Here comes Hillary Clinton for Presid...
Concerned

Custer, SD

#42 Aug 22, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
You've brought nothing to the table other than broad, sweeping generalizations, dubious spin, and cherry-picking of the lowest common denominator.
You're not a "Republican Conservative" and you never were. You're a troll. Anyone can see that. Try harder, make it look good.
I note that neither you or the other right wing nuts wrote anything remotely intelligent to dispute what I said.

Just more one liners.
Obskeptic

Rochester, MI

#43 Aug 22, 2013
Concerned wrote:
<quoted text>
I note that neither you or the other right wing nuts wrote anything remotely intelligent to dispute what I said.
Just more one liners.
It's not necessary to respond to you since it's difficult to wake someone that is pretending to be sleeping. The fact that you admit swinging from one extreme partisan side to the other establishes your inability to be objective, so what you say is irrelevant. You are a pied piper groupy.The reasoning behind that conclusion on my part is that both sides are pretending to be something that neither is turning out to be, and that is respectful of our constitution, our people and our heritage. So your support of the democrat whores is no different then supporting the republican ones. Get it?
Concerned

Custer, SD

#44 Aug 22, 2013
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not necessary to respond to you since it's difficult to wake someone that is pretending to be sleeping. The fact that you admit swinging from one extreme partisan side to the other establishes your inability to be objective, so what you say is irrelevant. You are a pied piper groupy.The reasoning behind that conclusion on my part is that both sides are pretending to be something that neither is turning out to be, and that is respectful of our constitution, our people and our heritage. So your support of the democrat whores is no different then supporting the republican ones. Get it?
If you don’t want to respond that is up to you. If you do wish to, then present something intelligent worth reading.
You are not exactly right. I have not moved from one extreme to the other, political parties have. There was a time that the Democrats were too extreme to the left but now the Republicans as a party is too extreme to the right. I do not vote for political parties I weight the candidates of political parties. Politics is not a religion where mine is the only way to political heaven.
When political parties get controlled by the extreme they lose me. Generally the final decision comes down to one of two candidates to choose from. Likely neither are perfect. I may agree with one on one issue and the other on another issue. Some issues do not hold the importance of other issues. I have said that I supported Barry Goldwater because I thought he was the better of the two. That does not mean I agreed with him on everything. Said to say I voted for Bush/Cheney rather than Gore, which I regret now. I still like Bush as a person but feel he was not the brightest candle and was led by his nose down a right wing path by Cheney, Rumsfeld & crew
I agreed with Romney on a couple of issues and with Obama on other issues. When it came time to pick one of the two Obama’s positions on many issues were far superior to Romney’s. In addition to that I felt that Republicans had made a total mess of things under Bush/Cheney. Enough is enough time for a big change.
You maintain that whores exist in both political parties which I would readily agree with. They should be held accountable if they in fact did something wrong or against the law. Made up accusation and scandals for political purposes don’t move me until the proof exists. I believe that all elected officials should be held to a strict code of conduct both public and private including Clinton and Bush.
If I had my way a workable guillotine would be placed in front of the entrance to the three branches of government with a note that “he who is elected by the people that gets caught violating the laws of the land shall be brought here for justice by the people”. The reminding daily presence of the guillotine might keep most in line and it would only take one use of the guillotine to convince the rest.

“Slightly below above-average”

Since: Jul 10

arguably garrulous

#45 Aug 22, 2013
Concerned wrote:
<quoted text>
If I had my way a workable guillotine would be placed in front of the entrance to the three branches of government with a note that “he who is elected by the people that gets caught violating the laws of the land shall be brought here for justice by the people”. The reminding daily presence of the guillotine might keep most in line and it would only take one use of the guillotine to convince the rest.
I'd like to take your idea one step further...
Ever read the short story "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson? Let's combine that with the guillotine suggestion.
Every six years, we have a lottery to find one random senator to be beheaded. If you are a freshly-elected senator, never held the seat before - then you don't get a lottery ticket. Only the re-elected senators get a lottery ticket.
So, every six years, we chop off the head of some senator that thinks his position is lifelong.

Roll the dice...

The Pay-Per-View income could be phenomenal!
nac

Merrick, NY

#46 Aug 22, 2013
Concerned wrote:
<quoted text>
I note that neither you or the other right wing nuts wrote anything remotely intelligent to dispute what I said.
Just more one liners.
There is no need for me to waste time disputing what you said.

This all started when you said that Christie isn't "crazy" enough to get the GOP nomination. You then went on to say that for him to be viable, he would have to take a hard right into radical right wing whacko-land.

I then asked you for specifics, as to what issues he would have to move far-right on.

You responded with a typical whiny rant about how (unidentified, unnamed) "right-wingers" want to force their religion on us, flood the street with guns, suppress minority voting, and overturn Roe v. Wade.

You didn't answer my specific question about how exactly Christie needs to get crazier and move to the far-right.

Answer my question... then maybe I'll address your childish, unnamed boogie man paranoid rant.

“she may be a murderer, but....”

Since: Dec 07

she'll ensure U cant prove it

#47 Aug 22, 2013
HangUpAndDrive wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd like to take your idea one step further...
Ever read the short story "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson? Let's combine that with the guillotine suggestion.
Every six years, we have a lottery to find one random senator to be beheaded. If you are a freshly-elected senator, never held the seat before - then you don't get a lottery ticket. Only the re-elected senators get a lottery ticket.
So, every six years, we chop off the head of some senator that thinks his position is lifelong.
Roll the dice...
The Pay-Per-View income could be phenomenal!
I'd like to nominate 'Schmuck' Schumer; I say his beak makes contact with the guillotine first
Concerned

Custer, SD

#48 Aug 22, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no need for me to waste time disputing what you said.
This all started when you said that Christie isn't "crazy" enough to get the GOP nomination. You then went on to say that for him to be viable, he would have to take a hard right into radical right wing whacko-land.
I then asked you for specifics, as to what issues he would have to move far-right on.
You responded with a typical whiny rant about how (unidentified, unnamed) "right-wingers" want to force their religion on us, flood the street with guns, suppress minority voting, and overturn Roe v. Wade.
You didn't answer my specific question about how exactly Christie needs to get crazier and move to the far-right.
Answer my question... then maybe I'll address your childish, unnamed boogie man paranoid rant.
Although I feel that Christie isn't "crazy" enough to get the GOP nomination, if you do so be it. At least I see him as not as whacko as the rest and he seems willing to "govern".

But maybe he is just as "crazy" as the other mentioned possible Republican candidates'.

Likely what I see as crazy ultra-right wing craziness you accept as normal behavior.

Most average Americans don't care much for the extremes.

If the Republicans nominate another extreme right candidate for President, either Hillary or Biden start to look pretty good if the choice is down to two people.

So if Christie is you boy, I have no problems with that as I kind of thought he was reasonably sane compared to the rest. But I think he plays to the wealthy and large corporate interests.

nac

Merrick, NY

#49 Aug 22, 2013
Concerned wrote:
<quoted text>
Although I feel that Christie isn't "crazy" enough to get the GOP nomination, if you do so be it. At least I see him as not as whacko as the rest and he seems willing to "govern".
But maybe he is just as "crazy" as the other mentioned possible Republican candidates'.
Likely what I see as crazy ultra-right wing craziness you accept as normal behavior.
Most average Americans don't care much for the extremes.
If the Republicans nominate another extreme right candidate for President, either Hillary or Biden start to look pretty good if the choice is down to two people.
So if Christie is you boy, I have no problems with that as I kind of thought he was reasonably sane compared to the rest. But I think he plays to the wealthy and large corporate interests.
I wouldn't vote for Christie in a million years... I was just curious and wanted to delve deeper into the madness that you posted.

Again, dummy, I'm not a Republican. Nor am I a Democrat. I think for myself. I am not a fan of radical behavior out of the fringes of either faction. I don't have to be a follower because I use common sense.

It seems to me that you just want to be part of what you perceive as the "winning" team. If a republican gets elected in 2016, it would not surprise me to see you pull a 180 and rail about the far-left whackos that have overtaken the democrat party.
Obskeptic

Fenton, MI

#50 Aug 22, 2013
Concerned wrote:
<quoted text>
Although I feel that Christie isn't "crazy" enough to get the GOP nomination, if you do so be it. At least I see him as not as whacko as the rest and he seems willing to "govern".
But maybe he is just as "crazy" as the other mentioned possible Republican candidates'.
Likely what I see as crazy ultra-right wing craziness you accept as normal behavior.
Most average Americans don't care much for the extremes.
If the Republicans nominate another extreme right candidate for President, either Hillary or Biden start to look pretty good if the choice is down to two people.
So if Christie is you boy, I have no problems with that as I kind of thought he was reasonably sane compared to the rest. But I think he plays to the wealthy and large corporate interests.
Most average Americans are faux Americans that are clueless on what our founding fathers intent was. Most average Americans today are already dependent on government in some way beyond the basic functions we all expect. Most average Americans know more about American Idol then they do the constitution. Thats why they are so easily manipulated. The reality that the bigger and more expensive government gets, the less we are able to exist as the founders intended. What you call the crazies that brand themselves "republican", which I would guess to be the Louis Gomert's, Trey Goudie'S, Rand Pauls, Ted Cruz's and a small handful of others have a far better understanding of what Washington's purpose is, and there is not a single democrat that I could say that about. Not even Joe Manchin. I realize I was the one throwing out names, but I would love to hear your example of a few "extreme" democrats and what positions they take that make them that? Chris Christie might as well join Hillary on her ticket. They think alike and would be a shoe in for the feelings crowd.
Concerned

Custer, SD

#51 Aug 22, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't vote for Christie in a million years... I think for myself.----I use common sense.
Ok, you don’t like Christie but then who do you like and why? Since you “claim” to think for yourself and not a follower you could provide examples of where you disagree with the radical right. Try using the common sense you claim to possess.
If you wish you could present your “common sense” to these issues which I have already mentioned. You could pick one or all and tear it all apart using whatever intelligence you have with the
#1. Republican Conservatives will jump up and down over individual rights granted to us under the Constitution as “God Given Rights” to do as they wish. They want no 2nd Amendment restrictions when it comes to gun control. No one will take my guns unless it is out of my cold dead hands. No reasonable restrictions but full rights to own everything.
But when it comes to individual rights to make personal decisions in regards to abortion they do a 180 degree turn around on the Constitution and are willing to use big government laws to impose total elimination contrary to the Constitution and eliminate all individual rights in that area. Surely the individual right to make personal decisions regarding one’s own body is just an important and basic individual Constitutional freedom right compared to the right to own a large clip for military-assault weapon or armor piercing bullets.
#2. One could point to religion where they are quite willing to combine religion and government as long as it’s their religion. Let’s pray in schools as long as it’s not to Allah and we haven’t even got to the differences between Catholics and Protestants. I wonder how a few Hail Mary’s would work with the Protestants or talking in tongues & faith healing would work with the Catholics. Somehow all this brings to mind the religious death battles in Ireland between the Catholics and Protestants. That might not happen here until they get rid of Muslims & Mosques. It would seem that Churches and parents should be up to the task granted to them under the separation of Church and State.
#3. We could talk about the right to vote but these same people will do everything in their power to suppress the vote in areas where the opposition is that might vote differently. Interesting how that was done only in Republican controlled States and how many times the Federal Courts had to step in.
#4. We could point to Republican gerrymandering across the country to win House seat elections. More total people across the county voted for Democrats than Republicans for the House but do to gerrymandering more Republicans got elected. Is that fair elections that represent the will of the people that conservatives claim to support?
#5. We could point to the same people who are working to redo the Electoral College votes in selective States in order to win the next Presidential election. They want no part of a popular vote of the people to elect the President.
#6. While fighting two wars that were unfunded and being put on the credit card and implementing a prescription drug program that was unfunded, they pushed through the Bush Tax cuts mainly for the wealthy and corporations thus causing the debt spiral. Now it would seem to me that if one was a true conservative you would start paying your bills as you were spending large amounts of money fighting two never ending wars, even if it took a special War Tax. Now the deadbeats don’t want to pay the bills for the two unfunded wars they put on the credit card. Problem is the same political party that uses “big government & laws” to impose their moral views on other people’s rights. Happens all the time in a number of different areas, State abortion hurtle laws, abortion clinic elimination laws, anti-Sharia laws, burning the flag laws, praying at government meetings, pushing their religion into public schools.
Concerned

Custer, SD

#52 Aug 22, 2013
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
Most average Americans are faux Americans that are clueless on what our founding fathers intent was. Most average Americans today are already dependent on government in some way beyond the basic functions we all expect. Most average Americans know more about American Idol then they do the constitution. Thats why they are so easily manipulated. The reality that the bigger and more expensive government gets, the less we are able to exist as the founders intended. What you call the crazies that brand themselves "republican", which I would guess to be the Louis Gomert's, Trey Goudie'S, Rand Pauls, Ted Cruz's and a small handful of others have a far better understanding of what Washington's purpose is, and there is not a single democrat that I could say that about. Not even Joe Manchin. I realize I was the one throwing out names, but I would love to hear your example of a few "extreme" democrats and what positions they take that make them that? Chris Christie might as well join Hillary on her ticket. They think alike and would be a shoe in for the feelings crowd.
I would likely come close to saying in many cases the opposite is true.
"If" you wish you can appeal an issue to the Supreme Court of the USA to determine whether or not it is Constitutional.
Abortion? Combining religion into government? Social Security?
How about Obamacare? Gay rights? Voter suppression?

Tell me again about the wonderful understanding of the Constitution the extreme right has and better yet explain to me how they time and time again use "big government" laws to impose their economic and moral views while claiming to be against government interfering with individual rights.

Have you ever heard of a hypocrite, well today when you get a bunch of them together they are at a Republican Party meeting?
Concerned

Custer, SD

#53 Aug 22, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not a Republican. Nor am I a Democrat.--- I think for myself.----I am not a fan of radical behavior out of the fringes of either faction.--- I don't have to be a follower because I use common sense.
Are you sure about all that self praise?

I guess by your silence that either you take a long time to “think” or you are having a hard time applying your common sense to those issues. Maybe if you wait long enough someone will bail you out.

Or maybe you did use some common sense coupled with a small degree of intelligence and now you now agree with those statements.
nac

Merrick, NY

#54 Aug 22, 2013
Concerned wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, you don’t like Christie but then who do you like and why? Since you “claim” to think for yourself and not a follower you could provide examples of where you disagree with the radical right....
[First off, start using spacing between paragraphs so your nonsense is readable]

Second, I don't have to defend the far right because I'm not affiliated with it. I only engaged you on the subject because of your hilariously ironic (insane) comment about how Christie needs to get crazier to succeed in the GOP.

You're obviously paranoid and confused. Maybe take a break from this for a while... Get some fresh air.
Concerned

Custer, SD

#55 Aug 22, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>

I don't have to defend the far right because I'm not affiliated with it. I only engaged you on the subject because of your hilariously ironic (insane) comment about how Christie needs to get crazier to succeed in the GOP.
You're obviously paranoid and confused. Maybe take a break from this for a while... Get some fresh air.
Based upon the fact that you jumped into this you evidently are on the extreme right but unable to present an intelligent position.

