't inform themselves in any meaningful way. Instead, they base their vote on some amorphous "feeling' that they have about the candidates. It's a sordid little interlude that doesn't exactly contribute to good feelings toward him or the potential first lady by his side.
Being all girly, I can't speak to how men perceive the situation, but I suspect that many women will be disgusted by his runaway wife, regardless of how the situation ultimately resolved itself. There's Man Law and then there's Woman Law, and Woman Law states that there's nothing lower than amother who abandons her kids for a man. My concern would be that some on-the-fence feelings-based female votersmight hop over to the wrong side bcse of their distaste for her behavior.

Posted by: TiredWench at May 13, 2011 05:04 PM (oPceJ)

120 Posted by: Jeff B. at May 13, 2011 05:01 PM (NjYDy)

You've just got it all fucking figured out, don't you, Jeff?

Posted by: Soona at May 13, 2011 05:05 PM (4HYWk)

121 Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 05:01 PM (Jq4xH)

Wait until the primary gets really rolling. We will be ripping each other into tiny little pieces.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 13, 2011 05:05 PM (TMB3S)

122 There's a click or a clique on the ONT? Can I get in? I have more seal pics!!

Posted by: dagny at May 13, 2011 05:06 PM (/kRxM)

123 Superman, Daniels, Ron Paul, Jason Vorhees, Sun Tzu...

Posted by: Dr. Varno at May 13, 2011 05:06 PM (QMtmy)

124 curious - it's clique, m'kay? Not at all like the NYC click thing you got going on, right?Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at May 13, 2011 05:02 PM (LFiVW)

Actually the clicks are probably from the surplus Soviet equipment we're using to monitor your internet usage. We're hoping to upgrade to some pre-owned Chinese stuff after the next fundraising drive.

Posted by: Mætenloch at May 13, 2011 05:06 PM (pAlYe)

125 112, All of those guys with Gov. Experiance, How's that working for us again?

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 05:07 PM (Jq4xH)

126 "Mitch and the Bitch" versus "Barry and Scary."

No contest here.

Posted by: MaxMBJ at May 13, 2011 05:07 PM (6SIms)

127 I know I'm the least popular person to be making this argument on AoSHQ, but people really need to stop beating up on curious. I've read EVERY post of this stupid kerfuffle, and the simple fact is that while she said some intemperate things, 95% of what's going here is mere piling on for the sake of beating up on the perceived 'easy target.' It's over, it's done, let's move the hell on.

You know what? I honestly respect the fact that, despite all the abuse, she HASN'T left. People in this thread are calling it "doubling down" -- which is disingenuous bullshit because what would you have her do, issue a Soviet style "Public Self Criticism" mea culpa and beg forgiveness? Not defend herself like anyone/everyone else would? -- but c'mon...that's the stubbornness of a True Moron. I can respect that.

And FWIW I speak as a person who, back when I first encountered curious, started off by attacking her and accusing her of being a troll. I was wrong. I still think she's a negative nelly, but then again she's an independent from New York City so it's not entirely surprising.

Posted by: Jeff B. at May 13, 2011 05:07 PM (NjYDy)

128 Wait until the primary gets really rolling. We will be ripping each other into tiny little pieces.
ace will need to start new websites...
Ace: Newt Edition, Ace: Daniels Edition, etc.

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 05:07 PM (+sBB4)

129 Yeah, the way he handled that thing with Wisconsin was terrible.

Posted by: rdbrewer at May 13, 2011 05:08 PM (PCE0w)

130 I was accused of being a borderline rapist by Y-not and unknownjane for disagreeing with them and do you see me still bitching about it?

Past the first couple of weeks, I mean?

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 13, 2011 05:08 PM (TATbF)

131 122 Fortunatly we can't shoot each other through the screen.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 05:08 PM (Jq4xH)

132 "113
What if Daniels covered the fire and red meat angle with his VP pick? Is
there anyone out there that would compensate for Daniels' alleged
weaknesses?"

Personally, if Daniels were the VP, I'd love a foreign policy VP like Cheney (not ACTUALLY Cheney, but similar to that choice).

For red meat, I think Daniels should pick Cain or Palin. Fortunately, Daniels is actually red meat on social issues himself, but I think a lot of the voters don't know that yet. He may actually need a moderate to make him more appealing to blue states. I realize this isn't how it appears today.

Posted by: Dustin at May 13, 2011 05:08 PM (Q3nWV)

133
Toughness is not the willingness to be brutal or judgmental. It's especially not a readiness to inflict punishment for an offense. Toughness is the ability to absorb punishment and keep going; that is all. And Mitch Daniels seems to have it.

Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at May 13, 2011 05:02 PM (FeYbR)
Oh ok so are we talking about an Everlast heavy bag or Bounty paper towels?

Posted by: Krazy Kat at May 13, 2011 05:08 PM (oNphh)

134 O/T - All you S.E. Cupp fans. She's on Beck right now.

Posted by: RushBabe at May 13, 2011 05:08 PM (Ew27I)

135 LEAVE CURIOUS ALONE!!!

WAAAAAA

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 05:09 PM (+sBB4)

136 Daniels has a real Coolidge vibe to him which is a pretty good strategy against Obama- the cool competent executive. Media attacks will be pretty lame (Bush and Boring).
He has to show something though in the debates- a real willingness to mix it up when needed.
He does however have 2 big things right now- he was a much more conservative Governor than either Pawlenty or Romney and he has the upside of beating initial low expectations.

Posted by: Dick Cavett at May 13, 2011 05:09 PM (ToOEC)

137 Actually the clicks are probably from the surplus Soviet equipment we're
using to monitor your internet usage. We're hoping to upgrade to some
pre-owned Chinese stuff after the next fundraising drive.


If you're monitoring my internet usage, you really should get out more. I'm very boring.

Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at May 13, 2011 05:09 PM (LFiVW)

138 does this mean im part of the cool kids?
I never was part of the cool kids before in my life!
wow! i just dont post during the day because welll. usually im busy having a life... well... and i hate daywalkers... but mostly because i have a life

Posted by: Gushka at May 13, 2011 05:09 PM (93zw2)

139 borderline rapist

This is why we need alligators

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 05:09 PM (+sBB4)

140 >>the post was border line threatening.
Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 04:53 PM (k1rwm) You are a troll intentional or otherwise, and are continuing to demonstrate it.If "border line threatening" is a new threshold for FBI intervention in your book then I'm glad that you outed yourself.Everyone is expected to be patient with you, but if it's borderline lookout.You sure rationalize like a lib.


Posted by: ontherocks at May 13, 2011 05:10 PM (HBqDo)

141 Not that he needs any help, being as he's so totally awesome and tells you every chance he gets, but Jeff B. is so much better than all of you!

Posted by: Jeff B.'s Catamite at May 13, 2011 05:10 PM (c45xH)

142 Since when is playing the victim card a conservative trait?

Right. I guess that's an 'independent' thing.

Posted by: laceyunderalls RINO Trash Committee Chair, Cincinnati Chapter at May 13, 2011 05:10 PM (pLTLS)

143 .... im just so excited to be part of a clique.... (i know, maybe i should get out more and talk to people rather than horses and cats and ONT people)

Posted by: Gushka at May 13, 2011 05:11 PM (93zw2)

144 I'll try to be positive for a change...

Daniels: He's good in his current job. He seems to like it. The folks in his state generally seem to like him. Why promote him to a job that he clearly does not have his heart into?

One of the problems with all out candidates seems to be the mad push for a Peter Principle Presidency. Sorry, just because you didn't completely fuck up at one job does not qualify you for a bigger job.

Worse, the majority of our candidates are total fuckups at their current/ former jobs. For example, can anyone here seriously support Romney based on his record as Governor? All I ever hear in his favor is regurgitated talking points about him being a "successful business man"... in other words, repeating the crap his PR people put out without backing it up with any actual evidence or accomplishments. And it's not just him.

Is it so wrong to expect...no... demand someone who is exceptional for the hardest and most demanding job in the world?

Posted by: Damiano at May 13, 2011 05:11 PM (3nrx7)

145 (although never two lawyers, that never works but ironically two doctors does work)
Mrs. Mallamutt is a lawyer. As am I. Married 19 years. We even meet in law school, her first year, my second. And as a true testament to our committment, she is a Cardinal fan........I am a Cub fan.
Oh, and its Mrs. Mallamutt's birthday today - so if you see here, tell her Happy Birthday,

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at May 13, 2011 05:11 PM (OWjjx)

146 If you're monitoring my internet usage, you really should get out more. I'm very boring.Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at May 13, 2011 05:09 PM (LFiVW)

[checking log] yes. yes you are. It really the others that the ONT Clique on Unmoronic Activities has to worry about.

Posted by: Mætenloch at May 13, 2011 05:12 PM (pAlYe)

147 RRRRRRRRRon Paul!!!!!1!

Sorry.

Posted by: JackStraw at May 13, 2011 05:12 PM (TMB3S)

148 @131
Hell, I even thanked you for the nutting.

Posted by: Y-not at May 13, 2011 05:12 PM (pW2o8)

149 ... im just so excited to be part of a clique.... (i
know, maybe i should get out more and talk to people rather than horses
and cats and ONT people)

Posted by: Gushka at May 13, 2011 05:11 PM (93zw2)
That reminds me.....how is the horse that you rescued?

Posted by: Tami at May 13, 2011 05:13 PM (VuLos)

150 Leave curious alone! Just leave her alone!!!!

She didn't call DB a selfish bitch-selfish bitch.

/Curious, first rule of holes - when you're in one, stop digging!

Posted by: Chris Crocker at May 13, 2011 05:14 PM (c0A3e)

151 #146

I salute the fact that 2 lawyers have survived 19 years of marriage.

However, if my wife were a Cub fan, her fuckin' ass would be kicked to the curb!

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 05:14 PM (Xm1aB)

152
With all respect, that's just horseshit.

Nope. Ronald Reagan would be subjected to five hundred snarks a day from AoSHQ commenters because he didn't scream into a microphone about Democrats all day long like Mark Levin on Dexedrine. Ronald Reagan would be mocked and condemned for not getting into daily piss-fights with every media liberal in sight, and we'd get non-stop speculation about why Ronald Reagan didn't have the testicular fortitude of Conservative Media Talking Head X. Ronald Reagan would see himself painted by the True Conservative Warriors of 2011 as something near a communist for some of the things he did as Governor of California.

Ronald Reagan would be excoriated around here as a ball-less RINO squish for saying things like "Die-hard conservatives thought that if I couldn't get everything I asked for, I should jump off the cliff with the flag flying -- go down in flames. No, if I can get 70 or 80 percent of what it is I'm trying to get, I'll take that and then continue to try to get the rest in the future."

70 percent?! People around here are RINOs if their ACU scores are in the low 90s. Certainly, we don't put up with guys on our side who believe in working steadily and incrementally to accomplish what they want (which is exactly how the Left enacted all the things it wanted over the decades). We want Warriors, not Politicians. We want all or nothing, and if we can't get it all we'll let the Dems take it all and congratulate ourselves for playing our twisted, perpetually-losing version of the "long game". Reagan? He might as well have been another Mike Castle.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at May 13, 2011 05:15 PM (FYCiJ)

153 149
@131
Hell, I even thanked you for the nutting.

There are supposedly trace neurological agents and such in that bodily fluid that make women feel better...

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at May 13, 2011 05:15 PM (c0A3e)

154 @152
It's obvious that the superior intelligence of his wife, as evidenced by her support of the Cards, is what is keeping that marriage going.

Posted by: Y-not at May 13, 2011 05:15 PM (pW2o8)

155 152, I'm sure the cuteness and availability of that ass would have something to do with your decision making. I'm a Bears fan that married a Packers fan.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 05:16 PM (Jq4xH)

156 If this isn't a Mitch Daniels Vs. Romney poster, I'll eat my hat.

Posted by: nickless at May 13, 2011 05:16 PM (MMC8r)

157 #153

Comparing Ronald Reagan to Mike Castle is simply heresy in my book.

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 05:16 PM (Xm1aB)

158 @113

By that question, can someone define for me what "fire and red meat" even means?

Our nominee is going to have to attack Obama on 9% unemployment and an 16 trillion dollar debt, and specifically why that is a danger to our future, not just by calling him a Marxist (which he is btw).

Posted by: Nate at May 13, 2011 05:16 PM (BBlzg)

159 14
If you can't take on your wife, you can't take on Obama.

Ir maybe it would make you mean. I mean honey badger mean. There are advantages to that.

Posted by: pep at May 13, 2011 05:16 PM (gmlb7)

160 Cub fan

Is that like self-mutilation?

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 05:17 PM (+sBB4)

161 Where is the Trucifier when it comes to gay marriage, DADT, abortion, amnesty, etc. Call a truce while the Socialists advance their agenda?

No thanks.

Posted by: Anon Y. Mous at May 13, 2011 05:17 PM (2BMbC)

162 It's obvious that the superior intelligence of his wife, as evidenced by her support of the Cards, is what is keeping that marriage going
How fucking smart can she be.........she married me!

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at May 13, 2011 05:17 PM (OWjjx)

163 [checking log] yes. yes you are. It really the others that the ONT Clique on Unmoronic Activities has to worry about.


Well, there was the whole meat curtains incident, but I've reformed.


Can we get a list of clique members? I'm really not sure who they are. Maybe a show of hands?

Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at May 13, 2011 05:17 PM (LFiVW)

164 #155

I agree.

Cards in Cincy tonight.

Beat that Brandon Phillips senseless, the little bitch.

And Cueto too--I hope the fucker eats a beanball this weekend!

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 05:18 PM (Xm1aB)

165 There are supposedly trace neurological agents and such in that bodily fluid that make women feel better...

Incredibly true. Gives me the same feeling as a xanex or 3 beers but lasts longer.
I wonder if that's why people are suspicious of guys who get cuckholded when they aren't physically separated? They think he's not doing the good work? (I do know that sometimes the chick is just a whore and usually unorgasmic but,,,)

Posted by: dagny at May 13, 2011 05:18 PM (/kRxM)

166

Y'know, I see Huckabee (and Huckabee alone), as Barry O with a twang and vitiligo.

I would let Barry drive this country into the dumpster if its a choice between him and Huck-up. We're heading there anyway, and Huck would enact the same policies as Barry, only with an oppressive holier than thou churchy flavor.

The lasting guilt for killing this nation would at least then not be on another republican's hands, the way they blame Hoover for the depression.


Posted by: s'moron at May 13, 2011 05:18 PM (UaxA0)

167 Ronald Reagan would be subjected to five hundred snarks a day from AoSHQ
commenters because he didn't scream into a microphone about Democrats
all day long like Mark Levin on Dexedrine.

I dunno. Walker was calmly in command of his situation. They don't all have to be Chris Christie types.

I think the thing is we're all waaaaay too plugged into politics and we tend to get spooked easily and go into attack mode. It's probably an internet thing.


Oh, and I denounce myself for using the word spook.

Posted by: Y-not at May 13, 2011 05:19 PM (pW2o8)

168 Forget it Cardinal fans.
Beware the Brewers, for only the have..........The Greatness........That Is..........Zach Greinke.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at May 13, 2011 05:19 PM (OWjjx)

169 Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at May 13, 2011 05:15 PM (FYCiJ)

STFU, RINO-lover.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 13, 2011 05:19 PM (TATbF)

170 144
.... im just so excited to be part of a clique.... (i know, maybe i
should get out more and talk to people rather than horses and cats and
ONT people)


Posted by: Gushka at May 13, 2011 05:11 PM (93zw2)
I think I am just noodling up to the edge of the clique. Someday....

Posted by: Museisluse at May 13, 2011 05:19 PM (a8aqn)

171 >>>112, All of those guys with Gov. Experiance, How's that working for us again?

