December 17, 2013
Inslee's uses 2014 budget announcement to set stage for 2015 tax increases
Gov. Jay Inslee announced his proposed supplemental budget this morning, calling it a "hold-steady" budget but warning that the state "will face a sizable shortfall next year" -- meaning 2015. He stopped short of uttering "tax increases" but said "we'll need to take additional steps."
Inslee, who opposed tax increases while running for governor, said the problem was "in the billions, not millions," presumably an amount that can't be raised by ending tax incentives alone. The state is predicting General Fund tax revenues in the 2015-17 biennium will be $2.6 billion higher than the current biennium.
Asked if he supports an income tax, Inslee gave an answer about the oft-cited extracted fuel exemption. "So we're proposing significant changes in tax exemptions that do not produce jobs," he said, adding that the extracted fuel exemption results in the state "losing about $65 million a year" that could go to education.
The actual revenue is about $20 million a year, but regardless, it would take many similar tax exemptions to equal "billions, not millions." Inslee didn't share his thoughts on income taxes or other general tax increases.
While Inslee shared no specifics on tax increases, he seemed to call for a massive overhaul of the state's tax structure, calling it an "old jalopy" that can't produce the revenues the state needs:
Now I also want to point out that -- we will have a lot of discussion over the next year about this -- we have to recognize in our state that we have a condition of our revenues that is not up to the 21st century economy.
It is based on an economy that no longer exists. It is based on an economy that did not have the Internet. It is based on an economy where most of our economy was based on goods rather than services.
And as a result of the antiquated fiscal situation in the state of Washington, the demands for services by our citizens are significantly outstripping the ability of this old jalopy to produce the mechanism of providing those services.
Inslee's supplemental budget calls for more than $200 million in new spending, including more prison capacity, 500 new slots in the ECEAP pre-school program, and an 8% raise for childcare providers (though only to unionized childcare providers) as well as additional funding to cover high K-12 enrollments. Inslee said he wants the next budget to include pay raises for state employees and teachers, describing the raises as expenditures that cannot be put off any longer.
Posted by Adam Faber at December 17, 2013
04:43 PM | Email This
Adam Faber, you sad, sad HACK.
If only McKenna had had a marginally capable policy director you would not need to spew this irrelevant infrequently read and never heeded BS.
Why did McKenna employ you?
LMAO. So it is Adam's fault that McKenna did not win. Timing is everything. If the election had been held this year, McKenna would be the Governor - and probably would not have had much to do with Adam. Fortunately the State Senate is more affiliated with the people unlike the House and Governor - who side with the ruling class and centralized Soviet style government.
It will be an interesting struggle to see who prevails in this struggle to increase taxes or cut spending. Doesn't he also want an increase in the minimum wage - the same old leftist mantra, which does little to solve any problems and creates higher unemployment.
@2 KDS on December 17, 2013 06:21 PM,
Which bothers you more
a) the same old leftist mantra?
b) or the fact that Democrats OWN the WA governor's office for the rest of your life?
PS. I'm okay with accepting that the reason the Republicans lost the Governor's office for the 8th consecutive election is because Washingtonians reject Republicans, not Adam Faber (HACK!). Are you?
It was just that when given no choice, given two candidates who talk liberally, they usually choose the Democrat. After all why go for a light imitation when you can have the actual thing. "Me too" leads to the question why not the other then.
I remember during one of the Presidential Debates I was watching it in a bar, and McCain was going I agree with Obama on this, I agree with Obama on that, and some guy who was watching in the bar I was in shouted WHY DON'T YOU VOTE FOR HIM THEN! The bar burst out with laughter!
Give the people a choice and they will vote conservative! Give the people a RINO and they will more times than not vote for the Democrat.
Interesting Video shows why RINOs lose.
Shall any of the (un)SP peanut gallery take a stab at naming a Republican who can beat Gov Inslee's bid to be re-elected in 2016?
No. I didn't think so.
Look, you have two candidates. One who is PROUDLY SECURE in what he believes and one who is almost embarrassed about what he believes, if you weren't policy driven, if you were a low information voter wouldn't you vote for the person who was confident about what he believes than the one who almost seems ashamed of it?
Conservatives can win. Even in this state. But someone who wants to be a "Lighter version of Left" no. People see the shame the person has.
Now I am not saying a conservative should be ashamed about being a conservative, quite the oppose, but a RINO is practically by definition ashamed and therefore has to lie practically everyone he meets.
No, I can't name a Republican. It is going to take someone who comes out of the Private Sector. And the person is going to have to convince the people that it won't be politics as usual and after what they saw of the so called "Tea Party Senators" these are Senators who won on the strength of the Tea Party in 2010 only to betray the Tea Party once in office, that is indeed going to be a hard thing to do.
I think there will have to be some kind of collapse in this state before they are going to be ready for change. BUT when they are ready for change they will be ready for change and not "Me too but a little less".
Can you really blame the people of Washington State for not wanting a Republican Governor. After all one harbored a Serial Killer!
Looking at it another way, I would rather have a Democrat Governor than a RINO President. Say Rob won and the National RINOS tried to put him up as a national candidate.
At least here he was stopped at the bud. I think that is much more important especially since in substance he wouldn't have done much differently.
I am old enough to remember Spellman. He RAISED taxes too. So in our state since there's little difference between a Democrat administration and a Republican one, I would rather have a Democrat one.
Of course people seeking jobs within a Republican Administration, I get why they would care, but the average conservative, no difference and in a way perhaps it is better that we have a Democrat we can blame things on.
Remember Evergreen College - That was Dan Evans!
This article I have a link to below gives a very good explanation why RINO ROB lost.
@6 - Why are you obsessed about finding a Republlican who might defeat Inslee in 2016 ? There is certainly someone out there who would do a better job as Governor than Inslee, but that may not be a Republican - it might be a libertarian or a conservative Democrat - who would push for smaller and more efficient government..
Keep believing he is invincible - it shows your sorry approach to solving problems, because he is actually worse than Gregoire, but the composition of the Senate is better than when she was Gov. Curious - why are you a statist ?
Also, and I know we don't like to talk about this truth, but we know that Republicans can't get elected governor in Washington State due to institutionalized voter fraud.
Republicans in this state should stop running for Governor. I mean I hate to surrender on something like this but you can only hit your head on a wall so often.
King County is as corrupt as it comes and they determine who becomes Governor. I mean do you REALLY believe some of these recent results?
In Seattle that commie running? I mean sure it can be a Lefty town, but not as completely lefty like that. And the marijuana vote, sure, yeah I don't know even one person I have ever met that voted that way.
So yeah, I admit, Republicans can't win a Governor's race. But in RINO ROBS case that was a good thing.
Voter Fraud in Texas (and it is far worse here).
We don't really have the vote in Washington State.
It's fixed in King County and King County controls the state in elections.
I mean Seattle is bad, but to vote for Marijuana and a communist. No, that was proof of voter fraud if there ever was one.
If I lived in King County I wouldn't even vote. Perhaps that could even be a way to catch the fraud because it could indicate I did when I didn't.
Whatever it is, keep doing it because every time you do, MikeBS wets his pants.
MikeBS gets his politics from Will Ferrell, a fellow statist and a Hollywood pinhead actor who is in to shock, which went out with streaking.
Referring to to anyone on the left who comments here as a Communist is a bit harsh, although it would not be that difficult to support.
Wow that link that Jim provided was incredible. That group donated to the Republican Senate committee and the Democrat Senate committee and incumbents Republican and Democrats alike.
There really is just "one Party" in Olympia, and when it comes to governing it doesn't matter who is in office, the lobbyists control the show.
I guess the only ones who would care would be those who are seeking jobs in Olympia.
I think this year I will be sitting it out. For years I have voted Republican and even when my candidate won the person would turn around and stab me in the back. Which now all makes since if lobbyists back both sides. They are obviously more beholden to these lobbyists than the voter.
What would happen if they held an election and no one showed up? At any account not work my time, effort or money. Well perhaps in the primary to see if I can shake some Republican incumbents from the teat but absence success in that, why would I vote in the general if either way it's more of the same.
Vote anti-incumbent this year. Don't care about the Party id for you can be sure they don't!. And if you can't vote anti-incumbent, just don't vote.
"Inslee said he wants the next budget to include pay raises for state employees and teachers,"
...that wouldn't have anything to do with the absolute fact the teachers and public employee unions put millions into his election fund, would it?????
Inslee: he was againswt tax increases before he was for them. And we're calling BS on him for his laughable approach to BS-ing the people.
A wasted vote would be to vote for one of those "Tea Party Senators". They proved that they would say anything to get elected only to shift to the left(probably to get lobbyist money which a look at the records proved they did get).
