18 comments

    • iLarynx says:

      Are you referring to the numbers representing sales, or the number representing credibility?
      For the former, the answer will be “less than.” For the latter, the answer will be “equal to” (i.e. “zero”).

  1. USA1 says:

    I love the image of red fists raised in the air and that so-called conservatives now gladly refer to themselves as belonging to red states. If this book were published with that title and cover any time during the 20th century, those on the Right would be burning it not buying it.

    I assume in time the Right in this country will align with radical Islam to fight the ultimate war against modern liberals.

  2. saltycracker says:

    Well sure hope it is more optimistic than recent opinions:

    Charles Krauthammer opinions Obama has pulled off the most massive wealth tranfers in U.S. history and put us on a course of ruinous debt and massive tax increases, probably including a VAT.

    And while 2010 will be bad for Democrats, Obama’s focus is on his 2012 reelection to complete his plan.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/15/AR2010071504593.html

    Steve Forbes opinions that CK is wrong, it isn’t cast, yet, and we can tear down this welfare state wall but only with revolutionary changes.

    http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0809/opinions-steve-forbes-fact-comment-tear-down-welfare-wall.html

    Or AT&T’s CEO in a Fortune interview reflecting corporate America’s consideration of dumping employees on Obamacare and paying the fines. Q&A:

    Fortune: AT&T took a well-publicized noncash charge of about $1 billion after the health-care reform was enacted. An internal document showed that the company figured it could save $1.8 billion a year if it dropped health insurance. Is that actually a possibility?

    Stephenson: I do not know where we’re going to land on this. Long term, things will land where economic gravity takes them. Every element of the health-care plan that we look at says that if you just follow economic gravity, you’re better off paying the government a fine and dropping health care coverage for your employees. That’s not what I want to do. It’s not what I personally want nor is it what I want for our employees. But you’re going to see people in industry begin to move that way. People we compete with will begin to move that way, and it will create an economic gravity. That’s just the reality. Where will we land? I don’t know yet. But something will change. It’s inevitable.

    http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/04/news/companies/randall_stephenson_att.fortune/index.htm

    Bottom line as in a current IBM ad:
    86% of CEO’s see an uncertain business climate.

  3. Lone Star Georgian says:

    I think a more appropriate cover would feature a bunch of insidious red hands wielding pens and editing the Constitution for the parts they don’t really like, such as the 14th amendment. That’s a little more honest characterization of the “Red State Uprising.”

  4. Steve says:

    Isn’t it strange how our bugaboos change over time? If Erick had published this book cover when my father was in grammar school, McCarthy would have dragged him before a Congressional committee.

    If he had published it two or three years ago, he would have been mistaken for a Ron Paul guy.

    Today, the exact same imagery just means that you don’t like abortion, or you want kids to be lead in school prayer, or you just don’t like Obama in general or something. Imagery is a strange thing.

  5. Chris says:

    Looks to me like Zombies rising out of the ground trying to take our freedoms. Which could be an allusion to either Nathan Deal or the vast majority of Chicago voters. 🙂

  6. Red Phillips says:

    “How to take back America”

    Let me guess – endorse a moderate RINO in the Gov. primary and ban supporters of the most truly r[3vol]utionary Presidential candidate from your blog? Help me out here, because I just don’t get that strategy.

  7. John Konop says:

    This is why the country has so many problems that never get solved. This is an issue most rational people agree will hurt the internet and free speech. And instead of putting aside other issues and focusing on common ground that will help all of us it looks like Erick Erickson would rather fight with groups he even agrees on with this particular issue.

    We have a lack of adults on both sides driving the debate! Would you rather sell books or help your country?

    ……..The blog RedState described Save The Internet as a “neo-Marxist Robert McChesney-FreePress/Save the Internet think tank” and questioned why GOA would participate in a coalition that includes liberal groups such as the ACLU, MoveOn.Org, SEIU, CREDO and ACORN.
    GOA was one of the charter members of Save the Internet, but a spokesman for the gun rights group said times have changed.
    “Back in 2006 we supported net neutrality, as we had been concerned that AOL and others might continue to block pro-second amendment issues,” said Erich Pratt, communications director for GOA.
    “The issue has now become one of government control of the Internet, and we are 100 percent opposed to that,” Pratt said.
    Save The Internet had long pointed to the support of gun owners as evidence that net neutrality is a nonpartisan issue.
    Net-neutrality advocates are struggling to maintain bipartisan support during an election season that has cast the issue along party lines.
    Last month, 35 Tea Party groups came out against net neutrality in a letter to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The letter accused the FCC of “relentlessly pursuing a massive regulatory regime” that would stifle the growth of the Internet.
    The FCC is considering a move to boost its authority over broadband providers through a controversial process known as reclassification. The process could give federal regulators the power to impose net-neutrality rules, which would prevent Internet access providers from favoring some content and applications over others.

    Tim Karr, the campaign director for Save the Internet, cited the midterm election season to explain why net neutrality is increasingly cast along partisan lines.
    “Anytime you approach an election, these issues tend to be politicized,” he said.
    Still, Karr said Save The Internet views net neutrality as a free speech issue rather than a liberal or conservative one. He noted the group’s membership still includes a number of conservative groups, including the socially conservative Parents Television Council and the Christian Coalition……..

    http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/115367-as-elections-near-net-neutrality-backers-challenged-by-moveonorg-and-acorn-ties

Comments are closed.