<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Seven Rules for a 2012 Victory</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 11:05:15 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Delia</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-337886</link>
		<dc:creator>Delia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 15:49:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-337886</guid>
		<description>176. Rachel Peepers:

ROTFL! You rascal! He-he-he!

You watch it there, Rachel. Them men folks can be dawgs er frogs and they don&#039;t turn into Princes when you kiss &#039;em [politicians maybe, Princes?...no way]!

How many internet proposals are you gonna rack up, you nawty, nawty girl? :lol:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>176. Rachel Peepers:</p>
<p>ROTFL! You rascal! He-he-he!</p>
<p>You watch it there, Rachel. Them men folks can be dawgs er frogs and they don&#8217;t turn into Princes when you kiss &#8216;em [politicians maybe, Princes?...no way]!</p>
<p>How many internet proposals are you gonna rack up, you nawty, nawty girl? <img src='http://pajamasmedia.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif' alt=':lol:' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: usafirst</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-337191</link>
		<dc:creator>usafirst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 04:30:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-337191</guid>
		<description>Abortion has been legal since 1973. Nixon (R) was president at the time. Since that time Republicans have had the White House for 22 years to 12 for the Democrats. Abortion is still legal. The Republicans don&#039;t want the laws to change because it gets them voters. If it weren&#039;t for that single issue, they would lose a consideral amount of their base. On the other hand, a change in the law would mobilize more votes on the Democratic side, whom already have a bigger base. Add in all of the people who are dissed by the Republicans (i.e. anyone who isn&#039;t white or Christian), and you can see their dillema. 
It doesn&#039;t matter how many Americans like or dislike the law, it only matters if the Supreme Court finds it constitutional or not. That one is very debatable, as are many, many more. Even in a democracy, majority rules don&#039;t override the constitution. Its a good thing too, as we would gradually lose all of your rights otherwise. 
I personally can understand the pro-life&#039;s point of view on this issue more than the pro-choice&#039;s view, but I am not going to vote Republican across the board on this one issue. Especially since it won&#039;t change things anyhow (see above). It is an effective vote getting tactic they work well however.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Abortion has been legal since 1973. Nixon (R) was president at the time. Since that time Republicans have had the White House for 22 years to 12 for the Democrats. Abortion is still legal. The Republicans don&#8217;t want the laws to change because it gets them voters. If it weren&#8217;t for that single issue, they would lose a consideral amount of their base. On the other hand, a change in the law would mobilize more votes on the Democratic side, whom already have a bigger base. Add in all of the people who are dissed by the Republicans (i.e. anyone who isn&#8217;t white or Christian), and you can see their dillema.<br />
It doesn&#8217;t matter how many Americans like or dislike the law, it only matters if the Supreme Court finds it constitutional or not. That one is very debatable, as are many, many more. Even in a democracy, majority rules don&#8217;t override the constitution. Its a good thing too, as we would gradually lose all of your rights otherwise.<br />
I personally can understand the pro-life&#8217;s point of view on this issue more than the pro-choice&#8217;s view, but I am not going to vote Republican across the board on this one issue. Especially since it won&#8217;t change things anyhow (see above). It is an effective vote getting tactic they work well however.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: myth buster</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-336994</link>
		<dc:creator>myth buster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 01:41:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-336994</guid>
		<description>#156- except the majority of Americans DO want to overturn Roe v. Wade: 51% of Americans are pro-life, and well over 80% support expanding restrictions on abortion.