We for one agenda and they give us the exact opposite agenda. If they are rewarded for their 2010 lies by being re-elected they will shift even more to the left.
Republicans/Democrats makes no difference in Olympia where the lobbyists run the show. The best you can do is minimize each politicians time at the teat.
The only way to restore your vote is to vote anti-incumbent. Otherwise you might as well just flush your vote down the toilet for all the good it will do.
I haven't heard it said any better than this...
scooter wheedles: "Shall any of the (un)SP peanut gallery take a stab at naming a Republican who can beat Gov Inslee's bid to be re-elected in 2016?"
I don't know if it is possible for a pubbie to overcome the invincible ignorance exhibited by king co voters last time around. You LIV's vote for morons like jay and actually believe that you're affecting positive change in the state?
Republicans are not about change. They are about LIES.
And the the lobbyista really run the show. If the past 3 years have proven anything with those who were elected in 2010 it proves that. All you have to do is look at who have already donated to their campaigns. They ran as Tea Party but become Establishment the moment they won.
I wish there would be more discussion on how lobbyists give money to incumbents of both parties. And in that way they unify the parties against the people they are supposed to serve.
The next time you get a call from someone saying "Hey Charlie Brown, I have a football" (Hey won't you help this RINO get re-elected) I hope you tell that caller where to go!
It's the great pumpkin Charlie Brown.
Next year will be a Tea Party year just like 2010. But this time the Tea Party will Target those people who lied to them to get elected!
From the Republican Perspective you are looking at another 2006 or 2008. You will lose the House of Representatives unless you get rid of people like "the Great Pumpkin" (Boehner) in the primaries.
Primary them out or prepare to suffer defeat in November.
By the way, I predicted 2006 when all you were saying how great that year was going to be. What was it, Senator McGavick. You were all saying he was a shoe in but I said "hold on a moment". So if you think I am going to be wrong by calling this another 2006, remember I was right calling 2006 when you all weren't.
Don't be a Charlie Brown!
Fool me once shame on you.
Fool me twice shame on me!
This year I am really going to kick the football. That's what you were all saying in 2006 wasn't it!
In a less metaphorical video does Scott Brown have the record quickest backtracking on a campaign promise or what. I mean I don't think the election night balloons had even deflated yet.
This is what I mean by Pulling the football.
By the way whatever happened to that damn truck he was running around in trying to pretend he was "one of us"?
Yeah, Republicans will say things to get elected but they LIE. They govern just like the Democrats.
So if regardless of how I vote I am going to get the Democratic Agenda, I rather have the Democrats do it to me than the Republicans.
Politicians lie, and people all go duh! But to say YOUR particular politician lies well then you deny it and get made.
It's NOT only the other guy's politician that's the problem. IT'S YOURS!
Jeff Flake got elected from the House to the Senate with the backing of many conservatives. He promptly betrayed many groups that had supported him with his immigration flip-flop. He proved himself willing to lie to the faces of conservatives. He went so far as to betray conservatives on gun issues once he secured himself six years of unaccountability.
Don't tell me that the moment Rob McKenna would have gotten into office you wouldn't have seen the same policies coming out of him that we see coming out of Inslee. After all during the campaign McKenna worked hard to make it clear that on the issues they were almost the same. So of course had he been elected he would be doing what Inslee is doing now.
Oh, but he probably would have had some republican employees (along with Democrats for somehow RINOS LOVE to have Democratic work with them as employees). So yeah, there's the difference. Who gets to feed off the teat.
Sound Politics loses credibility every time it engages in partisan attacks. There's nothing wrong with attacking Democrats as long as it is done in a principled not partisan fashion. And part of attacking in a principled fashion is also attaching the Republicans who are doing the same thing.
It's BOTH party's fault. That's the only thing the voter will respond to favorably this year. Attacking someone just because that person is a democrat won't fly this year as long as people can see the Republicans doing the same thing.
I am glad that Inslee doesn't have any mass murderers on his staff.
That more than can be said for some of our previous governors.
But what the hell, he "had good ideas", as Ralph Munro put it.
Yeah, and Hitler made the trains run on time.
It's incredible the similarly Rockefeller Republicans have with the Nazis. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. They are cut out of the same cloth.
"He was very friendly, very open," Munro recalled. "There were other people in the 1972 campaign that I probably knew better, but I remember him being there and being involved. I thought he was bright, sharp. He had good ideas."
As bad as Inslee's administration may or may not be, it is certainly not as bad as that was.
I hate everything the Left believes but at least you have to give their politicians credit. They stand by their "principles" for the lack of a better word. I really believe that most of their politicians (with a few exceptions) are there because they want to work to what they believe is the betterment of their state. Again, what they believe is in the betterment of the state is, evil, just plan historically proven evil, but from their perspective they believe they are doing good.
Republicans on the other hand, they don't give a damn. They are there to BE something not do something. All they care about is the power and just the power.
Looking at it that way Democrats have far more "integrity" than Republicans. Again, unfortunately it's integrity in doing things that will do us harm (although that's not how they see it) but integrity nonetheless.
Yeah, there's little lies here and there but for example Obama believes socialized medicine is best for America. He promised in his campaign to give us Obamacare. And he has done exactly that.
Republicans have promised to remove Obamacare but they have no intention of doing so. So they are actually what they claim they are fighting. They have to always present this big lie out to the public. They can never present themselves as they really are.
If we are going to save our state, save our country FIRST we are going to have to Defeat the Republicans. Only then will we be even able to go up to bat against the Democrats.
I have to agree with Mark Levin here. Even if the Republicans Controlled the Senate, controlled the White House, have total political control.
They are never ever going to Repeal Obamacare.
That is why they need to go the way of the Whigs!
29. Ban MikeBS here too, for the love of humanity!
Good News WINGNUTS!
2008 GOP Presidential Nominee, Sen John McCain (R-AZ) has written your often dreamed about, but never seen ObamaCare Repeal & Replace bill.
Now, all you need to do is get it passed.
Well, how about we set the bar a little lower for y'all?
Can you get a majority of Republican congresscritters to support it?
No. I didn't think so.
One of the consistent treats about this blog's front-page posts is the vast chasm between what they boldly assert as fact...
INSLEE'S USES 2014 BUDGET ANNOUNCEMENT TO SET STAGE FOR 2015 TAX INCREASES
And what they can actually show to be true:
He stopped short of uttering "tax increases" but said "we'll need to take additional steps."
How to bridge this gap? Simple! Just assume what needs to be proven!
Inslee, who opposed tax increases while running for governor, said the problem was "in the billions, not millions," presumably an amount that can't be raised by ending tax incentives alone.
So, Inslee ran against tax increases, and has not proposed any. Does Adam give Inslee credit for keeping promises? (Are you so high you've personally violated I-502 for every man, woman, and child in the state?)
Asked if he supports an income tax, Inslee gave an answer about the oft-cited extracted fuel exemption. "So we're proposing significant changes in tax exemptions that do not produce jobs," he said, adding that the extracted fuel exemption results in the state "losing about $65 million a year" that could go to education.
(Of course, it's not Inslee nor Democras who constantly insist that every tax break ever creates jobs, that we can't ever close unproductive loopholes because these, by definition, cannot exist.)
The actual revenue is about $20 million a year, but regardless, it would take many similar tax exemptions to equal "billions, not millions." Inslee didn't share his thoughts on income taxes or other general tax increases.
On that last point, the reader can be forgiven for not inferring it from Adam's blaring headline, "INSLEE'S USES 2014 BUDGET ANNOUNCEMENT TO SET STAGE FOR 2015 TAX INCREASES "
(Emphasis not added.)
You want us to cut government spending, you want us to cut government spending...
Here's what we will do! We will find the one area of government spending that you most likely don't want to cut and we will cut that just out of spite.
That will show you. How dare you expect us to cut spending!
The Republican "Brand Name" is tarnished beyond repair. I can't look my Veteran friends in the face any more. I am conservative but when you ask people to fight in wars you owe them something in return. I would be ashamed to call myself a Republican.
So, yeah it is time for the Republicans to go the way of the Whigs. Because they are going to see a defeat this year greater than they have ever seen. I just hope we can survive the transition years until we get a new party firmly established.
Boehner, Ryan, McConnell, McCain, these people are freaking monsters! Cut the benefits of disabled vets just to spite us. Well forget about members of the Armed Forces ever voting Republican again.
Why would we want to replace Obamacare. Can't fix what wasn't meant to work in the first place.
I hate McCain, He is mentally disturbed.
When this guy came to Congress to testify (which in and of itself was an outrage) he hugged him like he was an old friend.
