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 26th, 2012 at 8:54 pm, happyscrapper said:

   It is a pity that the MSM no longer asks the hard questions anymore.

   I’m no longer blaming the media for all of it. The candidates aren’t asserting themselves at all!! They take the defensive, rather than change the questions around to get back to the issues. They have ALLOWED the media to dictate the agenda. Just turn it around on them, guys!!! If they ask about contraception, just tell them you think the American People are much more interested in things that are actually affecting their lives, the economy, energy, etc. Just keep going back to that when the MSM tries to play “gotcha”. I am amazed at their inability to do that! These are supposed to be “seasoned” politicians!

2. #102
   On February 26th, 2012 at 9:02 pm, OK_Loyalist said:

   On February 26th, 2012 at 8:49 pm, happyscrapper said:

   I continued my public education, my mother a teacher in the same school system told me I didn’t have to take sh!t from no one! Something I practice everyday

3. #103
   On February 26th, 2012 at 9:10 pm, happyscrapper said:

   On February 26th, 2012 at 8:49 pm, happyscrapper said:

   On February 26th, 2012 at 9:02 pm, OK_Loyalist said:
   I continued my public education, my mother a teacher in the same school system told me I didn’t have to take sh!t from no one! Something I practice everyday

   Ain’t that the truth!

4. #104
   On February 26th, 2012 at 9:31 pm, Age said:

   OK, now that some of the shrills have made a big push for sensorship (can’t you just ignore it if it bothers you that much?), how about some more of the news that apparently has been missed today.

   Sanctomoron wants to vomit on JFK’s separation of church and state speech.

   http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2012/02/santorum-jfk-speech-makes-him-115569.html

   Yep, you’ve got a real winner here folks! Er, I mean a real whiner is more like it.

   “I don’t believe in an America where the separation between church and state is absolute,”

   And now he was for No Child Left Behind before he was against it.

   This guy is truly scary.

5. #105
   On February 26th, 2012 at 9:34 pm, Age said:

   er, make that censorship…

6. #106
   On February 26th, 2012 at 9:36 pm, OK_Loyalist said:

   Not as scary as Romney or Paul

7. #107
   On February 26th, 2012 at 9:49 pm, FilAmWIguy said:

   On February 26th, 2012 at 9:31 pm, Age said:

   OK, now that some of the shrills have made a big push for sensorship (can’t you just ignore it if it bothers you that much?), how about some more of the news that apparently has been missed today.

   After a few days away, I log in and see your post. Without reading the rest of the posts, I can see you are not willing to add to a comprehensive debate.

   One, you quoted politico which indicates a particular Democrat leaning. Second, namecalling anyone means you have little of substance to add. It is childish and adds nothing. It diminishes anything else you say.

   As to the substance of your statements, you are missing a few obvious points. First, separation of church and state does not exist in the Constitution anywhere. Second, separation of church and state is an impossibility. Every person elected into office has a set of values that are guided by their religious belief system whether it be Christianity, atheism, secular humanism, or any other. It guides much of what they do and is not possible to separate.

   Next, you took his statements out of context and distorted them. From the article…

   “Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum says the notion of religion not playing role in politics “makes me want to throw up.”

   “To say that people of faith have no role in the public square? You bet that makes me want to throw up. What kind of country do we live in where only people of non-faith can come in the public square and make their case? That makes me throw up. And that should make every American [throw up],” Santorum said on ABC’s “This Week.”

   The former Pennsylvania senator was referring to John F. Kennedy’s famous 1960 speech that argued religion should be separate from politics. “I don’t believe in an America where the separation between church and state is absolute,” he said.”

   His point is valid. Our government is for all people of all points of view and not limited to only those who do not have Christian based religious beliefs.

   Next, the statements of JFK have to be taken in context of the times he was in. A Catholic President in a predominantly Protestant nation was a hard thing for many to swallow. So JFK needed to play his being Catholic down to get votes. Santorum, in these times, does not feel the same and is taking a stand.

   It can be said that your lack of comprehension of the subject material is scary.

   It isn’t censorship to invite you to take your tired arguments elsewhere. If you want to constructively add something of substance, then stay. Spewing long discredited talking points, namecalling, and adding nothing of value can go.

