Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Barber...is he right, no matter how you CUT it? (get it? heh!)

Other than the fact that the reporter AND his editors are illiterate (see the first paragraph), what do you think of what Haley Barber said HERE?   Would YOU rather support less conservative candidates just to win over the Left?

Would YOU "buy them drinks" for that situation?

Z

48 comments:

Always On Watch said...

If there are not substantial differences between the GOP and the Democratic Party, the latter will win every election -- if only because of the mainstream media's alliance with the Democratic Party.

I also have to wonder this: Is it possible for Conservative candidates to garner enough votes to win a national election? Regional, state, and local elections are different in that many of these are "pockets" of Conservatives.

But NATIONALLY Conservatism may not be a winner. After all, look at the huge concentrations of Democrats in the cities and large metropolitan areas -- most of which have moved Left in the past few decades.

I have my doubts that Reagan himself could win in the political climate and the demographics that we have today.

The game changer would be a total discrediting of the Democratic Party. Do you see that happening anytime soon?

George Zimmerman said...

Haley Barbour is the #$%$ that pardoned a whole bunch of convicted murderers when he was the governor of Mississippi, eight of the murderers killed their wives and girl friends. He has no credibility as far as I'm concerned, I would never buy him a drink, unless it's a glass of Kool-Aide.
Support the Tea party movement candidates!.

FreeThinke said...

Recent headlines re HALEY BARBOUR from POLITICO indicate he is more POLITICIAN than REPUBLICAN:

Barbour disputes Crossroads report

KEVIN CIRILLI | 4/11/13 7:27 AM EDT

The former Mississippi governor says a report on why he left Rove’s super PAC “has no basis in fact.”

Barbour backs 'path to citizenship'

KEVIN ROBILLARD | 3/20/13 12:18 PM EDT

The former Mississippi governor is unequivocal in his support for the option for illegal immigrants.

CPAC muddle mirrors GOP mess

JONATHAN MARTIN and MAGGIE HABERMAN | 3/13/13 4:36 AM EDT

The confusion is more complex than ever.

Barbour: No Electoral College change

KEVIN ROBILLARD | 1/25/13 2:29 PM EDT

He says plans are the work of isolated legislators, not a “Republican conspiracy" to rig elections.

Barbour: 'Stupid' comments hurt GOP

KATIE GLUECK | 1/25/13 8:25 AM EDT

He warns one candidate can hurt the whole party.

When Republicans should walk away from a deal

JOE SCARBOROUGH | 12/11/12 6:27 PM EDT

Former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour sounded like a "Morning Joe" regular today when he said, "Let's face it — the problem here is not that we tax too little but that we spend too much."

Barbour: Tax the rich in cliff deal

KEVIN ROBILLARD | 12/11/12 7:58 AM EDT

The former governor says he would accept higher tax rates if Democrats agreed to cut entitlements.
______________________________

MY OPINION? The Republican Party as outlived its usefulness. They are NOT a viable alternative to Statism run amok. They are PART of The Problem.

Ducky's here said...

In related news

The Tea Party is dead. Do you have to view the corpse before you acceopt that?

Z said...

What I'm wondering is if any of you agree with what Barber said more than your dislike of Barber, who I'm not a fan of, either.

REGARDING WHETHER A CONSERVATIVE CAN WIN: We could say, as many do, that Americans would respond to the Republicans if they just went back to their conservative roots of hard work, looking at the character instead of color, not gutting the military, etc etc., but I wonder if the left's not indoctrinated a generation or two so hard into thinking that the gov't owes us everything, and that all war is bad, and that race trumps all, that we can't win with a platform of real freedom?

I mean, Weiner is only 4 points behind in the NYC! is that voting for character? it's voting for A CHARACTER, but ...?

Z said...

So what, Ducky? Want to present the list of Dems not running again? There's a list.

The Tea party's demise was helped by Obama's IRS thugs. They couldn't even raise the money they might have. Good job, Lefties.

And, as I said above, the left has indoctrinated so well a generation or two who don't even know the Constitution, or the hard work factor, etc etc. Why do you think Obama's not doing much for JOBS? It's not his thing..not when the gov't could pay people for not working and get their votes.

