A quick hit this morning, as I'm on the road . . . Question for our readers, astute observers of the political scene that they are. Scanning the news this morning, you see a report on the latest presidential poll. John McCain has lost over 1/3rd of his support. What's the first thing that pops into your mind? OK, the headline here is a hint, but isn't it obvious that McCain's pro-amnesty stance has hurt him badly among Republican voters? Well, apparently not so obvious to Tim Russert. Here's how it went on this morning's "Today."
TIM RUSSERT: John McCain's lost eight points since April, Matt.
MATT LAUER: What's wrong with his campaign?
RUSSERT: Well, he's having some fund-raising problems and I think Fred Thompson's presence is starting to draw folks away.
View video here.
A classic case of confusing cause and effect on Russert's part, no? What explains McCain fund-raising woes? Why did Thompson, testing the waters, find them friendly? Because -- as would seem obvious -- McCain's belligerent advocacy of the amnesty-first immigration bill has demolished his support among Republicans. But for whatever reason, Russert failed to connect the dots.
Contact Mark at mark@gunhill.net
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Why is money always the rea
June 14, 2007 - 07:32 ET by Sergeant ROCKWhy is money always the reason? It wouldn't have anything to with his message, right? I didn't know that conservatives were unhappy with the current field of Republicans because of their finances? So, does that mean that Thompson has more money than the rest? What gives?
I read last week that a lot o
June 14, 2007 - 07:39 ET by vrwc13I read last week that a lot of Republican donors had been waiting in the wings, many of them came out to support Thompson right after his "outing" on Drudge.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
Sure, I can understand that
June 14, 2007 - 07:45 ET by Sergeant ROCKSure, I can understand that.. but, the way the reporting is framed, it's as though this guy or that guy has so many percent because of his bank account - not for what he stands for.
Money has a lot to do with it
June 14, 2007 - 08:13 ET by vrwc13Money has a lot to do with it. A lot of good candidates carry low numbers because they do not have the money. On the otherhand, hillary, and Romney carry a lot higher percentage of support right now because of their money.
Alot of politics has to do with name recognition. The more money the better chance your name has been heard in one form or another. An old adage of politicans is "get your name in print, good or bad, for people will forget the why but remember the who."
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
Huh? How does that find it'
June 14, 2007 - 08:19 ET by Sergeant ROCKHuh? How does that find it's way into these polls? Are they asking 'In your opinion, who has the most money in the current field?' As opposed to who will you vote for? I think that you're missing the point.
No, my point is that after wa
June 14, 2007 - 08:33 ET by vrwc13No, my point is that after watching "real" (not some of your msm fairytales) polling for many years, in the details is a not so well known catagory where the poll asks a question like:
Early on responses to the above were highly on answer c. It took a lot of money to get where he is today.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
That's because Obama Bin Ba
June 14, 2007 - 08:42 ET by Sergeant ROCKThat's because Obama Bin Barrack is the current media darling, not because he came in with millions of dollars from the gitgo. Of course, the result of this FREE media coverage has garnered him more money.
I'm not discounting the fact that money has an impact on opinion, just that it's not the driving force as the MSM alleges. Like in this case.
I am afraid we will just have
June 14, 2007 - 08:52 ET by vrwc13I am afraid we will just have to agree to disagree on this one. It's a noble thought to think that we elect people based on the "best man for the job", but (and I could get a lot of mail for this one) one family that comes to mind that would have never had its role in American politics that it has if it was not for tons of money - kennedy...
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
I agree that you're missing
June 14, 2007 - 09:27 ET by Sergeant ROCKI agree that you're missing the point.
I'm with ya Rock...the Repubs
June 14, 2007 - 10:14 ET by TruthMongerI'm with ya Rock...the Repubs always raise more money then the Dems - looks kinda bad for the value of the Dem platform - so what's a Dem to do? Take a hard look at the Dem platform and fix it? Naaaah. Do "news" stories that make money look evil! Let's "get the money out of politics!" McCain Feingold...
McCain's problems are strictly due to his positions. He's a RINO. A true newsperson would report this correctly. But we all know how hard it is to find one of those...
BTW Obama's "free" publicity so far has literally been worth about a billion dollars...
And you'll note that money
June 14, 2007 - 10:17 ET by Sergeant ROCKAnd you'll note that money has never been an obstacle to FREE, most often favorable, coverage of media darlings like McInsane and Obama.
Free you say...just follow th
June 14, 2007 - 10:32 ET by vrwc13Free you say...just follow the money. All the "freebees" get payback, and in turn favors. As my Dad used to say "nothing is free, you pay for it somewhere"
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
Follow what money? Why woul
June 14, 2007 - 10:40 ET by Sergeant ROCKFollow what money? Why would there be payback when you are part of the liberal agenda? You have it backwards.
Obama's "paying for it&q
June 14, 2007 - 10:45 ET by TruthMongerObama's "paying for it" - he's an MSM bootlicker now...if he wants to keep getting on the frontpage of snoozweek and time anyway...
I think you have it backwar
June 14, 2007 - 10:50 ET by Sergeant ROCKI think you have it backwards too. If you were talking about Dick Cheney getting favorable coverage for a price, then you might have something!
Has nothing to do with politi
June 14, 2007 - 11:36 ET by vrwc13Has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with politics.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
(and I could get a lot of mail for this one)
June 14, 2007 - 10:07 ET by misterbill(and I could get a lot of mail for this one) you may be correct. One would hope that it would all be in agreement with what you said. I certainly agree. The mindless voters of MA continue to "prove" their "unbiased lack of prejudice" by repeatedly re-electing that obese sinner, Teddy and sending Barney Frank and Gerry Studds to the Congress. I have not singled out the latter two for their sexual preferences, which is their business, but rather for their sexual escapades. Frank's DC boyfriend use Frank's DC abode as a trysting place for homosexual prostitution. Studds had an affair with an underage boy. The hero worship of Kennedy (all of them) is unexplainable.
Money that is the way the MSM
June 14, 2007 - 16:03 ET by general companyMoney that is the way the MSM sees it, the more cash they have the less the MSM can do about their exposure. They never talk about the second tier candidates, because they are purposely controlling their air time. And yes, it should be obvious that the Dems get free and more positive press. Why else would we need News Busters
The real bias is in a news
June 14, 2007 - 07:33 ET by sarcasmoThe real bias is in a news media that tries in concert to pretend either of those 4 sets of 4 numbers adds up to anything close to 100%, especially this early in the race. As we've repeatedly-seen, I'm used to busting this kind of bias at this point. I'm easily doing it now one-handed and -- as Limbaugh says -- with half my brain tied behind my back.
JMR
I have been waiting for a mor
June 14, 2007 - 07:34 ET by vrwc13I have been waiting for a more "conservative" candidate to rise from the pack. Is Fred Thompson for real?
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
I think Romney is about as &q
June 14, 2007 - 10:16 ET by TruthMongerI think Romney is about as "electable" a conservative as your going to get - the victors always need moderates in order to win the election...
You may be right, but I perso
June 14, 2007 - 10:25 ET by vrwc13You may be right, but I personally cannot get past his "religion". With that said, and all the mail to follow, if hillary is his opponent, she'll kill him with them feminist view versus (gulp) his religion's point of view on women. I think that's why the dems are secretly hoping for him as their opponent.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
I'm an evangelical protestant
June 14, 2007 - 10:37 ET by TruthMongerI'm an evangelical protestant and I'm just fine with Romney in the oval office...don't tell me you're concerned about the polygamy...
No, it's "secret/scared&
June 14, 2007 - 10:43 ET by vrwc13No, it's "secret/scared" stuff. Studied a lot about faiths other than the one you and I subscibe to. The more you know, the harder it is to believe. Trust me we do not want to go there, here. But "They" (the libs) will if/when it becomes necessary.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
What are you afraid that Ro
June 14, 2007 - 10:46 ET by TruthMongerWhat are you afraid that Romney might try to do in office - worst case scenario...?
School prayer?
June 14, 2007 - 10:51 ET by Sergeant ROCKSchool prayer?
Dear God-----
June 14, 2007 - 10:55 ET by misterbillDear God-----prayer--Oh, not that. The next thing you know. they will be encouraging our youth to live good, clean, moral lives. How dangerous!
Exactly. Kids need to grow
June 14, 2007 - 11:02 ET by Sergeant ROCKExactly. Kids need to grow up 'crack heads' so that they can wander the streets of America without a care.
pray for our schools please!
June 14, 2007 - 10:57 ET by TruthMongerIn my dreams...so what has Romney done so terribly bad as the Mormon governor of Massachussetts? The MSM would surely have organized all of their summer entertainment around it by now - news, weather, sports, prime-time tv, films, etc...
I would be more comfortable
June 14, 2007 - 11:00 ET by Sergeant ROCKI would be more comfortable with him had he been governor of any other state.
He was RE-ELECTED governor of
June 14, 2007 - 11:04 ET by TruthMongerHe was RE-ELECTED governor of that state - that's almost God like - maybe his Mormon ways ain't so "whacky" after all:)?
Exactly my point. How is it
June 14, 2007 - 11:09 ET by Sergeant ROCKExactly my point. How is it that happened in such a state? And how is it that lard @ss Kennedy keeps getting re-elected? Something doesn't add up here.
I see Romney as a conservativ
June 14, 2007 - 11:16 ET by TruthMongerI see Romney as a conservative person of faith, and a problem solver...I see his re-election there as a plus for the badly-needed conservative movement in MA...
