Image 01 Image 03

“Really, this party is too dumb to live”

“Really, this party is too dumb to live”

Some people in the Republican Party want to follow John McCain’s policy of not going after Obama personally:

Republicans on a private Republican National Committee conference call with allies warned Tuesday that party surrogates should refrain from personal attacks against President Barack Obama, because such a strategy is too hazardous for the GOP.

“We’re hesitant to jump on board with heavy attacks” personally against President Obama, Nicholas Thompson, the vice president of polling firm the Tarrance Group, said on the call. “There’s a lot of people who feel sorry for him.”

Here’s Michael Walsh’s response at NRO:

I took some grief on the recent NR cruise by telling the group that I thought Mitt Romney would lose to Barack Obama rather handily. That for some mysterious reason Obama continues to have relatively strong personal-approval numbers and a substantial, reliable base, which Romney doesn’t. As a typical standard-issue Republican, Romney wouldn’t have the heart or the courage to take the fight to the president, but instead would debate around the edges, and lose…

Gee, if Obama’s personal-approval numbers are still high, why would you want to take them down? Let them stay there, lest the Democrat-Media Complex accuse you of being a blue meanie.

Remember, GOP: principles, not policies. Principles, not policies. Principles, not policies.

It’s not Obama’s policies that are the problem, it’s Obama and everything he represents and stands for. Engage the president on the deepest, most potent level, or join John McCain and Bob Dole on the ash heap of history.

Really, this party is too dumb to live.

I’m still formulating a response.  Just as soon as I can calm down.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


In Washington State, 2010 GOP candidate Dino Rossi (who in 2004 lost the Governor’s race by 2 Al Franken style recounts) would not throw more than a love tap at super committee Patti Murray. He lost in a landslide.

I think counting fund raisers, rounds of golf and all the belittling hypocrasy from King Barack is not only in line, but it is required.

Also REALLY???? After what they just did to Cain?????

So basically the RNC is saying the best way to campaign against Barack “I want you to argue with them and get in their face” Obama is to turn around, pull down your pants, bend over and say “Mr Obama please sir may we have another beating”?

Republican Party is the Enabler Stupidly enabling the Democrat Party Addicted to Evil.

You could almost tie the story, about how “GOP Kingmakers” don’t like either of the two frontrunner, together with this story and come to believe that these “GOP Kingmakers” would rather have 4 more years of Pres**ent Barack Obama.

    Neo in reply to Neo. | December 6, 2011 at 5:14 pm

    I stoled this froma commenter at Hot Air:

    the sad truth about The One is that he has so little to show from his term that he’s now forced to lift messaging from liberal outsiders who themselves are popular partly because of … disaffection with Obama.

    Obama is running against….himself.

    If they skip the personal attacks, it might be a really empty campaign.

    Neo in reply to Neo. | December 6, 2011 at 5:18 pm

    The irony here is that would leave Obama as the only party attacking Obama.

    Anchovy in reply to Neo. | December 6, 2011 at 9:51 pm

    Always remember GOP Kingmakers are superfluous if the King is already a GOP King.

Republicans would rather attack each other than the real enemy…

Yeah, the stupidity of the Republican Party is unbelievable.

So just so we are clear here, we are supposed to attack Newt because he angered the establishment Republicans, and handle Obama with kid gloves because it might possibly make us look bad?


The F*ing Republican Establishment is the biggest enemy of the Republican Party, and its showing again…

Henry Hawkins | December 6, 2011 at 5:40 pm

The core of the argument is how to win independents. Establishment GOP-ers believe attacking Obama will alienate and drive away independents.

The answer may be found in recognizing that too much in the way of personal attacks on Obama possibly could drive off independents, but it isn’t necessary to attack Obama personally. This time around he has a record and established policies, all of it eminently ripe for frutiful attack.

The GOP also needs to form a better across the board message, that this election isn’t merely yes or no on Obama, but on the whole Democrat machine operating for the past three years. We need to tie Obama securely to Pelosi, Reid, Frank, Dodd, Shumer, Weiner, et al, and the totality of the crapfest these libs have rained down on us all for the past three years.

Most of all, the GOP needs to FIGHT. Not speak civilly and tickle the edges. FIGHT.

    I agree.

    Attack policies and outcomes; then counter-attack the Dems personal attacks – the best example of which was Gingrich’s riposte to Princess Pelosi’s belligerant threat by which she would violate House ethics. She really has no shame.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to logos. | December 6, 2011 at 10:43 pm

      No shame – and no brains. Though she can’t bring out ugly tidbits, such as they are, from the ethics investigation, it doesn’t they can’t and won’t come out. Except now, thanks to Princess Nancy (Cain’s biggest contribution: “Princess Nancy”), it’s off the menu for Dem smear merchants, the ‘gift’ Gingrich thanked Pelosi for.

