Ive been paying special attention to listening to Odonnell...I dont like her one bit...does that mean I wouldnt vote for her over coontz...NO..she would get my vote.
She would have never been my choice to run...shes whacky, she says the same thing over and over...and offers no answers when asked how shes going to do anything she says she wants too....she was absolutely the wrong candidate to put forward....a big teaparty mistake.
Ok ill let you all go off and tell me how wrong I am.. :)
If someone would have used their heads and did some homework..the teaparty would have supported someone else in the primary and the GOP would OWN that seat in delaware lock stock and barrel....
Have you heard her opponent?
She could stand up there and drool, and still out debate the guy.
I don't think there is much to worry about, you only need to be better than the person you're running against.
She murdered him in the debate.
Quote from: Solar on October 19, 2010, 05:53:59 AM
Have you heard her opponent?
She could stand up there and drool, and still out debate the guy.
I don't think there is much to worry about, you only need to be better than the person you're running against.
She murdered him in the debate.
I said I would vote for her over coontz hands down...I just dont take to her
Quote from: zip on October 19, 2010, 04:20:16 AM
Ive been paying special attention to listening to Odonnell...I dont like her one bit...does that mean I wouldnt vote for her over coontz...NO..she would get my vote.
She would have never been my choice to run...shes whacky, she says the same thing over and over...and offers no answers when asked how shes going to do anything she says she wants too....she was absolutely the wrong candidate to put forward....a big teaparty mistake.
Ok ill let you all go off and tell me how wrong I am.. :)
If someone would have used their heads and did some homework..the teaparty would have supported someone else in the primary and the GOP would OWN that seat in delaware lock stock and barrel....
FIRST WE OUST THE COMMUNISTS, THEN WE CAN GET RID OF THE RIONO'S AND CRAZIES IN OUR OWN PARTY. IF THEY (INCLUDING ODONNELL) VOTE THE WAY WE WANT THEM TO, THEN THEY WILL DO THE JOB WE'RE ELECTING THEM TO DO. TO THAT END, I DON'T EVEN CARE IF RAND PAUL IS AN IDOL WORSHIPER WHO BOWS DOWN TO AQUABUDDAH EVERY NIGHT!
Quote from: zip on October 19, 2010, 06:05:53 AM
I said I would vote for her over coontz hands down...I just dont take to her
I don't know what video you saw her on, but when ever I've seen her, she seemed quite credible.
I just don't see these people as gods, if they can hold their own in the public arena and are proven Conservatives, that's all I can ask for.
Quote from: wally on October 19, 2010, 06:28:37 AM
FIRST WE OUST THE COMMUNISTS, THEN WE CAN GET RID OF THE RIONO'S AND CRAZIES IN OUR OWN PARTY.
Hell, Wally, after that, there will only be about 4 of you left. Lot's of luck winning then. ;D
Quote from: wally on October 19, 2010, 06:28:37 AM
FIRST WE OUST THE COMMUNISTS, THEN WE CAN GET RID OF THE RIONO'S AND CRAZIES IN OUR OWN PARTY. IF THEY (INCLUDING ODONNELL) VOTE THE WAY WE WANT THEM TO, THEN THEY WILL DO THE JOB WE'RE ELECTING THEM TO DO. TO THAT END, I DON'T EVEN CARE IF RAND PAUL IS AN IDOL WORSHIPER WHO BOWS DOWN TO AQUABUDDAH EVERY NIGHT!
Isn't O'Donnell a conservative?
There you go again, with the RINO stuff. Do you really think you can get anyone elected without the support of moderates and Independents?
Quote from: bama_beau_redux on October 19, 2010, 09:09:34 AM
You are spot on this one, zip. Of course, being a dumbass ideologue makes her the perfect
modern GOPP candidate and I'm sure the darling of many here. Anyway, here's her latest:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101019/ap_on_el_se/us_delaware_senate (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101019/ap_on_el_se/us_delaware_senate)
WILMINGTON, Del. – Republican Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell of Delaware on Tuesday questioned whether the U.S. Constitution calls for a separation of church and state, appearing to disagree or not know that the First Amendment bars the government from establishing religion.
The exchange came in a debate before an audience of legal scholars and law students at Widener University Law School, as O'Donnell criticized Democratic nominee Chris Coons' position that teaching creationism in public school would violate the First Amendment by promoting religious doctrine.
Coons said private and parochial schools are free to teach creationism but that "religious doctrine doesn't belong in our public schools."
"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him.
When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"
Her comments, in a debate aired on radio station WDEL, generated a buzz in the audience.
"You actually audibly heard the crowd gasp," Widener University political scientist Wesley Leckrone said after the debate, adding that it raised questions about O'Donnell's grasp of the Constitution.
Why am I not surprised to see you post an opinion piece, rather than the actual quote.
Coons was wrong, and that's what O Donnel was responding to.
"Government shall make no establishment of religion," Coons responded.
O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"
Now who's the Dumb Ass? ;D ;D ;D
The phrase "separation of church and state" is not mentioned anywhere in the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or in any other amendments. That is obviously what O'Donnell was referring to.
Apparently "bama" is unable to comprehend this FACT.
Always love to read what the "dark side" has to say. Cracks me up.
I had thought the guy's name was spelled COONS.
As I have said before in a post "if my last name were Coons,I would RUN not walk to my lawyers office to get it changed."
Quote from: AmericanFlyer on October 19, 2010, 10:53:09 AM
The phrase "separation of church and state" is not mentioned anywhere in the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or in any other amendments. That is obviously what O'Donnell was referring to.
Apparently "bama" is unable to comprehend this FACT.
Always love to read what the "dark side" has to say. Cracks me up.
Libs wouldn't make these mistakes, if they actually knew the Bill of Rights.
Quote from: zip on October 19, 2010, 04:20:16 AM
Ive been paying special attention to listening to Odonnell...I dont like her one bit...does that mean I wouldnt vote for her over coontz...NO..she would get my vote.
She would have never been my choice to run...shes whacky, she says the same thing over and over...and offers no answers when asked how shes going to do anything she says she wants too....she was absolutely the wrong candidate to put forward....a big teaparty mistake.
Ok ill let you all go off and tell me how wrong I am.. :)
If someone would have used their heads and did some homework..the teaparty would have supported someone else in the primary and the GOP would OWN that seat in delaware lock stock and barrel....
Why? She has been on point and bitch slapped Castle and Coons like the idiots they are.
Please, indulge us on her crazy remarks.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 19, 2010, 08:35:34 AM
Isn't O'Donnell a conservative?
There you go again, with the RINO stuff. Do you really think you can get anyone elected without the support of moderates and Independents?
There you go again, not understanding what a RINO and a conservative is.
Quote from: Solar on October 19, 2010, 09:53:07 AM
Why am I not surprised to see you post an opinion piece, rather than the actual quote.
Coons was wrong, and that's what O Donnel was responding to.
"Government shall make no establishment of religion," Coons responded.
O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"
Now who's the Dumb Ass? ;D ;D ;D
She made him look like the idiot he is, yet SHE said something crazy????? I can't wait till someone brings this one up in a political discussion.
