« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Obama’s Unicorn of Hope and Change Died Under the Weight of Ted Kennedy’s Ego

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  January 19th, 2010 at 11:15 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

In Massachusetts, Barack Obama’s unicorn of hope and changed died under the weight of Ted Kennedy’s ego. The left gets angry when it is pointed out, but it is an objective fact.

Once Kennedy’s condition became terminal, he could have resigned his seat in favor of an appointment or special election. Instead, the Democrats and Kennedy decided he should martyr himself to advance socialized medicine in America. Had he resigned before the health care debate began, the Republican victory in Massachusetts would be a myth. Instead, it is now a reality. Yes, you can credit Ted Kennedy with killing health care, not just Mary Jo Kopechne.

ObamaCare was on life support. Scott Brown just removed its feeding tube thanks to Ted Kennedy.

There are ten other things to take away from Scott Brown’s victory:

1. Someone needs to ask Keith Olbermann, David Shuster, and the Democrats how the teabags taste.

2. Scott Brown should give the Republican response to Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech next week. From his truck.

2. Centrist Democrats are running away from health care deform as fast as possible now. As Evan Bayh (D-IN) said, if Massachusetts is not a wake up call, there is no waking up for the Democrats.

3. The GOP has as much to worry about from Scott Brown’s victory as the Democrats do. Consider this: Brown ran against the DC Republican establishment as much as the Democrat establishment. When the DC Republicans put in their $500,000.00 after the tea party had already raised Brown millions, they did so quietly and under the radar. Contrast that with Jim DeMint, who publicly endorsed Brown and used the Senate Conservatives Fund as a vessel to rally conservative activists for Scott Brown very publicly.

4. Jim DeMint said health care was Barack Obama’s Waterloo. Yup. And the people of Massachusetts delivered the decisive blow. Today we may have to start calling DeMint “Wellington.” He, not the GOP, has beaten Obama like a drum on health care.

5. Like it or not — Mitt Romney: Winner. But the health care issue in Massachusetts could be a serious vulnerability for him in light of the voters of Massachusetts who have the Democrats’ universal health care dream have voted for the candidate opposed to expanding that “dream” to the nation.

6. There are a number of liberal Democrats tonight who are thinking the following: force health care through, take the hit in November, then expect every election from here on out to be about problems with health care — the Democrats will, in every case, be able and willing to outbid the GOP thereby creating a permanent Democratic majority. They will try it if they can. The GOP must not get overconfident of a health care deform defeat.

7. Little noticed bit of Scott Brown trivia: he polled better on the issue of “enemy combatants” than on health care. Voters really do not trust the Democrats on national security and it is growing in the conscience of voters as a very real issue.

8. How many people will die because Barack Obama’s White House is incompetent? This is not hyperbole. No competent White House would spend political capital on a trip to Europe to sell the Olympics without a guarantee it would happen. No competent White House would spend political capital two days before an election viewed as a referendum on the President of the United States with the President’s candidate’s poll numbers cratering. If the White House is not competent in spending the President’s political capital, how the heck can it be competent to save American lives?

9. The Left tells us the nation is now ungovernable. Actually, the allegedly ungovernable citizenry just told those attempting to govern to go to hell.

10. In 2008, Independent voters voted for Obama to prove they were not the racist bigots the media and Democrats hypothesized they were. Ever since, Independents have been voting against Obama to prove they also are not socialists.

BONUS NUMBER 11: A year ago today, Barack Obama was sworn in as President of the United States. Today, he wakes up rejected by the independents who elected him and a social pariah within the Democrat Party. Outside of the Congressional Black Caucus and a handful of far left seats in Congress, it is hard, this morning, to imagine any Democrat wanting Barack Obama to go out on the campaign trail. Every statewide candidate for whom Obama has campaigned since his election has lost.

Tags: , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • malbis

    And yes, I meant Majority Leader.

    Perhaps next January, if Obama, Reid and Pelosi continue to dig in their heels and try to bull ahead with their agenda.