The Kennedy family is royalty in MA - you can always put a Kennedy sticker on a turd there and sell it for $100...in fact that's probably how Ted gets re-elected...
However, it is not unreason
June 14, 2007 - 11:20 ET by Sergeant ROCKHowever, it is not unreasonable to be a little wary of Romney because of shifting positions on the issues. Maybe having Alan Keyes or John Bolton as a running mate would make him more appealing?
Yes I'm wary of him, too...ev
June 14, 2007 - 11:24 ET by TruthMongerYes I'm wary of him, too...everyone actually...good policy...
He will need a southern running mate - Thompson would qualify and shore up Romney's conservative shortcomings very nicely - not perfect but nothing ever is...
I suspect that this is Fred's and Mitt's plan...
Being wary of any politico is intelligent
June 14, 2007 - 11:51 ET by RJBeing wary of any politico is intelligent. I have doubts about all of the contenders, including Thompson, but will vote for any of them against any of the socialist fools the Democrats will put up.
As for Romney, my main concern is that some of Jeb Bush's staff have joined him. That makes me worry that Romney shares the Bush family attitude toward immigration.
You know the pres could be mo
June 14, 2007 - 12:03 ET by TruthMongerYou know the pres could be more on board with proper immigration policy if the spineless Repubs in congress grew some stones...it's not a one-man job
A new prez won't solve that problem...
Disagree, TM
June 14, 2007 - 12:25 ET by RJDisagree, TM. What we are seeing is the real George Bush. He's been dragging his feet on the border all along and in the face of a true uprising against him that stiffened the spine of more than a few Republicans, he's coming back for a second shot at his amnesty bill.
Hi RJ - I have to disagree
June 14, 2007 - 12:32 ET by Dee BunkHi RJ - I have to disagree here. The real George Bush told us from the start that he wanted a guest worker program so I don't think anyone can fault him on that. He ran with it out in the open both times. I happen to agree with him on the guest worker thing. I know I'm probably the only conservative on here who does, but I have yet to see any type of realistic solution to the problem from conservatives.
No disagreement, Dee
June 14, 2007 - 12:40 ET by RJNo disagreement on the real GWB, Dee. I said he's been dragging his feet on the border all along. This bill just confirms again what he believes.
Yes, we'll probably have to do something like a limited guest worker program, but not before making a serious attempt to fix the border and to enforce current laws. In any event, the current bill is just a giveaway of the Republican Party and of America.
RJ
June 14, 2007 - 12:34 ET by TruthMongerwhat is Bush's motivation right now?
I would say his legacy, but I
June 14, 2007 - 12:36 ET by florida_chadI would say his legacy, but I think he really believes in his plan.
TM --RJ
June 14, 2007 - 12:36 ET by misterbillI am with RJ all the way on this one. To my surprise and disgust, this has been Bush's plan all along.
"Even though the Mexican political class is notoriously corrupt, they can often count on stronger support in Washington than can several more worthy world leaders who are genuinely attempting to reform and improve their countries. The history of the Bush family is symptomatic."
Fredo Arias-King
MisterBill - Bush has always
June 14, 2007 - 12:41 ET by florida_chadMisterBill - Bush has always talked about a guest worker plan. Its not new, 9-11 just stopped it for awhile.
fc...You are correct...Presid
June 14, 2007 - 12:48 ET by bigtimerfc...
You are correct...President hasn't changed a lick about his views...you are also correct about it being slowed since 9-11...and that is exactly when any thinking President would of shut the damned borders...COMPLETELY...with few exceptions...until this whole danged invasion could be stopped....
We had an opportune time with National Security....and lost it....PC, msm, and lobbyist wise that is.
I couldn't agree more bigtime
June 14, 2007 - 12:53 ET by florida_chadI couldn't agree more bigtimer. The border should have been closed to illegal immigration when the repubs had control of congress. If they had done that they would still be in control IMO.
Sgt. Rock...Excellent running
June 14, 2007 - 11:35 ET by bigtimerSgt. Rock...
Excellent running mates you mentioned...both of them.
I too have mentioned here John Bolton would be excellent...plus it would be priceless after what has been done to him in the press and in the Senate.
This country would get straightened out fast if he had two terms, and a Congress that would work with him...but none of that is to be....unfortunately for us all.
Anyone who has followed Keyes forever as I have, knows what the leftists in the msm have done to him.
I voted for Keyes. He moppe
June 14, 2007 - 11:42 ET by Sergeant ROCKI voted for Keyes. He mopped the floor with the others in those debates. I like Bolton, he pulls no punches and is tough. At the very least, I would have him as Secretary of State or Defense.
Of course, you'll be faced with the 'sure, he's a good guy, but he can't win' crowd. Because, you see, it's more important to win than anything else.
sarge...learn from the past
June 14, 2007 - 11:49 ET by LionKingsarge...I understand the dilemma. Do you remember Bob Dole? A TRUE War Hero and a very decent man. He probably deserved to be elected POTUS. His problem was that he was not charismatic enough. It's crap and it's not fair...blah,blah,blah...but that is reality.
All of that to say this...ELECTABILITY is important. Winning is important, because of the cost of losing.
But you left out the most i
June 14, 2007 - 11:58 ET by Sergeant ROCKBut you left out the most important thing - he was no more conservative than GWB.
Another turn-off was his alleged staement about it being his turn to be President.
What I'm tired of is being stuck with the lesser of two evils every election. And the idiotic thinking behind vote for the guy that can win.
true conservatism
June 14, 2007 - 12:02 ET by LionKingSarge...look to the Constitution Party for true conservatism. I would love it if they could become a serious factor. Until we have term limits, it will always be the lesser of 2 evils...TOO MUCH PORK in DC !!!
Yeah, I've taken a look at
June 14, 2007 - 12:08 ET by Sergeant ROCKYeah, I've taken a look at them. I think we would be better off if we can over-throw the current GOP leadership and put conservatism back on the front burner and end the capitulation to the left.
Dole was indeed a true war
June 14, 2007 - 12:04 ET by sarcasmoDole was indeed a true war hero, but he was a bit too decent to Archer Daniels Midland to also be decent to taxpayers like me. I voted proudly against him, by voting for the Libertarian "NOTA" choice.
JMR
Sarc--Dole may have been shot
June 14, 2007 - 12:28 ET by ncstevemSarc--
Dole may have been shot during WWII but I certainly don't consider him a 'hero'. He's a political hack who became a multi-millionaire 'working' for the government. The country would have been better off if the Nazi who shot him had a better aim. The same is true for McCain. Wish he never made it out of Hanoi. Both are pieces of trash as are most politicians.
I've seen, and actually got
June 14, 2007 - 12:35 ET by sarcasmoI've seen, and actually got to shoot, the kind of machinegun Bob Dole experienced that day, and it's very impressive. I don't think those of us who weren't there should try to deny his heroism, or McCain's, just because we disagree with their subsequent politics. Politics is a separate issue. IMO it's a miracle Dole survived that lead-hose. I managed to knock-over a water heater instantly using only part of a belt... My problems with Dole centered on corn subsidies. Sadly for US taxpayers today, that's another of yesterday's battles I lost.
JMR
Gross, TruthMonger
June 14, 2007 - 11:21 ET by Cool ArrowThe mental image of the lips that dropped that chaw is disgusting.
ROCK--I referenced this in a previous post--
June 14, 2007 - 11:44 ET by misterbillROCK--I referenced this in a previous post. The people of MA, for some inexplicable reason, feel a strong need to do things that they believe show that the are not prejudiced, bigoted people. Witness girl killer Teddy, Barney Frank, Studds. It is a compulsion to challenge the possibility that they may be prejudiced. The predominant religion in MA is Catholicism. I know it is a syllogism, but therefore they must elect a non-Catholic to show we are not prejudiced, they must elect the first ever black man to the Senate (Brooks), or so they claimed that he was first,etc, etc. I left a long time ago. Many of my old friends (and I still love them) were and are beneficiaries of the MA spoils system and the contacts are all through the Kennedy political machine.
One other experience I will share--while back in Boston on a 2 year assignment, I had two workmates (a man and a woman) encourage me to have a homosexual affair so that I would understand there was nothing wrong with homosexuality. I never had expressed an opinion. I do not know why they brought it up with me. Go figure!
They weren't successful, we
June 14, 2007 - 11:50 ET by Sergeant ROCKThey weren't successful, were they???
sergeant----no--
June 14, 2007 - 12:14 ET by misterbillsergeant----no--you silly you (limp wristedly.) I am and have been a very happily married man. I must admit that the woman was quite attractive and I was thinking of a con job by saying, "well let's start with the hetero half of this first."
Actually my rejoinder was not particularly brilliant. I asked them what they thought of suicide and I told them they would have to try it before they passed judgment on it.
Ok then.. I'm relieved to h
June 14, 2007 - 12:17 ET by Sergeant ROCKOk then.. I'm relieved to hear that (some others on here are probably envious of you though).
Your guess is as good as mine
June 14, 2007 - 10:53 ET by sarcasmoYour guess is as good as mine...
JMR
Truthmonger, Sarc has part of
June 14, 2007 - 11:00 ET by vrwc13TruthMonger, Sarc has part of it right in his link. I am not quite sure what he would do in office...has more to do with the "ends justify the means" in both his political and personal life.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
So who's a better candidate t
June 14, 2007 - 11:02 ET by TruthMongerSo who's a better candidate then Romney on any of that?