His policies are precisely a reflection of his principles, so in my book they are one and the same and, therefore, he is fair game.

I echo the sentiments of the previous commenter regarding the consummate stupidity of the Republican party, or rather the party elite. In my book, whatever his reasons, if Newt is willing to take on Obama, the Dems and the Republicans, he has my vote, because right now he is the ONLY one hitting, and hitting hard and also coming up with solutions. Does he want to be President, of course he does. Is that arrogance, of course it is. You have to have a bit of arrogance to run for the position. How is that different from anyone else? It isn’t. The important thing is to turn this country around and he seems to be willing to put himself out there for all of us and work. Is he the best, who the hell knows? I certainly don’t. Baggage? Who really cares what he did. Have you ever heard of redemption of seeing the light? This is for all those who come her spouting religious and conservative purity!! I’d like to see the first IDEAL person and candidate. All we can do is try to live our lives as best we can and rectify mistakes. So if we can all get a second, third and fourth chance, why can’t he or Cain, or anyone else…. Sorry for the rant, but I am sick of the holier than thou comments I have heard lately. Off high horse and back to work with apologies if I I insulted anyone, as that was not my intention. We should all be united in ONE and only one task… to turn this thing around and stop the meltdown.

Oh heck.. I should never hit submit without proofreading. Sorry for all the typos.

    Mutnodjmet in reply to MAB. | December 6, 2011 at 8:04 pm

    I detest grammar Nazis, and your comment was excellent. I think, at this point, it would be very unwise to donate to the RNC. They obviously will not use the money wisely and seem to lack the “fire in the belly” necessary to defeat Obama. Obama has more baggage than American Airlines — Fast and Furious, Solyndra, Vacation-o-rama, and the chronic mismanagement of foreign policy. He needs to be the #1 target and I want the candidate who is willing to do it.

Why is it that it’s acceptable for Obama’s surrogates both in the media and elsewhere to trash any GOP politician they want to, for Obama to make snide snipy comments about the rank & file Republicans but the GOP is supposed to play nice because Independents won’t like us?

GOP surrogates ahould be digging and finding & using every piece of dirt they can find on Obama, Biden, Pelosi etc. When Nancy Pelosi threatened Newt someone should have been prepared to surface the Mafia Princess’family dealings.

    Aitch748 in reply to katiejane. | December 6, 2011 at 6:06 pm

    @katiejane: Yes, it is strange that the independents should be turned off if the GOP starts to speak up about the problems with the Democrats, but these same independents are apparently not so bothered when Democrats go on witch hunts against Republicans. Or at least we don’t hear much about how independents feel when Democrats are the ones going on the offensive.

    logos in reply to katiejane. | December 6, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    “Why is it that it’s acceptable for Obama’s surrogates both in the media and elsewhere to trash any GOP politician they want to, for Obama to make snide snipy comments about the rank & file Republicans but the GOP is supposed to play nice because Independents won’t like us?”

    I’m not certain, but it’s my guess that the Establishment Republicans have been trained to do so becausethe Democrat-Media Complex aka the mainstream media spins every story to the benefit of the Dems and the detriment of the Republicans.

    Their reaction is much like that of a dog who has been beaten; it cringes.

    But, unless the beaten dog begins to bite back, it will always be a cringing dog.

Typical of the go-along-to-get-along bunch that lies to talk smack about the Democrats to conservative voters and then accomplishes nothing in DC. It’s garbage like this that is the reason why people who might normally be “principled conservatives” who might reject Gingrich in less troubled times are rallying around him. (Well, that and the fact that he isn’t Romney.)

“Really, this party is too dumb to live.” I agree with this sentiment. Heck, it wouldn’t surprise me too much to see the GOP breaking up by ticking off the conservatives one time too many.

I think the idea of “going after” or attacking Obama is a bit of an overreach — we don’t have to. We only need tell the truth about: his hatred of America and all it stands for; his closing off energy development so we become poorer and weaker; his plans to take away our freedoms by unelected bureaucrats regulating the very life out of us; his support for the Islamic revolution a la the Muslim Brotherhood and their triumph in Egypt, you know, advancing those 57 states; his destruction of our financial base beyond what any other President ever did (Bush and those before him, Repubs and Dems, did their part, but it is small in comparison) so that all our productivity and savings post-WWII are down the drain, and then some; his advancing unions as the wealth makers, the creative ones in this country….Everything has been turned upside down and emptied out. You know. We only need the truth.