Yes, I will say it McCain, far from being a war hero was actually a traitor to his brother in arms. Hear what other Vietnam war Vets have to say about McCain
McCain should have been shot for treason a long, long time ago.
In Congress, John McCain has been one of Vietnam's strongest allies.
I believe it is because they have compromising video on him that they have threatened to release.
Watch this explosive video.
By the way, while we are on it, did you know that Ted Cruz's father actually vote ALONGSIDE Castro. There's something about Cruz that makes me concerned. I don't think he is who he pretends to be (wow, kind of like how those "Tea Party" Senators really turned out in the end to become part of the establishment). I know it's rare but I think this politician is lying and just saying what he thinks we want to hear.
I meant to say Ted Cruz's father FOUGHT alongside Castro.
Could this whole "not shaking Castro's hand" just have been a political stunt?
And why was Cruz there in the first place. There was nothing forcing him to attend?
Was McCain Brainwashed as a POW.
The evidence says YES!
In 1992, NVA Col. Bui Tin, who interrogated McCain in the Hanoi Hilton, testified before the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs. He told the Senators (including McCain) that Soviet officers regularly interrogated and tortured American POW's. During a break in the proceedings, Sen. McCain and Col. Tin enjoyed a hug and exchanged the kind of longing looks that a man would usually share with his long-lost father, or perhaps in McCain's case...His comrade?
In the liberal lexicon "revenues" always means increased taxes and a "massive overhaul of the state's tax structure" means massive increases in taxes. Such feckless unavailing "solutions" always fail but that is the way it is for people who have no comprehension of economics as they affect the well being of human beings.
Inslee (a standard liberal zombie) will do all he can to trade what he calls the "old jalopy" for an even older liberal cart that is drawn by poor people, has one speed backwards, and may only drive Washington into more recession poverty and destruction. They pretend to care about the poor but centralized power is all liberals understand. Poor people always suffer the most from these types of liberal economic formulae for failure.
The good news is that the conservative coalition in the Senate (including two Democrats) in cooperation with conservatives in the house will stop Inslee in his tracks and be lots of fun to watch doing it.
"I meant to say Ted Cruz's father FOUGHT alongside Castro.
Could this whole "not shaking Castro's hand" just have been a political stunt?"
LiAR. He was against Castro.
"And why was Cruz there in the first place. There was nothing forcing him to attend?"
Because, he wanted to pay his respects to Mandela, who became a great man. Get back on your meds ! You sound deranged.
"I hate McCain, He is mentally disturbed."
Not a McCain fan, but I do know that YOU, Steve are mentally disturbed and full of s**t.
41. KDS at #41,
Why not focus on the subject?
How is McCain relevant to Inslee?
44. @43 - To defuse Steve's ridiculous comments - for the benefit of the low information leftists or those who paid attention.. I had already expressed my views earlier on how pathetic Inslee is and how it helps to have a sensible State Senate.
First the comments are not ridiculous. I backed them up (perhaps you didn't go to the links).
Second, if that one link from Jim proves anything it's a least in this state elections don't matter because it's the lobbyists who run the show.
Now we haven't seen it in the Governors Office because well the Governor has been the same party for so long, but I still remember how after the 1994 elections (Republican Revolution) the next year all the committees in the House in Olympia were chaired by Republicans whereas a year earlier they were all chaired by Democrats.
Yet, still the same types of legislation were being passed even though the chairs has switched parties.
(Here's probably my favorite article about the "effects" of the so called Republican Revolution in Washington State. It was my involvement with the Republican Revolution that made me so cynical about the "tea party" from the start and why although I shared similar goals I really didn't get all excited about or involved in 2010. And I was proven right, wasn't I. I would have loved to have been proven wrong).
A tail of two picnics.
Michelle Malkin wrote it!
Anyway, the point is you really weren't have seen anything much different from an McKenna Administration than what you you are seeing now from Inslee. Oh McKenna might have hired some Republican operatives so that would be a difference (for the people hired I mean as they would have a job under McKenna where they weren't have under Inslee). Guess what he probably would have hired at least a couple of Democrat operatives as well. But policywise not much difference because the lobbyists run the show.
As that link above shows they donate to Republican Senate Committee, Democrat Senate Committee, incumbents from both parties, etc.
Sound Politics will find that even Conservatives are getting tired of its anti Democrat partisan attacks. It's not so much we disagree with the substance of the attacks in and of themselves, but we are tired of the intent which is to divert attention to how really, really bad the Republicans are too.
IT IS BOTH PARTIES FAULT. That's what's going to ring true in 2014. This "Blame the Democrats" thinking is so, so behind the times. This year the belief is WE MUST DEFEAT THE GOP FIRST BEFORE WE ARE EVEN IN A POSITION TO DEFEAT THE DEMOCRATS.
Malkin's husband told me personally how shocked he was seeing the same types of legislation going out of the Health Committee as was when the Democrats were in charge of that committee.
I saw the same thing happening with Education.
So, yeah, in Olympia, Republican, Democrat, unless you are like some kind of operative who depends on a joh, for most of us "who is in control" doesn't really matter. It's the same slop regardless.
Now we can look back at the "Tea Party" to see I was unfortunately right there too. The only thing the "Tea Party" Senators gave us was the deciding votes in FAVOR OF Gay Marriage. They had no intention to go to Olympia to "shake things up" but instead became part of the very establishment people thought and they claimed they were going to Olympia to fight.
"It's the same slop regardless."
True, that this state has been on more or less on the same track for decades. But I'd say it's a different story in other states, say Michigan, for example, and certainly on the national level.
In an odd way, the GOP of today is kind of like the Bible's description of the first Israelis as a "mixed multitude". Sure, it marked the beginning of "the One God", yet there was still a fertility idol or two in every home.
Sorry to go O-T for a moment, for for some odd reason Pudge has repeatedly deleted the following comment and is apparently banning whoever posts it. Since it isn't abusive in any way that I can see, I can only conclude that it must be very damning of what has occured over there. You be the judge.
. "If you weren't insinuating that there was nepotism"
I'd say the insinuation was in the original post, but once he got into the comments, Pudge directly accused the DelBenes of nepotism several times. Since this accusation is directed towards Congresswoman DelBene, she is, in fact, being accused by Pudge of having committed an ethics violation per US Code as referenced in comments above. What is unfortunate is that Pudge makes this accusation without offering any evidence at all that Congresswoman DelBene in any way advocated for a relative, as advocacy is required by US Code to have occurred for there to be nepotism, also noted in comments above. Simply being married to someone is in no way evidence of a federal public official advocating for a spouse's employment or appointment.
Look at it this way. If the husband had promoted a relative at Microsoft, a disgruntled co-worker might go to a dictionary to better understand the meaning of the word nepotism to see if there's an issue. But if one suspects Congresswoman Suzan DelBene of nepotism, you need to go to US Code. When it comes to nepotism, the private sector and public sector are horses of different colors. If you accuse a federal public official of nepotism, you have a higher bar to clear than a disgruntled private sector employee. In these comments, Pudge hasn't once come close to clearing that bar.
Really, the subject of nepotism should never have been brought up at all. If anyone is to be blamed for that, it can only be Pudge for putting that word in the title of his post. He should have backed off immediately. Unfortunately, instead he doubled and then tripled down on his baseless accusations.
Posted by Charles S. at December 19, 2013 09:21 AM
48. At #46, 47,
Given all of your generalized equivocation of the supposedly indistinct parties, and samo-samo leaders, how would you propose to correct this "same slop regardless?"
Or is there just no solution?
I think the best Bible Quote I would use the describe the Republican party is the following...
I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm--neither hot nor cold--I am about to spit you out of my mouth. (Revelations 3:15-16)
Gosh, at least I have a little respect for the Democrats. Hatred but respect. At least they fight for what they believe, as wrong as what they may believe is. They have a larger purpose besides their own self comfort.
Republicans, and I mean the elected officials, the establishment, believe in NOTHING. To them it is just about their own narrow self interests. It's all about the title on the door.
SO YEAH, WE SPIT YOU OUT! That's what 2014 is going to be about!
50. Given all of your generalized equivocation of the supposedly indistinct parties, and samo-samo leaders, how would you propose to correct this "same slop regardless?"
Or is there just no solution?
Indeed, there may be no solution.
But leaving that possibility out for a moment, first we must hold those who betray us accountable.
We must be vocal against these incumbents. We must discuss who they are getting their campaign money from and how these are the same people who are funding the other side.
That's why the primaries will be CRITICAL this year.
