Previous post
Hang on to that gag-reflex, boys and girls. Beto is playing coy, but the pining-for-Camelot girlfriends are panting to get O’Rourke to Iowa.
The swoons and giggles from erstwhile feminists in the D-camp over O’Rourke hasn’t abated in spite of his loss to the authentic Hispanic in the Texas Senator race.
“It’s real. In Iowa, everybody knows the next person that they want to meet and by far he is the No. 1 person that’s being requested right now — volunteers. Elected officials. Our membership base,” … “Everybody right now is asking for Beto.”
Besides marrying the money that helped him run, what has O’Rourke ever accomplished?
Sure, O’Rourke was a congresscritter of pallor. But even some Democrats grudgingly admit he’s an empty suit.
[Andrew E. Smith, director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center] agreed that the Texan’s resume is light: a stint on the El Paso City Council, six years in the U.S. House, and “as a congressman he hasn’t been on the forefront of any issue.”
Let’s hope this John Kerry retread just gets bored and wanders off to spend his wife’s money on things like starting a garage band or opening a taco cart. Let’s just keep him away from any power over others.
Didn’t we suffer enough for 8 years under the cult of Barry?
.
UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit readers!
.
.
featured image and Tiger Beat parody by Darleen Click
GWB says: It’s a common failing of humanity to desire a messiah.
But the Democrats have been searching for a political messiah since Woodrow Wilson. One of the reasons they hate our Constitutional Republic system is that it requires their messiahs to step down after a while. (Of course, the Founding Fathers saw that as a feature, not a bug.)
GWB says: (Yes, I understand presidential term limits were not the Founders’ idea, but a later amendment. But, the system was built to prevent El Presidente For Life results.)
(BTW, how different might WW2 have ended up if presidential term limits had already existed? Or would the nation have clambered for removing that limit to prevent “changing horses in mid-stream”?)
Wfjaf says: We weren’t in WWII in 1940. However, like Wilson in 1916, in 1940 FDR held himself out as a peace candidate who was keeping the US out of war. Unlike Wilson, he was secretly supplying Great Britain and building up the armed forces.
Johnny says: I’m usually not one for trigger warnings but you really should have put one before that Tiger Beat cover…yeesh!
Citizen Stan says: This “article” was a snotty, sarcastic, snarky piece of petty drivel. Maybe the writer was trying to be humorous but she fell quite short of being witty or funny. It’s fine if the writer has some substantive arguments against O’Rourke, and it’s fine if the writer wanted to write a humorous piece lampooning O’Rourke, but this brief little ditty was neither humurous or informative. The writer instead came off as a precocious high school student failing in her attempt to be edgy and humorous.
Alhtough the author is obviously no fan of O’Rourke, I think he does deserve credit for giving Ted Cruz a run for his money. I was surprised that O’Rourke was able to come as close to Cruz as he did. Of course, Cruz is hardly known as being a charismatic politican or campaigner, so maybe this had something to do with Beto’s realtive success in challenging Cruz.
I remember disparaging comments made about Jon Ossoff after he lost the special election in Georgia to Karen Handel. Handel was recently defeated in the midterms by her Democratic opponent. I’ve heard political commentators say that Ossoff’s campaign, although he failed to win, certainy helped pave the way for a Democratic victory in this district because his campagin was responsible for setting up much of the infrastructure that Handel’s opponent was able to use to her advantage. I wonder if O’rourke has paved the way for future Democratic successes in Texas. I do know that I’ve heard political commentators give O’Rourke credit for helping a couple Democratic candidates in Texas for the U.S. House of Representatives beat their Republican candidates in districts that were previously held by Republicans.
I’d suggest that if this writer wants to write in a humorous vein that she try reading Molly Ivins. Although Ivins wrote from a left wing perspective, I didn’t find her humour to be mean spritied. She could also write some touching serious articles. Ivins frequently wrote about state politics in Texas. I remember reading an aritcle about how people noticed that the very politicans that she made fun of in her columns would happily sit down and have a drink with her. That’s probably because Ivins tempered her political humour with humanity, unlike this writer whose humour comes off as snarky,sarcastic and immature. Of course Ivins was a professional writer and the writer of this article is simply another blog writer . As they say, the good thing about the interent is that anybody can write a blog, and the counterpoint to this is that the bad thing about the internet is that anybody can write a blog. My suggestion is that the writer of this piece of “humour” study up by reading some succcessful writers of political humour before attempting another failed piece such as this piece. Molly Ivins was just the first writer that came to my mind because I enjoyed her writing. I remember a column she wrote about going to a weekend type spa resort that catered to wealthy Republican women which she contrasted with her experienceof going to a New Age type resort that catered to liberal women. She was equally funny in her description of her expereinces at both places.I kind of doubt that the writer of this article could successfully lampoon somebody from the right of the political spectrum as she’s apparently not even been able to do this with Beto O’Rourke, who despite whether you may like or dislike his political views, is ripe for being satired.
