Author: TSO

Thanks to someone I will keep anonymous since I am not sure he wishes to be named, I now have the document, and it is every bit the piece of beauty I knew it would be.

THANKS GUYS.

(more…)

Well, since my earlier post got everyone’s attention, I might as well piss off anyone I missed.

So the House Republicans have come out with their “Pledge to America.” I believe exactly as Erick Erickson of Red State who said that it was Perhaps the Most Ridiculous Thing to Come Out of Washington Since George McClellan:

The entirety of this Promise is laughable. Why? It is an illusion that fixates on stuff the GOP already should be doing while not daring to touch on stuff that will have any meaningful longterm effects on the size and scope of the federal government.

This document proves the GOP is more focused on the acquisition of power than the advocacy of long term sound public policy. All the good stuff in it is stuff we expect them to do. What is not in it is more than a little telling that the House GOP has not learned much of anything from 2006.

I will vote Republican in November of 2010. But I will not carry their stagnant water.

What is semi-ironic is while I agree with him on all this, he is voting GOP, against the guy I praised earlier, Jim Marshall, in whose district Erickson lives.

If the GOP takes over again, and acts like they did last time, the GOP will likely go extinct as a viable option. I’m accused off all kinds of things in the comment section of my other post, and some of it is understandable, but if the GOP takes over, and doesn’t make SIGNIFICANT changes, we are through. Now, how much can the GOP do with a President Obama? Virtually nothing.

So, let me address a few comments. From Matt:

The only problem with voting for Democrats is Pelosi, Rangel, Conyers, Franks, Waters, Miller, the pipsqueak from Cinci, et al. Voting for a demorat put these clowns in power. The liberals out number the conservatives in the party. They control the agenda.

Yes they do, and they are impotent provided that the GOP stands tall, and the blue dogs come on over for anything asinine.

In the House particularly, it is a numbers game. So what if Marshall’s personal platform is conservative? His votes for the the Democrat leadership ensures left wing policy outcomes. Even if he votes contrary to that leadership, he allows them to set the terms of each vote.

I figured Stupak’s example from the health care debate would’ve put this issue to rest.

I’m not sure how this is even remotely true. If there are 218 Democrats, and Marshall sides with the GOP on a vote, that vote fails. What happened on the Stupak thing is he caved. Had the House been closer, say 220-215, then Obamacare would have failed. Now, because it did pass, the GOP looks great right now. So, what happens when the GOP is in the majority, and can’t pass anything, because Obama vetoes it all. Who is the bogeyman now? It’s not the Dems.

I’ve grown pretty weary of this ‘pox on both their houses’ style of analysis. Your preference doesn’t just prevent the GOP from going stupid, it also allows the Democrats to go full retard, precisely due to the early critical support of the few ’sane dems’ in the caucus. You’d be just as responsible for the excesses of another Pelosi/Reid congress as a Democrat who enthusiastically voted for their Democratic congressional candidate.

Um. Wow. How the fug can they go “full retard” if they don’t have the votes? Explain to me how that happens? Based on your logic though, when the GOP wins, and they pass a appropriations bill with a ton of pork for George Miller in California (R), just like they do every other year, you sir are fully and totally reponsible for it.

Screw that. I don’t trust that the GOP has learned anything. The budget ballooned under Bush and a GOP Congress. It has gone up even more since then, true. My ideal situation, a GOP minority with enough blue dogs to block anything and everything. I’d rather have a GOP majority that is smart enough to handle the reins, but I have never seen such a thing.

If someone is going to take the blame, I want it to be them, not us. Because do you really want Sue Collins deciding what bills get passed, or a Conservative Dem like Marshall? Obviously we differ on that.

This man truly is criminally idiotic. Well, maybe not criminally, but indisputably anyway:

You’re surprised I’m sure. But even as President Bush was stating to the American people that “every measure has been taken to avoid war.”, his administration had already been planning ways to instigate a war with Iraq as early as December of 2001.

Through the Freedom of Information Act, the National Security Archive at George Washington University has obtained notes from a meeting between then-SECDEF Donald Rumsfeld and then-CENTCOM commander General Tommy Franks in which planning for the Iraq war was underway. One of the points discussed was how to start a war with Iraq…

Are you ready for the smoking gun? OK, here goes, it is from a memo:

Now, let’s work on some logical thinking. Let’s assume that dick is right, and “How start?” used in this context actually means “How can we precipitate a war with Iraq”, the first way we might do so would be to get Saddam to move against the Kurds? How the hell are we going to do that? Maybe Tony Camerino and dicksmith could stare at goats and invade Saddam’s brain? We could harness the brain power of the collective trust of them to infiltrate the dreams of the Iraqi dictator to make him do our bidding.

