Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Jim DeMint: Leading the conservative revolution?

1. South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint (R) threw his endorsement behind Weld County prosecutor Ken Buck (R) in the Colorado Senate race, the latest in a series of moves by DeMint to buck the Republican Party establishment in contested primaries.

DeMint called Buck "an authentic conservative" who has "rapidly gained momentum" in his primary fight against former lieutenant governor Jane Norton among others.

DeMint's endorsement comes roughly 24 hours after Americans for Job Security, a conservative independent group, began running ads touting Buck, and following a Norton announcement that she would forgo the state convention -- where Buck had emerged as a clear favorite -- and instead would petition her way onto the ballot.

DeMint's endorsement of Buck marks the fifth time he has backed a Senate candidate via his Senate Conservatives Fund PAC this cycle. His past endorsements include: former representative Pat Toomey (Pa.), former state House speaker Marco Rubio (Fla.), state Assemblyman Chuck DeVore (Calif.) and Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams (Texas). In all five races -- including Colorado -- faced candidates with varying levels of support from the party establishment. (Williams' bid ended the day Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison announced she would not resign from the Senate after losing a gubernatorial primary last month.)

"Senator DeMint is helping strong conservative candidates around the country who have been overlooked by the Washington establishment," explained Matt Hoskins, an aide to DeMint.

DeMint's increased endorsement activity has riled some within the party who believe he is, at times, backing the more ideologically pure candidate even if that person simply cannot win the seat.

"Many in Republican circles are still waiting for Jim DeMint to explain how, in the real world, having only 30 Senators who agree with him on every issue rather than 60 Republicans who might not, would do anything to stop the Democrats from steam-rolling their agenda through Congress," said one senior party strategist upset with DeMint's decisions.

What's clear is that -- like him or not -- DeMint has rapidly built himself into a forced to be reckoned with in conservative circles. That heightened profile -- and the fact that DeMint is from the early-voting state of South Carolina -- have led some to speculate that a 2012 presidential race might be in the offing.

Not so, according to one longtime Republican DeMint observer. "This has nothing to do with running for president," said the source. "Jim DeMint doesn't want to lead a government he wants to lead a revolution."

2. Just days after offering a Shermanesque statement on the possibility of an independent bid for Senate, Gov. Charlie Crist -- or, more accurately, his campaign manager -- seemed to leave that door wide open in an interview with the Wall Street Journal.

Eric Eikenberg told the Journal that Crist would qualify for the race to replace appointed Sen. George Lemieux (R) but refused to say whether the governor would do so as a Republican or an Independent. Pressed in the wake of the story, Crist himself refused to address the Eikenberg statement saying only: "I'm not even thinking about that right now."

Eikenberg's statement stands in marked contrast to what he said last Thursday. "Governor Crist is running for the United States Senate as a Republican," said Eikenberg. "He will not run as an Independent or as a No Party Affiliation."

Crist has until April 30 to make up his mind (if it isn't already made up). Momentum is all on Rubio's side, a trend born out by the two candidates fundraising; Rubio raised $3.6 million in the first three months of 2010 while Crist collected just $1.1 million.

Polling done by Research 2000 for the liberal Daily Kos blog last month showed a Crist independent candidacy would give the governor his best chance at getting elected. Rubio led the three-way race with 32 percent followed by Crist with 29 percent and Rep. Kendrick Meek (D) with 27 percent.

ALSO READ: Why what Crist does with a pending education bill might tell us about his political future.

3. In yet further evidence -- in case you needed any more! -- that Newt Gingrich (Ga.) is seriously considering a presidential run in 2012, the former House speaker will appear at a Tea Party rally today in Austin, Texas in which the group's "Contract From America" will be revealed.

"What better way to study the Contract from America than through a dialogue with the architect of the 1994 plan," asked Greg Holloway, a board member of the Austin Tea Party Patriots. "We recognize that Speaker Gingrich is reaching out to tea parties. We'll join him in that endeavor."

The Austin rally is meant to serve as a kick-off for what is billed as "Phase II" of the movement by Judy Holloway who founded the Austin group. "Our rallies, while useful in bringing us together, will now be taking a back seat to focused education and training," she said.

Gingrich is somewhat behind other potential 2012 candidates -- namely former Alaska governor Sarah Palin and Texas Gov. Rick Perry -- in courting the tea party crowd. But, after a well-received speech at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans last week, it's clear that Gingrich is hoping to build some momentum with the new force within the GOP.

ALSO CLICK: To celebrate the birth of the tea party movement one year ago today, both CBS and CNN have new data out offering a detailed look into its membership.

4. Sen. Blanche Lincoln and Lt. Gov. Bill Halter are exchanging televised body blows with more than a month still to go in the Arkansas Democratic primary.

Halter launched an ad Wednesday alleging that Lincoln both voted to cut Social Security benefits and to raise taxes on the program.

Lincoln is set to air a commercial of her own today that derisively labels Halter as "Dollar Bill," alleging that companies he has been associated with not only outsourced jobs to India but also "sold $100 million of stock even though they knew their cancer drug was dangerous."

And, those are just the ads the candidates are running. The American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees is up with commercials painting Lincoln as beholden to lobbyists and special interests in Washington while Arkansans for Common Sense, a group with ties to the son of retiring Rep. Marion Berry, is up on television slamming Halter for allegedly supporting the privatization of Social Security.

With all the back and forth, it's hard to get a read on where the race stands. Halter's campaign trumpeted a poll Wednesday night that showed Lincoln with a single digit lead but the numbers came from a previously unknown firm and were gathered using automated interviews.

5. Ohio Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher (D) did nothing to quiet rumors of his disappointing candidacy for the Senate in the first three months of the year, raising only $551,000 -- a total more than quadrupled by former representative Rob Portman (R).

Fisher's fundraising was less than he raised in the last three months of 2009 ($780,000), a total that had many national Democrats worried about his campaign. In the interim, Fisher has swapped out campaign managers and many party operatives insisted he was now on the right track. These numbers suggest otherwise.

