Don't do anything dumb, Republicans

[JakeStarkey]

Nope, you are wrong: the far right does not speak for the mainstream party. Don't want your crap no more. Go be a party of stupid elsewhere.

Again, guy, that's a lot of big talk, but I'm not seeing any GOP Moderates taking on the crazies.

"Oh, please don't say anything nuts before the election" is hardly a "Profile in Courage".

Except my principle advice was to not nominate nuts.

Try reading, JoeB. Amelia just hung you out and dropped you on your pointy head.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So, the Republican's best strategy is keeping their mouths shut about what they think? Doesn't say much for the GOP.

Nope, you are wrong: the far right does not speak for the mainstream party. Don't want your crap no more. Go be a party of stupid elsewhere.

They don't speak for them per se but they define them. Just like the far left defines the Democrats. Thank the propaganda machine aka mainstream media for this.

Nope, neither far left nor far right define either party now.

The GOP mainstream has been pushing the TeaPs since the election, and after the dummy dance by the TeaPs last fall, the GOP mainstream has been pounding them.

Ted Cruz and those like him are the party of stupid, not the GOP.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So, the Republican's best strategy is keeping their mouths shut about what they think? Doesn't say much for the GOP.

Nope, you are wrong: the far right does not speak for the mainstream party. Don't want your crap no more. Go be a party of stupid elsewhere.

The problem is all politics are local – all it takes is a few republicans saying something stupid in a few Senate races, the same thing that happened in 2010 with Nevada, Colorado, and Connecticut, and the GOP can forget about the Senate.

And Nevada, Colorado, and Connecticut were races republicans would have won in 2010 had they only nominated responsible candidates, not TPM nitwits.

If that should happen again, Clayton, then the GOP is not controlling its stupid wing. I will grant you that.

 

[Howey]

If you can avoid nominating nuts, and avoid tripping over your tongue by saying stupid things about abortion and such, Obama and the Democrats in Washington can be stopped in their destructive tracks

Fresh hope for GOP to take over Senate | New York Post

If the GOP concentrates on real issues instead of talking points, it can very well take the Senate.

The only issues they concentrate on are opposition to gay marriage, women's rights, immigration reform, and equality for all. All of these are favored by an overwhelming majority of Americans. Oh. And repealing the law of the land, Obamacare.

They may pick up a few seats in heavily infested teabagger states, but there's a distinct possibility those may be offset.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

If you can avoid nominating nuts, and avoid tripping over your tongue by saying stupid things about abortion and such, Obama and the Democrats in Washington can be stopped in their destructive tracks

Fresh hope for GOP to take over Senate | New York Post

Let's assume that the liberal Democratics have managed to set the stage. Because they have loyally and dutifully and stupidly followed President Obumbler over the cliff, they should indeed be ripe for the picking. In that sense, let's agree that they are certainly ready to be disposed-of, electorally.

But, even so, what point is there in defeating them so handily at the polls simply to assume the title of "majority party" in Congress if the GOP remains an insipid and ineffectual and standard-less entity?

I want the Republican Party to be in the majority if, for no other reason, it is easier to defeat the Obumbler agenda with the Democratics being in the minority. And defeating the Obumbler agenda is a wholly good thing.

However, what do conservatives and even the milquetoast "moderate" Republicans propose to institute in place of the radical left wing garbage offered by the liberal Democratics?

Obtaining a majority just for the sake of getting a majority will not reverse the course of Obumbler's/Pelousy's/Reid's 5 plus years of disastrous "leadership." And reversing course is not just necessary; it is crucial and urgent. The GOP must articulate this and make it THEIR platform. They must explain the hows and the whys, too.

I'm ok with putting the whole issue of abortion on a back burner for a while to secure a meaningful Republican victory. But they ARE at long last going to have to STAND for something and they MUST articulate how and why they are different from the liberal Democratics. (Under the inept "leadership" of guys like Boehner, by the way, they have done no such thing.)

 

[kaz]

Which Democrats voted for, then went against, then supported again when Obama stayed the course. It may be an important issue to you people, but you're flexible on the side you're on.

