Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by Moxin24, Mar 25, 2011.
Unknown clusterfuck > Romney without a clusterfuck
The phrase "be careful what you wish for" comes to mind.
I want a full implosion of the GOP as we know it!
Yeah, I mean who wouldn't want a generation of Democratic control?
Until something changes, we will always be stuck with the Republicrats in control. Obama or Romney, we lose either way. Might as well benefit from it in the future.
The idea that Republicans and Democrats are the same is so sophomore year of college.
This is dumb. Lose big or lose small? After seeing who Obama nominated the SCOTUS, I could really go without him picking a few more liberal fucks to lifetime appointments who see no value in the rule of law.
I don't usually go for Red State stuff but he had a great post on that today.
"Our nation is no longer a nation of laws, but a nation of elites who interpret those laws for us. "
Than read Sowell on the subject.
The constitution is a restraint, if it is no longer able to restrain, might as well burn it.
I would much rather have Mitt Romney appoint a SCOTUS justice to likely replace a conservative justice than letting Obama appoint a liberal to replace a conservative.
Since he already voiced his support for him, this isn't really new news...
Preferably a scotus that doesn't worship marx and doesn't carve La Rasa into his/her arm between hearings
This is truly a head scratcher.
What does this imbecile think judges do other than interpret laws?
Read the article and find out. It's not what you are thinking.
Hate to break it to you, but this is how the judicial branch has worked for 2 centuries. Despite the cries of conservatives, this is how its always been.
That really is a pretty good article. The interstate commerce clause has been used way too freely since that ruling.
I think it's almost 100% that the SCOTUS is going to overturn the part of the act that requires everyone to buy insurance, but I'm still not sure how that will affect the rest of the act. This was Obama's biggest fiscal move during his first term and if it's overturned, that's not gonna look good when it comes to re-election.
Medvedev should check who's about to be running Russia again
sophomoric comment detected
We need more of these guys elected to the US Congress
I'm sure ya'll will just pull apart the validity of the quote, but his is why I voted for Gingrich
Joy Lin @JoyLinFN
Student from Spain asks why we spend so much on defense. Gingrich: Because you don't. (audience laughter) I'm not trying to pick a fight.
There is some truth to that. Gates had a really good speech just before he left office when he was visiting NATO where he basically said the NATO members need to start carrying more of their own weight and needed to invest more in each countries military so they can develop more capabilities so the US doesn't always have to fill them (refueling, transport, ISR, etc). Most countries spend their defense on fighter/bomber capability in their Air Force and then call the US for everything else.
Hopefully NATO's performance in Libya will wake them up, but I doubt it given their other economic issue.
I'm always hopeful but not very optimistic.
RUBIO just endorsed romney
Rubio shoulda kept his mouth shut and hinted that Santorum was America's choice
FEATUS!! is dead in the water.
Similar, not the same.
Blow it up. Lose now to win later. I would rather have a competent GOP in 2016, than the same ol same ol BS. if we want real change in this nation, the GOP must change.
Problem is, the GOP doesnt respect the constitution either. Those who do respect it like Paul are considered nuts.
Yeah but the problem in that logic is a pure Ron Paul GOP wouldn't be electable. Plus the main reason why people confuse the two parties for being the same is they see the final result out of Congress. But that is a bad metric to judge from since those are always negotiated / compromised positions. A Ron Paul party that said "it's our way or we won't vote for it" would last a grand total of two years and then we would see the Democrats with a super majority.
The public doesn't want an ultra fiscally conservative practically no government party anymore than they want an ultra socially conservative party that wants to govern their bedroom life.
Refreshing sounding, but probabaly a long road ahead of him
The National Organization for Marriage, likely to spearhead the referendum drive to repeal marriage equality in Washington, is -- in its own words -- pursuing a strategy to "drive a wedge between gays and blacks" and to make opposition to same-sex marriage "an identity marker" for young Latinos.
A series of four internal NOM memos, outed as part of an investigation in Maine, talks of such goals as "Sideswiping Obama". The memos reveal a manipulative, brazenly cynical strategy for winning America's cultural wars by diving Americans.
Gay and straight, Evergreen State residents should wake up to the outfit that will be trying to manipulate our thinking and embed code phrases (e.g. "redefine marriage"). The NOM is also behind the "Dump Starbucks" boycott campaign launched in reaction to the company's support for marriage equality.