Even if Fisher beats even-worse-funded Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner in the May 4 Democratic primary, he will start the general election at a massive cash disadvantage to Portman. At the end of March. Fisher had $1.8 million in his warchest while Portman had a stunning $7.6 million on hand.

The lone saving grace for Democrats at the moment is that polling suggests that the race remains tight. In a late March Quinnipiac poll, Fisher took 41 percent to 37 percent for Portman, an improvement from a February Q survey that showed Portman at 40 percent to Fisher's 37 percent.

Still, Portman's cash edge -- particularly in a state the size of Ohio -- should be very worrisome to Senate Democrats. Fisher still looks like the nominee but he must find a way to stay within financial shouting distance of Portman heading into the summer and fall.

By Chris Cillizza  |  April 15, 2010; 6:05 AM ET
Categories:  Morning Fix  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sarah Palin become an issue in KY-Senate primary
Next: Jim Bunning, Rand Paul and the Fix Endorsement Hierarchy

Comments

Posted by: margaretmeyers | April 15, 2010 6:41 AM |
Please, please post the comment with cheerful noise if you must. The gloom that we have from the earthquakes and birth quakes is enough for all to fall sick. As is the Iceland debt, the volcano eruption that has left many-stranded causing chaos leaves me wondering where I will sleep to night. I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA

Posted by: flymulla | April 16, 2010 6:02 AM | Report abuse

Darnit, Conservative. Well stated.

I'll send you my personal opinion. I lived in Massachusetts when the original decision came down. My heart was with those couples. I personally favor same sex marriage. I also feel that it is a significant change in law. And so I have significant doubts about this change occurring through the courts. Then again, when other "unnatural" examples from the past are given, I wonder exactly how unnatural this is.

We'll see how it works out.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | April 15, 2010 10:10 PM | Report abuse


OK FIRST - it appeared there was going to be a bipartisan bill - with Sen Corker of TN negotiating with Chris Dodd


Then Obama pulls out of the negotiations and says he is going to have his own bill -


ONLY Obama decides that in addition, he is going to try to blame the Republicans for supporting the Wall Street Banks - and try to make the whole thing a campaign issue against the Republicans.


AFTER going through BIPARTISAN negotiations.


So the Republicans go to the floor of the Senate and accuse Obama of cozying up to the Wall Street Banks, which is probably true - and they all have a fight.


GOOD GOING OBAMA.

Is there any other way that Obama can VIOLATE HIS OWN CAMPAIGN PLEDGES.

AND THEN you have Stern of SEIU making an issue with North Carolina Congressmen about violating campaign pledges.

What a complete joke.


Anyone who doesn't think this nation will be much much better off when it gets rid of Obama - you really need to re-think your position.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

"they refuse to accept the will of the real life majority in this country that voted for Obama and wants moderation on both sides. they want the parties to work together and compromise. they want real things to get done. They do not want a ideology driven agenda. Posted by: vwcat"

And hold that thought. Newt deciding that he stands a chance of running for President has to buck just that claim, since he was THE leading voice telling the republicans that they way to get back into power was NEVER work with the democrats. It is the very essence of the Contract with America. Of course that contract was backed by all those term limits Republicans who promised to serve only two or three terms and then let someone else have a chance.
Promises promises.

Demint is a good thing, though, since he has a talent for picking winners, like Hoffman, in swing districts, like NY23 that hadn't swung in a century. Let Jim and sahar work their Tperson magic in lots of insufficiently pure red districts. Please.

Posted by: ceflynline | April 15, 2010 6:16 PM | Report abuse

mark;

I don't see Fisher's low fund raising as that good, because he gets two cracks at donors, once for the primaries and again for the general election, but I don't see Portman's big numbers as all that great, because the Dems will certainly go big after the primaries.

The race is going to swing on defining the other guy. As long as the Dems can sell Portman as Georgie's boy, and a big agent of shipping Ohio jobs to Mexico and China, and that won't be all that hard a sell, bad job numbers that are getting better are running against him. GM adding shifts to its remaining Ohio plants won't hurt, either, and there is just enough good news out there for voters to be patient and stick with the Democrats.

Portman has to define Fisher as something negative at a time when about all the negative things that the Republicans use aren't so negative in context. "Tax and Spend"? As long as the spend means jobs, go for it. "Big Government Socialist"? I can see a doctor, or I will be able to see a doctor. Go for it.

And the T-Party around here has too many iffy members, like the founder of one Local unit who is now in jail for violating a protective order taken out by his wife.

Portmaqn is known in S. W Ohio and not so much else where. Fisher is something of a known quantity statewide. When Fisher hangs the aura of GWB around Portman's neck and it won't wash off, the R's lose their fillibuster super majority.

Oh! and there is a Teaperson running against Boehner for good measure.

Posted by: ceflynline | April 15, 2010 6:01 PM | Report abuse

"Jim DeMint doesn't want to lead a government he wants to lead a revolution."

That's good because Republicans have shown themselves completely incapable of running the government. Running America into the ground? Yes. Running the government? No.

Posted by: thebobbob | April 15, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

FarlingtonBlade, you have a great argument. Hrmmm.... I've misplaced my pocket Constitution somewhere, but perhaps the 14th Amendment should already apply to homosexuals and their right to marry as they please.

I, personally, am of Christian faith(I'm totally imperfect, and I need to iron out many personal problems regarding faith), but everyone has something in which they want to believe. If homosexuals, as individuals, want to marry, I don't personally see a problem with that. I don't agree with the ACLU's position on Separation of Church and State(Not that I want the Fed. to institute a theocracy, more theocracies have killed people out of non-adherence to a religion)taken from the decision of Justice Hugo Black, but persecution of people for their religious or non-religious beliefs is simply wrong and should not be tolerated.

This country was founded on a Judeo-Christian moral structure, that argues that all men have equal an inalienable rights that come from nature, or nature's God. Those rights should extend also to homosexuals. Live and let live, eh?

