Posted on 08/15/2010 11:42:21 PM PDT by Loyal Sedition
LAS VEGAS (Aug. 15) -- After weeks of bumbling from one did-she-really-say-that moment to the next, Republican Senate hopeful Sharron Angle last week showed some signs -- in answers to questions on evolution, prostitution and gay marriage -- that she may be learning the fine art of politically shrewd phrasing, and becoming a more deft and potentially formidable candidate in the bargain.
(Excerpt) Read more at aolnews.com ...
Pinko Reid is not pulling any further ahead.
There is, of course, no bumbling from Sharron Angle. There is only Sen. Hairy Reid's (Socialist-Nev) campaign propaganda. A kaleidoscope of cut and paste hit pieces so poorly produced that any observer can see they are phoney.
They are so bad they almost say, "The quality of this ad is an example of Hairy's best effort, in Nevada and in Washington D.C."
yitbos
It would take a lot more than a few gaffes to get anyone rational to vote for Harry Reid. I wouldn’t vote for Reid if it turned out that Angle worked in a brothel. And planned to keep working there. I wouldn’t vote for Reid if she drove drunk, ran over kittens, swerved into little old ladies, then laughed about it. Reid is worse. I’d vote for Stalin first.
Its frustrating that Angle has ‘prove’ she is mainstream when the Dem Party is full of full fledged wack jobs.
Unless Angle expresses concerns in public hearings that Guam could tip over from troops deployments there, I’d say she’s well within the bounds of rational and mainstream discourse.
Sharon needs to get in there and fight, explain her positions and don’t let that commie Reid define her. Show the world she knows what she’s talking about. Unfortunately that requires Money the one thing Reid’s insider position has supplied him with a gigantic supply of.
Reid Is Washington incarnate buying its own elections with the people’s money.
Oooo... A secret recording.
Does anybody know about it?
Does anybody know about it?
And will anyone be prosecuted for making it?
I'm sure Eric Holder is dispatching his crack Justice Department lawyers to jump on this case even as we post.
“Unless Angle expresses concerns in public hearings that Guam could tip over...”
LOL, you are right, that IS now the standard!
Hahahaha
When she pointed out that we don't own Social Security, she was simply telling the unvarnished truth.By design, the intent of Social Security is that it owns us. No socialist can really wrap his mind around the idea that senior citizens who are collecting SS can go to Taxed Enough Already rallies to protest the taxation which the government pays out to buy our rights away from us.
To rationalize Social Security and liberty, you would have to amend the Constitution to cede title to Social Security to those who have, perforce, paid into that Ponzi scheme. The conundrum being, of course, that there isn't enough money in the world for the government to meet its "obligations." You would have to adjust the system so that it would pay an annuity to people based, not directly on age, but on the percentage of the population which was older than you. A system, IOW, which would not leave the elderly out in the cold but would also not commit so much to seniors as to tax our grandchildren into penury.
I have lately become an advocate of the application of Article V - amendments of the Constitution. To the extent that I advocate the calling of a constitutional convention. The mere act of calling a convention would assert states' rights, since Congress has no authority to prevent the amendment of the Constitution if the states should determine to do so without the assent of 2/3 of Congress. And since it takes fewer (34) states to call for a convention than it would (38) to ratify amendments, 38 states could negotiate the outlines of the desired changes, call for a convention, and give the results the force of law without a supermajority in either the House or the Senate (or indeed, I would argue, without even a majority of either house, since Congress would have a duty to call a convention, and the states could convene it without Congress' assent if Congress defaulted in that duty). IOW, 34 states could act alone to present any four of the remaining 16 states with the option of ratifying amendment(s) which the 34 states had proposed.
I would advocate that this power be used to enforce states' rights on the behavior of SCOTUS by the simple expedient of actually naming names in an amendment. If the Constitution says that Sonia Sotomayor, for example, isn't a justice of SCOTUS, then she isn't - simple as that. The precedent of the states agreeing on such a statement would put paid to the idea of a "living" Constitution by establishing the existence of an authority above SCOTUS willing and able to take effective action in defense of the rule of law.
Aren’t double standards beautiful?
Angle might be a bit out there, but put her next to Biden, Charlie Rangel, Harry Reid and some of the other nuts in the Dem party and she looks like the absolute sanest, most normal person you’ve ever had the pleasure of knowing.
No need to snipe at the messenger, I though making the members aware of press items regards candidates was a main function of this forum.
Take a pill. I wasn’t “sniping”, just making fun of the ridiculous headline.
FRegards,
LH
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.