O o . There goes the angry yout' vote..
Posted on 07/08/2011 1:27:34 PM PDT by ejdrapes
At least it gives my militant lesbian cousin in Minnesota something to rage about and that’s always good entertainment.
She should add opposition to Marxism to that pledge.
And while Barack has claimed that he is not a Marxist, he should be pushed on the matter to (A) define the chief principle of Marxism, and (B) explain how his goal of redistributing wealth is somehow different.
The big idea is to try and convince a Christian that by not caring about the values, a politician can exemplify them better. I mean, think of it this way, liberals at least have the sense to try appealing to those who posess values, right? That’s what the AGW issue has largely become: politicians and some interested members of religious affiliations using the idea that God set us up as stewards, to promote supporting Global Warming, which is an exaggeration at best, a twisted dogma at the worst.
I’m currently reading “You can still trust the communists to be communists”,
and you can see how their methods fit right in with the AGW issue, and how they’ll use Christian dupes to advance their cause by couching it in terms congruent with Christian values.
No one would gain any power if they stood up and said “I’m a Communist, and I want to enact policies that will destroy the capitalist free market in America”.
But, if you couch it in terms of “saving the erf”, you can accomplish the same goals AND be seen as a good person AND gain power by getting the votes of those who think saving the erf is something that needs to be done.
Mail.
I’m usually ambivalent about politicians being asked to sign pledges but this one seems reasonable for a conservative and something Most conservatives can agree with. I think Michelle Bachmann did the right thing. It may or may not help her but it can’t won’t hurt her with conservatives or Iowa voters.
We could use a no nonsense one-termer.. one determined to move some piles of BS this country has been sold of late out of the WH.
If ya can’t make a gubamint run on 3 trillion, for criminy, what good are ya?
We face more than a few elections to cleanse the Congressional colon of all the pork, largesse, waste and fat.. and stimulus.. raising the debt limit only invites more spending.
O o . There goes the angry yout' vote..
Marriage is already deeply entwined in the law, and should be, due to the inherent tendency of the arrangement to produce new taxpayers.
Sharia does often entail contract law, but the bare terms of a contract appear against a backdrop of what is called gap filler law, not directly in the contract but an influence on how the contract should be interpreted. It is that back door which could allow development of a body of law that is alien to our traditional legal principles.
As for pornography, it is an assumption too far to say that the protection sought for women and children is necessarily violative of the first amendment. Many women and children every year are drawn into lives no reasonable person would choose, coerced by drugs or poverty or threat of force to serve as sexual entertainment for debased persons. This often ties directly into criminal activity that is so profitable that local law enforcement fails in their duty to protect. This is the foul root from which much pornography stems, and it is not the proper subject of free speech protection, though the end product is considered so.
Bottom line, a pledge can be a good thing in such areas, if there is not an over-commitment to a specific legal strategy, unless that strategy, like DOMA, is a proven and constitutional strategy.
I don't either, but they always paint an interesting from the candidates who refuse to sign them. Especially the ones who depict traditional, time-honored, sane values as "controversial."
It's why they placed the word personal in front of liberty.
If something is illegal, okeedokee.
Give us a detailed account of the head explosion if Bachmann is elected president. That ought to be good.
Her last rant about “rethuglicans” included some fantasy about homosexuals being hunted with dogs, forcible conversion, forced marriage to filthy Christian men, and internment camps.
She’s a Minnesota state employee so she’s got plenty of spare time on her hands these days. LOL
Placemark.
But this is a sticking point with me, FI presidential candidates are going to sign pledges, and influential conservatives are going to create them. Could they at least take some care with the wording so that they don;t make it so very easy for the left to take things out of context and make us look ignorant?
for example the Pledge requires “a rejection of Sharia Islam”
There is no such thing. There is Sunni Islam, Shi’ite’ Sufist, Salaafist, Wahhibist etc, but No Sharia. Sharia is the term they use for their religious laws. Using the term “Sharia Islam” makes about as much sense as “Kosher Judiasm” or “Canon Law Catholic”. A quibble perhaps but why give the other side the ammunition?
Same thing with the bit that talks about how There were more intact African-American families during Slavery than now. Why is that in there? Never mind the dubious historical accuracy, the fact is, that sort of thing is red meat to the opposition. I guarantee you, even now they are twisting this into “Michele Bachmann signed a document saying black kids were better off as slaves”
Yes that’s a total distortion of what she actually signed, but the first casualty of a political race is nuance, and She should know that.
>”If you don’t like Sharia Laws, don’t enter into a contract on those terms’’< Holy S**t! That is staggeringly stupid! Sharia law? Where do you live?
That’s what shallow pandering get you...
It’s really worse than that, although you’re headed in the right direction. There is a fellow who was a mentor to Bachmann who has made statements like “for a while it was humane to keep slaves because life was so hard for them otherwise.” I forget the fellow’s name, but if Bachmann gets the nomination, that fellow and this pledge will be combined to do a reverse Jeremiah Wright to her, paint her, not just as a flake, but as a scary dominionist theocrat, with credentials to prove it. It’s a trap.
Boy you hit that dead-on. Just let the libs try and overplay their hand... Most people - and I live in a liberal state - do not think the way they, the true extremists, do.
And in formal logic that’s the fallacy of pretended neutrality. You’re right.
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.