8. #108
   On February 26th, 2012 at 10:10 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:

   On February 26th, 2012 at 9:36 pm, OK_Loyalist said:
   Not as scary as Romney or Paul

   So Gingrich is your man? Kewl. Nothing to be afraid of there.

9. #109
   On February 26th, 2012 at 10:14 pm, Age said:

   Sorry wiseguy, that was too long winded for a simpleton like me to digest.

   But I do thank you for pointing out that he was referring to JFK’s famous 1960 speech. That was very helpful.

10. #110
    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:27 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 9:31 pm, Age said:

    OK, now that some of the shrills have made a big push for sensorship (can’t you just ignore it if it bothers you that much.

    Ignoring posts such as Shamu’s is not an option. I know you regressives think you can ignore a problem and it will go away. We consrvatives are realizing we have to speak up when something is WRONG! And that post was WRONG on so many levels, it needed to be gone, not ignored.

    Now go away.

    We seem to have a lot of ICKY people lately…how do we get so many of them here? I enjoy bantering with somewhat like-minded people. But, as I have given up friendships with regressives because they are destroying my country, I also do not wish to engage them here. Disagreements are great and fun to debate. But hateful rhetoric is not fun, just upsetting and I don’t care to deal with it.

    In the future, I will try to skip those posts as soon as I get used to which ones are the trolls. I am letting them anger me too much.

11. #111
    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:41 pm, Age said:

    That’s great Happyscrapper, sounds like you’re making progress already! Especially since getting angry will diminish your namesake. Remember, sticks and stones….

    But no worries, because I’m sure you’ll just ignore this post anyway…

12. #112
    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:49 pm, Flyoverman said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 9:49 pm, FilAmWIguy said:

    If a candidate like Santorum scares the crap out of people like Age and Ota Benga, then Santorum definitely has my vote.

    About time people of their persuasion felt some fear. I want the entire Left and the radical right to have insomnia for at least four years.

    Reagan’s biggest strength was the fear he generated in his enemies and critics.

    Exhibit one: Iran releases the Embassy hostages exactly 35 minutes after Reagan’s inaguaration. They were sweating bullets.

13. #113
    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:51 pm, Popeye3 said:

    Pinch me quick. I just got called a SHRILL. But the “Shrills” were correct, and the Decider-in-Chief, Doug, decided to delete the post. Go fight with him or Michelle if you believe it was wrong.

    In my 22 year Navy career, I learned a very colorful language, but I also know when and where to use it.

14. #114
    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:57 pm, Flyoverman said:

    In the future, I will try to skip those posts as soon as I get used to which ones are the trolls. I am letting them anger me too much.

    Happy, you have to take the attitude, “What is this guy going to write next?

    You will note that Ota Benga will not respond to any of my posts refuting his posts. I am in his supposed “lunatics that I ignore” group. Ya sure. I own him.

    That’s why we all love Chap. Chap can be witty and is a good debator. He is a challenge. These bigoted, name calling light weights are just spewing things out. They need a Tony Snowe hug and a cookie.

15. #115
    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:59 pm, Age said:

    A vote for Santorum GUARANTEES another 4 years of Obama. Are you willing to put up with that because you can’t stomach compromising? I held my nose and voted for McCain last time and I would do the same for Santorum…knowing full well that he is going to keep most of the independents and too many republicans at home, or, heaven forbid, voting for Obama.

    He is not the most electable guy right now and as more of his sanctimonious past catches up with him, he’ll turn off even more voters. The Obama machine is salivating at the opportunity to run against him and they will DESTROY him. Santorum has been the latest in a long line of lemming runs over the past 6 months and there’s a good reason everyone has pretty much ignored him until now.

16. #116
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:00 pm, Flyoverman said:

    In my 22 year Navy career, I learned a very colorful language, but I also know when and where to use it.

    And no one does it better than the U.S. Navy. Hat tip from this green suit. We admire the best.

17. #117
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:00 pm, Paratus said:

    Sanctomoron? Tell me Age do you have the outside plumbing to say that to someone that respects Santorum; face to face up close?

18. #118
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:04 pm, Flyoverman said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:59 pm, Age said:

    All I can tell you is with respect to your opinion, I do not agree with it at all.

    I think based on history, your assessment is wrong.