Let the NOM's memos speak for themselves. The tactics:
Ads by Google
Performance Solid State Drive
Get the New High Performance SSDs from Kingston. Super Fast Shipping!
--The Race Card: "The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks -- two key Democratic constituencies," says the most explosive of NOM's internal memos.
" We aim to find, equip, energize and connect African-American spokespeople for marriage, to develop a media campaign around their objections to marriage as a civil right, and to provoke the gay marriage base into responding by denouncing these spokesmen and women as bigots."
The newly formed National Organization for Marriage worked this strategy in California four years ago. President Obama won in the state, but a large number of African-American voters were persuaded to Prop. 8 -- a measure that rolled back marriage equality in the Golden State.
--The Latino Card: Under the heading "Internationalizing the Marriage Issue: A Pan-American Strategy," the NOM talks about negotiations with a former Miss New Mexico and actor Eduardo Verastegui to serve as spokespeople, and hiring the PR firm Schubert Flint to develop Spanish-language TV and radio spots and "popular spongs."
"Our ultimate goal is to make opposition to gay marriage an identity marker, a badge of youth rebellion to conformist assimilation to the bad side of 'Anglo' culture," says the NOM's strategy memo.
--The Global Goal: The Catholic hierarchy and religious right have played the persecution card, arguing that "religious freedom" is threatened by such marriage equality and health insurance coverage for contraception.
The NOM memos reveal a today-the-United States, tomorrow-the-world strategy to reverse gains made by gays and lesbians. "Our goal is to use a victory in the U.S. to launch a global movement to reverse the tide on cultural and legal respect for core family values like marriage," said the NOM. It stressed importance of the "religious liberties" argument.
--The children: The NOM memos speak of "documenting the victims" of same-sex marriage, budgeting $120,000 for an outreach coordinator who would "identify the children of gay parents willing to speak on camera."
Several such children offered powerful testimony FOR marriage equality in Olympia earlier this year. As Michelle Goldberg noted in The Daily Beast, "Thus an organization ostensibly devoted to family values is going to start encouraging people to publicly denounce their closest relatives."
--The President: Not surprisingly, the National Organization for Marriage has the goal of toppling the 44th President, no matter his happy traditional marriage or solid family example. The NOM speaks of a need to "expose Obama as a social radical."
NOM supporters will "raise issues such as pornography, protection of children, and the need to oppose all efforts to weaken religious liberty at the federal level." The heading is, appropriately, "Sideswiping Obama."
Again, this outfit will be operating here, and in Maine, Marland and Minnesota -- all states likely to vote on same-sex marriage in the November election. The memos, released by a U.S. District Court, flow out of a 2009 marriage equality referendum in Maine.
The NOM has sued to overturn Maine ethics laws that would require it to disclose donors who financed a successful campaign against same-sex marriage. "One key advantage we now have is the capacity to protect identity of our donors," boasts one of the group's memos.
One of America's premier civil rights leaders, NAACP chairman-emeritus Julian Bond, said it best Tuesday: "Pitting bigotry's victims against other victims is reprehensible. The defenders of justice must stand together."
A final thought: Our state's three Catholic dioceses stood boldly for civil rights in the 1960's, and for racial justice ever since. The Washington State Catholic Conference has forcefully defended Latino families against draconian (and racist) anti-immigrant legislation proposed in Congress and the Legislature.
The National Organization for Marriage speaks, as part of its strategy, of fostering closer relationships with Roman Catholic bishops to "equip, energize and moralize Catholic priests on the marriage issue."
In response, I would suggest that Washington's Catholic laypersons -- and their priests -- should stand equipped, emergized and moralized to resist those who walketh about fostering racial division and discrimination in our state. Our bishops should have neither truck nor trade with the National Organization for Marriage.
Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/local/conn...ive-a-wedge-between-3439288.php#ixzz1qTogsqIJ
Do the math. Put simply, neither party has the middle class in mind, both expand government power, and both are financially supported by the same giant corporations.
It doesnt have to be pure Paul, just more like it.