You're making my exact argument for me, though you apparently don't realize it: indeed, it's working terribly for us, precisely BECAUSE Obama had no fucking serious experience in government. And now you want to nominate someone even more unqualified, even more unprepared to handle the transactional and functional aspects of the job? And you think you'll convince Americans with that argument?

Remember, there are TWO aspects of why Obama is a terrible President. The first reason, his liberal policies, is actually not relevant to this particular argument; of COURSE we hate him for that, but then we always were going to, because we're conservatives.

But the second argument, which is going to be the MAJOR part of pitch to moderates and swing voters during the general election, is competence: it's not just that Obama's a left-wing douchebag, it's that he's an incompetent one at that, a guy who just sucks at the job on an execution level, wasn't prepared for it when he took office, and still doesn't know how to do it well.

And the evidence is massive: I can name a hundred different examples, from the "reset button" hilarity with Russia to the fumbling of our Middle East policy to the cackhanded way they've botched the post-bin Laden story to the failure to build any sort of coalition for Healthcare to the willingness to "lead from behind" w/r/t Congress and let Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid usurp his prerogatives to his dithering on the debt and deficits issues etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum.

I'm going to let you in on a not-so-big secret right now: no matter who we nominate, our campaign against Obama is going to focus primarily on these arguments. Since he's the incumbent, unless we make the disastrous mistake of nominating Palin (which would turn the election into a referendum on her acceptability), 2012 is going to be run on the question of "can Obama actually do this fucking job?" And we're going to say, implicitly, "this is what happens when you succumb to the allure of Hope and Change and elect someone without any experience because he looks nice and talks nice."

If we nominate someone like Herman Cain, without any relevant experience of his own whatsoever (and no, being CEO of a pizza company several years ago does not count -- as valuable as business experience is for a candidate, it's not a substitute for government experience), then that entire argument -- our best, most convincing, WINNING line of argument -- is immediately destroying. Blows up in our faces. And Obama wins.

Furthermore, on a principled level, I simply don't think someone like Cain would make a good president. Not yet, at least. This ain't the happy-go-lucky 1990s anymore. We're facing problems that literally threaten to destroy the fabric of our entire country, and they're not simple ones with easy answers. I want someone who actually knows how to get shit done in the political arena dealing with these issues.

Posted by: Jeff B. at May 13, 2011 05:20 PM (NjYDy)

172 #169

How many games back are the Brewers?

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 05:20 PM (Xm1aB)

173 CINO - cliques in name only

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 05:20 PM (+sBB4)

174 I can see the Clique, but as with any clique, the more you reach the farther away it gets.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 05:21 PM (Jq4xH)

175 I also want to bring up something to all of the social cons touting the anti-abortion legislation he just signed. What issue was in the spotlight when Daniels came up with all the "truce" talk? Abortion? NO. Thecontroversy of the moment was GOProud.
Does signing anti-abortionlegislation add any "clarity" to his truce comments when his truce comments were so obviously about the gay agenda? Why no, actually, it DOESN'T.

Posted by: NotALibertarian at May 13, 2011 05:21 PM (psns8)

176 STFU, RINO-lover.
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 13, 2011 05:19 PM (TATbF)
That sounds border line threatening. I'm calling the FBI!

Posted by: curious(ly stupid) at May 13, 2011 05:21 PM (c45xH)

177 Posted by: laceyunderalls RINO Trash Committee Chair, Cincinnati Chapter at May 13, 2011 05:10 PM (pLTLS)

Geez! *scribbling in notebook: Women don't forget stuff*

Posted by: Soona at May 13, 2011 05:21 PM (4HYWk)

178 By that question, can someone define for me what "fire and red meat" even means?



Our nominee is going to have to attack Obama on 9% unemployment and an
16 trillion dollar debt, and specifically why that is a danger to our
future, not just by calling him a Marxist (which he is btw).


It's the term Ace used in his post. I took it to mean someone provocative, who would carry out the more "blood thirsty" attacks, off setting Daniels' perceived weakness (and supposed lack of fire and red meaty-ness.)

Is there any person out there who would fit that description that Daniels could name as a VP candidate?

Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at May 13, 2011 05:21 PM (LFiVW)

179 C'mon, we all know that the problem with the ONT is chemjeff's lewd Hello Kitty postings.

Purge him! Purge him!

Posted by: Y-not at May 13, 2011 05:22 PM (pW2o8)

180 How many games back are the Brewers?
4 1/2 - in Mid May. Not even the game a week level. But the Brewers and the Cardinals have one thing in common - neither club is sure of what they will get out of whoever closes in the 9th.
Though I did admire Ryan Franklin's spunk in taking a 3 inning ass kicking for the team on Wednesday.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at May 13, 2011 05:22 PM (OWjjx)

181 * click click click*

When you're a Jet an 'ette
You're a Jet an 'ette all the way
From your first Valu-Rite
To your last dying day

*click click click*

Posted by: laceyunderalls RINO Trash Committee Chair, Cincinnati Chapter at May 13, 2011 05:22 PM (pLTLS)

182 If I were a Cubs fan, I would call the FBI on myself

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 05:22 PM (+sBB4)

183 Is there any person out there who would fit that description that Daniels could name as a VP candidate?

John F'ing Bolton.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at May 13, 2011 05:22 PM (c0A3e)

184 Is there any person out there who would fit that description that Daniels could name as a VP candidate?

I think Allen West would be an interesting foil for Daniels.

It bothers me that he's gravitating towards Condi.

Posted by: Y-not at May 13, 2011 05:23 PM (pW2o8)

185 In which Ace throws in w Krauthammer and Will. Yes more of that quiet competence that was the hallmark of two Bush Presidencies is exactly what the country needs.

Ace , what's your take on the VAT. Kraut says it's inevitable. You?

Posted by: It's Morning in the Pension Fund of America at May 13, 2011 05:23 PM (u7WYD)

186
154 149 @131
Hell, I even thanked you for the nutting.

There are supposedly trace neurological agents and such in that bodily fluid that make women feel better..

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at May 13, 2011 05:15 PM (c0A3e)

Last time I went to the urologist to rub out some population yogurt into a cup for him, he told me that technically, my semen is 92% small-batch bourbon, so that explains the dreamy smiles he gets.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at May 13, 2011 05:23 PM (TATbF)

187 @168

That is true about Gov. Walker, but some posters on here and other blogs were preparing to call him a RINO and fake squish over taking his time to wait for the Democrats to come back to Madison, and for not shoving down every piece of conservative legislation he could through the legislature in that time.

Posted by: Nate at May 13, 2011 05:24 PM (BBlzg)

188 A homo thread is up?

Posted by: Cherry π at May 13, 2011 05:24 PM (+sBB4)

189 I was excited about this "conservative" 2 time Governor of "Indiana" when I first heard about him. I thought this guy could be the one. I wanted to like him. Since then EVERYTHING he has done and saidother then the planned parenthood thing has turned me off. Its almost like he is subconsciously commiting politcal suicide every time he opens his mouth. Maybe he really doesn't want the job deep down.
Also, after watching him do his one and only interview cycle during the union fight and watching him do a couple of softball interviews on Fox News, I came away feeling more creeped out by his style then bored.
I haven't ruled him out yet, but the dude is batting .125 with no homers and 1 RBI even though he is getting lots of protection and lots of opportunities in the lineup hitting cleanup.
In other words he better start hitting for the home team soon.

Posted by: Keven at May 13, 2011 05:24 PM (UMRed)

190 Posted by: Cherry


Posted by: laceyunderalls RINO Trash Committee Chair, Cincinnati Chapter at May 13, 2011 05:24 PM (pLTLS)

191 Fuck. This can't be good.
From Crazy Jim Webb: I recently made recommendations to the Department of Defense (DoD) to save taxpayers billions of dollars as we restructure U.S. military forces in East Asia. The DoD’s current base realignment plans for South Korea, Japan and Guam are simply unrealistic and unaffordable. The new recommendations I offered, along with Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ), are workable, cost-effective and will strengthen the American contribution to the security of the region.

