The Right Guy Show

An old fashioned libertarian’s view on the world

Archive for the ‘Dick Morris’ Category

An Open Letter to the Democrats From Dick Morris: The Charge Of The 280 Dems

leave a comment »


Published on on December 8, 2009

Let’s first channel Alfred, Lord Tennyson from his poem “The Charge of the Light Brigade”:

Half a league, half a league,
Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred (two-hundred eighty)
“Forward the Light Brigade!
Charge for the guns,” he said
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred. (two-hundred eighty)

“Forward, the Light Brigade!”
Was there a man dismay’d?
Not tho’ the soldier knew
Someone had blunder’d:
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred. (two-hundred eighty)

But still you charge. Still you vote for a bill the American public has repudiated, after extensive debate, by 18 points. Still you back legislation that seniors oppose by two to one. Still you use your majorities to pass the single most unpopular piece of legislation in recent history.

Civil rights, Social Security, women’s suffrage — all of Harry Reid’s metaphors — were popular and had broad approving majorities. This bill has the opposite: a nation paralyzed with fear for what you are about to do to its healthcare.

Will you listen to the elderly who absorb 40 percent of medical care and not to the AARP, which you have bought by way of a promise to eliminate Medicare Advantage?

Will you listen to the doctors of America, two to one in opposition, and not to the AMA, which you have bludgeoned into submission via your threats of reimbursement cuts?

Will you stop to examine how, as Democrats, you can vote to slice $500 billion from Medicare and cut home healthcare? Former comrades-in-arms, former party-mates, do not commit party-cide by passing this bill!

Is this to be your epitaph? That you put all healthcare under government control? That your legacy is to be the waiting list to see a doctor? That the memorial to your public service is to be the denial of care at a bureaucrat’s whim?

Many of you must know that you are sacrificing your careers. Can Blanche Lincoln, Byron Dorgan, Harry Reid and others really believe they will return?

Can any of you believe you will remain in the majority after you have so flouted the obvious will of your constituents?

Why does this pied piper have such power over you? His approval is sinking in every poll at a pace unprecedented for presidents. If he promises you judgeships, ambassadorships, Cabinet posts or other patronage to enliven your retirement, can you doubt that there is but a two-year term in the offing?

And think about what the deficit you are creating will do to your country. The nation you have already burdened with so much debt that you know and we all know that inflating the currency is the only way out! In your souls you must know that in five years and 10 years and 15vyears, it will be the skyrocketing cost of the system you now put in place that will animate future deficits. You must realize that the CBO estimates are a fiction created by 10 years of taxing divided by six years of spending.

What has gotten into you? Where are your senses? What happened to your instincts?

Are you all to line up and drink the Kool-Aid, march off the cliff in lockstep? Charge into the cannon?

Charging an army, while
All the world wonder’d:
Then they rode back, but not
Not the six hundred.

Cannon to right of them,
Cannon to left of them,
Cannon behind them
Volley’d and thunder’d;
Storm’d at with shot and shell,
While horse and hero fell,
They that had fought so well
Came thro’ the jaws of Death
Back from the mouth of Hell,
All that was left of them,
Left of six hundred.

Have you truly worked for this all your life: to sacrifice your political careers to pass the most unpopular piece of legislation I can ever remember passing Congress?

Thank you for reading this blog. 


Written by James Lagnese

December 9, 2009 at 2:45 pm

I must be doing something wrong

leave a comment »

Like the 45RPM jacket sleeve says, I must be doing something wrong. It seems I lost a blog friend today. I guess my honest views on the healthcare bill are too much for some on the right. I may be cynical, but I’d rather be cynical, that delusional, but as crazy as it seems to me, affirming Scott Adams critique of blogs increases my site traffic. May be I can learn something here.

While I admit the deed isn’t done, and Habitrail Harry Reid may not get the votes for cloture this time, it seems to me, the dems have a death wish, like a kamikaze pilot, you can shoot most of them down, but sooner or later, one is going to get through. I will reiterate this: The GOP has been at best ineffective at preventing the tide of fabianism in this country, and at worst complicit. If you don’t believe me, ask Tim Daniels at LCR about The Overton Window.

