One Less Republican in Camp

Sierra Times ^ | 3-29-02 | Colonel Dan

[Skooz]

Amen!

[AmishDude]

IIRC, recess appointments are only for executive branch assignments, not the judiciary.

[southernnorthcarolina]

You can almost tell where one of these screeds is headed when there's a basic error of grammar in the headline. If there's going to be one fewer Republican, I'm glad it will be this dude, who's about two tacos short of a combination plate.

Always, and I mean always, these melodramatic leave-takings are written by those who were never on the team to begin with. The recap of his near-departures reminds me of a 6 year old kid threatening to run away from home, and yet hoping that Mom will try to stop him.

6-year-old Dan: "I'm leaving now, and I'm not coming back!"

Mom: "Don't you want lunch before you leave?"

Dan: "Okay, I'm really leaving now!"

Mom: "Better take a sweater with you."

Dan: "All right, I'm really, really leaving now! Don't try to stop me!"

Mom: "Don't forget to write."

Somehow, I think the GOP can survive this grievous loss. And Dan can go back to his silly vanity internet column. A happy ending for everyone!

[Lazamataz]

Another award winning rational thought, bravo. When are you going to publish a book listing all these gems of original thought?

Why bother? I can piss off people like you right here.

So my needs are met already.

[Darth Sidious]

Everything you just wrote about is focused on taking power, not on serving others.

The Republicans want power. Bush wants power. Their supporters and followers, in one way or another, want power.

They lack the gumption to ask themselves if they deserve power.

So I'll ask aloud: do the Republicans deserve to be in power? Do the Democrats? Did Bush or Gore deserve to have such power?

They and their followers will be quick with an answer in the affirmative. But they are so consumed with the accumulation of power, they can not examine themselves as to whether their identities are worth being entrusted with power.

As long as the Republicans continue to crave power, without a sincere desire to serve, then it really matters not that the Democrats have the Senate, or that "conservative" judges will be squeezed out of the system, whatever.

Is there anyone at all in this place that's looking for something above the meaninglessness of power?

[Clara Lou]

Thanks for posting the comments by TexasForever. I hadn't seen them.

[Poohbah]

More recent experience trumps the experience of 1980. And conservatives generally expect to be given everything from the GOP by Divine Right, and will "punish" the GOP if the majority of the GOP disagrees with them.

Your ilk do a fine job of scaring off more moderate conservatives and centrists--based on your tendency to "punish" the GOP when they don't deliever 110% of your specification, most folks view your faction as being likely to write laws forbid anything that isn't compulsory. If your stripe of conservative made up a 50% +1 majority of all likely voters in America, this would not be an issue. Unfortunately, you don't.

Third party candidates do nothing but allow you to feel good as the Left gets a free pass to execute their agenda without your interference.

[uncbob]

How else can he uphold and defend it, besides preventing unconstituional bills from becoming illegal laws? And possibly using the bully pulpit to cojole the other branches of the government into doing their part in protecting the Constitution.

And in the past SCOTUS has requested ( do your jobs you dumb asses ) that congress NOT fall into the practice of using the SCOTUS as a filter as to the constitutionality of laws they pass

[going hot]

No sarcasm intended, just how does one "serve" through enaction of legistation if they are out of power, politically speaking?

[68 grunt]

We might as well just close shop and dissolve the Republican Party.

That appears to be your goal. Laugh out loud if you like but I think it's rather pathetic.

[uncbob]

So all of you professional GW haters can rant and rave. This is going to the Supreme Court as it should.

Wrong . It should have been vetoed

Now time effort and $$$ that could have gone for campaigning will have to be expended in fighting this in the courts.

A plea was posted yesterday on this site for donations to help the court battle All you people that think not vetoing was such a great idea HOW MUCH YOU GONNA ANTE UP

[Howlin]

If we agree, fine, if not, that's ok too.

Well, I believe you've gotten to the heart of the problem; apparently it's NOT okay with we don't agree with them.

[Sci Fi Guy]

nobody yet here can refute or challenge the poster with substance, in concise, unemotional tones. its just the usual mudslinging; maybe folks are late for work and can only post a line and run. I don't know. I think it merits wider academic debate.

why bother? He has already surrendered. We have a 2 party system. And rather than working to make one of those parties more conservative(a never-ending task), he would rather quit and weaken the conservative voice in the Republican party.

[AmericanInTokyo]

I would neither worrry, nor waste time and bandwith, fretting therefore about third parties, if they have really no effect on the outcome. What's the big worry if conservatives 'walk' when they are fed up. They simply lose power, right?

[uncbob]

IIRC, recess appointments are only for executive branch assignments, not the judiciary.

Not according to what I have seen and heard but the pundits could be mistaken .
Anybody have any more facts on this

[Sabertooth]

These Bash Bush/Repulican post have increased in numbers over the past several days. (If I was paranoid I would think there was a group like the "seminar callers" that infected talk radio that have found a new tactic).

If this poster is serious, debate is not going to change his mind. If as I suspect, he is nothing more than a disrupter, debate is not going to change his mind.

So what is the point?

Thoughtful contemplation on the part of the Loyalists as to the cause of the division and strife?

I'm not leaving the GOP, but I understand much of the frustration of those like the Colonel... my own vote is now in play, rather than straight line Republican. Instead of greeting this news with derision, shouldn't the Loyalists consider a more prudent approach?

Or, after the closest Presidential election in American History, are you confident you have votes to spare?

[gitmo]

Right. Why choose the most inefficient method of filtering out illegal laws?

Gee, let's let it pollute our nation for a few years before the filter (Supreme Court) catches it.

[going hot]

So true.

It's actually entertaining when they hold their breath and throw a hissy fit. :-)

ps, gotta get to work, will check on this thread later.

[Skooz]

Yep. If we do not agree, we are unprincipled apologists in favor of tyranny.

Dang. This morning I thought I was a pretty nice guy.

[Ima Lurker]

While I agree with a lot of what you say, I still live in fear that a vote for an Independent is a vote for the Demonrats. So, even though I will rant and rave, I will continue to vote Republican. Frankly, I don't think a bunch of Independents in control would be any better than the other two parties. I think 99% of politicians are only interested in getting elected then re-elected and nothing more.