Posted by: dagny at May 13, 2011 05:25 PM (/kRxM)

192 If we nominate Mitch Daniels we deserve 4 more years of Obama.

Posted by: Marie at May 13, 2011 05:25 PM (W7Seu)

193 172, Bush started this deficit spending mess cause he wouldn't say fuck you no. Most Pols don't have enough balls to say fuck you no. So no I am not supporting your arguement. Are there pols that will say fuck you no? Maybe? But Cain is just as qualified as any of the rest of those asshats. I'm taking my little one to T-ball practice now, Later.

Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at May 13, 2011 05:26 PM (Jq4xH)

194 That is true about Gov. Walker, but some posters on here and other blogs
were preparing to call him a RINO and fake squish over taking his time
to wait for the Democrats to come back to Madison

You're right, although I think a lot of that is the magnification you get from internet chat room discussions by folks who have access to too much information, much of which is bad information.

Posted by: Y-not at May 13, 2011 05:26 PM (pW2o8)

195 >>>You've just got it all fucking figured out, don't you, Jeff?
I have my opinions and I'm arguing them. Seriously, is there something wrong with that? If you disagree, then pick apart my argument and tell me the parts you disagree with! Then I'll respond rebut. That's how it goes.

But just telling me I'm an asshole, or a smartypants, or that "ooh you must think you're SOOO smart"...what does that accomplish? How does that refute me? How does that convince anyone who's reading along and weighing the claims on both sides? I write such long, involved posts precisely because I'm always trying to add in justification for my positions, not just say "Herman Cain sucks! Faggots!" and walk away.

Posted by: Jeff B. at May 13, 2011 05:26 PM (NjYDy)

196 "I'm voting for Jack Daniels.
Twice."


Posted by: Joe Mama at May 13, 2011 04:56 PM

I like the way you think! lol

Posted by: derised1 at May 13, 2011 05:29 PM (xI4NA)

197 @176

He's against Abortion and Gay Marriage. Hence clarity. Just because he was temporarily in the Bush administration doesn't make him a covert social liberal.

Posted by: Nate at May 13, 2011 05:30 PM (BBlzg)

198

Certainly, we don't put up with guys on our side who
believe in working steadily and incrementally to accomplish what they
want (which is exactly how the Left enacted all the things it wanted
over the decades). We want Warriors, not Politicians. We want all or
nothing, and if we can't get it all we'll let the Dems
take it all and congratulate ourselves for playing our twisted,
perpetually-losing version of the "long game". Reagan? He might as
well have been another Mike Castle.


Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at May 13, 2011 05:15 PM (FYCiJ)

Geez, undead, Reagan was conservative for the times (2+ decades of "progressives" of one stripe or another), but he was no Goldwater. That said, before Reagan, Goldwater got trounced. There's no evidence that a real conservative would be a dead man walking the way it was assumed in 1980. We can, and should, demand better. If all the Republicans are going to do is efficiently run a leviathan of federal waste, then there's no need for them.
And no need to feel obligated to vote for them, for that matter.

Posted by: s'moron at May 13, 2011 05:30 PM (UaxA0)

199 I think Romney's record as Governor is very accomplished especially with the fact that 80% of the other lawmakers were democrats.

Posted by: polynikes at May 13, 2011 05:32 PM (3hdsA)

200 He's against Abortion and Gay Marriage . . .
This helps, thanks, but it would help more if you would cite evidence of this.

Posted by: NotALibertarian at May 13, 2011 05:32 PM (psns8)

201 150
... im just so excited to be part of a clique.... (i
know, maybe i should get out more and talk to people rather than horses
and cats and ONT people)

Posted by: Gushka at May 13, 2011 05:11 PM (93zw2)
That reminds me.....how is the horse that you rescued?


Posted by: Tami at May 13, 2011 05:13 PM (VuLos)
no longer a dead horse walking. my rescue is adorable and now tame enough to wear a halter and stand on a box and Take X-rays which proved she was worth saving and could even with proper shoes be made sound and able to be ridden gently. Which is awesome because this darling lady horse wants a job...

Posted by: Gushka at May 13, 2011 05:36 PM (93zw2)

202 Mitch Daniels cannot be elected in an Idiocracy. He doesn't have electrolytes. He has to be loud, brash and aggressive, like a man fighting three cougars armed with chainsaws that breath fire.Or like a turbo-charges bulldozer pushing 600 land sharks off the side of an aircraft carrier.Is Uhmerica an Idiocracy now? Does Daniels have to change his name to Herbert Alonzo Mountain Dew Camacho?

Posted by: Presnit Barry Soetoro at May 13, 2011 05:37 PM (/FqjZ)

203 @201

By the same token, do you have "evidence" that he was ashamed of the Abortion Bill he signed recently?

From the examiner:
Curt Smith of the Indiana Family Institute has since noted his governor is "pro-family, pro-faith, pro-life guy" who supports both the Mexico City Policy and the Hyde Amendment. As governor, he has actively implemented pro-life legislation.

So what was Daniels thinking? In remarks given to me by the governor's office, Daniels says the truce was "just a suggestion. It was an expression of urgency I think that all Americans should feel about certain other questions like the debt burden."

Daniels continued, "I chose the word truce because no one has to change their point and no one has to surrender. Simply, we have to come together to address what I believe are the most urgent problems of the country."



Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/node/77051#ixzz1MGr2F4Jf

I will have to look deeper to look at his record on Gay Marriage, but the Indiana Family Institute is hardly a RINO, social liberal outfit.

Posted by: Nate at May 13, 2011 05:38 PM (BBlzg)

204 Look, the field is narrowing and about to be set in stone. We have a choice between a finite number of candidates and the trick is to pick a conservative who can beat Obama. Daniels is the only one who fits the bill. Maybe Pawlenty as well, and Romney if you consider Romney a conservative. But that's pretty much it. Palin, Bachmann, Cain, Trump, Santorum... they'd all lose. Newt as well. Buddy Roemer is way past his prime. Ron Paul and Gary Johnson would never get past the so-cons. Huck ain't running. Huntsman is an Olympia Snowe RINO.
So it's Daniels, Romney, or Pawlenty. Daniels strikes me as the one with the clearest record of conservative accomplishments. But the point is, we have to pick one of those three. Not one of those three OR Zombie Reagan. One of THOSE THREE. I pick Daniels. If the rest of you say, "We can't live with Daniels, but Romney would be okay," then I'd cut a deal with you and pick Romney. Let's get real here and figure out which one we can all live with.

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 05:41 PM (Mr4uJ)

205 I'm actually looking foward to 2012. This is going to be one of the most heated and contested elections in a long time, perhaps since before Lincoln. We're going to be deciding, not only the president, butthe future direction of this country.
Oops! (Got distracted there by SE Cupp)
Anyway, I think we'll nominate a good candidate. He/she won't be perfect, but the ticket will be much closer to what conservativeswanted in 2008.

Posted by: Soona at May 13, 2011 05:42 PM (4HYWk)

206 203 Mitch Daniels cannot be elected in an Idiocracy. He doesn't have electrolytes. He has to be loud, brash and aggressive, like a man fighting three cougars armed with chainsaws that breath fire.Or like a turbo-charges bulldozer pushing 600 land sharks off the side of an aircraft carrier.Is Uhmerica an Idiocracy now? Does Daniels have to change his name to Herbert Alonzo Mountain Dew Camacho?
Posted by: Presnit Barry Soetoro at May 13, 2011 05:37 PM (/FqjZ)
yes

Posted by: dagny at May 13, 2011 05:44 PM (/kRxM)

207 What is this about "red meat" being "what the customers want", Ace? This is the same bullshit that sunk Fred Thompson. Are people's memories that short that they don't remember even the post a few weeks ago on this very website about Fred's take on how the media portrayed him as tired, unambitious, and therefore not serious? I mean, every time I read some new "woe is us conservatives for not having a Golden Boy" piece that inadvertently shits all over the current candidates for not being movie stars (and this is usually done by the same people who called Palin not serious because she did leverage her star power), it looks to me like we're already doing the media's job of demoralizing everyone about whoever starts to pick up a bit of steam and generate a bit of interest because, oh, they're not perfect or they've said a few things that will hurt them or what not. Do we care about results and policy and serious governing, or are we going to lean back and shit all over anyone who doesn't dazzle us because "that's what the media's going to look for"?

