Noah Rothman:
How do you know that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has taken at least temporary custody of frontrunner status in the race for the GOP presidential nomination in 2016? Beyond, of course, the polls that show him rocketing to the front of the pack in critical early primary states likeIowa? The political press is coming down hard on him and his nascent campaign.
After three unambiguous statewide victories in a Democratic state in just four years, Scott Walker is thoroughly vetted. If there were skeletons in his closet, the media and the myriad opposition researchers scrutinizing his past would have found them by now. “Scott Walker could very well be indicted in the coming days,” the forlorn MSNBC host Ed Schultz predictedon the night of Walker’s second statewide victory. He never was.
So, the press has taken a keen interest in catching Walker in unflattering moments or making hash out of otherwise minor controversies. Rudy Giuliani was speaking at an event for Walker when he sent the political media into a manic frenzy in which reporter and pundit alike tripped over one another to denounce what they dubbed the New York City’ mayor’s callous and quite possibly racist assertion that President Barack Obama doesn’t love his country. Only now, on day five of that story, is it finally beginning to fade from the media’s focus.
When Walker refused to denounce the former Big Apple mayor to the media’s satisfaction, they pounced. “What Scott Walker did ought to disqualify him as a serious presidential contender,”Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank hyperventilated. “Clownish,” insisted Rachel Maddow Show producer Steve Benen. “Spineless,” The Washington Post editorial board averred.
And all this merely because the Badger State governor said “the mayor can speak for himself” despite conceding that his comments were “aggressive.” The press would not have been satisfied unless Walker had thrown himself upon a pyre in penitence for the sin of having attended an event at which the president’s values were questioned and his honor attacked. It was bizarre to see the political press respond to Giuliani’s remarks as though they had been personally insulted.
This episode did provide the media with the opportunity to quiz every Republican candidateabout how they feel about a politician out of office for over a decade. Despite the fact that the head of the Democratic National Committee is involved in a significant quid pro quo scandaland remains suspect of interfaith marriage and the Vice President of the United States is aserial groper, Democrats are spared association with these figures by an energetic political media.
@retire05:
my standards are not for governors, they are for presidential candidates, whether presently governors or not. I wouldn’t vote for Jindal for president because he’s not eligible. Perry is eligible.
The real problem both of us have is whether anyone that will stick with conservative principles will be nominated as the candidate. Too many politicians are not living up to their promises (never have)
@Redteam #30:
“‘border/amnesty’ issue. I don’t think you have a clue on that. While you’re at it, tell me what your position on that issue is.”
Short-term memory loss = Alzheimer’s.
I’ve told you repeatedly that my solution to illegal immigration is to make it a capital offense. Accept Retire05’s position that illegals represent an extraordinary threat to the national security and make the death penalty the mandatory punishment for breaking immigration laws. Publicize the right ordinary citizens have to take the enforcement of THIS law into their own hands, and after the first one or two Illegals get shot dead on the streets of El Paso, watch how fast the other 15 million illegals self-deport. NO cost to the tax-payer, immediately effective and imminently humane. You got a BETTER solution?
@retire05 #50:
“What I object to is your different standards for different governors.”
Good point, Retire05.
You caught Redteam with his intellectual pants down.
But don’t expect me to step up from behind to finish what you started.
He’s not my type.
@George Wells:
George, you obviously weren’t following the conversation. I was not discussing ‘governors’ I was discussing presidential candidates stands on illegal aliens. There are persons other than governors that are ‘presumed’ to be in the race, though as far as I know, no one has announded for the office as of now.
I agree with O5 that illegal aliens are not the responsibility of state governors enforcement efforts, only the federal gov.
She won’t, she knows you couldn’t take care of anything. Most males wouldn’t let you ‘behind’ them
George, do you think that policy would gain you hispanic votes or lose hispanic votes? (if you were running for office)
@Redteam #54:
“I’ve told you repeatedly that my solution to illegal immigration
George, do you think that policy would gain you hispanic votes or lose hispanic votes? (if you were running for office)”
Seems like YOU’RE the “Dim” one.
I’m NOT running for office, and if I was, I sure wouldn’t PANDER to any constituency just to win. I’d be more ethical than that, and more ethical than 99% of the politicians in both parties.