Apparently you are not capable of presenting your positions and only want to disagree over my opinion that Chris Christie is a somewhat moderate Republican and to win in today’s Republican Party he will be driven further to the right in the Republican primaries which also in my opinion will hurt him if he gets the nomination of the party.
Evidently a number of others agree.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08...
http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2010/05/...

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/08/18/chris-christie...
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/12/opinion/zelizer...
Obskeptic

Fenton, MI

#56 Aug 23, 2013
Concerned wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you so fixated on killing babies? You think thats moral? You can shroud the concept in all sorts of liberal double speak, but the reality is you celebrate the killing of innocent, unborn human beings and that is just sick. I don't care what you think it is, it is what is. W was way more of a liberal then a conservative, but your to intellectually dishonest to recognize that. You better hope Sharia Law never finds roots anywhere in America. You don't have a problem with the muslims pushing their religion into our schools? Its already happening here in Dearborn, MI. The majority of the tax brackets under the Bush cuts were benefiting the lower brackets. Did the wealthy benefit also? Of course they did, they pay the majority of the taxes in this country. As for the vote, the democrats "gerrymander" districts when they control the process as well, thats politics. Not a single person in this country should EVER be permitted to vote without PROVING who they are, period! You were NEVER a conservative. Not even close. That transformation is as likely as a muslim giving up their beliefs to be christian. Our president is the only living example I know of that has done it, unless he is simply practicing "taqiyya".
Concerned

Custer, SD

#57 Aug 23, 2013
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you so fixated on killing babies?------You better hope Sharia Law never finds roots anywhere in America.----- The majority of the tax brackets under the Bush cuts were benefiting the lower brackets.----Not a single person in this country should EVER be permitted to vote without PROVING who they are, period! You were NEVER a conservative.---practicing "taqiyya".
Let’s see if I can follow your ranting.
Can’t say I am fixated on killing babies, so the rest is not really that important since it is not your right to impose your morals on me. Neither the reason why a woman might need one or her reasons to use birth control is your business.
Sharia Law can only become law if enough Muslims gain political powder to pass such a law. Then it has to be constitutional a both at the State and Federal levels. But I realize that is kind of like the Christian Taliban of the Republican Party does by passing unconstitutional laws to impose their religious values on everyone else. Then it takes some effort to get it declared unconstitutional. So if the Muslim majority in Dearborn wishes to use the Republican Christian Taliban’s methods they could pass local ordnance that required a woman to wear a scarf. You know kind of like the State passing ultra-sound laws for women or special laws for abortion clinics. Then it all will head into the courts.
The tax cuts far more benefited the wealthy and corporate interests than it helped the average person. If one takes into consideration that at the same time Bush gave the tax cuts he was increasing the debt with two unfunded wars.
Most States that have become controlled by Republicans have been quickly gerrymandered for their benefit along with the Republicans desire to redo how electoral college votes are granted in States that would benefit them.
In a Democracy I want everyone to vote. We send our young men to die in other countries trying to give those people the “right to vote” then we proudly display them hold up their purple finger after they voted. I wonder if we demanded ID's ’rom them? Can you show me proof where there is voter fraud in the USA that has ever affected one political race? Can you show me cases in States where voter fraud has happed to “any” extent that would necessitates making it harder for people to vote.
Concerned

Custer, SD

#58 Aug 23, 2013
Obskeptic wrote:
<quoted text>
You were NEVER a conservative. Not even close. That transformation is as likely as a muslim giving up their beliefs to be christian. Our president is the only living example I know of that has done it, unless he is simply practicing "taqiyya".
Without question I am not a conservative as you would define it and certainly not in line with the silly stupid stuff Republicans are pushing today as conservative issues. Enough said.

Hypocrisy matters to liberals because the principles of equality and fair-dealing are based upon the constitutional individual rights and freedom granted to each as an individual. When those principles are impartially applied because of a self-righteous majority group our individual differences become greater.