Quote from: taxed on October 19, 2010, 11:17:49 AM
She made him look like the idiot he is, yet SHE said something crazy????? I can't wait till someone brings this one up in a political discussion.
Beau did, and look how well that turned out. ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: taxed on October 19, 2010, 11:15:17 AM
There you go again, not understanding what a RINO and a conservative is.
I think that a moderate Republican and a Conservative Republican are on the same side. Do you disagree with that?
I don't understand why some conservatives want to knock their own team. Can you explain it to me?
Quote from: Solar on October 19, 2010, 11:19:33 AM
Beau did, and look how well that turned out. ;D ;D ;D
I mean during my day, when folks want to get into political discussion....
Beau isn't a serious poster I am afraid.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 19, 2010, 11:21:39 AM
I think that a moderate Republican and a Conservative Republican are on the same side. Do you disagree with that?
I don't understand why some conservatives want to knock their own team. Can you explain it to me?
Go back and read Wally's post again, you actually misunderstood him.
He said lets get rid of the commies first, then work on the RINO. You two are actually in agreement.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 19, 2010, 11:21:39 AM
I think that a moderate Republican and a Conservative Republican are on the same side. Do you disagree with that?
I don't understand why some conservatives want to knock their own team. Can you explain it to me?
A "moderate" Republican and a "conservative" Republican are on the same side? That statement is only true PART of the time.
"Moderate" Republicans are nothing more than political whores. They are willing to compromise with the opposition. Their phoney core beliefs are for sale to the highest bidder. Their phoney core values change with the wind. They are either confused, lack integrity, or both. The phrase "moderate Republican" is an oxymoron. They exist only because they are chameleons.
Until the Republican Party, as a whole, decides what the hell they are.............."moderates" or "conservatives"...........the Democrat/Communist Party will retain its legitimacy among the wingnuts and moonbats.
Quote from: taxed on October 19, 2010, 11:22:59 AM
I mean during my day, when folks want to get into political discussion....
Beau isn't a serious poster I am afraid.
Conservatives actually have a set of values that match the Constitution.
Libs on the other hand, want nothing more than to destroy it.
Doesn't matter how right we are, the libs will always fight for what they consider change, good or bad, they just like change.
Character flaw or mental disorder?
Quote from: Solar on October 19, 2010, 12:27:51 PM
Conservatives actually have a set of values that match the Constitution.
Libs on the other hand, want nothing more than to destroy it.
Doesn't matter how right we are, the libs will always fight for what they consider change, good or bad, they just like change.
Character flaw or mental disorder?
I would say character flaw because of their mental disorder. They have an ingrained Stockholm Syndrome.
Quote from: taxed on October 19, 2010, 12:38:12 PM
I would say character flaw because of their mental disorder. They have an ingrained Stockholm Syndrome.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Well played!
Quote from: Solar on October 19, 2010, 12:44:03 PM
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Well played!
hahaha
These people really are of lower intelligence.
Before someone jumps on me for saying libs have lower intelligence, yes, if you can't think, or refuse to think, then you are of lower intelligence. It is very simple.
Quote from: taxed on October 19, 2010, 12:52:21 PM
hahaha
These people really are of lower intelligence.
Before someone jumps on me for saying libs have lower intelligence, yes, if you can't think, or refuse to think, then you are of lower intelligence. It is very simple.
It comes down to a battle of intellect over emotion.
Libs are emotional, while Conservatives tend to analyze things.
That's why the left had the big push to feminize men back in the late 70s and 80s.
Thank God they didn't succeed.
Now we just need to kill, or demonize PC, that is another way to silence free speech, or out spoken males, through political correctness.
Quote from: taxed on October 19, 2010, 11:14:34 AM
Why? She has been on point and bitch slapped Castle and Coons like the idiots they are.
Please, indulge us on her crazy remarks.
She was asked by Wolfe on cnn pointedly how she would go about doing what she said she was going to do...she couldnt answer and made some off the wall statement that wasnt relative...and theres been other bits and pieces...
I believe she was the WRONG conservative to put up in delaware and the proof of that is we are going to lose that senate seat....a halfway decent conservative candidate would blow coontz to cuba
Umm sorry bama beau but you and I are NOT on the same page with this...I dont like her and I believe another conservative would win delaware handily...but shes a far cry better than coontz...coontz is what his name kinda indicates
Quote from: zip on October 19, 2010, 01:54:27 PM
She was asked by Wolfe on cnn pointedly how she would go about doing what she said she was going to do...she couldnt answer and made some off the wall statement that wasnt relative...and theres been other bits and pieces...
What was the question? I am going to go find the snippet and slap you upside the head with it.
Quote
I believe she was the WRONG conservative to put up in delaware and the proof of that is we are going to lose that senate seat....a halfway decent conservative candidate would blow coontz to cuba
We already lost the seat if Castle had won. You still need to say how she is the "wrong" conservative. Just being chunky, bubbly, and a non-politician type aren't really negatives in my book.
You say she is wacky, please elaborate because that remark alone sounds as if it is derived from the same MSM that wanted you to think that Ronald Reagan was a renegade cowboy.
Quote from: taxed on October 19, 2010, 02:33:55 PM
What was the question? I am going to go find the snippet and slap you upside the head with it.
We already lost the seat if Castle had won. You still need to say how she is the "wrong" conservative. Just being chunky, bubbly, and a non-politician type aren't really negatives in my book.
I agree.
I see her as a breath of fresh air. She is not a slick and polished career politician, she is our neighbor, the woman that had to earn a living along with the rest of us.
Too many people have had the illusion the MSM has created in their assault on the right all the while protecting the Marxist in our midst.
The people we elect, should be just like us, having the best interest of the Country in mind, not the interest of a group of whiners.
Quote from: Solar on October 19, 2010, 12:59:32 PM
It comes down to a battle of intellect over emotion.
Libs are emotional, while Conservatives tend to analyze things.
That's why the left had the big push to feminize men back in the late 70s and 80s.
Thank God they didn't succeed.
Now we just need to kill, or demonize PC, that is another way to silence free speech, or out spoken males, through political correctness.
Well they partially succeeded, they're called democrats. ;)
Quote from: Indy on October 19, 2010, 05:58:46 PM
Well they partially succeeded, they're called democrats. ;)
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
I didn't think about that.
Here we go, the Leftist press forms our opinions for us...or tries to.
Bottom line, you can argue what you want about some jerk off debate on seperation of Church and State and the first amend but the leftist COMMIES who run the Govt now continue to stomp on your rights every day.
If you want to know how the left feels about the 1st amend then look at their attitude toward Fox news.
I don't give a rats ass if O'Donnel flies in on the broom and doesn't know what the Constitution even is, NEVER vote for a damn democrat.
Billy
Quote from: taxed on October 19, 2010, 02:33:55 PM
What was the question? I am going to go find the snippet and slap you upside the head with it.
We already lost the seat if Castle had won. You still need to say how she is the "wrong" conservative. Just being chunky, bubbly, and a non-politician type aren't really negatives in my book.
You love to put words in peoples mouths dont you...go back and READ what I wrote..I said another conservative candidate would have won delaware handily..I never mentioned castle.