19. #119
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:10 pm, Flyoverman said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:00 pm, Paratus said:

    Sanctomoron?

    It indicates an opinion based on emotion and not a dispassionate assessment.

    So what does that tell you about how far off target he’s going to be?

20. #120
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:13 pm, Age said:

    Sanctomoron: A guy who wears his religion on his sleeve yet has enough hypocritical history to make himself look like a complete moron.

    And if you don’t know what I’m talking about I’ll just let you continue to exist in your happy, yet ignorant, little world. I would hate to destroy that for you if you sincerely think that Sancto is “the one.”

21. #121
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:16 pm, Republicanvet said:

    Question, partly related to the other thread:

    Whatever happened to all the leftists droning on about clawbacks of what they said were excessive executive bonuses?

    I recall both ObaMao and Hillary running on about clawbacks, but now when all these pond scum and unicorn fart companies who got energy loans, and their CEO’s are raking in huge pay raises and bonuses, both are silent.

    I’m sure the amount being laundered through the DNC back to Urkel has nothing to do with it. /sarc

22. #122
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:19 pm, Age said:

    Flyoverman, thank you for being the grownup in the room. We can be conservative and yet still differ in many ways without freaking out over a childish namesake I think fits Mr Santorum appropriately.

    Many of you have similar “names” for others in the GOP race. I’ll stick to Sancto in the future since I have apparently been a little too offensive.

23. #123
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:19 pm, Republicanvet said:

    On February 26, 2012 at 10:38 am, Hiraghm said:
    

    Meanwhile, 7 soldiers have been injured by Afghan rioters. In addition to the 4 that have been already killed.

    Nice to know we’re talking about Daytona.

    WHY are you both ignoring the #1 story that’s happening right now?

    Nice to know the smarmy punk in the CinC chair apologized so quickly for a couple books being burned….Lotta good that did.

    I wonder if he’ll apologize to their families for being so eFing worthless.

24. #124
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:35 pm, Paratus said:

    Age:
    You’ve just talked about a “childish name” then freaking out over others freaking out about it. Then go on to say that the “childish name” fits. Ok, I’m getting the picture.

25. #125
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:43 pm, kwrxxx said:

    Mitt Romney is the last hope to save our Republic from financial collapse. Santrum & Gingrich are Washington insiders. We also need to vote in 51 Republican Senators so we can cram the austerity measures against the Social Security welfare sponges & Medicare wasters.

26. #126
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:48 pm, Paratus said:

    Republicanvet:
    As to the apology “to their families, using Joe Biden math, 2 words: no Obama won’t.

    I don’t know what Obama said after September 11th, and I’m not going to look it up right now, but I’d like to know what he said.

    As far as I can see he has no concern for the military. His “corpseman” comment sickened me. That was no accident or how could I have made that mistake moment.

27. #127
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:53 pm, Flyoverman said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:19 pm, Age said:

    Two points.

    1) While enjoyable, when you call someone;s canidate a moron, do not expect them to put much stock in the rest of your argument.

    2) It would be nice to know who you might be FOR. I really can’t tell.

    I am for Santorum, because Bachmann dropped out. I am not Mr. Articulate. So if you want to understand my position listen to Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh. They cannot and should not endorse any candidate. But I think their praise and criticisms of Santorum are dead on.

    He fits my worldview the closest. In a representative government, I am voting for such a person.

    If you are concerned with what you call hypocrisy on santorum’s part, I think you need to be prepared to defend your guy’s “hypocrisy” if you support Mitt or Newt.

28. #128
    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:59 pm, Republicanvet said:

    On February 26, 2012 at 09:48 pm, Paratus said:
    

    Republicanvet:
    As to the apology “to their families, using Joe Biden math, 2 words: no Obama won’t.

    I don’t know what Obama said after September 11th, and I’m not going to look it up right now, but I’d like to know what he said.

    As far as I can see he has no concern for the military. His “corpseman” comment sickened me. That was no accident or how could I have made that mistake moment.

    …in addition to his shout-outs prior to saying anything about Ft Hood IIRC.

    I despise him with a passion!

29. #129
    On February 27th, 2012 at 12:02 am, Flyoverman said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 11:43 pm, kwrxxx said:

    Mitt Romney is the last hope to save our Republic from financial collapse. Santrum & Gingrich are Washington insiders.