Posted by: OfConservativeMind | April 15, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

and it was his son, and he was using him to troll for women... ewww.

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Now, on the topic of marriage... If homosexuals want to be given equal rights, I cannot disagree. They're people too. They should fight for the States to change their laws, and petition the States or the Fed. for an Amendment to the Constitution giving them their due.

Posted by: OfConservativeMind | April 15, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

---

Would you say the same thing about interracial marriage? That too at one time was considered against nature.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | April 15, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Dude, zook, you can't just photograph random kids and call them your "sons."

I'm hoping that it's just that you don't know what "son" means rather than some weird fetish.

And no, no one believes for a second that you've procreated.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 15, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

katem1

Please read the 10th Amendment and get back to me.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

That's the point I'm trying to make, noacoler. Of course they could not have foreseen everything that was to come after they founded our country. The Constitution is supposed to be the law of the land; The fact that it has been amended no less than 20 times points to its inherent imperfection(It was created by men, not angels), but it also shows its inherent flexibility.

Reform(which, applied to an ailment of society, is supposed to either cure it; Or if it fails, nobody is for the worse), not destructive change(a change in the substance of the ailment, removing all of its inherent good as well as its accidental evil), was intended to be the logical way to solve the problems of society. Through the Amendment process, societal change was to be agreed upon by majority of the representation of society(3/4 of the States).

The Fed. has been running roughshod over the Constitution since the 1930s. Using a broad view of the commerce clause, and then instituting precedent after the fact, those in government then and now have sought to change the way the federal government and the individual interact in society.

Perhaps central regulation of some elements of our economy is better for the country. I'm not as educated as I could be on those aspects. I disagree with the federal government regulating or deciding upon the activities of individuals where States should have the last word. Arguments about marriage, controlled substances, social programs, and others -- Those, in my opinion, belong to the States.

Now, on the topic of marriage... If homosexuals want to be given equal rights, I cannot disagree. They're people too. They should fight for the States to change their laws, and petition the States or the Fed. for an Amendment to the Constitution giving them their due.

Posted by: OfConservativeMind | April 15, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Unless the GOP wants to be collectively relegated to Saint Helena then DeMint should think evolution, not revolution. Maybe it's time to change when the last 30 years haven't worked and you're being overrun by a handful of old folks looking for a hobby.

Posted by: hoser3 | April 15, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Your understanding of conservatism in general is next to zero. Reasonable people look at the activities of our federal government in the last several decades, look at the Constitution, and can argue that we have made a definite departure from our founding document and its intent in limiting a centralized power structure with the U.S.

==

Too bad the world didn't freeze into stasis once the ink dried.

I don't make a fetish of the Constitution. Matter of fact I'm getting a little bored of heating about it. Its writers didn't foresee everything that was ever going to happen, you know.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 12:22 PM | Report abuse

That was my son.
You two are sick and twisted.

No wonder no one will talk to you.

==

... he said, talking to me

A chid in wedlock or a perforated condom? Because the former implies wife, and it's a little weird for a guy with a family to be sending dozens of "friend requests" to scantilly clad women who appear to be selling sex.

You're a mess, zouk.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Expelling reason, expelling logic and science, expelling human rights, popping the acephalic infant known as conservatism, a nation where illiterates call the tune and racists get to be regarded as gentlemen, just like in this blog
posted by noacoler

Your understanding of conservatism in general is next to zero. Reasonable people look at the activities of our federal government in the last several decades, look at the Constitution, and can argue that we have made a definite departure from our founding document and its intent in limiting a centralized power structure with the U.S.

Expelling logic and science? You expel nothing logically but gratuitous assertions, which can be equally and gratuitously refuted. Science? When is the liberal-enviro-statism crowd on the side of science? Those who want to impose environmental controls on CO2 and choke the life out of our economy aren't looking at any science other than what the IPCC has set before them in regards to planning to reduce our "environmental impact." Our globe may be warming, but it's sure not what the IPCC predicted with their computer-generated climate models. In the midst of a recession, we're looking at applying more taxes and regulatory controls on our economy? Get outta here.

Conservatives will have a place in this world as long as we have a country for which to fight. The Fed. has become a massive behemoth with a spending problem not unlike any individual addiction. I propose that we decentralize the U.S. and give the States the authority they were supposed to hold under our Federalist government. A true conservative doesn't imagine a government that cannot change to suit the needs of its constituents; That's why we have the Amendment process. Social programs belong to the States, not the U.S. government.

Posted by: OfConservativeMind | April 15, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

That was my son.
You two are sick and twisted.

No wonder no one will talk to you.

Posted by: Moonbat | April 15, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Gee, who knew going to wh*res was a hobby...

and the young boy thing was pretty strange, this obsession he has.

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

And oh, yeah, shutterbug, one more thing. About your pedophilia obsession.

Was there any special reason the centerpiece of your hastily-erased Model Mania page was a very young boy wearing makeup? That would raise inquiries in some quarters.

I doubt you get very many repeat gigs when your "professional" work is as out of focus as that.

Good thing you're willing to learn.

hahahahahaha

LOSER!!!!!

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

The marginals from the CBS poll can be misleading. CBS asks "do you usually consider yourself a Republican, Democrat or Independent/Other?" The National Election Study asks a follow up question of those who identify themselves as independent/other, "Do you think of yourself as CLOSER to the Republican Party or to the Democratic party?" The leaners (respondents who say they are closer to one of the major parties) are often more partisan than respondents who weakly identify with a party.

This reduces the number of respondents who are truly independents. In election years since 1952 the percent of respondents who are true independents ranges from a low of 6 percent in 1952 to a high of 15 percent in 1974.

Given that the CBS poll finds that 66 percent of the tea party respondents either always or usually vote Republican, it seems likely that a good number of CBS's independents lean toward the GOP and are more likely to vote Republican than true independents.