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at May 13, 2011 05:46 PM (Y5I9o)

208 no longer a dead horse walking. my
rescue is adorable and now tame enough to wear a halter and stand on a
box and Take X-rays which proved she was worth saving and could even
with proper shoes be made sound and able to be ridden gently. Which is
awesome because this darling lady horse wants a job...Posted by: Gushka at May 13, 2011 05:36 PM (93zw2)
That's great news and all due to your efforts! Well done.

Posted by: Tami at May 13, 2011 05:47 PM (VuLos)

209 @207,203: If we already live in an Idiocracy that won't elect a serious, sober candidate over Barry-O, then we're already fucked no matter what. But we don't know that yet, and the whole game the Barry and the media are going to play is the inevitability/demoralization game--which we already seem to like to play ourselves by self-righteously shooting down anyone who doesn't sparkle and shine and wow us like some two-bit entertainer, rather than a serious presidential candidate. We need to stick to policy, policy, policy, and forget all of this personal background, personality/likeability bullshit that plays to the Left's strengths of media manipulation and character assassination.

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at May 13, 2011 05:51 PM (Y5I9o)

210 By the same token, do you have "evidence" that he was ashamed of the Abortion Bill he signed recently?
I don't think he was ashamed of the abortion bill. I am concerned that he's a squish when it comes to gay rights, and that social cons are willing to call him a social con based on his anti-abortion viewsalone.
Look, the year Daniels comes out with his truce comments -- seemingly in support of allowing GOProud to yank the GOP around -- we end up with a repeal of DADT. That repeal was supported by Toomey, Flake, and other"conservative" Republicans.And now our military personnel are having tosit through sermons about how fabulously normalhomosexuality is.If Daniels is a sincere social con, he isn't a very smart one. With social cons like this, who needs liberals?
Why, by the way,are so annoyed that I want actual evidence of his views on gay issues in light of his comments?

Posted by: NotALibertarian at May 13, 2011 05:53 PM (psns8)

211 ... I was wrong. Posted by: Jeff B. at May 13, 2011 05:07 PM (NjYDy) Everyone, take note. Prepare ye and repent, for the end is nigh!

Posted by: Minuteman at May 13, 2011 05:54 PM (/FqjZ)

212 Look, the year Daniels comes out with his truce comments -- seemingly in
support of allowing GOProud to yank the GOP around -- we end up with a
repeal of DADT. That repeal was supported by Toomey, Flake, and
other"conservative" Republicans.

Including Palin, as I recall.


DADT happened. I think it's a terrible idea, but I don't put it in the top 3 issues facing the country right now. I'm not even sure if it makes the top 10.

Posted by: Y-not at May 13, 2011 05:58 PM (pW2o8)

213 Whoopee! I was post # 69.

Posted by: Randall Hoven at May 13, 2011 05:58 PM (AI5dd)

214
This may be the year I do a write-in vote. Had enough nose-holding and misgivings about candidates to last me a lifetime. Did consider not voting at all, but realized that is plain stupid. Down ticket is every bit as vital.

I did some looking in reference to the current crop , and only one meets most all the criteria. I'm sure y'all know who is being referred to here.

And with that, I'm all done commenting about candidates, but will be reading everyone's opinions with the usual great relish.

Posted by: irongrampa at May 13, 2011 05:59 PM (ud5dN)

215 @211: But this is precisely the kind of shoot-yourself-in-the-foot bullcrap that's useless. I mean, I understand that social cons (and I'm a strong social con) want to leverage power in the party through the primaries, but seriously, you're getting on the back of the guy who just cut state funding for Planned Parenthood because he made a comment (the "truce") recognizing that a large segment of the general electorate is not socially conservative? To me, this smacks of valuing style over substance. And you're equating Daniels to openly Liberal policy? Are you kidding me? Nothing is ever going to be good enough for you except a down-the-line, red-meater like Santorum who will alienate large swaths of the public.

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at May 13, 2011 06:02 PM (Y5I9o)

216 I think it's a terrible idea, but I don't put it in the top 3 issues facing the country right now.
Is it possible that we don't have the luxury of only worrying about the top 3 issues facing the country?

Posted by: NotALibertarian at May 13, 2011 06:03 PM (psns8)

217 irongrampa@215: Obama thanks you for your vote.

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at May 13, 2011 06:03 PM (Y5I9o)

218 I think Daniels was a dipshit for his truce statement. And I have no desire to vote for Santorum. Try again.

Posted by: buzzion at May 13, 2011 06:05 PM (oVQFe)

219 @211

I'm annoyed that some people seem to be ignoring chunks of his legislative record for simply some of the words that he has said (not you per say).

Whether he is on our side on Abortion shouldn't be in question at that point looking at the pro-life groups in Indiana that talk him up.

The GOProud thing at CPAC annoyed me too, but whose fault do you think that is? The organizers at CPAC who want sweet sweet registration money from organizations like GOProud and the college students that attend every year.

As I said, I'll look into his legislative record on Gay Marriage, but at this point unless I find out about him actively organizing his campaign with the Log Cabin republicans of Indiana, I am not going to immediately assume secret motives on that issue.

Posted by: Nate at May 13, 2011 06:07 PM (BBlzg)

220 @217: Is it possible that we don't have the luxury of only worrying about the top 3 issues facing the country?

That doesn't make any sense. It's a luxury to be able to consider more than just the most important, crisis-inducing topics. You restrict your considerations in a crisis, and you broaden them in luxurious times. Yes, I understand your point that everything is so fucked up that nothing can be considered unimportant, but there's still a hierarchy in play and for most people social con issues don't cut it. Seriously, that's why it's so important to get a guy like Daniels in because he's a proven policy social con who actually can win and be taken seriously by non-social cons. Or else you're just cutting off your nose to spite your face. I mean seriously, who of these republican candidates would be worse for a social con than Obama, who?

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at May 13, 2011 06:07 PM (Y5I9o)

221 I love all you guys griping that Reagan would be condemned as a RINO who fails the purity test if he were running in today's environment.

Maybe that would have happened, but let's not pretend that a bunch of you wouldn't be wetting your pants in fear that he's just too darned divisive and conservative and unelectable because of his silly past the first time you heard the Left smear his acting career or declare him too stupid to be POTUS.

Posted by: Kensington at May 13, 2011 06:08 PM (kFdeH)

222 @72: "The evo psych explanation is that this is the equivalent of wandering into another tribes territory when out hunting. Your body reacts by trying to make you meek so you don't start a fight and get killed. Head down, shoulders tucked, small and unthreatening.As right-wingers we are constantly in enemy territory -- which is why we actually need bluster and bravado."
Ok - if the GOP runs anyone who comes out and does a Maori haka (Ka mate, ka mate, ka ora!)before each debate, I will vote for that person unashamedly.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at May 13, 2011 06:09 PM (xy9wk)

223 . . .you're getting on the back of the guy who just cut state funding for Planned Parenthood because he made a comment (the "truce") recognizing that a large segment of the general electorate is not socially conservative? To me, this smacks of valuing style over substance.
News flash: Abortion and gay marriage are two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT issues. That means that it is possible to be conservative on one and agnostic on the other. People who care about the gay marriage issue have rational questions about Daniels. Sorry to rain on your parade.
By the way, if you take a look at actualreferendums and election results, you'll notice thata large segment of the general electorate IS socially conservative.

Posted by: NotALibertarian at May 13, 2011 06:09 PM (psns8)

224 @222

How is either way of looking at things smart when picking a nominee? That is the point. Each denies the fact that we need to get to 50 + 1 anyway we can.