    :-)

    From the 1940 feature film Ghost Breakers, starring the late, great, Bob Hope and Paulette Goddard:

    Scientist: “It?s worse than horrible, because a Zombie has no will of his own. You see them some times, walking around blindly with dead eyes, following orders, not knowing what they do, not caring.”

    Bob Hope: “You mean, like Democrats?”

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    We just can’t be ruled.

    And memo to Democrats: We the People are NOT Socialists.

  • spainishirish

    (perhaps for no reason other than I watched that vile broadcast for the first time since 2008 tonight for sheer glee). They are actually–I kid you not–as I type discussing how to ram the health care bill down the American electorate’s throat. EVERYTHING we ever have said here about the Left’s aversion to actual democracy is coming to fruition tonight. It is both sad and liberating at once, and their tone deafness should serve us well come November.

    Incidentally, you deserve all of the thanks of us who frequent here for your determined and unflinching voice tonight.

  • ciscoguy

    Of course, no party in power likes to throw themselves out. Fine – make it effective 2020.

  • clintonformccain

    Did Ted Kennedy’s unicorn of hope and change die under the weight of Barack Obama’s ego? I think that’s actually just as true.

    Do not underestimate just what a nasty guy this Obama fella is. He’s pure ego and will throw anyone under the bus to make himself look better.

    He’s also, quite obviously, poison on the campaign trail. If he wants to come campaign for you, you might as well drop out of the race and cite family reasons for something to save face.

  • dwander
  • NeoKong

    If the Governor of Massachusetts still had the ability to appoint a replacement Senator then we never would have had the chance to have a special election.
    The Democrats did themselves in.
    They are reaping the harvest of sleaze that they sowed.
    Ha Ha!!!!

  • EagleWatcher

    10. In 2008, Independent voters voted for Obama to prove they were not the racist bigots the media and Democrats hypothesized they were. Ever since, Independents have been voting against Obama to prove they also are not socialists.

  • jhip87

    I love how speculative and question-begging much of this is.

  • http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

    If they had held the special election earlier they would have kept the seat.

  • djemi

    “Definitely an homage to the El Rushbo school of diplomacy”

    You might be getting quoted all over the place tomorrow, well the truths the truth. and sometimes it hurts.

  • malbis

    maybe his legacy is going to be something completely different than what anyone expects.

    First, the Olympics. Then, the Global Warming Treaty. Then the Virgina and New Jersey governor races. And now, the Massachusetts Senate race.

    Barack Obama comes to town, and the vote goes in the opposite direction from what he wants.

    The Obama Effect?

  • 6eorge Jetson

    .

  • NeoKong

    Maddow actually demanded that now we MUST pass health care no matter what it takes.
    She is int he state of shock.

    Also I think that MSNBC must have rented out that entire bar because no one was smiling or heckling Rachel.
    I bet if you panned out the camera far enough you would see a few cops standing nearby and some private security guards to protect her and Chrissie.
    The people in the background looked like hostages and not just people out for a drink.

  • EagleWatcher

    Keith Olbermann – for demonstrating the condescending arrogance people are sick of from the Left.

    Obama – for his elitists jester of campaigning at a college where all the “real” people are and making fun of all people who drive trucks and work hard earning a living.

    Martha Coakley – for dissing Catholics, Red Sox fans and just being a ghastly candidate.

    David Gergen – for asking the dumbest question and setting up the greatest campaign quote in years: “It’s the people’s seat.”

  • The_Rebel

    he needs to remind people of your point #7 by repeating this quote from tonight’s victory speech:

    ?And let me say this, with respect to those who wish to harm us: I believe that our Constitution and laws exist to protect this nation. They do not grant rights and privileges to enemies in wartime. In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them.?

  • malbis

    I notice you haven’t even made it to the 2 day mark so far?

    Want to get in something of substance while you’re here? Or has the Boston Massacre left you somewhat scrambled?

    From the 1940 feature film Ghost Breakers, starring the late, great, Bob Hope and Paulette Goddard:

    Scientist: “It?s worse than horrible, because a Zombie has no will of his own. You see them some times, walking around blindly with dead eyes, following orders, not knowing what they do, not caring.”

