Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(National Review)   2006 was pretty disastrous for conservatives - we lost the House, the Senate, and our ability to turn on the television without seeing Nancy Pelosi   (article.nationalreview.com) divider line
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

497 clicks; posted to Politics » on 31 Dec 2006 at 5:44 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



63 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2006-12-31 5:29:54 PM  
Real conservatives lost the House and Senate a long time ago.
 
2006-12-31 5:32:38 PM  
You think that's bad? I lost my socks.
 
2006-12-31 5:35:03 PM  
What General Specific said.
 
2006-12-31 5:35:22 PM  
Not as disastrous as that piece.

Was it supposed to be funny?
 
2006-12-31 5:37:41 PM  
Wow. Sore losers much?

And can someone please explain why the "Colbert-Wexler" thing (July) is a "blunder?"

...or has all that pissing and crying just short-circuited Ms. French's sense of humor?
 
2006-12-31 5:45:37 PM  
Descartes: Was it supposed to be funny?

That's why there aren't too many conservative comedians.
 
2006-12-31 5:47:33 PM  
Article, distilled:

"We sure are a bunch of dumbasses who totally farked things up, but you'll be sorry when Hil and Pelosi have a gay marriage on the Senate floor, soldier-hater."
 
2006-12-31 5:49:16 PM  
The party of responsibility became the party of hypocrisy.
 
2006-12-31 5:51:08 PM  
That article was another great example of why conservatives should leave humor to people who sit far to the left of them on the political spectrum. This is especially true for satire. Admit it right-wingers: You know it to be true no matter how much it hurts.
 
2006-12-31 5:52:21 PM  
[image from 225.ca too old to be available]
 
2006-12-31 5:54:19 PM  
 
2006-12-31 5:56:33 PM  
The NRO is a joke.

/not the funny kind of joke, either
 
2006-12-31 6:01:04 PM  
inFARKshun: The NRO is a joke.

/not the funny kind of joke, either


The same can be said of the Republican party.
 
2006-12-31 6:10:23 PM  
phaedrusiszen: That's why there aren't too many conservative comedians.

What about Dennis Miller?

Oh. Never mind. You're right. I see your point.
 
2006-12-31 6:11:30 PM  
JohnnyC

As well as the Democrat party
 
2006-12-31 6:23:28 PM  
Bush is not a conservative. So who lost what?
 
2006-12-31 6:25:45 PM  
rob.d

Then who voted him in?


/ghosts perhaps?
 
2006-12-31 6:39:52 PM  
When asked about it on her blog, the "Queen of Nice" responds, "go f-k urself."

Oh, liberals say the darndest things, don't they? They do have a way of allowing their true blue color to shine through. Have a great 2007.


Yep, those damned libs. Thank God no Republican, especially one in a position of power (unlike Rosie), would dare lower himself to saying something like that.

Keeee-rist, you'd swear the raw hypocrisy would make one's head explode.
 
2006-12-31 6:42:10 PM  
Ah. Now Republicans know how I felt every time I turned on the television just to see Dubya's face. I still have to repress the urge to toss the television out the window whenever he pops on.
 
2006-12-31 6:43:30 PM  
So now republicans are conservatives? The real conservatives DON'T SUPPORT any democrat/republican attempt to destroy the US by the inside, you know about the definition of DOMESTICS ENEMIES?
 
2006-12-31 6:46:46 PM  
phaedrusiszen: That's why there aren't too many conservative comedians.

What about Bush? He's hilarious once you get past all the deaths and corruption and whatnot.
 
2006-12-31 6:47:04 PM  
maybe it's because no one likes a buncha biased snots passing off year-old emails of questionable soldier testimony in Iraq as brand new, while the US Military Times polls show that most soldiers dissaprove of Bush's going into Iraq in the first place
 
2006-12-31 6:53:04 PM  
B-b-but Israel has WMDs.
 
2006-12-31 6:53:14 PM  
[image from img297.imageshack.us too old to be available]

Props to Detry
 
2006-12-31 6:57:22 PM  
deliusion on the cusp of madness
 
2006-12-31 7:11:14 PM  
rob.d

Bush is not a conservative. So who lost what?

Huh? What does the president have to do with Congress and the House of Representitives being defeated in a landslide?
I never knew the president had the sole power to do so many things.
 
2006-12-31 7:12:56 PM  
elminestrone: deliusion on the cusp of madness

we passed madness a LONG time ago.
 