That's what the primaries are
June 14, 2007 - 11:26 ET by vrwc13That's what the primaries are for, unfortunately some of the more qualified conservatives are at the bottom of the polls.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
IMO this guy. (Hey, you ask
June 14, 2007 - 11:57 ET by sarcasmoIMO this guy. (Hey, you asked!) And Reason is, as usual, right about Wolf Blitzer needing to watch and learn -- Colbert's excellent "raise your hand" questions SHOULD be posed to the entire sorry bunch, but it won't.
JMR
Thanks sarc...I guess we'd al
June 14, 2007 - 11:01 ET by TruthMongerThanks sarc...
I guess we'd all pull Reagan out of the grave if we could but it's not an option...
Didn't read anything there about Romney pushing polygamy, etc...
Seems to be a story about Romney smarting up from his old RINO ways...
No, it's more of a story th
June 14, 2007 - 11:58 ET by sarcasmoNo, it's more of a story that rightly -- albeit disturbingly -- compares Romney to Edwards.
JMR
What kind of bigoted whisper campaign is that?
June 14, 2007 - 11:01 ET by RJ"Trust me, we do not want to go there here."
vrwc13, what kind of bigoted whisper campaign is that? Say it openly or stop making dark, sneaky allusions.
I didn't understand vrwc's co
June 14, 2007 - 11:13 ET by SouthJersey1953I didn't understand vrwc's comment either.... Does he think Mormons are women haters?
vrwc, don't elude to something unless you are willing to back it up.
No RINOs in '08 - Thompson/Hunter would be a good ticket; Thompson/Steele would be a great ticket
here
June 14, 2007 - 11:23 ET by vrwc13here
And you're afraid that this
June 14, 2007 - 11:26 ET by TruthMongerAnd you're afraid that this might be part of Romney's plans for the US Government?
No, just like you and me clai
June 14, 2007 - 11:31 ET by vrwc13No, just like you and me claim our faith is our most important attribute, underlying all we do, or at least we try to do, he is very likely to feel this way about his faith. To me that's scary, again the "ends justify the means". This issue is a ticking time-bomb in the hands of the libs.
I see.. you're part of the
June 14, 2007 - 11:35 ET by Sergeant ROCKI see.. you're part of the winning is the most important crowd?
Not at all, I am for the righ
June 14, 2007 - 11:41 ET by vrwc13Not at all, I am for the right person, one who supports:
and you?
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
I voted for Alan Keyes beca
June 14, 2007 - 11:52 ET by Sergeant ROCKI voted for Alan Keyes because he was the right person. What about you?
vrwc13, you are a bigoted fanatic
June 14, 2007 - 11:40 ET by RJAnother of your hate the Mormons sites, vrwc13. Do you spend a lot of time "studying" up on Mormonism, so you can hate better? Clearly, you're a bigoted fanatic.
Sorry RJ this is public recor
June 14, 2007 - 11:50 ET by vrwc13Sorry RJ this is public record with noted LDS references, my Bible says the truth should not be hid. No secret stuff with my Jesus.
Right on vrwc
June 14, 2007 - 11:55 ET by Cool ArrowNow let's go after those churches that condone Masons and Knights of Columbus.
We know what they're really about, huh?
I am right behind, er right w
June 14, 2007 - 12:03 ET by vrwc13I am right behind, er right with you. They are here too.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
vrwc13, you doofus! Riled One was mocking you.
June 14, 2007 - 13:11 ET by RJvrwc13, you doofus! Riled One was mocking you....but you jumped right in and gave us another of your fear-and-hate-mongering sites. You spend a lot of time learning to hate, eh?
Funny thing is, you and Debra behave more like "cultists" than anyone on this board. ;^>
Thanks RJ
June 14, 2007 - 13:18 ET by Cool ArrowBut I was revelling in having so easily zinging one over his head.
Correction?
June 14, 2007 - 13:19 ET by Cool ArrowHaving so easily zung one?
zanged?
June 14, 2007 - 13:21 ET by RJHaving so easily zanged one?
Zing Zang Zung
June 14, 2007 - 13:24 ET by Cool ArrowForgot the rules of verbal declension. Thanks, I thunk.
Ya know RJ, my Jesus would no
June 14, 2007 - 13:48 ET by vrwc13Ya know RJ, my Jesus would not like me calling others names, apparently yours doesn't mind. As far as hate, hate the sin love the sinner. Don't hate you RJ, just think you are mis-led on a path that leads to an eternity you are not counting on.
You guys have to lay off vr
June 14, 2007 - 13:57 ET by The Wicked ConservativeYou guys have to lay off vrwc13. Speaking out against mormonism is similar to speaking out against homosexuality. Both are a mindset/behavior that according to Christian doctrine leads to an eternity in hell. If vrwc speaks out against it because he's concerned about the eternal destiny of someone he's acting in love. If another is willing to say go ahead with your destructive behavior they are complicit in the sinners damnation. Who's the hateful one again?
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
This isn't really a thread fo
June 14, 2007 - 14:01 ET by TruthMongerThis isn't really a thread for a detailed theology debate...
Bigoty is "love?"
June 14, 2007 - 14:02 ET by RJBigoty is "love?" Jeez, sounds like 1984...
Yeah sorry RJ i'm just not
June 14, 2007 - 14:08 ET by The Wicked ConservativeYeah sorry RJ i'm just not comfortable with watching people march off to an eternity in hell without trying to reach them with the truth. If you call that bigotry then fine I'm in some super company with Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles.
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
Trying to convert people to
June 14, 2007 - 14:18 ET by Conservative VoiceTrying to convert people to your faith isn't bigotry, disagreeing with another faith isn't bigotry. However, not voting for someone who is of a certain faith ( especially if they are just as conservative as you are line by line ) is bigotry, not hiring or working for someone of that faith because of that faith is bigotry.
To be a bigot you have to be prejudice and be intolerant. I am intolerant of many things...doesn't make me a bigot. I can be prejudice of many things...doesn't make me a bigot. If you are judging people by their fruit, then you aren't being prejudice.
That's a frivolous comparison, WC
June 14, 2007 - 15:17 ET by RJTsk. That's a frivolous comparision, WC. I doubt Jesus, Paul or the other apostles would have concerned themselves with which politicans had which religion for purposes of voting. If you're going to put yourself in their class, you'll have to shun politics entirely.
Mormon Doctrine is akin to
June 14, 2007 - 15:03 ET by Conservative VoiceMormon Doctrine is akin to Homosexuality? Wow
I'm sorry vrwc13
June 14, 2007 - 13:57 ET by RJI'm sorry, vrwc13, that you are a doofus.
So your cult disapproves of "name calling?" tsk. I remember you doing just that awhile back. Does that make you a liar, or just a cultist with a bad memory?
And how about making sly, dark allusions? Is that ok with your cult? You did just that on this thread until you were called out.
I won't ask if your cult approves of bigotry, because we all know that it does....
Doofus it is RJ. I will jus
June 14, 2007 - 14:11 ET by vrwc13Doofus it is RJ. I will just turn the other cheek. No name caling on my part though. Regardless of what you and BT say, there is none.
Dark, sly, allusions? That's funny. Just did not want to take this thread right where you took it.
Oh, give me a break
June 14, 2007 - 14:20 ET by RJOh, give me a break. You've given up the right to even pretend to take the high road. You're a name-calling, hate-pushing bigot who attempted a whisper campaign. Now you want to be a liar, too.
Bull, vrwc13. You're a common bigot
June 14, 2007 - 12:01 ET by RJ"It's just public record"
Bull, vrwc13. The site is anti-Mormon and that you reference it adds to the body of information that proves you to be a common, garden-variety, bigoted fanatic.
The SNL Church Lady comes to mind as an appropriate characterizaton of your bigoted kind. If we use your character assassination style to choose our Presidents, many would say that disqualifys evangelicals for the office.
Give to Caesar what is Caesar
June 14, 2007 - 12:05 ET by vrwc13Give to Caesar what is Caesars, give to God what is Gods.
If you believe that, vrwc13, you're a hypocrite
June 14, 2007 - 12:18 ET by RJIf you believe that, vrwc13, it's hypocritical of you to attack a candidate's religion. Romney is a politican, not a preacher or a priest.
vrwc13Well You have just join
June 14, 2007 - 12:34 ET by Airforce_5_Ovrwc13
Well You have just joined the same club as Debra. The 'I know more about somebody elses relgion then they do" club. Please reframe from post your false hoods about my religion. If you want to hald a persons religion against them then you are ignorant.
This site is about the lefts bias in the military not your view on someones religion. If it were it would be called "MormonBusters".
So please keep your ignorance of my faith to yourself.
Got a crazy Mormon in the W
June 14, 2007 - 12:35 ET by Sergeant ROCKGot a crazy Mormon in the Whitehouse... who you gonna call???
LOL now that was good Rock.He
June 14, 2007 - 12:58 ET by Airforce_5_OLOL now that was good Rock.
He will not answer my questions though. I guess he is afriad I'll put a curse on him or something.
I am not afraid of you or any
June 14, 2007 - 13:21 ET by vrwc13I am not afraid of you or anyone else. And just what questions would you like for me to answer?
The one were you learned to h
June 15, 2007 - 09:02 ET by Airforce_5_OThe one were you learned to hate Mormons.
Foul again...this makes 3?
June 15, 2007 - 09:38 ET by vrwc13Foul again...this makes 3? Who is doing this and why?
AF and RJ can't play fair? Why are my responses gone?
AF, I give you an answer and you(?) delete it?
vrwc13I don't have the power
June 15, 2007 - 09:53 ET by Airforce_5_Ovrwc13
I don't have the power to delete your answers. Maybe it's a sign from God. :)
Whose? Yours or mine?
June 15, 2007 - 09:55 ET by vrwc13Maybe your buddy RJ?
These is part of his rules of "engagement"?
vrwc13 (sounding like the Chu
June 15, 2007 - 10:01 ET by Airforce_5_Ovrwc13 (sounding like the Church Lady): Or maybe it was...SATAN!!!
Sorry that was just tooooooo easy.
You know vrwc13, for a person
June 15, 2007 - 10:09 ET by Airforce_5_OYou know vrwc13, for a person who says Jesus taught you not to hate, you sure are hating today.
Calm down.
<sound of vrwc13 leaving..
June 15, 2007 - 10:08 ET by vrwc13<sound of vrwc13 leaving...shaking the dust off his sandals>
Try again...Yours or Mine?
June 15, 2007 - 10:02 ET by vrwc13Try again...Yours or Mine?
LOL, AF
June 15, 2007 - 10:04 ET by RJ"sign from God"
LOL, AF. I had the same thought.... ;^>
Morning RJ...I saw this so-ca
June 14, 2007 - 11:55 ET by bigtimerMorning RJ...
I saw this so-called man on BOR last week I think it was...
Debra and 13 both immediately came to mind....immediately.
I also looked up the biography on this guy...it is full of ton's of eye-opening information.
I see they took off the link to BOR that he was on that was to the right of the column....I do not wonder why either...he got creamed for his bigoted Mormon bias...he was outrageous....it may still be in the BOR files on Fox news if anyone cares to watch it.
Exactly, BT. The bigots don't recognize their own vulnerability
June 14, 2007 - 12:08 ET by RJExactly, BT. Every religion has individuals and practices that can be thrown open to question. Those small minded bigots on this board who attack candidates because of religion don't recognize that their own religion is not above reproach.
Name one for Evangelical Chri
June 14, 2007 - 13:31 ET by vrwc13Name one for Evangelical Chritians, one. You won't find me calling others names either.
BT-- right on--I was
June 14, 2007 - 12:31 ET by misterbillBT-- right on--I was watching with my wife. Debbie does not spend any time on the internet, but I have shared many things with her. I said , "honey, you would not believe how much this man sounds like a lady named Debra on NB. And one other person too". Small world!
Afternoon to you misterb...Su
June 14, 2007 - 12:58 ET by bigtimerAfternoon to you misterb...
Sure glad someone else saw that....it was impossible to not think of Debra and vr13 when viewing the hatred coming from that man about the Mormon faith.
I too mentioned this to my other half regarding the forum blog/post Debra titled.....
Romney (It will be the real believers in God who stop him)....
Anyone can go there and read on the views of other posters here...just click to the forum section, the title is there, it is listed under the middle choice to the left.
BT...show me the hatred in ev
June 14, 2007 - 13:28 ET by vrwc13BT...show me the hatred in even one of my posts, just one. I will be waiting.
Yours,
Churchman :^)
Seek and you shall find vcrw
June 14, 2007 - 13:32 ET by bigtimerSeek and you shall find vcrw 13.
I have not forgot that evening...I will not forget that evening...nor what you posted.
I will not be bothered going back and finding your own posts for you.
Do it yourself.
I know exactly what I posted,
June 14, 2007 - 13:54 ET by vrwc13I know exactly what I posted, no hate, no bigotry, just my faith express in the truth of the Bible. Don't need a church, organization, heirarchy, or added writtings to tell me what I am to beleive. One God, one source, one truth.
Religious Bigotry is where
June 14, 2007 - 14:10 ET by Conservative VoiceReligious Bigotry is where you will not vote for someone who is of that faith, will not work for and/or hire someone of that faith.
Hate is a strong word, I won't go as far as calling you hateful, but you do spend a lot of time being anti-Mormon, hence the judgement that you are hateful.
I do find it interesting that you think people here...especially us Mormons are telling you what you are to believe. Give me a break, if anyone here is telling people what they should or should not believe it is you. I don't care what you believe...just don't spread lies about what I believe.
And there you have it ...CV
June 14, 2007 - 14:19 ET by The Wicked ConservativeAnd there you have it ...CV says, "I don't care what you believe..." Well CV I do care what others believe because I'm commanded to care. Why am I against abortion? It's murder times 2 the infant and the mother for choosing to end life and thusly choosing damnation for herself. I'm against homosexuality because it leads to damnation. I speak truth as it's written in my Bible because ignoring that truth leads to damnation. And maybe my truth spoken will change the eternal destiny of a sinner and direct him to heaven. This is the opposite of intolerance.
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
Don't twist my words Wicked
June 14, 2007 - 14:34 ET by Conservative VoiceDon't twist my words Wicked Conservative. I am quite engaged in doing missionary work for my Church because I care about spreading the gospel (I don't however debate religion, because you can't debate faith). What I don't care about is what your religion is in respect of will I associate myself with you or not.
Funny, abortion...Mormons are against it.
Homosexuality...Mormons are against it.
Bible...Mormons are for it.
Teaching, Learning, Preaching about Christ...Mormons are for that too!
We have more in common than we are different...are you among the people who refuse to vote for Romney because he's Mormon? You aren't voting to have you teach your Sunday School class...you don't have to agree with his religion you know. Judge him by his fruits...if by his fruits he doesn't measure up, fine...but don't write him off because he is a Mormon...or you are a bigot.
The WC, these guys sure like
June 14, 2007 - 14:47 ET by vrwc13The WC, these guys sure like the bigot word. First me now you. Sounds a lot like al sharpton, disagree and you are a bigot. The definition of bigot does not include not voting for someone.
And you are right about a lot of common ground, only when it comes to the single most important issue, in fact the only real issue, you believe in a different Jesus than I do and Romney claims the same. I will tolerate his view but I have the freedom not to support it when I vote. And if he is elected I will not only tolerate his postion I will respect it, his postion not his faith.
Didn't call a bigot, ther
June 14, 2007 - 15:21 ET by Conservative VoiceDidn't call [edited...him...Wicked] a bigot, there was a big if there...you must of missed it. vrwc you are either ignoring what I am saying, or you can't read.
A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.
You are called a bigot because you are both prejudice (he's Mormon, oh my) and intolerant. You aren't willing to judge a man based on his fruits, but on his religion...and only because you have judged that religion to be non-Christian. You don't just disagree, you aren't willing to hire (vote for) a Mormon ( as far as working for a Mormon, I haven't seen you make such a claim, but it wouldn't surprise me ).
I do my best to avoid name calling such as doofus, idiot, etc...but you by definition are a bigot, your own words condemn you. Wear the label with pride and honor...because if you are Right with your bigotry, then God is smiling on you.
Not anti-Mormon just pro-Jesu
June 14, 2007 - 14:27 ET by vrwc13Not anti-Mormon just pro-Jesus. I go to chruch services where the pastors remind us to call them on anything that goes against scripture. Just doing the same here. If something you truly believed in was wrong, wouldn't you like to know? Or do we resort to name-calling instead of open debate?
Bigotry: 1.
stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own
Guilty as charged for the stubborn part, not-guilty of complete intolerance as I believe you are absolutely free to believe what you believe. Just that my Bible says to speak the truth and love. The truth is your faith contradicts my scripture.
Self-serving twaddle
June 14, 2007 - 14:34 ET by RJThat's self-serving twaddle. You won't vote for a man because of his religion. That's pure bigotry.
My church is better than you
June 14, 2007 - 14:39 ET by florida_chadMy church is better than you church
lol, vrw you are like Debra
June 14, 2007 - 14:40 ET by Conservative Voicelol, vrw you are like Debra...a bigot...wear the badge with honor and pride.
You are so thick in your bigotry and blinded by your stubborness that you can't see how much we are in common. A bigot is not just intolerant, they are prejudice. I am intolerant of murder...doesn't make me a bigot. I will not vote for Senator Kennedy because he is a murderer...doesn't make me a bigot...because there is no prejudice.
And for the last time...I am pro-Jesus as well, so stop implying that I am not, you are not an authority of what I believe, nor does somehow "proving" my Church to be "false" does not imply yours is by De Facto true.
Bigotry traditionally has mor
June 14, 2007 - 14:59 ET by TruthMongerBigotry traditionally has more to do with things one can't change such as race or ethnicity...if vr didn't want to vote for the most evangelical conservative Christian out there just because he or she was black (assuming vr is not black of course) then you might have something there...
Libs twist the meanings of words...let's not do the same...
I don't think it's bigotry but I think it's a mistake to expect our president to always be a "Christian" as defined by fundamentalists like me and vr...the presidency has nothing to do with doctrinal minutia - it's more about grand values - Romney shares most of those with me - I don't really care where he gets them when it comes to political offices...
TM, then you aren't a bigot.
June 14, 2007 - 15:13 ET by Conservative VoiceTM, then you aren't a bigot. Disagreeing with my religion doesn't make you a bigot...even if the disagreement is major. Not voting for someone...ie hiring, or working for someone who is of a certain faith because of that faith (ignoring the fruits) is by definition a bigot.
A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.
included in this are things that people can change...such as religion. vw and Debra are bigots not because they disagree with my religion, but because they won't vote for a Mormon no matter what. Take me for example, you and I agree politically I would say 95%...and I probably am politically there with Debra and vw 95%. You would vote for me, they would not because I am Mormon. That is why they have earned the title. A key element to bigotry is to be prejudice, the second is what people tend to focus on (being intolerant). Any definition that doesn't have that element is a faulty definition.
OK - I'm afraid I just can't
June 15, 2007 - 15:12 ET by TruthMongerOK - I'm afraid I just can't see vr's attitude as traditional bigotry - but I do have a problem with it, vr said it himself - render unto Ceasar. I don't feel like the Bible requires me to only associate with what my doctrine calls a "Christian" when it comes to government. But one must be careful of becoming yoked with unbelievers. It can be very tricky to balance these things sometimes...
I also think were a long, long way off from significantly addressing what vr and debra are talking about with your group - could very well be centuries before it can be done the right way - positively and with cheer...
This is a time for people of faith to work together as much as possible - we have bigger fish to fry...
vrw and Debra are related som
June 15, 2007 - 09:10 ET by Airforce_5_Ovrw and Debra are related some how or the same person because they spout the same bigoted rhetoric.
I'm tired of it.
I refuse to engage this person again.
Sorry pal, I am not Debra and
June 15, 2007 - 09:18 ET by vrwc13Sorry pal, I am not Debra and other than this site, know nothing else about her.
You may be tired of our message, but like you and your missionaries, we have a duty to respond to what we see as "errors" in a faith claiming to be Christian.
vrwc13So in your opinion you
June 15, 2007 - 10:22 ET by Airforce_5_Ovrwc13
So in your opinion you teach "truth" not tolerance? Ok I get it.
So your Truth is intolerance.
Got it.
I wonder what would have happened if Christ had followed that belief.
He, as a Jew, would have shunned the Samaritans.
He would have stayed away from the Lepers.
He would have let them stone the women.
I see now.
Well, I'll continue engaging them, Airforce
June 15, 2007 - 09:19 ET by RJWell, I'll continue engaging them, Airforce. I'm not Mormon, but their billigerent bigotry is too dangerous and too disgusting to ignore.
Foul again...this makes 3?
June 15, 2007 - 09:46 ET by vrwc13Foul again...this makes 3? Who is doing this and why?
AF and RJ can't play fair? Why are my responses gone?
RJ, "engagement" including deleting my responses?
Accuse without support, and t
June 14, 2007 - 14:50 ET by vrwc13Accuse without support, and thought only trolls did that.
So vrwc, I take it you would
June 14, 2007 - 11:39 ET by bassndudeSo vrwc, I take it you would vote for Hillary instead?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
I think that's what he's im
June 14, 2007 - 11:53 ET by Sergeant ROCKI think that's what he's implying. lol
Nope, wrong again, I vote my
June 14, 2007 - 11:58 ET by vrwc13Nope, wrong again, I vote my convictions. No unborn babykiller supporters will ever get my vote.
If the choice is the lesser of two evils...they are both still evil.
That's what the primaries a
June 14, 2007 - 12:03 ET by Sergeant ROCKThat's what the primaries are for, unfortunately some of the more qualified conservatives are at the bottom of the polls.
So, which one of those guys are you planning to vote for in the primary?
Going here says I should supp
June 14, 2007 - 13:05 ET by vrwc13Going here says I should support Hunter, Tancredo, or Brownback. My actual vote is private.
I suspect that your secret
June 14, 2007 - 13:08 ET by Sergeant ROCKI suspect that your secret vote will be whoever is leading in the polls.
You don't get it do you, chec
June 14, 2007 - 13:16 ET by vrwc13You don't get it do you, check out my profile. I will not vote for anyone who supports the killing of the unborn. Is that not clear?
Green, purple, or red, and blue. Doesn't matter, all life is precious and not to be taken lightly.
Even Mormons?
June 14, 2007 - 13:18 ET by Sergeant ROCKEven Mormons?
Even Mormons.
June 14, 2007 - 13:23 ET by vrwc13Even Mormons.
So if it comes down to Hillar
June 14, 2007 - 13:01 ET by Airforce_5_OSo if it comes down to Hillary or that "Not the same Jesus I believe in" Mormon, your voting for the green party?
He'll sit that one out.
June 14, 2007 - 13:09 ET by Sergeant ROCKHe'll sit that one out.
Not if they support the death
June 14, 2007 - 13:10 ET by vrwc13Not if they support the deaths of the unborn.
No, she supports the killing
June 14, 2007 - 11:56 ET by vrwc13No, she supports the killing of the unborn. Nuff said about her or any of her ilk that support that.
Morning TM...If Thompson does
June 14, 2007 - 11:22 ET by bigtimerMorning TM...
If Thompson doesn't run and it looks like Hunter can't make it...Romney is my choice too.
vcrw and Debra both have a problems with the Mormon's....as they have posted as such, quite a lot.
Thompson/Hunter 08
Makes sense bt - I'm liking R
June 14, 2007 - 11:28 ET by TruthMongerMakes sense bt - I'm liking Romney/Thompson at this point...I'll be at the convention this fall to promote it...if nothing better materializes...
All I can say...
June 14, 2007 - 11:32 ET by LionKingThompson/Rice
Rice isn't an option either -
June 14, 2007 - 12:01 ET by TruthMongerRice isn't an option either - otherwise i'd go with Rice/Rice
Jerry Rice and Dr. Condolee
June 14, 2007 - 12:25 ET by Conservative VoiceJerry Rice and Dr. Condoleezza Rice ?
ha!
June 14, 2007 - 12:31 ET by TruthMongerha!
Truth--I'll tell you why I'd
June 14, 2007 - 12:23 ET by ncstevemTruth--I'll tell you why I'd never vote for Romney. He was behind a goverment mandated health insurance scheme in MA. All citizens in the state are mandated to have health insurance. From the little I've read about it, the 'plan' is already unraveling because of huge cost overruns.
Just more big government sticking its nose where it doesn't belong.
Romney is no conservative.
He's no Reagan that's for sur
June 14, 2007 - 12:30 ET by TruthMongerHe's no Reagan that's for sure...
Maybe Thompson can "act" like one?
ncstevem, none of the candidates are "clean"
June 14, 2007 - 12:32 ET by RJncstevem, none of the candidates are "clean." For just one example, Rudy has promised in his "12 points" that he will appoint conservative judges....but all of his judical appointments (around a thousand?) were liberal.
But.. but.. but.. he can wi
June 14, 2007 - 12:34 ET by Sergeant ROCKBut.. but.. but.. he can win! Some will say...
Funny how Rudy never mentions
June 14, 2007 - 13:32 ET by waka wakaFunny how Rudy never mentions IRAQ in those 12 points.
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
vrwc13And what is our view on
June 14, 2007 - 11:57 ET by Airforce_5_Ovrwc13
And what is our view on women there Mr "Mormon Expert"?
Right... Fred Thompson's pr
June 14, 2007 - 07:50 ET by motherbeltRussert doesn't connect the dots because he doesn't want to. Does he actually think that save for Thompson, people would be supporting McCain's stand on illegals? I think he hopes that by not talking about the reason for the slide, he can avoid exacerbating McCain's problem.
McCain started losing support when he authored that abominable first-amendment-squelching bill with Sen. Feingold. It's only his stand on the Iraq war that has kept him from losing even more support up until now. It's questionable how long even that will last, in the face of this illegal immigration fiasco that he supports.
"McCain started losing s
June 14, 2007 - 07:55 ET by sarcasmo"McCain started losing support when he authored that abominable first-amendment-squelching bill with Sen. Feingold."
Which, if you'll recall, would not have passed without Senator Thompson. That's one of the few things which make him quite suspect to me, but it is a serious one, because it was so obviously-flawed.
JMR
Don't worry Sarc.These guys w
June 14, 2007 - 07:57 ET by LeonDon't worry Sarc.
These guys will ignore that blatant hypocrisy like they've done with all the other candidates.
That is, if Thompson even runs but from the pictures I've seen the man looks old as dirt and quite unhealthy.
See, I don't think he's tha
June 14, 2007 - 08:05 ET by sarcasmoSee, I don't think he's that bad -- despite this very severe mistake Fred's a politician who actually thinks about the Constitution and voted "1" against the other 99 statists in the senate in a vote that was not a mistake. I think he'd possibly be a good vice president for Dr. Paul. Further, I predict my saying he'd be a good VP will infuriate NB conservatives even more than you can infuriate 'em with 5 separate posts. ;)
JMR
In your dreams Leon. Me thi
June 14, 2007 - 08:05 ET by vrwc13In your dreams Leon. Me thinks you libs are a bit concerned now since the "beatable" Guiliani, McCain, and Romney are being challenged by someone who could wipe the floor with shrillary or b. hussein obama (lower-case for outright supporters of killing babies).
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
I don't usually address "
June 14, 2007 - 08:24 ET by vrwc13I don't usually address "trolls" but with leon its works like this...he (leon) is such a great foil (not your hat leon) that after his normal hit-and-run posts one can post a response knowing he will not have a reasonable reply.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
To reiterate,I find the despe
June 14, 2007 - 08:51 ET by LeonTo reiterate,
I find the desperation surrounding Thompson support to be hilarious. 5 months ago this guy's name wasn't even uttered in the same sentence as the word President.
