No Exit Strategy for Right on Shutdown

Russ Douthat makes a very interesting point about those Tea Party Republican legislators who have made sure the government would shut down in a temper tantrum over health care reform: They don’t have a way out. Obama and the Democrats are not going to cave on Obamacare and they know it. This is all posturing. But if it doesn’t actually work, if it doesn’t achieve anything, couldn’t that backfire even with their own base?

But even if you grant that this strategy isn’t entirely unreasonable (which isn’t the same as agreeing that it’s wise – I don’t), the problem for Republicans is that it has become deeply entangled – in part because of deliberate rhetorical choices by figures like Ted Cruz — with the genuinely unreasonable, irresponsible, and self-destructive theory I described above, in which a shutdown is actually a way to get Obamacare defunded now, and all the party needs to do is stick to its guns and eventually the White House will buckle, the health care law will fall, and the republic will be saved. The savvier, saner, “let’s only threaten a shutdown” plan, in which brinksmanship is a tactic to highlight differences and prove commitment, only works if it persuades both base voters and swing voters that the party is absolutely committed to repealing Obamacare without persuading the latter that the party is absolutely bonkers. But if the base has been told true commitment should lead to actual legislative victory (and that this might be the “last chance” to stop Obamacare), then merely threatening a shutdown, or letting one happen for a few days and then cutting a deal, is as likely to disillusion conservative voters heading in to 2014 as it is to mobilize them. And if the G.O.P. doesn’t want to disillusion them, then it doesn’t have an obvious way to back off or quickly make a deal – in which case the party is risking a real debacle with non-base voters, who might forgive a brief shutdown but probably won’t forgive Republicans if it turns into a lurching political and economic crisis.

Right now, then, a kind of sour spot seems like a pretty plausible outcome for Republicans: A shutdown that lasts just long enough to convince swing voters that the G.O.P. can’t be trusted with the reins of government, but also ends with the party’s grassroots convinced that they’ve been sold out by their leaders once again. And because that sour spot is so plausible, and has been for some time, it’s hard to escape the impression that even the “reasonable” case for G.O.P. brinksmanship is only reasonable if the goal mostly just to increase the pro-shutdown faction’s power within the party, irrespective of what that means for either the actual repeal of Obamacare or for Republican prospects in the next few national elections.

Paul Waldman goes further, noting a phenomenon that is at the core of right-wing politics these days: If you didn’t get what you wanted, you only have to become more pure, more strident, more militant.

That’s because the idea that conservatism can never fail, it can only be failed, extends beyond ideology to its tactical extension, eternal and maximal opposition to Barack Obama and everything he wants to do. Fighting Obama is a strategy that can never fail. If failure happens, it can only be because we didn’t fight him hard enough.

Once this is all over, they’ll be telling everyone the same old story. If only the party had been stronger, if only Boehner had stood firm, if only we had kept the government closed for another week or another month, everyone would have seen we were right, Obama would have been crippled for the remainder of his term, we would have won a smashing victory in the 2014 mid-term elections, and the blow that led to Obamacare’s inevitable death would have been struck. But we were betrayed by Boehner and the other cowards and quislings.

I wouldn’t even be surprised if come 2015, where you stood on the shutdown becomes a key litmus test Tea Party activists apply to GOP presidential contenders.

I think that’s exactly what is going to happen. The extremists are simply immune to political reality, as zealots always are.

51 comments on this post.
  1. marcus:

    ZOMG! Douthat said something interesting! Stop the fucking presses! Insert broken clock analogy here…

  2. Mr Ed:

    Fanaticism is the end of rational thought, it precludes compromise. Fortunately paradise for the tea party is not being primaried or we we see even more extreme tactics

  3. Reginald Selkirk:

    Remember that inability to admit that one was wrong is a prominent trait of the authoritarian psychology.

  4. colnago80:

    If the Rethuglican crazies force a default of the government’s debts in 2 weeks, the consequences of such a strategy will make the consequences of the shutdown pale in comparison.

    It is my contention that the crazies actually want the collapse of the US economy, under the theory that Obama and the Democrats will be held responsible and Rethuglicans will triumph in 2014 and 2016, much like Frankenberger emerged after the 1932 elections in Germany as the head of the largest party and eventually was appointed Chancellor by the senile President von Hindenburg.

  5. Gregory in Seattle:

    They don’t WANT a way out: the “leaders” of the Tea Party have said, publicly and repeatedly, that the shut down was itself the goal. One does not develop an exist strategy for how to extricate yourself from a game you’ve won.