    I would hope you would have figured out by now that Romney is the errand boy for the Washington insiders. Do not look at Mitt. Look at where his support comes from.

    Romney is not going to govern like candidate Romney. He is going to govern like 1992-2005 Romney. That is what the elites want. I do not.

    Obamacare will not get repealed. The Ryan budget will not get passed. No government departments will be abolished. The deficit will not shrink; it will just grow slower. Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security reform will not happen. Tax reform will not happen.

    We need a sea change; not another four years of elitist Compassionate Conservatism with Boehner and McConell running Congress.

30. #130
    On February 27th, 2012 at 12:03 am, Flyoverman said:

    I despise him with a passion!

    Roger that.

31. #131
    On February 27th, 2012 at 12:04 am, Age said:

    No Paratus, you are incorrect, you didn’t get it right at all despite your pathetic efforts to psychoanalyze me from a sentence.

32. #132
    On February 27th, 2012 at 12:06 am, Flyoverman said:

    P.S. Jan Brewer is delusional if she thinks Romney’s backers will secure the border and take real action againt the illegals and reform immigration.

    No good for the contributors.

33. #133
    On February 27th, 2012 at 12:31 am, redgypsy said:

    I love my gov, Jan Brewer, but I think she goofed on this one. She’s probably in the “anyone but Obama” crowd and thinks only Romney can fit the bill. But she will, I’m afraid, continue come to grief on securing the border and taking real action on illegal immigration.

    On the other hand, Romney probably won’t sue us…

34. #134
    On February 27th, 2012 at 12:34 am, Paratus said:

    You’re kidding me right? “Psychoanalysze” you. That’s way to funny.

    The picture is you think Santorum is a moron, and you freak out over others freaking out.

    Not only that, but I “exist in my happy, ignorant, little world”, because I like the guy.

    My “little world”, I can’t believe you said ” little world”, that’s funny too.

35. #135
    On February 27th, 2012 at 12:35 am, OK_Loyalist said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:10 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 9:36 pm, OK_Loyalist said:
    Not as scary as Romney or Paul

    So Gingrich is your man? Kewl. Nothing to be afraid of there.

    Rogue, you magnificent bastard, I knew you couldn’t write me completely off. You’re not paying attention, it’s Santorumn not Newt here.

36. #136
    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:26 am, Blackstone said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 9:31 pm, Age said:

    “I don’t believe in an America where the separation between church and state is absolute,”

    ….

    This guy is truly scary.

    Really? What exactly are you “scared” of? That he’ll reintroduce witch trials or something? You really need to get over your paranoia.

37. #137
    On February 27th, 2012 at 2:51 am, EWTHeckman said:

    Wow.

    This thread has me pining for an “Ignore” feature.

    

38. #138
    On February 27th, 2012 at 8:10 am, ChapBix said:

    #107. On February 26th, 2012 at 9:49 pm, FilAmWIguy said:

    Thank you! And a huge Bravo for what you posted.

39. #139
    On February 27th, 2012 at 8:22 am, Rogue Cheddar said:

    Popeye: Whoooaah! It’s a new day Olive! Igigigigigigigig!

40. #140
    On February 27th, 2012 at 9:11 am, swede said:

    The Daytona 500 is today, and there will be an air of politics around and above the race track:

    Racist!

41. #141
    On February 27th, 2012 at 9:18 am, Popeye3 said:

    Good Morning RC, and thanks for the shout out. The Scent of a Woman reference brought out a smile on this old man’s face. Whoooah yourself my friend.

42. #142
    On February 27th, 2012 at 9:30 am, old goat said:

    Happy
    Just saw your post from yesterday. I agree. Folks, can we please stop the hate filled comments? Disagreeing is fine–we certainly have different opinions on President Malkin’s site here, but we don’t need to continue the hate filled rants that permeate the other boards on the internet.

    Our founding fathers had huge differences of opinions — they tried hard to maintain civility when trying to solve the nation’s problems though.

43. #143
    On February 27th, 2012 at 9:41 am, ITookTheRedPill said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:26 am, Blackstone said:
    

    On February 26th, 2012 at 9:31 pm, Age said:

    “I don’t believe in an America where the separation between church and state is absolute,”
    …
    This guy is truly scary.

