What We’re In For

rules

It’s not going to be pretty according to Quin Hillye at the American Spectator: Saul Alinsky Takes The White House:

Conservatives may not realize just how difficult it might be to recover from this week’s elections.

The day after the big defeat, the conservative chatter everywhere was about how the “movement” and the Republican Party (two different things) could finally unshackle themselves from the bad old habits that brought them down, and about how the ability to draw a sharp contrast with the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate would allow us to focus attention, rally the faithful, and re-storm the castle in 2010 and 2012.

Fat chance.

Too many conservatives think we’ve seen all this before — in 1964 and 1974 and 1992 — and that we know how to handle it. Fly, meet ointment: We’re not dealing with the same sorts of opponents. These New Alinskyites who are taking over the White House, combined with the most leftist congressional leadership in memory, will not let us play by the same rules under which conservatives recovered from those earlier debacles. They will try to drastically tilt the playing field, seed our side of the field with land mines and, in short, rig the process to make it next to impossible for the political right, or Republicans, to recover. And they are likely to succeed in at least some of these designs.

It will begin with their efforts to secure a filibuster-proof majority of 60 senators (including the two independents). Right now the libs (and yes, all the Democratic senators, with the possible exception of Nebraska’s Ben Nelson, are libs) have 56, with three Republican moderates and one conservative leading their races but awaiting recounts or runoffs. Watch for the Alinskyites to try stealing all four, and to succeed in at least two. We’ve seen this game before. They did it in Indiana’s “Bloody Eighth” congressional district in 1984. They almost succeeded in 2000 in Florida. They did succeed, outrageously so, in the Washington State governor’s race in 2004. Those are just the most obvious of many similar examples. And now they are even more ruthless, more lawyered-up, and in a more powerful position to pull it off than they were in any of those instances.

Next, watch what happens if they regularly can’t peel off enough Republicans (or hold their own semi-fairminded people like Nelson and Joe Lieberman) to overcome whatever filibuster attempts Republicans do mount. Watch for an assault on the filibuster itself. Watch how they use as precedent the GOP “nuclear/constitutional option” on judges in 2005 — except instead of just using it for judges, watch them use it against all filibusters. It’s easy: Make the ruling from the chair that the filibuster is out of order for some reason. Instruct the parliamentarian to rule in their favor. Win the appeal of the parliamentarian’s ruling by simple majority vote. And watch the courts pronounce it an internal matter of the legislative branch and thus outside of courtroom purview.

Watch a cheerleading establishment media — the Fourth Estate as a veritable Fifth Column — actually back these lefty maneuvers. It’s all in the name of one-man/one-vote democracy, dontcha know? The filibuster once served its purpose, they’ll say, but as a vestige of Southern “massive resistance” to integration it is now being used for massive resistance to the first black president, which invalidates it (suddenly) as a legitimate tool.

Watch the left use these tactics and others to pass even more liberalized voting laws — an open invitation to even more fraud that is more creative, easier to hide, and less challengeable in court.

Read the whole depressing thing. It’s what I’ve been saying all year to those who wanted to stay home, because McCain had pissed them off too much in the past. The deck will be so completely stacked against us it will take an act of God for us to come back in the coming years.

Who’s going to be our Moses to lead us out of the desert?

30 thoughts on “What We’re In For

  1. I think it’s going to take more than a person. It’s going to take a movement much like the one the Dems have been building for years. We need to start building our own “Shadow Party” type organization that funds think tanks, websites, gives grants to the media, just as the Dems have done. They have spent billions doing this including a very effective campaign of demonizing the Bush administration and Repubs in Congress and making it look like a grassroots movement. We need to start getting our message out in a more effective way.

    If we don’t we will just be sending our candidates out to slaughter against a badly stacked deck.

    Like

  2. I think times have changed, Deb. No one man or woman is going to go up against the coordinated and highly financed organization the Dems have constructed. Toss in a compliant media and I don’t think any one person is charismatic enough to go up against it.

    I’ve been beating this drum for a while but for any who haven’t read it, I would strongly encourage picking up a copy of Shadow Party. These guys documented the organization built by Soros and remnants of the Clinton organization and how their tentacles reached into every part of the media, the Dem party and the public conscious and paved the ground for a President Obama.

    We need to fight back with that type of organization or we are going to stay in the minority.

    Like

  3. We’re anti-government dissidents now. I relish the role.

    We are going to eviscerate the Obama regime. And they’re going to help us do it. They’ll hand us the knife. Be patient.