My solution to illegal immigration would be viewed as Draconian by some, barbaric even. But some people would be clear-headed enough to appreciate the simple elegance of such a practical solution to what in every other possible scenario will cost Billions – if not Trillions – of dollars to correct and will otherwise never be solved. Sooner or later, SOMEONE in government will have the courage to fix this, or else the country will become irrevocably swamped with a tsunami of the world’s human detritus.
@George Wells:
George, would that solution apply to all criminals or just illegal aliens? What about homosexuals back at the time homosexuality was illegal. Do you think shooting one criminal per type would scare away others, a la the illegal aliens? I personally would not have been for shooting homosexuals (when it was illegal) just to ‘solve the problem’.
Want to reassess your position on ‘shooting criminals’ to scare others away?
@Redteam #56:
“Want to reassess your position on ‘shooting criminals’ to scare others away?”
Uhhhhh…. NO.
Evidently every time you read a post, you forget everything else you ever read, or you would remember that I have said – what, at least six times? – that I support a society’s right to exterminate whatever group within their borders that they deem appropriate. That includes gays. No, I don’t ADVOCATE exterminating gays, for the obvious reason. But support a society’s right to do so if that’s what they want.
Don’t you REMEMBER ANYTHING?
If a society sets forth by its laws what it considers to be criminal, and then sets the punishments for those crimes, not to be slaps-on-the-wrist, but to actually be deterrent-grade enforcements of those laws up to and including capital punishment, I’m fine with that. A society DOESN’T HAVE TO coddle its masses, DOESN’T HAVE TO create a dependent class, DOESN’T HAVE TO grant “equal rights” to all of its citizens. Within its borders, a society has every right that I can think of to be as strict or as lenient as it chooses to, and it doesn’t even have to be fair about it.
Each of us makes a choice every day to either stay and try to make things better where we are, or leave and go somewhere else that MIGHT be more welcoming.
I chose to stay here, and to try to make things better for me and my kind by working within the system that is already in place HERE. It must have been a good choice, because I’ve been pretty successful. Haven’t gotten everything I wanted, but the system isn’t ever going to be perfect, and it’s a pretty good system. If things had gone in the direction that you are speculating on hypothetically, I WOULD HAVE LEFT. But they didn’t.
So what was the point you were trying unsuccessfully to make?
Regarding crime and punishment (“would that solution apply to all criminals or just illegal aliens?”) it’s like I said. Whatever the society wants. Start murdering gays, they leave. Start murdering illegals, THEY leave. The World is full of refugee camps filled to the brim with people who societies have driven out. Do you see the rest of the World getting all up in arms over it? No. For now, they just get squeezed in wherever they can fit. But a time will come when there isn’t enough room or patience left in the world for all of the excess human population, and then it will get a lot uglier than your crying about killing some criminals. Life is cheap, and getting cheaper by the minute. “Sacred,” indeed!
@George Wells:
Most things. Do you recall EVERYTHING i’ve said?
your inability to correctly answer questions does not constitute my failure to make a point. While you say you support the ‘right’ to make any laws they want to, I suspect you would not always support the rights of the majority to do what they want with the minority. Any number of examples could be given, but you get the point.
@Redteam #58:
“Don’t you REMEMBER ANYTHING?
Most things.”
Evidently, you can’t even remember what you read in the post that you’re responding to.
My #57 stated:
“I support a society’s right to exterminate whatever group within their borders that they deem appropriate. That includes gays. No, I don’t ADVOCATE exterminating gays, for the obvious reason.”
That is about as clear an answer as you could have had, yet in response to it you posted:
“I suspect you would not always support the rights of the majority to do what they want with the minority.”
Can’t you FOLLOW this?
Can’t you SEE the DIFFERENCE?
I support a society’s RIGHT to exterminate gays. I would not ENCOURAGE it. I would fight AGAINST it. But they have the right to DO it.
A society has the right to do ANYTHING that they G*DD*MN please.
Murder innocent babies, you name it.
What “LAW” stops them?
The society MAKES the law, and they MAKE it anything they want.
Geez, Redteam!
Get real, and then find something REAL to argue about!
@George Wells:
yeah, l see you point, although you’re a little extreme. But yeah, you’re free to run around in your assless chaps and if society gets fed up with it enough, they’ll either run you off or buy you something that covers your ass. I only use the assless chaps because you said ” find something REAL” and I know you will find it humorous.
@Redteam: ‘GW a little extreme” Ya think? They ARE hunting down and killing gays in Russia. If Dr. Carson gets in the hunting will begin here.