Posted by: Nate at May 13, 2011 06:11 PM (BBlzg)

225 I'm sorry, but in what universe does a President Mitch Daniels somehow lead to gay marriage? It's like you're projecting your worst fears onto Mitch Daniels. "If Mitch Daniels is elected, my favorite shows will be taken of the air. Think about it."
I mean, come on. It's time for people to admit that they just don't like Mitch Daniels, either because they support another candidate, or because he just rubs them the wrong way. But don't pretend it's because of some liberal policy view that you just KNOW he holds even though his record is pristine conservative.

Posted by: Dave at May 13, 2011 06:12 PM (Mr4uJ)

226 "How is either way of looking at things smart when picking a nominee?
That is the point. Each denies the fact that we need to get to 50 + 1
anyway we can."
Yeah, I get it. It's just that I only ever see this presented through the "REAGAN WOULD BE CALLED A RINO!!1!" lens, and it annoys me.

Posted by: Kensington at May 13, 2011 06:12 PM (kFdeH)

227 Yeah, I get it. It's just that I only ever see this presented through the "REAGAN WOULD BE CALLED A RINO!!1!" lens, and it annoys me.
Posted by: Kensington at May 13, 2011 06:12 PM (kFdeH)
Well you know don't forget how the guys saying this are the same ones constantly mocking anyone comparing Palin and Reagan with the media'sefforts to paint them as stupid.

Posted by: buzzion at May 13, 2011 06:17 PM (oVQFe)

228 I'm sorry, but in what universe does a President Mitch Daniels somehow lead to gay marriage?
When the President of the United States is a member of your party, he exerts an enormous amount of influence onyour party. A Republican president who is a marriage agnostic will -- even if only through his indifference to the issue --advance the gay rights movement currently pushing itself into the Republican Party.

Posted by: NotALibertarian at May 13, 2011 06:17 PM (psns8)

229 @228

Some of those folks are also pointing out that just because she is being attacked for stupid stuff doesn't mean she is Reagan reincarnated. We'll see how she does if she runs.

Posted by: Nate at May 13, 2011 06:20 PM (BBlzg)

230 @116: "don't vote for Obama by staying home."
Unless you live in a swing state, staying home/voting makes no difference. Like it or not, it's only the votes in a few states that *really* count.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at May 13, 2011 06:20 PM (xy9wk)

231 209
no longer a dead horse walking. my
rescue is adorable and now tame enough to wear a halter and stand on a
box and Take X-rays which proved she was worth saving and could even
with proper shoes be made sound and able to be ridden gently. Which is
awesome because this darling lady horse wants a job...Posted by: Gushka at May 13, 2011 05:36 PM (93zw2)
That's great news and all due to your efforts! Well done.


Posted by: Tami at May 13, 2011 05:47 PM (VuLos)
Ok i MUST be believing she will go sound... I just bought the mare her very own saddle! It was totally on sale and i talked to the consigner about taking 20% off and they did and so i paid less for it than i have paid for some bridles.and its red. a deep burgundy bullfighting saddle for jousting. She is just gonna LOVE the new job we have planned for her.

Posted by: Gushka at May 13, 2011 06:28 PM (93zw2)

232 You're good people Gushka.

Posted by: Tami at May 13, 2011 06:38 PM (VuLos)

233 "Beta Male Mitch" Daniels is the Dems/Obama/Media dream candidate, all the McCain loserdom squared! Beta Male Mitch is such a loser, his wife dumped him after four kids to go after some Plastic Surgeon in California, and then came crawling back when she got dumped for a younger, hotter, tighter model.

Beta Male Mitch is the guy who not even his wife believed in. How's that for weakness? F it all, why not just choose Richard Simmons or something? Beta Male Mitch, little Timmy Down the Well (Pawlenty), who was AWOL when Al Franken punked him out and stole the election, are not going to get it done. Obama will steamroll right over him and take the White female vote like 90% or something.

Women cannot ABIDE weakness. Beta Male Mitch may have won in a Conservative state against weak opposition, but up against the Magical Black Guy(tm) of Hope and Change and Unicorns, he's toast. Short, weak, sexless, pathetic, and the very model of a loser beta male (marrying a skank and thinking her a princess).

No Beta Male Mitch. No Newt (divorcing your wife by dumping the divorce papers on her hospital bed after cancer surgery turns off, female voters). No smarmy, Hucksterbee. No Little Timmy down the well. No Mittens and the Healthcare of doom.

Santorum? Trump? Cain? Sure why not?

Don't let Obama pull a "I'll pick my GOP opposition" like he did with Ryan/Alan Keyes, or McCain. Obama would run right over Beta Male Mitch.

Bottom line, if even your own wife prefers other guys to you, then you are in trouble. [It is rumored that Daniels is not very well closeted gay, don't know if its true but would explain a lot. He's a joke. One best put down quickly. Just say no to Beta Male Mitch.]

Posted by: whiskey at May 13, 2011 06:39 PM (L03mw)

234 I am late for almost all threads, but if you have space in the clique for a late entry, I'm your man er woman. Lol
On topic I don't know enough about Daniels either way, but he sounds like he is dithering on making a decision.I hate that. And if his wife is trying to see if she will be off limits I suggest she not hold her breath. She cheated on her husband. How you going to pretty that up?

Posted by: lauren at May 13, 2011 06:40 PM (ibCFU)

235 Let 's address the key point about Daniel 's "humility" and his "quiet strength". Against the Soviet Union, Reagan wasn't shy in morally condemning the evil of their communist system. He didn't strut about it. Just calmly pronounce the evil of their system and how it is destined for the history 's ash heap. We need the same strength in our presidential candidate in anticipation of the sewage of the whole leftist machine. Obama declared that the Reps are the enemies. The left hates conservatives more than they hate the terrorists. They will not stop short of any lies/smears. Daniel is simply not a man of that caliber to take on this fight for our country. He can be a sec of Commerce. Obama is an example of strutting in the fight against the terrorists. But do we need the squishiness of Daniel in this war?

Posted by: LAI at May 13, 2011 06:42 PM (nFLL6)

236
@224: News flash: Abortion and gay marriage are two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
issues. That means that it is possible to be conservative on one and
agnostic on the other. People who care about the gay marriage issue
have rational questions about Daniels. Sorry to rain on your parade.
By the way, if you take a look at actualreferendums and election
results, you'll notice thata large segment of the general electorate IS
socially conservative.
1) Sure you can have your rational questions, but in what rational universe is Obama better on social con issues than any of the current serious Republican candidates? If Daniels is not good enough for you on SOME issues, are you willing to sacrifice ALL issues to Obama and the far social Left because of that?

2) I never said that social cons aren't a large part of the electorate; they are. But the fact that a large segment of the general electorate is socially conservative does not mean that the segment of the general electorate that is not socially conservative is small.


Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at May 13, 2011 06:46 PM (Y5I9o)

237 @234,236: How is any of this related to policy decisions and proven records of governing? "Beta male bitch" Daniels? Is that a smart way to pick who you want to govern your country? What is this, the WWE? That post is more akin to "idiocracy" than most of the Obama Hero Worship stuff I've seen.

And as for the Reagan vs. USSR deal, Reagan was a sitting president for several years and spoke from a position of strength against mortal enemies of the US. We should not expect presidents, much less not-yet-declared candidates, to always speak with such moral fervor, since it cheapens the effect. I go back to my example of Fred Thompson and how the media jumped on him as not being serious, when if you actually listened to him, he was often deadly serious. Are you going to play the media's game of choosing glitz over substance?

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at May 13, 2011 06:57 PM (Y5I9o)

238 @LAI

Your assuming Daniels would be squishy in War.

@Whiskey

"Bottom line, if even your own wife prefers other guys to you, then you are in trouble. [It is rumored that Daniels is not very well closeted gay, don't know if its true but would explain a lot. He's a joke. One best put down quickly. Just say no to Beta Male Mitch.]"

So now we are theorizing that he's secretly Gay?
This is ridiculous.

