Comments on: It’s a Trap!!!!!

By: garment sales worldwide

garment sales worldwide — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 20:42:30 +0000

Recent Blogroll Additions……

[...]usually posts some very interesting stuff like this. If you’re new to this site[...]……

By: American Elephant

American Elephant — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:05:45 +0000

Admiral Ackbar???

I thought that was Henry Waxman!

By: Sinapus

Sinapus — Sat, 30 May 2009 12:26:09 +0000

So Congress made a law forbidding you from posting here, or did it vanish into the ether?

Btw, I've seen several comments here from known trolls like antifascist show up as "deleted by administrator" so I have a feeling yours probably vanished into the ether. Even if you do make enough of a nuisance of yourself or post something that the admins delete it, whinging about the "first amendment" is futile. Their blog, their rules.

By: RightWay79

RightWay79 — Sat, 30 May 2009 05:46:38 +0000

Not only did you wonderfully articulate very solid and ever-so-true arguments…but you managed to slip in Star Wars, Star Trek…AND Worldwide Wrestling Federation references in the SAME POST! Major kudos to you, sir.

By: AndrewPrice

AndrewPrice — Sat, 30 May 2009 04:59:18 +0000

Well said. I agree. Anyone who runs for office, but has to tell you "I'll review my stance" on an issue like the Second Amendment is lying to you because they know their position isn't popular. That's not someone you can trust.

By: 63834440

63834440 — Sat, 30 May 2009 04:54:35 +0000

When I worked with the party in 2008 here in Enchantment Land, I met a fella running for a judge position. He carefully ran down the list of conservative ideals, but then BANG, hung himself up on the 2nd Amendment.
I very carefully explained to him the importance of it, why we had it, that criminals already committing gun crimes weren't about to pack it in just because someone added a new rule. He nodded sagely and said he'd review his stance.
I walked away KNOWING he wasn't about to reassess his stance because of my advice, and I knew he was going into the wall in turn three on election day. I was right on both counts.

We need candidates who FEEL the Constitution in their soul, who can look at issues and instinctively know whether its right or not. Candidates who can speak passionately from the heart and soul how freedom makes kings of us all, who knows the shining city on a hill is a reality, and we can all see it, touch it, and pass our lives there in equality and freedom, and that the city is everywhere freedom and restrained government exists.

The key is someone who can see that, explain it to people, and say, "Please, come with me; I want to bring you to a place where what you work for belongs to you, not some micro encephalitic policy wonk in Washington who has never met you, couldn't point out on a US map where you live, and has no idea who your best friends first name is, but is absolutely sure he can spend your own money better than you can."

By: Terry_Jim

Terry_Jim — Sat, 30 May 2009 04:42:45 +0000

Well writ.

The picture I see in imagining your great debate however,
is of our heavyweights being ambushed on the way to the ring by our 'moderates' and
RINO's while the slumping statists stagger in like the Borg – incapable of independant thought ,
but convinced of the inevitability of their assimilation.

By: StanH

StanH — Sat, 30 May 2009 02:15:57 +0000

10-4 Stergeye! It amazes me that these idiot Republicans give a damn what any of these talking heads have to say, especially Colin Powell, he endorsed Barry for God’s sake. I guess Washington Republicans will have to get kicked in the jewels to recognize the enemy.

By: StanH

StanH — Sat, 30 May 2009 02:03:30 +0000

Tear it up Tennwriter we deny conservatism and relegate ourselves to backbencher also-rans. These are Bob Michaels kind of Republicans content to be losers.

By: ExNYer1995

ExNYer1995 — Sat, 30 May 2009 01:15:16 +0000

The Republican Party is an *organization*, whereas "conservatism" is not. Conservatives called the Republican Party "home" for a time, but there's less and less real estate in the intersection of that particular Venn diagram. The support of conservatives came to be taken for granted by the Republican Party, to the point where every pol with an "R" after his name proclaimed himself to be "conservative" – regardless of whether the label fit. The term was watered down nearly to the point of being meaningless, sometimes by hostile Dem libs who wished to equate ALL Republicans with conservatism (because they felt it an easy road to electoral victory), and sometimes by well-meaning – but ultimately, more *damaging* – Republicans who courted conservative voters but couched their shame in qualifiers like "compassionate". (Guess who?)

Conservatism needs a structure of some sort, a platform with planks, like any other "party". I'm tired of people telling me that they're conservatives, when they're in the last position to be able to do so. I'm tired of the media telling me who's a conservative, when they're so far to the left that they think Arnold Schwartzenegger, Rudy Giuliani, Charlie Crist, John McCain, Colin Powell and Elisabeth Hasselbeck are conservatives…

Elizabeth Hasselbeck came to mind because I was thinking of "Survivor". As in, "vote 'em off the island". Yeah, I think we deserve the Right of Refusal. The right to stand up publicly and collectively and say:

"No, sir – you are not a conservative. I don't give a crap what *you* claim to be or that Katie Couric says you are. You are NOT."

When we can define our own ranks, we'll get somewhere…