George Seems strange to me you would advocate the shooting of illegals or other minorities. Is your wiring O.K?
@Rich Wheeler #61:
My wiring? LOL. It’s fine.
I got tired of Retire05’s endless wailing at her caldron, tossing in eye-of-newt flakes and shaking her snake rattlers, crying about how the whole country was on the brink of financial disaster because the Obama administration wasn’t doing nearly enough to stem the tide of children crossing the border who we might pay to feed, school and give medical care to. Never mind that the crowd was full of criminals and disease-carriers, and that the rest of them were taking our jobs and our livelihoods. They were going to ruin us, one way or another, remember?
Her solution was to feed them a meal and pay to put them on the nearest bus back across the border so that they could start their little journeys back to the land of
honeygreenbacks all over again. The way I saw it, that was no solution at all to a problem that Retire05 was characterizing as a national security threat of the first order.So I concocted this little “solution” that seemed like it would actually solve the problem with almost no loss of life, almost no cost at all, and that it would be immediately effective and more humane in the long run than any of the other half-buttocked lame solutions that either side has come up with so far. It doesn’t worry me that neither political side has the nerve to support anything like this, because BOTH sides are scared to death of losing Hispanic voters that they may or may not already have “sown up”. BOTH sides are slaves to opinion polls. The GOP’s dropping gay marriage like a hot potato is proof enough of that. Principles be damned. But you and I and the Republican Party know full well that nobody is ever going to pay to deport 15 million illegals, so the GOP’s posturing that it is prepared to go that route is bald hypocrisy. In the absence of that course of action, we are left with a slow, “common-law-styled” absorption of these illegals into the shadows of our population, to be assimilated or not as they wish. Sure doesn’t sound like an effective response to Retire05’s national security threat, does it?
@George Wells:
Don’t blame me because you are one sick POS. That is entirely on your head.
@rich wheeler:
I view any action that creates unnecessary debt for the United States to be harmful to our economy. So let me give you some information as to why I reached that conclusion:
Between 2003-2008, the United States spent $245,501.726.00 to care for, house and feed unaccompanied alien children. From January, 2009 thru July, 2014, the U.S. spent $1,082,502,857.00 to care for unaccompanied alien children. We spent $623,356,377.00 in 2014 and so far this year, $91,548,794.00.
This does not include the burden put on taxpayers who have to pick up the tab for the education of UACs. Houston Independent School District was required to absorb 5,000 UACs just last year. At a cost of around $8,500/per year/per student, how much did the taxpayers have to pick up? You do the math.
The numbers also do not include the cost of the illegal adults that is seen in the labor of the Border Patrol and other law enforcement officers, our courts or our jails/prisons, nor do they include the cost and drain on our social services imposed by illegals.
George wants to blame me because yeah, he has a wire loose.
@George Wells: LOL Shows how extreme one must be to get to the right of our resident reactionaries.
@retire05 #63:
You’re singing to the choir, fat lady.
I’m not fussing with your arithmetic, I’m agreeing with it. In fact, you do a very nice job of making the argument for me that the illegal alien problem is a big one.
But then you drop the ball, just like every other lame politician who lacks the spine to actually solve this problem.
All that you do about the problems you so ploddingly articulate is cry about them.
You have nothing to offer but your crocodile tears.
@Rich Wheeler #64:
Just once, I’d love to see Tiresome05 offer up a real solution to something, instead of just re-running worn-out tapes of her sermons on Marxism, Socialism and Sodomy.
Funny how spineless a “conservative” can be…
Is there such a thing as a “CINO”?
@rich wheeler:
He’s already said his wiring is screwed up. He’s homosexual.
@rich wheeler:
I don’t think you can point to anything Carson said that implies he is for shooting gays.
@George Wells:
sorry to disappoint you but I’m not fat.
Not my arithmetic. It’s the federal governments arithmetic.
Like all johnny-come-latelys, you want to claim credit for something you did not start.
I’m not a politician. I’m a private citizen. So what are you doing, as a private citizen, to resolve the problem of illegal immigration?
Compared to your doing what?
At least I have tears to offer. You have nothing but bloviating hot air.
Perhaps that is because your singular issue is the right to be a sodomist.
@Redteam:
Can you imagine the howling that would be coming from George if someone recommended his solution for illegals be applied to queers? Wonder if he would then claim their comments were nothing more than tongue-in-cheek? Somehow, I doubt it.