Posted by: Nate at May 13, 2011 07:00 PM (BBlzg)

239 I dreamed a dream ... and Michell Bachmann roared to the front just as many conservatives were giving up hope.

There's Newt, gamely explaining his, errr, peccaddillos to a smirking press. No one is real sure why he's running in the first place.

Then Ron Paul folds after his UFO speech, as most expected, and quietly recharges his House campaign funds, as everyone expected. Most know that if Paul gets the nod, Obama will dance a jig all the way back to the Oval Office.

Mitt Romney holds an emergency press conference to dispel rumors he's a
liberal but is unable to pronounce "conservative" when asked. The head
spin did not help his poll numbers much, either. Obama will beat him, anyway.

Mike Huckabee announces he is thinking of running, maybe will not run, but is seriously, seriously giving it a lot of thought and plans to form a committee to study it from all angles and then let us all know. Obama would cream him, anyway.

Amid growing despair, Bachman releases her economic recovery plans, her plans for reducing the debt, and her plans to wreak holy war on some sorry SOBs that need killing. I resisted the siren call of this Amazon queen -- how dare she when so many GOPers had waited patiently for their turn?



How could she turn The Newt into so much news oatmeal?

Wasn't this a mortal insult to Romney and Paul? Could we deal with a seriously po'ed Huckabee???

The PTB turned desperately to someone to rescue them from this .. this woman! .. before it was too late. Why, she might even actually win and that would not sit well with Boehner and McConnell, nosireebob. McCain lit up the wires for a while ... but faded when everyone realized it was a last-ditch trick by the NY Times ... and when the dust settled, it was Bachman all the way.

She wore a fashionable but business-like navy blue suit to her swearing in.

... but I woke up and the 100 billion in cuts the GOP called for had, again, been reduced to a few billion but with Boehner's promise that next time ... next time they were serious about cutting.


Posted by: Full Moon at May 13, 2011 07:04 PM (m75CK)

240 . . . but in what rational universe is Obama better on social con issues than any of the current serious Republican candidates?
Am I to understand that you think Daniels -- or a social semi-lib --is our only chance against Obama?
I know I'll get yelled at for saying it, but with $4.00 gas and 18% unemployment, Anybody But Obama is a shoe-in.

Posted by: NotALibertarian at May 13, 2011 07:04 PM (psns8)

241 @241:
Am I to understand that you think Daniels -- or a social semi-lib --is our only chance against Obama?

I know I'll get yelled at for saying it, but with $4.00 gas and 18% unemployment, Anybody But Obama is a shoe-in.


1) I don't think Anybody But Obama is a shoe-in. Look at how McCain did against a guy who still has no serious coherent policies except Bigger Government, who still contradicts himself at every turn, who still has not had a serious vetting by the media about what his actual positions are, etc. And they will be even more in the tank for him now, and he has the incumbent's advantage in machine-voting turnout.
2) As for your question, I'm looking at the current crop of candidates, not some ideal Social Con candidate. And in fact, we kind of already have that guy in the mix; his name is Rick Santorum. How has he done in past years? Not too well. Anyway, I'm not beholden to a Daniels candidacy; I'm just pointing out that he does have a strong pro-life record, which is a lot more than you can say about the social conservatism of other current candidates. yeah, I know abortion isn't gay marriage or DADT. And I respect that at this stage of the game you do want clearer answers from him on those issues, esp. in light of his comments.

But this is where my question to you comes in: If Daniels, or some other candidate you deem "semi-lib" gets nominated, are you willing to throw away potential gains on some social con issues and risk liberal advances in them due to a 2nd Obama term, by withholding your support because they're not socially conservative enough for you? And if that's the case, how precisely would any of the current candidates be worse for social con issues than Obama so as to merit effectively supporting him over any Republican?

Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at May 13, 2011 07:26 PM (Y5I9o)

242 This election cycle we are going to need someone to fight and not be so polite. Saying that I am not a fan, I don't believe in a Vat tax which he does seem to give thought at implementing. Meaning he is sort of a big government guy and trying not to admit it. We are going to need someone who is not establishment guy to move away from this behemoth of government that is stagnating business. I do have to say the wife thingy really bothers me too. I just think it's weird. Mitch Daniels step next to Boehner, I get the same strange weirdness with these guys just the moment or this period in time is just too monumental for them. I'll take quiet like Gen Petreaus.

Posted by: lions at May 13, 2011 07:28 PM (BUnJ9)

243 But does not forgiving a wrong take more toughness than taking self-pleasing pleasure in payback?

Yes.

But I question his judgement. When his wife left, then came back, we are unsure of the circumstances. If it is a simple as presented (doubtful), how did she win his trust on the second go round?

What did she do to earn that trust back?

I can forgive a lot. But once you've broken trust with me, especially on a deep, personal level like theirs, you're most like not every going to win it back.

I'd like to know how she earned his trust. It'll shed a great deal of light on his character.

If he just forgave her, and welcomed her back no questions asked, then he is unsuited for the Presidency.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at May 13, 2011 07:37 PM (1hM1d)

244 Look at how McCain did against a guy who still has no serious coherent policies except Bigger Government
This is not 2008. Obama is not the same candidate.He has a record -- an utterly contemptible record in the eyes of many former Obama-voters who still do not have jobs, and whostill find themselveswaiting for the oceans to stop rising.
I'm looking at the current crop of candidates, not some ideal Social Con candidate.
You have a valid point. (Pence was my ideal.) But is Bachmann really unelectable? How about Herman Cain?
I will certainly not withhold my support if Daniels is the nominee. But he isn't the nominee. That's the purpose of the primary-stage.Here are some non-social concerns I have: his supposed interest in a VAT (if true, this should disqualify him automatically), his support for private-sector unions, and the fact that heisn't Mike Pence.

Posted by: NotALibertarian at May 13, 2011 08:08 PM (psns8)

245 Here's an admiring summary of Daniels' RINO accomplishments, from liberal Ruth Marcus who can't wait(!) for a Daniels' run:
In a rigid GOP world of no-new-taxes ideologues, Daniels actually proposed a temporary tax increase to help close the state’s budget gap. He created a health-care plan for uninsured residents not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid — and paid for it in part with higher tobacco taxes. He believes in limited government but implemented all-day kindergarten and pressed for new spending on infrastructure.

Posted by: NotALibertarian at May 13, 2011 08:24 PM (psns8)

246 Me:anybody havea linkto the formsfor renunciation of citizenship?
Posted by: glowing blue meat at May 13, 2011 04:29 PM (K/USr)
You know you are allowed to check out - but you can never leave . . . - The Eagles

Posted by: 57 states at May 13, 2011 08:25 PM (DzFce)

247 seriously, you guys would be better off getting the red eye crew in a room and having gutfeld announce the party nominee, the nominee they are all their regulars picked. They have more of an idea of what's going on in the republican party than guys like boehner and mcconnell.

Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 08:26 PM (k1rwm)

248 @ 242- But this is where my question to you comes in: If Daniels, or some other candidate you deem "semi-lib" gets nominated, are you willing to throw away potential gains on some . . .
We haven't even held the primaries and we are discussing the terms of surrender?
Alex, I'll take Marxism-lite for theLast Hundred Years for 50 bucks please . . .

Posted by: 57 states at May 13, 2011 08:36 PM (DzFce)

249 From Lugar's number 1 butt boy to bag man for Eli Lilly to governor of Indiana. Its the American dream.

Posted by: Call me Ishmael at May 13, 2011 08:41 PM (do977)

250 What is often taken as "toughness" -- surface bluster -- is not in fact toughness. Toughness often exhibits itself as quietness -- and loud brashness is actually often not toughness, but overcompensation due to fear.
This can not possibly be said often enough. I could write a whole freaking book on the truth of this statement. Those who whine about Daniels not being a fucking loudmouth jackass like Trump or whomever obviously aren't thinking of how people really are, in real life.