Now on to something a little different…

While we are onto things done wrong, let’s take a look at Sarah Palin. I love Palin and if she runs I would love to work for her in some way, BUT, someone needs to sit her down and tell her to get help…Not the kind you are thinking, but political advice. She would do well to hire Dick Morris as a consultant and help her with her brand and image. I think she has natural charisma, but it is not refined and she doesn’t always think things through before she speaks. Just my opinion. I think she could be great, but she needs someone to help her. The problem may be, form what I have read, that she, like many politicians, she likes to surround herself with yes people. Giuliani is guilty of the same thing. Look at the results. Still, you have to love the Unsinkable Sarah. I wish her well no matter what she does.

And to those that think they have it bad:

Thank you for reading this blog.

Written by James Lagnese

November 20, 2009 at 9:01 pm

It Was Terrorism: Dick Morris Explains it all

leave a comment »



Published on on November 8, 2009

Printer-Friendly Version

In his nationally televised remarks following the horrendous killings at Ft. Hood, President Obama never mentioned the T word.  The attack was an act “of violence.”  No mention of terrorism.

In fact, the Ft. Hood shooting is the first terror attack on American soil since 9-11.  But Obama, reluctant to take the rap for inadequate protections against such attacks, is doing everything he can to make it look like an adult version of the Columbine school shootings.  We are treated to stories about the killer’s dread of being sent back to Afghanistan and his deformed personality.

But, the fact is that Major Nidal Malik Hasan jumped on a table, yelled “Alah Hu Akhbar” and began the shooting rampage that killed 13 people and wounded 30 more.

Ilana Freedman, CEO and Senior Analyst for the Gerard Group International, which provides intelligence analysis for business and homeland security, describes Hasan as a “lone wolf terrorist” who acts without apparent coordination with any other person or organization.  But that does not make him any less of a terrorist.
The dividing line, of course, between a terrorist and a psychopathic killer is political motivation.  His statements right before opening fire would indicate that Hasan was motivated by fanaticism and a commitment to Islamic fascism, even though President Obama bends over backwards to avoid saying so.

Obama’s refusal to call the attack terrorism, and to heed the warning signs about the porous nature of our security system that allowed it to happen on a military base, recalls President Clinton’s deliberate decision to downplay the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center.  He did not visit the site of the attack and treated it as a crime, promising to find those guilty and punish them, rather than to attack the international groups that funded and enabled them.

There may be no groups behind Major Hasan’s attack, but the fact that he was an officer in the Army, with full access to a military base and its arsenal of weapons, while holding the views he did, is the first indication of a laxity in security under President Obama.  This attack did not take place in a shopping mall or a school, where security procedures are, understandably, relaxed.  It happened on the highest security place of all – a military base!  That the military failed to spot the possibility of an attack and had no measures in place to prevent it must be laid at the feet of the commander-in-chief of that military: President Barack Obama.
Many commentators have warned that the diminution of security and the weakening of our anti-terrorist protections would leave us vulnerable to be hit again.  Now it has happened.  And the president is doing everything he can to blur the distinction between murder and terrorism.

It was his failure to understand the difference between an act of war and a crime that undermined President Clinton’s administration’s anti-terror efforts and led directly to 9-11.  It would appear that President Obama is going down the same road of denial and minimization of political harm.  There may be casualties at Ft. Hood, but Obama is determined that his popularity will not be among them.

Thank you for reading this blog.

Written by James Lagnese

November 8, 2009 at 10:51 am


leave a comment »



Published in the New York Post on July 23, 2009

President Obama’s rhetoric last night summoned the memory of “1984,” George Orwell’s novel of a nightmarish future — where the slogan of the rulers is “War is peace; freedom is slavery; ignorance is strength.”

The president assures us that he will cut health-care spending…by adding $1 trillion to health-care spending.

He says that “health-care decisions will not be made by government”…while he sets up a new Federal Health Board to tell doctors what treatments they can offer and to whom and under what circumstances.

Obama told the media, “I will free doctors to make good health-care decisions”…by telling the physicians what to do.

When the president says he guarantees the “same coverage” to people who like their current health-insurance policies, he means that their current HMOs, insurers and doctors will be the ones to implement the protocols and instructions the government hands down to them — not that we’ll have our current freedom of decision-making.