    Really? What exactly are you “scared” of? That he’ll reintroduce witch trials or something? You really need to get over your paranoia.

    +1!

    Age clearly doesn’t know much about Founders and would find it “truly scary” to learn about how they, in 1776 in Congress assembled, did:

    earnestly recommend, that FRIDAY, the seventeenth day of May next, be observed by the said Colonies as a day of HUMILIATION, FASTING, and PRAYER; that we may with united hearts confess and bewail our manifold sins and transgressions, and by a sincere, repentance and amendment of life, appease his righteous displeasure and through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, obtain his pardon and forgiveness; humbly imploring his assistance to frustrate the cruel purposes of our unnatural enemies; …

    Do you find that “truly scary”, Age?

44. #144
    On February 27th, 2012 at 9:54 am, stillontheroad said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 9:31 pm, Age said:

    “I don’t believe in an America where the separation between church and state is absolute,”
    …
    This guy is truly scary.
    Where in the Constitution do you find,
    “separation between church and state”
    Shows us all the way!!

45. #145
    On February 27th, 2012 at 9:58 am, granite said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 9:30 am, old goat said:

    Our founding fathers had huge differences of opinions — they tried hard to maintain civility when trying to solve the nation’s problems though.

    Correct.

    However, as far as I am aware, they did not have different worldviews.
    And that, the 180-degree, mutually exclusive, irreconcilable difference in worldviews, is the problem in our country today.

    Did I say problem?

    With the socialist America-destroyers currently in power, their opposite worldview is the mortal danger for our country today.

46. #146
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:06 am, FilAmWIguy said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:14 pm, Age said:

    Sorry wiseguy, that was too long winded for a simpleton like me to digest.

    But I do thank you for pointing out that he was referring to JFK’s famous 1960 speech. That was very helpful.

    If that was too long winded for you, then I’ll try to keep my post under the word count of a Dick and Jane book.

    Further, it isn’t wiseguy. It is WI guy. In other words, it is the state of Wisconsin’s postal abbreviation.

    What are you doing on a website that requires reading skills?

    a childish namesake I think fits Mr Santorum appropriately.

    Defending childish antics?

    What grade are you in?

47. #147
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:38 am, Teddy Kennedy said:

    Errah, I’m wondering where Obama’s #12 Solar/Wind/Bio Fueled Electric Solyndra Fisker car will finish??!! Probably dead last.

48. #148
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:38 am, steamjetKC135 said:

    It’s probably good marketing for the candidates to use the Indie 500…

    I’m surprised no one picked up on this at #7…It’s Daytona Nascar not Indy Open Wheel…

49. #149
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:41 am, SHoward said:

    I see in the comments that some folks might be thinking Obambi will destroy any but the best, most electable candidates that might run against him. Specifically Santorum. Um, I have only one name for you: Carter.

    You see, we got one of the greatest presidents ever out of the 1980 election cycle, but what most people don’t realize is that Carter had done such a colossally bad job Donald Duck could have beaten him. Indeed, that’s how we got Carter in 1976. We just got lucky that Reagan was the Republican nominee.

    No, we don’t have a Reagan in this bunch. But it is important to point out that with O-bite-me doing so badly, it is unlikely he can pull off a win against anyone. Santorum is a good candidate. He may not win the primaries, but if he does we are still in good shape in the general. Don’t buy the leftists carp. All the flak they’re spewing is a pretty good indication that they are feeling the heat, and they know they’re in way more danger than they want us to believe.

50. #150
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:56 am, happyscrapper said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:06 am, FilAmWIguy said:If that was too long winded for you, then I’ll try to keep my post under the word count of a Dick and Jane book.

    Further, it isn’t wiseguy. It is WI guy. In other words, it is the state of Wisconsin’s postal abbreviation.

    What are you doing on a website that requires reading skills?

    I love it when regressives are put in their place! Nice Job!!

51. #151
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:59 am, happyscrapper said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:41 am, SHoward said:

    I pray you are right! There is one thing wrong in your assessment, however. You left out corruption and voter fraud. The regressives are SO GOOD at those things, we could be in a lot of trouble. They seem to have the dishonest part down pat. Add in the “no conscience” piece and they have nothing to lose.