    Bob Hope: “You mean, like Democrats?”

  • Third Street

    Our country can be governed. Our national affairs can be governed. We cannot.

  • http://corruptedlamb.townhall.com thecorruptedlamb

    That is MSNBC’s thought! Did you know that your knuckle dragging (mostly liberal) idiots!

    Criss is up next…. Let’s watch!

  • gekster
  • nvrepub

    Obama will now approach the Maine sisters and let them basically write the health care bill, then block-vote it through and claim “victory”.

  • california_red

    If not for the 2004 rules change then I think Deval Patrick appoints a replacement until 2013.

    We have Teddy to thank for that too

  • Third Street

    Erick, the GOP should do this! They absolutely should! The Democrats will howl about what a stunt it was, but who will everyone be talking about the next morning?

  • marshmom

    from his truck!! That’s great. Wouldn’t that be hilarious! Talk about sticking salt in a wound.
    And I absolutely, positively agree with what Scott Brown said about our Constitution being there to protect US, not our enemies and that our money should be spent on weapons to defend against our enemies, not for lawyers to defend them!

  • http://corruptedlamb.townhall.com thecorruptedlamb

    From Hardball to:

    “kind of soft and squishy without much use”

    He looks really bad… Coming back on at 12!

  • EagleWatcher

    Libs can’t seem to get beyond genitals or skin color.

  • thurman

    … especially on DeMint and Romney. I give McCain a little credit too, as much as it pains me.

    I see this as karma for Teddy’s naked abuse of power, with changing the law in 2004, and brazenly changing it back again. Not to mention the illegal “emergency” appointment of Kirk, which should never have been allowed legally. Calling it an emergency to need a 2nd senator to represent them for health reform, when they already have universal care in Mass, was disgusting.

    Ah, the irony.

    The thing is, I think Teddy held on as long as he did thinking Health Deform would be wrapped up well before the special election anyway. I think he actually thought he’d be able to vote for it himself– Obama even thought this would be wrapped up last summer.

  • thurman

    … especially on DeMint and Romney. I give McCain a little credit too, as much as it pains me.

    I see this as karma for Teddy’s naked abuse of power, with changing the law in 2004, and brazenly changing it back again. Not to mention the illegal “emergency” appointment of Kirk, which should never have been allowed legally. Calling it an emergency to need a 2nd senator to represent them for health reform, when they already have universal care in Mass, was disgusting.

    Ah, the irony.

    The thing is, I think Teddy held on as long as he did thinking Health Deform would be wrapped up well before the special election anyway. I think he actually thought he’d be able to vote for it himself– Obama even thought this would be wrapped up last summer.

  • 6eorge Jetson

    Ha!

  • audax

    …the Maine Twins would try something like that after BROWN (kinda like Roe…LOL)? Do ya think they would be that tone deaf? I mean REALLY? Are “teabaggers” ready to primary them in Maine?? PLease tell me YES!!!!

  • spainishirish

    And over their dead (or soon to be–bodies, not literally, you fascist pigs).

    Good times, good times.

    Let us stay focused.

    2010. We are here.

  • misterbill

    –All’s right with the world and God is in His heaven.

    We must not coast, it is still the first quarter of the game.

  • jeffreywturner

    Could there be a better team?

  • shadowtax

    Demint was on the Wilkow Majority this afternoon and said that he had not endorsed Brown, and then he went ahead and endorsed him. Now his Conservative Group did help, but I think he may have played a low profile. At least that was my impression.

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    He didn’t use the word “endorse” earlier, but he very clearly said he supported Scott Brown and urged SCF donors to give to Scott Brown.

    He used the word “endorse” for the first time today, but it was like the NRSC and Fiorina ? he’d done everything but use the word and did so loudly and publicly.

  • Mary Beth

    Yes…you read that right.