    Like

  4. Barry says that we are anti-government dissidents now, and he is relishing the role. Perhaps he is, but this is simply the role of the trouble maker, not the builder. You can continually attack the government, harass them, and try to make things difficult for them, much like the IRA has done in Ireland for a very long time, but it never leads to anything positive. It is never going to regain control of the country. That requires something much bigger than simply being anti-government dissidents!

    Like

  5. Dr D

    Yes, I will be a troublemaker as opposed to ‘a builder’. Chicago Jesus is my enemy. You can handle the milder stuff- I will be throwing bricks. There is a dark place inside me that has a case of the ass for the whole world. Chicago Jesus has tapped it, and I’m finally gonna let it out. Maybe you should stand aside so you don’t get any on you.

    Like

  6. Given the sentiments and perspectives I have encountered on this site (eg., Barry in CO) and on other sites, I fear that the “Moses” you seek to lead you out of the desert will carry a high-powered sniper’s rifle, or a semi-automatic, or a bomb vest. And if that’s what happens, God help us all. You must understand that this is not an apocalypse, nor is it the endtimes. It is a natural swing in the balance of political power, fueled in large part by the corruption and incompetence of the former administration. Learn, reform your party and see if you can logically and realistically convince the majority of the American people that your policy initiatives represent the best path for the country. It’s as simple, and as difficult, as that.

    Like

  7. Jeff, don’t let people blowing off steam get your panties in a bunch. They’re profoundly disappointed, and disgusted with their fellow countrymen. I know I am.

    You can call the Bush administration incompetent in some respects. But it was not corrupt. The answer to Republican incompetence is not a thoroughly corrupt Marxist posse to take its place.

    Gad. Still reeling.

    Like

  8. I fear that the “Moses” you seek to lead you out of the desert will carry a high-powered sniper’s rifle, or a semi-automatic, or a bomb vest.

    Good. If you’re stupid enough to believe that’s a reasonable scenario, then you deserve to live in fear.

    Like

  9. >>And if that’s what happens, God help us all. You must understand that this is not an apocalypse, nor is it the endtimes. It is a natural swing in the balance of political power, fueled in large part by the corruption and incompetence of the former administration. Learn, reform your party and see if you can logically and realistically convince the majority of the American people that your policy initiatives represent the best path for the country. It’s as simple, and as difficult, as that.

    Your either breathtakingly stupid or criminally arrogant. Incompetence and corruption were the stock in trade of the Clintion administration in case you forgot. Most of us never will. What other administration would cap its tenure off by tearing the “W” keys off the keyboards of the Whitehouse computers.

    You assclowns spent 8 years, most in a time of war, doing anything possible to hamstring the Bush administration. You didn’t care that we had troops in harms way or what comfort your actions could give our enemies. BushchimpyhaliburtonMcHitler? You have a lot of payback coming your way. You ran the most dishonest, media controlled race in the history of this country and you think you won a victory? For who, for what? You don’t even know what you elected.

    I will never sink to the levels you scum did but I will also never forget and I will fight the garbage this dishonest administration is bound to put out as hard as I can. Take your lectures and shove ’em you sanctimonious turd.

    Like

  10. You must resist the temptation to use overly provocative labels like Marxist (and posse, and terrorist, and Socialist, etc). Most of them have specific meanings that applied in specific historical contexts which don’t apply here, and thus are meaningless, except as an attempt to frighten and anger other people. And if you want a reasonable conversation/discussion, resist the temptation to try to insult me with comments like “panties in a bunch.” I have been in some flame-throwing sessions, and that kind of stuff doesn’t interest me anymore. Believe me, I was just as profoundly disappointed and disgusted with my fellow countrymen for the past eight years. And if you don’t think that corruption has been a significant problem during the Bush years, see if you can find out where hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars have gone in Iraq…money that was supposed to go to rebuilding the country. The accounting simply doesn’t exist.

    Like

  11. Jeff. Have you looked in any kind of serious way at Obama’s past? His associations, his activities…groups he’s been a part of?

    “Marxist” wouldn’t be so meaningless to you if you had taken the time to look into his background,

    Like

  12. I was just as profoundly disappointed and disgusted with my fellow countrymen for the past eight years.

    Yet, here you are, free to tell me about it. How many of your freedoms were taken away from you? Did you pay higher taxes during the Bush years, than you did under Clinton?

    Come back in a year and ask me those questions.