When he blandly assures us that we will “stop paying for things that don’t make us healthier,” he really means that his Federal Health Board will overrule your doctor and stop him from using his own best judgment in your treatment.

The president will “get the politics out of health care” by putting it under government control.

Obama says that he will not “add to the deficit” to fund health care. But the bill reported out by Rep. Charlie Rangel’s Ways and Means Committee leaves $550 billion unfunded.

The president says that he’ll identify savings that will reduce the need for more taxes — even though the Congressional Budget Office refuses to say that his “savings” will actually work and warns that the bill will really be added to the deficit.

He repeatedly tells us that he’ll cut health-care spending. What he means is that he will cut doctors’ incomes and will turn down patients — particularly the elderly — when they seek medical care that his bureaucrats disapprove of.

And he ignores that cutting incomes in the medical field will reduce the number of doctors and force further rationing of care.

The president opines that he will replace the most “expensive care” with the “best care” by empowering government officials who have never met you to substitute their judgment for that of your doctor, who has examined you thoroughly.

When Obama laments that “14,000 people lose their insurance every day,” he is referring to the job losses that his own failed efforts to end the recession have permitted.

He warns that health-care costs are gobbling up money that employers should use to raise wages and worker pay — yet the plans he backs would require employers to pay 8 percent of their payroll as a tax or provide insurance to their workers.

The Obama plan highlights greater preventive care — but, at the same time, cuts medical incomes and so will cut the number of doctors who might provide it.

The stimulus package, in the Gospel According to Barack, was “designed” to work over the next two years. But at the time, he demanded immediate passage to “jump-start the economy” — something that clearly did not happen.

Medicare and Medicaid are “driving the deficit” even as he increased the amount of red ink by at least $800 billion in six months with little, if any, increase in the cost of either program.

He says he “expects” banks to repay their TARP money. In fact, they’re lining up around the block to do so — but the Treasury will only permit a handful of them to do so.

In summary, Obama’s health program will promote “lower cost and more choice” by increasing spending by $1 trillion, telling patients what care they’re permitted to have, and limiting their access to quality care.

Orwell’s heirs should sue for violation of copyright.

Dick Morris say it better than most here. Thanks Dick, Eileen and…

Thank you for reading this blog.

Written by James Lagnese

July 23, 2009 at 7:04 pm

Obama and His Legacy

leave a comment »

With all the hubbub of his first 100 days, is Obama all what he is portended to be? Some hail the Chicago Magician as the best president we have ever had. Such talk ignores reality and more importantly the ability to judge history correctly. It is very difficult to judge history while in the midst of it. Lincoln is considered one of our best presidents, yet in his day, he was not as well liked as he is now. In fact, he may share more with W than some are willing to admit, but I am digressing here.

What we are hearing now is pure spin from the magic show and the truth is, even though he has relatively high approval ratings, people don’t believe what he is doing will work. The disconnect is caused by the honeymoon period that is being accorded to him.
This is nothing new, and under the right circumstances, it can be promulgated well into the future. Another political magician, FDR, was able to do that. By keeping a balance of despair and hope, he was able to manipulate the populace to keep him in power. Things were always bad enough that we had to keep him in the game, but he was always doing a good enough job that we had to reward him. The truth is, things really did not improve under FDR. In 1938, unemployment was still over 20% and the stock market was as low as ever. All his micromanagement did was create a larger more socialist government that restricted people’s rights and created bureaucracies that will eventually bankrupt the country. All for the purpose of maintaining him in power.
Obama is no different, and in fact wants to take us one or two steps beyond anything FDR could imagine. In fact he says he wants to “remake america“. The difference will be that this pied piper may be judged differently than his acolytes believe. The people of this country still favor a more libertarian approach, and any approbation he receives now may be short lived. The problem though is that when he is done “remaking america”, it may be too much and/or too late to reverse. Look at social security and medicare. It just gets worse. Socialism coopts people by persuading them that they are getting something for free, but when in fact, the people are enlisting themselves willingly into indentured servitude. Like the frog in the warm bath, it will be too late at some point.
What can we do? Stay true to principles, vote, get active in politics and support candidates that espouse libertarian and classical liberal philosophies. Obama will undo himself with his crusader mentality in regards to his socialist agenda. He can’t help himself. May be we can send this Magician back to Chicago in 3 and a half years.
Thank you for reading this blog.