Posted by: blpeyton | April 15, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Sorry zouk but you called it "professional photography." Professional is the adjective formed from profession, meaning what you do to make ends meet.

That's not a hobby.

What do you get for a kids' birthday party? For a downscale wedding? For a mitzvah? Like, 80 bucks? Minus the cost of film and getting the prints done at a drugstore?

hahahahaha

Now go ahead and call the rest of us "losers." I dare you.

hahahahahaha

oh my aching ribs.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

37th & O: you continually break the rules that CC has warned you about, and you think we are complaining because we don't agree with your opinion? how does it escape you that we can't be bothered reading your posts because you flood the page? you double space and make it so reading EVERYONE'S posts more difficult. Why does this seem so difficult for you to understand? We aren't saying for you to shut up, we're saying follow the rules!!! or expect to be complained about, whichever side of the political spectrum you reside. What makes you think you are so special that the rules don't apply to you?

Posted by: katem1 | April 15, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

It's called a hobby ped. Succesful and interesting people often have one. Sometimes you have to lay out some of your gold to participate. You should probably stick with blogging and car repair.

Today I research small world networks while you and dribble trade insults all day.

Posted by: Moonbat | April 15, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Drivl. You are daft.

"A new CBS News/New York Times poll finds 62 percent of respondents believe the income tax they have to pay is fair, while only 30 percent called it unfair. “

maybe the non payers think it's fine (aka liberals) and the succesful( aka repubs) think they pay too much.

Even ddawd could probably figure that one out.

Posted by: Moonbat | April 15, 2010 11:17 AM | Report abuse

"Stuttering, zit faced, bald, sexually confused, rejected by his family, punching a clock at a miserable low paying job and turning out to Be a racist, misogynist lonely shallow loser. No wonder no one will talk to him. So he blogs.

Posted by: Moonbat "


Man, nobody does projection like this guy. A lost soul. Creepy.

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

I think drivl, ped, Baghdad bj and the imbecile ddawd are driving any thinking people away with the endless liberal carpet bombing.

==

Heh heh heh you "think?"

I smell burning insulation.

So which you today, champ? The Ph.D. economist? The mathematician? The millionaire investor?

Or the guy who found an Instamatic in the trash and decided to step up to the glamorous career of takin' pitchers of nekkid wimmin?

Thanks for the friend request!!!
-- Shafreeka Vulva

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 11:11 AM | Report abuse

"A new CBS News/New York Times poll finds 62 percent of respondents believe the income tax they have to pay is fair, while only 30 percent called it unfair. “Majorities across all income groups, moreover, called their income tax fair.” Even a majority of those identifying themselves as Tea Party supporters said their taxes are fair."

But in follow-up
interviews, Tea Party supporters said they did not want to cut
Medicare or Social Security — the biggest domestic programs,
suggesting instead a focus on “waste.” Some defended being on Social
Security while fighting big government by saying that since they had
paid into the system, they deserved the benefits. Others could not
explain the contradiction. “That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked
Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe
I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and
my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the
perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.”

These folks don't seem to comprehend the meaning of the word 'think.'

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Ped, who took seven years to finally graduate community college and who has to scrape pennies together to afford lunch, even in a third world country, is not very representative of someone who should make fun of others. Imagine poor dribbls feelings who never went to college and has been unemployed for years. And poor ddawd who despite going to a no name third tier school in the middle of no where, still can't hack it and spends his days, well, blogging all day instead.

Poor ped. Stuttering, zit faced, bald, sexually confused, rejected by his family, punching a clock at a miserable low paying job and turning out to Be a racist, misogynist lonely shallow loser. No wonder no one will talk to him. So he blogs.

Posted by: Moonbat | April 15, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Instead of complaining - I would certainly like to see some of the posters on this blog CONDEMN THE ACTIONS OF THOSE WHO SAY THEY WANT TO PLANT RACIST EVIDENCE AT TEA PARTY RALLIES.

==

Coal to Newcastle.

Planting racist evidence at TP rallies would be like shipping water to the Pacific.

You've been doing this same post for over a month you drooling idiot.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Also from the poll, shrink:

"24% of supporters of the Tea Party believe that violence against the government is sometimes justified:

In terms of where the Tea Party turns for news, the poll found that 63 percent watch Fox News “most for information about politics and current events.” Additionally, 53 percent of Tea Partiers consider “shows hosted by people like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity” to be news rather than entertainment."

They must have very clean brains, considering that they are washed daily.

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Racist evidence at tea bagger events -- no way!
Let's just keep providing the aluminum foil planet mogno antennas and official, signed Sarah Palin platinum spit cups.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | April 15, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I think drivl, ped, Baghdad bj and the imbecile ddawd are driving any thinking people away with the endless liberal carpet bombing.

It would be nice if this blog were about content, not numbers, but liberals like to shout and shut down the opposition when confronted. Their positions are just too weak to defend rationally.

Posted by: Moonbat | April 15, 2010 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Palin/Gingrich 2012 a match made somewhere perfect. Palin/Gingrich 2012-Smarts and Fidelity all in one!!!

Posted by: matchtuff | April 15, 2010 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Caller: "what is your level of education?"

Teabagger: "Ah gots me a college DEEgree"

Caller: (jot jot jot) what is your income?

Teabagger: "Ah makes me TWO HUNNERT THOUSAND DOLLERS EVER YEAR!"

Caller: (jot jot jot) thanks for taking the time to take this poll.

Teabagger: "you tell thet SOCIALISTIST MUZZLIM thet he's a-gunna be AT UVVA JOB this cummin' EEEE-lekshun!! TWEE YOO!!

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 10:51 AM | Report abuse

'There's the conservative revolution ... losing but still pure. Writing Copernicus out of the textbooks.'

Thomas Jefferson doesn't exist in their parallel universe, either...

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Instead of complaining - I would certainly like to see some of the posters on this blog CONDEMN THE ACTIONS OF THOSE WHO SAY THEY WANT TO PLANT RACIST EVIDENCE AT TEA PARTY RALLIES.

