Skip to content

Reince Priebus: You know who is a model Republican? Huckabee

03/22/2013

cmblake6:

My ass. Huckabee would be far better than Ovomit, but “model Republican”? The thing wrong with this is simple, IMHO. If they would just stand by the original principles, instead of being wishy-washy-what-difference-does-it-make, perhaps they would see that what America wants isn’t just more of the same.

Originally posted on The Daley Gator:

Vomit inducing statement of the day for me anyway

RNC Chair Reince Priebus told reporters today that former governor Mike Huckabee would be an example of a “model” Republican in his eyes.

The Corner reported:

Earlier today, Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus pushed back at critics who have questioned his continued support for Senator Rob Portman, the Ohio Republican who came out in support of gay marriage last week.

“When someone asks me ‘Are you going to cut off funding for Rob Portman?’ I think it’s just ridiculous,” Priebus told a group of reporters Friday during a briefing at National Review’s Washington, D.C., office. “He’s a good Republican. I think it’s also normal and decent to still support a person that you agree with on 99 percent of the issues.”

But Priebus says his support of Portman doesn’t signal a policy shift within the party’s platform. “Yes, we’re still…

View original 106 more words

4 Comments
  1. 03/23/2013 00:04

    Nice guy, BUT a pure RINO if there ever was a RINO….

  2. 03/23/2013 00:36

    Possibly a touch right of center, but yeah.

  3. 03/23/2013 07:33

    So the perfect republican is a fiscally incontinent former governor.

    Doesn’t surprise me in the least

    He is the epitome of the dubious premise of “compassionate” conservatism in which the welfare state is justified from an allegedly conservative point of view. If he were truly a conservative clergyman he would advocate for more action by organized religion and citizen voluntarism. What he and others of his ilk do not understand is the crowding out effect of government involvement in charitable endeavors as the time and effort it takes to live in America and fund government “benevolence” creates an I gave at the office mentality. They diminish the charitable instinct by pushing people through taxation and inflation closer to subsistence levels while elevating those who receive those funds to a standard of living they did not earn.

    What they also take out of the equation is the shame factor. When religions used to be the predominant charitable organizations your subsistence was not cost free as you got a sermon on self reliance and you had to look your neighbors and fellow congregants in the eye everyday. It was and is a great motivator.

    Today the stigmatization of being on assistance is gone. Now recipients petition a far of bureaucracy for more of OPM and never once equate that they are living off of the coerced wealth of their neighbor. This de-personaliztion creates the belligerently entitled mentality we have today from the kept victim class as they are not a ashamed of asking the government to coerce more form their neighbor. A task that if they took on for themselves would land them in jail(?). The question mark is intentional because with the way the justice department acts we may soon have a need test when prosecuting property crimes ie if the person stealing needs it more than the victim there is no crime and in fact the victim may be prosecuted for crimes against equality and social justice.

    The duality of the no-shame agenda and increasing subsidization of poor choices are self re-enforcing. If there is no shame in making poor choices then the powers that be increase entitlements for those choices make it a double win for the choice makers citing it as a moral imperative that we subsidize the stupid or profligate. These items need to be in opposition to make it more costly for the choice makers.

    It is liberal policy preferences that intensify such societal and economically costly pathogens. It is liberals(and their ruling class enablers) who champion this no-fault form of life: All rights(including an invented right to a proprietary interest in your wealth for re-distribution at the direction of those with the “vision of the anointed”) and no responsibility. It is they who promote the arrant nonsense that all choices and cultures are equally valid. If that was the case those ideas and cultures could pay for themselves.

    It is this mindset that creates the virulently infantilzed and belligerently entitled society we have today. It is the craven calculation of politicians that exacerbate such pathologies and fund it to the tune of 16 trillion in actually recognized debt and another 75-130 trillion(depending on the source) in unfunded liabilities for entitlements. As Dr Sowell says these are long term liabilities and elections happen in the short term. Politicians believe they will be able to get out before the music stops on such a robust game of economic musical chairs.

    Keep in mind that government pays bills through taxes on us. So these are essentially a preview of future taxes that are going to be exacted. Our economy produces about 14 trillion including government spending of 3.5 trillion government which only reshuffles wealth. It does not create any value. So the real economy produces around 10.5 trillion. If we were to send every dollar in the private economy to pay for the debt owed it would take around 15 years to pay off and fund this bloat.

    Herb Stein once said “”If something cannot go on forever, it will stop,”. The indulgence of ruling class “altruism” at our expense will eventually stop… One way or another.

  4. 03/23/2013 10:06

    Damn you’re good. Exactly so.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 187 other followers

%d bloggers like this: