Hah!

anonemouse · March 7, 2007

Apparently, the evangelicals aren't happy with Guiliani being divorced. And from what I've read, they are worrying that McCain is a little too wishy-washy for their tastes and they're not sure he is really respectful of true conservatives.

I hate to say this, but it looks like they're just going to have to suck it up, no matter which candidate they go for. Those two (IMO) are probably the only ones that would have half a chance at actually winning the Presidency. Well, Mitt Romney might, but he's Mormon, so the evangelicals won't be happy with him, either. Looks like either way, they aren't going to very happy.:rolleyes

faithmd · March 7, 2007

Frankly I was shocked the mud hadn't started to be slung against Rudy yet. Not only is he divorced, he technically had an extra-marital affair and is on what, wife number three?

I am also shocked the mud hasn't been truly slung yet about Hilary having been a Republican in a former life. And a staunch one at that.

Elections are better than a soap opera, Britney should have waited a few months to have her breakdown, no one would have taken notice once the primaries start. And when they start seriously investigating Howard K. Stern in the deaths of Daniel and Anna Nicole, no one will know about it because we'll be too busy sifting through the political rhetoric.

musicalmomma · March 7, 2007

Let's face it, evangelicals and the like (I am the like) have had to choose between the lesser of two evils for MANY moons now!! I guess I'm considered a bad evangelical, because while I believe we all must fight for our rights as believers, and I vote according to my values, and I believe in being well informed. BUT, I also believe that this country is getting exactly what it asks for. We are a country torn and no one political leader is responsible for that. People want what they want regardless of the moral implications. We've become so tolerant of everything that we stand for nothing. The only thing we stand for is tolerance, and it is impossible for everyone to be tolerant of every thing. What has all this tolerance and so called political correctness brought us to? More fighting and unrest than ever before in our nation. People LOVE to fight and argue, from the play ground, to the war zone, it's so evident. I will always stand for what I believe in and support the candidate closest to my values, but I won't force my opions on others, it's futile and only stirs more unrest and arguing.

Tired_Old_Man · March 7, 2007

Frankly I was shocked the mud hadn't started to be slung against Rudy yet. Not only is he divorced, he technically had an extra-marital affair and is on what, wife number three?
I am also shocked the mud hasn't been truly slung yet about Hilary having been a Republican in a former life. And a staunch one at that.

Elections are better than a soap opera, Britney should have waited a few months to have her breakdown, no one would have taken notice once the primaries start. And when they start seriously investigating Howard K. Stern in the deaths of Daniel and Anna Nicole, no one will know about it because we'll be too busy sifting through the political rhetoric.

I love how the the leaders of Christian Right Political Movement forget their Christian values when they smell blood; the blood of victory that is.

In the 2000 presidential campaign, I saw Ralph Reed, Director of the “Christian Coalition”, on a Sunday Morning political TV talk show. Mr. Reed told the shows moderator that he could guarantee that George W. BuSh would win the 2000 election. When asked how, he explained that his people were telling their congregations that no matter what BuSh said to attract voters from the middle of the political spectrum (Independents, moderate Republicans and moderate Democrats), he would do the things that the Conservative Christians wanted him to do when elected. When queried on the lying (by BuSh) that would be required to do that, Mr. Reed had no problem with the lying because it was necessary for victory. I guess Christian Politicians are Politicians first. Maybe Politicians only.

The (Un)Christian (Never)Right Political Movement (as I refer to it) faces that same problem again in the 2008 election. Do they stick to their Christian principles or do they stick to their "need to win at any cost" principles.

Need I tell you where my money goes?

Carlene · March 7, 2007

I am also shocked the mud hasn't been truly slung yet about Hilary having been a Republican in a former life. And a staunch one at that.

I don't think that's a secret. Nor does it bother many Liberals, myself included. A Conservative Democrat (or a Liberal Republican) might be the best thing to come along in....oh, about 8 years.

Tired_Old_Man · March 8, 2007

Barry Goldwater, the father of the Conservative movement in the USA, today might be considered a Liberal by the Neo-Cons and Christians who have high-jacked the "Party of Lincoln".

The only reason that I, (today) a Liberal Democrat (about 3 paces to the left of either of the Clinton's), did not vote for Goldwater in 1964 was that I was 17 months too young.