Just because you like her taxed doesnt make her any less of an asshole...
Im not the kind of guy that cheerleads for someone just because...shes full of baggage and whacked out...
Food for thought...
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/10/17/meghan-mccain-christine-odonnell-seen-as-a-nutjob/ (http://michellemalkin.com/2010/10/17/meghan-mccain-christine-odonnell-seen-as-a-nutjob/)
Quote from: zip on October 20, 2010, 07:11:04 AM
You love to put words in peoples mouths dont you...go back and READ what I wrote..I said another conservative candidate would have won delaware handily..I never mentioned castle.
Just because you like her taxed doesnt make her any less of an asshole...
Im not the kind of guy that cheerleads for someone just because...shes full of baggage and whacked out...
I'm not sure what you mean by "another" conservative. Castle certainly was NOT a conservative. I didn't see any TRUE conservative step forward in Delaware and challenge Castle or O'Donnell, did you?
Isn't this Biden's old senate seat? A loss here is not a loss. It's just a missed opportunity. Delaware is one of those wingnut states that rarely goes Republican, so a Republican win there is really the TRUE upset.
This Delaware race is just another case of SETTLING for, and voting for, an unknown candidate primarily because the candidate is not a "Democrat". I'm tired of "settling".
Maybe I have a bad case of "pie-in-the-sky syndrome", but there has GOT to be candidates out there who have integrity, core beliefs, core values, and will not COMPROMISE any of those things. There has got to be people out there who CAN'T BE BOUGHT. I have all of those traits, and NOBODY can buy me, so I KNOW those people exist.
Quote from: zip on October 20, 2010, 07:11:04 AM
You love to put words in peoples mouths dont you...go back and READ what I wrote..I said another conservative candidate would have won delaware handily..I never mentioned castle.
Just because you like her taxed doesnt make her any less of an asshole...
Im not the kind of guy that cheerleads for someone just because...shes full of baggage and whacked out...
I did read, and you gave no reason as to why you don't like her. Maybe just let us know. If you don't know why you don't like her, then that is fine, but just say so. You said she has baggage, etc., but give no indication to what this baggage is.
If you don't know, then just give us the links to the Bill Maher or Huffington Post articles that you have been reading and have been affecting your thought process, and we can take it from there.
Or, you can just tell us, but we know that ain't gonna happen....
Quote from: taxed on October 20, 2010, 12:02:52 PM
I did read, and you gave no reason as to why you don't like her. Maybe just let us know. If you don't know why you don't like her, then that is fine, but just say so. You said she has baggage, etc., but give no indication to what this baggage is.
If you don't know, then just give us the links to the Bill Maher or Huffington Post articles that you have been reading and have been affecting your thought process, and we can take it from there. Your talking to the wrong guy, I dont get intimidated...which is always your game
Or, you can just tell us, but we know that ain't gonna happen....
Let me just slap your silly ass around with this...shes a loser and she lost that senate seat....thats the biggest reason and if you dont think the witch thing hurt her your nuts...she doesnt look like a breath of fresh air to me...she looks sneaky and a bit whacked...aside from all that..I dont have to have a reason to not like her...I can not like her If I choose...
As far as your insinuating im a liberal because I dont like someone you do...instead of me going to the huffington post...you should get a real job and get out in the real world and take that spoon out of your spoiled little sarcastic ass
I cant stand far left handjobs that are out of touch with real people...and that goes for far right ones that are just as bad...and talk and try to act like idi amin
Quote from: zip on October 20, 2010, 01:09:48 PM
Let me just slap your silly ass around with this...shes a loser and she lost that senate seat....thats the biggest reason and if you dont think the witch thing hurt her your nuts...she doesnt look like a breath of fresh air to me...she looks sneaky and a bit whacked...aside from all that..I dont have to have a reason to not like her...I can not like her If I choose...
As far as your insinuating im a liberal because I dont like someone you do...instead of me going to the huffington post...you should get a real job and get out in the real world and take that spoon out of your spoiled little sarcastic ass
I cant stand far left handjobs that are out of touch with real people...and that goes for far right ones that are just as bad...and talk and try to act like idi amin
Zip, I am agreeing with you essentially that you don't know why you don't like her. We are saying the same thing.
I didn't insinuate you are a liberal. i am just saying that is what liberals do.
I'm beginning to like her more because she's making so many people somewhat crazy. There evidently was something about her that connected with the Delaware voters. Perhaps it's that the voters were tired of always seeing tired old men with balding heads taking the lead. Perhaps not. Whatever it was, she connected with the voters, and I hope she continues to do that through the election. She doesn't have to be liked or admired by the rest of us. If she wins, we'll see how she does. If not, we'll never know.
I've read people saying that Delaware was an assured Rep seat with Coons. Evidently it wasn't. The Reps didn't seem to want him, and the Dems certainly weren't going to vote for him.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 20, 2010, 02:26:45 PM
I'm beginning to like her more because she's making so many people somewhat crazy. There evidently was something about her that connected with the Delaware voters. Perhaps it's that the voters were tired of always seeing tired old men with balding heads taking the lead. Perhaps not. Whatever it was, she connected with the voters, and I hope she continues to do that through the election. She doesn't have to be liked or admired by the rest of us. If she wins, we'll see how she does. If not, we'll never know.
I've read people saying that Delaware was an assured Rep seat with Coons. Evidently it wasn't. The Reps didn't seem to want him, and the Dems certainly weren't going to vote for him.
Zip apparently likes the balding old RINOs...
Quote from: taxed on October 19, 2010, 11:15:17 AM
There you go again, not understanding what a RINO and a conservative is.
Of course I do. I am one. You decide which.
The difference I have with people who keep making the distinction is that we're all in the same party. We all need each other to win an election. If we fight among ourselves, the dems will win, not because the dems are so wonderful, but because the Reps are shooting themselves in the foot......... again. It's time to unite.
Quote from: taxed on October 20, 2010, 01:16:00 PM
Zip, I am agreeing with you essentially that you don't know why you don't like her. We are saying the same thing.
I didn't insinuate you are a liberal. i am just saying that is what liberals do.
I told you why I dont like her...Ill like her if she wins that senate seat....
Right now 9 are pretty ours...1 lacking from taking control of the senate
I will stand fast that she was absolutely the wrong candidate to put up in delaware..
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 02:57:33 AM
Of course I do. I am one. You decide which.
The difference I have with people who keep making the distinction is that we're all in the same party. We all need each other to win an election. If we fight among ourselves, the dems will win, not because the dems are so wonderful, but because the Reps are shooting themselves in the foot......... again. It's time to unite.
Are you saying you're a RINO?
Crepe has said more than once that the GOP cannot win without the Big Umbrella approach including Socialist Lite into their political mix.
...Well, close to that. ;)
Quote from: quiller on October 21, 2010, 06:13:50 AM
Crepe has said more than once that the GOP cannot win without the Big Umbrella approach including Socialist Lite into their political mix.