FYI- many social conservatives adamantly refuse to vote for someone who is not pro-life, thus ignoring social issues is a non-starter.  You can&#039;t win if 1/3 if the electorate who would support you boycotts the election because they see you as no better than your opponent.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#156- except the majority of Americans DO want to overturn Roe v. Wade: 51% of Americans are pro-life, and well over 80% support expanding restrictions on abortion.</p>
<p>FYI- many social conservatives adamantly refuse to vote for someone who is not pro-life, thus ignoring social issues is a non-starter.  You can&#8217;t win if 1/3 if the electorate who would support you boycotts the election because they see you as no better than your opponent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: usafirst</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-336930</link>
		<dc:creator>usafirst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 00:56:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-336930</guid>
		<description>maak:
&quot;Liberals make the mistake of thinking Republicans are all alike but they are a very varied bunch. I personally don’t know any conservative that supported that 1st Stimulus Package. McCain and Republicans really caved in on that and I think it really hurt them.&quot;

Republicans make the mistake of thinking all &#039;liberals/independant/Democrats&#039; are all alike as well. We are just as varied on our side. I didn&#039;t like any of the stimulus/bailout packages either. I had to hold my nose and vote as you did, but John &#039;the fundamentals of the economy are strong, I don&#039;t have a single new idea&quot; McCain/Sarah &quot;the clueless hockeymom&quot; Palin decided my vote. 

Athinkingperson:

&quot;Again, liberals are so intimidated by an attractive, accomplished woman because they are few and far between on the Dem side of the ticket. Pelosi? Clinton? Boxer? Maddox? Yeah. We understand where the anger towards Palin stems from. It’s obvious.&quot;

And you call yourself a thinking person. Just because I don&#039;t think Palin is fit to be president doesn&#039;t mean I dislike her personally, and I am certainly not intimidated by her. I don&#039;t care if she&#039;s attractive, ugly, old, young, a woman, or a man. That doesn&#039;t affect my vote at all. Your comment is clearly sexist, as you apparantly only see as far as her looks. My wife is far hotter than Palin, and I wouldn&#039;t vote for her as president either, and I love her.

&quot;Now, please feel free to trash the GOP all you want. We know the source. Little education. MSM spoonfed bias. Reads the HuffPo for “news”. Simple brains put out simple ideas in the liberal camp we’ve found.&quot;

Are you serious? Education? I have a master&#039;s degree, not that that means anything, education and intelligence are two different things anyhow. Just because I don&#039;t agree with you, doesn&#039;t make me ignorant, and vice versa. Look at the last election, Obama/Biden had way way way more education than McCain/Palin, and that didn&#039;t seem to sway you any. 
MSM spoonfed bias, HuffPo?? Ever hear of Fox News? Fair and Balanced? What a joke. For every &#039;left wing media&#039; source out there, there are 10 right wing. Hannity, Limbaugh, O&#039;Reilly, Coulter, etc etc. I don&#039;t get my news from any one source, I like to get everyone&#039;s point of view before I make my own decision. Anyone who just watches to MSNBC or Fox only wants to hear what they want to hear, not be informed. Where are your sources coming from?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>maak:<br />
&#8220;Liberals make the mistake of thinking Republicans are all alike but they are a very varied bunch. I personally don’t know any conservative that supported that 1st Stimulus Package. McCain and Republicans really caved in on that and I think it really hurt them.&#8221;</p>
<p>Republicans make the mistake of thinking all &#8216;liberals/independant/Democrats&#8217; are all alike as well. We are just as varied on our side. I didn&#8217;t like any of the stimulus/bailout packages either. I had to hold my nose and vote as you did, but John &#8216;the fundamentals of the economy are strong, I don&#8217;t have a single new idea&#8221; McCain/Sarah &#8220;the clueless hockeymom&#8221; Palin decided my vote. </p>
<p>Athinkingperson:</p>
<p>&#8220;Again, liberals are so intimidated by an attractive, accomplished woman because they are few and far between on the Dem side of the ticket. Pelosi? Clinton? Boxer? Maddox? Yeah. We understand where the anger towards Palin stems from. It’s obvious.&#8221;</p>
<p>And you call yourself a thinking person. Just because I don&#8217;t think Palin is fit to be president doesn&#8217;t mean I dislike her personally, and I am certainly not intimidated by her. I don&#8217;t care if she&#8217;s attractive, ugly, old, young, a woman, or a man. That doesn&#8217;t affect my vote at all. Your comment is clearly sexist, as you apparantly only see as far as her looks. My wife is far hotter than Palin, and I wouldn&#8217;t vote for her as president either, and I love her.</p>
<p>&#8220;Now, please feel free to trash the GOP all you want. We know the source. Little education. MSM spoonfed bias. Reads the HuffPo for “news”. Simple brains put out simple ideas in the liberal camp we’ve found.&#8221;</p>
<p>Are you serious? Education? I have a master&#8217;s degree, not that that means anything, education and intelligence are two different things anyhow. Just because I don&#8217;t agree with you, doesn&#8217;t make me ignorant, and vice versa. Look at the last election, Obama/Biden had way way way more education than McCain/Palin, and that didn&#8217;t seem to sway you any.<br />
MSM spoonfed bias, HuffPo?? Ever hear of Fox News? Fair and Balanced? What a joke. For every &#8216;left wing media&#8217; source out there, there are 10 right wing. Hannity, Limbaugh, O&#8217;Reilly, Coulter, etc etc. I don&#8217;t get my news from any one source, I like to get everyone&#8217;s point of view before I make my own decision. Anyone who just watches to MSNBC or Fox only wants to hear what they want to hear, not be informed. Where are your sources coming from?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rachel Peepers</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-336880</link>
		<dc:creator>Rachel Peepers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 00:14:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-336880</guid>
		<description>Delia,

