The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

@Finn dAbuzz,

New York took good care of the Cheeseheads today.

The Pats will destroy Baltimore.

Giants vs Pats in the Superbowl.

Does that answer your question, Finn?

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Nope.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

Huntsman - did I spell it right? - says he is dropping out. He will endorse Romney.

I just heard he was overtaken by Stephen Colbert in South Carolina. That can't be good. Over here we've got a joke political party called The Monster Raving Loony Party. If you lose your seat to one of those, there's not really any coming back.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Don't tell me you are a commie pinko who doesn't watch football.

Now, just a cotton-pickin' minute, there.

0 Replies

@Rockhead,

Quote:

"America is a moral enterprise, not an economic enterprise," Rick Santorum...

that's some scary ****.

When Tony Blair asked an American high-up what a neocon was he was told that it was someone who believed that politics had a moral purpose.

0 Replies

Romney to hammer Gingrich, Perry on immigration in SC

Quote:

Mitt Romney plans to hammer Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry on immigration in a bid to win over conservative voters in South Carolina, where the GOP front-runner has a narrow lead in polls.

Romney intends to highlight his credentials as a firm opponent of illegal immigration in an appearance Monday with Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach (R), who worked with state legislators on Arizona’s controversial immigration law.

Quote:

Before he became Kansas’ secretary of state, Kobach worked for Immigration Reform Law Institute, the legal branch of Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which the Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled as a “nativist hate group.” One of FAIR’s main goals is to overturn the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which “ended a decades-long, racist quota system that limited immigration mostly to northern Europeans.” FAIR’s founder John Tanton has said that he wants the U.S. to remain a majority-white nation through limiting the number of non-whites who enter the U.S.

source

Quote:

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is a group with one mission: to severely limit immigration into the United States. Although FAIR maintains a veneer of legitimacy that has allowed its principals to testify in Congress and lobby the federal government, this veneer hides much ugliness. FAIR leaders have ties to white supremacist groups and eugenicists and have made many racist statements. Its advertisements have been rejected because of racist content. FAIR’s founder, John Tanton, has expressed his wish that America remain a majority-white population: a goal to be achieved, presumably, by limiting the number of nonwhites who enter the country. One of the group’s main goals is upending the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which ended a decades-long, racist quota system that limited immigration mostly to northern Europeans. FAIR President Dan Stein has called the Act a "mistake."

source

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

Huntsman - did I spell it right? - says he is dropping out.

And we will miss them

http://www.gq.com/images/news-and-politics/2012/01/huntsmans-daughters/huntsmans-daughters-lightbox.jpg

0 Replies

Quote:

When Tony Blair asked an American high-up what a neocon was he was told that it was someone who believed that politics had a moral purpose.

I don't think the high-up got to finish.

A neocon's political moral purpose includes:
redefining war to be permittable as long as the enemy is brown enough or there's oil production involved;
that the government shouldn't involve itself in any business' enterprises, but must make clear declarations (laws) about when, where and how a man's penis can be operated and with whom;
and, although life is the most precious gift God (that's the Christian God, not any of those other icky kinds of gods like Allah or Buddha or Vishnu) has given man so that he, man, must prevent the humblest zygote from being harmed no matter what the cost is to the human (female) hosting it, the death penalty needs to be exercised as often as humanly, not humanely, possible.

Joe (see above for being 'brown enough', it apples here too.)Nation

3 Replies

@revelette,

Thanks, revelette, all these people need are sheets and crosses to set alit.

Joe(is this really the best the GOP has to offer?)Nation

0 Replies

@Joe Nation,

There appear to be distinctions in principle
between neocons and Originalist American conservatives,
one being that the latter r more conservative; i.e., that thay adhere more closely
to principles of personal liberty,
in keeping with the doctrines of the Founders (the Sons of Liberty) as set forth in the Constitution.

