Schism on the Right

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

If you're a "kook", do you feel talked down to by the "pragmatists" and their pedigreed ways...

...and...


...if you're a "pragmatist", do you feel the "kooks" are dragging the conservative movement back under a rock?

[Cuda]

How about the pragmatically kooky?

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

How about the pragmatically kooky?

They are a fringe element and should be (rightly) marginalised.

[War Wagon]

If you're a "kook", do you feel talked down to by the "pragmatists" and their pedigreed ways...

A "kook" doesn't know he's a kook and wouldn't admit it even if he did.

if you're a "pragmatist", do you feel the "kooks" are dragging the conservative movement back under a rock?

back under a rock, eh? I see you working.

Nevertheless, it's the liberals who came out from under the rock (or outta' the closet), not the mainstream conservatives.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

I'll say this about the "kook" Right...

...scrape away the faggoty, hand-wringing Evangelicals and the "Little Green Footballs" Hebrew bloggers and you're left with a pretty solid core of Jew haters.

"Dirty Muslim" turns into "Dirty Jew" overnight, just like magic. Ask any Jew, if they're honest, they'll tell you that the enemy is truly within.

[War Wagon]

I would, if I knew any Jews. Needless to say, I don't bother them and they don't bother me.

What's with the obsessive fascination and fanatical hatred towards folks of the Jewish faith around here? Is one supposed to either love them or hate them?

[Cuda]

A "kook" doesn't know he's a kook and wouldn't admit it even if he did.

[Smackie Chan]

I would, if I knew any Jews.

I knew two, but one of 'em died Saturday.

[ChargerMike]

...didja mean Gook?

[Diogenes]

...if you're a "pragmatist", do you feel the "kooks" are dragging the conservative movement back under a rock?

Nobody gives a fuck what Ron Paul has to say.

Or the RINOs, for that matter.

[Mikey]

All the Republicans have left, at this point (besides Limburger of course) is an over the hill, disgraced, discredited philanderer who still seems to have delusions of grandeur.

Sad, but good entertainment anyway.

Newt Gingrich, zombie politician
The former House speaker resigned under a cloud of dishonor and disgrace, but now the dead man talking walks among us again.
By Marc Cooper

June 14, 2009

At this point in the recession, you've probably become familiar with the term "zombie bank," a financial institution that can continue operating, thanks to government support, even though its debts outweigh its assets. Now it's time to add a related descriptor to our public discourse: "zombie politician." The term describes a political figure whose electoral worth is less than zero and whose ideas are totally bankrupt, but who can continue to offer up political guidance because he's kept on life-support by media-generated oxygen.

Or if you prefer a shorter definition of a zombie pol, try this one: Newt Gingrich.

Gingrich's political career flat-lined a decade ago when he resigned as speaker of the House under a cloud of dishonor, disgrace and corruption. Yet the dead man again walks among us. Flip on a cable news show, a Sunday talkfest or C-SPAN, or crack open the national section of a major newspaper, and Gingrich is seemingly everywhere, positioned as no less than the leading opposition figure to President Obama.

Strange, because the Republican Party certainly didn't elect him to this position. Indeed, some of today's top GOP leaders -- among them Sen. Lindsey Graham and House Minority Leader John Boehner -- were among the Republicans whose disillusionment with Gingrich's speakership in the fall of 1998 left him little choice but to resign his post.

That's right. Gingrich was swept off the scene not by Democrats but by the very same GOP he now would love to lead. By overplaying the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Gingrich so mismanaged the political moment that his party actually lost five House seats in the 1998 election -- the worst midterm outcome in nearly a century for a party not holding the White House. This catastrophe came in the wake of a tsunami of national disgust after Gingrich effectively shut down the federal government in a budget dispute, telling reporters that he was playing hardball with President Clinton in part because of having been "snubbed" on Air Force One, where he was assigned a seat at the rear of the plane.

Gingrich had to pay a $300,000 fine after his colleagues in the House voted to reprimand him for ethics violations. And then there was the small matter of the congressman's $4.5-million book advance from Rupert Murdoch, whose corporation had several pieces of business pending before the House over which Gingrich presided.

As speaker, he railed against Clinton's immoral behavior, but then it became public that Gingrich had handed his wife a divorce ultimatum in 1981 while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery (an illness Gingrich shamelessly exploited during his 1978 House campaign). Published reports at the time said his ex-wife had to depend on church donations because Gingrich wouldn't provide adequate support for her and his daughters.

Six months after that first divorce, he remarried and stayed married until an affair he was having with an aide 23 years his junior led to yet another divorce. Gingrich was carrying on with his aide, he later confessed, at the same time he was pushing for Clinton's impeachment because of his dalliance with Lewinsky.