Poor George, he’s sick in more ways than one.
@retire05:
Actually, l did just above and he responded to it in 59, saying “I support a society’s right to exterminate whatever group within their borders that they deem appropriate. That includes gays. No, I don’t ADVOCATE exterminating gays, for the obvious reason.”
See George, I can remember some things.
On the other hand, the tactics ”for illegals be applied to queers,” are being applied as you can see here:
Beltrán’s talk highlights two key aspects of today’s university culture…..
First, the concept of personal responsibility is wholly taboo when applied to officially approved victim groups.
The second is the impetus to always find oppression and injustice in the “state, its leaders, ideals, and institutions.”
So, alumni, how long will you donate only to have your hand bitten while you feed this beast?
Recall how blacks howled when gays tried to co-opt their Civil Rights fight?
Will homosexuals howl about this?
@Redteam #71:
“See George, I can remember some things.”
So happy to hear the good news!
Your remarkable recovery, however unexpected, is a welcome relief.
I called and canceled your Belleview pick-up that I previously ordered under the name of Dr. George Edward Wells. My father and I have identical names, and although he’d be 93 if he was still alive, nobody checks to see if he’s dead. (What a gold mine those prescription pads were…)
Oops! My BAD! But no-harm-no-foul… unless you’re already in a straight jacket in the back of an ambulance, taking a little trip somewhere…?
@retire05 #69:
“sorry to disappoint you but I’m not fat.”
The context of my comment was as in: “It’s not over until the fat lady sings.”
I exercised artistic rhetorical license, not intending to besmirch your tonnage.
You were not amused.
Who’d have thunk it?
“Not my arithmetic. It’s the federal governments arithmetic.”
You posted it without attribution. It’s YOURS.
The point is that I agreed with it. You missed that. Clean your spectacles.
“Compared to your doing what?
At least I have tears to offer. You have nothing but bloviating hot air.”
What YOU have done is raised an alarm amounting to shouting “The Sky Is Falling!” and you blamed the Obama administration as if the current president was the architect of the problem, WHICH HE IS NOT. Every president I can remember has failed to adequately disincentivize illegal immigration, and the American public has had neither the will nor the stomach to do anything about it.
Like so many problems, the solution to illegal immigration lies beyond politics, yet everyone prefers to actually do NOTHING to correct the problem, instead content to just BLAME the other side of the isle for it as if something is to be gained in doing so. What is gained? NOTHING!
I have done more that cry. I have offered a REAL solution. It is exactly as reasonable as YOUR assessment of the threat posed to national security by illegal immigration. You cannot rationally disconnect the two. Treason warrants capital punishment. If it is as terrible as you have certified, why doesn’t the effect of illegal immigration warrant the same? Because the poor saps (and criminals) just come here to work (and to rob us)?
In this case, the ends justify the means.
The society has the right to protect itself however it deems necessary.
If you had a shred of intellectual integrity, you’d admit that the solution I have suggested would work as I have described.
But you don’t have that.
You’re just a partisan hack.
@George Wells:
And your “solutions” hold as much weight as a balloon. IOW, nada. You have no real influence on anything other than promoting your “I’m queer and I’m here” mantra.
OTOH, my report on the cost to the taxpayers for unaccompanied alien children was done at the request of a sitting U.S. Congressman and was used in his remarks to the committee he sits on. And while I make no claim that the report influenced anyone, at least I was active in trying to bring the issue to the attention of those who do have a vote in the U.S. House of Representative.
Oh, that’s too funny coming from someone who lacks all integrity, intellectual or otherwise.
So says the angry old queer who has only one issue that he cares about; legalized sodomy.
@retire05 #75:
“Oh, that’s too funny”
Glad I gave you a laugh. I imagine you need a few.
But instead of mimicking a laughing hyena, why not offer your explanation of how my suggestion would NOT work?
I’ll say it again:
“If you had a shred of intellectual integrity, you’d admit that the solution I have suggested would work as I have described.”
Laughter isn’t an effective rebuttal.
It’s the Chinaman’s nervous effort to save face after committing an egregious faux pas.
It’s the child’s effort to win sympathy after breaking a prized family heirloom.
It’s YOUR snarky way of saying that you really have no better rebuttal to a solution that was offered by someone you find blindingly distasteful.
Get over the fact that I committed sodomy thirty five years ago and argue like a man.