    Read this and weep…for joy, that is:

    //

    http://spectator.org/blog/2010/01/19/barney-frank-deals-potential-d

    Rep. Barney Frank is not a wobbly moderate in a marginal district, but a liberal Democrat who has been supportive of the health care push. And that’s why this statement below, which essentially rules out all of the options being discussed for pushing through Obamacare, deals a potentially fatal blow to the legislation.

    The following was read on MSNBC by Rachel Maddow, and I transcribed it off the screen:

    ?I have two reactions to the election in Massachusetts. One, I am disappointed. Two, I feel strongly that the Democratic majority in Congress must respect the process and make no effort to bypass the electoral results. If Martha Coakley had won, I believe we could have worked out a reasonable compromise between the House and Senate health care bills. But since Scott Brown has won and the Republicans now have 41 votes in the Senate, that approach is no longer appropriate. I am hopeful that some Republican Senators will be willing to discuss a revised version of health care reform because I do not think that the country would be well-served by the health care status quo. But our respect for democratic procedures must rule out any effort to pass a health care bill as if the Massachusetts election had not happened. Going forward, I hope there will be a serious effort to change the Senate rule which means that 59 votes are not enough to pass major legislation, but those are the rules by which the health care bill was considered, and it would be wrong to change them in the middle of the process.?

    UPDATE: Frank’s comments rule out delaying the seating of Brown and ramming a bill through in the meantime, rule out simply passing the Senate bill as is, and rule out passing it through the Senate using the reconciliation process. The only “hope” Frank holds is a compromise in the Senate with Republicans, but I’m not sure how much appetite there would be for dragging on the process for what could be months, even if there were some magical accord that could be reached between the two parties. And if President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid try to ignore Frank and push ahead anyway, the comments he made are a political goldmine to Republicans. Plus, the fact that Frank felt emboldened to jump out with this statement so soon after the results suggests he’s probably expressing the private views of other members. Simply put, it will be difficult for Democrats to revive Obamacare after tonight.

    //

    When you’ve lost Barney Frank….

  • http://nanosecondinv.proboards.com/index.cgi? irondiopriest

    “…Outside of the Congressional Black Caucus and a handful of far left seats in Congress, it is hard, this morning, to imagine any Democrat wanting Barack Obama to go out on the campaign trail. Every statewide candidate for whom Obama has campaigned since his election has lost.”

    Obama has failed on every front. Miserably. But I wonder if there is an element at play here that is a product of the shallow and hollow nature of the very controlled presentation of Barack Hussein Obama that was sold in 2008.

    The Socialists and the Obama campaign created a media star – a celebrity sensation with no depth, and all hype. The American people are well-known for building people up so that they can be torn asunder. Obama’s repeated failures notwithstanding, I wonder if the American people are turning on him in part, simply because he is a shallow, hollow celebrity whom we have determined has run his course and usefulness as the rock-star-of-the-day with whom we are now sick and tired.

  • gekster

    Now he realizes, and knows, the people are watching them and know what they are trying to pull.
    The Scott win showes MA was watching what they were doing,
    and they do not like it.
    Watch for other Dems to have an “awakening” so to speak.

  • scarlos

    now THAT would be the best team

  • piratecoastbucs

    If any of these clowns on MSNBC actually knew anything, they would have thought twice before calling the Tea Partiers ‘teabaggers’.

    This is that whole ‘connect-the-dots’ thing that liberals just don’t comprehend. In order to have a ‘teabagger’ you must have one who is being ‘teabagged’…..

    Olbermann… Shuster… Consider yourselves teabagged.

  • hickorystick

    Your health-care racket is going to screw up my banking racket by losing our Majority.in the house.

  • http://andrightlyso.com/ civil_truth

    He’s got to be nervous about facing the voters of his state when he comes up for reelection this November.

    But like any of today’s Democrats, anything he says has an expiration date. We’ve got to keep his feet to the fire as well as those of Democrats in Republican majority districts.

    We still need to hold 218 votes in the House against the Senate bill.

  • Flagstaff

    5. Like it or not ? Mitt Romney: Winner. But the health care issue in Massachusetts could be a serious vulnerability for him in light of the voters of Massachusetts who have the Democrats? universal health care dream have voted for the candidate opposed to expanding that ?dream? to the nation.