It wasn't until the incredible weakness of the Republican candidates became brutally apparent that people started talking about Thompson (who as far as I know isn't even in the race yet). He's an after thought and a last ditch effort to scrounge together a palatable Republican ticket.
It makes me laugh watching you hitch your wagons to a different horse every day. Don't worry, each and every Republican candidate is a flip-flopping hypocrite. They all have savage black marks on their records. So I guess, you all just need to choose whichever candidate you think is the LEAST hypocritical. Good luck.
Leon, find me one example o
June 14, 2007 - 08:59 ET by sarcasmoLeon, find me one example of Dr. Paul being a "flip flopping hypocrite." One.
JMR
leon...desperation? You hav
June 14, 2007 - 09:12 ET by vrwc13leon...desperation? You have got to be kidding? Do you have any idea how far off the primaries are yet alone the election? :^)
and your democrat possibilities:
gimme a break...maybe your ilk will find its desperation in the "Dr to be" quoted below...
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
You like your motley collection of Democrat candidates, Leon?
June 14, 2007 - 09:13 ET by RJAll intelligent voters have to do, Leon, is look at the collection of far left fools, pretty boys, incompetents, neophytes and socialists that make up the Democrat choices, and our guys start looking better.
I feel very sorry for the Dem
June 14, 2007 - 10:20 ET by TruthMongerI feel very sorry for the Dems - it's either hilary or obama on election night - both a snowballs chance in hell - Gore and Kerry towered over both in terms of accomplishment and qualification - and yet again with the Senators!
Hey Dems - GET A GOVERNOR ON THE TICKET HINT HINT
Legitimate question for sarc
June 14, 2007 - 08:54 ET by Six String SpiffHey Sarcasmo, Why is it that 95% of Libertarians can boil everything down to "Legalize it!"? Honestly, what is the infatuation with drugs form this group? I consider myself Conservative/Libertarian, and I have absolutely no use for drugs.
Islam should have it's religious status revoked until it can prove it's not a hate group.
Why do you people think thi
June 14, 2007 - 08:58 ET by sarcasmoWhy do you people think this is only about illegal drugs, and not about spending in general. Can't you read what I write??? Don't you see that it's not about whether you have any use for anything but individual freedom? (And see what I mean by anyone being able to call themselves a libertarian? Everyone from a drugwarrior to Bill Clinton seems to feel free to expropriate the term these days, accuracy be damned!) Anyway, this is the same dumb question I've been asked dozens of times, I'm not backing off on the drug war or on spending of any other sort, is that clear enough for you??
JMR
Maybe if so-called 'Liberta
June 14, 2007 - 09:03 ET by Sergeant ROCKMaybe if so-called 'Libertarians' weren't so fanactical about legalizing drugs, then maybe they wouldn't be so often associated with it as they commonly are.
Maybe if conservatives woul
June 14, 2007 - 09:11 ET by sarcasmoMaybe if conservatives would actually read what I write instead of worshipping big government, that would also happen. I don't just talk here about drugs, and everyone knows it. My biggest issue is spending, and the tax & spend drugwar is but a small part of that big problem...And if I'm a "so called" Libertarian, can you please direct me to a "real" one? (I didn't think so...)
JMR
You're right, there are non
June 14, 2007 - 09:15 ET by Sergeant ROCKYou're right, there are none.
I think most people would associate your zeal for legalized drugs more so than any other position you so-called libertarians may have. So, don't get all huffy with me for simply pointing this out.
None exist, eh? That's abou
June 14, 2007 - 09:19 ET by sarcasmoNone exist, eh? That's about as big as any of your whoppers...
And it's not "getting huffy" to expect 5th grade level reading comprehension, either. And was I "obsessed" with the FCC the other day when I once-again berated our hosts for sending Brent Bozell to testify in front of 'em?? Tim Graham can't post anything about decency without me chiming-in, and he's quite aware of it. Does that make me "obsessed" with 100%-defunding the FCC, too? (Well, maybe!)
JMR
You really take things too
June 14, 2007 - 09:25 ET by Sergeant ROCKYou really take things too literally and too personally. The simple fact is that you Losertarians are simply Liberal-lite and have as much chance of being elected President as LaRouche.
Don't bash Libertarians
June 14, 2007 - 09:44 ET by Six String SpiffLook, I believe Libertarians are the closest thing we have left to Constitutionalists, so let's not bash them for being conservative enough. I wasn't trying to pick a fight with Sarc, but I seem to have started a mini brawl. Sarc, your claim of anti libertarian bias in the MSSM is unfounded. They first need to recognize there is a Libertarian party before they can hate it. :-)
Conservatives are not Const
June 14, 2007 - 09:51 ET by Sergeant ROCKConservatives are not Constitutionalists? This so-called libertarian
thinks that conservatives 'worship' big government. Doesn't sound very
rational to me. Nor, do I see anything in the Constitution about drug
addicts.
Liberty is about freedom to d
June 14, 2007 - 10:22 ET by TruthMongerLiberty is about freedom to do the right things - not to just do whatever you want...
We have prisons for those kinds of "libertarians..."
Dumbest...Comment...EVER
June 14, 2007 - 11:51 ET by sarcasmoDumbest...Comment...EVER. You, and your crook-filled political party especially, do NOT get to describe what is the right thing to me. Why? Well, let's just say I have pistols for those kinds of control-freaks...
JMR
Liberty or Death
June 14, 2007 - 12:43 ET by TruthMongerMost...asinine...thinking...EVER.
FYI We determine what's "right" democratically here...
You don't get to dictate right and wrong here either, pistols or otherwise...
Thanks for that "eithe
June 14, 2007 - 12:48 ET by sarcasmoThanks for that "either" admission that you and your crook-ridden political party don't get to dictate what's "right," but you remain wrong on the main point behind my rights and therefore yours, too. We are a REPUBLIC, not a democracy, thank God.
JMR
A republic - gee never knew t
June 14, 2007 - 13:05 ET by TruthMongerA republic - gee never knew that one, sarc...
We better tell Bush to stop promoting "democracy" then...
You're just pissed at people like me because I push a traditional moral code that conflicts with your ability to enjoy a good drool at hooters, smoke a bong while driving down the road (backwards if "you want to"), subscribe to 24 hour prostitute home delivery, etc, etc...
We will decide the right and wrong of all of this DEMOCRATICALLY within our "constitutional republic" much to your chagrine...I think you know how it's going to continue to turn out...
Yep, you act like you're just learning about it...
June 14, 2007 - 13:11 ET by sarcasmoYes, Bush needs to stop nation-building, like he said he would not do. And I think you're scared of how it's going to turn out, and I don't care about your alleged morality because you lie, just like the others who can't argue with me & therefore need an intellectual crutch (he's "obsessed" and he wants to use heroin every minute blah blah blah). Plonk.
JMR
Hooters is calling
June 14, 2007 - 13:18 ET by TruthMongerYour posts are off the deep-end now I'm afraid - proving of course that I'm right...
Have the last word if you like - feel free to break a few laws while your at it:)!
The question isn't is drug
June 14, 2007 - 13:23 ET by Conservative VoiceThe question isn't is drug use, porn, prostitution, gambling, etc morally wrong, the question is, does the government have a moral obligation to fight these things ( while at the same time ignore adultery, fornication, alcohol, cigarettes, ... teach our kids its OK to live together before marriage, that homosexuality is OK, and allow porn to be sold despite how it effects society ... porn is more addictive than heroin. ) ?
It goes with the old saying, why does the government fight the mafia? It doesn't like the competition.
I am against drugs, I don't even drink or smoke...but I am not convinced that government is the best way to enforce morality. But we should absolutely prosecute crimes that are related to drugs and alcohol...as well as give parents more power with school vouchers ( among other things ).
Legalize everything!!!
June 14, 2007 - 13:35 ET by TruthMongerThen we need to strike the murder laws I guess...
Can you name just one thing any government does that isn't founded in morality?
Again truth, I am for the d
June 14, 2007 - 14:03 ET by Conservative VoiceAgain truth, I am for the drug war...I just think we need to either be consistent with our drug laws and if we are going to call it a war, then wage it as a war, with full commitment and force, or come down hard on drug related crimes...driving drunk, rape, robbery, murder etc. or a combination. The question I have is how we are currently doing it, is it the most effective way to help people off drugs? And does the government have the moral authority to enforce personal use items like food and drugs ( what is your position on forcing restaurants using only approved oils to cook with? )
I absolutely disagree with Sarc that making drugs legal that we will see a decrease in drug related crimes...I think there will be an increase. And just because drugs are legal doesn't mean there won't be a black market. And as far as trial lawyers are concerned...I think they create more harm then good, so his argument there is pretty weak.
We need to go against drug related crimes...robbery, rape, murder, neglecting kids...or giving minors harmful substance ( alcohol is legal if you are over 21, though we need to either change the definition of an adult being 21 and not 18, or change the drinking laws to be allowed at 18...you are either an adult or you aren't )
For example if you are an addict, then your kids should be taken from you until you are cleaned up...after a year you lose parental rights if you fail to show any progress.
CV we seem to agree alot - an
June 14, 2007 - 14:14 ET by TruthMongerCV we seem to agree alot - and i'm with ya on this too...
And if our Democracy eventually legalizes drugs then so be it...I will live with it - kinda like the flourishing porn industry I suppose...