Right it needs to be more fiscally conservative but not like Paul. Look at his comments on the various Paul budgets. Basically, they're the best on the table (outside of his own of course) but he won't vote for any of the because they not go far enough. I've talked to conservatives like this and they think if we don't cut everything out of the current budget then the plan is just shit. A more reasonable approach is to put forth an actual plan to bring down deficits and get budgets back over time since its been decades that we've screwed ourselves to get ourselves into this position. So it's our way or fuck it we will shut the government down. That absolutely turns the middle off. The moderates want fiscal conservatives that make the government run more efficient and balances budget. They don't necessarily want to cut half of the federal government.
The GOP is finally electing people who will do what the middle wants but they just don't have enough and need a few more elections to get enough in both houses to do some damage. The problem is letting idiots like Santorum (sorry Dog ) on the top of the ticket that will let Obama and the Dems defeat some already in office and keep the GOP from electing more Paul Ryan's to office. Also add in another Obama term could radically alter the Supreme Court and we will lots more things like Obamacare declared constitutional.
The party is far from perfect but they're starting to move in the right direction.
And has more qualifications than "dean of harvard law", what a joke
National Organization for Marriage? Fuck them.
I swear, social conservatives are forcing me to go Democrat.
They force a lot of people to go democrat
No one hates the gay bashers more than me, but I'm continually surprised that people don't hold the fringe left wing groups to the same standard. A school nurse can't give a 14 year old girl an aspirin without her parents' permission but NOW thinks she should be able to get an abortion without them even knowing. The ACLU threatens to bankrupt small school districts though prolonged litigation if they call it Christmas Vacation instead of Winter Break.
I'm all for demonizing groups that deserve to be demonized but this notion that the right has a monopoly on batshit insane groups is something I've never understood.
It's always comical to see the Presidents budget get rejected in Congress. While this is Obama's budget now, both parties typically reject the Presidents budget no matter who the President is. 414-0 though is still funny
I agree the inalieanable right to an abortion that has sprung up in this country is ridiculous.
And so it begins. I think you will see both Paul and Newt begin to do things that ensures little Ricky doesn't get the nomination. His most recent comments about Obama being a better alternative apparently is the last straw for many on the right that we're previously content to let this thing play out till Romney won the delegates outright. Now they see Santorum being self destructive while hurting the party overall. The good thing is he may harmed his chance of (a) running again and (b) playing a meaningful role in the parties future.
Considering he isn't even being challenged in the primaries this is incredible
I'm so sick of social issues like gay marriage, abortion, the death penalty, etc being a focal point for politicians in a time where that should be the least of our worries. stuff like gay marriage and abortion is just ridiculous anyways. why the government should have any say in either issue is beyond retarded. if gays wanna get married, who cares. if some chick wants to kill her unborn baby, who cares. i may not personally agree with them, but i don't care what other people want to do if it has absolutely no effect on me. santorum is just getting obnoxious. we get it, you're conservative. you don't have to say things like you want to go on a crusade against porn to have people believe you're serious. the further right he tries to go, the more ridiculous he looks. can't wait for him to vanish. i hate that i'm having such a hard time supporting anyone the GOP has put out there. crazy they've had 3+ years to find a suitable candidate to beat someone with an awful approval rating, and this is what they've come up with.
The ACLU has done a LOT of litigation on behalf of religious groups and even Jerry Falwell. "Play by the rules" is hardly 'batshit insane.'
I get that you hate the left and have to reach from time to time, but you can't equate the ACLU being douchey to these organizations trying to make homosexuals second class citizens through inciting race wars.
I despise the ACLU, and PETA, and all that shit. But all they do is political correctness bullshit, not harm anyone's rights.
They don't try to get people to "play by the rules" they try to get people to conform to their bastardized version of "the rules". Handpicking a conservative group to represent every few years doesn't make you impartial.
You don't have to be a right wing conservative to believe its ridiculous to sue a town for decking the grounds of City Hall with Christmas specific decorations.
The ACLU: the American left's equivalent of neo-Nazi and paramilitary separatist groups
Second, my post was in response to someone saying a group like NOM was going to cause them to become Democrat. My point was you can't judge a party or an ideology by the crazies. Most my Democratic friends don't support much of what the ACLU does and I know most Republicans don't support this organization. I mean Christ, its a group so far out there I had never heard of them until today.
Hey man, paramilitary separatist groups =/= neo-Nazis
NOM is popping up a lot recently. Starbucks with saying they support gay marriage, this thing, etc.
It seems any time someone comes out in support of gay marriage NOM issues a press release saying they are boycotting their products or something similar. And the media covers it.
Separate names with a comma.