The more I listen to White Top pontificate, the more interesting he becomes. I&#039;ve had enough college boys to sink a battleship. An older man like our White Knight somehow whets my appitite. 

Incidentally, I told my father about the new direction my secret internet life is taking, and he&#039;s threatening to take my jet black Mustang away if I don&#039;t bend to his wishes. And start studying like my life depended on it.

At the same time, WH was spot on with the thing he said about Keith Olberwoman.

Furthermore, it&#039;s not as if there wasn&#039;t any foreshadowing going on in my fairly short but rich past. 
I&#039;m, of course, talking about the high school letters I used to write to Bill Clinton, reminding him how the late Billy Mayes swore that Oxy Clean could get most any stain out. Sadly, he never wrote back.

Anyway, I&#039;m picturing White Helmet as a young Harrison Ford. And, frankly, I like what I see. 

Golly gee, what&#039;s gotten into me? 

Hopefully, in the next few hours I&#039;ll feel one of my old Rachel rants coming on. And forget these silly day dreams of my knight in shining armor coming to sweep me off my feet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Delia,</p>
<p>The more I listen to White Top pontificate, the more interesting he becomes. I&#8217;ve had enough college boys to sink a battleship. An older man like our White Knight somehow whets my appitite. </p>
<p>Incidentally, I told my father about the new direction my secret internet life is taking, and he&#8217;s threatening to take my jet black Mustang away if I don&#8217;t bend to his wishes. And start studying like my life depended on it.</p>
<p>At the same time, WH was spot on with the thing he said about Keith Olberwoman.</p>
<p>Furthermore, it&#8217;s not as if there wasn&#8217;t any foreshadowing going on in my fairly short but rich past.<br />
I&#8217;m, of course, talking about the high school letters I used to write to Bill Clinton, reminding him how the late Billy Mayes swore that Oxy Clean could get most any stain out. Sadly, he never wrote back.</p>
<p>Anyway, I&#8217;m picturing White Helmet as a young Harrison Ford. And, frankly, I like what I see. </p>
<p>Golly gee, what&#8217;s gotten into me? </p>
<p>Hopefully, in the next few hours I&#8217;ll feel one of my old Rachel rants coming on. And forget these silly day dreams of my knight in shining armor coming to sweep me off my feet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Delia</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-336600</link>
		<dc:creator>Delia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 20:35:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-336600</guid>
		<description>Ut oh. I think White Helmet is smitten with my dear friend Rachel!

White Helmet, you is gon&#039; be mightily disappointed iffin&#039; ya wants to attempt an &#039;internet affair&#039; with Ms. Peepers.

Just sayin&#039;. ;)

Tee-hee

&quot;Pining for Obama to be frog-marched&quot;

When did Rachel say &#039;that&#039;???????

Balderdash!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ut oh. I think White Helmet is smitten with my dear friend Rachel!</p>
<p>White Helmet, you is gon&#8217; be mightily disappointed iffin&#8217; ya wants to attempt an &#8216;internet affair&#8217; with Ms. Peepers.</p>
<p>Just sayin&#8217;. <img src='http://pajamasmedia.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Tee-hee</p>
<p>&#8220;Pining for Obama to be frog-marched&#8221;</p>
<p>When did Rachel say &#8216;that&#8217;???????</p>
<p>Balderdash!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: white helmet</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-336445</link>
		<dc:creator>white helmet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 18:47:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-336445</guid>
		<description>Rachel @ 170:

Pining for Obama to be frog-marched from the White House only makes you sound as mean-spirited as the porcine Michael Moore who wanted Bush prosecuted for Iraq and keeping a trim waistline that made Moore look bad. 

The greeks and the romans criminalized each other like that, causing Athens to tear itself apart and Ceaser crossing the Rubcon etc.  Its unhealthy and has to stop. I think you agree, but are so frustrated with the current situation you are letting your commendable emotions get the best of you.

You don&#039;t hurt MY feelings (I&#039;m too busy changing batteries on my hearing aid, remember?). Your emotional outbursts just confirm that even bright, personable Stanford educated cheerleaders will attribute the current ills of the US to Obama rather than throw the dart at Bush and the republicans who controlled congress 1994-2006 and the WH from 2000-2008.   

Trying to grapple with the present w/o fairly assessing how it came to be, leaves you sounding as enlightened as the spittle-flecked Keith Olbermann, who I know you detest. 

I&#039;d like nothing better than to meet, but bed check in the retirement home is 8. They won&#039;t let me play any 50 cent either. (PS: forget that waive the tort nonsense: if its a suit worth bringing, keep the tort if you can).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rachel @ 170:</p>
<p>Pining for Obama to be frog-marched from the White House only makes you sound as mean-spirited as the porcine Michael Moore who wanted Bush prosecuted for Iraq and keeping a trim waistline that made Moore look bad. </p>
<p>The greeks and the romans criminalized each other like that, causing Athens to tear itself apart and Ceaser crossing the Rubcon etc.  Its unhealthy and has to stop. I think you agree, but are so frustrated with the current situation you are letting your commendable emotions get the best of you.</p>
<p>You don&#8217;t hurt MY feelings (I&#8217;m too busy changing batteries on my hearing aid, remember?). Your emotional outbursts just confirm that even bright, personable Stanford educated cheerleaders will attribute the current ills of the US to Obama rather than throw the dart at Bush and the republicans who controlled congress 1994-2006 and the WH from 2000-2008.   </p>
<p>Trying to grapple with the present w/o fairly assessing how it came to be, leaves you sounding as enlightened as the spittle-flecked Keith Olbermann, who I know you detest. </p>
<p>I&#8217;d like nothing better than to meet, but bed check in the retirement home is 8. They won&#8217;t let me play any 50 cent either. (PS: forget that waive the tort nonsense: if its a suit worth bringing, keep the tort if you can).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Kearney</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-336237</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Kearney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:18:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-336237</guid>
		<description>Thank you for a thoughtful piece. 

In addition to all the rest, Republicans need someone who will be highly articulate about the causes of, and solutions to, the credit and financial crises.

The 2010 congressional elections will give potential candidates the media exposure and new job titles to establish their credibility, stature, and name recognition with voters. 

&quot;House Speaker Ryan&quot; conveys instant national stature, whereas Rep. Ryan (R-WI) remains a long shot. If the word &quot;former&quot; precedes a prospective candidate&#039;s title, he needs a resume refresher. As we&#039;ve seen from Obama, author tours don&#039;t hurt.

If Obama&#039;s popularity somehow tanks by 2012 things will still not be a cinch, because Hillary looms. A major Republican sweep back into power in 2010 is much more likely to lead to Republican success in the next presidential election.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for a thoughtful piece. </p>
<p>In addition to all the rest, Republicans need someone who will be highly articulate about the causes of, and solutions to, the credit and financial crises.</p>
<p>The 2010 congressional elections will give potential candidates the media exposure and new job titles to establish their credibility, stature, and name recognition with voters. </p>
<p>&#8220;House Speaker Ryan&#8221; conveys instant national stature, whereas Rep. Ryan (R-WI) remains a long shot. If the word &#8220;former&#8221; precedes a prospective candidate&#8217;s title, he needs a resume refresher. As we&#8217;ve seen from Obama, author tours don&#8217;t hurt.</p>
<p>If Obama&#8217;s popularity somehow tanks by 2012 things will still not be a cinch, because Hillary looms. A major Republican sweep back into power in 2010 is much more likely to lead to Republican success in the next presidential election.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: L.A.</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-336095</link>
		<dc:creator>L.A.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:41:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-336095</guid>
		<description>If the GOP wants to win back the WH then we need to come together as a party and stop behaving like individual kings of the hills. 

1: Own up to the fact that many GLBT Americans agree with the fiscal responsibility of the GOP should take charge in the equalization of all Americans. Call it a civil union or even (and here&#039;s where the constitution comes into play) cut the church out of since they have no involvement in the matter and make it same sex marriage legal. 

2: Call in the accountants and have them go thru the Dem&#039;s plans that have been put into effect so far and prove how they are and were the wrong decisions. 

2.5: Have them come up with plans to fix the Dem&#039;s mistakes.

3: Get the bailout money back and give it to the people: Fix the school systems, offset college tuitions, give the troops better and more support. Don&#039;t just do something, make it big and public. 

I hope and pray that Americans see how WRONG OBAMA has been for us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the GOP wants to win back the WH then we need to come together as a party and stop behaving like individual kings of the hills. </p>
<p>1: Own up to the fact that many GLBT Americans agree with the fiscal responsibility of the GOP should take charge in the equalization of all Americans. Call it a civil union or even (and here&#8217;s where the constitution comes into play) cut the church out of since they have no involvement in the matter and make it same sex marriage legal. </p>
<p>2: Call in the accountants and have them go thru the Dem&#8217;s plans that have been put into effect so far and prove how they are and were the wrong decisions. </p>
<p>2.5: Have them come up with plans to fix the Dem&#8217;s mistakes.</p>
<p>3: Get the bailout money back and give it to the people: Fix the school systems, offset college tuitions, give the troops better and more support. Don&#8217;t just do something, make it big and public. </p>
<p>I hope and pray that Americans see how WRONG OBAMA has been for us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brad Moon</title>
		<link>http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/seven-rules-for-a-2012-victory/comment-page-4/#comment-336057</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad Moon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:05:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=60763#comment-336057</guid>
		<description>Sorry Sarah, I&#039;m not a big supporter of quitters.  As a retired Army officer, quitting when it&#039;s tough doesn&#039;t a good commander-in-chief.

This thread was originally about the 7 rules.  I like them.  What will really dissapoint me is if our republican representatives vote No on everything just because the Dems are proposing it.  I&#039;ve seen some good legislation get passed already that I wondered why we didn&#039;t do that the last 8 years, like raise the MPG standards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Sarah, I&#8217;m not a big supporter of quitters.  As a retired Army officer, quitting when it&#8217;s tough doesn&#8217;t a good commander-in-chief.</p>
<p>This thread was originally about the 7 rules.  I like them.  What will really dissapoint me is if our republican representatives vote No on everything just because the Dems are proposing it.  I&#8217;ve seen some good legislation get passed already that I wondered why we didn&#8217;t do that the last 8 years, like raise the MPG standards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
