• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Subscribe
  • RSS

In Criticizing Paul Ryan, Sarah Palin And The Tea Party Confirm Their Own Irrelevance

Sarah-Palin-at-Podium

Yesterday, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan introduced the latest version of his “Path To Prosperity” budget for the Fiscal Year that starts on Octber 1, 2014. It’s details are not significantly different from previous versions that he has released in the years since the GOP gained control of the House of Representatives in the 2010 elections and, indeed, in some respects this year’s version actually increases spending slightly over previous versions, especially in the defense area. As was the case with past proposals that the Congressman has made, the budget he proposed doesn’t resemble whatever budget Congress will actually pass this year, and it likely also differs from the budget that will ultimately pass the House.

None of that, however, has kept Sarah Palin from pontificating about the newest Ryan budget from her Facebook redoubt:

Holy Moly! Are you kidding? You’d think one who is representing the mighty Badgers, who made it to the Final Four based on sacrificial work ethic and discipline that obviously pays off in the end, he who represents the great state of Wisconsin that hosts this underdog celebrated college basketball team, would understand that future success depends on hard work and sacrifices. The latest Ryan (R, Wisconsin) Budget is not an April Fool’s joke. But it really IS a joke because it is STILL not seeing the problem; it STILL is not proposing reining in wasteful government overspending TODAY, instead of speculating years out that some future Congress and White House may possibly, hopefully, eh-who-knows, take responsibility for today’s budgetary selfishness and shortsightedness to do so. THIS is the definition of insanity. Do we still not understand how dangerous it is to allow government to grow unchecked as we shackle ourselves with massive debt – a good portion of which is held by foreign nations who don’t necessarily like us? If we can’t balance the budget today, what on earth makes us think it will happen at some future date? The solution is staring us in the face. We need to rein in spending today, and don’t tell me there is nothing to cut when we know every omnibus bill is loaded with pork and kickbacks.

Palin’s post also links to an article at Brietbart’s Big Government that details the complaints of Tea Party activists about the budget proposed by someone who, until fairly recently, was supposedly a Tea Party hero:

Leaders of the Tea Party movement around the country reacted to Ryan’s budget with derision, calling it a work of fiction.

Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation, told Breitbart News “Ryan’s budget should be found in the book store in the fiction department.  If there is one thing we know about Washington, increased spending now with the promises of spending cuts on the future means we will get the spending but never the cuts.”

Phillips had a message for Ryan.  ”Why don’t we reverse the order?  Spending cuts now and maybe spending increases in ten years. ”

Ben Cunningham, founder of the Nashville Tea Party, told Breitbart News it is fitting that Ryan released his budget on April Fool’s Day. ”On this day when we celebrate fools, we are once again presented with a budget by Republicans and asked to believe it is something more than a political document,” Cunningham said.

“If Republicans are serious about avoiding national bankruptcy they will stop appropriating nonexistent funds for $400,000 camel statues. Until then WE are the fools if we trust but do not verify,” Cunningham added.

Mark Kevin Lloyd, a Virginia Tea Party activist, was equally dubious. “I got tired of watching Popeye reruns when I was a kid in the ’60s,” he told Breitbart News. “Wimpy was always asking for a hamburger today, and offering to pay next Tuesday.  That is exactly what this budget does for us.”

“thesad fact is that the promised reductions never come,” Lloyd said.”Future congresses are not bound by the dreams, schemes, and chicanery of previous congresses.  These people think the American people are stupid, and the fact that we keep letting them get away with it makes me believe they might be right.”

Leaving aside criticisms of Ryan’s proposal for the moment, and I’m not necessarily entirely pleased with it myself, it’s obviously quite easy for Palin and these Tea Party activists to sit on the sidelines and complain that Ryan’s budget isn’t good enough from a conservative point of view. Unlike Ryan and the other members of House Leadership, they don’t have to worry about getting a budget plan approved by the Senate, or about the fact that the other House of Congress is controlled by the opposing party and therefore highly unlikely to even take a vote on the Ryan budget never mind pass it. They won’t need to be involved in the process of getting a spending bill passed by midnight September 30th in order to make sure the government continues to function, or sit in on a House-Senate Conference Committee like the one that Congressman Ryan co-chaired with Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray which resulted in the first real budget passed by Congress since the 2010 elections. They don’t have to deal with the competing claims of Members of Congress from both parties related to parts of the Federal Budget that matter to their constituents. Basically, they don’t have to do any work at all, all they need to do is sit back and pontificate while the donation checks roll in from people who quite honestly ought to know better at this point than to give money to people like this. 