Written by James Lagnese

April 29, 2009 at 9:15 pm


leave a comment »


Published on on January 20, 2009

2009-2010 will rank with 1913-14, 1933-36, 1964-65 and 1981-82 as years that will permanently change our government, politics and lives. Just as the stars were aligned for Wilson, Roosevelt, Johnson and Reagan, they are aligned for Obama. Simply put, we enter his administration as free-enterprise, market-dominated, laissez-faire America. We will shortly become like Germany, France, the United Kingdom, or Sweden — a socialist democracy in which the government dominates the economy, determines private-sector priorities and offers a vastly expanded range of services to many more people at much higher taxes.

Obama will accomplish his agenda of “reform” under the rubric of “recovery.” Using the electoral mandate bestowed on a Democratic Congress by restless voters and the economic power given his administration by terrified Americans, he will change our country fundamentally in the name of lifting the depression. His stimulus packages won’t do much to shorten the downturn — although they will make it less painful — but they will do a great deal to change our nation.

In implementing his agenda, Barack Obama will emulate the example of Franklin D. Roosevelt. (Not the liberal mythology of the New Deal, but the actuality of what it accomplished.) When FDR took office, he was enormously successful in averting a total collapse of the banking system and the economy. But his New Deal measures only succeeded in lowering the unemployment rate from 23 percent in 1933, when he took office, to 13 percent in the summer of 1937. It never went lower. And his policies of over-regulation generated such business uncertainty that they triggered a second-term recession. Unemployment in 1938 rose to 17 percent and, in 1940, on the verge of the war-driven recovery, stood at 15 percent. (These data and the real story of Hoover’s and Roosevelt’s missteps, uncolored by ideology, are available in The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes, copyright 2007.)

But in the name of a largely unsuccessful effort to end the Depression, Roosevelt passed crucial and permanent reforms that have dominated our lives ever since, including Social Security, the creation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, unionization under the Wagner Act, the federal minimum wage and a host of other fundamental changes.

Obama’s record will be similar, although less wise and more destructive. He will begin by passing every program for which liberals have lusted for decades, from alternative-energy sources to school renovations, infrastructure repairs and technology enhancements. These are all good programs, but they normally would be stretched out for years. But freed of any constraint on the deficit — indeed, empowered by a mandate to raise it as high as possible — Obama will do them all rather quickly.

But it is not his spending that will transform our political system, it is his tax and welfare policies. In the name of short-term stimulus, he will give every American family (who makes less than $200,000) a welfare check of $1,000 euphemistically called a refundable tax credit. And he will so sharply cut taxes on the middle class and the poor that the number of Americans who pay no federal income tax will rise from the current one-third of all households to more than half. In the process, he will create a permanent electoral majority that does not pay taxes, but counts on ever-expanding welfare checks from the government. The dependency on the dole, formerly limited in pre-Clinton days to 14 million women and children on Aid to Families with Dependent Children, will now grow to a clear majority of the American population.

Will he raise taxes? Why should he? With a congressional mandate to run the deficit up as high as need be, there is no reason to raise taxes now and risk aggravating the depression. Instead, Obama will follow the opposite of the Reagan strategy. Reagan cut taxes and increased the deficit so that liberals could not increase spending. Obama will raise spending and increase the deficit so that conservatives cannot cut taxes. And, when the economy is restored, he will raise taxes with impunity, since the only people who will have to pay them would be rich Republicans.

In the name of stabilizing the banking system, Obama will nationalize it. Using Troubled Asset Relief Program funds to write generous checks to needy financial institutions, his administration will demand preferred stock in exchange. Preferred stock gets dividends before common stockholders do. With the massive debt these companies will owe to the government, they will only be able to afford dividends for preferred stockholders — the government, not private investors. So who will buy common stock? And the government will demand that its bills be paid before any profits that might materialize are reinvested in the financial institution, so how will the value of the stocks ever grow? Devoid of private investors, these institutions will fall ever more under government control.

Obama will begin the process by limiting executive compensation. Then he will urge restructuring and lowering of home mortgages in danger of default (as the feds have already done with Citibank).