And no, Ann Coulter doesn’t quaify as a writer of political humour for training purposes. Her gig of writing things that shocked and offended people grew stale years ago and she’s now merely just another hack among many hacks churning out rapidly produced low quality, unoriginal and stale mean spirited fodder.
GWB says: tl;dr
Shorter: “I’m a preening concern troll.”
Pragmatic says: @cotuzen Stan
Yeah – no one is as impressed with you as you are with yourself. Go set up your pagan alter to the new BO (with an even more powerful stink than round one) somewhere else.
Devildog says: Suck it, buddy. I live in Texas & everything in the article fits Beta to a T. You do have one thing right: he gave Cruz “a run for his money.” 70 million, plus or minus. All that dough and the slobbering support of the media, and he still couldn’t buy Texas.
Citizen Stan says: GWB, Out of curiosity I checked around ten of the most recent blog entries on this site and saw that you had commented at least once on most of them. Does this make you a “troll” or just a reader that likes to make comments? I’m sitting here nervously preening, just sick with worry about this. I guess I’ll now need to double down on my large donations to communist causes to counter your deeply hurtful comment so that I can help to crate more safe places.
Seriously, I thought this site might offer some intelligent right of center ideas and perspectives, but it just seems to mainly be more of the some old sarcastic and poorly written pabulum that is so common on these amateur blog sites. I hope this comment is short enough for you.
GWB says: So, you’re saying you don’t know what a “concern troll” is?
Nor what a “troll” in general is?
(Do you think my comments were trollish? Or just long? I’ll admit to verbosity at times. I also do a lot of quoting, which makes the comments longer. I also disagree with the ladies here on occasion.)
This site DOES offer intelligent commentary. It also happens to offer some snark (and one writer often offers it in very acidic form). The post here was clearly a bit of snark, since it’s about the cartoon that Darleen created. She’s done a number of these in the recent past.
I doubt you’re going to find many conservative sites that don’t offer some snark and acid commentary these days, since it’s a defense mechanism against the sinking of our free Republic. It also is a defense mechanism against the atrocious rage mobs and horrid hypocrisy being deployed against free citizens.
Also, many of the anti-snark commentators are the same ones who have spent the last couple of decades telling conservatives “That’s not the hill to die on!” or “We can’t become like them!” while the progressives run rough-shod over our freedoms. So, a lot of folks (like me) aren’t really interested in that sort of finger-wagging.
There’s plenty of dense, serious commentary out there. Some of it is even still conservative. This here site is a small group of conservative women giving their personal views on the day’s political and newsworthy events.
(BTW, I’ve guest-blogged here – Fundamentals of Freedom: The FBI/Apple Kerfuffle. So, no, not a troll.)
Citizen Stan says: GWB, I read your guest blog and it is definitely the best blog I’ve read on this site. Granted I’ve only read about ten blogs on this site but your blog was by the far the most substantial and informative. Yes, I realize the blog I criticized was meant to be snarky, but in my opinion it wasn’t well done humor. Snarky sarcastic blogs like this are a dime a dozen on both the right and left and I find most writing like this tiresome and unoriginal. I also find most political stand up comedy these days tiring as well because it’s usually so snarky and sarcastic. A little snark and sarcasm is fine, but for my tastes the blogs I’ve read on this site have too much sarcasm, snark and name calling. That’s just my opinion and I know some people seem to like ongoing heavy doses of sarcastic humor.
Yes, I know what a troll is, although I’d never run across the term “concern troll” before. Thanks for furthering my online education. I was just pulling your leg when I wondered if you were a troll, and your comments that I happened to read were on the short side. I was trying to mimic the often sarcastic tone of sites like this site. Maybe I failed in trying to do this.
I agree with you that there is still serious conservative commentary. It just doesn’t seem to usually exist on conservative amateur blogs and I’ve pretty well given up finding worthwhile conservative amateur blog sites on the internet. I’ll take your word for it that there are good blogs on this site, but I’m not interested in wading through the less than good blogs on this site to find the good ones. My batting average so far at finding good blogs on this site is low, so I don’t plan to read through many blogs here in the future. I think just looking at the headlines and the first few lines will be sufficient to get a pretty good idea of what’s being espoused by this site. What I’ve found that works best for me on the internet is using the twitter accounts of skilled journalists and skilled writers from different political perspectives to find links to their writings.