Peter Wehner at Commentary adds this regarding Palin:

Now you may believe, as I do, that Ms. Palin long ago ceased being a serious national voice. But she is representative of something real. She personifies a mindset within conservatism that is almost proudly anti-intellectual, one characterized by resentments, that relies on banalities, and is disconnected from reality. It views politics as a pose and seems to take special delight in targeting perceived heretics within the movement. It’s all rather silly.

At the same time, there is something problematic when people on the right, including the GOP vice presidential candidate in 2008, attack those who are actually doing the hard, necessary work of providing a conservative governing alternative to the Obama years. I recognize that posting shallow reactions on Facebook is easier than offering serious analysis or putting together an actual budget.

This anti-intellectualism is nothing new, of course. It’s been part of Palin’s schtick since the day John McCain introduced her to the nation on that August day in 2008 and it’s something that the Tea Party, it’s spokespersons, and its advocates in Congress have hit upon continuously for the past five years or so.  Up until now, mainstream conservatives and the GOP establishment essentially let them get away with it, in no small part because they helped advance the fortunes of the Republican Party. In the wake of the 2012 election and the government shutdown fiasco, many of those people began to recognize the damage that was being done to their party, or at least they began to acknowledge publicly what they likely already knew. Now, with Palin and her fans in the Tea Party criticizing one of the most conservative members of the House Leadership for actually doing his job, the truth is finally revealed to such an extent that nobody can deny. These people are not contributing anything useful to politics or the nation, and it’s about time somebody said it.

Related Posts:

About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway. Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. RWB says:

    These people are not contributing anything useful to politics or the nation, and it’s about time somebody said it.

    That’s why they call her rouge

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

  2. C. Clavin says:

    So it’s the irrelevant criticizing the irrelevant?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2

  3. al-Ameda says:

    Sarah Palin is the slow motion NASCAR-spinout-and-crash-into-the-wall of American politics. We’re always going to have 27% of the people who like her because ‘she speaks her mind’ – never mind that it’s always a low-grade quantity, never a quality, consideration when it comes to what’s on her mind.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1

  4. anjin-san says:

    So Palin’s problem with Ryan is that he is not a big enough sociopath?

    It’s kind of sad watching this woman cling desperately to her status as a C list celebrity. But any sympathy I might have vanishes when I hear someone who is notoriously adverse to hard work and discipline spewing bromides about – hard work and discipline.

    Highly-rated. Helpful or Unhelpful: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 3

  5. jukeboxgrad says:

    We need to rein in spending today

    Spending is currently 20.5% of GDP. Average for the 20 years of Reagan-Bush-Bush: 21.5%. Reagan’s lowest number: 21.2%. Reagan’s average: 22.3%. The 40-year average is 21%. Spending as a % of GDP is currently below FY08, and it’s barely higher than what Bush spent in FY06 (20.1%) when the GOP controlled both Houses of Congress and the unemployment rate was two points lower than it is right now. GOP hypocrisy is adorable.

    Highly-rated. Helpful or Unhelpful: Thumb up 45 Thumb down 4

  6. michael reynolds says:

    Ryan’s budget = fwck the poor.
    Tea Party = you didn’t fwck ‘em hard enough.

    Highly-rated. Helpful or Unhelpful: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 6

  7. michael reynolds says:

    “…the truth is finally revealed to such an extent that nobody can deny. These people are not contributing anything useful to politics or the nation, and it’s about time somebody said it.”

    Been saying it since these people appeared on the scene. So has everyone on the Left. They are stupid people motivated by animus, largely racist animus. It wasn’t really hard to see.

    Highly-rated. Helpful or Unhelpful: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 4

  8. C. Clavin says:

    @michael reynolds:
    X 10

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3

  9. superdestroyer says:

    Considering that the Ryan budget is as irrelevant as whatever Sarah Palin has to say about it, who cares what either of them do.

    Once again, Sarah Palin serves the function of giving too many people involved in politics a reason to ignore issue of policy and governance in favor focusing on personalities. Maybe it would be better if wonks and pundits would focus on what the real budget will look like, what thee annual budget deficit will be, and what are the long term consequences of those budgets. But I guess focusing on irrelevant personalities is just easier.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0

  10. mantis says:

    Now you may believe, as I do, that Ms. Palin long ago ceased being a serious national voice.