  6. David Marjanović:

    Exit strategy? Didn’t Bachmann tweet that a miracle from God was going to come?

    Frankenberger

    Where did you get that name from?

  7. laurentweppe:

    A shutdown that lasts just long enough to convince swing voters that the G.O.P. can’t be trusted with the reins of government, but also ends with the party’s grassroots convinced that they’ve been sold out by their leaders once again

    Another possibility: a shutdown that convince swing voters that the GOP is nihilistic enough to be willing to starve the country as punishment for not voting them in office, who then vote for right-wing politicians to end the pain while pretending to espouse the tea-party rethoric in order to disguise their own submissiveness.

  8. MyPetSlug:

    This is sort of what I was saying yesterday. What incentive do the Republicans have to actually cut a deal now or anytime soon? Any Republicans who would vote to re-fund the government would be branded traitors unless they are getting some major concessions. The sane Republicans desperately need the Democrats to throw them a bone so they can claim some type of victory and make a deal, but that just isn’t going to happen (nor should it). So, the shutdown could be for a long time.

    Part of the thinking of shutting down the government when Clinton was president was that he was weak kneed. That if they went ahead and actually shut it down, he would blink first. That didn’t happen and the Republicans got the worst of it, but I wonder if that’s part of the thinking here. Obama was so bad at negotiating his first term. He gave up major concessions with the first debt ceiling faux crisis. Maybe he’ll blink again? Again, not going to happen this time. The stakes are too high for the Democrats to give in and even if they did so, this would give the green light to keep taking hostages at every opportunity.

    Also, I love how Fox news is framing this. The Republicans want to negotiate, it’s *Obama* who has said he will not compromise. As if merely funding the government is itself a concession on their part so Obama should give on his end.

    And I totally concur about the litmus test. I think *every* Republican candidate will have been for the shutdown and they will all be bragging about how much they were for it. And if it were up to them, the government would have never re-opened etc.

  9. arthurhunt:

    Perhaps the “moderates” in the GOP think that the best way to survive being primaried is to allow the Tea Party to crash the country. It may be harder for a TPer to run on an “I hate Obama AND the country” platform than just an “I hate Obama” one.

  10. scienceavenger:

    The base is not going to hold the shutdown against the GOP because they think Obama and the Democrats are responsible for it. They are tightly sealed in their bubble, no reality allowed. And when they get their asses handed to them again (because you can’t win much with 28% of the vote), they’ll blame George Soros, voter fraud, and of course, ACORN.

  11. colnago80:

    David Marjanovic @ #6

    I have posted several comments on this issue previously. The issue is that Adolf’s father Alois has no father cited on his birth certificate. In fact, Alois was christened Alois Schickelgruber after his mother’s maiden name. She later married one Johann Heidler who changed the family name to Hitler.

    The issue is, who was Alois’s father? There is no evidence that Maria Schickelgruber even knew Heidler at the time of Alois’ birth. The speculation in some quarters is that Alois’ biological father was one Leopold Frankenberger, the 19 year old son of the Frankenberger family who allegedly knocked up Maria, who allegedly was a maid in the Frankenberger household at the time.

    By the way, when I was an undergraduate, we always referred to the Fuhrer as Schickelgruber.

  12. raven:

    I don’t see that the Tea Party has any plans or ideas.

    This is pure nihilism. They shut the government down because they can.

    1. Obamacare simply isn’t that big a deal. It’s a tweak to our present system, written by the insurance companies and medical establishment.

    2. The idea here is to extend medical insurance coverage to a few more people. They aren’t even all poor. The self employed and preexisting conditions will be a major group.

    So what is wrong with people getting the health care they need? As many have pointed out, destroying the USA to keep people from buying private insurance is silly at best and sickening at worst.

    3. There isn’t much popular hatred of Obamacare either. The GOP base are already heavy users of one provision, putting adult children on their polices up to age 26.

  13. raven:

    Hard to say how this will end.

    Obamacare has already started. Enrollment started yesterday and interest was high. So high that a lot of their websites crashed. Other provisions are already in effect and being used.

    The big one will be the October 17 debt ceiling battle. If the government can’t borrow, they will have to default on their bonds, trillions of dollars of which are held by the Chinese and Japanese. Interests will go up, our credit rating will go down, and the US will end up in recession.

    1. So what can you do when enough voters vote to destroy their own country? It’s not the fault of the drunken Tea Partiers in congress, it is the fault of the voters that put them there.

    Nothing that I can see but make plans to survive it.