    I contend that Mitt and/or the Republican who matters can use MassCare to our advantage. “I/Romney tried to work out a compromise with the Democrats on health care. It has been a disaster-in-waiting because the predicted costs and utilization have been far worse than predicted. We know now that it was a bad idea. It would be worse to foist off something like it on the whole country.”

    Take that lemon and make lemonade.

  • bk

    Maddow grilled that numbskull Debbie Wasserman Schultz. DWS’s comments could be summed up as:
    1. Coakley blew it by running a terrible campaign.
    2. Now is not the time for finger-pointing.
    3. Coakley blew it by running a terrible campaign.
    4. We need to quicken the pace of what got us in trouble.
    5. Coakley blew it by running a terrible campaign.

    BTW did it seem like this bar where Maddow was broadcasting was a place she might hang out after work?

  • bk

    That’s what Coakley said Obama told her last night.

  • bk

    then they’d have had a Democratic Senator in place a few months ago.

    Then again, perhaps they can delay Brown’s certification for three years….

  • bk
  • bk

    WH/Dem leadership: “This was not a referendum on Obama, but just a matter of a candidate who ran a terrible campaign. We need to enact HCR now!”

    Moderate Dems who voted for HCR bill: “Holy crap! I’m toast!”

    Moderate Dems who voted against HCR bill: “Whew! I’m glad I didn’t cave to Pelosi!”

    Moderate Senate Dems up for re-election and moderate House Dems: “President Obama, please stay away from my state/district until the second week of November!”

    The disconnect could not be more stark. Our disagreements with the NRC/NRCC/NRSC look like singing Kumbaya compared to the infighting within the Democratic Party going on right now.

  • medicineman

    Ted actually pushed for the change in ’04 when Romney was gov. and he thought Kerry would win….God works in mysterious ways..

  • JadedByPolitics

    From the moment that headline came across a magazine cover in a magazine in the United States I KNEW I had to fight with my last breath to make sure that was NOT THE CASE. I have worked a second job for money to give to candidate just like Senator Scott Brown to send home all the STATIST’S/LEFTISTS/COMMUNISTS/SOCIALISTS because I could NOT have that in MY country for MY children and grandchildren and WE all have FIRED the first shot in that epic battle to pull back our country from the BRINK….Good Job!

    That they think in DC that this bill should still pass is the most DISGUSTING INSANE logic and thought process I have ever WITNESSED in my lifetime. IF they do this monstrosity AFTER We The People have spoken in DEEP BLUE MA then they truly are the CRAZIES WE joke about but deep down don’t want to believe they are and THEY MUST GO!

  • america1st

    For the informative blog, but even more for this sort of trenchant, cogent analysis which distinguish it from so much of the egotistical puffery labeled as “commentary.”

  • DefendUSA

    Brown ran mostly on national issues and this was a gem of a quote. Maybe now, we can get some traction and get those lousy Basturds out of this country and back to Gitmo where they belong.

  • eburke

    are they even still in business?

    And as an aside, Jaded. One of the lines in your post really sums up what the Marxists are up against: “I have worked a second job fo money to give to candidates just like Scott Brown…”

    What these libtards don’t and won’t ever get is that while their supporters lounge around all day looking for a handout to keep them fat, dumb, and happy, the lovers of freedom and liberty will do whatever it takes to fight for their country, their children, their grandchildren and their freedoms.

    Oh…and GOP establishment – can you hear us now? As the old saying goes: You can help make things happen, watch things happen, or wonder what the hell happened.

  • JadedByPolitics

    The Death of Conservatism book and all the “elites” calling for the death of America to APPEASE the IDIOTS overseas and the Appeaser in Chief trying his damnedest to make us WEAK….it is just so enjoyable to see that all of those IDIOTS were WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! My faith in my fellow Americans was restored during the summer and is now implanted on my heart for ever more!