Then will come guidance on the loans to make and government instructions on the types of enterprises to favor. God grant that some Blagojevich type is not in charge of the program, using his power to line his pockets. The United States will find itself with an economic system comparable to that of Japan, where the all-powerful bureaucracy at MITI (Ministry of International Trade and Industry) manages the economy, often making mistakes like giving mainframe computers priority over the development of laptops.

But it is the healthcare system that will experience the most dramatic and traumatic of changes. The current debate between erecting a Medicare-like governmental single payer or channeling coverage through private insurance misses the essential point. Without a lot more doctors, nurses, clinics, equipment and hospital beds, health resources will be strained to the breaking point. The people and equipment that now serve 250 million Americans and largely neglect all but the emergency needs of the other 50 million will now have to serve everyone. And, as government imposes ever more Draconian price controls and income limits on doctors, the supply of practitioners and equipment will decline as the demand escalates. Price increases will be out of the question, so the government will impose healthcare rationing, denying the older and sicker among us the care they need and even barring them from paying for it themselves. (Rationing based on income and price will be seen as immoral.)

And Obama will move to change permanently the partisan balance in America. He will move quickly to legalize all those who have been in America for five years, albeit illegally, and to smooth their paths to citizenship and voting. He will weaken border controls in an attempt to hike the Latino vote as high as he can in order to make red states like Texas into blue states like California. By the time he is finished, Latinos and African-Americans will cast a combined 30 percent of the vote. If they go by top-heavy margins for the Democrats, as they did in 2008, it will assure Democratic domination (until they move up the economic ladder and become good Republicans).

And he will enact the check-off card system for determining labor union representation, repealing the secret ballot in union elections. The result will be to raise the proportion of the labor force in unions up to the high teens from the current level of about 12 percent.

Finally, he will use the expansive powers of the Federal Communications Commission to impose “local” control and ownership of radio stations and to impose the “fairness doctrine” on talk radio. The effect will be to drive talk radio to the Internet, fundamentally change its economics, and retard its growth for years hence.

But none of these changes will cure the depression. It will end when the private sector works through the high debt levels that triggered the collapse in the first place. And, then, the large stimulus package deficits will likely lead to rapid inflation, probably necessitating a second recession to cure it.

So Obama’s name will be mud by 2012 and probably by 2010 as well. And the Republican Party will make big gains and regain much of its lost power.


Thank you for reading this blog.

Written by James Lagnese

January 21, 2009 at 8:31 pm

Dear Leader or Pied Piper of Hyde Park? Obama is the wrong man no matter which

leave a comment »

Barack Obama presents an interesting yet risky choice for president. To the average citizen, he may indeed represent positive change, and to anyone with a pulse rate would say he does represent change in some way, shape or form.

My thesis has been that Obama represents not only a socialist, but also a charismatic one that is poised to set the tone and direction of the United States in the 21st century. The direction at best is a socialist democracy, at worst a socialism like that of Denmark or Sweden. To many Americans, their eyes glaze over at such statements. The word “socialism” is not a dirty word anymore, most likely through ignorance. They are ignorant of the forces, values, philosophies and the vision on which this country was founded. They are also enculturated to accept a level of nanny-statism that would have been anathema to most Americans not long ago.