    You can’t cease what never began.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3

  11. MikeSJ says:

    It’s simple! Just cut spending on um…stuff! You know, waste and pork and that kinda stuff…

    Whaaaat? Medicare?? What’s wrong with you? Of course not. I mean that other stuff – waste and pork.

    Whaaaat? Defense? Are you crazy?? We need to increase that or the Commies will win.

    Like I said – it’s easy. Just cut…stuff.

    Highly-rated. Helpful or Unhelpful: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 1

  12. humanoid.panda says:

    @superdestroyer: Well, every liberal economist, think tank and blog I read had spent yesterday beating Ryan’s budget like a piñata, so if you want serious discussion of that specific fraud and liar’s budget proposals, you have very rich pickings.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2

  13. grumpy realist says:

    Ah yes, the Woman from Wasilla who couldn’t even manage to make it through one term as governor, talking about hard work….

    Highly-rated. Helpful or Unhelpful: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0

  14. C. Clavin says:

    @superdestroyer:
    You mean we should seriously consider cutting discretionary spending by 25%? And what that would look like?
    Look… You’re the one that complains about the coming single party nation.
    If that does happen it’s because of just this sort of thing.
    Democrats are interested in helping people.
    Republicans…not so much.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4

  15. Tillman says:

    Holy Moly! Are you kidding? You’d think one who is representing the mighty Badgers, who made it to the Final Four based on sacrificial work ethic and discipline that obviously pays off in the end, he who represents the great state of Wisconsin that hosts this underdog celebrated college basketball team, would understand that future success depends on hard work and sacrifices.

    To rephrase Marty Hart, “For someone who believes so wholeheartedly in the effects of hard work, you sure do sound panicked.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1

  16. superdestroyer says:

    @humanoid.panda:

    the beating shows why the budget is irrelevant. Considering that Congress has not actually passed a budget in years, who cares what anyone says about it. There is no budget that Congress can pass that cannot be torn apart by academics. Congress (in a bipartisan manner) have refuse to decades to deal with the budget in a realistic manner. All the academics are arguing is who they want to favor with the budget and who they want to punish.

    I think that Congress should raise taxes enough to close the annual budget deficit. That would require doubling the current income tax rates. That level of taxation will make people get serious about cutting the budget and decide what the federal government should actually be doing.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5

  17. superdestroyer says:

    @C. Clavin:

    The Democrats are interested in helping people with other people’s money. They are currently doing it will borrowed money. They hope to do it in the future by raising taxes on the rich.

    Of course, the U.S. will be a one party state when most people pay little, if no, income taxes while receiving a growing list of entitlements from them. The real question for the future is who will pay the taxes to fund the new entitlements, who will be the winners, and who will be the losers.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8

  18. @RWB:

    That’s why they call her rouge

    No, they call her that because she wears too much makeup. ;)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0

  19. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @jukeboxgrad:

    Spending is currently 20.5% of GDP. Average for the 20 years of Reagan-Bush-Bush: 21.5%.

    I wish I could add some pithy remark that would shine the light even more strongly on how ridiculous today’s spending debates really are but… if you can’t do basic math, I doubt logic or sarcasm will help.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

  20. Scott says:

    The Tea Party may be on their way out but they’ll be back. They always come back. It was John Birch in the 50s, George Wallace in the 70s, the Newt Gingriches in the 90s and Tea party in the 2010s. They are like herpes, ready to erupt every 20 years in the body politic, causing ugliness and discomfort.

    As for cutting immediately to balance the budget ,then you need to cut Defense, SS and Medicare right now. Go sell that one.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1

  21. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @superdestroyer: Screw the rich. I would like to see a rich man “work out” for a half hour, half as hard as I did working 40+ hrs per week making the SOB money. What they call work? I don’t even call a vacation. I expend more energy getting out of bed in the morning.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2

  22. James Pearce says:

    @Tillman: Yeah, that sentence confused me. You can diagram that sentence till tomorrow and never figure out “who” she was talking about.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1

  23. C. Clavin says:

    @superdestroyer:
    That’s how society works.
    We get together and build stuff and help the elderly live their lives in dignity and educate kids and stuff like that.
    In you vision of the world we only help oil companies and defense contractors.
    F&ck everyone else.
    I wonder where you would be if left to the world you now want for everyone else.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2

