Posted on 08/24/2004 4:15:41 PM PDT by Willie Green
Allowed by whom EV?
Is it that Keyes does not understand the meaning of "shall not be infringed"?
Look, I didn't say he was going to win. There are other factors here.
I think that Kerry's worst days are still ahead of him. It's already a slow drip of unbelievably crushing news for him so far. Even if you DON'T factor in other ridiculous news about guys like Sandy Berger - Democrats are going to be pretty severely depressed before November.
If Keyes makes sense during the debates, there is going to be a significant number of people that will flop to his side this time, just because the sheer weight of all the insanity coming from the left is going to leave the average middle-lefty pretty fed up.
Keyes may still lose, but it won't be a 65% to 35% affair. Obama is way, way over to the left like Kerry is.
What are these nonsequiters you're writing about Luis?
Are you having a conversation with an imaginary friend?
No takers re. #236??
I guess the anti-Keyes folks are reluctant to put their marks in the sand.
I'm more curious to see if YOU know where that phrase comes from.
How do you define your screename? As a local 80 grip I define it one way and was just wondering.
I define it has a hauler of liberal fecal sludge :-)
I view them as politics as normal. (relating to: "how do we view Keyes's constant attacks on Bush after he was elected?"
Guffaw!
Well, that works out swell for them, doesn't it, since there was NO "before" he was "selected."
I think Keyes might be able to ride the Bush super-landslide in November.
If we've disagreed in the past, I surely don't remember it; contrary what some may say, I don't carry grudges from issue to issue (well, there WAS that TLBSHOW thing...LOL), but that just falls under the "Don't Like Liars" things.
But as I have said from the very first one of these threads, I'm fascinated with the political process, especially "this" one; to watch people who for five years have told us that it's their CONSTITUTIONAL duty to NOT march in lockstep now demand that we.....er.....ah.....march in lockstep has been one of the most fascinating contortions I've watched in my six years at FR.
That and the fact that I just love to see exactly who will call me an anti-Christian traitor make these threads irresistable.
joesbucks said it at the very beginning: for years we 'fake conservatives' have been told that if ONLY we'd elect a "real, true" conservative they'd win; we have now arrived at the "money where the mouth is" moment.
(An exceedingly simple question, no?)
Loyalty Oaths generally are, n'est ce pas?
You forgot to complete it, though. Once you finish rounding it out, it'w not quite so simple, my lord.
You forgot "(d) Undecided", and, the biggie, "the penalty for giving the wrong answer."
Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to go board up some broken windows.
So you think that criticisms of politicians by other political figures (and non-political figures) is not valid? Sorry if I mis-interpreted your 'guffaw', but this is my best guess as to your meaning.
Nice try, but I was referring to the two different views you have there; one for Keyes and one for the rest of us.
Are you 399?
It's actually a very simple question to answer for honest, non-hypocritical folks. I'm pretty sure you're one of those. :-)
Not sure how useful an "Undecided" category would be. Does that mean one would flip a coin on election day?
Perhaps a better (d) choice could be "Not voting, so I won't have any credibility when griping about the (immediate and future) results".
Re. "the penalty for giving the wrong answer", what would be a "wrong" answer? I'm just curious how certain FReepers would actually vote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.