Reality. TW finds it unintenionally not funny, because it's stoopid. Still overcompensating, eh, Hank?

Why the non-reality-based community is for Bush.
 

fucker, you know how to hit where I'm vulnerable.
but you're right. Height wise I'm 99 percentile. but penis length only 87 percentile, and girth only 81 percentile. I hope you're proud to have outed me.

Why in the world would I do that when he indicates, in the quote you provided, that serious conservatives will be asking after the election. In complete contrast to this quote, serious conservatives have been protesting the economic portions (and some social portions) here for more than a year.

So I don't care who he quotes (unless its Buckley). I'm sick of you guys calling people like Buchanan and Hitler or whoever-you-feel-like-and-know-does-not-represent-serious-conservative-thought conservatives. The converse would be if we started calling Pelosi, Byrd, Ho and Stalin serious liberals (in the modern day sense of the word). But we are the nice guys and we take your shrill insults with a big smile. After the election, no more Mr. nice guy pal.

Kerry'v views on national security depend on the day of the week, the hour of the day, and his target audience. The one thing I've been asking from you guys for weeks, which you still can't show me, is him advocating the "preemption" thing. We aren't safe unless we are willing to kick a terrorist in the groin before he does it to us. Kerry and his wife, apparently, wouldn't mind an occasional kick in the nuts.

Hello

PS OK OK, I'll follow the link. It better quote some real conservatives, or I'm coming back with more and then some more.

Don't be stupid. He's not saying that conservatives are, perforce, blind to what's going on. He's just raising the issues in the present context -- in case you haven't noticed, there's a national election in ten days.

If I thought I or Schmitt had done something remotely like this, I would apologize. Instead, I think he has interesting things to say. If you don't want to engage, fine -- the Red Sox won, so I'm in a good mood -- but I don't want to defend the turf that you are trying to assign to me.

That's bullshit. He may not express himself well, but we're electing a President, not a Chief Public Relations Executive. He said in the debate that he would act unilaterally if necessary. He voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq when it appeared that force might be necessary to pre-empt the use of WMD against us. So what's your problem? His judgment couldn't be any worse than Bush's.

I agree with a lot of this (though not the foreign policy characterizations). The GOP has gotten fat and happy and has been terrible ever since Newt left. Problem is, the DEMs have yet to prove to me that they are the better alternative.

In related news, I was speaking to a GOP friend of mine last night about the election. This is a guy with a picture of Bush and Laura on his fridge. He admitted to me that if if Lieberman or Gephart was running, he would vote for either over Bush, but just can't vote for Kerry.

Ty, this Shit Works Both Ways
 

This is just as bad as what Cheney has been saying:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...ry_bin_laden_3

OK, first of all, you should have warned us that its a page for the "Decembrist". Despite this insane name, I read the first few pages. He characterizes people as "serious conservatives" etc. etc. etc. in order to use their words of desparation to send up the signal.

He also acknowledges that most conservative commentators like Will are not sounding an alarm. My guess is that Will, like most Americans, is trying to make sure we are all alive next year to debate social programs (and hopefully end or limit most of them).

He also acknowledges that there is no concept of liberalism left after it was destroyed in the mid-90's. In fact, the irony that Bush & Co. have taken up where Conservatives made the liberals get off might be his central point in one of his pieces.

Who did you guys run for President again? Among the other reasons I'd tolerate Dean over our current contenders, is because you know exactly where he's coming from (straight Liberal). The choice we are left with without him is this current horrible, but easy, choice. We don't know where either of these clowns really stands on anything because Bush lies and Kerry promises things domestically that he could never deliver and shouldn't be attempting to deliver. But Bush is just crazy enough to go after our enemies wherever feasible. Amen.

Ty, this Shit Works Both Ways
 

What's your problem with this? Kerry's complaint -- that OBL was at Tora Bora and that we let him get away by relying on Afghan irregulars and failing to deploy enough troops to block the exits -- echo what was widely reported at the time.

Congratulations. You've taken a relatively serious post about where the conservative movement is headed, whatever happens in this election, and responded to it by pointing out that you like Bush more than Kerry because he's "just crazy enough." And you think this refutes Schmitt's point that the conservative movement is bankrupt.

Ty, this Shit Works Both Ways
 

1. It suggests that it was permissive

2. It says that Kerry would have caught him (this is the reverse of Cheney's line that I don't like)

3. It blames Bush for a military, rather than a policy decision. So really he is blaming the brass.

The clear implication of the quote you gave is that conservatives aren't paying attention and will wke up after the election. Even the text of the blog says most conservative commentators aren't addressing this yet. All I'm saying is that he's bringing up a point that's been discussed here for quite awhile, so he shouldn't pretend like he's seeing into the future about how we'll feel after Bush wins.

Depends which day it is. More than half of the days since he's said it was the wrong thing to do. Will he do it next time given the same set of facts, and no knowledge that its all a bluff?

Hello


PS and sorry for questioning his characterizations of who is a "serious conservative". Not that he's trustworthy, and not that I even recognized the names of more than half of the people he cites, but I'm not sure there are even 10 household recognizable true and serious conservatives left in the public realm in this country.

Ty, this Shit Works Both Ways
 

As for your 1. and 2., whatever. Semantic quibbles, I say.

As for 3., I guess it's your view that when these wars go well, Bush gets the credit, but when they go poorly, it's the military's fault? Where does the buck stop? Wasn't that what Bush said when he landed on the aircraft carrier -- we've done pretty well so far in Iraq, and the military -- not we politicians -- deserve all the credit?

I've already covered the serious stuff about the conservative movement before. The military stuff is the only issue left here, and you have been repeatedly invited to seriously address this to bolster your boy.

As for the "conservative movement" being bankrupt, what in the world else do you think I've been saying for the last month? Maybe not bankrupt, but hijacked. Others here were more vocally making this point almost a year ago vis a vis spending. So no, I don't think Schmitt's point is refuted, ahhh I'm just repeating myself about his framing it as a forward-lookng prognostication.

Hello

Ty, this Shit Works Both Ways
 

Words mean something. Cheney's could be a semantic quibble.

Policy successes and failures = Bush
Execution/strategy = Brass

I really don't think so, but if you're intent on arguing about what you see between the lines in his piece instead of what he actually says, so be it.

He's said that the vote to give Bush the authority was the right thing to do, but that Bush mis-used that authority. What's confusing about that?

Are we really going to have this conversation again? The foreign-policy difference between Bush and Kerry is really very clear. Bush articulates policy in simple, clear terms, and knows what he wants to do. He also has terrible judgment and execution, and cannot hold his subordinates accountable. Kerry cannot articulate a simple, broad rational for the foreign-policy he advocates, but his instincts clearly belong in the moderate mainstream of Democrats and Republicans who led this country for the fifty or so years before W. There's no reason to think he would be as ragingly incompetent in the execution as Bush has been. Neither is perfect.

I don't know a lot about Schmitt, but he was a congressional staffer for a while, and his posts are more thoughtful and rewarding than 90% of political blogs of either political stripe.