  24. C. Clavin says:

    @superdestroyer:
    Do you realize that Walmart and MacDonalds and a bunch of other companies can’t survive without the Government subsidizing their employees ?
    When are you going to give up your housing subsidy?
    How about your health care subsidy?
    Yeah… That’s what I thought… It’s always about “The others”.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3

  25. gVOR08 says:

    … criticizing one of the most conservative members of the House Leadership for actually doing his job …

    Paul Ryan’s job is to write Magic Asterisk dependent April Fool’s budgets?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

  26. Skip Gainer says:

    There was an old hag named Nancy back in 2008 who claimed the Tea Party wasn`t much of anything she called them astro turf but her and her democrats got pretty banged up in 2010 trying to walk on that astro turf.

    Poorly-rated. Helpful or Unhelpful: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 27

  27. al-Ameda says:

    @superdestroyer:

    The Democrats are interested in helping people with other people’s money. They are currently doing it will borrowed money. They hope to do it in the future by raising taxes on the rich.

    Actually, statistics show that Red state taxpayers are interested in helping themselves with Blue state money. For every dollar that the taxpayers of California send to Washington, California gets back about 80 cents. That pattern is common across the country – Blue states subsidize Red states.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

  28. CSK says:

    Come on, guys. Palin’s got a reality show to promote: Amazing America, debuting (quite coincidentally, I’m sure) tomorrow night. She’s gotta get her name and face out there again.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

  29. bk says:

    @Skip Gainer: Come back to us when you are more coherent.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1

  30. C. Clavin says:

    @al-Ameda:
    And that is the proof of the pudding.
    Few Red States can support themselves and their failed economic and social agendas.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

  31. Just 'nutha' ig'rant cracker says:

    “These people are not contributing anything useful to politics or the nation, and it’s about time somebody said it.”

    Hey Doug! Welcome to the party. Nooooo, your not very late at all. It’s fine, we understand. Go get a drink and some food. The fruit salad is pretty picked over by now and the barbeque chicken has been gone for a while, but the second whole roast steer is almost ready, so you’re set to go!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

  32. anjin-san says:

    “These people are not contributing anything useful to politics or the nation, and it’s about time somebody said it.”

    Some of us have been saying it pretty much since day one. You know who we are – the same people who said the Iraq war was a terrible idea, the same people who said we would come to regret the Patriot Act, and so on…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0

  33. superdestroyer says:

    @C. Clavin:

    If the government was actually very successful in educating students you would have a better argument. But the government decided that the schools would be social welfare agencies instead of institutions of academic learning. Thus, school spending as doubled (after inflation) in the last 30 years with no improvement in outcomes.

    The government has gone from being a supplement for retirement savings to assumed 100% responsibility for too many people’s retirement savings. Do you really think a government that was serious about people being able to retire would operate lotteries and license casinos?

    What the Democrats seems to do is depend upon people who have a future time orientation to do the work and pay the taxes to transfer wealth to those who do not have a future time orientation. The question for the future is what will happen as the percentage of the population that has a good future time orientation goes down. How does the U.S. fund all of its entitlements when the majority of the U.S. cannot take care of themselves, let alone pay taxes to fund entitlements?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

  34. superdestroyer says:

    @C. Clavin:

    Do you really believe that if Mississippi had a Democrat for governor and Democrats in the majority of their state houses that the state would become a net payer of taxes. Where Mississippi was a red or blue state., it would be a net receive of taxes. However, if Mississippi was a blue state, it would probably have fewer middle class residents and a larger percentage of poor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

  35. C. Clavin says:

    @superdestroyer:
    Of course Blue States are blue for reasons that run deep. But facts don’t lie. You might not like them. But there you are. Very few blue states are takers. Almost all Red States are. I guess it’s like climate change. If you don’t like the truth just deny it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0

  36. C. Clavin says:

    @superdestroyer:
    I was educated in a public school.. Went to a state collage…and got my masters from a state run university.
    You just babble right wing talking points.
    Blah blah blah….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0

  37. C. Clavin says:

    @superdestroyer:
    Look… Right wing economic and social agendas are f’ed up. So of course red states are f’ed up. Even Texas, which is OK economically because of oil and immigration, has huge numbers of uninsured and under educated. Policies matter. Republican policies don’t work unless you are rich already.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0