Now, here is a test, and you tell me what you think.

In the context of this memo, “How Start?” most likely means:
1) How can the US start a war with Iraq? Answer: by manipulating Saddam to invade the north.
2) What is the most likely genesis of a war with Iraq? Answer: Saddam invades the north.
3) How can I start this briefing using ambiguous language so that down the road VoteVets can use tortured logic (oops, sorry for the torture reference) to assume that we are trying to start a war with iraq. Answer: “How start?”

Is it *not* entirely clear that #2 is the only answer susceptible to rational interpretation?

Obviously the latest and greatest is from the O’Donnell v. Bearded Marxist race, but I wanted to look at some other stuff regarding party affiliation and political ideology. I’ve made no bones about my support of Democrat Jim Marshall in Georgia, and I know nothing whatsoever about his GOP opponent in Georgia, but i would still support Jim no matter who it is.

Let me ask this, would you rather have a Democrat who is conservative, or a Republican who is moderate/liberal?

Take for instance Marshall’s latest hit on his opponent:

Marshall: “I’m Jim Marshall, and I approved this message.”

Male voiceover: “Times are hard. And illegal immigrants are putting more of a burden on taxpayers by using public services like hospitals and schools.

“But Austin Scott voted against penalizing illegal immigrants who try to send money out of the country. Austin Scott said he had ‘a moral problem’ making illegal immigrants pay.

“Mr. Scott, what about the moral problem of illegal immigrants breaking the law?”

For the life of me I can’t really figure out what makes Jim a Democrat, except his friendship with former Senator Zell Miller. The only vote that ever pisses me off that Jim makes is for Pelosi. And granted, that is an important one.

So here is my question, assume that you lived in that district. Further assume that both of the candidates is a virtual carbon copy. The only difference is party affiliation. Would you rather have a Dem, or a GOP? See, I would rather have a Dem. And here’s why….

Many of the pieces of legislation that are acted upon first get discussed in the Dem caucus meetings. Obviously if a substantial number of the majority doesn’t approve of something, it goes nowhere. Would you rather have a guy that is in there fighting against some asinine thing, or a guy who can just cast a vote against it when it gets to the floor.

There’s a wide spread story that during the caucus meetings on Iraq that one time Jim and Murtha had to be physically seperated. Now, I don’t know if that is true, I never asked the Congressman, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all. The last 3 times I have been in Jim’s office he had a stack of emails printed out on his desk that he wanted to read to me. They were from Dem’s in his district blasting the shit out of him for backing the surge and what we were doing in Iraq. And let me tell you, they were just venomous. So, it can’t be easy for Jim to be in the party and take that abuse. Frankly, I am somewhat amazed he hasn’t faced a more serious challenge from the left.

Anyway, subject for discussion is my earlier posed question, would you rather be represented by a Conservative (pro-military, anti-illegal immigration, pro-gun) Democrat, or a Sue Collins type Republican. Put another way, how important to you is party affiliation?

BTW- How hard core is Jim on Immigration, you be the judge:

(Maybe voting is closed, if so I will take this down, can someone check for me?)

Can you guys go to this link, and at the bottom, can you vote 10 stars? It’s for the Boston Mascot dude, and this kid deserves it. He’s behind by like 10 votes.

Do it from home, link is not entirely safe for work.

No, I have no clue why Mr. Greyhawk is featured with a naked Obama and Army Sergeants normal means of conveyance in this picture.

More here.

UPDATE: On edit, my Apologies to Mr. Greyhawk, it looks nothing like him. (Seriously, you must go take a look.)

Or, atleast so says Hotair.

I’m not down with her anti-masterbation fatwa, but she’s better than a Marxist I suppose. So, putting aside that she doesn’t want you to beat it like Rodney King, I dedicate this music video to the next Senator from Delaware, if all goes well.

I just did a guest post at my other home from the Uncle of a Fallen Marine. It’s the worst thing I have ever read, and has me so damn mad I can’t think straight. It is so damn bad, that I am putting the quote after the jump, and I give you the strongest possible warning. I mean it, 98% of you should not read what follows, and those who do will be enraged. It is about a father having to dig through his sons remains to ensure that Arlington had the right guy. Just wretched.

(more…)