#rsrh I call these ‘vodka bottle posts’…

…to wit, you start with a full bottle of vodka, a blank computer screen, and your pain.  You then start filling up the computer screen with words, with an eye towards seeing which runs out first: the pain, or the vodka.  In Jen Rubin’s case, I’m guessing that it was the pain, but not by much.

Sorry if this seems dismissive: it’s just that we go through this every. Four. Years.  Win or lose, it’s always the most awful Republican field since the dawn of time; the earth will crack and the flames of Perdition will wash across our candidates; and the very fabric of space-time itself will reconfigure into a portal from which the Dread Lord Azathoth will summon us all t0 be sanity-shattered servitors piping daemonic music for his court for all eternity.

And it could always have been avoided, if we had just convinced [INSERT NAME HERE] to run.

Yadda. Yadda. And I say, again: yadda.

Moe Lane

PS: Almost forgot! “But it’s DIFFERENT this time!”


  • DaveP. says:

    It’s more fun to be the One Guy Who Sees the Truth than it is to shut up, roll up your sleeves, and get to work.

  • Aruges says:

    I plead guilty.

  • Wombat-socho says:

    Mmmm, sweet sweet neocon tears. 😉

  • Catseye says:

    Rubin’s no neocon, she’s not any kind of conservative.

  • Murgatroyd says:

    *climbs on soapbox*

    There is a way we can minimize the insanity — both the selection of wretched candidates and the recriminations afterward. We currently have a series of winner-take-all primary elections and caucuses, a process that is almost guaranteed to widen divisions within the party, cater to the most ignorant voters, shut out the less well known candidates, and cause the candidates to tear down one another (doing the Democrats’ and the MSM’s work for them).

    Why not change the process? We’ve known for more than a century that there’s a better way: approval balloting. Give each voter in the primary a ballot with the candidates’ names and the instructions “Mark any and all candidates who are acceptable to you.” It pretty much guarantees that the winner will be the strongest candidate in terms of voter acceptability.

    It’s easy to implement, it’s understandable, it’s difficult to game the system, it makes far more sense than those stupid caucuses, and it’s gotta be better than what we’ve got now.

    *steps down from soapbox*

    Yeah, it’ll never happen.

  • Catseye says:

    There would have to be a a box for “None of the above”. The problem with these things is there may never be a Good Candidate, you’re always digging in the mud for the best one you can find. As my Wife says “Life’s a Bitch and then you Die”! Fun Times!

  • Kay B. Day says:

    Personally I think Rubin could benefit from a long vacation. She rarely makes sense–today, for instance on CNN. I don’t remember a word she said, but I find it amazing that anyone would hire her to cover conserv politics.

    The way I look at this thing we got a community organizer in the White House who’s just about tanked the country and made some highly suspect decisions that benefit, not the U.S., but China. Keystone and the Iraqi oil contract for instance.

    I could write a book about his screwups and our solutions. Actually now that I think about it I am writing a book about it.

    Anyway, we just need to pick our man and go for it. Ron Paul could run the country better than Obama. If that sounds radical, that gives an idea how lousy I think these Dems have done.

    What I am tired of: the constant ongoing barrage of sarcasm, snarkisms and wails from Romney supporters. I admit it started with their attitude towards Perry and went downhill from there.

    Thing is, we also need to focus on the Senate. And we need new leadership in the Senate. IMO.

    But above all, we need to call every candidate out on specifics. My problem with Romney right now is he talks like Obama. It’s all rhetoric. Too many speeches. And I’m not sure he can get fired up. His demeanor is like Obama’s.

    I don’t think the country is ready for GOP standard issue. Suit, square jaw and being rational to the point of making me want to pull my hair out. Romney can’t do mean either (somebody needs to remind him of what happened to Crist when he tried to do mean).

    Oh, well, enough said. I admit I got really mad tonight when Ann Coulter started bashing South Carolina. That’s my home state (live in Fla. now). I don’t like it when people do that because somebody had an opinion different from theirs.

  • Finrod says:

    Approval voting is a Good Thing. The American Mathematical Society uses it for their elections, for example. It easily allows for protest votes since you can simply not vote for anyone, which lowers everyone’s approval percentage.

  • K M Scane says:

    A V sounds like good sound policy. PRECISELY the reason it is post-history, abandoned. First, you gotta get people to register,then vote… HOWZAT gonna work out?
    whenever i do vote i talk with the workers present. Use-ta steal glances at the voter logs.[on paper] as of late 2010 it’s all laptops(S/E Mich.) and the only way to tell is to look at your ballot number. and ask where the system started numerically.It is always Pitiful to see.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com