  14. tbp1:

    “couldn’t that backfire even with their own base?”

    Your mouth to the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s ears.

  15. Nick Gotts:

    Frankenberger

    Where did you get that name from? – David Marjanović

    He got it from Hans Frank, the Nazi Governor-General of Poland under Hitler, and also Hitler’s lawyer. After his capture by the Allies, Frank claimed that Hitler asked him in 1930 to investigate the parentage of his father Alois, and that he (Frank) had uncovered the possibility that Alois Hitler had been fathered by one Leopold Frankenberger, a Jew. There is no evidence other than Frank’s claim that such a person ever existed, let alone that he was Hitler’s grandfather; and of course even if he had been, Adolf Hitler never had any other legal name, and was never known by any other name, so there is no rational reason at all for referring to him as Frankenberger. It is in fact a classic antisemitic trope to allege that Hitler, or other top Nazis, had Jewish ancestry, but while colnago80 (aka slc1) is a deeply unpleasant individual who advocates genocide against the Iranian people, I have no reason to believe he is antisemitic. Possibly he thinks he’s showing how clever and sophisticated he is; silly pseudo-sophisticates sometimes try to show off by referring to Hitler as Schicklgruber, which was Alois Hitler’s name at birth (he was the illegitimate son of Maria Schicklgruber; his likely father, Johann Georg Hiedler, married Maria when Alois was 5, and Alois took his name – surname spellings were still somewhat variable in that time and place, as I expect you’re aware). So colnago80 perhaps thinks he’s showing how extra-specially super-sophisticated he is.

  16. Raging Bee:

    Thank you for that explanation, Nick — that makes his advocacy of “settlements to the far horizon” and nuking Iran SOOO much more credible! Because using an incorrect name for Hitler, based on a fishy rumor told by one person already charged with war crimes, shows a superior command of history (*eyeroll*).

  17. eric:

    I still think this can happen for a few days and then they can cut a deal. One key issue is reelection/saving face: once the shut down has gone on long enough that GOP congresscritters can go to their constituents and say “look, I fought hard for you” and win reelection on that position, it will end.

    I don’t think that’s certain, just possible. The big barrier to a short shutdown is Hastert rule: for Bohner to save face and look like he’s still in control, he can’t let a clean bill go to a vote until a majority of House GOPers say they support it. Now, a majority of GOPers might actually support such a bill, but very few of them are going to want to publicly admit it.

    Still, I’m hopeful. The GOP moderates basically need 17 “sacrifical lambs” to vote with the Dems to pass a clean bill. There’s 14 on record now who will do so (either out of ideology, stupidity, or because they feel safe about their chances of reelection). So they’re already really close in terms of passing such a bill and ending the shutdown. They just need to find a way to get by the Hastert rule, to bring it to the floor without most GOPers having to admit that they want it brought to the floor.

  18. Nick Gotts:

    Mano Singham links to an article by Charles P. Pierce which I think diagnoses the USA’s problems much better than Douthat or even Waldman:

    The true hell of it, though, is that you could see this coming down through the years, all the way from Ronald Reagan’s First Inaugural Address in which government “was” the problem, through Bill Clinton’s ameliorative nonsense about the era of big government being “over,” through the attempts to make a charlatan like Newt Gingrich into a scholar and an ambitious hack like Paul Ryan into a budget genius, and through all the endless attempts to find “common ground” and a “Third Way.” Ultimately, as we all wrapped ourselves in good intentions, a prion disease was eating away at the country’s higher functions. One of the ways you can acquire a prion disease is to eat right out of its skull the brains of an infected monkey. We are now seeing the country reeling and jabbering from the effects of the prion disease, but it was during the time of Reagan that the country ate the monkey brains.

  19. D. C. Sessions:

    I think that’s exactly what is going to happen. The extremists are simply immune to political reality, as zealots always are.

    And then what? When they reach the point where they’re obviously losing even the political clout that they have today?

    * Will they accept their marginal status (e.g. the last of the full sheet-wearing KKK?) Your premise seems to rule that out.
    * Will they continue the (proven futile) means that they have pursued to get to their current power? (More plausible, but surely at some point some of them will give up on those means, no?)
    * Will they adopt other means? (Do I need to spell these out?)

  20. D. C. Sessions:

    There’s 14 on record now who will do so [...] They just need to find a way to get by the Hastert rule, to bring it to the floor without most GOPers having to admit that they want it brought to the floor.