2006-12-31 7:13:56 PM  
God-is-a-Taco: Huh? What does the president have to do with Congress and the House of Representitives being defeated in a landslide?

*pats on head*

its ok, maybe someday someone will explain why the president's unpopularity might have a negative effect on people in his own party. There there child. Shush, it'll be okay.
 
2006-12-31 7:19:02 PM  
thumbtack: As well as the Democrat party

As well as folks who don't know a noun from an adjective.
 
2006-12-31 7:20:12 PM  
Four things which strike me as hipocritical about this list. Two of the quotes are from Rosie O'Donnell. Since when was she the Democratic representive from ANYWHERE?

Next was the Wexler quote from the Colbert Report "I enjoy doing cocaine because it's a fun thing to do." No sense of humor, no context on the quote, haha.

Then the Hillary quote stating the House of reps is ran like a plantation. Guess what Newt Said the same thing in 1994
"I clearly fascinate them," Gingrich said of the Democrats. "I'm much more intense, much more persistent, much more willing to take risks to get it done. Since they think it is their job to run the plantation, it shocks them that I'm actually willing to lead the slave rebellion." [Washington Post, 10/20/94]

Not really surprised by the NRO.
 
2006-12-31 7:29:07 PM  
fark Bush, fark the Republicans, fark the conservatives, fark the evangelicals, fark them all.
 
2006-12-31 7:31:25 PM  
grytpype-thynne: fark Bush, fark the Republicans, fark the conservatives, fark the evangelicals, fark them all.


I hummed Auld Lang Zine while reading that.
 
2006-12-31 7:32:13 PM  
That's the Republican stance on governance. Just change the parties, ideologies and activists.

Be a uniter, not a divider.
 
2006-12-31 7:36:57 PM  
March: Rep. Cynthia McKinney, having been stopped by a security checkpoint, throws her cell phone at U.S. Capital police and throws a punch. Just as Russell Crowe's flying cell phone couldn't save Cinderella Man, McKinney is soundly defeated in the Democratic primary.

Too bad. Cinderella Man was a good movie.
 
2006-12-31 7:54:14 PM  
SilentStrider

*pats on head*

its ok, maybe someday someone will explain why the president's unpopularity might have a negative effect on people in his own party. There there child. Shush, it'll be okay.


I guess so. I never knew the President could declare war, increase national debt, conduct illegal wiretapping, approve and re-approve the Patriot Act, legalize torture, and otherwise create/approve other legislation all by himself. I should have paid more attention in school I guess.

But to reply to your misplaced condescension in a serious manner:

It's funny that now it's Republicans that are taking the "It's Bush's fault!" stance.
 
2006-12-31 7:58:57 PM  
God-is-a-Taco: I guess so.

There is fairly well-supported work that mid-term results of a party are highly influenced by two factors: the general subjective view of the economy and presidential popularity.
 
2006-12-31 8:07:13 PM  
Abagadro

God-is-a-Taco: I guess so.

There is fairly well-supported work that mid-term results of a party are highly influenced by two factors: the general subjective view of the economy and presidential popularity.


I can see why it can be that way, but I don't understand why. This is an honest question of mine, as I am admittedly not an expert politician:
Why is the President so readily seperated from the rest of government?

It goes both ways:

"Bush started the Iraq mess!"
Democratic politicians (or fans) that ignore the Democratic senators and such that approved of it and gave their signature.

"Bush cost us the majority!"
Republican politicians (or fans) that voted and approved of the policies when they were first created.
 
2006-12-31 8:11:49 PM  
God-is-a-Taco: Why is the President so readily seperated from the rest of government?


Theodore Lowi had a good line about the office. He said Americans imbue the president with meaning similar to a combination of the Statue of Liberty and Jesus Christ.

Essentially the president gets the blame or the credit for lots of things he doesn't have much to do with. He is a symbol for the entire federal government. A majority of people can't even name their Congress member. They use what is called "low information rationality" to make most voting decisions and part of that is the view of the president.
 
2006-12-31 8:34:49 PM  
Abagadro

Ahh, thanks. That makes sense to a degree*. I forgot to factor in ignorance. So it is basically just that people need a central, prominent figure to place blame on rather than researching each candidate?

*Although in this specific instance, the legislative branch (or whatever its called with the House and Congress) was infamous for supporting the White House without question. (Rubber stamp congress and other cliché phrases)

The more I learn about politics, the more I realize I could never be a politician.
 