Of course the Tea Party's floundering. There just aren't enough Americans with values anymore. BIG "news"??

Always On Watch said...

Z,
I wonder if the left's not indoctrinated a generation or two so hard into thinking that the gov't owes us everything, and that all war is bad, and that race trumps all, that we can't win with a platform of real freedom?

That's what I'm thinking these days. **sigh**

I really hate being a pessimist. But recognizing reality is important.

The Debonair Dudes World said...

Z said...
“ I mean, Weiner is only 4 points behind in the NYC! is that voting for character? it's voting for A CHARACTER, but ...?”

Funny I just did a blog on this exact subject.

What Has Happened to the Morality of the American Voters!

Thersites said...

You already know my answer.

Thersites said...

ps - And I have no problem imposing my values upon a "Democrat majority" at the point of a gun.

JonBerg said...

Z

"What I'm wondering is if any of you agree with what Barber said more than your dislike of Barber, who I'm not a fan of, either"

Barber disappointed me, as well, but reality is what it is and unless one thinks that the likes of B.O. and his ilk are preferable to some idealistic concept of conservatism, Barber's words [here] should be heeded. How's B.O.'s second term working for you?

Sam Huntington said...

Barbour is but one example of how we got to where we are today. I know this opinion won't be popular here, but Beamish was right all along. If you adopt conservative principles, then you cannot accept deviation from those principles and remain principled.

The GOP has been moving steadily left for the past 100 years, and we are at the point now where there is no substantial difference between the new communist party (Democrats), and the Politically Correct Enablers (Republicans).

So it comes down to this: if you want to maintain America, take a conservative position and stay with it. No compromises. Any difference between the communist position and the communist light position is only temporary. Read history; read Orwell … and tell me how meek acceptance of communist ideology benefits our country. I would rather see another civil war than accept Ducky’s vision for America. We are almost there.

Z said...

So, Sam, what about my suggestion that there aren't enough people left who actually can stand the thought of being rugged individualists with freedom as their first consideration (i.e. Conservatism) and not the government teat supplying all their needs?

Deb Dude...I'll be over later!

Thersites...how're you going to do that?

Z said...

BY THE WAY FOLKS:

I have been up since about 4:30 am and had FOX and CNN on all morning, switching back and forth especially at the 'top of the hour' to see what's their Number 1 story, etc...several times.

CNN has COMPLETELY IGNORED the Benghazi investigations, the IRS and the AP scandal has died from both channels, have you noticed?

Yup...CNN's so desperate to fill space they mentioned a Cruise Ship company offering something special to people on a ship with problems, and even Camilla doing her royal thing 'solo' overseas for the first time got rather lengthy coverage(THERE's a story!?)...and a very nice rock concert for tornado relief, and the Chinese baby, and about any story they could grasp that would fill air space between commercials and help them avoid some pretty important things about Eric Holder that maybe Americans should know about? Like the fact that what he said two weeks ago is demonstrably wrong considering the new emails they've got?

FOX covered all of the above, including the IRS situation's new evidence, but left Camilla out. How Americans will feel adequately informed without knowing Camilla's traveling is beyond me :-)

They're now suggesting that the Gibson Guitar raid was part of the "you gave money to ROMNEY? We'll show YOU!" IRS purge...
You all know Gibson spent two million fighting the government?
That's quite a story.
But, Americans didn't hear about that on CNN.

Sam Huntington said...

I completely agree with you that there simply are too many people today who are willing to offer up their vote in exchange for an Obama phone. But I think that there are still enough people that prefer individualism to collectivism, but voting fraud on a massive scale mutes their voices; they are being robbed of their political power and most of this is happening within the states, rather than at the federal level. I think, too, that this situation, more than any other, will lead us to violent confrontations.

Z said...

Sam, people around the world used to look to America for DEMOCRACY, HONESTY, VOTING INTEGRITY, etc....

In Germany, you can only vote ONCE because of the system they have in place...that involves a kind of ID card but Germans can handle it.
Why not us?

I never heard of voting corruption in France when I lived there, either, and I was there during Chirac's reelection........