David

2 Replies

@Joe Nation,

Joe(always insightful)Nation, You probably got about 90% of the GOP's moral purpose, but I'd like to piggy back on yours with the following;
1. they believe wealth is their god, and only the wealthy should inherit the earth.
2. sharing is anathema to their wealth-building; sharing their wealth is a sin.
3. wars are better than humanity.
4. the poor just didn't work hard enough.
5. they renounce government intrusion into private lives - only when it doesn't conflict with their bigotry and control of others.
6. they don't know the definition of words like morals, lies, ethics, equality, humanity, sharing, and democracy.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Part of C.I.'s hysteria is true,
tho mischaracterized.

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Omsig(godloveyou)David:
Which of the Founders, if living today, would be an Originalist? And why?

Joe(Do you think we should have listened more closely to Roger Williams, not a Founder, but still.... . ?)Nation

2 Replies

@spendius,

Greetings, spendius! Smile

I hope you're doing well. Sorry I don't have time to read all of your posts. (I have constraints on my time now.)

I came across this particular post of yours by accident and felt compelled to respond ...

spendius wrote:

Re: realjohnboy (Post 4862283)
Quote:
I happen to be mostly on the left wing of the Democratic party, ...

I'm sorry to be such an asshole rjb but the left wing of the Dem party (ultra left) has nothing good to say about NFL. The game inculcates the barbarian predatory impulse (exploitation using force and cunning), and is suffused with quasi-religious imagery and gambling. It is quite extreme right wing in all its essentials. It exudes mastery/subservience.

There may be an element of truth in what you say here, but the stereotypes eventually fail. Football has nothing to do with politics. If you check any liberal forum website, you'll discover that along with some members who don't care for football, some of the other liberal members (as opposed to independents and conservative trolls) played football in high school or even college or university. I recently came across one such liberal at a liberal website who was a semi-professional player. There have been leading liberal politicians (both past and present) in the U.S. who played football earlier in their lives, just as there have been conservatives like the late Jack Kemp. Many football fans are liberals while some conservative guys object to the more negative aspects of the sports culture. Also, many gay men love football. I'm not plugging football or some political ideology. That's not my point. I'm simply saying the stereotypes eventually fail.

Not that it really matters, anyway. Wink

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

There was no member of the Sons of Liberty who attended the constitutional convention.

1 Reply

@Joe Nation,

Quote:

I don't think the high-up got to finish.

I could find he name if you want Joe. It was one of GWB's close aides. Not a politician. A spin doctor type.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

I don't think the high-up got to finish.

spendius wrote:

I could find he name if you want Joe. It was one of GWB's close aides. Not a politician. A spin doctor type.

Truly, the Bushes were never conservatives.
I was saddened when Reagan chose Bush.

I infer that he did it to balance off
his own conservatism.

David

0 Replies

@wmwcjr,

Greetings womwicodger,

Some altar boys wank.

The nature of the ceremonials I was referring to. There are many reasons to perform the lesser rituals. Those who do so will pass away and the ceremonial will remain. The glory of the barbaric temperament. Reactionary conservative.

A left wing person is compassionate and caring and would hand the ball to the opposition receiver and wish him well. The receiver would jog around in the red zone not wanting to upset his friend who had given him the ball.

But what am I saying. A left wing person doesn't recognise opposition. We all pull together in a co-operative spirit. 2 hours of kneeldowns. Continous clapping and cheering to encourage such Christian etiquette.

That's what they say at least.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

There was no member of the Sons of Liberty who attended the constitutional convention.

Yeah, and u know that because u kept their membership roster, right?????????

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

No, i didn't keep their membership rosters, they did that themselves. After 1775, participation in the Sons of Liberty became a badge of honor. In fact, i suspect that many of those who claimed to have been members had not actually participated. Certainly those who carried out the Boston Tea Party and who burned HMS Gaspée weren't telling their names at the time of those events--but you can also be sure that people rushed to claim the honor after it became more or less safe to do so. In New York, in particular, we know who they were because they formed a political party and passed a measure in 1784 to confiscate the property of alleged Tories, in contravention of Treaty of Paris.

So tell, oh snide one, just how you figure the Sons of Liberty had anything to do with the fantasies of so-called libertarians today?

0 Replies

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know