Let's hear that.

Or is there silent agreement ?


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Well, the wierdo KKKonservatives and similar nut jobs are awake and posting, spewing their failed KKKonservative ideas while desperately trying to ignore the presence of the tea baggers. Likely the RepubliKKKan party will emerge from the next election cycle an unrecognizable defunct party party trying to spin Bush/Cheney atrocities out of existence and promoting the case for doing everything possible to make America fail. Just more racist body dragging.
Hey, how's that Mikey-Steeley thing workin' out fer ya?
Wanna make it all better? Run bad hair dayn Perry for el Presidente. That'll really fix it up gud, bubba.

Posted by: bgreen2224 | April 15, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

drinl


Like you don't do many posts a day ???


how much sillier can you be ???

Are you like 5 years old ?

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

' South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint (R) threw his endorsement behind Weld County prosecutor Ken Buck (R) in the Colorado Senate race, the latest in a series of moves by DeMint to buck the Republican Party establishment in contested primaries.'

I'm lovin' it.

==

Who wouldn't?

Rejecting electoral math for ideological purity. Logic and science are for liberals. Real men pass purity tests.

Just wait till the next election!

Uh, the one after that, I mean. Or the one after that. Or ...

There's the conservative revolution ... losing but still pure. Writing Copernicus out of the textbooks.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 10:39 AM | Report abuse

60% of baggers like Glen Beck and the same fraction think Obama was or might have been born in a "foreign country". Coincidence?
Oh yeah, these people are very well educated.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/04/14/us/politics/20100414-tea-party-poll-graphic.html#tab=1

Posted by: shrink2 | April 15, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

doesn't everyone's hands get tired of scrolling past 37's floods? It could take years off your life. I wonder how many people he's driven away?

It seems that's the sole reason for his existence, to destroy this blog.

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

'How do we know the TEA people are more wealthy and educated than average Americans? Well that is what they told the nice person on the phone who called them up and asked. What are they supposed to say, I didn't stay in school long enough and that is why I don't make much money? I'll bet they would say they were better looking too, not to mention just plain smarter. Another day of laughing at Republicans...'

beat me to it, shrink. also amusing is the credulity of anyone in the media who takes unverifiable telephone polls seriously.

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

At this point one must begin to make a list of the DISGRACEFUL actions of Obama.


- This latest banking fight is one example.


- Releasing Terrorists from Gitmo and sending them to Yemen


- False Charges of Racism


- Obama has STILL not acted from stopping his people from PLANTING Racist evidence at Tea Party Rallies.


- Telling terrorist to remain silent when the government should be trying to get intelligence about imminent attacks from them.


- Allowing Afghanistan become a narco-state


- Not adhering to his pledges to be bipartisan

The list can just go on and on

The thing is the American People had NO IDEA that Obama was going to be this bad when the vote was taken.


Obama's campaign was nothing but a COMPLETE FRAUD.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

George Allen aka Mr. Maccacca, will be addressing one of the VA bagger parties. Perfect fit. The biggest motivator for these people, as mark said, is hatred of our president. Also, that they say he favors blacks over whites. No surprises here.

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Tea baggers worry about militant bigots in their midst?

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/04/15/us/AP-US-Tea-Party-Concerns.html?_r=1

Oh no, not possible, very few of them are activists, that is what they told the poll worker, along with the fact that they are very wealthy and educated and of fine breeding. Like the tea baggers here, overeducated, wealthy yachtsmen, trophy wives, they are all that.

Obese, raging, toothless, downwardly mobile bigots who have with waaaay too much* ammo? Why would the "organizers" be worried about those people?


*yeah, I know, no such thing as too much...

Posted by: shrink2 | April 15, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse

' South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint (R) threw his endorsement behind Weld County prosecutor Ken Buck (R) in the Colorado Senate race, the latest in a series of moves by DeMint to buck the Republican Party establishment in contested primaries.'

I'm lovin' it.

Posted by: drindl | April 15, 2010 10:15 AM | Report abuse

c'mon CC, look how he flooded your previous post too, the Palin KYsenate one. lots of great exchanges of ideas and info in most of the posts, except for the constant flooding by the corner. I so miss BobbyWC, a great righty who used to post here, and was a great exchanger of ideas and info. but he got tired of poll driven stories and having to scroll through "floods" to read the relevant posts. It is unfair to your posters from both sides to constantly have to deal with the corner's rule breaking.

==

Think 37th would last a day here doing the exact same shtick albeit pro-Obama?

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Threadjack warning!

Ya might want to see this - Al Jazeera interviewing Dentist McElroy, outgoing TXBofEd [former chief] cretin. Made for each other? Dogs and cats, together? 7 minutes, and fairly done, actually.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0ZgTLZ0oBI&feature=player_embedded

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 15, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

NOW, THIS IS OBAMA REJECTING BIPARTISANSHIP AGAIN.

==

... Meaning he can learn. Unlike his predecessor.

Obama should go before the Republicans and tell them to go screw themselves until they're ready to grownup. Bipartisanship is for partners, not committed opponents, which you're clearly too stupid to understand.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

c'mon CC, look how he flooded your previous post too, the Palin KYsenate one. lots of great exchanges of ideas and info in most of the posts, except for the constant flooding by the corner. I so miss BobbyWC, a great righty who used to post here, and was a great exchanger of ideas and info. but he got tired of poll driven stories and having to scroll through "floods" to read the relevant posts. It is unfair to your posters from both sides to constantly have to deal with the corner's rule breaking.

Posted by: katem1 | April 15, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

Has anyone been following the banking discussions on Capitol Hill?


Senator Corker R-TN was negotiating with Senator Dodd - and there were various statements being made that an agreement was in the works.

THEN in an abrupt move, Dodd pulled out of the BIPARTISAN NEGOTIATIONS, AND the Obama people said they were going to come up with their own bill.