Obama makes no bones about his socialist ideals. Answering a question about taxation from a plumber who said he felt tax burdened, Obama said, “It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody that is behind you, that they have a chance for success too.” This is redistribution of wealth and by that definition, is part of a socialist agenda. So you have to ask why?
You can dig into Obama’s upbringing if you like, but I’d rather focus on Obama as an adult. According to Dick Morris, we have “a man whose spiritual adviser is Wright, whose financial backer is Tony Rezko, and whose first major employer was William Ayers might not be a good choice for president. We all have heard the hate Wright has spewed forth from his filthy mouth, we know of the corruption of Tony Rezko through his trial, we know that Bill Ayers tried to blow up the pentagon and the only reason he never went to jail is that he got off on a technicality. To add insult to injury, he offers no apostasy, offers no regret, he is an unabashed communist and hates what America has stood for. Add to this the money that flowed with Ayers, the CAC, Acorn, Obama and the phony votes, and it leaves more questions than answers. Why aren’t people asking more questions and still flocking to his message?
It’s a Cabala of forces, actions and reasons that are behind this. One thing to consider is the overload of information that people have to deal with today. People are very connected and they have to parse what is important and what isn’t. The news, both new media and traditional media have served as the de facto PR arm of the Obama campaign. Part of this is on Obama’s part and most is that 9 out of 10 journalists are left wing. Obama knows he’s playing to the choir and someone once said something to the effect that journalists are like children in that you can do anything you like as long as you play with them. I wouldn’t say it’s a conspiracy, but they all read the same talking points, so journalists have gone from observers to participants. 
With the economy being weak, and 8 years of Bush, the war in Iraq,  and the war on terror, people have become weary and suspicious. Also, never underestimate the public’s ability to blame the person in charge. The problem is Obama has defined a McCain presidency as more of Bush, I digress, but you get the point. At this point, it’s the economy, and Obama is on point, and people don’t care if the message is socialist because they want results, and as I said above, people, through our left wing educational indoctrination system, have become enculturated to socialism. Point in case, my parents were born before the great depression. Their generation considered handouts from the government below them and disgusting. Today we have farmers taking every kind of subsidy, abortion being funded by the government, unemployment insurance, welfare, social security, medicaid, and medicare, to name just a few. With entitlements, people lose the link between work and earning something. The value of work is diminished. 
So we are left with the question of Obama, is he the charismatic socialist (or fascist) leader, like Hitler, Mussolini, Castro, or Chavez, or is he a pied piper like the socialist pedagogue equivalent of Don Quixote, leading us down the road of socialism? At first blush, one might assume the latter at worst, as he does come across like he cares, but one must remember what and who he is. Like the turtle and the snake, we do not want to learn the lesson too late. One, Obama is the product of the Chicago political machine, which is among the most corrupt in the country. Consider the sources of his money, his home, how he started his political career, and his spiritual advisor. Couple this with what we see in terms of youth groups for Obama that eerily resemble Hitler youth, and pledge allegiance to obama. We have Michelle Obama pining “Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism, that you put down your division, that you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones, that you push yourselves to be better, and that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual – uninvolved, uninformed…” (Speech in February 2008). My interpretation us that Obama is going to tell you what to say, how to think, what you are going to do. 
Consider this statement: “I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors…I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face.” This is nothing more that intimidation, taken from straight from the Hitler Youth handbook. He wants to stifle dissent, to shut people up, t punish those that dare speak against him. Take Stanley Kurtz’ appearance on Milt Rosenberg’s WGN radio program. Obama supporters tried to get the radio host fired and in Missouri, according to Michael Barone,  St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce warned citizens that they would bring criminal libel prosecutions against anyone who made statements against Mr. Obama that were “false.” See here. Obama will not come out himself and promulgate these tactics, as he is pusillanimous and non-confrontational. John R. Lott, the free market economist and best selling author worked with Obama at the University of Chicago Law School. Dr. Lott tried to engage Obama in discussions of the second amendment, and Obama turned his back every time and walked away. Speaking of the second amendment, Barack Obama went after the NRA because of an ad they ran. See my blog post here. Further evidence is the talk of a new Fairness Doctrine and according to Michael Barone,  “the Democrats’ “card check” legislation that would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions”. The effect of this is intimidation and censure. 
My intuition is that an Obama presidency would start out more the pied piper, and end up dear leader. It also depends on the opposition he faces. With a democrat majority in congress, he would be free to pass whatever legislation he wishes and he will. But the center right in this country, which is most people, could rise up and force Obama to either moderate, or start a campaign of stifling opposition. I would bet the latter would be the case. He is too much of an elitist and crusader to moderate his agenda. Look back at his wife’s words above. She has always been the the true marker of where he stands and it has been to his advantage to shut her up for the last several months in order to appear center left, which he is not. Right now, this is Obama’s election to lose. McCain can win, but he needs to get a pair of balls, turn Palin lose and trash the talking points. It’s not the war, its’ the economy. Stupid. If he doesn’t get this, look forward to at least 4 years of socialist hell. The only good that will come out of that is that one, the republican party will have to go through a rebirth if it is to survive, and two, I’ll have plenty to write about. 
Thank you for reading this blog. 

Written by James Lagnese

October 13, 2008 at 8:41 pm