Sarc sees a bunch of happy porn stars...
That's not what I see a few years later when someone is crying out stories of humiliation, drug addiction, rape, STD's, abortions, inability to have children, beatings, stab wounds, cigarette burns...
The problem with the curren
June 14, 2007 - 12:52 ET by Conservative VoiceThe problem with the current Constitution Party is they are against the Iraq war.
I consider myself a conservative libertarian. I do believe in the drug war, but obviously we either need to fight it as a war ( ie use the military to kill drug lords etc ) or we need to change how we fight the war. I have to agree with Sarc, to a point, that natural consequences should be the enforcer more so than prisons. If alcohol is legal, then the other drugs with similar harm should be legal. However, we should also at the same time be harder on drunk driving, using drugs around kids ( your kids should be put in foster care if you are an addict or drunk ) that is come down hard on drug related crimes and / or abuse.
But here is the problem with Sarc's argument as well...what about date rape drugs? Those drugs aren't about the user, its about getting a girl losed to be abused.
To an extent, alcohol is th
June 14, 2007 - 13:07 ET by sarcasmoTo an extent, alcohol is that date rape drug, and its legality and ubiquity, combined with widespread use, should be punished MORE than we presently punish rapes, IMO. The only way to do that without raising taxes is to free up prison cells by releasing nonviolent people. I'll repeat it, because this gets under people's skin yet it's a FACT: Jessica Lunsford's killer/rapist would have been in a cage except that someone else was in that cage instead for a nonviolent "crime" like selling illegal drugs or sex (I really haven't ranted nearly-enough about prostitution here, because my accusers are so-ironically-obsessed with illegal drugs!). Why do we have "minimum mandatory" sentencing on that, but not so much on crimes of violence, especially against kids? Also, legal drugs in many folks' minds seem to assume the complete outlawing of product liability lawyers as a side effect. Don't you think a date rape pill might have a tiny bit more difficulty in the free marketplace than a natural substance as proven-safe as cannabis? Keep in mind, the makers of Oxycontin just got fined severely for carrying on a tradition of big-pharma-lies that literally started with heroin -- which is the deliberate misrepresentation of the addictivity of new opiate drugs by sellers.
JMR
Im for defunding FCC too
June 14, 2007 - 09:41 ET by Six String SpiffDefunding the FCC is something we agree on.
Islam should have it's religious status revoked until it can prove it's not a hate group.
Ah, therefore I'm reasonabl
June 14, 2007 - 09:43 ET by sarcasmoAh, therefore I'm reasonable and not "obsessed." I get it now! ;^)
JMR
Worshipping bg government?
June 14, 2007 - 09:33 ET by Six String SpiffWhat? I dontt know anybody here that worships big government. Look, I made a very valid statement. I am not just talking about illegal drugs. I agree there is a tax/spend problem with the drug war. The solution is harsher punishment. None of this 3 strikes BS. I don't want to hear sob stories about how so and so was caught up in some drug raid that wasn't performed with the utmost care and sensitivity. If people just stayed the hell away from drugs, there wouldn't be a drug 'war' now would there?
See my other posts, the dru
June 14, 2007 - 09:42 ET by sarcasmoSee my other posts, the drugwar seems as holy to the right as pestering peaceful gun owners is to the left. I think it's a worship of big government, since government already takes substantially more than a tithe anyway, but people don't like when I call out what they actually-worship any more than they like it when I call-out lies. Your "harsher punishment" costs me taxes, and HAS NOT WORKED. My solution, which works where it's tried, has not been tried in the USA, but Amsterdam -- like it or not -- exists.
JMR
Hmmm.. You do have a point ab
June 14, 2007 - 09:47 ET by Six String SpiffHmmm.. You do have a point about Amsterdam. Although, I would like to see a report of how many STDs are floating around there too.
Amsterdam is sorrounded on al
June 14, 2007 - 10:25 ET by TruthMongerAmsterdam is sorrounded on all sides by the Amish in the countryside...
We have an Amsterdam here - it's called San Francisco...birthplace of aids perhaps?
sixstring--have you met --
June 14, 2007 - 10:16 ET by misterbillsixstring--have you met --any 13 years old kids who are trying drugs???
misterbill
June 14, 2007 - 10:42 ET by Six String SpiffYes, I have. In the tiny little Suburb I grew up in, drugs were THE thing.
Who would receive the harsher punishment-
June 14, 2007 - 10:50 ET by misterbillWho would receive the harsher punishment- you suggest?? Certainly not these young people, I hope. I recently have found out a whole lot of info on drugs of which, in my conservative, limited knowledge I was totally unaware.
That is, if Thompson even run
June 14, 2007 - 10:18 ET by bigtimerThat is, if Thompson even runs but from the pictures I've seen the man looks old as dirt and quite unhealthy.
Got your lines from the leftist talking points I see Leon.....straight from the Mouth of Chrissy Matthews yesterday...too...same implications....if you little leftists think that is going to work, and that's all you have to use against Thompson you are in bigger trouble and even bigger fools than I thought.
Eeew...I didn't realize Tho
June 14, 2007 - 08:03 ET by motherbeltEeew...I didn't realize Thompson voted for that. I will have to join you in being suspicious. Well, maybe he will say that, seeing now how it has played out, he realizes it was a mistake.
I think a lot of them, including the President, went for it because they thought they would appear to be on the side of campaign reform, and they thought SCOTUS would shoot it down for them.
Well, as my mother-in-law always said...you know what "thought" did? S***t in his pants and "thought" he didn't.
Quite a while ago, Fred admit
June 14, 2007 - 08:20 ET by SouthJersey1953Quite a while ago, Fred admitted that the McCain-Feingold was a mistake. I do not have a link off the top of my head, but he basically said that there were some areas of it that were good, but quite a bit of it is bad and he regrets voting for it. One of the things I like about him is that he is not afraid to admit when he makes a mistake, unlike so many pols that just try to avoid/change the subject.
No RINOs in '08 - Thompson/Hunter would be a good ticket; Thompson/Steele would be a great ticket
Admitting a mistake is a go
June 14, 2007 - 08:31 ET by sarcasmoAdmitting a mistake is a good start, but it's at-most only halfway there. I need an explicit and exact promise from Fred that he's not just gonna blow hot air on this one because he needs to work, hard, to un-do the harm his vote has done. He can't have big government in this vitally-important area and still get forgiveness with just an apology - it's gonna take that ol' four-letter-word to satisfy free speech absolutists like me: work. I await eagerly, but as with Fred's response to these questions, so far I see nothing...
JMR
I have the drug debate with
June 14, 2007 - 08:40 ET by The Wicked ConservativeI have the drug debate with a wacked out lib friend of mine that tries to call himself a libertarian. A libertarian that wants even more social programs than we have now...lmao.
Sarcasmo, the problem with legalizing drugs is that they destroy lives. Addiction isn't caused by the illegality of the substance. Neither will the crimes committed to support a habit be mitigated by the legality of the substance. You want the government to stay out of your "special snacks", I understand that but the consequences WILL AFFECT MORE THAN THE USER. And just because a few may be able to perform as functioning addicts doesn't mean that everyone should have unfettered access to life destroying toxins.
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
You're right about addictio
June 14, 2007 - 08:46 ET by sarcasmoYou're right about addiction and wrong about crime. The tax and spend drugwar causes crime, period, and the proof is all over and all around, not least in incarceration-rates. What IS it with you people and "your special snacks," too? Can you not, for once, actually just argue an issue up or down without making a lying accusation? Do you really feel THAT aware that you're losing the debate?? And various people with various opinions call themselves "libertarian," the key thing to look at is spending. More social programs = not-a-real-libertarian.
JMR
And more social programs is
June 14, 2007 - 08:51 ET by Sergeant ROCKAnd more social programs is exactly what you'll get if you have crack heads, etc. doing as they please.
Nope, not if they're not fu
June 14, 2007 - 08:55 ET by sarcasmoNope, not if they're not funded. I don't mind people killing themselves in various ways, that's just one of the ways I don't mind...But I see no reason to spend penny one on it, and neither do lots of other folks just like me.
JMR
A 'need' not being funded b
June 14, 2007 - 09:05 ET by Sergeant ROCKA 'need' not being funded by this government? You're delusional. What do you propose to do with all of the homeless crack heads wandering the streets of America?
Leave them alone unless the
June 14, 2007 - 09:08 ET by sarcasmoLeave them alone unless they commit a real crime. If they don't wish to work and can't find someone to support them, they can starve as far as I'm concerned.
JMR
Sarcasmo's utopia: Crack he
June 14, 2007 - 09:10 ET by Sergeant ROCKSarcasmo's utopia: Crack heads wandering the streets of America - sounds cool! LOL!
Too funny for words...JMR
June 14, 2007 - 09:13 ET by sarcasmoToo funny for words...
JMR
Government would absolutely s
June 14, 2007 - 10:27 ET by TruthMongerGovernment would absolutely shrink to nothing if drugs were legal that's for sure:)...
Sarc just move to Amsterdam and be happy...this is not Holland and it never ever will be...
It's naive to think that by
June 14, 2007 - 10:35 ET by Sergeant ROCKIt's naive to think that by eliminating one problem, especially in this case, that you will not therefore create another. And further, that the government at some level will not address that problem as well.
The only way our government i
June 14, 2007 - 10:39 ET by TruthMongerThe only way our government is ever going to shrink will be via strategically placed nuclear devices or the sun going super-nova...