JonBerg said...

Sam,

"I would rather see another civil war than accept Ducky’s vision for America. We are almost there."

Sadly, "civil war" may be the only way it could happen! While I'd love to see it, I'm not holding my breath for a significant [true] conservative victory at the "ballot box". Question: If there was an exact clone of Ronald Reagan would he stand a chance with today's electorate? I'd sure like to think so but...! All I can say, otherwise, is I'd prefer any of the Republican contenders of the last election to the miserable POS that we are stuck with in the foreseeable future, bravado aside.

Dave Miller said...

Jon Berg... the real question is whether or not an exact clone of Ronald Reagan could win the GOP Primary.

Many in the GOP, including the likes of Barber, who worked for him and former Sen. Bob Dole, doubt it.

Why do they think that?

Remember, one of Reagan's core beliefs was that someone with you 90% of the time was worth having in the tent. Isn't that what Barber is saying?

Ed Bonderenka said...

"What I'm wondering is if any of you agree with what Barber said more than your dislike of Barber, who I'm not a fan of, either."
Well, as far as I can tell, only JonBerg and sam answered the question.
If two republican candidates, or a republican candidate and a conservative candidate are running, get behind the more electable.
That's the jist of Barber's comment.
Otherwise, there's another vote for Majority Leader or Speaker of the House and that's who sets the agenda.
Unless of course, you like Pelosi and Reid.
Do you?

Mustang said...

We may be talking about two things, here. The first is the selection of representatives in Washington and within state legislatures … the second is the process of governing. We did not much enjoy the leadership of Pelosi in the House, nor should we expect our ideologically opposed brethren to appreciate that same kind of treatment by any other Speaker … no matter how resounding his majority. So I feel that we must be ideologically driven to elect quality servants of the people, but we must also find a way to work with others, who do not share our views, as a means of advancing the interests of our country. The left are winning, I think, because they have embraced the advice of Jean de La Fontaine: “Patience and time do more than strength or passion.”

Impertinent said...

@Z:

"But, Americans didn't hear about that on CNN."

Of course not...nor this:

After an extensive self investigation, Eric holder has arrested himself as part of a DOJ sting; and then releases self after forgetting to read self Miranda rights!
/sarc on

conservativesonfire said...

I will never again vote for a lesser of two evils. Haley Barber is a perfect example of what is wrong with the GOP.

Thersites said...

Thersites...how're you going to do that?

Win the coming revolution. That's how.

Ducky's here said...

My,my all this gnashing of teeth.
You can't understand why you can't keep trotting out cretins like West and Bachmann and have the normals support you.
Come on, it doesn't take much thought.

Meanwhile the money boys are doing just swell. They got what they paid for and they will continue to rob you blind.

"By now you know
It's not going to stop
It's not going to stop
It's not going to stop
'Til you wise up"

Ducky's here said...

Ah, Sam gets his knickers n a twist over the Obamaphone. See, here's where you folks go south (literally and figuratively):

1. Bush expands a simple program to give low income people phone access by including cellphones.

2. It's part of the "Lifeline" program which is administered by a non governmental agency and funded by the phone companies.

3. The phones come with a very,very low minutes plan and you can easily find people taking out payday loans to finance additional minutes.

4. The phone companies and payday loan(shark) companies LOVE this plan.

5. It has nothing to do with Obama.

But we normals sit back, listen to the fringe right prattle on and try to figure out what you folks are about.
Hating the poor, homos and Muslims -- I've go that but your world view is not clear and I don't want to believe it is just a simple desire to block the decline of the white Protestant.

3.

JonBerg said...

COF.......

"I will never again vote for a lesser of two evils"

In a conceptual sense I can agree with this provided that you are the only one that can vote. OK, so much for that. Now, since [evil], to some degree, resides in every politician, depending upon one's perception, there will always be a lesser and greater of "evils" to choose from. I can't imagine that you are comfortable with B.O. in the White House again; I'M SURE NOT!

Thersites said...

Meanwhile the money boys are doing just swell. They got what they paid for and they will continue to rob you blind.