2006-12-31 8:43:51 PM  
Craptastic
As well as folks who don't know a noun from an adjective.

You beat me to it. :)

thumbtack
The old Bill Frist "democrat party" line will blow your neo-conservative cover. You A-hole reputlitard.

ceremony_1968
I'm in ur house, rasing ur taxes

Boo hoo. Whiney crying titty baby. Unless I totally read that wrong, I take it to mean you don't mind spending more of your money (made from the souls of crippled children) to spend on your Global War Against Everything. So pony up and put the money where your gaping pie-hole is.

/registered non-partisan
//And yes, I have something to say to just about everyone ;)
 
2006-12-31 8:43:52 PM  
Slaxl: You think that's bad? I lost my socks.

I lost the price gun from work. Let's share the sorrows.
 
2006-12-31 8:46:21 PM  
This was my favorite image from the 2006 elections:

[image from i12.tinypic.com too old to be available]
 
2006-12-31 8:54:52 PM  
Sure it was a bad year. Don't blame the populace. Y'all made your own bed and betrayed the public trust. Not that we trusted you all that much to begin with. Clearly, it was still far too much.
 
2006-12-31 9:12:27 PM  
Why are there so many National Review links on Fark?
 
2006-12-31 9:15:33 PM  
Essentially the president gets the blame or the credit for lots of things he doesn't have much to do with. He is a symbol for the entire federal government. A majority of people can't even name their Congress member. They use what is called "low information rationality" to make most voting decisions and part of that is the view of the president.

I can't believe this is the first time I've ever seen that phrase. I definitely need to remember that one. I've definitely used low information rationality to make more than one decision in my life.
 
2006-12-31 9:26:46 PM  
Actually, not only did the GOP lose the House and the Senate, they also lost 6 Governorships, 9 state Legislatures and who knows how many other state & local races (actually, I don't think anyone really keeps track of the local results overall, but I'll bet it wasn't pretty for Republicans in general).

They also lost the money race for the first time in history (that I know of); the DNC, DCCC, DSCC, DGA and DLCC combined raised quite a bit more than the RNC, RCCC, RSCC, RGA and RLCC combined.
 
2006-12-31 9:44:07 PM  
That was craptacular. Add into the fact that some of it is patently false. For instance, that story about Jamil Hussein? EVen the right-wing Little Green Footballs says the guy exists.
 
2006-12-31 9:48:16 PM  
Congress favorable numbers have been in the dumpster for many years.
As long as I can remember it has been in the dumpster.
Regardless of the party in power.

Why do you think Republicans gained control in 1994?
Congress under Democratic control sucked and people wanted change.
Well it didn't happen and won't till we get Term Limits.
Yep thats right those in the cat bird seat have to vote to cut their teat off.
There is an inherent built in flaw called lobbyists and the power of spending trillions.
 
2006-12-31 9:56:13 PM  
No one in the GOP that has any clout is worried at all.

They have plenty of money, own their homes, have trust funds set up for their farked up kids, live in the relative safety of suburbia and are so old that by the time all the Republican actions come home to roost they'll either be in the drooling years or already frying in Hell anyway.

Does anyone really believe that they care enough to do anything but cough up some more spin?
 
2006-12-31 9:57:36 PM  
larry00 :Congress favorable numbers have been in the dumpster for many years.
As long as I can remember it has been in the dumpster.
Regardless of the party in power.


As with most of what you post, that was totally and completely false. Congress' approval ratings skyrocketed after the 1994 Republican Revolution for a time. They tanked because your pals persecuted Clinton for an affair, and because Newt Gingrich thought that, somehow, shutting down the government would win his party points. Republican control started sliding after that; had it not been for the 2001 terrorist attacks, the Republicans probably would have lost control sooner.

Well it didn't happen and won't till we get Term Limits.

Yes. Because the most important thing in an age of globalization is a Congress full of freshmen and relatively new legislators who don't know jack-all about foreign policy, America's existing economic and military commitments, and the complex interrelationships between the Presidency, executive offices, the courts, and our existing treaty relationships.

Yep thats right those in the cat bird seat have to vote to cut their teat off.

Don't like it? Use the power of constitutional conventions to change it. In the meantime, the smarter Americans realize that, for all the dangers of incumbency, kicking out smart legislators simply because they know what the fark they're doing is a great way to fark over the United States.
 
Displayed 50 of 63 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.