Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
TOP NEWS   LeftArrow - Townhall.com   RightArrow - Townhall.com  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Kevin McCullough :: Townhall.com Columnist
LIBS: Standing on the Shoulders of Crash Dummies
by Kevin McCullough
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Who should John McCain pick as his running mate?














Liberals have been clucking non-stop since election night at the prospects of what Democrat victory means to their radical causes. In first recruiting, then funding, faith-friendly, conservative, and in a couple of instances even born-again candidates -- the Democrat party captured needed numbers to swipe leadership posts.

The strategy proved extremely effective. Nancy Pelosi will bring San Fran values to the Beltway debate, and Kennedy, Kerry, and Clinton will clamor to be first in line.

But how did she get there? In many instances - by taking advantage of terrible Republicans - and their own criminal wrong doing. But the main strategy was to convince a needed one-fourth of the electorate that the Democrat option on the ballot was not much different than the Republican option. Winning enough of the seats to take control of both houses, Pelosi is free to assign every committee chairmanship in the House, as is Reid in the Senate - to the most disgusting and vile liberal creatures imaginable.

The strategy was so sound it was as though they had taken the ideas right out of my book: MuscleHead Revolution: Overturning Liberalism with Commonsense Thinking or at the very least from the scrap notes of Karl Rove.

Look at how the candidates described themselves: "pro-marriage", "pro-life", "pro-gun", "born-again Christian", "pro-business", "anti-tax,” and in one case "former member of the Reagan administration."

And understand this clearly, it wasn't important that any of them demonstrate these beliefs - merely campaign on them. And in doing so,they campaigned only enough to make the point that in pulling the lever for them - the "common sense" voter wouldn't lose on certain, and vitally important "values" issues.

They invoked Jesus, God, the Bible, marriage, and faith in decibel and volume that would have earned Soros-sized scorn, and Kos-site mockery - were the party to actually let them demonstrate any of it.

But in doing so, they tricked the masses into believing that their positions on such matters would stand as strong as the true-believers that some of them displaced.

So what of it...

In January Speaker-Elect Pelosi will remind Heath Shuler that while he could throw a somewhat average NFL pass back in the day, that on her team - she's the coordinator of offense and he'll only be throwing on her direction.

One of my listeners described this situation perfectly this week calling the freshman class - the Crash Dummies.

They will have no clout, no position, and will be in immediate and desperate need of support and organization. They will not be in position to openly defy Pelosi, Murtha, Reid, and Durbin. Some have gone so far to already admit on the campaign trail that though they hold the position the voter felt was important - they will not "lecture others about morality, like Rick Santorum." Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kevin McCullough's first hardback title "The MuscleHead Revolution: Overturning Liberalism with Commonsense Thinking" is now available. He blogs at www.muscleheadrevolution.com.

Be the first to read Kevin McCullough's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Subject: jerubaal
jerubaal writes: Monday, November, 13, 2006 11:33 PM

>>APR You have a specific lack of insight. In case you're wondering, it's a psychological term of art.

Can you be .... specific?

>>"I fully expect that any response you make to this will further demonstrate said specific lack of insight "

Thanks for clearing that up.


santorum
dukas writes: Sunday, November, 12, 2006 4:57 PM
Rick Santorum on Supreme Court.
Sounds practical, sounds needed; as these blogs attest. Well greeted.

(supposedly, this election was about removing corruption. What exactly was santorum's corruption? Being against murder of the unborn? And what exactly was george allen's corruption? I've never heard of anything but good about santorum (very rare for a politician). Not surprisingly, brilliant america continues to get rid of the best, while keeping traitors and other scum.
I'm with you, for santorum for supreme court. I doubt this country wants someone that good, though. They would rather have garbage like ginsberg and kennedy.)
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.