All I know is what I read in the paper.
Posted on 11/26/2012 4:30:15 PM PST by Bigtigermike
Ann Coulter, a long-time cheerleader for Mitt Romney, recently trashed the legacy of Ronald Reagan – and Americans who honor the legacy of Ronald Reagan – in a desperate attempt to deflect blame for Romney’s loss away from the candidate, and away from those who backed him.
Movement conservatives, Reagan conservatives, and tea partiers did not back Gov. Romney in the Republican primaries. Despite misgivings, when the GOP establishment chose Romney, these patriotic conservatives did not sulk or stay home. They walked through fire for Romney and formed the backbone of his base and ground game. They gave their all to their country, they volunteered their time, they donated what they could to a candidate they did not choose, and they voted for him. Why? Because they put the future of the country ahead of their own personal interests.
Which is something Ann Coulter may want to try. What did these millions of Reagan conservatives and tea party conservatives get in return for their time, dedication, and votes? They got shut out and ignored at the GOP convention (the words “tea party” were never mentioned), and now they’re getting blamed for Romney’s loss by his #1 cheerleader, Ann, whose latest screed “ROMNEY WAS NOT THE PROBLEM” also slammed the legacy of Ronald Reagan.
This is ironic, because Ann’s candidate rarely missed an opportunity to wrap himself in Ronald Reagan’s legacy for his own benefit.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Coulter’s age was disputed in 2002 while she was arguing that she was not yet 40, yet Washington Post columnist Lloyd Grove cited that she provided a birthdate of December 8, 1961, when registering to vote in New Canaan, Connecticut prior to the 1980 Presidential election.
Meanwhile, a driver’s license issued several years later allegedly listed her birthdate as December 8, 1963.
Coulter will not confirm either date, citing privacy concerns.
WIKI
Those indolent dumbasses deserve whatever they get for their stubbornness, but we'll all pay.
Bull crap!
It WAS Romney!
He was NOT electable and to TRY to blame THIS conservative indolent dumbass just pisses me off!
UHhhh...
The GOP has not yet got the last straw on it's back?
I hear that it is about to run out.
http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2012/11/22/romney_was_not_the_problem
Annie’s column.
She dumb.
A choice quote “Romney was the most libertarian candidate Republicans have run since Calvin Coolidge”
Pass the bong. Is she sleeping with the guy or something?
Sorry Ann but he ran a piss poor race and that probably made the difference even with the huge demographics problem.
We MUST get control of the propaganda machine!
Party ownership of the print media
made it easy to manipulate public opinion,
and the film and radio carried the process further.
|
....... The Ministry of Truth, Winston's place of work, contained, it was said, three thousand rooms above ground level, and corresponding ramifications below. The Ministry of Truth concerned itself with Lies. Party ownership of the print media made it easy to manipulate public opinion, and the film and radio carried the process further. The primary job of the Ministry of Truth was to supply the citizens of Oceania with newspapers, films, textbooks, telescreen programmes, plays, novels - with every conceivable kind of information, instruction, or entertainment, from a statue to a slogan, from a lyric poem to a biological treatise, and from a child's spelling-book to a Newspeak dictionary. Winston worked in the RECORDS DEPARTMENT (a single branch of the Ministry of Truth) editing and writing for The Times. He dictated into a machine called a speakwrite. Winston would receive articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, in Newspeak, rectify. If, for example, the Ministry of Plenty forecast a surplus, and in reality the result was grossly less, Winston's job was to change previous versions so the old version would agree with the new one. This process of continuous alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound-tracks, cartoons, photographs - to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance. When his day's work started, Winston pulled the speakwrite towards him, blew the dust from its mouthpiece, and put on his spectacles. He dialed 'back numbers' on the telescreen and called for the appropriate issues of The Times, which slid out of the pneumatic tube after only a few minutes' delay. The messages he had received referred to articles or news-items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to rectify. In the walls of the cubicle there were three orifices. To the right of the speakwrite, a small pneumatic tube for written messages; to the left, a larger one for newspapers; and on the side wall, within easy reach of Winston's arm, a large oblong slit protected by a wire grating. This last was for the disposal of waste paper. Similar slits existed in thousands or tens of thousands throughout the building, not