  38. Blue Galangal says:

    @C. Clavin: A rising tide can’t lift you if you don’t have a boat in the first place.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  39. C. Clavin says:

    @Blue Galangal:
    Yeah, right?
    What we’ve seen over the last 30 years that the metaphor does not work for economics…Reagan lied to us. It’s bull$hit.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

  40. Ken says:

    @superdestroyer: Of course, the U.S. will be a one party state

    You know, I don’t comment here much, and it’s usually just a bit of snark when I do, but but I’ve been reading this site for a long time, and it really is a good place with interesting, smart, and generally polite commentary. So for the love of all that is holy, could you please just shut the fuck up with this mind-numbingly stupid “one party state” bullshit? It adds absolutely nothing to the conversation – It’s not insightful, it’s not interesting, it’s not true. It’s mental illness, or trolling.

    in fact, didn’t James Joyner warn you about this shit once already?

    James Joyner 11/08/12: This is your last warning on the one-party state meme. We’re all tired of it. Find some new material or take it elsewhere.

    More than once, I guess, since that was your “last” warning.

    Superdestroyer 06/02/13 one party state

    I guess he’s going to give you until the count of three.

    Superdestroyer 06/09/13:a small fish in the coming one party state

    ONE

    Superdestroyer 09/30/13: the real beginning of the one party state

    TWO

    Superdestroyer 10/12/13 one party state

    TWO AND A HALF

    Superdestroyer 11/04/13 pushing the U.S. into being a one party state

    Superdestroyer 11/04/13 as the U.S. becomes a one party state

    Superdestroyer 11/25/13:Latino voters in the coming one party state.

    Superdestroyer 11/25/13:s what do they think the U.S. will be like when it becomes a one party state

    Superdestroyer 11/25/13: most Americans seem to want a one party state

    Superdestroyer 12/14/13 the U.S. will soon be a one party state

    Superdestroyer 01/05/14 As the U.S. becomes a one party state

    Superdestroyer 01/18/14: as the U.S. becomes a one party state

    TWO AND FIFTY-SEVEN SIXTY-FOURTHS

    Superdestroyer 02/02/14 As the U.S. becomes a one party state

    Superdestroyer 02/06/14 a huge win for the Democrats, turn the U.S. into a one party state, and lower the standard of living of many

    Superdestroyer 02/20/14 one party state

    Superdestroyer 03/07/14 Just another confirmation that the U.S. will soon be a one party state.

    TWO AND EIGHTY-NINE ONE-HUNDREDTHS

    Seriously, how many times does someone have to shit on your rug before you realize he might not be the best guest to have in your house, James?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

  41. HiPlanesDrifter says:

    In Criticizing Paul Ryan, Sarah Palin And The Tea Party Confirm Their Own Irrelevance

    Writing about Sarah Palin & The Tea Party’s confirmation of their own irrelevance confirms their relevance.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

  42. al-Ameda says:

    @Blue Galangal:

    A rising tide can’t lift you if you don’t have a boat in the first place.

    And that’s why I favor special tax treatment for yacht builders. For the record, I feel the same way about the builder of car elevators for residential properties in La Jolla, California.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  43. al-Ameda says:

    @Skip Gainer:

    There was an old hag named Nancy back in 2008

    Stay classy, Skip.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

  44. Pinky says:

    @C. Clavin: Blah blah blah? Heck of an education, the way it taught you to consider and analyze others’ arguments.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7

  45. Ken says:

    @Pinky: Blah blah blah? Heck of an education, the way it taught you to consider and analyze others’ arguments.

    “Consider and analyze”? nah – looks more like a paraphrase to me. And having read the source material, a surprisingly inaccurate one

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  46. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Pinky: He was responding to superdestroyer, Pinky. The predictor of the coming one party state. He who believes that every political event that happens in this country is just another sign of the impending doom of democracy in America. How the GOP is completely irrelevant to anything anywhere anyhow.

    Considering all that, I thought C. Clavin was being rather generously and unnecessarily eloquent in his response to superduper. A single “Blah.” would have sufficed.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

  47. Ken says:

    @Ken: looks more like a paraphrase to me. And having read the source material, a surprisingly inaccurate one

    Bah.