In closing I want to say that I’m really at a loss at what it means to be a conservative Republican with the rise of Donald Trump. I’m certainly no expert on conservatism,often being more a centrist on many issues and in my political outlook, but Trump doesn’t seem to fit within my limited knowledge of what constitutes a true conservative. Trump’s mocking of Utah Republican Representative Mia Love (“Mia Love didn’t show me any love”) when her race hadn’t even been officially called struck me as petty and an example of Trump’s rhetoric that harms the Republican Party. Maybe this is something that is somewhat unique to Trump, but I fail to see how mocking a candidate from your own party, even if she is on the moderate side of the conservative spectrum, can be called conservatism in action or even a smart political move. Would Trump rather bring down more moderate members of the Republican Party by calling them out when they run for office in the way they think is best for their district when the alternative is for them to be replaced with Democrats? How does this help the conservative movement in the long run? On second thought, maybe Trump’s mocking of Mia Love isn’t that unique now that I think about all the acidic and negative comments I’ve read made by Republicans about politicians like John McCain. Do conservatives that consistently make very negative comments about Republicans on the more moderate side of the conservative spectrum and who want to run very conservative candidates against more moderate conservatives in primaries who are likely to lose in general elections against Democrats if they win against more moderate conservatives in the primaries think that their idea of conservative purity will really take hold in the long run across the United States? This didn’t seem to work out very well for Trump and his supporters in the midterms.
Maybe this would be a topic that you could write about. Judging from your one blog on this site, I would be interested in your perspective on this. I would read your entire blog if I happened to see it when skimming the blogs on this site.
Flying Dutchman says: What’s a good Irishman like Robert Francis O’Rourke doin’ with a nickname like Beto? It should be Bob from here on.
The Irish name generator at RumAndMonkey.com came up with “Patrick O’Flaherty”, BTW.
Jimmy Tijuana says: Taco Cart is noble and worthwhile business endeavor. Would that Beto turn his back on politics and aspire to something constructive like making tacos. But I don’t think he could handle being an entrepreneur.
Mark says: His name is Bobby. Bobby O’Rourke. Dammit.
Tell the truth and shame the devil#####Democrat.
Citizen Stan says: Good golly Miss Molly, what a bunch of mean replies. I’m deeply hurt by your micro and macro aggressions and need to find a safe place, but before leaving to find my safe place and sit down with a good adult coloring book, I have a couple questions. “Pragmatic,” I’ve never built a pagan altar before or had any interest to build one, and it had never crossed my mind to build one for a politician, but you might be on to a good idea. What kind of items do you think would make a good pagan altar honoring a politician? And anybody, what’s a good Cuban American like Rafael Cruz doing with a nickname like “Ted?” Also I recently read that Beto was sent by the leprechauns from the Irish Qanon Society so he could infiltrate the U.S. government and steal all the gold at Ft. Knox to bring about the rise of the Globalist Socialist Communist No Borders New World Government, something, something, something, and that George Soros and Kathy Griffin actually were the main funders of his campaign because all those small donations on his campaign finance reports were falsified.
Citizen Stan says: Hey “Suck it Buddy” Devildog,
I’m sure you’re right and Beto’s large fundraising total was a big benefit to his campaign. Do you think it could be that Ted – oops – excuse me, Rafael, was hurt by his capitulation to Trump after Trump had maligned Cruz’s wife’s appearance, repeatedly called Cruz “Lyin’ Ted,” and insinuated that Cruz’s father could have had something to do with JFK’s assassination? Could it be that people didn’t respect that it appears Cruz sold out defending his family because he decided his own political ambitions were more important than defending his family? Maybe the following might refresh your memory about the cognitive dissonance when it comes to Trump and Cruz:
Donald Trump tweet – Why would the people of Texas support Ted Cruz when he has accomplished absolutely nothing for them. He is another all talk, no action pol!
Donald Trump in phone interview with Fox News – “HIs father was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald’s being – you know, shot. I mean the whole thing is ridiculous,” Trump said during a phone interview with Fox
News. “What is this, right prior to his being shot, and nobody even brings it up. They don’t even talk about that. That was reported and nobody talks about it.”
Kellyanne Conway when she worked for Cruz’s campaign – “For Trump, the debates are fraught with peril. Because now the question is going to be about to be about these Trump victims. The reason the messaging has gotten better since Alex’s barnburner article two seeks ago is they’re starting to talk about victims of Trump University, victims of Trump in Atlantic City. Before that it was his conservative apostasies. Now it’s actually you’re for the little guy but you built your business on the backs of the little guy.”
More Kellyanne Conway – “And I think it’s something that could hurt Trump in South Carolina and beyond if people start to see that he’s not – he says he’s for the little guy, but he’s actually built a lot of his businesses on the backs of the little guy and he’s a lot of little guys through eminent domain, or through not paying contractors after you’ve built something. The little guys have suffered.”
There are more Kellyanne Conway statements harshly criticizing Trump when she worked for Cruz, but I think this might help you get the idea.
Remember when Cruz called Trump a sniveling coward for maligning his wife? Remember when Cruz didn’t endorse Trump at the Republican National Convention and instead told voters to vote their conscience? I kind of doubt that the only reason that O’Rourke gave Cruz a run for his money was because of O’Rourke’s fundraising. I wonder if one reason O’Rourke was able to raise so much money is that people didn’t respect Cruz for bowing down to Trump after Trump had repeatedly insulted Cruz as well as insulting Cruz’s wife and father.
So what’s your response to this, Devildog? Can you come up with something better than “suck it buddy?”
16 Comments