  • Ausonius

    From what I have seen in the past year, he has acted according to basic conservative ideas, and like in this case of Scott Brown, has shown dynamic initiative.

    Such cannot be said about most other Republican Senators, or other potential candidates e.g. Romney, and DeMint (as far as we know) has none of the personal baggage of Newt Gingrich.

    DeMint should be considered one of our top candidates for the White House 2012.

  • Ausonius

    From what I have seen in the past year, he has acted according to basic conservative ideas, and like in this case of Scott Brown, has shown dynamic initiative.

    Such cannot be said about most other Republican Senators, or other potential candidates e.g. Romney, and DeMint (as far as we know) has none of the personal baggage of Newt Gingrich.

    DeMint should be considered one of our top candidates for the White House 2012.

  • eburke

    this did: I can’t believe I just found myself a) agreeing with Barney Frank; and, b) actually respecting his ethical approach to this.

    I swear I just saw a pig fly past my window.

  • rwb_hoosier

    I just sent an email to Senator Bayh and told him that he should pay close attention to Massachusetts and keep it in mind for his election here in this red state of Indiana in November. I also urged him to switch parties. Wouldn’t that be a kick in the head to the democrats for him to become a Republican while they are still rolling around in agony over last night?

  • Scope

    n/t

  • Scope

    So that we can have another Progressive Republican to destroy the country? No, no, no. He voted for Obamacare, even with the country screaming no, therefore, he is a traitor to the country. We are trying to get rid of those types of people, not to bring them under the tent. He needs to spend more time with his family, or, to be shown the door come November. There is no such thing as a Blue Dog Dem, they are all Progressives, just to lesser or greater degrees.

  • http://stores.lulu.com/iconicfreedom iconicfreedom

    Those of us under 50, from our mid 20′s to our late 40′s are tired of the good ol’ boy club that has dominated politics.

    We’re tired of the imposing of personal agenda feigning as political platforms.

    We’re tired of each side telling everyone what “values” to have and how to life our lives.

    There are more and more people who are rising up who never did before.

    Our passivity should never have been mistaken as stupidity.

    We want our freedom and we’re gonna have it!

  • http://www.helpawhiteguy.com livefreenh

    Just like a taste of fine wine, the final sentence of that article was delicious and deserves to float in the air for a few seconds.

  • jackbenimble

    If the Tea Party does not take out Bennet in Utah in the Primary I am going to be sorely dissappointed.

  • olddog

    could be the conservative policeman, protecting our constitution, from those politicians, who would destroy it, of either party. Taking the place of the lame-stream media or at least holding them to account also.!
    Just a thought!
    Support our Troops!
    One Old Dog

  • outspoken

    DeMint for President 2012 ! ! ! !

  • Ausonius

    than McConnell and Crew, and even more than putative candidates like Romney and Huckabee.

    It is time to start pushing this idea, and building a base of support.

  • Ausonius

    than McConnell and Crew, and even more than putative candidates like Romney and Huckabee.

    It is time to start pushing this idea, and building a base of support.

  • renny

    The Dems. have forgotten you can’t fool all of the people.

  • scubadiver49er

    We can’t get this clown out fast enough!!! Any of these goofballs who voted for this must GO!! Period!!! They can’t be trusted to do the right thing, by voting the way they did, over the loud and clear objections of the people they are supposed to represent. Say one thing to the constituents & then go back to DC, get pressured and vote the opposite. We can’t give the “Progressives” any wiggle room whatsoever. They all need to be strangled by the “Don’t Tread on Me” snake!!!!

  • voxoreason

    While we probably all speculate about who might or might not make a good prez candidate in ’12 (I’m not interested in ’08 retreads who lost to McCain, but things might change, ie, Mitt might be the last candidate on earth…might vote for him in this event), this is almost 3 years away. Anything can (and probably will) happen.

    Plus, this would give dems WAY too much lead time: prominent possibles will be heavily scrutinized for any dirt (or anything that can be MADE to look like dirt) on any candidate, especially a conservative.

    “Liberal” used to be a dirty word (the original meaning is closer to conservative than progressive), but now dems are trying to make “conservative” a dirty word. “Independents” will likely be more willing to call themselves conservatives (avoiding the association with Bush, who is like Palin in that both are blamed and criticized for almost everything almost daily; want to see DeMint’s every sentence parsed for mistakes that can be used to label him “stupid”…just like Bush or Palin?), but I’ve been voting a “lesser of two evils” straight republican ticket for decades. (See how that works in a 60 majority *dem* senate? Even the usual suspects, Snowe and Collins, acted like Americans in uniting against Health Care. I was shocked, but impressed by these two for the first time.)

    Independents would seem, after Brown’s solid victory over Coakley, likely to vote repub or conservative, if not buy the bumper stickers. Trying to manipulate these people might be like herding cats. Let the dems screw ‘em over, then try to manipulate them. Didn’t work for Coakley, did it? In MA, off all places!

    I love DeMint and wouldn’t hesitate to vote for him… but I’ll bet that he and his campaign staff have a plan of some sort. I would rather follow his lead than distract from the job he has to do through 2012.

  • Ausonius

    I agree that if he announced outright a presidential campaign now, he would be opening himself up to all sorts of nonsense: on the other hand, one could say that any “dug-up dirt” so early would be very old news by 2012.

    And who says that there is any dirt to be dug up? :)

    What I implied by writing above that the idea should be pushed is exactly that: an unofficial whispering virus to plant the idea throughout the country that DeMint could/should be the best C O N S E R V A T I V E Republican candidate for president.

  • Carol Tarasewicz

    I got emails from Senator DeMint, and the SCF. One did not endorse Scott Brown but gave links to his campaign if we wanted to support him. I don’t think he actually edorsed Scott but supported him.

  • jenniferjmilleresq

    Yes, I would LOVE to see DeMint for Pres. in 2012, but he could do a lot of good as Senate Majority Leader first.

    I agree about the other Pres. candidates you mentioned. Allthough Romney was involved with Brown’s win, I was noticing how up tight Romney seemed last night on Fox when asked about the election being a referendum on healthcare. The elephant was in the room, no doubt about it. I feel bad for him because I assume he’s a good man, but he was even stiffer than usual last night.

    How can he run successfully in 2012 when he pushed through the pilot program for Obamacare in MA? Of course he was pro-choice back then too so maybe he can argue his conversion changed all that.

  • Warrior

    is all they know…

  • Warrior

    I’m tired of the “good ole boy club,” too. Been votin’ agin’ ‘em for 32 years…

  • shadowmane

    C O N S E R V A T I V E candidate for President? We really need to get outside the party box. If we can’t, then the whole conservative movement is doomed to be linked only to that party. And one other thing. I think we need to take the term “liberal” back from the Progressives. If they are going to make conservative a curse word, we need to make Progressive, and not liberal, our curse word.

  • Flagstaff

    Maybe it wan’t ethical so much as what gekster and especially civil truth and hickorystick wrote–it’s self-preservation to a large degree.

    That’s OK, as long as they follow our lead and we are strong enough to lead, they can paint that pig with any color lipstick they want.

    Some pig! (Wilbur, that is.)

  • Flagstaff

    when was the last time a Newsweak cover got anything right?

  • Flagstaff

    It should not become a formal political party–how much good has the Conservative or any other third party done?

    The proper role for all these parties is as a vocal and well-funded watchdog to keep the major party leaders in line with their principles. The best place for ts members is in the Republican party, doing the same thing.

    As a co-functioning outsider, the Tea Party’s loose organization has already proven it can do Right while doing right.

  • Flagstaff

    If the White House is not competent in spending the President?s political capital, how the heck can it be competent to save American lives?

    Perhaps it’s not logically rigorous, buy in the case of the Obama administration, it’s a perfect fit.

    For an organization run by a Genius, the administration seems to get nothing right, from policy, to handling public and constituent relations, to using political capital. Bill Clinton could run rings around Obama as a politician, and as a President, and that comment comes from someone who is far from a Clinton fan.