Well, the big difference is, Obama got us the **** out of that mess. We'd still be there if McCain had one, or maybe in a war with Iran. With Joe Leberman (D- Israel) cheering the whole way.

Obama maintained W's timeline. Only a mindless liberal gives his side credit for being different than the Republicans while you do exactly what they do.

I don't support any party, not even the Libertarian, so I don't have a guy, Guy.

As for Romney being a reactionary plutocrat, you're not playing with a full deck. You're a few bricks short of a load. You're a sandwich short of a picnic. The lights are on, but no one's home. You don't have both oars in the water. You're a few birds short of a flock. You're a teabag short of a pot...

So you really can't refute my point, then?

I just did.

No, they weren't moderates, they were tax and spend liberals.

Right. the "No True Scotsman Fallacy"

I love when liberals try to go intellectual. You always miss. That isn't how a true Scotsman works. I would have had to say something like a true conservative would have...

LOL, content light. you have serious mental issues. Paranoia, delusions, the belief Democrat's farts don't stink...

 

[Amelia]

Which Democrats voted for, then went against, then supported again when Obama stayed the course. It may be an important issue to you people, but you're flexible on the side you're on.

Well, the big difference is, Obama got us the **** out of that mess. We'd still be there if McCain had one, or maybe in a war with Iran. With Joe Leberman (D- Israel) cheering the whole way.

Obama maintained W's timeline. Only a mindless liberal gives his side credit for being different than the Republicans while you do exactly what they do.



I just did.

No, they weren't moderates, they were tax and spend liberals.

Right. the "No True Scotsman Fallacy"

I love when liberals try to go intellectual. You always miss. That isn't how a true Scotsman works. I would have had to say something like a true conservative would have...

LOL, content light. you have serious mental issues. Paranoia, delusions, the belief Democrat's farts don't stink...

"Obama maintained W's timeline. Only a mindless liberal gives his side credit for being different than the Republicans while you do exactly what they do."

Worse. Obama maintained W's timeline and tried but failed to keep our troops there. His strong suit was supposed to be diplomacy but he wasn't good enough at it to accomplish what he wanted so he billed the failure as a success.

And now the area is erupting.

 

[JoeB131]

Nope, you are wrong: the far right does not speak for the mainstream party. Don't want your crap no more. Go be a party of stupid elsewhere.

Again, guy, that's a lot of big talk, but I'm not seeing any GOP Moderates taking on the crazies.

"Oh, please don't say anything nuts before the election" is hardly a "Profile in Courage".

You have not been paying attention.

Your poser style fails.

I've been playing plenty of attention.

The point stands. Not seeing the "mainstream" do anything but appease the Teabaggers.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Obama maintained W's timeline. Only a mindless liberal gives his side credit for being different than the Republicans while you do exactly what they do.

Bush's timeline was to never, ever leave. It was to build a PNAC empire in the Middle East. Take a look at what we were building over there, it was the infrastructure of permanent occupation.

[
I just did.

Only in your own mind, dude, what little mind you have.

[

No, they weren't moderates, they were tax and spend liberals.

Right. the "No True Scotsman Fallacy"

I love when liberals try to go intellectual. You always miss. That isn't how a true Scotsman works. I would have had to say something like a true conservative would have...

LOL, content light. you have serious mental issues. Paranoia, delusions, the belief Democrat's farts don't stink...

No, guy, you fail to understand what the True Scotsman Fallacy is. When someone fails to accomplish what you want, then he wasn't a "true conservative". But these guys were. They just failed miserably, mostly because modern "conservatism" is based a whole lot of flawed thinking.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Worse. Obama maintained W's timeline and tried but failed to keep our troops there. His strong suit was supposed to be diplomacy but he wasn't good enough at it to accomplish what he wanted so he billed the failure as a success.

And now the area is erupting.

He really didn't try that hard, nor was anyone keen on a permanent presense after Obama got elected.