Right wing conservatives do not share this vision of the Great Society and so are untroubled by hypocrisy because their first and only commitment is to their group. Lie, cheat, win at any cost and use government laws to push their group agenda on everyone else. To this new generation of radical conservatives are quite open to voter suppression and Republican gerrymandering. Or take charlatan preachers whose sole objective isn't saving souls but electing other Republicans. It’s impossible for them to vouch for the authenticity of President Obama's Christian devotion while they eagerly do just that for the three-timing Newt Gingrich.

But after all, why should a right wing conservative care if he's ridiculed for applying one set of standards to one group and a different set of standards to his? Why should he care if he is called a hypocrite considering that his ultimate objective is to guarantee the supremacy of white, Christian, affluent males? Jesus spoke clearly about the very people whose actions precisely fit those of people who today call themselves conservative Christians.

I would propose to you that if Jesus returns tomorrow he won’t ride into town on a Republican Elephant carrying an assault rifle, looking out for the rich, ranting about birth cert, promoting scandals -etc -etc. Rather than governing.. I don’t know for sure but would bet there is a better chance that he will ride into town again on a Democratic Donkey protecting social security and healthcare for the poor. Which version of this Biblical understanding and conduct belief should we practice yours or mine?
Opinion

Hot Springs, SD

#60 Dec 24, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
You've brought nothing to the table other than broad, sweeping generalizations, dubious spin, and cherry-picking of the lowest common denominator.
You're not a "Republican Conservative" and you never were. You're a troll. Anyone can see that. Try harder, make it look good.
Birthers, truthers, paranoids, conspiracists — the whole angry, resentful, frightened mob of right wingers who make up a good portion of the Republican base scares the wholly living hell out of most of the rest of us. They exist on a different plane of reality — uncomfortable with deep thinking, irrational when their delusions are challenged, and unable to climb out of the echo chamber in which they find comfort and support with other like minded crazies.

Worse than who and what they are, the establishment Republicans and even other rational conservatives tolerate them, dismiss them as inconsequential, or actively encourage them in hopes of using their energy, activism, and money to win office.

I categorize the crazies, recognizing there is overlap in and redundancy:

1. The Birthers. Still alive and kicking and insisting that either a) Obama wasn’t born here; or b) he is an illegitimate president because he’s not a “natural born citizen.”
2. Conspiracists. Runs the gamut from the birther issue mentioned above to the idea that hundreds of reputable scientists are colluding to cook the books on global warming. Several prominent congressmen - Michele Bachmann among them — have joined this group by wondering if Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s close aide, isn’t a Muslim Brotherhood plant.

3. Anti-Science crackpots. Enter the evangelical right who dismisses evolution, the Big Bang Theory, as well as other right wingers who worry about vaccinations and are convinced a woman can’t get pregnant from rape because her body automatically shuts down to prevent it.

4. Anti-intellectual. Dismissing out of hand any criticism from anyone who they believe isn’t a conservative. They are suspicious of anyone who went to an Ivy League school or who thinks for a living, and they reflexively reject nuance and logic because if you don’t feel it in your gut, you’re probably a squishy moderate.

5. Paranoids.

6. Cry “Communist!” and let slip the dogs of war! Is there anything loopier about the crazies than their belief that the US is turning into a Marxist dictatorship? Sheesh.

It is an open question how large this segment of “conservatives” might be. But the Tea Party does not represent the totality of the GOP crazies problem. Radical Christians who want to deny basic rights to gays, and even to women, are a far larger quandary. They vote. And no candidate for the presidency who runs on the Republican ticket can avoid toeing the line on their issues. If Mitt Romney had stood up to them by maintaining his position on gay marriage, abortion and other social issues, it is very likely he would not have been nominated. It’s at least partly the reason that governors like Mitch Daniels and Chris Christie refused to enter the GOP field in 2012. Catering to the concerns of people who believe the earth was created 6,000 years ago proves to be too much for some.