In my book, Perry is the one whose proven actions can take on telling the truth. The facts, the truth, exists. He has actually limited government; he has actually cut budgets and bureaucracies. He has kept taxes to a limited amount of the state’s GDP (13th largest economy in the world). That’s alot of truth. So what if he does not talk pretty like an eastern elitist.

Gingrich would make an excellent VP for Perry because he not only tells the truth well (and prettily), but he attacks. They can play something like good cop, bad cop. Not only that, he is skilled in federal legislative ins and outs. This is where we need him. I don’t have to “like” Perry to know that he is mightily skilled at governing; I don’t have to like Gingrich to know that he worked the halls of legislative power like a pro for conservative purposes, most of the time.

I think they would make a great dynamic duo. (And both Perry’s down-to-earth nature and Gingrich being VP would prevent Gingrich’s soaring ego and futuristic bombast from elevating (levitating?) us away from the main chance.

This is it. I think we have our team.

What could be wrong with Obama??
“You have to pinch yourself – a Marxist radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshipped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And it’s considered impolite to say so!” -Melanie Philips, The Spectator 10/14/08

Willard Romney doesn’t have a problem with his base although, they happen to also be Obama’s base; The Romney Scorecard: RINO

AND WTH was Arizona thinking when they re-elected McClown!?
“I believe my party has gone astray. I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy.” — John McCain

Bitterlyclinging | December 6, 2011 at 6:17 pm

Its ABO with all our might and all the fury we can muster, for failure to defeat BHO in 2012 could very well lead to president for life BHO in 2016. The country and the Constitution are depending on us.
My sentiments, MAB exactly, your typos forgiven.

    “…president for life BHO in 2016…”

    There’s another year before the election; I’ve wondered if what you forsee might well occur in 2012.

The only thing that I disagree with in Michael Walsh’s piece is that “It’s not Obama’s policies that are the problem, it’s Obama and everything he represents and stands for.” His policies are certainly a problem. Attack both his policies and his principles. Show how his policies flow directly from his principles. Demonstrate the pattern of increasing government control, fiscal irresponsibility, and corruption, and cite policies and actions as evidence of the pattern.

I don’t think Obama really is all that “personally popular” – it’s simply that no one wants to be mean and criticize him or tell the pollsters that they really don’t like him – or what he is doing…. it softens the blow to say, “He’s a nice guy, but…” “I’m sure he’s a really good Dad, but…” “I love his _____, but…”fill in the blanks, there are a million variations, but the truth is – he was a phony from the get go – and people are starting to see it.

Trump rose BECAUSE he was willing to stand up and say it out loud, Newt had nothing to lose, and he also chose to stand up and say it out loud, and he is rising. Palin was also able to say it – did the Democrat party take off the gloves against her? The Emperor has no clothes. He is a failure. He is a terrible President – and truly – not a very nice persona after all.

Romney can’t move out of his position BECAUSE he is incapable of standing up and saying it.

If he can’t say it to Obama, he won’t be able to say it to the leader of Iran or any other monstrous rogue nation.

The worst part of this thinking is this:

Establishment Republicans refuse to do the “dirty” thing and attack the other side of the aisle – instead trying to get along above all else while turning their ire on Republicans who rock the boat.

Harry Reid today comes out and says, again for the umpteenth time, “the extreme elements of the Republican Party… yada, yada, yada”

The problem is – he’s right! We are “the extreme element” when compared to the weak Establishment crowd who allows themselves to be pushed around and walked on without ever making a peep. Despite there being nothing overly extreme about any of our views, compared to limp-noodle stand-for-nothing types, we are as extreme as can possibly be.

The Republican Establishment, by refusing to do what is needed and play the game played against us, is ensuring anyone willing to make a change or take a stand is going to be “fringe” or “extreme” or “unhinged” or whatever the Democrats want to claim we are.

And all I can say is, F* you Establishment Republicans! You are allowing the country to be destroyed with your appeasement, and alienating yourself from everyone involved. And just so you know, its part of the reason you are a Tea Party target yourself!

I don’t know what the party guy actually meant to say, but it is certainly true that “personal attacks” might well fail or even backfire. Americans are prepared to fire Obama but that does not mean they don’t like him. Dislike for the man is so intense among some on the right that they cannot get their heads around this. It is not contradictory.

It’s also important to understand what is a “personal attack.” One does not need to be personal to be aggressive, even fierce.

It’s not personal to say “Obama has failed utterly and completely.” Or “Another four years of Obama will be a total disaster for the country.” Or Reagan-like, “Americans won’t be getting their jobs back until Obama loses his.” Or “No President in history has done more damage to America’s standing in world.”