    ACCURATE

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

  48. C. Clavin says:

    @Pinky:
    I considered your argument.
    It’s fatally flawed.
    Next.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  49. stonetools says:

    Hey, someone has to represent stupid. Stupid is a big part of the Republican coalition.Palin is doing an excellent job.
    You should understand that while Paul Ryan makes a great show of presenting the intellectual case for a conservative budget, complete with charts and numbers, ultimately his figures are bogus. They don’t add up. Paul Krugman has had his number (pun intended) for years. Ezra Klein tried to have a discussion with him, but gave up when it became clear that he would never admit that his figures were wrong.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

  50. anjin-san says:

    There was an old hag named Nancy back in 2008

    You hear things like this a lot from “conservatives”. As people who have been around the bay area for a while know, Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, and Dianne Fienstein were all reasonably attractive when they were younger.

    But apparently there is this shameful thing that happens to liberal women as they age, they… loose their looks.

    Considering the troll-like appearance of many conservative men, even when they are younger, I would think sticking to policy and forgetting about looks might be a good idea.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0

  51. Tillman says:

    @anjin-san: Oh, let’s not get into political physiognomy. That’s a dark road full of ugly people.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

  52. C. Clavin says:

    @stonetools:
    I was reading some analysis of his budget today.
    In the farm bill passed sometime ago Republicans wanted to cut $40B from foodstamps. Ultimately the bill passed with about $9B in cuts…which amount to $90 a month less for poor folks who work at Walmart or MacDonalds. Ryans new budget cuts $125B (on top of the $9B already cut). He calls this “Strengthening the Safety Net”.
    So take a minute and think about that…he wants to cut 13 times the amount they have already cut. What a douche-bag.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

  53. Moosebreath says:

    @anjin-san:

    “But apparently there is this shameful thing that happens to liberal women as they age, they… loose their looks.”

    See, when it happens to conservative women, their husbands trade them in on a newer model (e.g., Gingrich, McCain, Mitch McConnell, etc.).

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1

  54. Tillman says:

    @Ken: One thing you can say for SuperD, he’s not repeating the normal talking points.

    I’m glad my memory was accurate when I guessed he’d been doing it since the 2012 election, as if Mitt Romney running a horrible campaign was somehow proof of the inevitability of eternal Democrat rule.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  55. anjin-san says:

    @Moosebreath

    See, when it happens to conservative women, their husbands trade them in on a newer model

    Family values, baby!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  56. superdestroyer says:

    @Ken:

    If you do not want to be reminded that the U.S. is not headed to being a one party state even though pundits like Charlie Cook and George Will are beginning to notice that the U.S. is headed toward being a one party state and that there is almost nothing the conservatives can do about it.

    I have begun to assume that progressives do not want to acknowledge that the U.S. is headed to being a one party state not because they really believe that conservatives can begin relevance but because they want to keep pretending that the Republicans are relevant to keep many of the automatic Democratic Party voters such as blacks from questioning what the Democratic Establishment is doing.

    See how many more posts are made about irrelevant conservatives such as Sarah Palin instead of the three democrats in the California State Senate who are in trouble for corruption. Since the current state of California is the future state of National politics, I would hope progressives would show some level of concern about corruption. But I guess the instinct of focusing of irrelevant Republicans is too much of overcome.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

  57. superdestroyer says:

    @C. Clavin:

    Acecdotes do not mean anything. Spending on K-12 schools has double, after inflation, since 1990. Yet, the percentage of high school graduats who are capable of doing college level work or can read at the 12th grade level has not gone up. There is no metric that shows that increased spending on schools has helped academic education.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  58. superdestroyer says:

    @Tillman:

    It has been obvious that the U.S. has been on the road to being a one party state since 2004. As George Will has recently noticed, there are 240 electoral votes that the Republicans have zero chance of winning. Look at how the Democrats talk about turning states like Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas into blue state whereas there is no talk of turning any state red.

    Look at the model that wonks and pundits use to explain how the U.S. will remain a two party state: some unnamed Republicans will show up with the charisma, political skills, and abilities that no current Republican has and will lead the Republicans hard to the left in order to pander to Latinos while screwing over the white who currently vote for Republicans and will somehow create a winning coalition. Compare that to what Democrats have to do to become the one dominant party: stay on the course that they are on and let demographics overwhelm conservatives. Why does any thinking person believe that an incredibility unlikely scenario will happen instead of just believing that current trends will continue. .

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1