 

[Old Rocks]

For most of us, politics is local. So, here in Oregon, the GOP has as the head of it's party a complete fruitloop, the head of the OISM. The party that once gave us such steller governors as Tom McCall, now have most of the prior candidates for that office serving prison terms, or so thourghly disgraced that nobody even wants to talk about them. So, our government in Oregon is almost all Democrats, two Dem Senators, and only one Rep from the GOP. Damned hard to bring in new blood into the party when the old blood is either senile or totally fruitloop.

Oregon GOP Chair Pushes Extreme Views

Sprinkling radioactive waste from airplanes builds humans’ resistance to degenerative illnesses, says one congressional candidate.

Though it sounds like a statement taken out of an article from satirical newspaper The Onion, the idea that radioactive material can actually be good for humans is one that former congressional candidate Art Robinson, who last week became the Oregon Republican Party’s new chairman, believes in.

Last week Robinson replaced former Chairwoman Suzanne Gallagher, who stepped down after party officials accused her of mismanaging the party and the group’s finances. Robinson, also former president of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, narrowly defeated the party’s vice-chair, Bill Currier, in a third round of voting 55 to 52.Prior to being named head of Oregon’s GOP party, Robinson, who has a Ph.D. in chemistry, had two unsuccessful campaigns for Congress against progressive candidate Rep. Peter DeFazio, where it was discovered that Robinson not only believes climate change is a myth, but that AIDS is a “natural consequence of the gay lifestyle” and that a daily dose of radioactive material is not only safe, but beneficial to the human immune system.

Robinson’s arguably out-there ideas have been published throughout the past three decades in his monthly newsletter, “Access to Energy,” and were publicized during his congressional run in 2010.

Despite having a slew of controversial stances on issues ranging from nuclear waste to public schools to AIDS, Robinson has continued to garner support from many libertarians, including an endorsement from Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), as well as many tea party activists, specifically for denying that climate change is a problem created by humans.

 

[RoadVirus]

If you can avoid nominating nuts, and avoid tripping over your tongue by saying stupid things about abortion and such, Obama and the Democrats in Washington can be stopped in their destructive tracks

Fresh hope for GOP to take over Senate | New York Post

The GOP leadership held some sort of seminar or something for Republican candidates to teach them on how to keep them from pulling another Todd Akin.

 

[kaz]

Again, guy, that's a lot of big talk, but I'm not seeing any GOP Moderates taking on the crazies.

"Oh, please don't say anything nuts before the election" is hardly a "Profile in Courage".

You have not been paying attention.

Your poser style fails.

I've been playing plenty of attention.

The point stands. Not seeing the "mainstream" do anything but appease the Teabaggers.

No, you're not paying attention. You're in fact completely clueless. The establishment Republicans are shutting down and trying to defeat tea partiers while the tea partiers are trying to defeat them. Seriously, how do you live in this country with all the news at your fingertips and have no clue about what's going on? The world to you are the idiotic thoughts you think in your brain, and you're too arrogant to reality test what you made up in your head because it's what you want to believe.

 

[kaz]

Obama maintained W's timeline. Only a mindless liberal gives his side credit for being different than the Republicans while you do exactly what they do.

Bush's timeline was to never, ever leave. It was to build a PNAC empire in the Middle East. Take a look at what we were building over there, it was the infrastructure of permanent occupation.

Well guy, W established a timeline and Obama followed it. I realize you don't follow the news, but W was criticized by Republicans for establishing a public timeline since he was telling the enemy the timeline so they knew how long they had to hold out. The voices in your head aren't an authoritative source for reality, only that you need treatment for mental health.

LOL, content light. you have serious mental issues. Paranoia, delusions, the belief Democrat's farts don't stink...

No, guy, you fail to understand what the True Scotsman Fallacy is. When someone fails to accomplish what you want, then he wasn't a "true conservative". But these guys were. They just failed miserably, mostly because modern "conservatism" is based a whole lot of flawed thinking.

Guy, if you want to make up your own definitions, make up your own words to go with them. Mark Twain had some apt advice for you. It's Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.