52. #152
    On February 27th, 2012 at 11:37 am, MaverickThrowback said:

    Teddy Kennedy said:
    Errah, I’m wondering where Obama’s #12 Solar/Wind/Bio Fueled Electric Solyndra Fisker car will finish??!! Probably dead last.

    It died about 40 miles on route out of the motor city. ’nuff said

53. #153
    On February 27th, 2012 at 11:51 am, SHoward said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:59 am, happyscrapper said:

    Hey there, Happy. I realize the depths of corruption that exist, and I think you’re right that they will reach even new lows this year. But I actually believe (no this isn’t a proven fact yet, that’s election day) that so many people that voted for Obeyme will either vote against or not at all that they will not be able to fabricate enough votes ‘for.’ I think they underestimate just how upset even Obeyme’s own side is with him.

    And they certainly underestimate how bad he looks to everyone else. His guaranteed 40% or so won’t be enough.

54. #154
    On February 27th, 2012 at 12:58 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 11:51 am, SHoward said:

    It is very possible that those who LOVE Obamo and are so taken with him, they think he is God, will assume everyone feels the same, or at least a majority, and they will stay home, safe in the knowledge their savior can’t lose.

    One the other side, WE THE PEOPLE will be out in droves.

    So yes, we have a chance!

55. #155
    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:16 pm, FirstSkirt said:

    My 2cents:
    I’m agreeing with SHoward @#149. The dems are controlling most poll results and eliminating negative press about their guy. They are trying to control negative internet reporting on Obeyme. They are concerned about both Romney and Santorum. They are not generating the kind of donations they were in the last election. They have a fight on their hands and will use dirty tricks. Obeyme will not win because the economy is not recovering, gas prices are too high, his endless gaffes and apologies, and his horrendous track record.

56. #156
    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:40 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:16 pm, FirstSkirt said:
    My 2cents:
    I’m agreeing with SHoward @#149. The dems are controlling most poll results and eliminating negative press about their guy. They are trying to control negative internet reporting on Obeyme. They are concerned about both Romney and Santorum. They are not generating the kind of donations they were in the last election. They have a fight on their hands and will use dirty tricks. Obeyme will not win because the economy is not recovering, gas prices are too high, his endless gaffes and apologies, and his horrendous track record.

    BUT, the MSM isn’t reporting any of that! Unless everyone sees things with their own eyes and can draw their own conclusions, they will be kept in the dark. How many of Obama’s lemmings will wake up and realize he is not what he appeared to be in 2008?

    The MSM is the most dangerous to our liberty we have ever had. There are so many cover-ups, non-reporting, just plain lies in the media today. And most people get their news in 1/2 hour on NBC, ABC or CBS.

57. #157
    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:46 pm, Age said:

    Wiseguy sounds better to me. Please forgive my simple ways. You know, I may not be as sofistikated and intelijent as many of you incredibly smart people, but I do know a loser (Sancto, not some of you who get so uppity and offended far too easily) when I see one!

    Say, here’s something to digest. Guess who not only made the top 10 of lobbyist $$, but was number one! Here’s to Sancto, our fiscal conservative!! (That was sarcasm for those you who aren’t too sure)

    http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=K02&recipdetail=S&sortorder=A&cycle=2006

58. #158
    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:50 pm, yaymm said:

    Steamjet #148, you’re right. That was my posting and I had a brain lapse. I’ll chalk it up to my advanced age.

    This argument about who will win the nomination is becoming more futile by the day. So many things are still up in the air that it’s just too soon to tell the outcome.

    Personally, should even the old coot, Ron Paul (who is actually younger than I am) get nominated, I will support him financially all the way. This election is about ABO, nothing else. Anyone who doesn’t support and vote for the Republican candidate, regardless of who it turns out to be, will be helping to put Obama back in office.

    That would be not only more disasterous than the last four years, but we might never recover from the mischief he can produce over the next four.

59. #159
    On February 27th, 2012 at 2:34 pm, FilAmWIguy said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:46 pm, Age said:

    Wiseguy sounds better to me. Please forgive my simple ways. You know, I may not be as sofistikated and intelijent as many of you incredibly smart people, but I do know a loser (Sancto, not some of you who get so uppity and offended far too easily) when I see one!