NOW, THIS IS OBAMA REJECTING BIPARTISANSHIP AGAIN.

It gets worse.....


Then Obama comes out with his own bill - but then at the same time starts blaming the Republicans for supporting the banks.


The Republicans - on to this pathetic trick - immediately go to the floor of the Senate and state that OBAMA IS SUPPORTING THE BANKING LOBBY.

Clearly Obama is NOT TRYING TO GET A BILL THROUGH - ALL OBAMA WANTS TO DO IS MANUFACTURE A CAMPAIGN ISSUE.

Again, Obama has made a FRAUD of his commitment to be BIPARTISAN.

And Obama is actually doing the bidding of the banks - because now it is harder to get a banking bill through.

OBAMA IS POISON TO THE POLITICAL SYSTEM - INSTEAD OF CURING THE INFIGHTING IN WASHINGTON - OBAMA IS MAKING THE SITUATION MUCH MUCH WORSE.


.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

AND it looks like Obama wants to pull out Afghanistan next year - leaving Afghanistan to become a NARCO-STATE

==

Who cares?

Infinitely preferable to staying these and spending ourselves into has-been status like our predecessors there.

Want to stop Islamic radicalism? Encourage Islamic moderation. Cut off s hitty little Israel, what have they ever done for us?

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 9:57 AM | Report abuse


The major problem this country had is that Obama promised the country over and over again that he would pursue CENTRIST policies - and this has turned out to be a FRAUD of the highest nature.


___________________________________

And then the liberals start to shake their heads and say "we won the election."


But the election turned out to be won on a series of fradulent commitments.

The ONLY RESPONSE to this has been "you are a racist."

Then the liberals are saying "Since we do not have evidence that you are a racist, WE ARE GOING TO SEND PEOPLE TO YOUR RALLIES TO PLANT RACIST EVIDENCE."

Then the liberals appear to wonder why Obama is losing support - and no one wants the liberal policies.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

3. In yet further evidence -- in case you needed any more! -- that Newt Gingrich (Ga.) is seriously considering a presidential run in 2012, the former House speaker will appear at a Tea Party rally today in Austin, Texas in which the group's "Contract From America" will be revealed.

==

"American Contraction" more like.

Expelling reason, expelling logic and science, expelling human rights, popping the acephalic infant known as conservatism, a nation where illiterates call the tune and racists get to be regarded as gentlemen, just like in this blog.

Where do I sign up.

If that idiot DeMint had just one more neuron, why, he could have a synapse.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Chris, if some of us regular commentoers on your blog got together and got "flood" insurance, would that help against the incessant double spaced flooding of the corner's rants?
you have warned him multiple times of flooding and spacing but he seems to ignore your warnings.

Posted by: katem1 | April 15, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

will free market conservative demint lead the way to stop forcing usps to subsidize junk mail (his former business) with first class rates and close unneeded post offices?

Posted by: george32 | April 15, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

The major problem this country had is that Obama promised the country over and over again that he would pursue CENTRIST policies - and this has turned out to be a FRAUD of the highest nature.


On every point, Obama has gone back on his word to be a moderate.


On almost every liberal point, when it has become clear that the liberal policy is UNWORKABLE, Obama drags his feet for months and months trying to implement a completely unworkable policy.

Meanwhile - OBAMA HAS BEEN RELEASING TERRORISTS FROM GITMO.


This is all in a vain effort to have his liberal policies on Gitmo work.

The trials policy - which everyone thought was settled months ago - well Obama wants to push through his liberal version AGAIN.

AND it looks like Obama wants to pull out Afghanistan next year - leaving Afghanistan to become a NARCO-STATE - and Karzai will probably run the country by giving money to the Taliban.

That is where it is going.


.


.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

4 posts in 15 minutes. The daily spamming of the comments section has commenced.

Posted by: JakeD3 | April 15, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

"Conservative revolution"

Yeah, back to the geocentric universe. Back to disease cause by spirits and vapors. Meat DOES turn into maggots. Back to women as second class. Pillories and stocks. Back, back, back, back, back.

Where do I sign up.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

"Conservative revolution"

Yeah, back to the geocentric universe. Back to disease cause by spirits and vapors. Meat DOES turn into maggots. Back to women as second class. Back, back, back, back, back.

Where do I sign up.

Posted by: Noacoler | April 15, 2010 9:33 AM | Report abuse

"As for the Crist underlying matter, it would be interesting to find out whether Florida permits Crist to do a Joe Lieberman/Sore Loserman--that is, lose the primary and then come back to run as an independent in the general election. Some states like Pennsylvania have anti-sore-loserman rules to prevent that tactic but I don't know whether Florida does."

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 15,2010 8:39 AM

The link in the column tells us that Crist must decide by April 30, before the primary.

Posted by: MoreAndBetterPolls | April 15, 2010 9:32 AM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe


The last time we had this discussion it was before the Scott Brown race - and Rasmussen had Scott Brown pulling up to 9 points and you kept on saying that was wrong.

Would you like to take another look at that Massachusetts race and tell me whether Rasmussen was wrong???

I think your polling had a far different result.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD


You are a part of a group of 7-8 who post on this blog daily - almost in shifts -


Many of you use multiple screen names.


Yesterday someone admitted that you coordinated by email and conference calls.

All this has been going on for over two years.

AND then you complain that someone else is "flooding" the board. It is YOUR GROUP who is "flooding" the board.


It is your group who started, on a constant basis - harassing other posters so they do not post any more.


Yet you complain that someone else is posting.


THE TRUTH - The truth is you will object to ANY expression of any opinion which does not support your point of view.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

How do we know the TEA people are more wealthy and educated than average Americans? Well that is what they told the nice person on the phone who called them up and asked. What are they supposed to say, I didn't stay in school long enough and that is why I don't make much money? I'll bet they would say they were better looking too, not to mention just plain smarter. Another day of laughing at Republicans...

Posted by: shrink2 | April 15, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

Obama said "Whether we like it or not, American remains the dominant military power."