Say's the man who lives inside George Sosro's wallet...

Thersites said...

But we normals sit back, listen to the fringe right prattle on and try to figure out what you folks are about.

You're just jealous that Anthony Weiner isn't Tweeting you the latest pictures of his "Little Anthony"...

Z said...

Ducky, that's as silly as suggesting Bush is responsible for Fast and Furious because he started the gunwalking situation, but VERY good try.

Cell phones were discussed in the Bush administration and some were distributed because he felt everyone should have access to 911 when there had been deaths due to not having a phone.
The explosion of free cell phones is all Obama's and any quick check of the facts shows that.


By the way....How the heck do you excuse George Soros as you smack the Koch Brothers around? Ridiculous.

Dave Miller said...

Well Z you are certainly correct in that more cell phones have been distributed by the phone companies during the Obama Admin.

However that may be due to the phone companies themselves, operating in an unregulated environment, have abused the intent of getting phones into the hands of deserving people.

As the linked article points out, the spirit of the law follows the same logic we once used to make sure people in rural areas had phone access. We made those of us living in urban areas subsidize and make cheaper, phone coverage for people living in rural areas.

It's as simple as that.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-04-09/politics/38405292_1_president-obama-obama-phone-lifeline

Z said...

Hi, Dave,
I think we ALL know what we're talking about here is the vast majority of folks who got cell phones only recently and absolutely don't use them only for critical calls like 911 or job-finding. And who think Obama dreamed this up.
It was Bush who intended the 'lifeline'...
I stand by my F&F comparison.

And it's been paid for by private corporate funding and gov't funding...all sorts of ways.

I hope nobody minded that a corporation was paying for their cell phones since they've been taught to regard the corporation as EVIL. (unless it does something for us, of course)

Jack Whyte said...

@ Dave

If this is evidence of anything at all, it convinces me that politicians are capable of taking a good idea and blowing it all out of proportion. Initially, the program was intended to provide a landline to the elderly and indigent so that they could access emergency services. If Bush the Younger expanded it to cell phones, then Bush the Younger is an idiot.

I was not happy to see the First Lady serving free meals to the indigent a few years ago, while the individual receiving free food was taking her picture on a blackberry, paid for, I assume, by you and me. If paid for by corporations, do you not think they are passing those costs along to us, just as they are an ever-increasing tax burden?

Now, of course, we have this idea that everyone in America is entitled to a cell phone, at the taxpayer’s expense. Cumulatively, government is destroying our country as unthinking individuals feel warm and fuzzy and give them encouragement.

FreeThinke said...

I hate to "play the heavy," but I thought after posting all those sadly revealing headlines about Haley BARBOUR from Politico early today that SOMEONE would quietly pick up the error and start spelling the man's name CORRECTLY.

NO ONE DID!

ONE of the many many many reasons this country of ours is falling apart and about to be swept into the dustbin of history is that, apparently, NO ONE under the age of SIXTY-FIVE CARES enough even to TRY to BOTHER to be ACCURATE.

It is NOT a small point.

The man's name is B-A-R-B-O-U-R. He is not and never was the owner and operator of a TONSORIAL PARLOR (That's an old-fashioned name for a BARBER SHOP in case you didn't know it).

You can take offense at ME for DARING to CORRECT anyone on-what-YOU-may-think an insignificant point. But I don't care. SOMEBODY has to stand up for CORRECTNESS, or we will lose Civilization altogether.

The name is BARBOUR

BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR
BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR BARBOUR


How could we expect anyone to take us seriously if we allow ourselves to be so careless?

It's all right to make a mistake. Everyone does it. I do it ALL THE TIME, but it is NOT all right to REPEAT and COMPOUND the error -- PARTICULARLY after someone has been kind enough to quote several sources where the name is spelled properly.

Don't mean to be rude, but most of you are too intelligent and well-informed to let a thing like that stand unnoticed.

It's as bad as putting down Warshingtun, Franklyn, Addums, Linken, Roseyvelt, Trueman, Isenhour, Nicksun, Klintun, or Marlin Munro.

beamish said...

Would YOU rather support less conservative candidates just to win over the Left?