    2008 from Open Secrets

    Clinton, Hillary (D-NY) $1,450,180
    McCain, John (R) $1,295,475
    Obama, Barack (D) $653,113

    So which did you like in 2008?

    Gingrich took some money back in his day.
    Bachmann, Michele (R-MN) $16,973
    Paul, Ron (R-TX) $2,810

    “Sixteen lobbyists raised nearly $2.2 million to aid the presidential campaign of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in 2011″ – opensecrets.org

    Romney is loaded with lobbyists.

    Obama and his lobby money?

    “At least 15 of Mr. Obama’s “bundlers” — supporters who contribute their own money to his campaign and solicit it from others — are involved in lobbying for Washington consulting shops or private companies. They have raised more than $5 million so far for the campaign.”

    That’s the info. So you support who?

60. #160
    On February 27th, 2012 at 2:50 pm, Flyoverman said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:46 pm, Age said:

    Are you FOR anyone or just against Santorum?

    I know the location of several windmills that you would love to charge.

61. #161
    On February 27th, 2012 at 3:03 pm, SHoward said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 1:40 pm, happyscrapper said:

    Hey Happy. I don’t disagree with any of your particular points, but consider this:

    The Lame Media may not be reporting, and Obeyme’s minions may remain loyal, but whether the press reports stuff or not, people that aren’t minions ofr Obeyme simply aren’t going to vote for him. Think of it as minions vs. non-minions: no matter how the press dresses up their favorite pig, he’s only got around 40% of the vote. No matter what the lame media says that other 60% is mostly not going to vote for him. At this point I believe that only a few percent are actually in play.

    My first post was the point that the lefties know this, and them constantly stating that Obeyme can beat any of our candidates except the “very best” is wishful thinking rather than objective assessment. I’m just ashamed that some folks on our side of the fence have bought it. We could nominate a circus giraffe and beat this klutz. (Not that I want a circus giraffe, but what we have in office now is a clown….)

62. #162
    On February 27th, 2012 at 3:53 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 3:03 pm, SHoward said:

    Well, I just hope you are right! It does seem that Obama is having some problems getting money this time around. Rush said this a.m. that the Obama campaign has been e-mailing those people who contributed in 2008, but have not given anything for his current campaign. They are reminding him that they haven’t received his contribution yet. That is truly scary. They are assuming if you contributed in 2008, they can count on your contribution this time too.

    My response to an e-mail like that?

    Dear Mr. Obama, I haven’t contributed this year because I don’t have any money. No job, losing my home. Thanks to you! So, no contribution and no vote from me!

    P.S. Please don’t kill me.

63. #163
    On February 27th, 2012 at 4:02 pm, hawkeye54 said:

    Rush said this a.m. that the Obama campaign has been e-mailing those people who contributed in 2008, but have not given anything for his current campaign.

    Not to worry. Obama still has oodles of cash, it’s still early, and George Soros’ organizations will be more than happy to make up the difference.

64. #164
    On February 27th, 2012 at 4:10 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:

    Don’t forget we have untold billions from TARP unaccounted for.

65. #165
    On February 27th, 2012 at 8:52 pm, Hiraghm said:

    The former Pennsylvania senator was referring to John F. Kennedy’s famous 1960 speech that argued religion should be separate from politics.

    Well, JFK sure didn’t let his church’s doctrine interfere with his policy in the bedroom, did he?

    A Catholic who’ll repeatedly commit adultery on his wife is naturally going to be a candidate who doesn’t believe in letting his religious background affect his decision-making. But, I’m not too sure he’s the person we’d want as the standard-bearer of our national morality, either.

66. #166
    On February 27th, 2012 at 9:26 pm, SHoward said:

    I’m going to qualify my main point from a few comments ago.

    I absolutely believe we could nominate nearly anyone and beat Obeyme — but that someone would have to be willing to actually stand up and fight. We cannot nominate someone that’s going to try to get along with the other side of the fence. Whoever we send against Obeyme cannot go calling him a nice guy that means well. They must stick to their own convictions and they must call out that commie dud for what he is.

    As long as out nominee is able to do that, we really could run nearly anyone we want to. If Ronald Reagan were running but making all nice with the left, he’d lose, too.