That said, we can go back to even 2012 to see how the Republican Party treats those who challenge them. Look I was no fan of Ron Paul but the Republican establishment of Washington State used illegal tactics, closed down caucuses they were doing well in and denied them delegates that were legitimately theirs.
Time and time again we have seen the Republican Establishment destroy conservative candidates using tactics and a tone they wouldn't ever use against their supposed enemies the Democrats.
I do thing given this, and given the amount of money the incumbents have already raised few incumbents will be defeated in the primaries. Look I am not saying it's not worth the fight and I would LOVE TO ONCE BE PROVEN WRONG, but still in my head I fear that would be the result (but then again I haven't even seen primary opposition mounting against them).
But if that is indeed the case, after the primary we are just back to "what's the point" because indeed if elected or re-elected they will just do what the lobbyists tell them to anyway like they already do.
But yeah, the answer would be a healthy primary process (which the Republican establishment would never tolerate) that holds OUR people accountable. If these people lose in the primary it will make them think at least before they cast a vote in whatever the lobbyists want. Right now practically speaking the path to re-election is to do what the lobbyists tell you to do so you can get the money you can use to chase out opposition. It's not listening to your constituents, but have allowed it to become that way because we don't take primaries as seriously as we should and provide real competition.
Because, yeah, after the primary - who cares.
Matthew 5:13 - Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, where with shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.
Forget if you hated Paul or not. If they can do this to them, they can do it to you. They did get away with this and that is why I don't hold out much hope for successful primary challenges.
That and the fact that if they were as ruthless towards the Democrats as they are to conservative Republicans they probably would win more elections. You can't believe all the crap I have seen the Republican party do to conservative over the years, particularly in contested primaries against their chosen one. They will even give their mailing list to the Democrat chalenger if they are beaten by a Republican in the primary.
I respect Reagan for a lot of things. He won the Cold War. He improved our economy while he was in office. He gave great patriot speeches.
But he wasn't God.
He was wrong about immigration. He was wrong about Sandra Day O'Connor. He was wrong about having AMERICAN FLAGS placed at half mast for Sadat (what the hell was that about).
And he was wrong about the so called 11th Commandment. The Leftists in the Republican party never felt bound by it. But the Leftists have been able to use this to STOP talk about what THEY ARE DOING WRONG. Pretty hard to defeat an incumbent if you are banned from talking about why the incumbent should be defeated.
So, if there is a chance to turn things around, we are going to stop obeying the so called 11th Commandment. When they do ill to us, we speak truth to that ill!
We have allowed the Republican Left to deny us our First Amendment rights for too long.
And the so called 11th Commandment in return never stopped them from attacking us in the most vicious of ways imaginable, in primaries, in generals, hell whenever. No one is condemning Boehner for "breaking the 11th commandment".
Zatoichi,Pudge was right in what he called it.
But the point is WHO CARES!
Republicans have done the same thing. In this state Cheryl Pflug (Former Republican Legislator0 got a 5 year committee contract worth $500,000 and you didn't hear Pudge complain about that.
The problem with what he said wasn't in content but in motive. It was a partisan not a principled attack. And most of us we have heard enough of this "Democrats are Bad" mantra. Yeah they are bad but so are the Republicans. And it's the Republicans who stand in the way of us even getting up to bat against the Democrats.
I have heard some call Republicans the Democrats "Human shields" and while perhaps that's not the most apt analogy, it's true that they stand in our way and that is why we must defeat them first before even considering the Democrats.
This is simple. Abandon those who do 90% of what you want because you hate the other 10% and you will help elect those who will do 100% of what you hate.
I personally warned Rob McKenna that if he turned his back on conservatives he would lose and he did. I never understood why he did this but I believe he lost because many violated Reagan's 11th commandment as I predicted. I might be wrong but the problem is the same either way.
I consider your apparent cognitive disconnect even less availing than McKenna's blindness to principle. I still voted for McKenna because it was so obvious what would happen if he lost . . . and look at what we are getting from Inslee. Seems to me you are letting your anger affect your judgment and while while I understand the anger and feel it myself, I am not guided by my emotions like liberals are and recognize that such reactions only aid the degenerate destructiveness of those like Mike BS.
I hate the compromises of principles as much as you do, but the only thing holding Inslee et al back from totally hosing Washington State is the Coalition formed between Rodney Tom and Joe Fain and a few others.
If you are truly a conservative you are smart enough to know that losing them in 2014 over principles is not a strategy to winning ideological purity in the longer run. Many others like you are re-evaluating this issue and seeing it my way.
Once the virulent plague of ObamaCare blooms fully, people's general fear and anger will do the trick.
"Pudge was right in what he called it"
I probably said enough about it already, but I would readily agree with you in terms of general conversation. As an actual nepotism charge to be leveled agains a federal public official, no, there is no "there" there yet. I believe he'd need proof of advocacy by the congresswoman. That whole thing over there is just a failure to communicate.
Nepotism itself is an issue with me. We see it everywhere, in both the news and entertainment media, in politics - in so many arenas where I'd like to see some fresh blood. I don't see this as left-right, not with spawn of Gore and Bush both still running around in politics and the likes of the mediocre Chris Wallace and Luke "I know everybody" Russert in news media.
To tie that back into this thread's discussion, Dunn begat Dunn, and so where is the state party now? At least in this thread you appear to be going after each other's throats.
Zatoichi again. I don't give a damn. My country and state are on the edge of destruction and there's little hope to change things. Part of the reason we got here is because of us engaging in partisanship and treating politics as some sporting event!
But another reason we got there is by "discussing" stuff with people like here who never ever really wanted to debate. You wanted to destroy but no, we spent years upon years engaging in "logical Debate" thinking that really matters.
Guess what WE ARE HUMANS, NOT VULCANS. I personally do not depend on logic in my debates anymore. I have logic, I still put in logic and try to point to where I have the logic. But I know that's not going to win.
What is going to win is emotion. But truth can be very emotional if you use it right but we always felt beneath doing it like you people to.
Here's the truth. YOU ARE NOT MERELY WRONG. You are EVIL. Oh, I can point out so so many ways history has revealed you are evil but I don't feel like it today.
Don't mistake my hatred towards the GOP as agreeing with you. Not ever.
You can't negotiate with evil. You must defeat evil. Actually I have never heard it said better than this.
Why did we lose?
We lost because we failed to apply the strategic lessons of warfare to the attack on our culture. We lost because we gave away the psychological environment. We spent 30 years playing by our opponents' rules of engagement instead of forcing them to play by ours. During that time, we imagined that all we had to do was be right, present our views logically, and provide reams of documentation. We were under attack, whereas we thought we were merely under disagreement. We said we just needed to understand each other. The truth was, our adversaries understood us better than we knew.
We started off by violating the most basic principle of warfare, iterated as long ago as 550 B.C., by (ironically enough) a Chinese philosopher named Sun Tzu in "The Art of War":
"Those skilled in war bring the opponent to the field of battle. They do not allow themselves to be taken or drawn there," wrote the Chinese strategist. We fell all over ourselves for the privilege of debating issues on our adversary's turf. Our opponents proceeded to frame all the debates and dictate to the public what it would think about, and for how long.
We care about integrity i.e., the end doesn't always justify the means. The opposition doesn't. We anguish over aligning ourselves with those who might disagree with us on some nonrelated issue. Our adversaries work with anybody, including pornographer Larry Flynt, on an issue-by-issue basis. We worry about our families getting hurt. The counterculture doesn't care who gets hurt -- i.e. Hillary Clinton, Vince Foster -- as long as the larger agenda moves forward. We don't want our spouses maligned, our privacy invaded, and our good names dragged through the mud. Mudslinging is our adversaries' forte.
We were under attack, whereas we thought we were merely under disagreement.
That one line sums it all up. That is why we need to stop debating the Liberals and START DEFEATING THE LIBERALS!
You do that by adopting some of their tactics!
That is why I won't even engage you in explaining how wrong you are about this Zatoichi. I doubt you are debating this in good faith.
Who the hell cares. It's not like the Democrats don't do it as well.
Amused by liberals (that's part of your problem, they don't amuse me, I hate them with every fiber of my being) you are a BLOCKHEAD.
NOTHING would have changed if Rob McKenna had won the election. Except for the fact Adam Faber would probably be on here Defending the same types of policies he is now disdaining.
Lobbyists give money to BOTH PARTIES. Did you see that one link? The Republican Senate Committee, the Democrat Senate Committee, Republican incumbents, Democrat incumbents.
Hell, ask Malkin's Husband what happens when party change happens in Olympia. NOTHING. The same thing comes out of the Health Care committee as did the year before. I saw the same thing with Education.
It's the lobbyists who control the show. Until that changes, nothing will change.
