Recognition of the DEMOCRAT RELIGION

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bfrd8vRBla4&feature=player_embedded

That is one articulate guy. and, brimming with confidence!

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

C,mon heathens of the board, give 'er a whirl. He's just one of them Christians. You can laugh, and point fingers, knowing he's wrong as can be.

[yermom]

the question is, which *******s bother you the least?

[yermom]

and this guy would fit right in on this board ;)

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

and this guy would fit right in on this board ;)with you screaming and yelling at him, and calling Him America's greatest enemy.

[yermom]

i didn't say i'd welcome him...

[KantoSooner]

I wonder if I could get Heathenism listed as a religion?

I could then write off my house as a house-of-worship, my salary as a religious donation and have some really cool ceremonies of initiation for young women.

Maybe some neat hats and t-shirts, too. (Available through mailorder from our gift shop. Tax free).

This is shaping up.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I wonder if I could get Heathenism listed as a religion?

I could then write off my house as a house-of-worship, my salary as a religious donation and have some really cool ceremonies of initiation for young women.

Maybe some neat hats and t-shirts, too. (Available through mailorder from our gift shop. Tax free).

This is shaping up.no shiite! You could go third party, too, and charm some votes away from the democrats.

[KantoSooner]

Possible, but I'd probably just end up siphoning votes away from the Libertarians.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Possible, but I'd probably just end up siphoning votes away from the Libertarians.The Libertarians, or comparable, will always help the democrats at the polls. If they make the libertarian candidate prominent at the debates, which I think they will, it will help the Obear, as usual.

[KantoSooner]

Has it ever ocurred to you that, when faced with a choice between an economic centralized planner and a guy who wants to lend governmental force to antediluvian, church-based social rules, that some of us might say, '**** it, I'm going to vote for someone who actually believes in a small, limited government'?
If, as you say, it's the end of the world and the sky is falling, I'll at least have gone on record as voting against both the levellers and the beedles and in favor of liberty.

Take the church-lady jack-assery out of the Republican party and you can have my vote back, just the same way you enjoyed it for the last eight presidential elections.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Has it ever ocurred to you that, when faced with a choice between an economic centralized planner and a guy who wants to lend governmental force to antediluvian, church-based social rules, that some of us might say, '**** it, I'm going to vote for someone who actually believes in a small, limited government'?
If, as you say, it's the end of the world and the sky is falling, I'll at least have gone on record as voting against both the levellers and the beedles and in favor of liberty.

Take the church-lady jack-assery out of the Republican party and you can have my vote back, just the same way you enjoyed it for the last eight presidential elections.Someone who wants to vote perceived conservative 3rd party either wants to have the democrat reelected, or is a bit short of logic. It IS basic math, AND a political ploy. I'm sure the dems are DELIGHTED to have the 3rd party perceived conservative around. Divide and conquer works. Basic math and politics combined. So, if you're REALLY willing for America to take it in the shorts for at least 4 more years, and accept socialized medicine for our once-great country, you cast that 3rd party vote.

[KantoSooner]

I wouldn't have voted for Mussolini just to have my train run on time.

Still, you can comfort yourself knowing that Oklahoma's electoral votes are safely in Mitt's mitts.

I hope that somewhere in Repub Central, a light goes on sometime after November in which a bright boy or girl says, "Hey, we can't really be for freedom when we seek to invade our citizens' lives and impose sectarian mores. Golly! How did we get here?" (perhaps I hope for too much in the way of logic and background reading, but I'm a glass half-full kind of guy.)

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I wouldn't have voted for Mussolini just to have my train run on time.

Good comparison(assuming there is SOMETHING the Obear "administration" does that you like). Don't do anything to help Benito Obama get reelected.

[KantoSooner]

Rush,
You see, that's the logic I wrestled with and finally rejected: I am NOT going to engage in some tortured justification to vote for someone I really don't like and don't want to see as president. And that includes Obama and Romney. And, frankly, I don't see the damage that Obama is likely to do as being significantly worse than what Romney is likely to wreak. It's a ****ing mess either way you cut it.
I'll vote for someone who's at least closer to my beliefs and, if he's a minor candidate and stands efffectively zero chance of victory, so what? My opinions in our national debate will be more accurately registered than were I to vote 'least bad option' and have that party be erroneously encouraged in their wooly political thinking.