only in every room but at short intervals in every corridor. For some reason they were nicknamed memory holes. When one knew that any document was due for destruction, or even when one saw a scrap of waste paper lying about, it was an automatic action to lift the flap of the nearest memory hole and drop it in, whereupon it would be whirled away on a current of warm air to the enormous furnaces which were hidden somewhere in the recesses of the building. As soon as Winston had dealt with each of the messages, he clipped his speakwritten corrections to the appropriate copy of The Times and pushed them into the pneumatic tube. Then, with a movement which was as nearly as possible unconscious, he crumpled up the original message and any notes that he himself had made, and dropped them into the memory hole to be devoured by the flames. What happened in the unseen labyrinth to which the tubes led, he did not know in detail, but he did know in general terms. As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of The Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in its stead. In the cubicle next to him the little woman with sandy hair toiled day in day out, simply at tracking down and deleting from the Press the names of people who had been vaporized and were therefore considered never to have existed. And this hall, with its fifty workers or thereabouts, was only one-sub-section, a single cell, as it were, in the huge complexity of the Records Department. Beyond, above, below, were other swarms of workers engaged in an unimaginable multitude of jobs. There were huge printing-shops and their sub editors, their typography experts, and their elaborately equipped studios for the faking of photographs. There was the tele-programmes section with its engineers, its producers and its teams of actors specially chosen for their skill in imitating voices; clerks whose job was simply to draw up lists of books and periodicals which were due for recall; vast repositories where the corrected documents were stored; and the hidden furnaces where the original copies were destroyed. And somewhere or other, quite anonymous, there were the directing brains who co-ordinated the whole effort and laid down the lines of policy which made it necessary that this fragment of the past should be preserved, that one falsified, and the other rubbed out of existence. |
Ping to 86
Haven't you heard? The "rich" aren't payiing their fair share yet to be spread around but that's about to change. Besides, paper is in abundance and those Treasury printing presses can run 24/7/365 and those EBT cards bring in the groceries like magic. It's all good in Obamaland.
To win the R primary Romney took a bunch of positions that he had no idea how to sell to voters. So he gets the general election and he runs on next to nothing:
“This country is out of money so we must get it moving again by giving guys like me another tax cut, while cutting spending. No, don't ask me what spending we need to cut, I will tell you that after the election. Just think of those tax cuts.”
is what he sounded like to many voters.
His making tax cuts his number 1 issue and then losing on it is part of the reason why Obama sees himself haviing the advantage now.
Willard couldnt clean President Reagan’s shoes...
11/13/2012 9:13:00 AM
What now, conservatives? Relax, we’re winning the war
Richard Moore
Investigative Reporter
Not too long ago I wrote a column about how dynamic and vigorous the conservative movement in this country was and how quickly it was morphing into the most potent American political force of the young century.
The conservative wave of the future, I called it.
At first blush, looking at last Tuesday’s election results, it looks as if my prognosis was just a hair off, having missed the mark by about a century. On Wednesday, the conservative movement lay seemingly battered on the shore, looking less like a tidal wave than a wrecked ship run aground by a tsunami.
That’s exactly what the mainstream media called it in the wake of President Obama’s re-election. The president’s expansive electoral army of 2008, they intoned, was not a one-time deal after all but a durable coalition capable of dominating American politics for a generation or more.
To hear the tale, the Republican Party has lost everyone in the country except old, white men. Minorities, women, the young, environmentalists, urban liberals – this is the alliance of victory and of the future.
I beg to differ. The election results notwithstanding, this analysis is deeply blinkered. Indeed, a close look at the returns indicates big trouble looming for the Democratic Party, not for the GOP.
No, I am not out in Colorado smoking newly legal weed. Consider this: Mr. Obama’s durable coalition was considerably weaker this time around. As of Nov. 8, for example, the president had received about nine-million fewer votes than he did in 2008. Not all the ballots had been counted, and that number will shrink, but he clearly will receive substantially fewer votes than his remarkable 2008 total.