In short, there is plenty of room to be tough. “Not personal” does not mean soft.

    Darkstar58 in reply to JEBurke. | December 6, 2011 at 7:26 pm

    Read the post again: (and I’ll help out by highlighting just the quote part)

    “We’re hesitant to jump on board with heavy attacks” personally against President Obama, Nicholas Thompson, the vice president of polling firm the Tarrance Group, said on the call. “There’s a lot of people who feel sorry for him.”

    As you’ll notice, the “personally” part is not even part of the Thompson quote – it was added after the fact, and does not actually refer to “personal attacks” but rather personally attacking.

    Thompson solely questions attacking the President “heavily” because people “feel sorry for him”

      JEBurke in reply to Darkstar58. | December 6, 2011 at 8:24 pm

      One, I said plainly that I do not know what the guy meant and then went on to describe what I believe to be a smart, sensible distinction between being aggressive in attacking and being personal. The two are different. The former will be effective, the latter likely not.

      Two, if you click through on the conveniently provided link to the Yahoo story excerpted, you will find that the RNC rapped Yahoo for missing the RNC’s point which was not that surrogates should avoid attacking the President but to focus on his failed policies rather than on personal attacks.

      So, all in all, I don’t need your help interpreting excerpts of news stories.

I’ve heard arguments that the Trump debate is not presidential and unbecoming. And MSNBC gotcha’s are?
Oh, and the Trump just is a TV personality argument: I think he has a massive real estate and investment empire too. I’d bet this “debate” will get attention.
Trump merely went to Wharton. That is, not Hahvahd or Yale, like the n e. Establishment Repubs think are acceptable. Trump is not establishment, and therein lies the fight.

As for not going after Obama personally: Schmucks.

    JEBurke in reply to gabilange. | December 6, 2011 at 7:26 pm

    I don’t understand why conservatives who talk all the time about principles don’t understand that Donald Trump is a self-promoting celebrity real estate developer who has never known what a principle is — or cared. Until 2009, when he was well into his 60s, he was a Democrat, gave piles of money to Democrats, including Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden, and said scurrilous things about President Bush. Until 2009, he was never known to take any position on anything that was not liberal.

Thanks for your forgiveness “Bitterlyclinging.”
Another thought. It is the presidential election, but there are congressional races too. We have to concentrate on getting the best people in, those who are willing to right this ship. It’s all about checks and balances which seems to have been sidelined. It’s just as important if not more so than electing the President.

Rose, agreed. I just think our so called leaders are afraid to be called meanies by attacking the cute darling of the MSM and afraid of being called racist. That has given rise to the meme that he is “personally popular” which he really isn’t to anyone who is honest and can see him for the weak individual he is.

Barack Alinsky Obama has NOTHING but lies, and divisive words about ANYBODY who doesn’t agree with him, yet we republicans aren’t going to go after him with the truth??


the cowardly sons of bitches need to Cain themselves as well as Cain Obama.
these pussy whipped little bitches have pissed me off to no end the last few months.

sorry for the language but this is the final straw.

I don’t understand why Republicans shouldn’t attack Obama’s policies. They failed. If Obama’s policies are fine, we should elect the incumbent.

And I don’t understand why they shouldn’t attack him, personally, especially for the incompetence and corruption of his administration. Any President who didn’t fire Eric Holder a long time ago deserves to be attacked for having poor judgment and low standards.

“Really, this party is too dumb to live”

I’ve been thinking this for years but haven’t yet found a decent alternative. Anybody have the number of the Whigs?

Bastogne. Nuts! In the literal sense are we in a military combat war? No. In the Figurative as well as the survival of our nation,,,? Yes, We are.


We’re Surrounded.

Give up?


At the end of the day, is there really any difference between the two parties? Does it really mean anything to elect what we feel is a conservative? I have been trying to make a difference for 40 years, everytime we get a “conservative” elected, they get to Washington and become a liberal or a do nothing. I feel that if things don’t change we are looking a another civil war.

This is one of the reasons I refuse to give to the RNC. I will give directly to candidates that deserve support. The country is angry and we need angry people leading us. That’s why Gingrich has had my support all along. I get sick and tired of this crap. Pelosi is threatening to divulge secret documents and we’re saying, “Let’s not be mean to Obama or people may get mad at us.” The New York Times is already talking about Gingrich’s college dissertation from 1971 for God’s sake, and we want to be nice? Get a %(^)_) grip folks.

TeaPartyPatriot4ever | December 6, 2011 at 10:36 pm

I absolutely agree. This current Republican Party, needs to go.. We must start a new major Politcla Party-
The Constitutional Conservative Party of the Republic.. with the Tea Party making up mthe majority within the party.. and let the Republican RINO Party die out of existence..

