New Testingstan

Aaron wrote:Rob Fox seems pretty spot on, to be honest

weemadando wrote:Your party has issues when if someone says "The rape guy lost" you have to ask "which one". But of course it's because women are uncontrollable lust monsters who dream about black cock that they voted against you, not because you're evil fucks who want to roll back the clock on every right they've won.

nightwatch2 wrote:That is utter BS (says this Republican White Hispanic). Susan Martinez, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindahl, Rice, etc. We have lots of minorities and it is a vile, despicable lie of the Democrat Left to claim the Republican Party is a party of old white men. That kind of BS is playing right into the hands of the lunatic left and deranged MSNBC fringe.

Now, having said that, to some extent your prescription is correct to a point, that point being that we have to explain in much better terms and very clearly why conservative values are everyone's values. Much of the various block group values are much closer to the conservative values than to the leftist drivel articulated iin the Democrat Party Platform and it makes no sense why various groups vote against their own interests,
but they do because they've been told to. Ethnics politics is a vile dead end and belongs in the gutter from whence it came.

Poohbah wrote:Last night, I went to bed thinking "let it burn."

Now I say: "Burn it down." Withdraw your labor, end your consumption, and revoke your ratification of your servitude.

If America wants to go to Hell this badly, I say shove 'em into the express elevator, weld the door shut, shoot off the emergency brakes, and cut the cable.

Aaron wrote:How much of the decline in quality of life, jobs and earnings for blacks are the result of disasterous policies of the past 30 years, the same policies that are still destroying those for everyone? We all know that blacks have gotten the shaft since before the USA existed. How much is actually Obama's fault?

And if the black community refuses to address these concerns, does anyone think the white elite will?

edgeplay_cgo wrote:It may well be. I need to decide whether there is enough hope left to continue to try to set up my business, or just fire my employees, try to sell my equipment, and find a doctor who will put me on disability.

I can work under the table, and become a leech.

Theodore wrote:You know, part of me would love if, just once, the Republican candidate would respond in kind. Remind the Democrats that they're the party of pot-smoking, baby-killing hippies. They want a culture war, let's have a culture war.

But then I remember that we're the adults here and we can't do that.

shernpotter wrote:My wife agreed with what Mourdock said, just not how he said it. I concur with her, and we both voted for him. Only people completely ignorant of the bible and how God acts would take issue with what he said. In fact, God does use bad people and things to His purposes all the time. And Mourdock never said it was "God's Will" that a woman be raped, only that the pregnancy resulting from it might have been God's will, and that person was worth keeping. That person, the child of rape, might become the person who cures cancer. We just don't know. Believe me, the Dems played that clip ad nauseum here in Indiana, so I heard it ALL THE FREAKING TIME. Joe Donnelly, the guy who won, was and is a party hack from way back, and a crook. Nearly every thing he said during the campaign was a lie. I have known Richard Mourdock personally for six years. He is a stand up guy, and quite principled.

What Akin said was indeed stupid, and showed his ignorance on an issue. However, it was one peripheral issue, but since the Dems pretty much wholly own the media, that was all it took. McCaskill is pretty much the queen of stupid, but this issue won out over real things of importance to people like taxes and jobs. Let the fates of Mourdock and Akin be a warning to GOP candidates - do not elucidate, just answer a question concisely and briefly. The media are never your friend.

I know that more than a few of you on here will take issue with what I say here about Mourdock, but devout Christians understood what he was saying. He should have just clammed up after simply saying he was pro-life. Both Mourdock and Akin were taken to task by Neal Boortz this morning on his show, and quite rightly. However, Boortz then lost me by saying as soon as he got back to Florida he was changing his party affiliation back to Libertarian. He only changed it to vote in the Florida Primary for Marco Rubio (Good choice that). It's his choice to do so, but it makes your vote irrelevant. I am sorry, but it is true. Unless and until a real, viable, useful conservative third party rises from the grass roots, a vote for third parties especially when it is Libertarian is a vote for irrelevance and in fact helps the Dems. Most Libertarians would be otherwise Repbulicans, all things being equal. All the Lib votes in the Mourdock-Donnelly smashup could have still put Mourdock over the top or closer to it.

Gands wrote:Quickly, someone invent Rush Limbaugh!

David Newton wrote:Another thing that boggled my mind about this election was the stories of hours of queueing to vote. We did have some problems list during the last UK general election, but previously it had not happened on a large scale. There are clearly not enough voting slots in polling stations in the US. Something that I suspect might well not help is the massive combination of things that get voted for during US general elections. Mandating that federal and state/local elections take place in different years might be a help with that, with ballot initiatives etc only allowed during state/local election years.

Quackustra wrote:Dude literally thinks that liberals never do any kind of work for anybody.

Winston Smith wrote:So the Senate elections brought you guys your first Hindu and Buddhist Senators. Thoughts?

Waarthog wrote:Yawn. So what? Is there a reason this should matter?

Nightwatch2 wrote:I find it incredibly amusing that it is only the leftists/socialists class warfare lemmings who worry about that sort of stuff, as if any of it made the slightest bit of difference.

It always seems to be the secularist defenders of freedom from religion who worry about what faith someone is in a country that (used to) has freedom of religion and seem to think that it is the conservatives who actually uphold The Constitution (rather than subvert it) who would have a problem with it.

So what?

Who cares?

Of what relevance is that to the price of tea in China?

just out of idle curiousity, who are they?

Winston Smith wrote:I'm not worried, I think it's interesting how, at long last, the US legislative branch is starting to reflect the ethno-religious make up of the USA.

The Admiral wrote:Winston, do you realize how incredibly dumb that remark is on so many levels?

Rob Herrick wrote:It's Mazie Hirono and Tulsi Gabbard, both Democrats and both from Hawaii.

As for their religion, who the (expletive deleted) cares? It's like fuss about the new openly gay members of Congress. Nobody gives a damn, Winston, what box you check on the census - and it's insulting as all hell to put that in any kind of political context, because it hankers back to the tribal us vs. them crap most of us got on a boat or a plane to get away from.

What matters is what's between your ears and how you use it, and it's a major failing of this country - perpetuated by the Left - that you have to have people who look like you to admire, and that you have to elect or appoint people of group X for them to be "signs of dharmic communities being accepted in the country," to quote Anju Bhargava, founder of Hindu American Seva Charities. "It's all about inclusion and acceptance. The feeling that my faith and my people are accepted. Ultimately, politics comes down to 'how does it impact me?' or 'how am I included?' It will mean so much for the upcoming generations of Hindus and Buddhists."

It's Grade A bullhockey. You're included because your government works for you, whether they (or you) look like Admiral Togo, Colonel Sanders, or Marvin the Martian.

Rob Herrick wrote:Nah, but we could require everybody who wants to run to pass the State citizenship proficiency test. I suspect many folks now in office (including POTUS and VPOTUS) would fail.