Daniels isn't my dream candidate either, but right now I guess he's my candidate since my dad laughed when I told him he should run (he'd be far better than Trump or Cain on all counts). But Mitch Daniels' personal story is a PLUS for me. He dealt with a really difficult personal situation without flaking out, which is more than I can say for a lot of people (if not most). My biggest complaint about Mitch Daniels is that I think his wife seems like a bitch, possibly Teresa Heinz Kerry-grade bitch, but whatever.

And he's certainly NOT a "semi-lib." If that remark is due to the "truce" comments, then you don't understand those comments at all, or his record. Rick Santorum and Jim Demint and everyone who demagogues it has a personal, self-serving reason for doing so. Their demagoguery is utterly fallacious, completely based in fantasy.

Posted by: Beth at May 13, 2011 08:59 PM (5NfIh)

251 @246

He also capped property taxes, passed a voucher program, and did the socon things we discussed already. His budget tax was a one year 1% increase and a cigarette tax is a lot better for people than an increase on income or property tax.

But I'm guessing all of the Indiana Republicans that voted for him twice are raging RINOS.

Posted by: Nate at May 13, 2011 09:00 PM (BBlzg)

252 The worst thing I've heard about Daniels so far is actually that he thinks Condi Rice would be a good VP pick.

What a disaster she was - and that was when she was focusing on foreign policy.

Posted by: MlR at May 13, 2011 09:07 PM (uxyPr)

253 Nate, the problem is, people don't want Mitch Daniels because he's not full of fire and red meat. They want a conservative version of Obama - someone who has no substance but tons of fire and red meat rhetoric so they can have those fun tingles up their legs just like Chrissy Matthews. They don't want Reagan, they want Obama. This is why we have this fucking clown car of candidates currently wasting our time and slowly destroying every last shred of my faith in humanity. People are stupid, hypocritical, completely incapable of critical thinking these days. FML.

I actually saw someone say yesterday that they were for Sarah Palin because she knows how to shoot a real rifle. This is why we can't have nice things, you know. *weeps for America*

Posted by: Beth at May 13, 2011 09:13 PM (5NfIh)

254 Mark Levin had a caller who said that daniels passed the largest tax increase on small business in the state's history ostensibly to pay for unemployment. The guy was well spoken and he said the state is not so happy with him once you get away from the 90 mile radius around Indianapolis. Hmmm New York in Indiana? doesn't sound like a republican, free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity to me. Sounds like "let's make more unemployed by sticking it hard to small business".

Posted by: curious at May 13, 2011 09:29 PM (k1rwm)

255 It will take some backbone to beat Obama.

The presence of which some would be forgiven for questioning in the typical Republican Party member.

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at May 13, 2011 09:54 PM (gvBdW)

256 Nate, the problem is, people don't want Mitch Daniels because he's not
full of fire and red meat. They want a conservative version of Obama -
someone who has no substance but tons of fire and red meat rhetoric so
they can have those fun tingles up their legs just like Chrissy
Matthews. They don't want Reagan, they want Obama.

Let 's be honest about it. Can we imagine Reagan calling for a truce on social issues because the country was facing great danger from outside and economic malaise at home? Remember the communists were advancing around the world after the fall of South Vietnam in 1975. Can we imagine Reagan not ready to debate foreign policy with Carter? We can't because it never happened. This spin about fire and brimstone doesn't change the fact that Daniels is not ready. Let 's move on to a better and more electable candidate.

Posted by: LAI at May 13, 2011 10:02 PM (nFLL6)

257 Another take on Mitch Daniels will be the take the Dems will press on his involvement as CEO with the pattern of bribery and other scandals at Eli Lilly and also with the unholy mess in Duke Energy. Besides being inevitable that it all comes out, both are also potentially a double-edged sword, not just because raising them also brings up the contrast of his pre-political background with the total lack of any business finance or even real business experience at all by President Job Training, but also allow for a tsunami of stories to show Daniels working to change just that culture at both places.

Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at May 14, 2011 12:53 AM (NHeC0)

258 @LAI

Your telling me Reagan NEVER said anything stupid or politically inadvisable? And again, record should speak louder than words.

Posted by: Nate at May 14, 2011 01:00 AM (BBlzg)

259






Normal
0



7.8 磅
0
2

false
false
false

EN-US
ZH-CN
X-NONE















































































































































































/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:普通表格;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.5pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-font-kerning:1.0pt;}



the best pdf converter Windows and Mac OSX pdf converter for mac | pdf converter pdf to swf
converter Powerful
evidence: using PDF to IMAGE Converter, U can convert pdf to all kinds of image
formats: JPEG, PNG, GIF, BMP, PCX, TGA, TIFF. U can also adjust the color,
quailty, resolution, page of the files converted! flv converter
flv converter flv converter flv converter flv converter flv converter flv converter flv converter flv converter flv converter flv converter

Using pdf
to word converter, U can convert pdf to all kinds of
pdf formats to Word. U can also adjust the color, quailty, resolution, page of
the files converted | .baby steps, I
guess. pdf
to word converter pdf to
word converter pdf to
word converter pdf to
word converter pdf to
word converter pdf to
word converter pdf to
word converter pdf to swf
convert pdf
files

* Optimal preset
formats for iPad, Galaxy Tab, Dell Streak, iPhone, iPod, Gphone, Blackberry,
PS3, Xbox, PSP, Wii, DV, etc.

ipad converter iPad Video Converter is then designed for iPad
fans to convert videos to iPad. iPad converter This special
ipad video converter can convert all video formats to iPad compatible formats. DVD to ipad ipad to Mac
transfer ipad to
computer transfer ipad transfer epub to ipad |

Posted by: romains at May 14, 2011 01:32 AM (4C4RX)

260 I'm prejudiced against Daniels due to my experience working as a woman in a technical field for 30 years. He's short and bald. Sorry. That's a deadly combination. All the short balding men I've ever worked with were petty and insecure.

As for his marital history? Oh, boy. I'm afraid he must also suffer from Little Dick Syndrome. His wife has an affair with an old boyfriend and runs off to marry him, leaving Mitch with 4 girls. I would bet you anything that by then Mitch was probably already doing all the shopping, cooking, cleaning, and laundry anyway so really didn't notice much difference.

For me, it's not that fact that she ran off that reflects poorly on Mitch. No, it's that he took her back. Yeah, my guess is it's about 2 inches. We don't need an insecure man in the White House. Short, balding, and a little dick. Nope.

Posted by: Jaynie59 at May 14, 2011 10:39 AM (4zKCA)

261
Anything we say about Mitch will be nothing compared to what Obama's media say about him and his family. The media does even have to say anything that is true! They have a license to lie. They must. They do it constantly.

Posted by: burt at May 14, 2011 11:00 AM (OzqQM)

262 No.

Posted by: gary gulrud at May 14, 2011 07:52 PM (/g2vP)

263 Check Bill Quick at Daily Pundit on IN Supremes selection and Mich's contribution.

Posted by: gary gulrud at May 14, 2011 08:14 PM (/g2vP)

264 http://chuntiandegushi.easyjournal.com/
http://chaoshidexin.easyjournal.com/
4.8ºÅ
http://gongzuoblog.easyjournal.com/
http://gonzuoblog.easyjournal.com/
4.9ºÅ
http://www.blurty.com/users/kuaileshiguang/

Posted by: gwrgwrg at May 15, 2011 10:49 PM (iQ/HO)

265 http://www.blurty.com/users/qinrendegh/
http://kuaileshiguang.easyjournal.com/
http://qinrendegh.easyjournal.com/
4.11ºÅ
http://lvsedechuntian.easyjournal.com/
http://dazirandemqi.easyjournal.com/

Posted by: gwrgwrg at May 15, 2011 10:49 PM (iQ/HO)

266 http://yataishiye.easyjournal.com/
4.12ºÅ
http://quizilla.teennick.com/my/profile
http://qingchundechi.livejournal.com/
4.1ºÅ
http://yetri.livejournal.com/
http://www.blurty.com/users/hueyy/

Posted by: gwrgwrg at May 15, 2011 10:49 PM (iQ/HO)






Processing 0.04, elapsed 0.064 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0302 seconds, 275 records returned.
Page size 182 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat