See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #101
   On February 28th, 2009 at 9:15 am, happyscrapper said:

   On February 28th, 2009 at 12:25 am, PKAmmoTroop said:

   Bravo…well said!

2. #102
   On February 28th, 2009 at 9:15 am, twofoot said:

   So you all support the marriage/civil unions for your fellow gay conservatives ?

   First, they aren’t my fellow gay conservatives. They are my fellow conservatives who happen to be gay. Same with my fellow conservatives who happen to be black, or white, or polka dotted.

   Second, I have more important things to worry about than what two adults are doing in their own home. Society certainly has an interest in who is raising children. But other than that, who a person finds love with is who they find love with.

   How many of you support their right to serve in military ?

   Having spent some of the absolute best years of my life as one of Uncle Sams Misguided Children, and being a something of a student of military history, I can say beyond doubt there have always been gays in the military. Surely you aren’t trying to argue that gays or bisexuals make substandard warriors?

   Again, as long as it is not in the open and forced on everyone as a social experiment, I couldn’t care less.

   I have more important things to worry about than who is bedding who. Like making sure this nation doesn’t race headlong into a socialist rebirth.

   I would suggest that people like you are a contributing factor to that headlong dash towards socialism. By concentrating so hard on the sex lives and pigment of others you slap those in the face who share the same general ideals. You slap those in the face that are trying to fight the same fight.

   And why? Because they don’t look like you. Because they found love with someone you disapprove of.

   “A house diveded cannot stand.” That goes not just for the nation, but for the conservative movement as well. How long have those on the right condemned those on the left for identity politics? Well, you’re doing the same d@mn thing.

   American first, conservative second, the rest is just details.

3. #103
   On February 28th, 2009 at 9:18 am, twofoot said:

   You are a troll, aren’t you? Trying to make conservatives look like fools? That has to be it! NO ONE who claims to be a Christian Conservative would truly think that way or actually defend that position.

   Started thinking the same thing last night. The things that have been said seem more like they are designed to get someone to say something that can be used against them than any sort of reasoned argument.

4. #104
   On February 28th, 2009 at 9:28 am, happyscrapper said:

   I really think that trolls who pretend to be intolerant “conservative christians” just to make us look bad should be banned from this site. As long as we know someone is a troll, I say, let them speak. But someone who comes on here to sabbotage the conservative movement should not be given a voice here. Just my opion.

5. #105
   On February 28th, 2009 at 9:28 am, happyscrapper said:

   opion=opinion. Sorry.

6. #106
   On February 28th, 2009 at 9:32 am, Kent18 said:

   There is only one true God and one true religion.

   Haven’t they extradited you yet?

7. #107
   On February 28th, 2009 at 9:35 am, Kevin K. said:

   I endorse what twofoot said in #102. (Sorry about the Misguided Children, but that’s for inter-military fun at another time and/or thread.)

   What we are saying,usa_usa, is that one does not have to have one particular set of religious beliefs to be a conservative. Conservatism is worldly–Ceasar’s–which can make or doing God’s work easier. It does not rely on a particular interpretation of what God requires of us to get closer to Him.

   Sorry I can’t chat about this longer, but I get to spend most of today with my goddaughter and I have to go now.

8. #108
   On February 28th, 2009 at 10:04 am, mxtr said:

   re:#107. Well, I’m conservative AND I practice Nichiren Buddhism.
   It’s interesting how Buddhism is mostly viewed as for hippie, peace-loving, liberal types, but with its reverence for life it complements my pro-life views.

9. #109
   On February 28th, 2009 at 10:14 am, John Deaux said:

   On February 28th, 2009 at 2:21 am, usa_usa said:

   So you all support the marriage/civil unions for your fellow gay conservatives ? How many of you support their right to serve in military ?

   Gay marriage isn’t about gay rights. It’s about weakening religion’s place in our country and using gay rights as cover. Once gay marriage is legal, churchs can be forced into performng them against their beliefs or stop performing weddings at all.

   As far as the military, twofoot summed it up better than I ever could.

10. #110
    On February 28th, 2009 at 11:09 am, frontierguy said:

    I just watched the video and am still laughing. The only conclusion is that because it was nothing more than a conservative bashing by using Rush as the lead example, these people are scared. I think, as Garafolo would put it, they know that their ideas are losers. Garafalo and Olbermann are looking forward to being elites in a country full of common folk dependent on government handouts and they do not want to lose the possible edge. See, I can psychoanalyze too. Since Garafalo does have a self-loathing issue, she needs the shield of being a celebrity and she thinks that while the spending bill is pushing more and more people into lower class it elevates her class. Oh yeah, stockholm syndrome dig, no one has stockholm syndrome like liberals. They want Muslims to love them so much it is an obsession. That was pure projection on the part of Garafalo. Anyway, it was pure comedy gold. What a$$hats.

11. #111
    On February 28th, 2009 at 11:16 am, Kent18 said:

    Garafalo does have a self-loathing issue

    For good and sufficient reason, methinks.

12. #112
    On February 28th, 2009 at 11:20 am, sambo said:

    fighterDC said:
    is that garafalo or octomom?

    I don’t think even a doctor would try to impregnate her!

13. #113
    On February 28th, 2009 at 11:28 am, cabrerski said:

    I find this conversation of gay/Christian/conservative very interesting. I believe that everybody can be divided into a number of subsets based on their beliefs. I think there is a large subset of Christians that can be divided into conservatives, moderates, liberals, and whack jobs (right and left).

    In the conservative subset, there are Christians, Jewish, Muslims, and atheists. Surprisingly there are also gays, straights, transgendered, etc. Even more surprisingly (to some), the liberal subset is also made up of people with these characteristics.

    The point is: when you try to put a single label on people, you may be surprised that your particular group is made up of other people that may not share all of your values.

    If you are a conservative, that’s great. But please don’t assume that everyone else is a Southern Baptist (for example). And please don’t hijack conservatism as something only you and people exactly like you own.

    Webster says: Main Entry: con·ser·va·tism
    Pronunciation: \kən-ˈsər-və-ˌti-zəm\
    a: disposition in politics to preserve what is established b: a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change ; specifically : such a philosophy calling for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (as retirement income or health-care coverage).

    Nothing in there about sexual preference or religion, just about the direction that people believe their government should take.

14. #114
    On February 28th, 2009 at 11:31 am, sambo said:

    undresiege said:
    Here’s a serious problem the GOP faces. They simply won’t be able to get more than 5% tops of the black vote in 2012. .

    You forgot Acorn, the 2010 census, and corruption. And then DC will have 2 senators.

15. #115
    On February 28th, 2009 at 11:58 am, happyscrapper said:

    On February 28th, 2009 at 11:28 am, cabrerski said:

    Wow…that says it all! Thank you for the great clarification. I can close down this thread, confident that the matter has been nicely cleared up! You rock!

16. #116
    On February 28th, 2009 at 12:00 pm, happyscrapper said:

    undresiege said:
    Here’s a serious problem the GOP faces. They simply won’t be able to get more than 5% tops of the black vote in 2012. .

    On February 28th, 2009 at 11:31 am, sambo said:
    You forgot Acorn, the 2010 census, and corruption. And then DC will have 2 senators.

    So, I think what I am hearing from you is…we are screwed. You got that right!

17. #117
    On February 28th, 2009 at 1:31 pm, Elm Creek Smith said:

    No true Christian can believe that all religions are equal. There is only one true God and one true religion.

    O-o-o-o-o-kay. A classmate at the Armor Officer Advanced Course at Fort Knox suffered silently through another’s rant about Roman Catholics and everyone else who didn’t go to his church going to Hell and “Papist” this and “Papist” that. Well, Chris grew tired of it and said to the fellow, “I’m Roman Catholic. To which particular heresy do you ascribe?” It stopped the idiot in mid-rant while everyone else laughed.

    You may have your own ideas about religion, and you’re welcome to them. But going on a rant about “[O]ne true God and one true religion” puts you on the same level as the Islamofascists who want us to convert or die.

    Beating others up about their religious beliefs is just bad manners.

    Hope is not a plan; not all change is good. The resistance is here; the resistance is now.

    ECS

18. #118
    On February 28th, 2009 at 2:22 pm, right4life said:

    But let’s stick to Christianity for the moment. Which sect? They don’t all believe the same way, let alone worship in the same manner. Trinitarian or unitarian understanding of God? Saved by Grace, or by Deeds? Etc.

    if you’re not trinitarian, you’re not a christian…if you’re not saved by grace, you’re not a christian.

19. #119
    On February 28th, 2009 at 2:35 pm, right4life said:

    Again, as long as it is not in the open and forced on everyone as a social experiment, I couldn’t care less.

    what do you think the gay movement is all about? forcing their views upon the rest of us. their ‘tolerance’ is a one way street, and soon anyone who disagrees with them…thinks ‘incorrectly’ will be a criminal…

20. #120
    On February 28th, 2009 at 2:38 pm, cabrerski said:

    On February 28th, 2009 at 2:22 pm, right4life said:
    if you’re not trinitarian, you’re not a christian…if you’re not saved by grace, you’re not a christian.

    OK, I’ll bite…but just for the record, please ascertain or confirm for us which aspect of Christianity do you find to be the One True Way? And does this mean that all other denominations of Protestant and Catholism are doomed in Hell for all eternity? Not looking to ridicule, just looking for clarification in your arguments.

21. #121
    On February 28th, 2009 at 2:43 pm, Jeddite said:

    It might come as a shock to some people here, but just as not all Christians are Fred Phelps, not all homosexuals are the screeching chorus of harpies that nest in San Francisco. Or Anthony Romero.

22. #122
    On February 28th, 2009 at 2:49 pm, Thomas B. said:

    Liberals are too dumb to come up with a cogent argument so they just name call. What gets me is that it’s stated by a lily white liberal who never had minority friends growing up. A true bourgeoisie idiot: white, privileged, and liberal. For all you idiot liberals, I’ll tell you why I’m a minority and conservative, because liberalism is a sham. Pure and simple… liberalism is nothing more than a boot on the neck of minorities. Liberals have no interest in actually giving opportunity to minorities, they are only interested in tokenism. If liberals actually gave minorities opportunity, then they would lose their captive audience and political power. No liberal gave me true opportunity, but more than a few conservatives have. Example, in the liberal legal community of Seattle, over 90% of the partners of major law firms are white males; yet in the conservative military, the next three boss in my chain of command were minorities, including the Brigadier General. Liberals engage in tokenism, Conservative engage in opportunity. Liberals engage in words, Conservative engage in action. Pure and simple. So how is that “self loathing” thing work again? Are you sure that it’s just not white liberals that “self loath”?

23. #123
    On February 28th, 2009 at 3:06 pm, cabrerski said:

    On February 28th, 2009 at 2:49 pm, Thomas B. said:

    Thank you, my brother…and can we get an “Amen” from the choir!?!

    Well said, soldier!

24. #124
    On February 28th, 2009 at 3:30 pm, RetFireman said:

    Yup! Had everything to do with the color of her skin. Condi, were it not for her being black, would have NEVER got to where she was on her own. Hell, it’s a wonder she was able to tie her own shoes.

    You, sir, should change your ironic nick as noone who is as much a racist and bigot could ever call themselves that with a straight face.
    

    Biography: Academic, Republican politician. Born November 14, 1954 in Birmingham, Alabama. The only child of a Presbyterian minister and a teacher, Rice grew up surrounded by racism in the segregated South. She earned her bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Denver in 1974; her master’s from the University of Notre Dame in 1975; and her Ph.D. from the Graduate School of International Studies at the University of Denver in 1981. She joined Stanford University as a political science professor in 1981. In 1993, she was the first woman and first African American to become a Stanford provost, a post she held for six years.

    In the mid-1980s, Rice spent a period in Washington as an international affairs fellow attached to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In 1989, she became director of Soviet and East European affairs with the National Security Council and special assistant to George Bush during the dissolution of the Soviet Union and German reunification. In 1997, she served on the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender-Integrated Training in the Military

25. #125
    On February 28th, 2009 at 3:32 pm, RetFireman said:

    What is disgusting, that Liberals can actually claim people like Condi, Powell and Steele got to where they are simply on the basis of their skin, but Obama did it because he is just sooo smart and talented and NEVER had ANYTHING to do with the color of his skin, especially his getting elected.

    Thanks for once again showing everyone just what hypocrites you all are.

26. #126
    On February 28th, 2009 at 4:39 pm, Salt said:

    On February 28th, 2009 at 9:18 am, twofoot said:

    You are a troll, aren’t you? Trying to make conservatives look like fools? That has to be it! NO ONE who claims to be a Christian Conservative would truly think that way or actually defend that position.

    Started thinking the same thing last night. The things that have been said seem more like they are designed to get someone to say something that can be used against them than any sort of reasoned argument.

    I’ve wondered this from several of his posts as well. This is why I was curious about his statement about Jindal.

    He strikes me as a concern sockpuppet variety of troll. I wouldn’t be shocked if his comments were being pasted elsewhere on liberals blogs as evidence of conservative “intolerance”.

27. #127
    On February 28th, 2009 at 7:06 pm, right4life said:

    OK, I’ll bite…but just for the record, please ascertain or confirm for us which aspect of Christianity do you find to be the One True Way? And does this mean that all other denominations of Protestant and Catholism are doomed in Hell for all eternity? Not looking to ridicule, just looking for clarification in your arguments.

    uh christianity is the one true way. this talk about ‘which denomination is doomed for hell’ is ridiculous. denominations are not saved or damned, individuals are.

    Christianity does actually mean something…its not a roll-your-own new age type of religion. all christians believe in:

    1) Trinity, the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and there is One God.

    2) Salvation by faith though grace by the finished work on the cross. its not what we do, its what HE did….

    3) Jesus is going to return bodily, and we will be resurrected in a new body, to life everlasting.

    4) the bible is the inspired word of God.

    5) there is a heaven to gain, and a hell to shun…and yes there is a judgement for all men.

    thats basically it. those who reject these things are not christians by definition. its not really that hard.

28. #128
    On February 28th, 2009 at 7:08 pm, right4life said:

    and of course there is salvation in no other name under heaven, other than Jesus.

29. #129
    On February 28th, 2009 at 7:16 pm, usa_usa said:

    Ok guys. you win. I understand that Gays can be conservative, Atheists can be conservative. There are even pro choice conservatives, pro Obama conservative and even green conservatives. If Arnold can be a republican, everyone one else is welcome too.

    We are a big tent movement now. No wonder we keep coming up with nominees like Mccain.

30. #130
    On February 28th, 2009 at 7:23 pm, right4life said:

    We are a big tent movement now. No wonder we keep coming up with nominees like Mccain.

    sad but true…its why they’ve trashed conservatism, and given over america to the fascists…and we will never recover…

    conservatism is dead as a political philosophy in this country…

31. #131
    On February 28th, 2009 at 7:25 pm, MtsEdge said:

    On February 28th, 2009 at 7:06 pm, right4life said:
    OK, I’ll bite…but just for the record, please ascertain or confirm for us which aspect of Christianity do you find to be the One True Way? And does this mean that all other denominations of Protestant and Catholism are doomed in Hell for all eternity? Not looking to ridicule, just looking for clarification in your arguments.
    uh christianity is the one true way. this talk about ‘which denomination is doomed for hell’ is ridiculous. denominations are not saved or damned, individuals are.

    Christianity does actually mean something…its not a roll-your-own new age type of religion. all christians believe in:

    1) Trinity, the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and there is One God.

    2) Salvation by faith though grace by the finished work on the cross. its not what we do, its what HE did….

    3) Jesus is going to return bodily, and we will be resurrected in a new body, to life everlasting.

    4) the bible is the inspired word of God.

    5) there is a heaven to gain, and a hell to shun…and yes there is a judgement for all men.

    thats basically it. those who reject these things are not christians by definition. its not really that hard.

    #127On February 28th, 2009 at 7:08 pm, right4life said:
    and of course there is salvation in no other name under heaven, other than Jesus.

    right4life, once again, right on! It frustrates me so much when Christianity is confused with a particular religion. Either we have accepted the fact that we are sinners, and fall short of the glory of God, or we reject that truth in favor of our eternal damnation. It’s everyone’s individual choice, and not the domain of a “denomination” but of a person’s own heart. End of story.

32. #132
    On February 28th, 2009 at 7:32 pm, right4life said:

    right4life, once again, right on!

    thank you my friend!

33. #133
    On February 28th, 2009 at 7:35 pm, MtsEdge said:

    r4l, you’re welcome. Keep up the good fight.

34. #134
    On February 28th, 2009 at 8:19 pm, Speakup said:

    Minority conservatives hold a special place of gutter contempt in the minds of unhinged liberals, who can never accept the radical concept of a person of color rejecting identity politics.

    The haters have it bass-ackwards. In fact, “self-loathing” minorities love themselves, their families, and their liberty too much to succumb lazily to Big Nanny, race-card ideology.

    Exactly, liberals are forced by their own insecurity to project their vehement hate onto minorities who have the temerity to embrace (R)ism.

35. #135
    On February 28th, 2009 at 9:02 pm, RetFireman said:

    You know, the thing about one of the argument Liberals use concerning Gay Marriage is that Conservatives still get divorced and split and such. They claim that gays stay together longer (false) and that we are hypocrites to claim we support marriage and families, yet still have a high divorce rate. Why, even the man they think is our leader, (although we didn’t get that memo and I do not recall any voting taking place amongst us Conservatives), Rush Limbaugh, has been divorced a few times.

    However, the thing is, the reason there is such a high divorce rate is directly related to the very thing that Liberals have done to marriage. It was the Liberals who have taken religion out of marriage, and made it so that anyone, anywhere can get married to whoever they want BY anyone they want. You can even get, for a nominal fee, a 24 hour wavier from the County Clerk to be a “Minister for a Day” in order to be the person that marries said couple.

    Before that occurred, outside of the arranged marriages and those that were done by the wealthy in order to secure more wealth in times long past, the couple would have to go through certain steps before they could get married. In the Catholic Church you have to meet with a priest prior, take classes and other things that are meant to teach the couple what marriage means and to make sure they are getting married for all the right reasons.

    Marriage USED to be called “Holy Matrimony”. It was done with God in mind. It was seen as a very serious, life-long committment. The vows you took used to actually mean something and you were expected to keep them. Now, they are said more out of tradition, and no one really takes them seriously. Believe me, I am going through that even as we speak.

    Then, after making marriage a joke, where you can go through a drive-thru and have Elvis perform the ceremony without even having to leave the car, or some other such nonsense, they decided that they needed to make divorce even easier to obtain than a marriage certificate.

    Take Brittney Spears, for instance. She goes out, gets drunk, ties the knot, and before the ink is even dry on their signatures, files for divorce. Why? Just for a goof. Just because she thought it would be “fun”. So, in less than 48 hours, she not only obtains a divorce, but an actual annulment.

    People now have 3,4,5,10 marriages. It doesn’t matter to them. And it is all thanks to what Liberals have done to the institution. Hell, you do not even need an excuse to get a divorce anymore. “Irreconcilable Differences” it is called. One day, someone wakes up, decides, “Gee, I no longer want to be a wife/husband anymore.”, and by noon, they have walked into the courthouse, paid a small fee and BINGO, the divorce is started.

    But what if the other spouse does not WANT to get a divorce? Well, they thought of that too. The other spouse has no say in it. Even if the other person does not sign the original papers or respond, they automatically give everything to the petitioner as written. If they do not sign the final papers, the court goes ahead and ends it anyway. Hell, a person can go through the entire process without the other person even knowing it happened.

    And all because the Liberals took religion out of marriage.

    All the Gay Marriage people want to do is weaken the institution even more. It isn’t about love. It isn’t about commitment. It is not anything that these activists that are shoving it down people’s throats claim that it is. It is about “sticking it to the Conservatives”. It is about further taking the last bastions of religion completely out of marriage all together.

    I am NOT saying that the couples wanting to get married necessarily feel that way, but the activists, the people leading the charge, such as San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsome, DO feel that way. They are making a statement. They are tearing apart the fabric of this country, every last piece of it, that made this country the strongest, best and most prosperous in the history of the world.

    Marriage means nothing to these people. It is just one more notch in their belt. If it were, they would do things without breaking laws and insulting people’s beliefs.

    So maybe you have bought their crap, but the truth is the truth, and once you take God out of things, the lowest common denominator wins out…every time.

36. #136
    On February 28th, 2009 at 9:22 pm, RetFireman said:

    There are Conservatives who are Christian, Conservatism itself, however, is NOT Christian. This is what Liberals have been trying to get people to believe, especially as a two-pronged attack both to get people NOT to be Conservatives and as a way to attack Christianity as a whole.

    The reason why Conservatism attracts so many Christians is because the basic tenets of what it means to be a Conservative follows closely what Christians believe. Liberalism, however, has several major issues which is in direct contrast to what being a Conservative means.

    Conservatives believe in the sanctity of the life of unborn children. The know that life begins at conception and every child has the right to be born. Liberals, however, need to justify everything that they know is inherently bad and wrong. This is why they go out of their way to try and convince people, especially children, that a child that is growing after conception is nothing more than a lump of unwanted flesh, and that women have a choice in whether or not they want said lump. They dehumanize the unborn. However, they have no issue at all with saving the lives of murderers and child molesters.

    They do not understand the difference between a life that has harmed no one and has not had the opportunity at life, and those that made the decision to do incredible harm to others. They try to use the Bible to justify their actions, claiming it is a sin to kill, however that is only used to save the life of scum. When it comes to the unborn, that argument goes away. However, since the Bible says it is a sin to MURDER, not kill, and is very explicit in how you should treat murderers, they prove that they only know as much of the Bible as their masters of hate they follow allow them to know.

    Conservatives believe in The Family, of keeping families together and making a family strong. Liberals have, for decades, done everything they could to destroy the family, to legislate things that weaken family, to excuse horrendous behavior when it comes to families, such as seeing nothing wrong with a man having child after child with many women, not being held accountable, saying it is a “woman’s right” to have as many children with as many men as they can and, in fact, should be held up for al to see as being a “strong and intelligent” woman for doing so. They glorify a broken home, glorify single parenthood and laugh and make fun of people who get married, stay married and act responsibly. Christians also strive for good, solid families, speak out against casual sex, dead-beat fathers and irresponsible mothers.

    The list is long and detailed the reasons why Christians tend to gravitate towards Conservatism versus Liberalism. That is not to say there are no Christians that are Liberals, and I meant no such slight, however if they were to truly examine their consciences, it would be very difficult to justify calling yourself a “Good Christian” and a “Good Liberal” at the same time.

    This is why Pelosi was chastised by the Pope, why she attempted to justify her stance on abortion, which is a Mortal Sin in Catholicism by lying and saying Catholics are confused by when life starts, and why Kerry was chastised by Bishops and others due to his beliefs about abortion and other non-Christian stances.

    But go ahead and keep trying to fool yourself into believing the lies that have been fed you by the Liberal Overlords. In the end, you have to live with yourself, and answer to only one person. If you can live with yourself, good for you. If you can stand before God and think you can rationalize and justify your life…good luck.

37. #137
    On March 1st, 2009 at 12:43 am, undresiege said:

    This is why they go out of their way to try and convince people, especially children, that a child that is growing after conception is nothing more than a lump of unwanted flesh, and that women have a choice in whether or not they want said lump. They dehumanize the unborn. However, they have no issue at all with saving the lives of murderers and child molesters.

    They do not understand the difference between a life that has harmed no one and has not had the opportunity at life, and those that made the decision to do incredible harm to others. They try to use the Bible to justify their actions, claiming it is a sin to kill, however that is only used to save the life of scum. When it comes to the unborn, that argument goes away. However, since the Bible says it is a sin to MURDER, not kill,…

    You have stated on this very blog that you don’t oppose abortion in cases of rape and incest. You imagined how such a horrific scenario would impact one of your female loved ones. That raises a whole host of questions regarding your views in post #135. scratching head puzzled

38. #138
    On March 1st, 2009 at 1:14 am, undresiege said:

    Here are the specifics of your views:

    On April 19th, 2008 at 3:51 am, RetFireman said:
    I also had no idea that I should be in line for retro-abortions. After all, wht with the childhood I had…mom wworking three jobs to support my two brothers and I, the violence and abuse rgat went on for years, living well below the poverty level, father being booted out with restraining orders before my little brother…the CHP Detective, was even born…my God…my brothers and I were walking Abortion Poster Boys and never knew it.

    However, I do draw the line at rape, incest and threat to the mother. I question what it would be to have to raise the child of the man who raped my wife…

    Not saying it would be a decision that could be taken lightly, but one that would have to be made.

39. #139
    On March 1st, 2009 at 5:24 am, hadsil said:

    These are the same people who claim any Conservative minority is a mere “token” then further call Conservatives racists because they lack diversity in make up.

40. #140
    On March 1st, 2009 at 7:06 am, wfcook said:

    Many on the left are just self-hating Americans.

41. #141
    On March 1st, 2009 at 9:59 am, cabrerski said:

    On February 28th, 2009 at 7:16 pm, usa_usa said:
    Ok guys. you win…

    It’s not about winning the argument as opposed to understanding the goals. As I stated earlier, conservatism is an idea of less government, strong national defense, etc. However it is not an absolute. Every thing about government is a compromise and here is where the problems begin among conservatives.

    We all have our ideals based on our faith, experiences and hopes. Within each one of us, they are very strong because it is what makes up who we are. Just view the previous entries to see the passion. When I see the writings or Right4Life, RetFireman, Undersiege and others, I see good people with strong convictions.

    But not all the convictions are the same. In order to achieve a viable and working government, there must be some form of compromise. The issue then becomes what we are willing to compromise on. If we dig our heels into the ground and refuse any compromise, then you might as well go out and form your own country with your own constitution.

    The United States Constitution itself was a compromise, not a divine document. There must be some playing field we can agree on that will capture the minds and hearts of the majority of Americans in order to achieve an acceptable form of government. And some aspects may cause us to hold our noses. We must find that common ground to get the majority of our goals into action, otherwise we get very few of them.

    Remember that this is government and not your Church. Your faith is absolute whereas your dealings with others doesn’t have to be. In voting, we are not asking to change your beliefs or Church, just to help us find a way to govern this country of everyone. Somewhere in every belief system, there are allowances for those who do not follow the faith. If your belief is to avoid all those who do not agree with you, fine. However, even churches subscibe to interfaith meetings and councils.

    Now, more than ever, we need as many as we can in our conservative alliance. So all that I ask is we try harder than ever to find that way to become the majority.

42. #142
    On March 1st, 2009 at 11:39 am, happyscrapper said:

    On February 28th, 2009 at 3:06 pm, cabrerski said:
    On February 28th, 2009 at 2:49 pm, Thomas B. said:
    Thank you, my brother…and can we get an “Amen” from the choir!?!

    Well said, soldier!

    Just poking my head into this thread for a few minutes before church and I want to add to the chorus…Amen, Amen, and AAAAAAMEN!

43. #143
    On March 1st, 2009 at 1:22 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On March 1st, 2009 at 9:59 am, cabrerski said:

    Your points are so amazingly spot-on, I can’t believe no one has articulated them in the Republican Party. Conservatives come in all sizes, shapes and creeds. We are black, white, asian, latino, etc. etc. We are gay, lesbian, straight, Catholic, Jew, Protestant, muslim, buddhist, athiest, etc. We are all those things. What binds us together is a love of freedom, liberty and the ideal that we all have equal opportunities for success. Small government, state’s rights, power to the people!! We believe in helping the unfortunate through charities, not through big government and high taxes on the wealthy. We believe that the unfortunate people who CAN’T. Those who CAN earn a living, SHOULD earn a living. We believe in those very core principles that the Republican platform had always espoused until the “middle of the roaders” like John McCain diluted the platform until it is no longer recognizable. We believe that if you reach across the aisle to liberals, they will cut off your arm at the elbow and make you eat it. Please, please, please, can we all agree that our party needs to follow the core principles and stop the infighting about those few things that we will NEVER agree on? Some of you are so fanatical in your beliefs that you don’t think ANY candidate who isn’t a born-again Christian fundamentalist should be POTUS. But as has been stated here, the POTUS is the leader of ALL America, not just the Christians. (Of course, we all know that Obama is the leader of only blacks and poor, but that is another subject!) Sorry for the rant, but these ideals need repeating over and over until our fellow conservatives GET IT!!

44. #144
    On March 1st, 2009 at 1:26 pm, happyscrapper said:

    There are some posts on this thread that I have copied and pasted into my Word program and I am keeping them. I hope that RetFireman and Cabrerski don’t mind. They are worth keeping and pulling out often to send to everyone in my address book. Don’t worry, I will give you credit…or at least your username! I am so proud to be a part of Michelle Malkin’s team!

45. #145
    On March 1st, 2009 at 1:27 pm, corona said:

    One more time for both for the deceivers and those who have been deceived:
    The correct term is same-sex pseudomarriage.

46. #146
    On March 1st, 2009 at 1:28 pm, happyscrapper said:

    We believe that the unfortunate people who CAN’T

    oops, I meant, We believe that the unfortunate people who can’t help themselves should be helped. I must have deleted part of my sentence!

47. #147
    On March 1st, 2009 at 1:30 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On March 1st, 2009 at 1:27 pm, corona said:
    One more time for both for the deceivers and those who have been deceived:
    The correct term is same-sex pseudomarriage.

    Please explain your comment. I am not getting it. Thanks.

48. #148
    On March 1st, 2009 at 2:25 pm, usa_usa said:

    We believe that the unfortunate people who can’t help themselves should be helped

    And how does government decide who can or can’t help themselves ? You fill out some kind of 1099-MOOCH form ? I think the charity is best done by churches and not government.

49. #149
    On March 1st, 2009 at 2:37 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On March 1st, 2009 at 2:25 pm, usa_usa said:
    And how does government decide who can or can’t help themselves ? You fill out some kind of 1099-MOOCH form ? I think the charity is best done by churches and not government.

    You have a good point. Some of the welfare programs have worked fairly well, but they can be misused. Food stamps, for instance (Cigarettes, whiskey and corn chips instead of baby food). On the other hand, charities can be bad too, unless carefully vetted before you donate to them. Some have huge salaries going to their top execs. even though they claim exempt status. There is so much corruption these days, it is truly frightening. That’s what happens when people do their darndest to take God out of the country. Evil moves in to fill the void. I do think though, that it would be just as hard to decide who can or can’t help themselves if it was all left up to charities. What would be the criteria and who would make those decisions? I suppose any system would be better than Big Brother Government!

50. #150
    On March 1st, 2009 at 3:24 pm, cabrerski said:

    ‘scrapper,

    Go right ahead and quote me. Nice to have peeps.

51. #151
    On March 2nd, 2009 at 6:25 am, cabrerski said:

    On March 1st, 2009 at 2:37 pm, happyscrapper said:
    On the other hand, charities can be bad too, unless carefully vetted before you donate to them. Some have huge salaries going to their top execs. even though they claim exempt status.

    In cabrerski’s ideal world:

    1. Charities would have to state their cause.
    2. After the first year of setup, prove at least 2/3 of all income is directly utilized for that cause.
    3. The other third is the maximum for all salaries and administrative costs. If you operate beyond these limits, then it appears you are not charitable, but making money off of others’ grief and lose your tax-exempt status.
    4. Track the people in the charity world to ensure the scam artists do not profit.
    5. Special listing/recognition for the 75/25 and 90/10 levels. Low overheads should encourage people to participate even more.
    6. Eliminate clearing house charities like the United Way. They are a drain on the total resources and do nothing for actual causes. Many of the corruption incidents do not make it to the MSM.
    7. All political donations to PACs, political parties, campaigns, etc. lose their tax-exempt status. This will be the hardest to do (asking Congress to remove itself from suckling) but probably the most critical. This would be one good way to reduce the monies that continue to plague our political system.

    No details, just ideas…hey, a guy can dream can’t he?

52. #152
    On March 2nd, 2009 at 3:07 pm, wighttrasch said:

    That they actually have friends who are similar

    actually, I think their problem is they don’t have any friends. Period.