    Like

  13. And if you want a reasonable conversation/discussion, resist the temptation to try to insult me

    I swan, the next liberal who walks in, plops himself down, takes a dump on the thread, and then whines when he’s called names, I’ll, I’ll, I’ll . . . I’ll start trolling liberal sites. I’d be way better at it than the lib trolls we get.

    Like

  14. You must resist the temptation to use overly provocative labels like Marxist (and posse, and terrorist, and Socialist, etc).

    Must we? Oh my, please excuse us for using the terms per their dictionary definitions, rather than any revisionist politically correct interpretation that you’ve conjured up.

    see if you can find out where hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars have gone in Iraq…money that was supposed to go to rebuilding the country. The accounting simply doesn’t exist.

    …and with that idiocy, the trap swings shut. Turns out we do know where the money went. The big controversy over the “missing” $8.9 billion was completely misrepresented. If you read the actual criticism by SIGIR, they said that the money was properly delivered to the Iraqi ministries, but that they felt that the CPA’s responsibility extended to tracking the money within the ministries. The CPA disagreed, saying that their responsibility ended with the money delivery, and that there was no feasible way of tracking the money inside the ministries.

    Basically an administrative dispute, which the press characterized as incompetence at best, and fraud at worst.

    More recent criticisms resolve to not having paperwork properly filled out. But keep spreading the meme instead of doing any research.

    Like

  15. And if you want a reasonable conversation/discussion

    That wouldn’t be too bad, if I believed that anybody visiting the sites of their ideological opponents might be sincere. I believed that 4 years ago, but was proven wrong time after time. Now I, and pretty much every other regular on any political blog, blast away as soon as dorks appear. Just look at David’s comments (at least, the ones that ND didn’t modify).

    But if you did want such a discussion, I hope it wouldn’t resemble the patronizing lectures you’ve posted thus far. I don’t know if you’ve ever had a discussion prior to this, but they don’t usually start with a set of instructions to the other participants. And I hope it wouldn’t consist of the shallow platitudes you’ve trafficked in so far.

    Like

  16. I have certainly looked at all of the accusations (some would call them smears) against Obama. Here’s a more realistic take on just one, the ACORN stuff… http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/acorn_accusations.html Before I leave you to continue stoking each others’ fears, angers and paranoias, I’ll just say that my perception of blogs is that they are for free discussion of ideas, including those of people you may not agree with, thus my appearance on your site. You are in fact my countrymen (women), and we all believe in the greatness of our country. We represent different perspectives on the directions the country has gone (is going), and I suspect that some combination of our perspectives and ideas would comprise a realistic version of the problems this country faces. I know right now that you guys are pissed off at events, but at some point, we’re all going to have to have a calmer policy-oriented discussion, not the really low level of coarse talk that I’ve been hearing so far. Nicedeb, here’s a link that talks about the transfer of wealth that I referenced in a different comment. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/12699486/paul_krugman_on_the_great_wealth_transfer/print And here’s one more on the type of reaction to the Republican loss that your site seems to represent: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/03/opinion/03krugman.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
    I wish you all well and hope that we might talk again in the not too distant future.

    Like

  17. Okay folks…like I’ve said, I ain’t gonna engage in flame-throwing. You are living in a world and a mindset that I don’t understand. Let me know how it works out for you.

    Like

  18. Door. Butt. Avoid contact.

    …and next time you might want to try entering a thread with a less incendiary first sentence.

    Like

  19. You are living in a world and a mindset that I don’t understand. Let me know how it works out for you.

    That world is reality.
    The mindset will be on truth and substantive information.
    We’ll use our brains and think.
    We’ll do fine.

    Like

  20. Hey Cathy – are you in need of some Marie Sharp’s? If so, I’ll grab some next time I’m home and ship them out to you.

    Like

  21. Hey Cathy – are you in need of some Marie Sharp’s?

    Unless, of course, you’re not Cathy from IB, in which case I apologize for the inappropriate familiarity.

    Like

  22. Geoff — I AM the very Cathy of which you speak from IB.

    Marie Sharp’s down to a couple of bottles left at this stage. I’ll email.

    Like

  23. The Spam bucket caught Jeff’s second to last comment. Too many links, I think.

    Too bad – there was actually some material worth hammering on in that comment. And he didn’t tell us what we “must” do or which words we can use.

    If he’d started with that comment, he’d have had a completely different reception.

    Like

  24. Pingback: The Irascible Chef » The Socialists are Coming!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s