Look, if you want to root for a Team, choose the Seahawks. If you want to make a difference in politics, leave your jersey at home!
Regardless, the Republican party is going the way of the Whigs. The "Leaders" (Boehner, Ryan et al) in DC has ensured that. So either get off this drowning ship or go down with it, I couldn't care less either way!
Who the hell cares. It's not like the Democrats don't do it as well.
I mean it's not like the Republicans don't do the same thing I mean.
Partisan attacks will not get you anywhere next year, Pudge. You will even turn off people who you think would agree with you.
Speaking truth. Standing up for principle, I think that's our only chance (if indeed we have a chance). We aren't in it for the "Long Haul" anymore. We have been pushed in such a corner we have no more room to retreat.
And we have already seen what a lie it all was. There was a point in Bush adminstration where Republicans had it all. They had the House they had the Senate, they had all freaking three branches of government, and it didn't change the direction of spending did it. They are LYING!
Even if they regain the Senate, even if they regain the House, even if they regain the White House Obamcare is here to stay. That's not me saying that. Here I put in links for a reason.
Listen to who says it!
Mark Levin: Paul Ryan is to blame for cutting benefits for disabled vets, NOT Democrats
This one act, done out of spite against US I know has irreparably destroyed the Republican Brand Name.
So..no the Republicans are a sinking ship. The only thing I can hope is since nature abhors a vacuum just like the Republicans came to replace the Whigs, a true conservative/tea-party party will come to replace the Republicans.
Look, 2014 will be a disaster for the party that perhaps even mentioning 2006 or 2008 or even 1992 doesn't give picture to the magnitude of the defeat. The only way to stop such a defeat would be healthy primaries but from the way I have seen the RINOS in the Party act in the past, that's very unlikely.
Being amused by foolishness and stupidity is a problem?
That you actually believe that NOTHING would have changed is amusing . . . and it says much more about you than party politics.
And who gives a damn what Malkin's Husband thinks?
Have ideas of your own or just morose criticisms?
"It's the lobbyists who control the show"
Wow what an incisive and original observation.
"The Republican party is going the way of the Whigs."
Another mind boggling revelation.
Yeah Steve, O.K. that's where they are going all right, you bet.
Your clincher is "I couldn't care less either way!"
Then why bother genius?
Who's the blockhead?
Thanks for the reply
"I am hoping for a quick death for the GOP this year so we can perhaps organize a new party for 2016."
Yeah O.K. Steve, good plan, and then you can go to the zoo.
Where do you get this brilliant stuff?
63. "It's the lobbyists who control the show"
Wow what an incisive and original observation.
Yeah, just like the observation "politicians lie".
So yeah, not really original insights we are going off of, but if not why don't you seem to get it?
Not Brain Surgery. And I gave you my proof about things not changing when you see a party change, where's your proof that things do. Granted on the State level we haven't had a party change since Spellman, but we have had occasionally in the legislature and when that has happened, policy wise little changed. Heck, the Legislature basically runs on autopilot with the bureaucrats and the lobbyists running the show. The politicians are just so much window dressing.
Talk is cheap, but even in the talk in 2012 there wasn't much difference between McKenna and Inslee, so where where is your evidence that we would have seen much difference except for a few more Republican operatives getting on the state payroll here and there?
Huh, you provide no substance in your argument. None at all.
Do you know that the legislative committees actually work even when the legislature isn't in session? How is that possible say like in 2014 when they don't know who the chair of the committee is going to be in 2015 or what bills that chair is going to want them to write?
It's because it doesn't matter who is chair (well I guess it matters to the person who is chair you know the title, the honors, and such) Not when it comes to the bills. They are already written by the lobbyists and the bureaucrats for the chair to put his or her name on when they come in after the election.
Again for anyone who even visits Olympia once or twice a session not a big revelation. So why are you having such a problem with the concept?
Again, just look at that one link as an example.
No, not hard to figure out why incumbents of both parties support similar legislation when both are getting campaign money from the same sources.
It's just that the Republicans have to lie about it more.
By the way, I don't find evil amusing. I don't get a laugh out of all the destruction they have caused in my state and my country.
So, yeah Charlie Brown (may I call you Charlie) not funny indeed.
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again yet expecting a different result. I have seen the Republicans in my life win the House of Representative, the Senate, have a majority of Republican appointed judges on the court and I have seen them win the White House. I have seen them have everything they said they needed to make the changes we know need to be made and that they promised they would make, but even with that power they did not. Instead spending went higher.
Did you ever see those photos of those death camps Hitler had in Nazi Germnay, Hah, Hah Hah I mean those Jews they looked like skeletons, so so Amusing.
And have you seen those videos of when those planes in the Twin Towers in NY. Hah, hah, hah. Those people were jumping to their deaths, plop. Hah, hah, hah hah.
Yeah, evil is just sooo Amusing! A laugh a minute.
No it isn't. If you didn't get it, I was being sarcastic. And Steve is right. You are a big sicko.
And a blockhead. After all how long is it going to take you falling on your back to realize that she is never going to let you kick the football. Not if Republicans get the Senate Back, not if Republicans get the White House back, not ever.
67. Republican Governor asks Legislature for Tax Raise
I know that was reaching way, way back but he was the last Republican we ever had as a governor in this state.
I guess I could go back to talking about Ted Bundy. Did you know that Ralph Munro donated to his defense fund when they finally arrested him. What can you say, he had good ideas. Bundy also went to the 1968 Republican Convention in Miami as a delegate for ... Nelson Rockerfeller. No, can't make such stuff up.
So, yeah while we can never be one hundred percent sure of something that never happened, I think I have provided more evidence to my thesis of "little change" than you, Amused by Evil have provide to support your belief of Great Change.
Actually you haven't provided anything to support your claim, Amused by evil.
Heh. Good God, it looks like my "spawn of Gore" and "Luke "I know everybody" Russert" thing didn't go over too well with somebody.
"Here's the truth. YOU ARE NOT MERELY WRONG. You are EVIL. Oh, I can point out so so many ways history has revealed you are evil but I don't feel like it today.
Don't mistake my hatred towards the GOP as agreeing with you. Not ever"
Too funny. I see what you mean about you abandoning all logic and embracing the hate. Well done, F'tard.
So let me see if I've got this right. When confronted with evil.., oh, wait, I should use CAPS like you did. OK, let's try again. When contronted with EVIL like myself, your response is to incessantly flap your trap? Indeed, it appears that your response to having the ULTIMATE EVIL threatening America laughing in your face is to whine, whine, and then whine some more. How intimidating. Oh my, I just might faint. In the face of such resolve I'll certainly abamdon my EVIL plans to destroy America. You betcha!
Look, Tough-Guy, if you want to be threatening to Zatoichi, the Blind Swordsman, you're definitely gonna have to grow a pair. You showing up without balls just isn't cutting it. Sorry to have to lay that one on ya, but that's just the way it is.
"Yeah, just like the observation "politicians lie"."
It's easy to euphemize anything until nothing means anything any longer.
Doing so creates a trap that makes things seem as if they are the same when they are actually quite different. Respecting changes between one party policy and another, you didn't PROVE anything, you only made a very weak case for an inference based on a rash generalization.
Your views are represented best by your statement of belief that "a quick death for the GOP this year," might possibly result in a new party for 2016 that will somehow be different from what we have today. How does that work?
Such a statement reveals a lack of appreciation of political reality. Party's are just people and all of those in the Republican Party are reacting to social pressures in a time of tremendous change and shared cultural pandemonium. We cannot control what people believe and we are outnumbered in this state. However, in the last two years literally billions of dollars of spending was stopped cold by a combination of Republicans including Joe Fain.
Based on her record of Democrat spending habits and her stated intentions, Joe Fain's Democrat predecessor Claudia Kaufmann would have approved every single item of spending that came along.
THIS EXAMPLE OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PARTIES IS AS PROFOUND AND SUBSTANTIVE AS IT GETS. If you are in fact a conservative you had best hope Joe Fain is re-elected.
Finally, I marvel at the naiveté of your observation that "Talk is cheap, but even in the talk in 2012 there wasn't much difference between McKenna and Inslee." I was irritated at how Rob McKenna ran his campaign but it was an election campaign. Running for office is one thing and policy making is entirely another.
I hated the fact that he was forced to play the "moderate" parsing game, but had he simply appealed to conservatives ON YOUR TERMS he may as not have run for office at all. Besides, assuming you are actually a conservative, McKenna lost more because YOU and your ilk stayed home than because of liberal votes against him.
McKenna would be so much better in nearly every way than Inslee it is laughable and to believe that "NOTHING would have changed if Rob McKenna had won the election" is a grotesque absurdity with no basis in reality.