    Note to sarcastic trolls: I know Reagan pursued a big tent philosophy. That’s not what I mean. He called out Carter as a failure and fought for the America he knew was better than that. Two. Different. Things.

67. #167
    On February 27th, 2012 at 9:53 pm, gmatt2003 said:

    I really don’t want to tear down any of the Republican candidates, since I’ll have to vote for whoever gets the nomination, but I’m really starting to dislike Romney. He was on Hannity tonight, and one of the first things he said was basically calling Santorum a liar about something. If any candidate challenges Romney, he unleashes his big money attack dogs to destroy his challenger.

    Romney’s negativity is really getting old. He’s turning into the new McCain, in my mind. I’ll hold my nose and vote for him if he’s the nominee, but I won’t try to convince anybody else to vote for him. He won’t get any money from me either.

    Godspeed, Mr. Santorum.

68. #168
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:06 pm, gmatt2003 said:

    Oh, by the way, regarding Santorum saying there is no absolute separation of church and state, he is correct. Another example would be Lincoln’s original Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1863. For a more in-depth analysis, a great book to read is “The Theme is Freedom: Religion, Politics, and the American Tradition,” by M. Stanton Evans.

    I think Santorum’s basic argument is that we can bring our religious convictions to the “public square”, and debate those opinions as they relate to public policy, along with all our other opinions. What’s wrong with that?

69. #169
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:38 pm, shimauma2 said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 10:27 pm, happyscrapper said:

    On February 26th, 2012 at 9:31 pm, Age said:
    Ignoring posts such as Shamu’s is not an option. I know you regressives think you can ignore a problem and it will go away. We consrvatives are realizing we have to speak up when something is WRONG!

    As a conservative I, SHIMAuma (emphasis added because HS’s lefturded version is meant as a degradation of my moniker) speak up candidly when I see something wrong and I emphasize it with candor because sometimes that is the only way to make the point clear. HS’s version of censorship is no less oppressive than any other libturd on a government payroll full of cowtowing to the PC speil and I have a funny notion that HS is very probably on a PTO board or worse one of those neighborhoods that has a board where people measure the length of someone’s grass. Busybody just because they think they know better how someone should spend their time.

    If that is the world we are turning into, then it’s no wonder turncoat horn sucking scumbags like brewer endorse rinos like rom-obamney.

70. #170
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:39 pm, Flyoverman said:

    I think Santorum’s basic argument is that we can bring our religious convictions to the “public square”, and debate those opinions as they relate to public policy, along with all our other opinions. What’s wrong with that?

    The Left is not stupid. This is a go for the throat issue.

    If they remove God from the discussion, they remove the authority that gave us our inalieanble rights.

    Of courese they want God gone. They want to be the authroity that grants us our rights. Ask any former GM bond holder or any gun shop owner along the Arizona border how well that works.

    Your rights will be dispensed based on your loyalty to the regime and your willingness to contribute.

71. #171
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:42 pm, OK_Loyalist said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:39 pm, Flyoverman said:

    More like your “coerced willingness to contribute” … Thuggery 101

72. #172
    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:55 pm, Flyoverman said:

    More like your “coerced willingness to contribute” … Thuggery 101

    Why should they be any different from every other despotical regime the planet has ever had to endure?

73. #173
    On February 27th, 2012 at 11:20 pm, OK_Loyalist said:

    On February 27th, 2012 at 10:55 pm, Flyoverman said:

    This goes part and parcel …

    Is the IRS Attempting to Intimidate Local Tea Parties?

    What are local Tea Partiers to think with requests like “Please identify your volunteers” or “are there board members or officers who have run or will run for office (including relatives)”? What possible reason would the IRS have for Tea Parties to “name your donors” when said donations are non-deductible? These are just a few of the questions asked by the IRS in these letters, and one cannot help but suspect an intrinsic threat encompassing all these demands.

74. #174
    On February 27th, 2012 at 11:40 pm, Flyoverman said:

    Is the IRS Attempting to Intimidate Local Tea Parties?

    They are on the ropes and they know it. I would respond with all the speed of Eic Holder. November is only 8 months away.

    You can delay ANY bureucracy for a year minimum.

75. #175
    On February 28th, 2012 at 9:38 am, FilAmWIguy said:

    Seems like Age has disappeared.

    His library rights in study hall may have been revoked.