@CooCoo:
CooCoo you forgot to use your new signature:
@George Wells:
A sexist queer; whoda thunk it?
@retire05:
Didn’t THINK had a real argument.
You’re just an empty head, spitting into the wind – as usual.
Come back when you get an idea other than that you don’t like OTHER people’s ideas.
@retire05:
He might be the hemale half of the set.
@George Wells:
Were your fingers busy when you typed that convoluted mess?
If you were pointing to me, I just don’t have a real opponent in you. You’re limited to one issue and even then you don’t know much about that except for the personal aspect of it, which is highly biased.
Give it up, George. You’re just an angry old queer and it shows.
@Redteam:
LOL
@retire05 #82:
I’m not angry at all.
I’m happy as a clam.
Like the time you REFUSED to rebut my SCOTUS prediction,
You AGAIN refuse to rebut my illegal alien solution.
Your refusal to challenge my argument confirms your acknowledgement that I am correct.
I knew as much, but wasn’t sure that you had the sense to figure it out.
But as you have already demonstrated repeatedly that when you CAN’T rebut, you spit, I take your spit as your surrender.
And I take it graciously, for I am a better Christian than you and live with the grace of Jesus.
Praise the Lord!
@George Wells:
Yeah, right.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
A Christian is one who follows the teachings of Christ. You do not. You lie with another man and that is an abomination in the eyes of the Lord. You don’t get to pick and choose which teachings of Christ you follow and then call yourself a Christian.
But salvation is promised to all who turn from their sinful ways and repent.
Opinions vary.
Pope Francis Takes Aim At Ideologically Obsessed Christians, Says They Have Illness
At least you still have a lot of support for your thinking among the Taliban, in Iran, and among numerous Islamic extremist organizations.
@retire05 #84:
“You don’t get to pick and choose which teachings of Christ you follow and then call yourself a Christian.”
Sure I do, “Church-Lady”. Exactly as every other so-called “Christian” picks and chooses the parts of the Bible that they are comfortable following.
You don’t get to hold me to a higher standard than other “Christians” are held to.
But keep ignoring your glaring failure to dispute the undeniable benefits of my illegal immigration solution.
Picking at my faith as if GOD died and left you in charge is a poor distraction from your intellectual bankruptcy.
Engaging in rhetorical subterfuge will only fool other fools.
@George Wells:
Your apparent disdain for “church” ladies, is recognized. Do you have equal disdain for “church” men or are you just exhibiting your sexism again?
The key phrase here being “so-called.” You can call yourself a unicorn, that doesn’t make you one. The teachings of Christ are clear. Just as you are to help the least among us, you are to do it in secret to glorify the name of God, not your own. just as you are to honor the Sabbath, honor your father and mother, et al, you are instructed not to lie with another man, which you do.
Not only do you disobey the teachings of Christ, you openly brag about it. You are no more a Christian than I am a Jew.
If they are cafeteria Christians, like yourself, they are not true Christians.
Christ died for your sins yet you choose to remain morally bankrupt. That is your choice.
In Acts 21:25 non-Jewish backgrounded Christians are specifically freed from putting themselves under Mosaic Law (with all those food restrictions, etc.)
But there were FOUR things from PRE-Mosaic times that they were to abide by.
Eating un-bled meat was one, eating blood as a food was another, eating foods after they had been sacrificed to idols was another.
Then there was fornication.
The root in Greek for fornication is the same as the root for pornography, it includes ALL sex outside of marriage as well as all homosexual acts.
So, Christians may ”pick-and-choose” inside of many other grey areas but not from doing any of these things.
@Tiresome05 #87:
“Keep ignoring your glaring failure to dispute the undeniable benefits of my illegal immigration solution.
Engaging in rhetorical subterfuge will only fool other fools.”
Instead of addressing your own failure, you preach about Christianity.
Will crying solve the illegal immigration problem? No.
“Keep ignoring your glaring failure to dispute the undeniable benefits of my illegal immigration solution.
Engaging in rhetorical subterfuge will only fool other fools.”
Your Bible cannot help you escape from the trap you’ve got yourself stuck in.
Keep crying, if it makes you feel good.
@Nanny G #88:
What gives you the impression that I care what YOUR opinion of Biblical scripture dictates? This argument isn’t about the Bible.
Tiresome05 is only hiding from her own inability to challenge the solution to the illegal immigration that I proposed. She is cowering under her cloak of righteous indignation. She doesn’t need your rescue. Leave her alone to lick her wounds.