It would be a dream solution for the evangelicals, the tea party, and the other crazies to form their own party, as Herman Cain suggested-– Rick Moran
nac

Merrick, NY

#61 Dec 29, 2013
Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Birthers, truthers, paranoids, conspiracists — the whole angry, resentful, frightened mob of right wingers who make up a good portion of the Republican base scares the wholly living hell out of most of the rest of us. They exist on a different plane of reality — uncomfortable with deep thinking, irrational when their delusions are challenged, and unable to climb out of the echo chamber in which they find comfort and support with other like minded crazies.
Worse than who and what they are, the establishment Republicans and even other rational conservatives tolerate them, dismiss them as inconsequential, or actively encourage them in hopes of using their energy, activism, and money to win office.
I categorize the crazies, recognizing there is overlap in and redundancy:
1. The Birthers. Still alive and kicking and insisting that either a) Obama wasn’t born here; or b) he is an illegitimate president because he’s not a “natural born citizen.”
2. Conspiracists. Runs the gamut from the birther issue mentioned above to the idea that hundreds of reputable scientists are colluding to cook the books on global warming. Several prominent congressmen - Michele Bachmann among them — have joined this group by wondering if Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s close aide, isn’t a Muslim Brotherhood plant.
3. Anti-Science crackpots. Enter the evangelical right who dismisses evolution, the Big Bang Theory, as well as other right wingers who worry about vaccinations and are convinced a woman can’t get pregnant from rape because her body automatically shuts down to prevent it.
4. Anti-intellectual. Dismissing out of hand any criticism from anyone who they believe isn’t a conservative. They are suspicious of anyone who went to an Ivy League school or who thinks for a living, and they reflexively reject nuance and logic because if you don’t feel it in your gut, you’re probably a squishy moderate.
5. Paranoids.
6. Cry “Communist!” and let slip the dogs of war! Is there anything loopier about the crazies than their belief that the US is turning into a Marxist dictatorship? Sheesh.
It is an open question how large this segment of “conservatives” might be. But the Tea Party does not represent the totality of the GOP crazies problem. Radical Christians who want to deny basic rights to gays, and even to women, are a far larger quandary. They vote. And no candidate for the presidency who runs on the Republican ticket can avoid toeing the line on their issues. If Mitt Romney had stood up to them by maintaining his position on gay marriage, abortion and other social issues, it is very likely he would not have been nominated. It’s at least partly the reason that governors like Mitch Daniels and Chris Christie refused to enter the GOP field in 2012. Catering to the concerns of people who believe the earth was created 6,000 years ago proves to be too much for some.
It would be a dream solution for the evangelicals, the tea party, and the other crazies to form their own party, as Herman Cain suggested-– Rick Moran
So you've bumped a thread from months ago to rant and fear-monger about extreme fringe groups that no one listens to?

Wouldn't that place you squarely in group number 5 as described above?

This is a new low for you, Polly.

Happy New Year Get help... & maybe you can work on having a sane new year.
Opinion

Hot Springs, SD

#62 Dec 29, 2013
nac wrote:
<quoted text>
So you've bumped a thread from months ago to rant and fear-monger about extreme fringe groups that no one listens to?
Wouldn't that place you squarely in group number 5 as described above?
This is a new low for you, Polly.
Happy New Year Get help... & maybe you can work on having a sane new year.
Merry Christmas & a Happy New Year.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

New York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Mets talkback (Dec '07) 14 min jimi-yank 40,221
Drop a Word, Add a Word (Jan '10) 54 min GEORGIA 14,645
Add a word, Drop a word (Dec '09) 1 hr Princess Hey 15,437
HILLARY will be THE BEST PRESIDENT EVER (Dec '14) 1 hr Nonlib 10,975
:Lawrence Jaeger Announces Scholarship Awards 2 hr lawrencejaeger 1
Time to go? (Jun '15) 2 hr Scam Government 11,950
Topix Human Sexuality Forum Discontinued 2 hr Ice Man 2
Yankee talk back 4, or is it 5 (Aug '08) 2 hr the don 329,730
More from around the web

Personal Finance

New York Mortgages