“We’re hesitant to jump on board with heavy attacks”

This just may have something to do with the race card, but it doesn’t matter, because you see, when pressed hard and heavy on policy and decisions of political nature, such as ignoring our Constitution and doing things HIS way, the race card will be dealt.

I would caution folks, especially those exasperated with the milquetoast, reluctant-warrior establishment GOP leadership, not to become pessimistic , lest it lead to apathy. Remember November 2010? The landslide that the Tea Party created? The Tea Party hasn’t disappeared, it’s just that there’s no current ongoing Obamacare level political fight going on at the moment to focus their energy and bring them out to protest.

The Tea Party will reemerge when the GOP nominee is set and the race against Obama heats up. You don’t have to be a formal, go-to-meetings Tea Party member – a great many people share their frustrations and support Tea Party positions and values, but don’t attend meetings or events. The conservative grassroots are there, ready to go. Conservatives across the board and across the country will rise up and engage this spring.

The forces that drove the 2010 midterms blowout are still extant, still in play. The Obama team has continued to bumble and fumble, both domestically and abroad. People are struggling and each week and month that passes stokes anger at the continuing struggle. Nothing substantive has changed since 2010 and conservatism remains on the upswing. In 2012 even more genuine conservatives will win House and Senate seats. We’ll very likely have a conservative in the White House. Slowly but surely a genuine conservatism will take over the Republican Party, pulling it ever rightward.

Remember the depth of young talent on the GOP ‘bench’ – Ryan, Rubio, Rand, Haley, West, Wilson, etc. Remember the veteran conservative GOP-ers – Barbour, Daniels, Thune, Demint, etc.

Don’t grow discouraged, just go through the process of finding our nominee. Ask yourself what Gingrich has done for American conservatism, what Romney has done for American conservatism, and so on, down the list of possibles: Perry, Bachmann, Santorum, Paul. Make your choice and support accordingly. Donate money to campaigns if you can. If you can’t donate much, save it for the general election for use against Obama.

Remain steadfast. Do not succumb to media and establishment GOP attempts to demoralize you unless you support their pre-selected candidate. Take nothing personal. Maintain perspective: one year from now we won’t remember 90% of the details that seem so important today. Only one thing truly matters – the defeat of Barack Obama and the radical cohort of liberals that has taken over the Democrat Party.

Subotai Bahadur | December 7, 2011 at 12:01 am

There is a common thread here. Sarah Palin stood up and fought back. And was hated more by the Institutional Republicans than by the Democrats. And the Democrats hate her with the passion of 1000 exploding suns. Rick Perry, before he proved that thinking on his feet was not his forte, stood up and fought Obama. And faced the opposition of the Institutionals. Herman Cain stood up and fought back, whatever his other character faults. And before his background came out, the Institutionals hated him for outshining their tame Romney. Newt, for whatever his faults [and they are many and earlier tonight I made a caller from his campaign quite nervous by listing them] has reserved his effective fire for the Leftist enemy and not his fellow Republicans. And is soaring because of it. And the Institutionals are in a panic. Trying to keep the meme of Romney as frontrunner operative when he is behind by 10-20 points is proving more than they can do. So we see Institutionals like NR going stark raving Chiroptera feces trying to tear him down.

Anyone see a pattern? To gain the lead, you have to fight the Enemy. And doing so, means that the pre-selected choice of the Institutionals fails. So they take after the leader, and now are signalling that fighting the Enemy is now beneath the Republican Party. And hope to enforce it.

TeaPartyPatriot4ever @ December 6, 2011 at 10:36 pm

If the “Constitutional Conservative Party of the Republic” forms, I am there. It is ten times overpast for the Institutionals to go the way of the Whigs. Henry Hawkins is right about keeping fighting the political battle. We may have to concentrate on electing Patriots to Congress to battle the Institutionals and the Democrats acting in concert. But it is what we have to deal with, and our efforts will shape the future battlefield, political or … otherwise.

Subotai Bahadur

This is more than an excellent post; it is a call to action. I am going to write Reince Priebus today and tell him that the GOP will not get one cent of my money until and unless I see some aggressive, BHO-is-by-far-the-worst-president-since-Jimmy-Carter-and-maybe-even-worse-than-Carter advertising.

I saw Newt’s new ad, and it’s nice, but way too touchy feely. In an interview with Matt Lauer in the beginning of his reign, Barack Obama said he should only serve one term if he could not fix the economy. We should play that video over and over and over and over. He didn’t “fix” the economy; he made it worse. Q.E.D.