@George Wells:
What you propose is murder, plain and simple. One other item forbade by the Bible.
Duh!!! You brought Christianity into the discussion. Of your meds again, George?
Wordsmithing doesn’t change that what you recommend, with no authority for that recommendation, is still murder.
MY Bible? Is it not also YOUR Bible as you profess to be such a stellar Christian?
I’m not crying. I’m laughing as your simplemindedness. Of course, you totally avoided the fact that I did a report for a sitting U.S. Congressman, which he presented to the committee he sits on which deals with homeland security. You can’t stand the fact that while you piss in the wind, I actually have done something positive to bringing the problem of illegal immigration to the attention of those who create our laws. What a sad, pathetic, little person you are.
@George Wells:
The only one wounded here is you, George. You have proven, beyond doubt, that you are simply an angry old queer. Most people who read FA will not even give you the time of day. Could that be a hint to the import you hold here?
Your entire hateful attitude is the antithesis of Christ’s most basic and important teaching. You want to hurt people with your words. You’re constantly trying to. The only reason you engage people in discussion is to give you the opportunity. You then gradually crank it up, and it becomes a game to see how much abuse they’ll take. Where in your personal history does that come from?
@Greg: That’s O5–. a professed Catholic she rarely follows the Pontiffs or The Church’s teachings. She suggesrs that few agree with George, but other than her sidekick RT , who at this Conservative site supports her reactionary views?
I’ve learned to stay clear, though I’m sure she’ll spew some venom at this comment.
Thank you for your service. Greg. RW
@Tiresome05 #91:
“What you propose is murder, plain and simple. One other item forbade by the Bible.”
Are you telling me now that you are against capital punishment? Isn’t Texas the leader in that barbarism?
You speak out of both sides of your mouth simultaneously, squawking noisily about the imminent disaster that illegal immigration will bring us, and then feigning righteous indignation when a REAL solution to the problem is suggested. The cost of my option would be minute – a few CHEAP lives at the most – and suddenly you’re a bleeding-heart liberal championing the end of the death penalty.
You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
“I’m laughing a(t) your simplemindedness.”
And how astonishingly Christian of you to laugh at the simpleminded.
@Rich Wheeler and Greg:
And thank you BOTH for your kind support.
I have encountered Retire05’s brand of bigotry often enough before to know that it is as immutable as a pillar of salt.
Nothing I say could ever thaw her ice-cold heart.
But I respond as a sporting adventure, enjoying the challenge to remain focused while holding steadfast against her hateful invectives.
Keeps me young.
@rich wheeler:
Few do agree with George. I do agree that shooting illegals will cause them to self deport. So would shooting homosexuals. I hardly think you would agree that it would be the best way to get rid of illegals or homosexuals, but everyone would agree that it would be an ‘effective’ way. Tell me Rich, do you think shooting illegals is the ‘best’ way to get rid of them? That would be you agreeing with George (also now known as CooCoo).
@rich wheeler:
Rich, I’m guessing you don’t think George’s proposed solution to get rid of illegals and homosexuals is ‘reactionary’?
@rich wheeler:
Oh, that’s rich. A cafeteria Christian, of the Protestant bent, presumes to tell us that a Catholic doesn’t follow the teaching of the Church, or the Pontiff, who is only representative of the spiritual leader of the Church and whose words are not infallible. But I would suggest that RW, who seems to have no true understanding of Catholic doctrine, supports the Pontiff who is a liberation theologist. The Church as endured other wrong-headed Pontiffs, it will endure, and survive this one.
My, how you leftists love the word “reactionary.” You seem to think it is some magic word that allows you to claim higher ground. Yet, time after time, it is the left that makes comments that are “reactionary” with no recognition of that from the lemmings that follow them. Yet, it was a New Hampshire Democrat county chair that recently said that the Republican candidates were members of the “serf and slave-owning class.” Nah, nothing “reactionary” about that, right?
Of course, it never dawned on you that it seems most on FA don’t want to bother giving George so much as the time of day. I at least give him the respect of a response, but I am sure my responses do not fit in with your high standards, while you more than approve of his insolent remarks aimed at me.
The venom is yours, RW.
I must be hitting nerves. Not having singular courage, in one thread the leftists have joined forces to take on one conservative. How brave you must feel.
@George CooCoo Wells:
Capital punishment is not classified as murder. It is classified as ‘justice’.