Your emotional attachment to supposed ideological purity is short-sighted and why Republicans lose in Washington State. The Republican Party is not going anywhere and it can win if you and those like you wise up.
Thanks for the reply.
You argue, "I don't find evil amusing." Then you write, "I don't get a laugh out of all the destruction they have caused in my state and my country. So, yeah Charlie Brown (may I call you Charlie) not funny indeed." [sic]
I agree with you that there is evil involved.
But if everyone that allowed themselves to be taken in by a wrong idea is "evil," YOU (and I) are both (along with humanity) totally screwed.
Most of those on the left are confused, and some are truly evil, but they are doomed.
Some while simply beyond reach because they are lazy thinkers make humorous attempts at defending views that have no merit.
I also hope that Republicans are conservative and realize that many of them are not.
Being about masses of people, politics is more complex than you represent or seem to acknowledge.
Please recognize that (aside from electoral fraud) it is the aggregate of manifested views that produces election results.
Divisive attitudes like those expressed here only work to make life more difficult for all of us that care.
I understand your angst and embrace your basic concerns.
" I was irritated at how Rob McKenna ran his campaign but it was an election campaign. Running for office is one thing and policy making is entirely another. "
That's my point. He would have been much weaker in policy making than he portrayed himself during his campaign. And he didn't really portray himself as being much stronger than Inslee to begin with. It was hard to find much difference between what he was saying and what Inslee was saying.
So if he would be even weaker than he was in campaign mode that equals "little difference"
As for Claudia Kaufmann would have approved every single item of spending that came along. It's not like every item of spending didn't pass without her vote. It's easy to vote no when you know it's going to pass anyway. This is what we are seeing with McConnell as a result of him having a primary challenge.
Now, if there was a chance of the spending not being passed, I think you would see the politician vote differently. It's all choreographed. As long as there's enough votes to get the thing passed anyway they allow some people for political reasons vote against it.
Voting against something knowing it is going to pass anyway, isn't changing policies. It's just game playing.
But back to whether McKenna's policies being much different than Inslee, I think I have proven you wrong by proving a) McKenna's campaign rhetoric wasn't much different than Inslee's to begin with and McKenna once out of campaign mode would have been much weaker than even that (hard to imagine as it is) and b) our last Republican governor had a policy much like what you are criticizing Inslee has having.
So, sorry, most all of so called proof you supplied actually strengthened my thesis.
I get the whole yeah, politicians lie but not my politicians, I mean the other ones thing. But no, all politicians lie. Even yours. They see it as 'part of the game." But of course to us out there it's not a game but that is how they see it as.
Come on we have seen that the Republicans are great when they are the opposition party at being "against spending" because that is when their vote doesn't matter one way or the other. But when they have control and their vote does matter they spend almost as fast as the Democrats do. That is what we saw nationally in Bush's administration when Republicans held both the House and the Senate as well as the White House.
You have still maintained your "blockhead" status.
I know how ironic it is but if the Republicans take the Senate in Olympia then many of these politicians who you so praise for voting against spending would actually start voting for the spending they had previously been voting against. That is if they aren't in a tough district. If after counting noses they have a few votes left over they will allow those who might find themselves in tougher races to vote against the spending.
But of course just like with McKenna it's going to solely be a matter of speculation. The Republicans are going to get creamed this year. The tea party is looking for revenge and no, they aren't no Charlie Brown!
"So if he would be even weaker than he [McKenna] was in campaign mode that equals 'little difference.'"
That's your point?
The fact that you fail to comprehend the complete nonsense in such a claim (even as a liberal sophist) is truly amusing.
Thanks for your pathetically humorous reply.
Nationally, because of the problems associated with ObamaCare and the unbelievable serial dishonesty of a President totally disinclined to tell the truth, and damage to individuals it produces, Americans will change the political landscape in 2014 by retaining the Republican majority in the House of Representatives and winning a Republican Senate Majority.
2014 will turn the tide against the left decisively and Obama's garbage will damage the Democrat party for many years to come.
This will affect elections in Washington State and help Republicans by solidifying the positive relationship they have with the Tea Party coalition and the moderate and conservative wings of the party.
Some hack democrat nitwits like "Steve" will goof around and pretend otherwise because he believes he can damage the right through pretense, but that will only be amusing for the rest of us.
Steve, no one on the right is as blindly arbitrary, and stupid as you.
But thanks for your reply.
I speak from the position of experience. Of two decades. I speak from the position of what has happened in the past.
You just speak from the position of partnership. You have no credibility. You have not shown how IN POLICY, not in rhetoric, not in games playing, but in actual results that reflect themselves in actual changes in public police how the Republicans are different than the Democrats. In fact the last Republican Governor in this state had a public policy much the same as what you area accusing Inslee of having.
Here's the link to an article about our last Republican governor.
"positive relationship they have with the Tea Party coalition and the moderate and conservative wings of the party"
You are insane? Positive? Yeah it was in 2010 but today?
Perhaps you missed what Boehner has said. He just declared war on the Tea Party.
You obviously aren't a part of the tea party. I am not either. But I have talked to many of them and they are pissed! You can pretend reality isn't reality (you are pretty good at that) but I actually go to their get togethers and their anger this year is totally directed against the Republicans. Yeah they hate Obama and they want to impeach him, but Obama isn't up this year and I doubt they are going to have any impeachment committees to keep them entertained, And for that..they blame THE REPUBLICANS. So even their hatred for Obama is turned in to hate against the GOP for not "holding him accountable".
Instead of talking ABOUT the tea party, you should have been talking TO them. Perhaps then you wouldn't be so clueless.
"Some hack democrat nitwits like "Steve""
He doesn't strike me as being a democrat. I was under the impression he wanted to destroy you, who he seems to see as an establishment Republican, to get to the likes of me, an EVIL Democrat whatever he thinks I am. Whichever or whatever, Amused, you're coming across as being much more sane and level-headed than Steve in this thread.
78. Americans will change the political landscape in 2014 by retaining the Republican majority in the House of Representatives and winning a Republican Senate Majority.
Amused by evil, you know what I love about Sound Politics?
It's their archive. They keep these discussions for years literally. I can actually go back to see what people like you were saying in 2012, in 2008, in 2006.
Election day 2014, I can go back to this very post (I have bookmarked it) and look back to what you have said.
And that day, mark my words I do plan god willing to go to this page. I just wish there wasn't a time limit on commenting, but still I can go back to this post.
For then it will indeed be history. Either indeed the facts the reality would have either confirmed my position or yours.
And if I am wrong, yeah, I will admit it. Wow, I sure didn't have that one figured right I will think. It won't bother me.
But I won't be wrong. Because I never am. Like I said I can go back to what I was saying in 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012 and yeah, while all you people were talking about how great it will be WHEN McCain is elected President, or WHEN Romney is elected President, I said, no that's not going to happen. I was right, and you were wrong, but you never ever admit it. You just continue to go along making the same mistakes over and over again in the true definition of insanity.
By the way, do you think Senator McGavick would be reelected this year? Oh, that's right, he lost in 2006, just like I had said would happen.
The number of times I can go back on Sound Politics and read where I predicted something correctly is many indeed. If I get 2014 wrong it would just be the first missed prediction and yeah I can live with that.
But I know somewhere out there in the future I am reading this post right now and saying Yep I called it. And you, amused by evil, are you reading this post after the election? Or are you going well, sure 2014 was bad but we are going to take it all back in 2016.
Let history be the judge. It has ruled in my favor so many times that if this one time I am wrong I can live with that. But I wasn't wrong, see. I told you about 11 months ago this is what was going to happen, and this is what did happen (that was just a post on behalf of futureself because I won't be allowed to post that comment then for there's some kind of time limit on posting)
You are still a blockhead and history have proven you again, so, so wrong. But thanks for playing. Any predictions about 2016 yet?
Zatoichi that whole Republican Establishment being "human shields" for the Democrats, is an apt, be it crudely apt analogy indeed.
I have another term for them besides RINOS. Undocumented Democrats.
Yeah, you will get yours Zatoichi, but first we have to get rid of the Republicans. It happened before. It is actually how the Republicans got started. We had to first destroy the Whigs before we could go after those Damn slavery loving Democrats. So, yeah next year when the GOP is in rubble and you are just oh, so joyful. Just remember this.
The GOP had to fail. It was the only way we could get at you. As joyful as you might be I am so so much more so because I don't have the GOP hanging around the neck anymore. Yeah, I am finally able to come at you directly!
At # 76 Steve writes;
"I speak from the position of experience. Of two decades. I speak from the position of what has happened in the past."