    Once Pelosi (who, unlike Boehner, can count votes before they go the floor) has 218 lined up, she can file a discharge petition and the Hastert Rule can go suck on a sewer pipe.

    My own guess is that she may already have them but is waiting for the best time to drop the bomb. That is one seriously canny politician and unlike Obama, she doesn’t seem to have a whole lot of romantic notions about the blood sport we call politics.

  21. Brain Hertz:

    The extremists are simply immune to political reality

    FIFY

  22. laurentweppe:

    The base is not going to hold the shutdown against the GOP because they think Obama and the Democrats are responsible for it

    The base is not going to hold the shutdown against the GOP because deep down, they want to punish the people who did not vote like them.

  23. d.c.wilson:

    Why would the wingnuts have an exit strategy when the shutdown was the end, not the means of their strategy?

  24. Scott Hanley:

    You have too little faith, Ed. God will certainly deliver them from bondage and if they’re only brave enough to hold to the path and push on between the walls of water, Pharaoh Obama will be destroyed behind them.

    They’re going to hate that next forty years in the wilderness, though.

  25. colnago80:

    Re Scott Hanley @ #24

    That was actually the highlight of the movie in my estimation.

  26. colnago80:

    Re D. C. Sessions @ #20

    Unlike Obama, Pelosi comes from a political family in Baltimore, the D’Alesandros. Her father was a Congresscritter from Maryland and a former mayor of Baltimore. Her brother is a former mayor of Baltimore. The Democrats in Baltimore play hardball and take no prisoners so she took lessons from hard-nosed politicos. There is nothing at all San Francisco in her makeup.

  27. colnago80:

    Re Nick Gotts @ #15

    The reason that there is no record of the Frankenberger family is because, after the Anschluss, Adolf had the records of his home town destroyed, both the church records and the records at the city hall.

    The claim that Leopold Frankenberger was Jewish is an inference because of the name. However, the Nazi ideologist, Alfred Rosenberg, which is often a Jewish name in the US, was known to have no Jewish ancestry. There are also non-Jews in Germany with names like Goldberg and Rosenthal (there’s a town in Germany named Rosenthal), which are usually Jewish names in the US. It is likely that the Frankenberger family, if it existed, was probably a mixed marriage so that Leopold was, at most, 1/2 Jewish, which would let Adolf off the hook according to the Nuremberg Laws.

    Re Raging Bee

    Actually, the name Frankenberger or Schickelgruber is no more incorrect then Hiedler or Hitler was as there is no evidence that the name was changed from the former to the latter legally. Hiedler apparently just started calling himself Hitler.

  28. Nick Gotts:

    colnago80@27, of course, provides no evidence for the existence of a Leopold Frankenberger apart from that I mentioned – the completely unsubstantiated claims of the Nazi Governor-General of Poland, Hans Frank. That’s because there is none. Frank also said that Frankenberger was a Jew, so there is no conceivable justification for accepting his word on the existence of Frankenberger while not accepting his word that Frankenberger was Jewish. As I said, Adolf Hitler never had any other name, and the name you have been known by all your life, and which has been used in all official documents concerning you is your correct name, so only pseudo-sophisticated fools think it clever to refer to him be any other name.

  29. martinc:

    Paul Waldman in the original post:

    “Fighting Obama is a strategy that can never fail. If failure happens, it can only be because we didn’t fight him hard enough.”

    “Fellows, we brought a HUGE amount of Stupid to bear, but we STILL haven’t stopped Obama.”

    “Clearly the problem is that we haven’t brought enough Stupid!”

    “Yes! Yes! We need to BRING MORE STUPID!!!”

  30. colnago80:

    Re Nick Gotts @ #28

    Now how could there be any records if Frankenberger had them all destroyed? He couldn’t have it be known that he might have Jewish ancestry, even if he was clean relative to the Nuremberg Laws. I would point out that his asshole buddy, Reinhard Heydrich, was known to have Jewish ancestry, and he would have been subject to the Nuremberg Laws if the fact became widely known; it was was suppressed by the muck da mucks in Berlin. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, especially then the evidence has been destroyed.

  31. DaveL:

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, especially then the evidence has been destroyed.

    The question is, in the absence of evidence, why would you eschew referring to a person by the legal name they used all their life, by which everybody else knows them, the name his father was using at the time of that person’s birth, in favor of using the name of someone merely speculated to be that person’s paternal grandfather?

    Barking.

    Mad.