Party names and idealogical names have morphed mightily during the past few years and greatly over the past 4 decades.

bitteroldhag · March 10, 2007

Jack -- You sound like Ambrose Bierce who was a writer in the 19th century. "The Devil's Dictionary" is hilarious. Plus ca change, plus ca le meme chose. Sorry I can't get the little s under the c's. But that's French for "the more things change, the more they stay the same" which you probably already know.

I am opting for Obama at the moment though I really like Richardson. I think it might be a good thing for us to have a president who is not from a political dynasty and who is actually intelligent which is why I like Obama. I like Richardson because he has lots of experience and is intelligent though I suspect he's an old line politician. But I'm a major fan of Jim Webb who is tough as hell and doesn't pull punches. He says what I want to say. Too bad I don't live in Virginia. I'm stuck in Oklahoma which has the two craziest senators in the nation according to DailyKos. I agree with the vote. Our senators seem to be from another planet though they do provide a lot of humor for us. After all, a Democratic candidate from here suggested we test books for how well they protect students from gunshots. So they shot at some books and the shooter was so terrible he missed from about 8 feet with a shotgun. I think I could hit the dang thing from 8 feet and I can't shoot a shotgun. But I like the idea that has been showing up on DailyKos about western democratic libertarians. I don't know about the coast, but people on this side of the Rockies just would like for the government to butt out on a lot of issues. We are very independent and not especially community minded, so I think a lot of us are republican or democratic libertarians. My brother, the family NRA mouthpiece, is a republican libertarian, and I'm a democratic libertarian. What do you all think of that idea, guys?

Tired_Old_Man · March 10, 2007

Jack -- You sound like Ambrose Bierce who was a writer in the 19th century. "The Devil's Dictionary" is hilarious. Plus ca change, plus ca le meme chose. Sorry I can't get the little s under the c's. But that's French for "the more things change, the more they stay the same" which you probably already know.
I am opting for Obama at the moment though I really like Richardson. I think it might be a good thing for us to have a president who is not from a political dynasty and who is actually intelligent which is why I like Obama. I like Richardson because he has lots of experience and is intelligent though I suspect he's an old line politician. But I'm a major fan of Jim Webb who is tough as hell and doesn't pull punches. He says what I want to say. Too bad I don't live in Virginia. I'm stuck in Oklahoma which has the two craziest senators in the nation according to DailyKos. I agree with the vote. Our senators seem to be from another planet though they do provide a lot of humor for us. After all, a Democratic candidate from here suggested we test books for how well they protect students from gunshots. So they shot at some books and the shooter was so terrible he missed from about 8 feet with a shotgun. I think I could hit the dang thing from 8 feet and I can't shoot a shotgun. But I like the idea that has been showing up on DailyKos about western democratic libertarians. I don't know about the coast, but people on this side of the Rockies just would like for the government to butt out on a lot of issues. We are very independent and not especially community minded, so I think a lot of us are republican or democratic libertarians. My brother, the family NRA mouthpiece, is a republican libertarian, and I'm a democratic libertarian. What do you all think of that idea, guys?

How about a Pragmatic Libertarian?

MarySue33 · March 10, 2007

You're right...Britney and Howard K. Stern pale in comparison to what we will be seeing over the next 18 months.

And when they start seriously investigating Howard K. Stern in the deaths of Daniel and Anna Nicole, no one will know about it because we'll be too busy sifting through the political rhetoric.

Not meaning to hijack this thread...but has anyone else noticed how much Howard K. Stern looks like Quagmire, the lecherous neighbor from "Family Guy"?

Carlene · March 10, 2007

I don't know about the coast, but people on this side of the Rockies just would like for the government to butt out on a lot of issues. We are very independent and not especially community minded, so I think a lot of us are republican or democratic libertarians.

Texans are notoriously suspicious of government. We allow our state legislators to meet only once every two years. We figure if they met more often, they'd just cause more trouble.

bitteroldhag · March 15, 2007

I lilke the idea of pragmatic libertarian. I may change brands and become one.

bitteroldhag · March 15, 2007

Texans are notoriously suspicious of government. We allow our state legislators to meet only once every two years. We figure if they met more often, they'd just cause more trouble.

In Oklahoma we actually let them meet every year which is lunacy. I think if they meet every 4 years that would be enough. Maybe every 8 years. In fact, I'm not sure they need to meet at all. I'm a big believer in plebiscites. Let's just have plebiscites every 4 to 8 years. That way we plebs get to have a say.