On the other side of the coin, the Democrats have their own growing racial problem – their inability to attract white voters. Winning only 39 percent of 72 percent of the electorate gives the opposition 42 percent of the total vote from the get-go. That should give Democratic Party leaders pause because, given population trend lines, the proportion of white voters is likely to remain above 60 percent for at least the next 20 years.
None of this is to say the GOP doesn’t have a minority conundrum. Any time you get less than 25 percent of the nonwhite vote, it’s a problem, and a growing one if the GOP can’t make inroads into those constituencies.
So both parties have voting-bloc impediments beyond their respective foundations, but this begs the question, which is more likely to hold and enlarge its base?
That quite clearly would be the Republican Party. Let’s take a look at why the mainstream media consensus is biased.
First, the voting blocs are mischaracterized. The Republican base is defined as a mass of old, white voters, while the Democratic Party is depicted as a broad and sweeping coalition. On Election night, for example, after exit polls were reviewed, ABC News blared out: “Obama’s winning coalition of women and nonwhites.”
Look again, though, and there is no ‘and’ in the mix. Mr. Obama’s base is nonwhite voters and, as a practical matter, nonwhite voters only. Sure, radical white feminists, white urban liberals, young white college students and white environmentalists are there, but those activist pods represent a miniscule share of the voting population.
http://lakelandtimes.com/main.asp?SectionID=10&SubSectionID=68&ArticleID=16315&TM=35274.06
What an insult to The Fonz
Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured.
Apparently you are in the mindset that Reagan, who ordered the deployment, absolved. I will leave you to your own delusions.
“The Rules of Engagement
Until 23 October the MAU virtually operated on ROE that limited the right to shoot back unless the hostile force could be clearly identified.13 Even as the climate in Beirut changed, starting in April 1983, and Marines became the subject of ever more frequent attacks including heavy shelling by what was assumed to be Syrian artillery-122mm mortars, RPG-7s (rocket propelled grenades) from various militia, and snipers-it was up to the combined amphibious task force commander to formally authorize return fire-hence the Can’t Shoot Back Saloon.14
The actual language of the ROE was exceptionally complex. The reality in the field was, “don’t shoot back unless you know at whom you are shooting.” Some days this was truly bizarre. Near the Beirut University library a sniper operated from a minaret, taking occasional shots at the Marines of Weapons Company, 1/8 who used the roof of the library as an observation post. This went on for weeks.”
http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/beirut-1983-have-we-learned-lesson
I hope you do not criticize Obama on his ROEs since you think a Commander-in-Chief is immune from operations and separated from the Chain. Politics of war, whether by Repubs or Democrats, get a lot of good people killed in the name of trying to limit collateral damage/International incidences. Either go in hard or not at all. Confusion starts at the top because one false move killing innocents will lead to an occupational execution (Commanders CYA while those under them are sitting ducks). The mission and ROEs need to be made as clear as possible and Commanders Pre-absolved from any collateral damage in which self-defense/broken perimeters/non-compliance of locals cause casualties. The one doing the ordering (Reagan who ORDERED the deployment) is the one who should shoulder the blame. Failure to give clear cut orders/mission objectives along the Chain is wrong if your a Republican or a Democrat.
Hey tune in, Reagan did not give the order for the magazines to not be kept in the weapon at the gate, for the two guards.
You keep going on and on about the larger combat operations, returning artillery fire, patrolling, ROE, yet that isn’t the topic.
Your posts are insane, I am not, have not, posted to you about anything other than the guards at the gate being instructed to not keep the magazines in their weapons.
Your posts are madness in regards to the gate security, and I’m not interested in switching to your topic, so quit pinging me to your unrelated posts.
You also never heard the word “Constitution” when defending the Republican position on anything, nor did you hear the words “socialism”, “communism”, or “Marxism” when it came to the Dims’ position on anything.
I’m so bitter right now, I bleed vinegar. And yes, I’m bitterly clinging to my guns and my religion for those keeping score at home.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.