...Well, close to that. ;)
Uhh...Ummm...OK, ...yeah, the party really needs more Schwarzenegger's running things, just look how well Ca. is doing under him. ::)
Quote from: Solar on October 21, 2010, 06:32:15 AM
Uhh...Ummm...OK, ...yeah, the party really needs more Schwarzenegger's running things, just look how well Ca. is doing under him. ::)
I'm teasing her a bit because I too believe that the RINOs are the problem. The spend-like-Democrats should BECOME Democrats (just as fiscal conservatives belong in the GOP, which sorely needs them).
However --- it is a sad commentary on American politics that the GOP has to accept people it cannot stand, and then hope to attract AGAIN if they betray those same converts by drifting back to the right after elections.
Quote from: quiller on October 21, 2010, 06:40:55 AM
I'm teasing her a bit because I too believe that the RINOs are the problem. The spend-like-Democrats should BECOME Democrats (just as fiscal conservatives belong in the GOP, which sorely needs them).
However --- it is a sad commentary on American politics that the GOP has to accept people it cannot stand, and then hope to attract AGAIN if they betray those same converts by drifting back to the right after elections.
That's just it, this is why the Tea party movement is so strong, it's because of the big tent principal.
Teaparty is oil, RINO are water, the two simply will never mix.
Quote from: Solar on October 21, 2010, 06:07:33 AM
Are you saying you're a RINO?
I'm saying that I've been deemed a RINO on this board. Therefore, I guess I am one. Actually, it's not anything I've given much thought to. I've always thought of myself as a Republican with a brain of her own. What do you think, and does it really make any difference unless I'm driven from the party by people who call themselves conservatives? My goodness, what's important right now is to get people to vote Republican.
Quote from: quiller on October 21, 2010, 06:13:50 AM
Crepe has said more than once that the GOP cannot win without the Big Umbrella approach including Socialist Lite into their political mix.
...Well, close to that. ;)
Nope, I never mentioned "Socialist Lite" at all. I do think that the Republican Party needs to attract people other than Conservatives to vote for their candidates. Do you have disagreement with that?
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 06:47:16 AM
I'm saying that I've been deemed a RINO on this board.
No You Have Not Been!
QuoteTherefore, I guess I am one. Actually, it's not anything I've given much thought to. I've always thought of myself as a Republican with a brain of her own. What do you think, and does it really make any difference unless I'm driven from the party by people who call themselves conservatives? My goodness, what's important right now is to get people to vote Republican.
The problem is, you do not understand the meaning of RINO.
Take the term Christian, if the person goes against all the tenets of Christianity, is he still a Christian?
No, of course not, he is in name only. Well that's what RINO are, they claim to be Pubs, but never do the Conservative thing, they do exactly what a Dim does, they just call themselves a Pub.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 06:50:53 AM
Nope, I never mentioned "Socialist Lite" at all. I do think that the Republican Party needs to attract people other than Conservatives to vote for their candidates. Do you have disagreement with that?
See the part about "Socialist Lite." (And yes, you did not use that phrase.)
The Republican Party needs to REJECT the free-spenders. Get right with principles and voters will follow.
Quote from: Solar on October 21, 2010, 06:54:56 AM
No You Have Not Been!
The problem is, you do not understand the meaning of RINO.
Take the term Christian, if the person goes against all the tenets of Christianity, is he still a Christian?
No, of course not, he is in name only. Well that's what RINO are, they claim to be Pubs, but never do the Conservative thing, they do exactly what a Dim does, they just call themselves a Pub.
I'll have to disagree with you that I haven't been called a RINO.
You say a RINO
never does the conservative thing. That's not my understanding of it at all. To me it's been explained that it's someone who doesn't toe the conservative line. It's the moderate Republican who is a called a RINO.
Quote from: quiller on October 21, 2010, 06:56:30 AM
See the part about "Socialist Lite." (And yes, you did not use that phrase.)
The Republican Party needs to REJECT the free-spenders. Get right with principles and voters will follow.
You didn't answer my question. Here it is again. " I do think that the Republican Party needs to attract people other than Conservatives to vote for their candidates. Do you have disagreement with that? "
And now I'm off to do the volunteer stint at a nursing home.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 07:11:24 AM
You didn't answer my question. Here it is again. " I do think that the Republican Party needs to attract people other than Conservatives to vote for their candidates. Do you have disagreement with that? "
If the GOP attracts other than conservatives, then it attracts RINOs. I do disagree with "Big Tent" thinking. Voters need distinctions, not confusion.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 07:08:45 AM
I'll have to disagree with you that I haven't been called a RINO.
Why did they call you a RINO, is more important, it's because you called yourself one first.
You say a RINO
never does the conservative thing. That's not my understanding of it at all. To me it's been explained that it's someone who doesn't toe the conservative line. It's the moderate Republican who is a called a RINO.
It's both, but what is a moderate if they always take the liberal stance?
Let me ask you this. Do you think it's right to spend more tax dollars than we take in?
A RINO does.
There are two types of Conservative, a fiscal one, and a social one, right now the Tea party is a group fiscal Conservatives.
A true Pub is a fiscal Conservative first, he can be a social Conservative, but that doesn't make him a true Pub if they aren't fiscal Conservatives as well, then they are nothing but RINO.
Quote from: quiller on October 21, 2010, 06:40:55 AM
However --- it is a sad commentary on American politics that the GOP has to accept people it cannot stand, and then hope to attract AGAIN if they betray those same converts by drifting back to the right after elections.
Sorry, Quill, but I have to put a snicker here. It hasn't been that many moons since the liberal PUBS, I'm sure, were saying the same thing, and there were a crap pot more of the LIB variety than the Conservative variety. Rockefella, Scranton, Romney, Nixon, et al, come to mind. Ike spoke from both sides of his mouth but governed like a liberal.
Quote from: quiller on October 21, 2010, 07:15:22 AM
If the GOP attracts other than conservatives, then it attracts RINOs. I do disagree with "Big Tent" thinking. Voters need distinctions, not confusion.
W hat do you do with moderates who lean more to the Rep Party than they do to the Dem Party? That's where I put myself, mostly because of the intolerance for homosexuals. If you don't consider moderate Republicans RINO, what do you call them?
Quote from: Solar on October 21, 2010, 07:19:07 AM
Why did they call you a RINO, is more important, it's because you called yourself one first.
You say a RINO never does the conservative thing. That's not my understanding of it at all. To me it's been explained that it's someone who doesn't toe the conservative line. It's the moderate Republican who is a called a RINO.
It's both, but what is a moderate if they always take the liberal stance?
Let me ask you this. Do you think it's right to spend more tax dollars than we take in?
A RINO does.
There are two types of Conservative, a fiscal one, and a social one, right now the Tea party is a group fiscal Conservatives.
A true Pub is a fiscal Conservative first, he can be a social Conservative, but that doesn't make him a true Pub if they aren't fiscal Conservatives as well, then they are nothing but RINO.
A moderate who takes the liberal stance is a Democrat, of course. No, it's not right to spend more tax dollars than we take in. I consider myself to be a fiscal conservative. I'm not totally a social conservative. I disagree with conservatives regarding the stance of some of them regarding homosexuality. That's one place that I part with conservatives, off the top of my head.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 09:59:16 AM
W hat do you do with moderates who lean more to the Rep Party than they do to the Dem Party? That's where I put myself, mostly because of the intolerance for homosexuals. If you don't consider moderate Republicans RINO, what do you call them?