  • jackbenimble

    Since the liberals are the great champions of gay rights, gay equality and the normality of the gay lifestyle, you would think they would understand that insulting people by accussing them of engaging in a perverse sexual activity that is mainly associated with homosexuals was a little less than politically correct. They might just as well have called them pillow-biters pooftas or queers because the implication the liberals who have popularized this insult are making is the same: gay is gross.

    I happen to agree with that sentiment but I never claimed to be a liberal or a champion of the gay lifestyle either.

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    Total editing fail on my part.

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    we cannot forget him.

  • jhip87

    Sure. One major assumption that hasn’t been defended is that the Democrats’ failure in MA was due to their being too ambitious with health care reform, climate change legislation, and financial reform. There is another possible interpretation that seems better–namely, that the failure was due to a lack of ambition on these issues, too many concessions to corporations, and an excessive desire for bipartisan agreement with a party which is interested only in derailing the Democrats’ legislative agenda, rather than attempting to engage in meaningful, productive discussion. Independently of whether this interpretation is cogent or not, the first interpretation seems quite weak on its own: the constitution of MA voters is still resoundingly liberal, and so it only seems sensible that such voters would react positively to a strongly left-wing legislative agenda, rather than against it. As some have noted, e.g. at firedoglake, a large number of progressives just didn’t vote, which suggests that they were uninspired by Coakley, rather than that lots of Democrats and hitherto silent Republicans were invigorated by Brown. Moreover, I simply fail to see how one could construe the Democrats’ actions on health care, climate change, or financial reform legislation as highly ambitious; sure, the rhetoric from some has been ambitious throughout the health care discussions (though not from most), but the deal with PhRMA was cut early, and made it impossible for any of the really radical reforms to happen (i.e. single-payer, or a strong public option, negotiated at Medicare rates). In short, it’s silly to claim that MA voters think the Democrats are moving too quickly, or are pursuing policies that are too liberal (the so-called `government takeover’ of health care), when the progress on the health care legislation has been slow and painful, and the reforms that most thought were likely to come *with* a Coakley win wouldn’t compromise the private sector’s monopoly on health care, anyway.

    I can pick a bit at particular points in the post: 10 is unsubstantiated, and assumes that rational people other than Glenn Beck and company believe that Obama is socialistic, which probably isn’t the case (or, it assumes that independents are irrational, which the poster probably doesn’t mean to be claiming). 9 falls prey to the above-mentioned begged question, and questionable analysis. 8 is silly, unless health care reform aims at making cabinet members doctors, which, of course, it doesn’t, given that it’s only health *insurance* reform (unless, of course, you want to push the misguided `rationing’ point, as if private insurers don’t already ration). Also, 8 suggests that government-run health care would be effective only if the Obama administration is effective at spending political capital. The inference is really puzzling, as these seem to have nothing to do with one another. 6 is just speculation. 4: perhaps, but again, the question is why the attempt to reform health care has been disastrous for Obama’s political standing, on which see the above. 3 and 2 (the second #2) are right, though, of course, I think Bayh is dead wrong.

  • http://www.thecampofthesaints.com robertbelvedere

    Quoted from and Linked to at:
    Happy Anniversary Mr. President

  • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

    I understand he’s been on tv a lot in the past day or so, and a bit before that, that he and Scott Brown are said to be friendly and supportive of each other, that Romney possibly steered some of his operatives to work for Brown, etc. I hear the GOP ‘business side’ decides the next pres. candidate, and it will be Romney. In connection with the Baker campaign, I’ve been listening to Boston radio in the past few days to hear what locals had to say. It’s not a scientific study, but local interest worked ok for Scott Brown. What I learned is Romney is history to people of Massachusetts, his name was never once mentioned in connection with Scott Brown, and these were people who had followed Brown for a long time. The only time his name was mentioned was in reference to signing his health bill with Ted Kennedy in the photo along with one or two other politicians who are now in jail. They do not want to see or hear anything about Romney. I heard one local reporter today say Romney had next to nothing to do with Brown’s campaign, that it was grassroots people.