The Campaign For DA

2.02.2016

Random Tuesday Morning Thoughts


  • I watched mostly CNN last night during the Iowa Caucuses.  It was so ramped up. So over the top. They had a reporter watching the handwritten ballots being put into baskets and you would think he was watching a last second Super Bowl field goal.
  • Why does Iowa go first?
  • And who wins Iowa often doesn't matter. But I'd be a little concerned it I was Hillary. But I can't imagine Sanders winning in the South. 
  • It's Groundhog Day which only makes me think of Bill Murray.
  • Mike Huckabee dropped out of the political race today. A guy who had a Fox News program with all that exposure never gained any traction. 
  • "I normally think poles are for strippers and cross country skiers." - Sarah Palin regarding political polls. 
  • Crazy ex-Cowboy Joseph Randle may have bet on games while a Cowboy.



64 comments:

Anonymous said...

bacon and me gonna need a few minutes to ourselves

Anonymous said...

I haven't watched a single news program for the last four days. I CANNOT listen to one more pundit tell me what it all means.

Anonymous said...

RTG where is she - Corpus Christi

Anonymous said...

I wouldn't count ole' Bernie out yet. He's got my attention. I'm specifically voting in the Democratic primary to help ensure Hillary isn't our option.

Anonymous said...

The great Texas Law Hawk has landed a Taco Bell commercial for the Super Bowl. A nationwide Super Bowl commercial. Awesome. Barry will really be bitter & jealous now. From sea to shining sea.

http://www.guidelive.com/viral/2016/02/01/texas-law-hawk-bryan-wilson-super-bowl-commercial

Anonymous said...

That RTG looks like she's in Galveston.

wordkyle said...

Hillary Clinton won Iowa by a coin toss. (Or several coin tosses.) There's your Idiocracy moment. Democrats use the same method to choose the next leader of the free world and to decide where to go for lunch.

Anonymous said...

Trump will still win!

Upstairs said...

I watched CSPAN cover one caucus in Des Moines. About 450 people attended. It was certainly wheels off. They were making up some of the rules as they went. The counting was anything but precise. Turned out they had 9 delegates to award. Hillary got 5 and Trump 4 with a difference of about 15 votes. Looks like that might have been a typical precinct.

Anonymous said...

I don't get the Trump coverage. All along Cruz was expected to win Iowa, it's only been in recent weeks that Trumps poll numbers there rose to the point where they thought he might win.

I've always considered myself a conservative, but if Cruz or Rubio get the nomination, I'm either staying home or voting for Sanders on election day

Anonymous said...

Those of you who are interested and know how to do a Google image search will enjoy the RTG's Instagram feed, I'm guessing.

Anonymous said...

9:23 -

Thanks for the heads up on the Texas Law Hawk.

The Backdoor Intruder

Anonymous said...

Who cares about what happens in Iowa?
The only time I hear about that state is once every 4 years.

wordkyle said...

940 - You might as well go ahead and vote for Sanders, based on your professed lack of knowledge. According to Real Clear Politics, which uses the averages of polls, since July Trump has been in the lead in Iowa, except for a few weeks.

And if you consider yourself a conservative, but are considering voting for Sanders the Socialist, then you really ought to reconsider one or the other of those considerations.

Anonymous said...

9:40 - You're either lying about being conservative, ignorant or both. I'll vote for any republican candidate over the democrat offerings, but for you to consider Trump more of a conservative than Cruz or even Rubio indicates you are just trolling.

Anonymous said...

Looks like she's got all her teeth. So I agree with the poster above, that's gotta' be Corpus.

Rage

Anonymous said...

What Barry??? Nothing on the national debt hitting $19,000,000,000,000.00? About $54,000.00 for every man woman and child in the US. Just send me your family's portion.

Anonymous said...

Interesting article on why Iowa goes first.

http://www.npr.org/2016/01/29/464804185/why-does-iowa-vote-first-anyway

Anonymous said...

I don't get the "no gambling" rule in sports. I understand the NFL not wanting players to bet on NFL games - you don't want a player to be able to affect an outcome for his own personal gain. But other sports? Why? If this moron had gone to Vegas for the weekend and blew $75,000 playing craps or slots or blackjack, no problem. But he wanders over to the sportsbook and lays down $50 on a tennis match, and he's violated league policy?

Anonymous said...

Everything you need to know about Wordy can be summed up in his two posts above.

Anonymous said...

I don't get the "no gambling" rule in general. Why exactly do we not have gambling, Indian or otherwise, in Texas?

Anonymous said...

Don't under estimate Sanders in the South. His message resonates with those that aren't billionaires or huge corporations.

Anonymous said...

Trump is a dumb A#@ Cracker and will never win the presidential election. The only place Trump would win an election is in Wise Co. with all of you other dumb Crackers.

Anonymous said...

It is obvious that the RTG today is a fine church going Christian girl. That's because you can see that the Lord has blessed her so bountifully.

DF Biblical Scholar Who Can Read Between the Lines.

Anonymous said...

Anyone want to bet that Mitt & Biden have the political sign printers on speed dial just in case they are needed?

DF Astute Political Analyst

Anonymous said...

10:56 - Nope. Nothing on the national debt. I guess Barry didn't get your memo again.

What would you like to see Barry comment on tomorrow on his blog?

Anonymous said...

12:23

TX has selective gambling, like the lottery, horse racing and dog racing.

Rumor has it the state doesn't want to become a haven for the types of folks involved in casino gambling and book making, so we all go to NM, OK or LA instead, taking our money out of state.

I have a relative that is a state representative in another state. He's told me they make a ton of money off of the casinos and can't believe TX is so stupid to let their money go across state lines.

Anonymous said...

I love big caucuses!

DF Wordkyle

Anonymous said...

@1045 and 1047

You're right about the poll data. I got that part wrong.

I'm not trolling and I know exactly what the word conservative means. To be honest though, I don't know that I've ever had an opportunity to vote for an actual conservative in the general election

I'm in my late thirties....

96 - Bob Dole, we were kidding ourselves right?
00 - Dubya, we all bought that bill of goods
04 - Dubya / I voted libertarian that year
08 - McCain, I bought into some of the hype. Palin's convention
speach was entertaining
12 - Romney / yup, voted Libertarian again
16 - Rand doesn't stand a chance.

I live in Texas, a Republican will carry the state regardless of my actions. A vote for Sanders would be a protest vote on my part and if any of guys are actually hoping for a Cruz nomination.... I would wager to say you really don't understand how the world works.

mzchief said...

To Anonymous 12:50...

The Sanders' message resonates with people who are bad at math and want "free" stuff. The rest of us know the numbers don't add up because NOTHING is free.

IF taxes are raised on the "wealthy" the "wealthy" just charge more for their goods, services and rental properties which are paid for by.....wait for it....working/poor people.

Soooo, anytime a politician tells you they're looking out for poor/working people and are going to raise the taxes on the wealthy, get ready to pay for those increased taxes.

Anonymous said...

In a democracy voters will vote for the candidate who promises them the most hand outs from the public treasury. LBJ knew that and hence his Great Society. Sanders knows the principle also.

Bear said...

11:25

The reason for athletes not being allowed to gamble is because if they get into debt to large debt, they can be "convinced" to shave points, take a fall, fake injury, etc... to affect the outcome of a legitimate game to make up for debts owed on other sports betting.

Should be easy to understand. Can't have professional athletes in debt to the book makers.

Anonymous said...

He would also win in Graham, they have tons of crackers!

Anonymous said...

The only thing that matters about Iowa is the pig farms. Huckabee won it last time so don't take it too seriously how the pig pokers vote.

Anonymous said...

Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Clinton, Sanders. Trump, Cruz are just too far out there (women are bimbos, gays are monsters, etc.) to win. Leaves Rubio. Clinton edges out Sanders, but all the "we want to have everything but want other people to pay for it" crowd makes it an almost win for the Socialist party candidate. Rubio v Clinton? Rubio wins unless Obama goes all out for Clinton. She knows this. Maybe the Supreme Court is the deal that's been done behind the scenes to mend the Obamas-Clintons riff. If so, Clinton is next POTUS.

Anonymous said...

2:50 -

I get your point - but it's really just advocating for no illegal, off-the-books gambling, which I agree with.

But if I go place a bet at a sportsbook in Vegas, don't they take my money up front? I'm not sure how a legal wager made like that would result in a guy owing a bunch of money to a bookie, who could then hold it over his head and make him affect a game. Sounds like a great movie, though.

And, again, an NFL player can gamble at a casino game or on a horse (or dog) race. How is that different than an NFL player placing a bet on a golfer in the PGA with the casino's sportsbook?

Anonymous said...

The Texas Law Hawk is starring in his own Super Bowl Taco Bell commercial http://youtu.be/M5Td2FCpzvo

Anonymous said...

Does this mean Joseph Randle won't get into Canton?

wordkyle said...

211 - Okay, you came clean on the polls, and I agree with you on the Republican nominees in the general. You're probably also right about the Republican winning Texas no matter who it is. But please clarify and expand on your opinion on a Cruz nomination. Are you a Trump supporter and think he's unbeatable? Think that he's the only chance against Hillary? That Trump is the only true conservative running? That the Republican establishment won't allow the others? What is the reason behind your opinion?

Anonymous said...

IF taxes are raised on the "wealthy" the "wealthy" just charge more for their goods, services and rental properties which are paid for by.....wait for it....working/poor people. - mzchief

You probably don't remember the 1950's. You know what everybody calls "the good old days". Guess what taxes were on the wealth then? Over 50%! The middle class was thriving because the wealthiest had incentive not to gouge the poor.

Anonymous said...

Wordkyle, Would you line up whole families of illegal immigrants, gays and Muslims and shoot them into a mass grave if you thought you could get away with it? I'm not being cute here, I really want to know. Far right conservatives really walk their rhetoric right up to that line and I want to know if it is just anger or something deeper.

Nasreen Iqbal said...

6:08: I agree. I am conservative on a lot of issues but the current crop of internet conservative seems to be about complaining how "these people (gays, Muslims, Mexicans, black people, atheists, the disabled) have it too damn good, and we're going to do something about that!"

They vary about how many layers of politeness they shovel over the basic sentiment, but it is always there.

wordkyle said...

608 - Please provide a list of names of people you've heard say such things. It should be easy for you to do, you trotted it out in public. (And I don't mean "anonymous" commenters on the internet.)

Here's the deal - I don't think you can do it. If you're not being cute, then you're indulging in an over-the-top premise created in your own mind, or under the influence of others who blurt out such nonsense. If you really believe such things, then you probably should seek professional help.

Anonymous said...

532,

"You probably don't remember the 1950's. You know what everybody calls "the good old days". Guess what taxes were on the wealth then? Over 50%! The middle class was thriving because the wealthiest had incentive not to gouge the poor."

Um, no. First, there has never been a tax on "wealth" in the US.

If you mean income, then you have to take into account deductions, tax breaks, from any individual year. During the decade of the 50's, deductions were huge. Very few individuals paid a 50% effective tax rate.

The data proves that a lower tax rate increases GDP, which benefits all in any society.

If you want to limit something, simply tax it.

D.D. Eisenhower

Anonymous said...

608,

Can you avoid being a douche, by not posting disgusting drivel?

I am a conservative, and I am not interested in shooting anyone, unless attacked. Further, I am not angry at anyone.

But you surely seem to be. In fact, liberal progressives seem to be the angriest, most intolerant people on the planet.

Turn that frown upside down.

Anonymous said...

So the comments section on Fox news is not indicative of the hateful views also held by pundits, lawmakers and party leaders? But to provide your quotable list:

Trump
Cruz
Ted Nugent
Palin
Gomer
Bachmann
Mo Brooks
Kris Kobach
Bobby Franklin
Mike Huckabee

I could go on for days, these are just the ones I follow on twitter. When a guy like Kobach talks about shooting illegals, do I really need the influence of others to dissect that. People that get off on that type of talk, like you, need professional help!

Anonymous said...

8:27 Well I am full of piss and vinager, so no, my drivel lives on. Maybe it will even cure your sexually transmitted crazy mouth!

You probably don't want to do the shooting, but you wouldn't oppose it if it happened. Many German citizens pretended to not know what was happening at the Nazi camps either.

I am a moderate and I see the hatred and intolerance on both sides but nothing touches the extreme level of conservative hate at this time.

Anonymous said...

1118,

Moderate...riiiiight.

Bear said...

The liberal side of our community seems to mistake disagreement with hate. How come every time I disagree with something, you say I am a hater? Don't you disagree with conservatives, yet you claim to be tolerant of all views? You are tolerant only of those views that reflect your own.

Chew on that for a while.

wordkyle said...

Well, you literally did what I asked - provided a list of names. Without, of course, proof that any of them said anything remotely like what you attributed to them. I googled "kris kobach shoot illegals" and found nothing.

So far, you've shown that you're either a troll, or a woefully misinformed and misguided individual with anger and ego issues. Your approach has been belligerent and you've made ridiculous and unsupported claims. Either provide evidence of your idiotic accusations, showing you deserve any attention, or don't, and confirm your troll status.

Anonymous said...

Then why are you "disagreements" always filled with such vitriol? Why do so many of you wish for boats of refugees to sink, illegals to die in the desert, Obama to be shot and the gays to be locked away on an island? You chew!

Anonymous said...

http://www.pfaw.org/press-releases/2015/04/pfaw-edit-memo-anti-immigrant-anti-latino-rhetoric-republican-leaders

Wordy, since you have suddenly forgot how to Google, here is your list including Kobach and many of the others. My claims are backed up here, my ego is doing OK and the only belligerent comments are yours. Not looking for attention just looking to get to the root of what drives people like yourself and why you are so afraid and desperate.

wordkyle said...

1239 - Okay, that's the best you'll be able to do, a list by an extreme Far Left website, with a list of positions taken by people you disagree with. That's the top shelf argument you'll ever have. And not a single mention of killing anyone or hating anyone. The one comment about shooting is by Mo Brooks, who expressly says he wouldn't shoot anyone. What you call "hate" or "afraid and desperate" is just people disagreeing with you. You mischaracterize their stance to justify your own bile.

A long time ago I read that a primary difference between Liberals and Conservatives is that Liberals think Conservatives are evil, and Conservatives think Liberals are stupid and foolish. You pretty much confirmed the accuracy of that observation.

Anonymous said...

12:24

You seem to take a few over the top comments from extreme right wing nuts and project that belief on every conservative. How about I take every left wing nut case and apply that to every democrat out there. Works both ways.

Anonymous said...

So 12:24

Do you believe in abortion as a selected form of birth control? Babies can be killed up to the point of birth and still be called an abortion? Or even killed after being born if the mom decides she doesn't like the way the baby looks?

All are positions that left wingers have taken in the past. So if you are a democrat, then you must agree with it all.

Baby killer, you are.

Anonymous said...

You stupid liberals forgot everything that JFK tried to teach you about taxes. Go read and listen to what he said. Then came LBJ and it all went to hell.

Anonymous said...

Why does it matter where the quotes are posted. These are actual quotes by these people and I only chose that website because it incorporated so many in one spot. It is easy to read between the lines and see what Brooks and Kobach are getting at, which is hate. They walk their speech right up to the line, like I said in my initial post. Good leaders don't play on hate to fulfill their agenda.

I'm not a liberal, I usually vote Republican. I'm just damn tired of the hateful rhetoric by conservatives because it has no place. I'm a Christian first and foremost and I just can't handle the hypocrisy anymore in the party in which I vote and who claims to share my values.

All you have done here is spin doctoring i.e. the "far left website", and then trying to peg me as a liberal with a made up reference to something you read one time which is nothing more than "Mr Conservative, describe Mr Liberal". It's pathetic, typical Wordkyle bullshit. All I want you to do is come clean about your feelings for immigrants, gays and other minorities. Elaborate on that! Tell me what you really want to happen to these people.

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure where abortion came in but I am staunchly pro-life. I am by no means a left winger, but a moderate. I vote Republican mostly, so I must agree with all the hate then.

Damn, at least Wordy can frame an argument, let him do the heavy lifting for you from now on.

Anonymous said...

The problem with that is far right hate speech is becoming mainstream. The over the top comments are from those leading the polls and garnering grassroots support nationally. So it is real and it is a problem.

I'm not seeing or reading the same rhetoric from liberals at this time. Not that I support them because their policies are horrible, but at least their trying to look sane.

Anonymous said...

2:07 I kinda think Liberals are ok with what LBJ did, I mean locking up the vote and all for few handouts here and there. Cheapest way to buy future elections is to have the people that vote against you paying for it. It was a genius political move by LBJ. I'd give my left nut I'd we had the black vote on lockdown and could troll the libs at every turn.

wordkyle said...

I dislike having to make my response all about you personally, but discussion of the issues, facts, and reality is impossible. You've inserted your unhinged outlook into the conversation.

Well, you seem to see hate where there is none. You make accusations of shooting and murder, involving mass graves, without a shred of anyone ever even implying such things. You're like the worst kind of conspiracy nut, so wrapped up in your own brain's imbalance that you don't even know what reality is any more. Look back at your own comments and see if any of them strike you as "over the top." If not, then you're too far gone to have a rational discussion with. At this point I take it you're sincere, so the best avenue is for you to seek professional help. (The worst part is that so many Liberals are just like you.)

Anonymous said...

No, Wordkyle, I've painted you into a corner and now you are resulting to attacks when faced with facts and tough questions.

You also twist my words. I never mentioned there were mass graves, just asked if that is what you support. You never answered. I never mentioned actual shootings, just quoted hate speech by an influential lawmaker referencing taking up arms against immigrants who he felt were going to "ethnically cleanse" us. If that is not inflammatory I don't know what is. People filled with hate need professional help, not those who call them on it! (And for the 3rd, and last time, I'm not a Liberal). That is the problem with neocons, if you don't agree with them 100% they label you as a liberal.

To clear it up, my views on top issues:

*Abortion- Pro life with exceptions of rape, incest, or danger to mother.
*Gay Marriage-I would support civil unions, but against marriage.
*Immigration-Anti-Amnesty, would like a path to citizenship and guest worker program; support deportation of criminals.
*Healthcare-Would like repeal of Obamacare, expanded Medicare, and keeping the pre-existing exemption for all insured.
*Education-No standardized tests, no common core. Remove federal controls and pave way for privitized education. Revamp college tuition and student loans to make it more affordable.
*Taxes-hybrid flat tax system
*Foreign Policy-protect our people and interests at all costs. Too much else to list.
*Drug War-Make marijuana legal, keep other hard drugs class 1, tackle prescription med crises by holding Dr's accountable.
*Gun Control-oppose most, if not all contol laws. We have the laws already in place to deal with gun crime. Mass shootings can't be stopped.
*Legal System-Remove the jury system completely and grand jury system as well. Average Joe's are just too stupid or have other agendas to determine guilt/innocence without bias. Remove mandatory minimums.
*Law Enforcement-Deep cuts to technology (plate scanners, phony cell towers) and military equipment. Weaken police unions so bad officers can be fired. Ramp up requirements, college degrees mandatory.
*Financial Regulation-lessen federal oversight, give the big banks free reign, but no bail outs. Open up the economy fully.
*Climate Change-keep an eye on it but don't base energy policy off of it. Back out of global climate pact.
*Energy-build the Keystone XL, extend path for energy independence.
*UN-don't back out completely, but turn a blind eye.
*Social Security-Open it up to individual control but if you lose it, it's gone.
*Welfare Programs-scrap them all unless you are clearly disabled physically or mentally. A one time bail out for all in the amount based on family size if you meet conditions such as death of breadwinner, loss of job in a economically repressed area, etc.

Now tell me again how liberal I am.

wordkyle said...

You say things, then claim you didn't say them, then say them again. You (at 11:10 PM) accused Kobach of "talking about shooting illegals," and it never happened. You re-emphasize it with your "ethnically cleanse" comment, and it still never happened.

When so much of your argument rests on something that never happened, none of what you say can be trusted. You all but accuse people of condoning murder, yet don't think your own remarks are "over the top."

For what it's worth, I don't really think you're that nuts. I think you're a troll, probably one with a lengthy track record. (You may have even been run out of another blog, years ago.) I have chosen, in this one case, to respond because I like to point out the methods (outrageous accusations, outright lying, lack of specific sources) that Liberals and other foolish people use when they can't make a valid argument. Thanks for being such a dandy illustration. And now, once again, I'm done with you.

Anonymous said...

Wordkyle,

If you can't read, or refuse to read the full transcript I cannot help you. You will reap what you sew soon enough!