And you know what? In the days since I came to this conclusion, I've felt increasingly comfortable with it; and that's generally a sign that I've made a good choice for me.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Rush,
You see, that's the logic I wrestled with and finally rejected: I am NOT going to engage in some tortured justification to vote for someone I really don't like and don't want to see as president. And that includes Obama and Romney. And, frankly, I don't see the damage that Obama is likely to do as being significantly worse than what Romney is likely to wreak. It's a ****ing mess either way you cut it.
I'll vote for someone who's at least closer to my beliefs and, if he's a minor candidate and stands efffectively zero chance of victory, so what? My opinions in our national debate will be more accurately registered than were I to vote 'least bad option' and have that party be erroneously encouraged in their wooly political thinking.

And you know what? In the days since I came to this conclusion, I've felt increasingly comfortable with it; and that's generally a sign that I've made a good choice for me.Just lodge somewhere in the back of your mind that you gave the okay for reelection of the worst president in our history, or at least since Woodrow Wilson, and at the same time, the first anti-American president.
RIP.

[KantoSooner]

I was unaware that James Earl Carter was on the ballot or had any real chance at victory.

[KantoSooner]

And calm yourself, if ole Hemmoroid Lips has somehow gotten onto the ballot, there's no chance in hell I'd vote for him.

[soonercruiser]

I wouldn't have voted for Mussolini just to have my train run on time.

Who's kiddin' who here?
If he was a liberal Demoncrat, you sure would have!
And, like today, even if the trains were all broken!

[KantoSooner]

I am sorry, your statement makes no sense.

I have evinced an interest in debating the different options available on healthcare and expressed my opinion that what we had before ACA was not working especially well and had nothing to do with a free market.

Where do you get 'liberal Democrat' from that?

Go read J.S. Mills 'On Liberty', the foundational philosophical text for modern (as opposed to Burkean) conservativism. Then read F. A. Hayek's little gem 'The Road To Serfdom' which is the anti-Keynesian touchstone. Finally sit down by yourself, in a quiet room, and think about how in the world you get a religiously, culturally diverse group of people with hugely disparate interests to live together in a reasonable degree of peace and satisfaction.

I believe you get to the conclusion that minimally invasive government is the best solution. But, it's politics, not religion, and requires a certain degree of common sense and flexibility.

Feel free to fire back with sound bites and untethered bullet points.

Cheers.

[yermom]

I am sorry, your statement makes no sense.

I have evinced an interest in debating the different options available on healthcare and expressed my opinion that what we had before ACA was not working especially well and had nothing to do with a free market.

Where do you get 'liberal Democrat' from that?

Go read J.S. Mills 'On Liberty', the foundational philosophical text for modern (as opposed to Burkean) conservativism. Then read F. A. Hayek's little gem 'The Road To Serfdom' which is the anti-Keynesian touchstone. Finally sit down by yourself, in a quiet room, and think about how in the world you get a religiously, culturally diverse group of people with hugely disparate interests to live together in a reasonable degree of peace and satisfaction.

I believe you get to the conclusion that minimally invasive government is the best solution. But, it's politics, not religion, and requires a certain degree of common sense and flexibility.

Feel free to fire back with sound bites and untethered bullet points.

Cheers.

only a Demoncrat would want "a religiously, culturally diverse group of people with hugely disparate interests to live together in a reasonable degree of peace and satisfaction"

[KantoSooner]

Really? And here I thought that the Republicans were running a Mormon and a Catholic on the ticket this year. Guess I missed the memo when the candidates were changed.

[Skysooner]

only a Demoncrat would want "a religiously, culturally diverse group of people with hugely disparate interests to live together in a reasonable degree of peace and satisfaction"

I actually thought this described America in the 1800s and early 1900s.

[yermom]

i think we have found a couple more Demoncrats.

get a rope!

[KantoSooner]

I actually thought this described America in the 1800s and early 1900s.

It describes almost any random group of more than 25 people. But let's not let that get in the way of a good shriek of authoritariian rage from the Barney Fifes.