It is an outrage for Obama to say this.

First, Obama pulled A MAJOR DECEPTION in his campaign in 2008 - because he never told the nation anything like this.

A person who does not believe that America should be the dominat military power has NO BUSINESS BEING COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

Obama should resign immediately.

Ask yourself - DO YOU LIKE IT THAT AMERICAN IS THE DOMINANT MILITARY POWER ???


Obama showed some basically UNPATRIOTIC sentiment with that statement.

Thank you.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Obama said "Whether we like it or not, American remains the dominant military power."


It is an outrage for Obama to say this.

First, Obama pulled A MAJOR DECEPTION in his campaign in 2008 - because he never told the nation anything like this.

A person who does not believe that America should be the dominat military power has NO BUSINESS BEING COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

Obama should resign immediately.

Ask yourself - DO YOU LIKE IT THAT AMERICAN IS THE DOMINANT MILITARY POWER ???


Obama showed some basically UNPATRIOTIC sentiment with that statement.

Thank you.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 9:14 AM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe


The reason Rasmussen is used is because he is always right.


The Research 2000 is always significantly off.


How many times does someone we have to tell you?

Do you have some sort of learning problem?

You keep on bringing up the same thing - the facts keep coming out proving you WRONG
-----------------------

Yeah, like Rassmussen called that special election in Fla earlier this week for the republican by 10 points.
The republican lost by 30.
but, sure, Rass. is always right! bwahahahahaha

Posted by: vwcat | April 15, 2010 9:07 AM | Report abuse

The Demint news is thrilling! Given that the GOP members of Congress vote in lockstep - regardless if they are full-on wingnut or just merely a corporate bootlicker - Demint putting money into the candidates that scare the bejeezus out of majority of the electorate will ensure that any losses the Dems take this year will be modest while doing nothing to change the way the GOP votes. Well done!

Posted by: SWB2 | April 15, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

"Senator DeMint is helping strong conservative candidates around the country who have been overlooked by the Washington establishment," explained Matt Hoskins, an aide to DeMint."

No. Demint is proving he is the most far rightwing nutcase in his party.
The problem with people like Demint is that they delude themselves into believing that the majority of the country agrees with them and are just as far right as they are.
they refuse to accept the will of the real life majority in this country that voted for Obama and wants moderation on both sides.
they want the parties to work together and compromise. they want real things to get done. They do not want a ideology driven agenda.
But, DeMint and the rest of the rightwing tea party crowd live in this fantasy that most people agree with them.
Talk about living in an alternate universe.
Instead of making him a senator his state should have committed him to a psychological exam.

Posted by: vwcat | April 15, 2010 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, like Ras's poll showing BHO 42, Ron Paul (of Ron Paul Newsletter fame) 41, in 2012. I'll save that poll. LOL.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 15, 2010 9:02 AM | Report abuse

Let's hear just one of these "conservative" politicians who want to cut taxes talk candidly to the voters about what sacrifices they will have to make in order to achieve both lower taxes (less revenue coming in) and a lower deficit at the same time. They'll talk of cutting "waste"(sometimes meaning programs other people use) and programs that other people use, but usually just talk in generalities, and will NOT say to voters, "It will be worthwhile in the long run, but even you will have to feel some of the pain." Just won't happen.

Posted by: Sutter | April 15, 2010 8:59 AM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe


The reason Rasmussen is used is because he is always right.


The Research 2000 is always significantly off.


How many times does someone we have to tell you?

Do you have some sort of learning problem?

You keep on bringing up the same thing - the facts keep coming out proving you WRONG

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | April 15, 2010 8:52 AM | Report abuse

Conservative revolution? "Conservative" and "revolution"? The contradiction in itself. Conservative is the people aiming to defend what is already existing. To conserve. Nothing new they can offer to any body. On the other hand, revolution means a total rupture, a critical change for something new to be imposed. This is probably the reason for conservatives to be so difficult to find any "conservative revolutionary".

Posted by: Vercinget333 | April 15, 2010 8:40 AM | Report abuse

Why is it relevant that the Research 2000 polling was done by the "liberal" Daily Kos? If the R2000 methodology is sound, who cares? Let's see how the polling of Rasmussen, totally right-wing biased and discredited in the opinion of many, is characterized here in the future.

As for the Crist underlying matter, it would be interesting to find out whether Florida permits Crist to do a Joe Lieberman/Sore Loserman--that is, lose the primary and then come back to run as an independent in the general election. Some states like Pennsylvania have anti-sore-loserman rules to prevent that tactic but I don't know whether Florida does.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 15, 2010 8:39 AM | Report abuse

The Washington Post pays an employee salary and benefits to manage a blog to provide political news to its multicultural progressive readership that voted for our President about 10 to 1.

Having the choice of about 155 political news stories to write about, the employee rolls out of bed to type: "Jim DeMint...."
I don't get it--the endorsement of a ultrarightwing Senator from Texas is news? News? But I guess that just me.

Texas journalist Britt Towery on DeMint:

"Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C, is one of several high government officials who continue the anti-Obama rhetoric. He has proudly proclaimed he aims to “break” the president on health reform.

DeMint said: “If we’re able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him.” Does he not know that the word “break” in this connection comes from “slave-breakers” who were used to teach slaves how to be a good slave and how to obey their masters."

http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2010/apr/08/sen-demint-and-slave-breakers/

"Breaking" our President hardly seems like a legitimate policy goal--but, again, that's just me.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | April 15, 2010 8:28 AM | Report abuse

yeah, no corner flooding! thanks Chris!

Posted by: katem1 | April 15, 2010 8:26 AM | Report abuse

gee, has DeMint been fact checked? look how long he ran around saying that the Prez has never even mentioned the war on terror without anyone, until Jon Stewart, challenging him about the truthfulness of his statement, which Stewart COMPLETELY debunked. So a Senator that lies for a month is a contender in 2012? or has huge influence in the GOP? that's pretty scary, and very werid that everyone seems to forget his lies.