I consider "moderates" to be RINOs. Paraphrasing Reagan, that party left me.
I would invite right-leaning "moderates" to get right about social issues---including their enabling the deviates. GOP tolerance for Log Cabin Republicans is absolutely incompatible with conservative values. (A little bit pregnant, a little bit deviate --- what's the difference?)
Homosexuality is an abomination, and it will always be wrong. Twenty
centuries of Christian doctrine out-rule the GOP trying to muster the switch-hitter vote. The same for infanticide. Murdering innocent unborn children is always wrong --- and moderates keep quiet when the death-toll reaches 50 million unborn Americans, and keeps climbing.
At present there is no distinction between parties. The Pledge to America may as well promise a unicorn in every child's nursery-room, if that sorry party continues to refuse to take real stands, and instead hews to the center, expecting later to betray its own converts.
Quote from: quiller on October 21, 2010, 10:33:33 AM
I consider "moderates" to be RINOs. Paraphrasing Reagan, that party left me.
I would invite right-leaning "moderates" to get right about social issues---including their enabling the deviates. GOP tolerance for Log Cabin Republicans is absolutely incompatible with conservative values. (A little bit pregnant, a little bit deviate --- what's the difference?)
Homosexuality is an abomination, and it will always be wrong. Twenty centuries of Christian doctrine out-rule the GOP trying to muster the switch-hitter vote. The same for infanticide. Murdering innocent unborn children is always wrong --- and moderates keep quiet when the death-toll reaches 50 million unborn Americans, and keeps climbing.
At present there is no distinction between parties. The Pledge to America may as well promise a unicorn in every child's nursery-room, if that sorry party continues to refuse to take real stands, and instead hews to the center, expecting later to betray its own converts.
I'm pro-life, so you can put that to rest. I just have more tolerance for homosexuality and Log Cabin Reps than you do. I do believe that homsexuality or heterosexuality are not choices. I believe that homosexuals have a different genetic code than we do. For what reason, I don't know. I have enough trouble leading my life the way I believe my God wants me to. I also believe that God made us all, so there's areason for everything, and I can't fathom all the reasons for anything. Dang, I wish I could see what I'm typing. It's making me nuts.
Quote from: zip on October 21, 2010, 05:20:18 AM
I told you why I dont like her...Ill like her if she wins that senate seat....
Right now 9 are pretty ours...1 lacking from taking control of the senate
I will stand fast that she was absolutely the wrong candidate to put up in delaware..
No you haven't. You just refer to baggage, and her saying crazy things, but offer no supporting evidence that she has baggage, or says crazy things.
You say she is the wrong candidate, but you don't support why.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 10:50:11 AM
Dang, I wish I could see what I'm typing. It's making me nuts.
You need to put your mouse pointer over the top of the blue
___ just under the text box. When you see the double arrow left click and pull it down, that will make the text box much longer. If you need more room mover the text box to the top and them do it again. See if that will do it for you crepe05
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 07:11:24 AM
You didn't answer my question. Here it is again. " I do think that the Republican Party needs to attract people other than Conservatives to vote for their candidates. Do you have disagreement with that? "
And now I'm off to do the volunteer stint at a nursing home.
Wrong. The Republican party needs to be 100% conservative, for the party and for our country.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 10:05:39 AM
A moderate who takes the liberal stance is a Democrat, of course. No, it's not right to spend more tax dollars than we take in. I consider myself to be a fiscal conservative. I'm not totally a social conservative. I disagree with conservatives regarding the stance of some of them regarding homosexuality. That's one place that I part with conservatives, off the top of my head.
So conservatives are anti-homosexual? What in the hell are you talking about?
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 10:50:11 AM
I'm pro-life, so you can put that to rest. I just have more tolerance for homosexuality and Log Cabin Reps than you do. I do believe that homsexuality or heterosexuality are not choices. I believe that homosexuals have a different genetic code than we do. For what reason, I don't know. I have enough trouble leading my life the way I believe my God wants me to. I also believe that God made us all, so there's areason for everything, and I can't fathom all the reasons for anything. Dang, I wish I could see what I'm typing. It's making me nuts.
Please find me one conservative candidate who is anti-homosexual in his or her positions.
Quote from: zip on October 20, 2010, 01:09:48 PM
Let me just slap your silly ass around with this...shes a loser and she lost that senate seat....that's the biggest reason and if you don't think the witch thing hurt her your nuts...she doesn't look like a breath of fresh air to me...she looks sneaky and a bit whacked...aside from all that..I don't have to have a reason to not like her...I can not like her If I choose...
As far as your insinuating I'm a liberal because I don't like someone you do...instead of me going to the huffington post...you should get a real job and get out in the real world and take that spoon out of your spoiled little sarcastic ass
I cant stand far left handjobs that are out of touch with real people...and that goes for far right ones that are just as bad...and talk and try to act like idi amin
Nothing here substantial enough with any real facts to make me agree with you Zip. I am not going to hold what she did in High School over her head. I doubt few if any of us can say we did not do anything we now regret. There is a reason why they do not vote, sign contracts or legally drinking at that age. Let's look at her current views rather then allowing a leftest media to dictate your views. I can not even begin to count how many times the media will potray conservatives in a bad light and never the same when it comes to the leftist ideologues. Right now her opposing candidate is something worse then a witch, he is a fking Marxist loving arse who is seeking to win the seat. I don't know about you but I will vote a witch before a Marxist anyday.
Quote from: taxed on October 21, 2010, 11:17:57 AM
Wrong. The Republican party needs to be 100% conservative, for the party and for our country.
It never has been, Taxed. Why now?
Quote from: Shooterman on October 21, 2010, 12:16:55 PM
It never has been, Taxed. Why now?
Because it never has been, and look at us now...
Same tired old "conservative" stereotypes.
Conservatives are:
Anti-homosexual
Anti-black
Anti-Hispanic
Anti-middle class
Anti-senior citizen
Blah, blah, blah. Absolute nonsense.
I don't consider myself a "moderate". I am a conservative. In my opinion, the word "moderate" implies compromise, "fluid" CORE beliefs and CORE values, and a lack of integrity.
My core values, core beliefs, and integrity are not for sale, and will never be compromised.
Homosexuality is a non-issue for me. I don't care what people do behind closed doors. But when people flaunt their sexual preferences in-public, expect special rights because of their sexual preferences, and attempt to "mainstream" their sexual preferences via our educational system, that's where I draw the line.
I also believe that the health care system in this country, PRIOR to Obamacare, is an absolute mess. I believe that a national healthcare program CAN become a reality, but the private sector must be the administrators, NOT the government.
I believe that abortion is INFANTICIDE. Period. Abortion is NOT a means of birth control.
I believe that ALL levels of "government" (local, state, and federal) need to GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY, and allow the American people to be productive and responsible and accountable again.
I believe that "political correctness" is the single most destructive mechanism that has permeated our society.
I believe that the U.S. Constitution and the Bill Of Rights are not subject to change or radical interpretation.