Considering that by record Barack Obama was hands down the "more conservative choice" if Mitt Romney was the only alternative (and both are batshit far left-wing) I would have to answer as I did last November - "Hell No!"

beamish said...

The Tea party's demise was helped by Obama's IRS thugs. They couldn't even raise the money they might have. Good job, Lefties.

You can't discount the quarter-billion dollars that noted leftist Mitt Romney spent in the GOP primary races smearing conservatives that were not in his corral of "Tea Party" / Free and Strong America PAC stalking horses.

Z said...

Jack, there is NO LIMIT to what we'll be paying for in the future, if WE have anything left after taxes and the extremely high Obama Care "affordable" premiums.

Can someone tell me what's "affordable" about it for any American who actually WORKS for a living?

beamish said...

"The Republican Party as outlived its usefulness. They are NOT a viable alternative to Statism run amok. They are PART of The Problem."

The fact that they are not ringing telephones at 3 in the morning, yelling, screaming, berating, and insulting in concerted efforts to drive everyone who thought Mitt Romney was a viable candidate the @#$@ out of the GOP tells me the Republican Party will not be serious about winning another election any time soon.

beamish said...

I probably won't vote for the Republican presidential candidate in 2016 if he / she doesn't spend a considerable amount of time telling Mitt Romney supporters that the GOP is a conservative party and that they're welcome to stay as long as they shut up and never speak again.

Robert Sinclair said...

By the time the DEM and GOP are all done, there will be only one party. The Communist Party.

Z said...

Robert, you're probably right :-(

And oh, will the leftwingers be shocked. Some will be thrilled that they got their goal, most will be regretful....
sadly, we go down with them.

FrogBurger said...

If there are not substantial differences between the GOP and the Democratic Party

The differences are getting slimmer and slimmer despite the word wars and the fight.

When you read this, they all stink at managing the economy and spendings, they're all pretty much statists (socially or economically), they all pass pork for their friends, etc...

I've said it a few times but I've given up. I have stopped caring about who runs the show.

Statism is here to stay till things crash. Then one day we'll wake up. A bit like Europe is doing now with free market ideas given a little more credibility. Just a little more for now.

FrogBurger said...

By the time the DEM and GOP are all done, there will be only one party. The Communist Party.

I've been thinking of the usefulness of political parties and have come to realize they are useless and even dangerous in 2013.

All they do is stigmatize issues and polarize people. They are useful to themselves because they are money making machines to the detriment of ideas.

So I think applying free market principles (atomicity) would make sense. Voters should vote for individuals with their own ideas and platforms. Those individuals could not rely on parties, would have total freedom of opinion, would have to work more pragmatically with other individuals once elected, etc... They'd have to find their own money and lobbies would have a much tougher time influencing them.

I vote for the abolition of political parties :)

Mustang said...

@ Frogburger

Our founding fathers, notably Madison, understood that political parties are unavoidable. This is because people differ from one another in rather substantial ways, actually or perceptually. Different interests (political equality, equal opportunity, accumulation of wealth, how we treat one another) combine to drive people into disparate corners. The result of this, unfortunately, is that it presents politicians with opportunities to take advantage of the not so bright among us … which I define as anyone educated in America since 1900. I make this distinction only because the American people are content to sit back while the politicians have their way with them.

Politicians, by the way, would like nothing better than to have people give up on the system … easier to gain reelection that way.

FrogBurger said...

Politicians, by the way, would like nothing better than to have people give up on the system … easier to gain reelection that way.

That's why we need term limits. One term and out. Then I can vacate to my hobbies and stop worrying about those useless people.

Ed Bonderenka said...

JonBerg @ 1:09pm.
Thanks JB.

Leticia said...

All I know is that something has got to change. And not all Latinos support the Obama administration or are happy with it.

So tired of this whole mess

Impertinent said...

@Leticia:

"And not all Latinos support the Obama..."

Yep...I suppose 70% is not "all"...as juxtaposed to 98% of blacks that do.

JonBerg said...

Ed,

False Bravado is one thing, reality is quite another. It seems that you recognize this. If so, thanks my friend!