And that proves?
Though his conclusions are obviously based upon emotionally concocted bull3hit, and supposedly from the position of two decades of experience, we should be persuaded of what?
More crap including the claim that "even their [Tea Party members] hatred for Obama is turned in to [sic] hate against the GOP for not "holding him accountable."
Who believes this utterly meaningless anecdotal clap-trap?
I don't because I know better.
My credibility is not at issue here steve.
But thanks for the reply.
You just speak from the position of partnership.
Sorry, I meant partisanship. You have failed to show me where any change in party leadership in the House in Olympia, heck I went back as far as Spellman and still no real change in policy despite him being a Republican.
So, no, history some of it recorded on this very blog has proven you wrong time and time again. But thanks for making your prediction. In the past here people predicted that McGavick would become an US Senator. They were wrong. People here made a prediction that McCain was going to defeat Obama (yes,you can read the talk here on Sound Politics archives) they were wrong again. Romney our next President, McKenna our next Governor all said in 2012 right here, and all with me saying the exact opposite. I was right and you were wrong.
So yeah, if I was wrong in 2014 oh, well. But I won't be. I have never been in the past. History has validated what I have said and has condemned you!
Oh, you put your credibility on the line here. Remember " Americans will change the political landscape in 2014 by retaining the Republican majority in the House of Representatives and winning a Republican Senate Majority."
That's putting your credibility on the line just like people put their credibility on the line in 2006 when they called McGavick our next Senator.
And just like with them I will be able to look back and see if you were right or wrong.
And if you were right, I will say, wow, didn't see that one coming. Where do we go from here?
Now if you were wrong (which given my track record is far more likely) what will you say?
The Tea party is mad at the Republicans for not holding impeachment hearings. Their hatred for Obama has indeed turned into hatred towards Republicans that they now perceive as protecting him. I know tea party people. I meet and talk with them. You obviously do not. You seem to live in this little bubble of yours.
Here' just for the heck of it I will write an apology. It will make it look even all the sillier when I am actually proven right.
Amused, I have to say, I am amazed. You were right. I had predicted a strong defeat for Republican incumbents this year as you know. I said the only way to minimize such a defeat was if a lot of incumbents were taken out in the primary, which I didn't really believe would happen.
Well, Boehner was successful in destroying tea party challenges in primaries (that I actually think will happen) but still when it came up to November the Republicans convinced enough of you to "run to kick the football" and as well was able to bring enough others along to indeed not only keep the House but actually win the Senate too. Not in my wildest dreams did I think that would happen. So, yes, your correct prediction did actually gain you a lot of credibility in my eyes.
So, here's my question? What's next. You have not won tonight, because for us winning isn't measured in election night victories but indeed how such victories effect public policies, you know legislation, spending and the like. Too many of us for too many years have seen winning elections as an ends to itself an not a means to an ends. But if the same types of policies still come out of DC than we have really lost. Real victory or defeat is too early to tell.
Surely now the Mantra will turn into we can't fulfill our promises until we take back the White House, and sure I see some validity in that. Though I can't help but remember that there was a time in the last Bush administration (Please, God please let that be the LAST Bush administration - Read Our Lips No New Bushes) where the Republicans actually did have the House and the Senate and that opportunity was squandered with nothing substantive coming out of it.
But my question is who do you see out there with the energy and spirit to drive our policy in the White House. Cruz has proven himself a flash in the pan, too many can't vote for a Canadian (go figure). Chris Christie is still being backed by the elite but do you really think he could win up against Elisabeth Warren (who I think will get it on the Demons side) or even a Biden?
Well, again you were right and I was wrong so congrats. But I just want to stress NOTHING WAS WON TONIGHT. Only now that campaign mode (as Scott Brown called it) is over can we see in the days, weeks and months ahead if these politicians were sincere in their promises.
I know you have a hard time believing it but, it has been known on occasion for politicians actually to lie.
So no, don't see tonight as a victory. It has the POTENTIAL to be a victory but winning a campaign in and of itself only benefits the person elected and the staff that they will have. For the rest of us there is now only hope, hope that these election gains will turn into something real in regards to the direction of our country, but that is yet to be seen. In the past it didn't really lead anywhere. I remember the joy I had way back now (gosh am I that old) 20 years ago when I personally saw for the first time in almost 50 years the House of Representatives come under Republican control.
I didn't want to be naive. I didn't think change was going to be immediate but I did think it would be a change in direction. Imagine my disappointment 4-6 years later that instead of getting gradually better the Republican House was actually spending much more than the Democrat House that had preceded it. Again, wasn't expecting overnight miracles but indeed I was expecting better than this.
So if you wonder where my cynicism is coming from on a night that you would think someone like me should have great joy, well it because of the failed promises of a night not too unlike this precisely two decades ago.
But again, my guarded congratulations. I have always said I wanted to be proven wrong. It has been hard going on the slim hope I have been going on. But again I am going to reserve most of my hope until I see what occurs in the weeks and months ahead. Tonight is not our victory. Yes, It gives us the potential of a great victory but such potential has been lost before. Only when election night victory translates to a REAL CHANGE IN DIRECTION have we really won.
But you did win in the sense of your prediction. Yeah, I thought Republicans were going to be totally defeated. First when Boehner started attacking the Tea Party and then Ryan with the whole cutting aid to wounded vets, and then that whole immigration mess last spring. Yeah, I did see this as bad if not worse than 1992 or 2008 and I was indeed wrong. Its the first time I have been wrong, but indeed I was wrong and you were right. I just hope for the sake of our country it leads to something positive because like I said 1994 really didn't.
This is a blog. There's no winning or losing; just exchanging ideas/insults etc.
I hope to learn from it and sometimes pick up a little something but not much these days.
Mostly it is a way of comparing notes with others and finding out a little of what they are thinking and believing.
What I know about you is only what I can tease out of your contributions and you know almost nothing about me except what you conclude as my comments clash with your opinions. All that matters here is substantive discourse.
Politics involves the never ceasing changing opinions and proclivities of an electorate - the most unpredictable thing there is. The best anyone can do is make educated guesses. Most people are not really interested in actual politics per se and view it in a shallow way -- as a contest of personalities, appearances, and popularity. They need to simplify and objectify (demonize and disparage)it to bring it down to their level. Then they can dispense with it and go back to their sports or whatever. Obama was elected and re-elected because he is black and Bush because his alternate was insane. Still people voted for Al Gore anyway. What kind of people would do that?
Largely lazy, unthinking, childish people whose agenda shifts with the wind and ever changing hair-styles. Some lazy thinkers on the right attribute causes and attributes to others and cherry pick "proof" of their theses from the internet. And there is plenty of nonsense to pick from. However, no narrative is more amusing to watch than the illusory ad hoc world of the "they are all alikers."
You aim in the wrong direction. Any political party is simply an expression of aggregate opinions and proclivities. There are liberals in the Republican party and there always will be. I disagree with many of them but that doesn't mean the party itself is bad.
Thanks for your comments.
"Zatoichi that whole Republican Establishment being "human shields" for the Democrats"
Delusional. If the GOP establishment are human shields for anything, it'd be Wall Street.
"Yeah, I am finally able to come at you directly!"
Oh, how I'd love to see that, Steve. Sadly, it'll never happen. You'll never get past the likes of Amused by Liberals and Amused by Liberals will never get past Wall Street. In case you haven't been paying attention, your beloved TP just got smacked down hard, and it wasn't the left who did it to you. Apparently the boys from WS don't like what they're seeing and they finally did something about you. Your plug has been pulled and you don't even know it. With that, I get to witness your death throes play out. God, how I love it!
.."is short-sighted "
Yes, I admit it, we are short sighted. We see the threat as immediate and we feel like we are backed up to a cliff we no more room to retreat.
We played the "long hawl" strategy for years The Republicans saying if we can only win this, if we can only win that. And we DO win this, and we DO win that, but still, still we get the Republicans pulling the football on us and us falling on our backs.
Hell many of us are building "bug out" bags. Now I haven't gone that far, but no, I have realized that this "long term" mindset, nope, tried that and it led us here. We are really on no compromise mode here because we don't have much more room to compromise. There's an urgency here that the Republican elite doesn't seem to understand.
Look, this "wait for another day" tactic is just another lie from the Republican Establishment. We are like those pioneers who put on their covered wagons "the West or Bust" A long term strategy may have made sense to us in 1994 but it's not 1994 anymore.
That's just the way it is now. And if the Republican party thinks it can win without its conservative base, well I guess that is what they are going to try to do this year. And if they are successful in doing that I might as well just "bug off" and go off the grid or move to Belize or something like that because the days of America will have been done.