I believe that the United States Of America is the greatest country to ever grace this planet, but this "grand experiment" is about to come to a tragic end, UNLESS we return to the principles that our founding fathers bestowed upon us.
I believe that our enemies must be identified as our enemies, and must be dealt with in a manner which makes it VERY clear to the rest of the world that the United States will no longer tolerate ANY aggression against it's citizens, anywhere in the world.
I believe that our borders MUST be secured, both south AND north, by building permanent barriers across the entirety of our borders. All illegal aliens shall be identified, detained, and deported as soon as possible, regardless of their personal or economic situation. U.S. immigration laws shall be revised by simplifying and streamlining the LEGAL immigration process. Illegal immigration laws shall be strengthened and vigorously enforced.
I believe that a complete review of the role of the Federal Reserve, investment banking, the U.S. stock market, and all other financial entities in this country, MUST be done as soon as possible.
I believe that ALL labor unions shall be held accountable for their political activities, their financial activities, and all tactics that are used to intimidate American citizens.
Well, that's a good start. Call me whatever you want. Those are my CORE values and beliefs, and they are not subject to negotiation or compromise.
Quote from: taxed on October 21, 2010, 01:31:23 PM
Because it never has been, and look at us now...
I'm just a dumbass, so you'll have to explain that.
Quote from: Shooterman on October 21, 2010, 01:37:17 PM
I'm just a dumbass, so you'll have to explain that.
We never have been, hence why we are on the brink of collapse.
If we had pure conservatives in office, we wouldn't be in the pickle we are in. Therefore, we all conservatives in the Republican party, so we can have a shot at saving the country.
Quote from: taxed on October 21, 2010, 01:39:48 PM
We never have been, hence why we are on the brink of collapse.
If we had pure conservatives in office, we wouldn't be in the pickle we are in. Therefore, we all conservatives in the Republican party, so we can have a shot at saving the country.
20% of the population ain't gonna win elections, so your pipe dream is just that.
Quote from: Shooterman on October 21, 2010, 01:45:48 PM
20% of the population ain't gonna win elections, so your pipe dream is just that.
Shooter, that is a majority of the population...
Quote from: taxed on October 21, 2010, 01:39:48 PM
We never have been, hence why we are on the brink of collapse.
If we had pure conservatives in office, we wouldn't be in the pickle we are in. Therefore, we all conservatives in the Republican party, so we can have a shot at saving the country.
Exactly Taxed, Liberals are like children and Conservatives, the parent.
Look what compromise has gotten us, spoiled children.
It's time to kick the kids out of the House to fend for themselves.
It's time they got a job and quit depending on the taxpayer for their sustenance.
It's time to Right the ship and get back on course.
Quote from: taxed on October 21, 2010, 01:46:39 PM
Shooter, that is a majority of the population...
Uh, 20% is a majority?
I think it was closer to 23% of the total populated actually registered and actually voted for whoever wins. Can't recall where I saw it, but it makes sense considering no-shows especially in off-year races. Here the GOP should draw well from the regular voters.
Quote from: quiller on October 21, 2010, 02:10:52 PM
I think it was closer to 23% of the total populated actually registered and actually voted for whoever wins. Can't recall where I saw it, but it makes sense considering no-shows especially in off-year races. Here the GOP should draw well from the regular voters.
Shooter is saying only 20% of the country is conservative.
Quote from: taxed on October 21, 2010, 11:19:17 AM
So conservatives are anti-homosexual? What in the hell are you talking about?
Using the term "deviant" for one. That certainly isn't an accepting or even tolerant word. Also, someone denigrated the Log Cabin Republicans on this board. Everyone has a right to do that. We all have freedom of speech, but it's remarks like that I'm talking about.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 02:49:36 PM
Using the term "deviant" for one. That certainly isn't an accepting or even tolerant word. Also, someone denigrated the Log Cabin Republicans on this board. Everyone has a right to do that. We all have freedom of speech, but it's remarks like that I'm talking about.
That isn't a conservative position, Crepe. That is a person's opinion or take. If you have no problem with gays, then that doesn't mean you aren't conservative.
There may be a generational thing going on here maybe.......
Quote from: taxed on October 21, 2010, 11:20:52 AM
Please find me one conservative candidate who is anti-homosexual in his or her positions.
I'm not necessarily talking about the politicians. I'm talking about avowed conservatives on various message boards. Sorry if I gave you the wrong impression. People who talk that way don't endear themselves to people who have different beliefs about homosexuality when they use denigrating words. If those conservatives are activists who want to bring people to their beliefs, they need to cut out that verbiage. It's just my opinion, but it's a real turn-off for me.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 02:55:27 PM
I'm not necessarily talking about the politicians. I'm talking about avowed conservatives on various message boards. Sorry if I gave you the wrong impression. People who talk that way don't endear themselves to people who have different beliefs about homosexuality when they use denigrating words. If those conservatives are activists who want to bring people to their beliefs, they need to cut out that verbiage. It's just my opinion, but it's a real turn-off for me.
Your opinion is very far off from reality.
If someone is a conservative that hates gay people, then they are people who hate gay people that happen to be conservative. That has nothing to do with the conservative platform itself.
Charles Manson can kill someone and say "Damn, my taxes are too high".
Quote from: walkstall on October 21, 2010, 11:16:07 AM
You need to put your mouse pointer over the top of the blue ___ just under the text box. When you see the double arrow left click and pull it down, that will make the text box much longer. If you need more room mover the text box to the top and them do it again. See if that will do it for you crepe05
Oh beautiful! Thanks a lot, walkstall. It worked. Hopefully, it won't make me more verbal than I am. :)
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 03:00:27 PM
Oh beautiful! Thanks a lot, walkstall. It worked. Hopefully, it won't make me more verbal than I am. :)
LOL good, in my house a woman has a right so post on young lady. ;D
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 02:49:36 PM
Using the term "deviant" for one. That certainly isn't an accepting or even tolerant word. Also, someone denigrated the Log Cabin Republicans on this board. Everyone has a right to do that. We all have freedom of speech, but it's remarks like that I'm talking about.
Deviant isn't a derogatory word in the least, in fact it is a perfect description of gays.
Deviant: Markedly different from an accepted norm, A person whose behavior deviates from what is acceptable especially in sexual behavior.
Gay sex in no way is the norm, there is no way two people of the same sex engaging in sex can procreate, therefore it is "deviant sex".
Quote from: Solar on October 21, 2010, 03:37:35 PM
Deviant isn't a derogatory word in the least, in fact it is a perfect description of gays.
Deviant: Markedly different from an accepted norm, A person whose behavior deviates from what is acceptable especially in sexual behavior.
Gay sex in no way is the norm, there is no way two people of the same sex engaging in sex can procreate, therefore it is "deviant sex".