After his forced resignation in November 1998, Gingrich disappeared into a little-noticed think tank he founded for himself.

But now, like the living dead, he is back. And his deeply polarizing and frankly fringe rhetoric is unchanged. Sonia Sotomayor is a "racist." Non-Christians are "pagans." The evil federal government should outsource national ID cards and medical registration cards to FedEx, Visa or MasterCard.

The good news: Gingrich is never again, I'd bet cash money, going to hold elected national office, let alone become president. He is a dead man talking.

The bad news (at least for Republicans): He's acting like he's already been elected.

It's not really surprising that the leadership vacuum in the battered, rudderless Republican Party should be filled so quickly by a professional blowhard like Gingrich. Pompous self-promotion is his specialty -- even in his political afterlife.

Nor can we really blame the media for his untimely resurrection. Which news director in his or her right mind wouldn't focus the cameras on a walking, talking zombie? What a show!

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/com ... 5519.story

[Diogenes]

...if you're a "pragmatist", do you feel the "kooks" are dragging the conservative movement back under a rock?

Nobody gives a fuck what Ron Paul has to say.

Or the RINOs, for that matter.

And we care even less about what idiots like Marc Cooper have to say.

Thanks for playing, losers. Dream on.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

There is no schism on the right. There is a schism in the Republican party. Two very different things.

What does this mean?

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

...if you're a "pragmatist", do you feel the "kooks" are dragging the conservative movement back under a rock?

Nobody gives a fuck what Ron Paul has to say.

Or the RINOs, for that matter.

And we care even less about what idiots like Marc Cooper have to say.

Thanks for playing, losers. Dream on.

Actually, Ron Paul never even crossed my mind. That's not what I was refering to when I mentioned "pragmatists".

[Diogenes]

...if you're a "pragmatist", do you feel the "kooks" are dragging the conservative movement back under a rock?

Nobody gives a fuck what Ron Paul has to say.

Or the RINOs, for that matter.

Actually, Ron Paul never even crossed my mind.

Then why mention "kooks"?

[Diogenes]

There is no schism on the right. There is a schism in the Republican party. Two very different things.

What does this mean?

The GOP embraces the Right, the Center, kooks like Paul, and even mugwumps like McClown, Powell and their ilk.

But there is no 'schism'. Just disagreements, as opposed to the leftist herd in the Party of Pelosi.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

There is no schism on the right. There is a schism in the Republican party. Two very different things.

What does this mean?

The GOP embraces the Right, the Center, kooks like Paul, and even mugwumps like McClown, Powell and their ilk.

But there is no 'schism'. Just disagreements, as opposed to the leftist herd in the Party of Pelosi.

But isn't there an increased push to the harder Right that even right/centrists can't completely control?
I'm not specifically talking about the "no tax" whack-jobs...

[Diogenes]

The GOP embraces the Right, the Center, kooks like Paul, and even mugwumps like McClown, Powell and their ilk.

But there is no 'schism'. Just disagreements, as opposed to the leftist herd in the Party of Pelosi.

But isn't there an increased push to the harder Right that even right/centrists can't completely control?

No. There is a spin by he mugwumps that the GOP needs to become Dem-lite, but nobody cares what they think. Of course mainstream Republicans are annoyed by the RINOs blaming them for everything when they had one of their own as the last candidate...

[Van]

mvscal, wouldn't Dio rightly be called one of those conservatives?

Dude seems pretty conservative, and he's still in the building.

[Van]

mvscal, your red state, rural area thumpers, those people tend to be pretty conservative. They're typically your NRA types, your Pro Military types, your Get Washington The Fuck Outta My Business types. They like to kill shit for fun, they distrust government and they're your most passionate Pro-Lifers.

You seem them as socialists?

Farmers who live off of government subsidies, those people seem to be the only ones who really fit the mold of socialists. Otherwise, they seem pretty conservative to me; socially, fiscally, politically.

So, 'splain.

[Diogenes]

So, 'splain.

He's an atheist. Don't look for any common fucking sense.

Hell, the asswipe was supporting Obama in the last election just to see the country go down in flames.

He's as irrelevant as the Paulistas.

[Van]

Dio, no, mvscal was most definitely not supporting Obama in the election. No way, no how.

He may have made jokes along the lines of, "Fine. Let them eat cake," referring to a country who elected that guy deserving what they get, but he sure as hell never supported Obama's election.

He also didn't support McCain's, Romney's or Clinton's candidacies. He basically called all of them worthless.

[LTS TRN 2]

your Get Washington The Fuck Outta My Business types.

Yeah...except when they want Washington to ban gay marriage etc etc. There is nothing conservative about social conservatives. They what to control who you fuck, what you watch, what you drink, what you smoke and what you say.

