Steele:when you come into someone's house, you're not looking to change it

[Lunar]

I saw this story a while ago, but it wasn't in rhetorically significant terms enough for me to post it in my ongoing Steele thread, simply because I don't think the layperson is clever enough to understand the implications of what he said.  More importantly, Steele doesn't actually mean anything he says!  He just says whatever the interviewer expects him to say!

It is hilarious that he implies that moderates [and libertarians] aren't allowed to have a voice in the GOP, they're only allowed to vote for Republican politicians.  Joining the GOP for them is like having dinner at someone's house, and no real disagreement is allowed, it's to be kept private



The Democrats, in contrast, allow healthy debate, they allow politicians to vote against major Democratic policies and so on.  Which is why, if you sort by PVI on this wikipedia page, and examine the House seats based off of that list, you get the results that you do:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cook_Partisan_Voting_Index


If you scratch Cao off the list, what do you see?  Hmmmmmm

[Lunar]

Walt isn't dead, his insane opponent from 2008 is looking for a rematch, and Walt's getting the support of some of the GOP establishment in the area

I saw this story a while ago, but it wasn't in rhetorically significant terms enough for me to post it in my ongoing Steele thread,

I posted it there.

Fine then!

I think it's thread-worthy though.

You can vote for us, but don't try and talk to us!

[Lunar]

Interesting list.  If you count up all the House members that come up with a score bigger than a +30 you get 25 Dems (2 over 40!) and 0 (zero) Pubs.  Pubbies may not encourage healthy debate but they do seem to vote a little more "mixed" than a lot of Dems.

Well, the Democratic vote is more concentrated, such as majority-African American districts.

The list is the product of presidential elections, after all.