I agree that gay sex certainly isn't the norm. However, I can't go along with not being able to procreate makes it deviant. I can't procreate (thankfully, I must say), but I don't consider sex at my age, or sex after 48 y.o. when I had to have a hysterectomy, deviant sex. It certainly was "more fun" sex, though. :D ;D
Do you think calling someone a deviant perv will win votes to the conservative side? Just asking, cuz that's been used on the board, too. In your opinion, can a homosexual be a conservative? I've never really related sexual habits to political beliefs.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 05:01:32 PM
I agree that gay sex certainly isn't the norm. However, I can't go along with not being able to procreate makes it deviant. I can't procreate (thankfully, I must say), but I don't consider sex at my age, or sex after 48 y.o. when I had to have a hysterectomy, deviant sex. It certainly was "more fun" sex, though. :D ;D
Do you think calling someone a deviant perv will win votes to the conservative side? Just asking, cuz that's been used on the board, too. In your opinion, can a homosexual be a conservative? I've never really related sexual habits to political beliefs.
Crepe, you are contributing to the lie and myth that conservatives are anti-gay. Please don't give that lie and myth any life. There are conservatives who are that way, but that isn't a conservative platform. Please get it straight, no pun intended.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 05:01:32 PM
I agree that gay sex certainly isn't the norm. However, I can't go along with not being able to procreate makes it deviant. I can't procreate (thankfully, I must say), but I don't consider sex at my age, or sex after 48 y.o. when I had to have a hysterectomy, deviant sex. It certainly was "more fun" sex, though. :D ;D
Do you think calling someone a deviant perv will win votes to the conservative side? Just asking, cuz that's been used on the board, too. In your opinion, can a homosexual be a conservative? I've never really related sexual habits to political beliefs.
If you were to poll conservatives, you would be shocked at the amount of people that don't care what people do in the privacy of their own home.
We just don't think that sexual behavior deserves any special rights.
I could care less about who does what to whom, I just don't want to see them being used as political pawns by the left and I don't want them to be viewed as another privledged minority whose rights exceed others'.
Billy
Quote from: BILLY-bONNEY on October 21, 2010, 05:30:11 PM
I could care less about who does what to whom, I just don't want to see them being used as political pawns by the left and I don't want them to be viewed as another privledged minority whose rights exceed others'.
Billy
Perfect Billy....
Hating Gays is not a conservative position...billy stated what the conservative stance on Homosexuality is perfectly in my opinion...However, there are conservatives that hate gays and Im sure theres liberals that do also.
If homosexuality cant be considered deviant, then beastiality and Polygamy cant either and it could be argued that Pedophilia isnt deviant just against the law like polygamy is and homosexuality was...in other words of course its deviant behavior
Quote from: taxed on October 21, 2010, 05:05:16 PM
Crepe, you are contributing to the lie and myth that conservatives are anti-gay. Please don't give that lie and myth any life. There are conservatives who are that way, but that isn't a conservative platform. Please get it straight, no pun intended.
I've never seen any liberal call gay people any names. I don't know what the liberals really think about it, but they seem to be smart enough to want to get the votes to win an election. Is that honest or is that pandering? I think it's smart because politics is a pandering-to-an-extent profession, imo.
Even if your pun wasn't intended, it was rather funny. ;D
Quote from: taxed on October 21, 2010, 02:59:29 PM
Your opinion is very far off from reality.
If someone is a conservative that hates gay people, then they are people who hate gay people that happen to be conservative. That has nothing to do with the conservative platform itself.
Charles Manson can kill someone and say "Damn, my taxes are too high".
I have to disagree, taxed. As I have previously said, I'm talking about people who identify themselves as conservatives on various message boards. Their political beliefs are well known. It won't influence the platform, but it certainly could influence a voter who is trying to figure out how to vote.
Was Charles Manson rep or dem, liberal or conservative? You have to identify that for your analogy to be an argument.
Quote from: crepe05 on October 21, 2010, 02:49:36 PM
Using the term "deviant" for one. That certainly isn't an accepting or even tolerant word. Also, someone denigrated the Log Cabin Republicans on this board. Everyone has a right to do that. We all have freedom of speech, but it's remarks like that I'm talking about.
I was the one using "deviant," and I stated that twenty centuries of Christian doctrine outweigh
any effort by the GOP to be accepting of those who practice an abomination, the most serious level of offense. You are 100% correct. I am 100%
NOT accepting of this vile choice (which
can be addressed through psychiatric or penal treatment.)
The term "deviant" is clinical. It describes those outside society's norm, which clearly is accurate for what most recognized authorities say is between one and three percent of the total U.S. population. The Log Cabin Republicans are deviants first, Republicans second (if at all).
Quote from: quiller on October 22, 2010, 06:25:10 AM
I was the one using "deviant," and I stated that twenty centuries of Christian doctrine outweigh any effort by the GOP to be accepting of those who practice an abomination, the most serious level of offense. You are 100% correct. I am 100% NOT accepting of this vile choice (which can be addressed through psychiatric or penal treatment.)
The term "deviant" is clinical. It describes those outside society's norm, which clearly is accurate for what most recognized authorities say is between one and three percent of the total U.S. population. The Log Cabin Republicans are deviants first, Republicans second (if at all).
Okey dokey. I guess they can be addressed psychiatrically just as I can change my gender sexual partner if I'm treated psyciatrically.
BTW, is there a law against being homosexual? That's the only way the penal system would get involved. Why did you bring in the law on this one? Are you talking about guys doing it in a public restroom and getting caught, or are you talking about the cops breaking down someone's door to their home due to a suspicion that a homosexual might live there and be having sex at that moment? I believe there's a law against against anyone having sex in a public place.
You do know that the Jews in Germany were considered to be outside the norm in Nazi Germany in the '30's, don't you?
Quote from: crepe05 on October 22, 2010, 08:49:20 AM
Okey dokey. I guess they can be addressed psychiatrically just as I can change my gender sexual partner if I'm treated psyciatrically.
BTW, is there a law against being homosexual? That's the only way the penal system would get involved. Why did you bring in the law on this one? Are you talking about guys doing it in a public restroom and getting caught, or are you talking about the cops breaking down someone's door to their home due to a suspicion that a homosexual might live there and be having sex at that moment? I believe there's a law against against anyone having sex in a public place.
You do know that the Jews in Germany were considered to be outside the norm in Nazi Germany in the '30's, don't you?
Ample evidence was revealed during the Nuremberg Trials and through diligent historical search that numerous high-ranking National Socialist Party members were in fact practicing homosexuals. Socialists and homosexuals and repression of Official Victims are not new in the Hun homeland. Today's Nazis wear brown SKIN, not shirts: at least Der Fuhrer Big Ears.
Now we evidently have a cabal of them pushing to get deviates into the military, forcing it against its will and structure, into a social experiment and not a functioning defense unit.
Homosexuality is a choice. Gender Identity Disorder is treatable. An abomination is
always an abomination.
Quote from: quiller on October 22, 2010, 09:06:56 AM
Ample evidence was revealed during the Nuremberg Trials and through diligent historical search that numerous high-ranking National Socialist Party members were in fact practicing homosexuals. Socialists and homosexuals and repression of Official Victims are not new in the Hun homeland. Today's Nazis wear brown SKIN, not shirts: at least Der Fuhrer Big Ears.
Now we evidently have a cabal of them pushing to get deviates into the military, forcing it against its will and structure, into a social experiment and not a functioning defense unit.
Homosexuality is a choice. Gender Identity Disorder is treatable. An abomination is always an abomination.
