freecounterpoint: Krauthammer

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Krauthammer

14 comments:

Tecumseh said...: Cucumbers to Chance the gardener. Saw Kraut on TV in vivo last night talking about this.; 2/16/2010 6:21 PM
Mr roT said...: I ain't got no TV.

Meanwhile, Scotty throws up an airball...; 2/16/2010 6:23 PM
Tecumseh said...: Much better than Palin droning on about Trig and Bristol. Not that you'd have the cojones to pick up on that thread, except for a lame non-sequitur about some boobs...; 2/16/2010 6:27 PM
Mr roT said...: To compare that to Scott Brown's silly BS about basketball is apples and oranges.

Brown's is a stupid publicity stunt. I don't give a shit about Haiti and neither does he. He wants to be on the same level as the POTUS, and though our present POTUS doesn't deserve to be on the level of Palin or McCain, it is also true that he'd only being Brown a favor and providing a photo-op.; 2/16/2010 6:37 PM
Mr roT said...: About Romney getting into a tiff with some asshole, I am not sure what to say.

Uh, orange juice?

Joe the Plumber can decide for whom to vote all day long. Seems a bottom story of the day to me. I mean I am sorry for him that the State of Ohio went after him, but he's just a guy that publicly disagreed with Obama. Has he held office? So what if some posterboy detests Palin. So does Frank Rich.

And the attack on Palin's kid on TV in a cartoon sitcom really is a change for the worse. The State of Ohio didn't go after the plumber with such tenacity.

This shit is unprecedented and extremely ugly, Tecs. What do you want Palin to do? Keep quiet?; 2/16/2010 6:43 PM
Tecumseh said...: It would be fine if she responded, but then also had something else to say. She's been involved into these stupid controversies forever (eg, with Letterman, etc). So OK, those guys attacking her are assholes. But maybe if she had something else to talk about, this bs would sort of fade away? Just a thought.

Now, in all fairness, Palin did say one thing of substance since the 2008 elections -- that's when she came out against the proposed "death panels". But that was like last summer. What theorem did she prove lately?; 2/16/2010 7:14 PM
Mr roT said...: I agree that the death panels was a bomb and her best one. I really think that got Obama on his back foot and no one trusts him on HCR anymore largely because of that.

We talked about the importance of what she said to the tea partiers. I think some are not getting it.

We have a truther in Texas running for Gov and we have primary challenges in Az and a third-party idiot going to keep Reid in the Senate in Nv.

She has a lot to take care of now, and a lot of it is opposing ideologues that would keep the GOP out of power to the benefit of the goddam Democrats.

I don't detest all the Democrats (Bayh is fine with me) but Reid is beneath contempt!

Who do you trust and how do you want GOPers to keep the thing from unraveling before Nov?

She has to discourage dumb primary challenges (which she is doing) she needs to reward decent ones (Rubio, check)...

She helps people campaign, that's all. What she says sounds simplistic, but that's what's selling now.

I should remind you that Reagan sounded simplistic too!

OK, she should say stuff less thin. If she does, will she stir up a hornet's nest of ideologues that will wreck the GOP's chance to win big in Nov?; 2/16/2010 7:30 PM
Mr roT said...: But maybe if she had something else to talk about, this bs would sort of fade away? Just a thought.

Only technically, Tecs. Did the pinkos ever let up on W? When he started winning the war he was even more a war criminal and all that.

No way that stuff is fading. I don't want her to run for the presidency because of that. All this screaming has to fade away.; 2/16/2010 7:32 PM
Tecumseh said...: I never heard Reagan babbling about his kids. And he wasn't "simplistic" -- that was only the pinko caricature. He had a long stint as California governor under his belt, and he would talk about taxes and the economy and the Russkies and defense and whatnot in the late 70s, running up to the election. He could hold his own like a pro against an excellent field in the 1980 primaries (you ever watch his debate in NH with Bush Père?). At any rate, to paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen's putdown of Dan Quayle at the debate in 1988 -- I knew Ronnie, and Sarah Palin is no Reagan. Not by a mile. Sorry, Herr Rot, that's how the cookie crumbles.; 2/16/2010 9:51 PM
Tecumseh said...: As for W, of course the pinkos never let up on W. I don't think there ever was a President who had to endure more deranged hatred from his fellow citizens -- except perhaps Nixon. But again, I never recall W babbling about his daughters or whatnot -- or getting back at his detractors, even after they would shoot a movie where they would fantasize about killing him. You gotta admire his stoicism. Do you think Palin even knows what the word stoic means?; 2/16/2010 10:00 PM
Mr roT said...: Reagan and W didn't talk about their kids because pinko faggots like Andrew Sullivan weren't lurking around the gynecologist regarding them.

And Reagan sure as hell did sound simplistic! Jeez, he'd been a B-actor! Sure, Gov of Cali, but also chief of the Screen Actors' Guild!

His views on the economy and foreign policy amounted to "get the gov't off our backs" and "communism is bad".

He was right, but don't think he came off as intelligent as the wrong wrong wrong wrong nucular engineer from Plains, GA. Lemme give you a hint: Eureka College is not the same as the Navy's nuke school.

A good man, through and through. But no damned genius.; 2/17/2010 3:48 AM
Mr roT said...: Nixon deserved it.; 2/17/2010 3:50 AM
Tecumseh said...: Ronnie may not have been an economic genius, but he was smart enough to listen to Arthur Laffer (and Jack Kemp) when the "supply side" idea came up in the late 1970s, and then fight like hell to implement once in power. Remember the term "Reaganomics"? It was used like the lowliest pejorative by the pinkos -- it still sticks in their throats. I haven't heard of Palinomics, have you?

I still don't understand the irrational hatred of Tricky Dick. OKay, he was a dick, but so are most politicians. Methinks the libs never forgot him for going after their poster boy, Alger Hiss, back in the day, and exposing him for the Soviet spy he truly was. You stand with Nixon or with Hiss on that?; 2/17/2010 8:29 AM
Mr roT said...: You're right and we agree. Reagan didn't make it clear he understood anything beyond the basics. He repeated those basics in public and then got some theoreticians to make his general case, in more detail, to people wanting more than quips.

Not that it matters much, but Laffer was a dope and Reagan grew the government like crazy while claiming the opposite. Like W. Palin seems to be further along than these two because she actually has the principle and is more morally tenacious than either of them. She can hire her Lafferstocks too, but she wouldn't grow the government, I bet. Probably this is what the derangeds sense.

To answer your question, Palinomics is probably sincere Reaganomics (something that Reagan didn't practice).

As to Nixon, he was justly impeached. What else is there to say? He brought us Jimmy Carter by tainting the whole process with Ford's pardon...

He bears a lot of blame. He was a really bad guy. He sent Kissinger to Paris to get the VC to stall until the election.

What more do you want than that? You just like that he and Kissinger turned the Chinese against the Russians. OK, good idea. At what price and weren't things already going badly for those two when the Russians didn't take Mao as their chief?; 2/17/2010 9:44 AM

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)