  32. Nick Gotts:

    With every comment, colnago80 simply confirms what a fuckwit he is. Notice that he cannot dispute that the only evidence for the very existence of a Leopold Frankenberger is the word of Hans Frank. When records have been destroyed, then in the absence of credible external evidence, as in this case, we cannot know what was in them. If any additional grounds are needed for doubting the evidence of Hans Frank beyond the fact that he was the Nazi Governor-General of Poland, look here.

  33. macallan:

    At least it should be obvious to absolutely everybody by now that deals with the republicans aren’t worth crap.

  34. Raging Bee:

    Actually, the name Frankenberger or Schickelgruber is no more incorrect then Hiedler or Hitler was as there is no evidence that the name was changed from the former to the latter legally. Hiedler apparently just started calling himself Hitler.

    Yes, and that’s the name everyone knows him by, so there’s absolutely no reason to waste any keystrokes even typing any other name, let alone to waste even more keystrokes explaining why you’re doing it. Seriously, boy, all this “Frankenberger” stuff is absolutely the most pathetically pointless diversion I’ve ever encountered since the Internet was invented. Is anyone still keeping a count of how many topics, big and small, to which this adds absolutely nothing?

    You’re giving preteen-level mental masturbation a bad name.

  35. Raging Bee:

    From the article Nkck cited:

    Some suggest that Frank (who turned against National Socialism after 1945 but remained an anti-Semitic fanatic) made the claim that Hitler had Jewish ancestry as way of proving that Hitler was really a “Jew” and not an “Aryan”; and in this way, “proved” that the Third Reich’s crimes were the work of the “Jewish” Hitler.

    On other words, Frank, when confronted with the reality of what a colossal, bloody, asinine failure the movement he joined turned out to be, just fell back on pure fantasy and victim-blaming on a whole new order of magnitude. And this is the guy SLC1 insists on taking seriously. How fucking retarded do you have to be to quote this crap over and over and think you’re being insightful or clever? What a fucking joke.

  36. Raging Bee:

    I’m beginning to suspect that SLC1 is the kind of Jew-hating pond-scum who mindlessly supports Israel merely because he wants Jews to have their own separate state as far away from him as possible. There’s no other reason for him to keep on harping on this totally discredited “Hitler may have been part Jewish” theory. (That would also explain why he gravitated toward that other flaming bigot Don Williams.) The “Frankenberger” story was clearly made up for no reason other than to insinuate that Jews, not Jew-hating pond-scum, were the cause of Jews’ suffering. And it was made up by a flaming racist, to appeal to other flaming racists and no one else. The only reason SLC1 would take it seriously, is that he’s a flaming racist himself and it appeals to his desperate need to pretend his racism isn’t to blame for its consequences.

    Seriously, I’m trying to give a regular the benefit of the doubt, but there’s less and less doubt every time he comments. If anyone has any other explanation for SLC1′s pathetic fake-cleverness, I’d love to hear it.

  37. Raging Bee:

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence…

    …but absence of CREDIBILITY is.

  38. colnago80:

    Re the Fairfax flibbertigibbet aka Raging Bee

    Does the Fairfax flibbertigibbet even consider the possibility that Frank was accurately reporting what Frankenberger told him, except he made up the part about the Frankenberger family being Jewish?

    I’m beginning to suspect that SLC1 is the kind of Jew-hating pond-scum who mindlessly supports Israel merely because he wants Jews to have their own separate state as far away from him as possible.

    That theory is worthy of Don Williams!

    By the way, as my Syrian friend Ammar Kanaan once said, Dr. colnago80 is prejudiced against everybody.

    Re DaveL @ # 31

    It is my information that Johann Hiedler never legally changed his name to Hitler; therefore, son Alois was not legally entitled to use that name and thus neither was his son Adolf. I’m not even sure that, although Alois was adopted by Johann, his name was legally changed from Schickelgruber to Heidler. I will acknowledge that at no time was he ever legally named Frankenberger.

  39. Raging Bee:

    Does the Fairfax flibbertigibbet even consider the possibility that Frank was accurately reporting what Frankenberger told him…?

    So a statement that comes from one known bigoted liar is reliable if it actually (allegedly) originated from another known bigoted liar? Yes, I did consider that possibility…irrelevant.

    And now I’ve gone from a “fuckhead” to a “fussbudget” to a “flibbertigibbet?” What comic strip are you getting your new vocabulary from?

  40. Raging Bee:

    It is my information that Johann Hiedler never legally changed his name to Hitler; therefore, son Alois was not legally entitled to use that name and thus neither was his son Adolf. I’m not even sure that, although Alois was adopted by Johann, his name was legally changed from Schickelgruber to Heidler. I will acknowledge that at no time was he ever legally named Frankenberger.