LOL! True!!
June 14, 2007 - 10:42 ET by Sergeant ROCKLOL! True!!
Sarc, please explain.
June 14, 2007 - 08:59 ET by The Wicked ConservativeOh come on Sarcasmo. Exactly what will all the people that make a living from drug trafficking do? Get a job at Philip-Morris' new narcotics division? Sure the war on drugs causes crime just as much as the laws against murder cause crime. No law = no crime. I've watched drugs and alchohol ruin two lives already, my father with boos and a friend and coworker with cocaine. Neither had control over their drug of choice. Both destroyed jobs and relationships because they lost control of their lives to drugs. Dammit some things are worth fighting for. Now would you please explain to me exactly how the legalization of drugs will stop crime? I'm not persecuting you or any crap like that. I want an honest debate, sorry about the "snacks" line.
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
1. Possibly, I don't care w
June 14, 2007 - 09:06 ET by sarcasmo1. Possibly, I don't care what other people do for a job.
2. When did I say legalizing drugs would "stop crime"? Please provide exact date and time and cite exact quotation. (I know, you can't, but I'd like to see that admission from you -- all I've ever said is that it'll lower crime, and you know it.)
3. You and others have inserted the "snacks" BS ("line" is a sound-alike for "lie" though) too often for me to believe you want honest debate. I think you want state control because despite the evidence you think it will work just like lefties think things like "gun control" will work, although it's beyond me how state control would have worked on alcohol without reinstatement of Prohibition. Want honest debate? Explain to me why teenagers in the Netherlands are less likely to test positive for weed than teenagers in the USA, and then we'll start, but until I get a drug warrior admitting that Amsterdam exists on the same planet as us, I'll stick with snappy sarcasmo-replies instead. Saying that drugs should be legal is NOT saying that drugs cause no harm, they're 2 different issues.
JMR
Sarc says, "I don't mi
June 14, 2007 - 09:14 ET by The Wicked ConservativeSarc says, "I don't mind people killing themselves in various ways, that's just one
of the ways I don't mind...But I see no reason to spend penny one on
it"
That was the end of the debate. You'd have to give a damn about someone other than yourself to make any sense to me here. Respect for human life and wanting better for everyone is pivotal for me.
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
Not wanting government to s
June 14, 2007 - 09:17 ET by sarcasmoNot wanting government to spend a penny on something is not the same thing as not caring, and you know it. It's just not wanting waste. Private charity works best on these addiction issues, and it's cheapest for taxpayers. But the debate was over with the lie, it ends every time at the beginning on that for me, and the rest of the time I just jab. I have rarely if ever seen an honest pro-drugwar debater here, to tell you the sad truth. Like you, they always want to open with the big lie, because they know they're in for another ass-whippin'! Today was more proof.
JMR
Please Sarc, what was my li
June 14, 2007 - 09:27 ET by The Wicked ConservativePlease Sarc, what was my lie. The "your snacks" accusation? I'm sorry, I know you don't have to be on drugs to want uncle sam to stop spending money on the war on drugs. I say some things are worth it. Now as for you second question above about finding your quote on ending crime, you said "The tax and spend drugwar causes crime, period," Not even being a jerk and saying I drew the conclusion from the absoluteness of your statement just explain to me how the defunding of any government war on drugs will even mitigate the crime rate significantly. And your right about privately funded organizations being WAY more effective than uncle sam at ending abuse. Programs like Teen Challenge are extremely effective at ending addiction compared to AA. But Sarc I don't want them to become addicts in the first place.
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
1. Yep, you guessed it. Tha
June 14, 2007 - 09:34 ET by sarcasmo1. Yep, you guessed it. That's the lie, but people -- especially the liars in question -- seem to hate when I call a spade a spade in this case. Sorry, not gonna change, WHEN someone lies again I'll call 'em out on it again, just like this time, no changes, no mercy, you've seen it time and again.
2. Defunding the drugwar will VASTLY reduce law enforcement corruption. (Link contains hours of reading-proof.)
3. Not spending government money does not cause people to be addicts in any place, much less the first. Why do people think I want people to use more drugs when all I really want is for big government to spend less money on the problem and leave druggies alone if they're not bothering anyone? I repeat, the conservative irrationality on this subject -- especially weed, the holiest of holies in the drugwar -- rivals the irrationality of the left on firearms, where what we're doing isn't working in both cases the only "solution" is to throw even more tax money at the problem.
JMR
Sarc, please explain.
June 14, 2007 - 08:59 ET by The Wicked Conservativeoops double
Clearly Russert's yet anoth
June 14, 2007 - 07:59 ET by Jack BauerClearly Russert's yet another Washington D.C. establishment elitist who's
With that same logic why is B
June 14, 2007 - 08:02 ET by USA4freedomWith that same logic why is Bush popularity numbers going down??
Remember the line,: it’s the economy stupid..
Well how about: it’s the immigration STUPID!!
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
We are pissed and we are not
June 14, 2007 - 08:11 ET by USA4freedomWe are pissed and we are not going to take it anymore.
RNC donations down 40%
RNC firing the phone bank people
The RNC knows what we want its just too stubborn to move.
Bush seems to be clueless on this. I just don’t get it. Maybe it the whole Christen thing of helping others. But, I will be damed if I let this country that we will be handed over to our kids and Grandkids one day go down the drain with out a fight.
When this comes back up I will re-send all the e-mails, fax, and call each and every offical I can.
Oh… we are so confused why Thompson is doing so well…. Give me a break. He is the clostest thing to a hard consertive we have at this point in the game.
One more note: we will be hunting season for RINO’s during the primaries.
NO RINO’S
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
Ann Coulter's column this wee
June 14, 2007 - 08:23 ET by SouthJersey1953Ann Coulter's column this week hits it:
"President Bush was so buoyed by the warm reception he was given in Albania that he immediately gave all 3 million Albanians American citizenship, provided they learn Spanish. The offer was withdrawn when Bush found out most Albanians haven't broken any U.S. laws."
IMO - one of her best columns
No RINOs in '08 - Thompson/Hunter would be a good ticket; Thompson/Steele would be a great ticket
:^) gotta love Ann, she kno
June 14, 2007 - 08:35 ET by vrwc13:^) gotta love Ann, she knows how to put it in perspective.
Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore
You know Scooter Libby dese
June 14, 2007 - 08:42 ET by The Wicked ConservativeYou know Scooter Libby deserves a pardon in my opinion but I'm a lot less passionate about it than Ramos & Compean. Those two have been so railroaded it makes my stomach turn. Her column made me sad for this nation this week.
The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.
Agreed. What's the total nu
June 14, 2007 - 08:45 ET by Sergeant ROCKAgreed. What's the total number now of those sacrificed on the altar of appeasement by this administration?
Press '2' for--
June 14, 2007 - 13:25 ET by misterbillPress '2' for--Albanian.
McCain polls in toilet
June 14, 2007 - 08:48 ET by Six String SpiffSeems as though NBC has McCain on the wrong list.. That couild be part of it. I would love to see a poll taken to see how many liberals like him. that would be interesting.
Islam should have it's religious status revoked until it can prove it's not a hate group.
Go Fred go......Prove you can
June 14, 2007 - 12:06 ET by Clear thinkerGo Fred go......
Prove you can secure our borders first. The only legislation that counts!
I just love watching the GOP
June 14, 2007 - 13:19 ET by waka wakaI just love watching the GOP cannibalize itself over immigration. While Big Money, Bush, Rove, etc., realize the importance of realistic reform and reaching out to Hispanics, it's the the party's rabid, bigot wing that's calling the shots.
We Democrats, most of whom side with the president on this issue, are just sitting back and laughing as you guys permanently alienate the fastest growing demographic in the U.S.
Keep it up, guys. All together now, No amnesty! No amnesty!
Tancredo 08!
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Yeah, that's it waka
June 14, 2007 - 13:34 ET by Cool ArrowAnd you Dems keep your chants going. Here's a few:
Keep them in their place Rev. Al, keep them in their place.
Islam is a peaceful religion.
Most ethical Congress in history. (unless it involves somebody we're trying to keep in their place).
I rely on my faith. And I have faith you'll buy this sh!t.
Ironic, waka that Kennedy is trying to screw the hispanics
June 14, 2007 - 13:41 ET by RJYeah, as if these illegal aliens were EVER going to vote Republican in any numbers.....
But you ignore the fact that many liberals, for different reasons, are also against this bill.
It's ironic that the fat pig Kennedy, hero to the huddled masses, has had a big part in creating this sellout to big business that would create a permanent underclass.
Guess that makes you the same kind of phony humanist as Kennedy...
Kennedy's logic
June 14, 2007 - 14:01 ET by Cool ArrowKennedy seems to be saying:
Better to be a slave in America than a citizen in Mexico. Wow, I'm not sure I disagree.
You're right, Mark. McCain'
June 14, 2007 - 15:31 ET by GalvanicYou're right, Mark. McCain's fund-raising woes can be attributed to the positions he's taken on the 'immigration reform' bill and other matters. He's also been more wonkish than fire-brand in the debates. He's looking like an old Beltway denizen out of touch with the Republican mainstream, than a reformer.
I think whatever support he still has rests heavily on his name recognition amongst a lot of new comers, and respect for his past. Many predicted that as the public got more familiar with the other Republican candidates, McCain's numbers would sink.