The military has always been used to promote social experiments. They integrated their forces as a social experiment. They gave women leadership jobs before private business did. They integrated their base housing prior to civilian integration. They've always been leaders in social experimentation.
I've always wondered why some people think that homosexuality is a choice. Do you really think that anyone would
choose that lifestyle that will bring him/her so much emotional pain and some ostracization?
Again, I'll say that homosexuals have always been in the military. They just didn't identify themselves as such. Homosexuals have served openly in armies of other nations without any detriment to the military. Homosexuality and ability to serve in the military aren't mutually exclusinve. :-*
Quote from: crepe05 on October 22, 2010, 03:52:31 AM
I have to disagree, taxed. As I have previously said, I'm talking about people who identify themselves as conservatives on various message boards. Their political beliefs are well known. It won't influence the platform, but it certainly could influence a voter who is trying to figure out how to vote.
I am not sure why I can't make my point with you. They may be on a conservative board, and they may be saying anti-gay stuff, but that doesn't make them a conservative. Conservatism and hating gays have nothing to do with each other.
If you would like an example, somehow poll the blacks and latinos who support Obama. Ask them how they feel about gays, overall. Culturally, they don't like gays. That is a cultural thing, and not a conservative vs. liberal thing.
Quote
Was Charles Manson rep or dem, liberal or conservative? You have to identify that for your analogy to be an argument.
If you seriously didn't deduce my point from this, then never mind.
Quote from: taxed on October 22, 2010, 10:47:55 AM
Conservatism and hating gays have nothing to do with each other.
If you would like an example, somehow poll the blacks and latinos who support Obama. Ask them how they feel about gays, overall. Culturally, they don't like gays. That is a cultural thing, and not a conservative vs. liberal thing.
Cultural, or experience. I know many sexual abuse victims who are male, and what
THEY would do to the queers far surpasses anything thought up by the Huns at Dachau.
Having a mental illness should not stigmatize the afflicted. Treatment is available, to help them see the wisdom of
not following abhorrent, life-threatening, soul-destroying practices.
Quote from: quiller on October 22, 2010, 11:56:26 AM
Cultural, or experience. I know many sexual abuse victims who are male, and what THEY would do to the queers far surpasses anything thought up by the Huns at Dachau.
They haven't met Bama Beau yet...
I'm evidently behind on requisite gossip here. Are you saying Our Boy likes boys?
Quote from: quiller on October 22, 2010, 11:56:26 AM
Cultural, or experience. I know many sexual abuse victims who are male, and what THEY would do to the queers far surpasses anything thought up by the Huns at Dachau.
Having a mental illness should not stigmatize the afflicted. Treatment is available, to help them see the wisdom of not following abhorrent, life-threatening, soul-destroying practices.
You left out genetic in your "culteral, or experience............" statement. Was that intentional
And what's the mental illness that heterosexual males who sexually abuse females have? We all have heard about some of the things those women have done to the males who sexually abuse them.
Do you really thing that "wisdom" is going to change the behavior of any sexual abuser, hetero or homo? I think we've beaten this horse to death, and neither of us (or should I say none of us) are going to change our opinions on this. You're frustrated with me, and I've become frustrated with you, although that's not to say that I didn't enjoy it. :)
Quote from: crepe05 on October 22, 2010, 02:26:06 PM
I think we've beaten this horse to death, and neither of us (or should I say none of us) are going to change our opinions on this. You're frustrated with me, and I've become frustrated with you, although that's not to say that I didn't enjoy it. :)
Why should I be frustrated in being consistent? You're 100% right --- I won't change my mind.
Quote from: quiller on October 22, 2010, 05:18:25 PM
Why should I be frustrated in being consistent? You're 100% right --- I won't change my mind.
For the same reason that I'm frustrated since I'm 100% right. I'm frustrated that you can't/won't see the error of your thoughts.
Anyway, it's been fun while it lasted. ;D
Quote from: crepe05 on October 23, 2010, 06:10:37 AM
For the same reason that I'm frustrated since I'm 100% right. I'm frustrated that you can't/won't see the error of your thoughts.
Anyway, it's been fun while it lasted. ;D
There is no error. This species would not survive if it were homosexual. For 2,000 years, fully one-third of this planet has become aware that it is an abomination to lie with another man (or same sex partner, to include the women).
Homosexuality is a choice. It is surrender to twisted impulses which can be tamed through effective, sympathetic psychiatric treatment. Gender Identity Disorder can be cured.
How did the original topic (O'Donnell) get transformed into a debate about homos? Is O'Donnell a lesbian or something? :o
;D Conservatives are like puppies. We have a short attention span. :)
Quote from: AmericanFlyer on October 23, 2010, 08:10:45 AM
How did the original topic (O'Donnell) get transformed into a debate about homos? Is O'Donnell a lesbian or something? :o
Re-reading the thread, crepe05 first mentioned homosexuals in any context.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/index.php?topic=440.47 (http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/index.php?topic=440.47)
That
didn't immediately shift things. My refusal to send Candygrams to the deviates may have helped it along a bit.
(Paraphrasing Obama about Hillary Clinton), O'Donnell is not a lesbian
as far as I know. That's foul and catty, but that's what liberals think is a fair comment about a woman politician. They sure as hell let Bubba get away with it.
Quote from: quiller on October 23, 2010, 09:26:21 AM
Re-reading the thread, crepe05 first mentioned homosexuals in any context.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/index.php?topic=440.47 (http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/index.php?topic=440.47)
That didn't immediately shift things. My refusal to send Candygrams to the deviates may have helped it along a bit.
(Paraphrasing Obama about Hillary Clinton), O'Donnell is not a lesbian as far as I know.
That's foul and catty, but that's what liberals think is a fair comment about a woman politician. They sure as hell let Bubba get away with it.
Yep, just like there is no proof to the roomer that Barney Fwank sucked on Bills Cigar.
Isn't that the shit the leftists pull?
It's easy to establish a fake rumor and pin it on people you can't find later. (Ask our old pal Dan Rather to find the source of that TANG memo for Bush, for example.)
And since John Edwards was the hard-left darling, it was easy to ignore the Rielle Hunter rumors because the hard left who dominate U.S. media wanted that little scumbag to win. But then by some divine comedic touch, it all turned real and Edwards was busted, nearly-inflagrante, all by lowly wretches from a supermarket laughingstock.
Quote from: zip on October 19, 2010, 04:20:16 AM
Ive been paying special attention to listening to Odonnell...I dont like her one bit...does that mean I wouldnt vote for her over coontz...NO..she would get my vote.
She would have never been my choice to run...shes whacky, she says the same thing over and over...and offers no answers when asked how shes going to do anything she says she wants too....she was absolutely the wrong candidate to put forward....a big teaparty mistake.
Ok ill let you all go off and tell me how wrong I am.. :)
If someone would have used their heads and did some homework..the teaparty would have supported someone else in the primary and the GOP would OWN that seat in delaware lock stock and barrel....
They all say the same thing over and over. How about Obama and his car analogy. It's part of campaigning. You repeat a certain talking point over and over to drill it into the minds of the voters.
What I don't see you talking about is the issues she's talking about. Is there anything you disagree with or is it a personality issue?