    …therefore you’re calling him Frankenberger? Your “logic” is somewhere between silly and nonexistent.

  41. Nick Gotts:

    It is my information that Johann Hiedler never legally changed his name to Hitler; therefore, son Alois was not legally entitled to use that name and thus neither was his son Adolf. – Fuckwit

    More asinine nonsense. Adolf Hitler was known all his life by that name, all official documents concerning him in both Austria-Hungary and Germany identified him by that name. Of course he was fucking well legally entitled to use that name. For that matter, Alois Hitler was employed by the Austro-Hungarian state under that name, which constitutes de facto official recognition that he was legally entitled to use that name. In the era before modern civil registration (never instituted in the Austro-Hungarian Empire) variation in the spelling of surnames was common, and of no legal significance.

    I note that colnago80 has not legally changed his name to colnago80, and hence is not entitled to use that name. I have information from a well-known Nazi war criminal that colnago80′s paternal grandfather was called Fuckwit, and will henceforth refer to him by that name.

  42. Raging Bee:

    … therefore, son Alois was not legally entitled to use that name and thus neither was his son Adolf.

    Stupidiest legalistic quibble EVER! Hitler was DICTATOR OF GERMANY, so if he called himself Hitler, that was, by definition, his legal name. HE WAS THE LAW, dumbfuck.

    Am I the only one thinking SLC1 is starting to sound like a birther, with extra dollops of total fucking irrelevance?

  43. Raging Bee:

    SLC1′s legal acumen makes him a fit partner for Orly Taitz. Togther they’re sure to find Hitler’s long-form birth certificate — which is probably in the same vault as Obama’s, because…well, you know.

  44. bmiller:

    Actually, given his prescription for the world’s (and the Middle East’s) problems…nuclear bombs to kill millions, I suggest we refer to slc1 (I refuse to grant him the dignity of using a beautiful bicycle’s name as a permissable name for his genocidal trolling) as General Jack D Ripper. (GJDR, for short) I wonder if GJDR lies awake at night worrying about Persian Perverts stealing his manly ESSENCE?

  45. colnago80:

    Re Nick Gotts @ #41

    Actually, Hiedler probably changed his name because he was dodging bill collectors.

    By the way, I think that the makers of Colnago racing bicycles might object if I tried to change my name to Colnago.

    http://www.velociao.com/wp-content/gallery/colnago-super-57-1984/P7261772.jpg

  46. Raging Bee:

    Adolph Hitler changed his name to dodge bill collectors? Do you have a citation for that VERY SERIOUS CHARGE?!

    And did he attack France for the same reason? Or was that to link up with the South and get access to West Virginia coal?

  47. colnago80:

    Re Raging Bee @ #46

    Johann Hiedler numbnuts.

  48. colnago80:

    By the way, If Brayton is upset about the way this thread has been hijacked, and well he should be, I would point out that my comment #4 was very much on point. The thread was actually hijacked by Bee and Gotts. They started the hijacking when I attempted to answer a question posed by David Marjanovic @ #11. Given what happened subsequent to that, I am no longer going to answer any questions raised on the subject how I refer to the Dictator of Germany from 1933 to 1945.

  49. Raging Bee:

    So the way for us to avoid threadjacking is to let your stupid blithering go on unquestioned?

    Here’s another idea: YOU can avoid threadjacking by not saying stupid irrelevant shit that makes us wonder aloud what your fucking problem is.

  50. naturalcynic:

    Back to the main thread…
    As yet another example of R jerkiness, several prominent pols have condemned Obama for being weak on Syria. They were itching for another bombing campaign and Obama “promised” them one if the Syrians used poison gas. since Obama has not bombed Syria and has agreed to the outlines of the Putin-UN lead destruction of the Syrian’s poison gas, they think that Obama looks wussy for not following his original threat. No, if Obama gives up his position of keeping the ACA intact, what will the world think of him? “Compromising” with the TeaParty position will also show his weakness, won’t it?

    And why should “selling out” the TeaPartiers be such a big deal to the old line Republicans. What is the TeaParty worth? Nothing, so selling them out should be free.

    And in 1980 Masi was cooler than Colnago anyways.

  51. colnago80:

    Re naturalcynic @ #50

    But Ernesto Colnago designed and manufactured the bike that Eddy Merkx set the one hour record on.

    By the way, in 1980, the Masi Gran Criterium was manufactured in California on license from the Masi company.

Leave a comment

You must be