Interesting commentary below. What does Obama and the Tea Party have in common.
Steve, your link didn't work but I was able to go to the site anyway. I didn't see the article you referenced but I did find this.
"the firing of Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson for being a Bible-believing Christian"
First off, the Duck guy wasn't fired, he was suspended. That your blogger hero begins with a blatant lie isn't a very good start, now is it? To continue, suspended because he's a Bible-believing Christian? Really? By the network that just aired "The Bible"? By the network that somehow overlooked suspending the rest of the cast of Christians on Duck Dynasty, let alone any other show they air? Your Steve Deace is obviously a loon. That you would link to that site doesn't speak well of you, Steve.
88. This is a blog. There's no winning or losing;
Yeah, you would say that since you have always LOST.
My predictions have always become true.
By the way on another issue. You know if I can sum up the biggest misunderstanding you in the Republican establishment in one way it would be this way.
We're not debating strategy in the Republican Party, we're debating the survival of the Republic.
There's an urgency to the tea party that you never got. We are in your words "short sighted" because we see the threat as immediate and because we just don't have any more room to compromise.
Look there are two things that will be at work next year. There are people like me who the tea party was Republicans last chance (although I personally was already through with the GOP and thought things would go with the Tea Party the way it did). So yeah, we have been running at the football for years, always having Lucy (Republican Establishment) pulling it out from us a the last moment, us falling on our backs, and the tea party was our okay, we will do it one last time. We did it. Same thing happened - we are out of it! We won't vote next year. Not in the general at least.
And then you had your people for whom it was never about the future of the GOP but the future of our Republican. They were never involved in Party Politics before, and this year, oh yeah they will vote. They are seeking revenge.
Here try this link, first hour.
The duck dynasty thing is just another example of the immediacy of the threat we see ourselves in. No we are in survival mode. We are in "or bust" mode. We are not in may be when we win the Senate or maybe when we win the White House or maybe when we...
And we certainly don't give a damn about the future of the GOP. We are too worried about the survival of our Republic.
Our backs are against a cliff. So, no we have no further room to compromise. It is Tea Party or Bust.
Oh, yeah, we are short sighted. We are not looking out long term (except those of us with our bug out bags). The immediacy of the situation is too real.
It might not be YOUR strategy. But it is a real strategy. Survival IS a strategy.
And for us, it's not about the future of the Republican party. We admit it. It is about the future of the Republic!
Zatoichi there's a storm abrewing. You can only push for so long so hard until you get a reaction. I know you aren't a Christian I guess in all honestly I am not either, but that Bible sure has some good quotes.
Here's one you should keep in mind - "They that sow the wind, shall reap the whirlwind"
You have done so much evil for so long, and yeah I have become your student yoda. The monster that I have become to defeat you is one of YOUR creation. I have watched your techniques and have adopted time to my own. What you have dished out to others, we will soon return to you ten fold (I am still not "there" yet with necklacing but I am sure I will be pretty soon).
But before you, this coming year, I have to take down Amused. But yeah, you are next!
"If your opponent has a conscience, then follow Gandhi. But if your enemy has no conscience, like the American Left, then follow Bonhoeffer."
93. Nothing new here.
Oh, and what I have learned from you Amused. Supporting a Left Wing Democrat for Governor rather than a moderate Republican...
Yeah. after all the things YOU have done to conservatives, yeah, I have learned a lot from you too.
So, be afraid, be afraid. You only cite "party loyalty" when it came to your candidates. You always stabbed ours in the back, even when that means publicly supporting a Democrat. So yeah, you created me too. And you are going to have every betrayal, every back stabbing moment that you did to us come back on you this year!
It's Open Season on RINOS. And if that means the Republican party is totally destroyed in Washington State, then well I say GREAT! Bring it on!
And those "Tea Party" Senators. They couldn't win an election without tea party help. What makes you think they can win one when the tea party has now turned against them!
"the survival of our Republic"
To that I'd say that is indeed ours, you, me, Amused by Liberals, MikeBoyScout, the anarchists from Oregon who I felt like offing a few years back, even that stupid pathological liar, Pudge. Yeah, even him. Everybody. While that presents problems, it also presents opportunity. It's all in how you look at it. One thing I've seen through the years is that, while a positive view might not end in positive results, a negative view definitely goes nowhere. I'm saying that yours seems to me a negative view of the future and so that's likely how you're going to experience it.
"We are in "or bust" mode."
At first I thought you were talking revolution, but then you brought up bug-out bags. I had to do a search on that one! After looking at that, I struggle to see where you're coming from. It seems that you're anticipating something to happen, inspiring you to bug out, but I'm not clear on what "cliff" event that would be.
Back in 1968 I didn't think things would end well at all, especially coming as I did from an extremely poor inner-city background. Me, a white guy, was partying with Seattle's Black Panthers. I had visions of brown hordes and me with them! No bug-out-bags for me. My survival strategy was a Stevens sawed-off 12 ga. Good God! But you know what. None of those dark visions ever came to pass. Not even close. It all seems so silly now. If I were to put money on it, I'd bet that's the way it will be with you too, at least as far as it not coming true.
"I know you aren't a Christian I guess in all honestly I am not either, but that Bible sure has some good quotes."
Actually, I am a Christian, but since I have no inclination to impose my faith on others, there are folks folks here who will tell you that I'm not a REAL Christian. Whatever. But you're right, the Bible has some great quotes, but one can also come up with some of the most ridiculous quotes imaginable. I suppose that latter thought doesn't score me any points with our right-wing Bible thumpers either.
Out of curiousity, are you one of those Dominionist/Reconstructionists?
"Out of curiousity, are you one of those Dominionist/Reconstructionists?"
Wait, I think you already answered that with "I guess in all honestly I am not either". Sorry.
"I have to take down Amused. But yeah, you are next!"
Well, okay, if you must. But how about we have a beer first? And if Amused by Liberals is still kicking, maybe you wouldn't mind if we asked him to come along as well.
Where you were in 1968 Zatoichi is where we are now in our mindset. All except the revolutionary part. For all our talk we aren't for violent overthrow but if you keep pushing us there is no telling what we will do in our self defense.
The whole "bug out" and "Off the grid" comments that is really a response to the thing I have heard the Republican establishment say about me since I have gotten involved in politics. They can treat me like crap because I have nowhere to go. They are the only game in town.
That's my reminder that I don't have to play the game (which for us was never a game to begin with). We can and will stay home and watch things crumple around us.
Look the Republican left mirrors you in so many ways. They are hypocritical. They Talk party loyalty while conspiring with the Democrats when they see it's in their interests. They talk "speak no ill" when it comes to them but they are more than willing speak ill about us.
So, we say no more. After their 2010 betrayal of the Tea Party (like I said I was done with them before that) we will not "run to kick the football" anymore. For us it was always more about the future of the Republic rather than the future of the Republican party.
This civil war was a long time coming and mirrors my own experience with the Republicans. I didn't get involved in politics before 1992 so I don't have all the warm fuzzies about being part of the Reagan revolution. No to me perhaps my most defining experience, the experience that shaped my opinion of the Republicans the most was the Whole Sid Morrison backing Mike Lowry thing. It was my first but not nearly the last experience I had with the Republican establishment stabbing us in the back.
If the Republican Party goes and a new party forms perhaps there I could find the loyalty I could never place with the GOP. Of course any party is still going to be imperfect because it is going to be made up of humans so you should never put your full loyalty to any political party. I am an American, that's supposed to drive my support for any political party, not the other way around.
Too many people treat their political party like it was a sports team. Also they use their political party as their main social outlet which traps them.
This whole "where will they go" line worked on a previous generation of Conservatives because they saw voting as a duty which they have to participate in regardless of result. Our generation not so much. We will not be Charlie Brown. If our participating isn't working, we will not participate, and a pox on all them.
Duck Dynasty is just another push Leftist society is giving us and like I said we are about all out of railing space as it is. It's a reminder of the immediacy of our situation.
I have a hard time forgiving the Tea Party for them re-electing McCain. It seems like each time we have this whole process we don't learn from the past experience but instead have to be "freshly betrayed".
But if you look from experience I think the whole Republican Revolution Plus United Stand movement was much stronger than the Tea Party was. So each time when opposition rises it is weaker than the last.
So, no time is not on our side. We don't have another decade or so to wait on the faint promise that "this time it will be different."
2014 must be the year of payback against the Republicans. It took from 1994-2006 for us to finally say ENOUGH last time. We don't have that much time left anymore.
"My predictions have always become true."
When you root for failure and do nothing for success then I don't doubt that your predictions "always" come true.