'short pecker politics'...I am SO stealing that.

I'd go with Puny Pecker Politics, myself...if just for alliteration. :-)

How about LimpDick Leadership?

How about Petulant Penes.

In Kentucky, it's the "knowing little about anything," period, that carries the day, at least in a midterm election.

Trust me. I was born and raised there.

I'm sorry, but she's just as competent, or more so, than Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell, both of whom are about as worthless as an udder on a bull.

I'd say she has an impressive enough resume. Much more so than Rand Paul. (The only reason I leave McConnell out is simply his time in Congress, no matter how @!$%#ty he is in representing Americans.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_Judd

Karensc, according to my daddy, the phrase you are looking for is: "tits on a boar hog"

Or Rand's predecessor, senile former pro-baseball player Jim Bunning, who Paul replaced.

They're so scared they're about to pee their pants. They wouldn't be reacting they way they are if they weren't.

They are afraid. And one of the biggest reasosn they are afraid is that she is pretty. Ms. Judd is also intelligent and witty and lots of other good things, but before she is anything else, to someone who knows nothing else about her, she is pretty.

There was recently a study that found that female r candidates/office holders were more "gender accurate" than liberal female candidates/office holders. Meaning they would be considered more "feminine" looking.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/10/01/study-finds-republican-women-look-more-feminine-than-democrats/

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/the-gop-has-a-feminine-face-finds-238867.aspx

The party of old white guys likes looking at attractive younger women candidates/officeholders. When scrutinizing the ludicrous malarkey put forth by r females such as Palin, Bachmann, Blackburn and McMorris-Rodgers, it's obvious they barf up the same junk as their boneheaded male counterparts, but they are attractive. It's likely that many of the votes those women acquired, or would like to acquire, come from the reptilian flicker of desire and fantasy that directs much of the r male "mind", (acknowledging that such thoughts and projections are not exclusive to r's, but in this case it's the r "mindset" that is relevant).

Rove, McConnell and Paul are aware of the shallow priorities and primitive analytic capabilities that their male voters are capable of. There's an excellent chance that a significant number of their potential male supporters might just vote for "the pretty one", not really knowing or caring about much else besides that they like the way she looks.

And then there's the potential for Ms. Judd to be a rallying point for Kentucky women who see her as an intelligent, independent and very successful woman that they could easily identify with as a role model. And I don't know where Ms. Judd's mother and sister come down on Ashley's politics, but if they are all on the same page, that would be a force to reckon with.

And the idiot supremo Paul might denigrate her ability to connect with her fellow Kentuckians, but her roots go back many generations. She belongs there. He's the interloper by miles and miles.

Ashley Judd could win this thing and Rovo the Clown and his brain dead buddies know it.

Good post. It's the "R" mindset that's important, since they never "get any" and desperately want to. But wouldn't know what to do if they did.

Another thing that must be terrifying Republicans is the fact that, bit by bit, the power of the accusation "Liberal!" is weakening. They spent four long years pointing at Obama and shrieking "Liberal! Socialist! Communist!" and the country went ahead and re-elected him anyway. It used to be that just pinning "Liberal!" on someone or something was enough to kill him her or it stone dead. Now, not so much. What Republicans must be dreading is the day when they trot out the old charge of "Liberal!" only to have a once-reliable media stenographer wait expectantly for a few moments before asking, "Is that all you've got?"

The satisfaction you would gain knowing that you helped to knock El Tortuga off his self constructed pedestal would be limitless.

"Randy" Paul (like all R's he doesn't "get any" more than twice a month in the missionary position, such "getting" being the wifely duty for an R female) lives in Fantasyland 24/7.

Considering that KY takes in a far larger amount of federal tax dollars than it contributes, a higher unemployment rate than the nation on average, lower education rates, smaller median income (by more than $10K below the national average), higher poverty rates, etc., it baffles me that anyone in that state would vote for someone who wants to reduce the amount of federal dollars coming in. The state isn't self sufficient and is getting worse.

Then again, we are talking about the state where not too long ago you supposedly could go to CPS and custom order children that the state would then trump up reasons to take them from their parents and deliver them to you expeditiously, so I cannot be too surprised by anything that comes up.

No matter how outclassed Rand Paul may be, he and his supporters know how to take down a woman.

It looks like Mr. Rove is looking for an easy 'win'.

Odds are that Ms. Judd will not run, regardless of what Mr. Rove says about her.

If she does run, odds are that she will not be able to defeat the incumbent senior Senator from Kentucky. The best she can reasonably hope for is to force the GOP to spend a ton of money to defend McConnell, instead of spending it elsewhere to pick off an incumbent Democrat.

So, why run adds now? To claim success when she announces she will not run. Mr. Rove desperately needs a few successes to brag about to his donors.

Pathetic, yes, but what more could we expect from 'Turdblossom'?

The problem is not Rove. He is just a lackey for the 1%, they are the problem.!!

Please let me draw an historical parallel.

In about 1400 China produced more steel than all of Europe did in 1820. Yes, I said steel, which is harder to produce that simple iron.

Then the powers that be around the Emperor got it into their heads that the owners of that industry were a threat to the throne. So, taxes were raised and raised repeatedly until the industry was destroyed.

Historians have said that this is an example of the Gov. destroying its military power base, "shooting itself in the foot". 100 years later Europeans arrived and found a weak Chineese Empire and "took over", slowly, very slowly.

I wonder if the owners really were a threat. I see that our 1% certainly are a threat to American democracy. We need to raise taxes on the 1% enough to keep them from being a threat.

I have suggested a "net worth tax", progressive of course. No shelter for worth that is overseas. If they leave then good riddance, what do they do that is good for us here? Start at say 50%/yr. But lower it after a while.

At the state level, we have had a long history of "net worth taxes". In the west a rancher was taxed on his land and how many cows and steers he owned, his net worth.

There is a well know theory that government should tax what it wants less of. An alternative would be Publicly funded elections with NO WAY to use vast money to attack a party or its candidates. OR, a tax on political campaign contributions [including to independent groups], a tax of say 90%. Tax what you want less of. I might even be willing to give the super rich the choice of which 1 they wanted.

Of course the new/old economic theory, MMT, says that the Fed. Gov. does not need taxes to fund spending. It says taxes are 1] necessary to force people to work for some of the fiat currency that it issues, and 2] necessary to suck excess money out of the economy to avoid inflation. MMT says that the Fed. Gov. can create all they money it needs for good public purposes when there is unemployment by key strokes to put money into its bank account (it doesn't even need to print it). MMT says that we would need to watch out for inflation (esp. when there is full employment), but there is NO risk of default.

Thom Hartmann has started talking up MMT on his radio show. He says he'll talk about it most (or was it every) day.

You have something good to say about that talentless pedophile prick, who would be living in a cardboard box were he not right wing crazy enough to find an audience ignorant enough to think he is any good? Big brave bow hunter, he buys old, used-up circus animal rejects that have been declawed and defanged, to go pump up his helium ego with his "manliness."

The day I hear that worthless PoS has finally become a "Good Republican," (pushing up daisies) I will break open a bottle of Dom Perignon to celebrate. It can't happen too soon.

I hope someone punches his lights out tonight.