They're no different from liberals who also want to micromanage your life for you. They're just hostile to different things.

Uh..so what does that leave?...I mean as a true "conservative"? Sounds to me like you're (as usual) promoting some sort of survivalist Libertarian shtick....hmmm, good luck with that.

[Diogenes]

Dio, no, mvscal was most definitely not supporting Obama in the election.

Actually he was the one who said he wanted to see America "irrevocably destroyed" because there wasn't a candidate who fit his particular agenda.

Irrevocably destruction=Obama.

[Van]

Dio, you're smart enough to know not to take a statement like that literally. We all know what he meant.

[Diogenes]

I have no doubt he meant exactly what he said...

When McCain loses because large numbers of fiscal conservatives sit this race out in utter disgust, it will signal the Republican party to get its fucking head out of its ass and start paying more than lip service its traditional philosophy of smaller, limited government and fiscal responsibility.

Voting for McCain proves nothing except for the fact that you're a gullible idiot who will cheerfully support whichever piece of shit they pile in front of your face. Until you say, "ENOUGH!!", they will continue to pile up turd after turd after turd.

What YOU are doing is playing right along with the DNC handbook. Apathy is a major part of their strategy.

I'm not in the least bit apathetic. The sooner this country is irretrievably destroyed, the sooner we can begin putting it back together on a more sane footing starting with the basics.

The current status quo merits nothing more than a bullet in the back of the head. Why do you hate Thomas Jefferson?

http://www.theoneboard.com/board/viewto ... 10&t=28692

Well, he got his guy. And his opinion is now somewhere below Nick Frisco's on the relevancy scale.

[Van]

The sooner this country is irretrievably destroyed, the sooner we can begin putting it back together

Impossible. The first obviates the possibility of the second.

Obviously, mvscal doesn't wish to see his own country truly irretrievably destroyed.

Roughed up a little, maybe. Taught a lesson or two, sure.

Irretrievably destroyed?

Nah. He likes his Chargers, porn and Peruvian food too much. He needs America to keep on keepin' on.

[Diogenes]

The sooner this country is irretrievably destroyed, the sooner we can begin putting it back together

Oxymoron. Obviously, mvscal doesn't wish to se his own country truly irretrievably destroyed.

Not that obvious at all. But be that as it may, he was favoring a McCain loss.

Just like the rest of the Obama supporters.

[Cuda]

Dinsdale, give mvscal back his password

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Dinsdale, give mvscal back his password

No, I'm 8th in line after Bushice and then Mikey gets it.

If you didn't enter your name in the raffle, that's your tough luck.

[Tom In VA]

No fault, none to blame it doesnt mean I dont desire to
Point the finger, blame the other, watch the temple topple over.

[Van]

Where would mvscal post from next, if this country truly were irretrievably destroyed?

Somehow, I just can't see our boy being any happier in, say, Portugal. He'd consider Kiwis to be boorish wankers. He'd want to curbstomp every German who looked at him the wrong way. The Irish would make him violently ill. The Argentinians got ruined by the Brits, so he'd have no respect for them, plus they're not really known for killer porn.

We already know how much mvscal respects Canada.

Hmmmm. Lithuania, perchance? Could mvscal truly find happiness in a country the size of Shaq's shoe; a former Soviet satellite mongrel with no NFL franchise? Could he get all warm and fuzzy about a place whose national dish is boiled limestone with a side of rotting fish heads?

I'm not entirely certain there's a country on this planet where mvscal could find peace, love and good happiness stuff.

[Tom In VA]

You're confusing mvscal with a Utopian. mvscal is much more pragmatic and respectful of nature - human nature - to have visions of rainbows and unicorns running through his head.

He is an admirer and respects the Consitution of the United States. He is simply not a STATIST

And he sees this country going further and further into a what it was not intended to be, a country run by ..... STATISTS.

[Van]

Great. He's already given this country its last rites. So, now it's time to find him a happier, better place.

Any ideas? Iceland? He's kinda latin-y, so it might be a bit too cold there.

Maybe somewhere like Japan. Good restaurants, subserviant women, amazingly freakish porn, everybody's tiny and servile so they'll likely just stay out of his way and they have good cable so he could easily get the NFL Network.

Yeah, maybe Japan. Or Singapore, since they still beat people with sticks, wily nilly.

[Tom In VA]

<object width="320" height="265"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UhjG47gtMCo&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UhjG47gtMCo&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="320" height="265"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Schism man.

[Diogenes]

mvscal is much more pragmatic and respectful of nature - human nature - to have visions of rainbows and unicorns running through his head.

Bull. A pragmatist would recognize that the perfect is the enemy of the good.


Albania would be a good fit.