Posted by: katem1 | April 15, 2010 8:25 AM | Report abuse

Berry's off the prompter again. What an embarassment. No wonder his handlers won't allow press conferences. Without being fed every word, there is simply nothing there.

Posted by: Moonbat | April 15, 2010 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, we definitely don't have to go back to Reagan to see the consequences of patsy watchdogs. And these things always have some unexpected consequences. I'll have to read up on it some more. I wonder if this will be different since it's job is more to see that costs are controlled and not so much to ensure that regulations are being followed.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 15, 2010 8:04 AM | Report abuse

When RWR appointed watchdogs with explicit statutory duties they performed them with their eyes closed.
The benefit of Congressional oversight is moderation in either direction. It is also the curse. Presidential panels reflect the predisposition of the president. Some years, IBAP will be aggressive and some years it will be passive.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 15, 2010 7:54 AM | Report abuse

But isn't the panel required to make suggestions to control costs? That should be independent of the political leanings of whoever assigns them, right?

Posted by: DDAWD | April 15, 2010 7:42 AM | Report abuse

ddawd, the current panel is a friend to the health care industry. IPAB will be stronger b/c of the independence from Congress, but the Prez appoints them. So when the next RWR is Prez there will be zero oversight.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 15, 2010 7:38 AM | Report abuse

More likely that Jim DeMint and other folks backing far-right candidates over mainstream Republicans are leading the GOP to disaster in November...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | April 15, 2010 7:37 AM | Report abuse

I sent that Ornstein link to a very conservative old friend of mine and he sputtered. We talked. He eventually conceded the main points that Ornstein made, but remained convinced that BHO wants to strengthen the welfare state with close governmental supervision of business, but he is constrained by the limitations of the presidency not being a dictatorship. He also thought that federalizing more of HC was sure to be a fiscal loser either by blowing another hole in our solvency or by necessitating heavy taxation. The VAT balloon angers him.

I think that Ornstein link is a TPM for the BHO gap - try it on your conservative friends. It will not lead to agreement but it will focus the conversation.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 15, 2010 7:30 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, Mark, I asked you about that. Supposedly it's supposed to be one of the best cost saving measure in the affordable health care law. It's called IPAB. I think the way it works is that if Medicare's growth exceeds a certain rate, the board would be required to suggest changes to control costs. The suggestions will go into effect unless explicitly overruled by Congress. No action means the changes go into effect.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 15, 2010 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Ddawd, I also liked your deconstruction of DeMint's endorsements. Michael Williams is one of TX's two statewide elected black Rs. He is a Railroad Commissioner and that means he has oversight of the O&G industry in TX. He was an O&G lawyer and personal friend of GWB. He is a friend to the industry. He was likely Goodhair's appointment if KBH had resigned. So I thought DeMint's support was a nod to Perry.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 15, 2010 7:18 AM | Report abuse

ddawd, did you ask me about the medicare advisory panels yesterday, or was it a different subject?

Thanks for the Lincoln proposal link. She is a good soldier to carry on with legislative proposals while Ds from outside AR are fueling her intended demise. If it has resonance with AR voters perhaps she will rebound from being bloodied. Just how strong will the Halter supporters be for her after the ugly primary?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 15, 2010 7:09 AM | Report abuse

Mark, I read that link too. Seemed like it was just a long winded way of saying teabaggers are idiots.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 15, 2010 7:06 AM | Report abuse

MM, DeMint is fitting himself to the CBS and CNN polls relating to TEA. So are several other Rs. That looks like riding a wave crest from their perspective. DeMint is actually sincere in his sympathies, judging from his past performance[s]. Newt is actually cynical in his, judging from his past performances.

While it is not surprising to me, the two polls find a higher % of TEA symps are college grads than the general public. The two polls find the same demographics, but one puts "activists" at 4% and one puts them at 10%. Their motivations are polled. In one, the biggest single motivator is dislike of BHO. The polls reflect what some of the more strident rightwing Fixistas long have said here. That a vocal minority of Americans hold these views is not news to anyone here. DeMint is a natural for them.

Ornstein, the house liberal at the conservative AEI, had this to say about the seemingly unbridgeable polarity of views about BHO:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/13/AR2010041303686.html

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 15, 2010 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Chris, you should warn 37th like ten more times. I think then he will finally stop flooding these sections.

#1 - Were DeMint's picks really that far out there in left field? Toomey is the only choice. Rubio is looking really strong to win his primary and I don't think either are particularly unelectable in the general. I don't know much about Michael Williams, but I don't see how extreme of an endorsement he was. The only one that seemed kind of out there was DeVore.

#4 - I think it is safe to say we can look at this in a political spectrum, but Lincoln has come out with her own proposal on regulating derivatives trading.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=F8A81183-18FE-70B2-A831C0E9C666043D

Her regulations are supposedly stronger than what Dodd has in his bill and even stronger than what the Obama administration (Geitner) wants to do.

And she is making it very clear that her proposal will stave off the need for more bailouts, something that Halter has been hammering her for.

Posted by: DDAWD | April 15, 2010 6:47 AM | Report abuse

#4 and #5 offer an educational contrast.

#4 is a union fueled fratricide where money is no object but the general election is surely lost to the divided and angry [at each other] Ds.

#5 reflects the low fundraising of a non-divisive party primary. The survivor there has dry powder for the fall and fundraising will suddenly become a priority.

I ask AR and OH readers to post - I am viewing from a distance and might be misreading for lack of detailed info. Please critique the following assertion.

"Citizens United" assures that there will be a wash of money from lobbies available to both parties in the fall in an industrial giant like OH. In the union fueled fratricide in AR, it is already flooding.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | April 15, 2010 6:43 AM | Report abuse

"Jim DeMint doesn't want to lead a government he wants to lead a revolution."

Sounds like he's got that hopey-changey thing to me.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | April 15, 2010 6:41 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company