Skip to comments.Queenmaker Palin Triumphs with Christine O’Donnell (The Left spinning like a centrifuge)
Posted on 09/15/2010 1:16:20 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Democrats shouldnt crow too loudly about Christine ODonnells Republican primary victory for the open Senate seat in Delaware.
Yeah, shes nuts.
Thats all the Tea Party serves up is a bowl of mixed nuts. Its gotten so bad that the Planters corporation is suing for product defamation.
ODonnell is especially odd on the matter of sex. Shes on record saying condoms dont prevent AIDS, that AIDS victims shouldnt be called victims, and that masturbation is bad, bad, bad.
Yes, ODonnells upset will make it more likely for the Democrats to win the Senate seat there, and thus hang on to majority control of that chamber. But dont count her out, since hard-core conservatives are going to show up in huge numbers on November 2, no matter what.
Even if, as expected, she loses the campaign, ODonnell represents the rise of the far right in America. She was correct when she said, in her victory speech, that shes riding a wave.
Its a wave with a dangerous undertow, and it could take our democracy away with it.
Her victory on Tuesday was another triumph for Sarah Palin, whos proving to be quite the queenmaker.
Palins endorsements have paid off dramatically, and with every new one, it seems more and more possible that she could actually win the Republican nomination. Already, she has the highest favorability ratings among the leading candidates, and her unfavorables were comparable to Romneys. It is Palin, more than any other Republican figure in the country, who senses the moment and is seizing it.
Some Democrats think thats great, on the assumption that, as the Republican nominee, shed have no chance of beating Obama.
But be careful what you wish for. Shed start with about 40 percent of the voters who cant stand Obama. And she wouldnt have far to go to make it a race. If the economy continues to stall, who knows?
The Progressive? ‘Nuff said...
Still don’t see how this wave could ‘take our democracy with it’
O’Donnell is aising $2,500 a minute right now. See the link on Drudge. She started with a 50k goal. Now she’s 93% of the way to 500,000. There are 700,000 voters in Delaware in total. The RNSC got scared (of us basically) and gave her $47,000 earlier in the day as well. :P
Dem Dems is in troubles.
Libturds still haven't figured out that they live in a Republic.
U.S. Constitution Article 4 - The States Section 4 - Republican Government The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,...
All this does is give Coons a CHANCE to win, when he had NO chance before. He is not guaranteed anything...not in this climate. People see that others feel the same as they do, and they are responding exponentially...
“Still dont see how this wave could take our democracy with it.”
It would get rid of the Dem’s mob-ocracy & restore a REPUBLIC!
Anyone know how Mr. Coons is doing in his fundraising as compared to Mrs. O’Donnell?
God Almighty - Planters jokes? I haven’t heard those since George Jessel died.
If pundits are right and democrats have a disastrous November 2nd, the lib rags will be a SCREAM to read!!!
EVERYONE: Put the money bomb link from Drudge up on your facebook.
“shes on record saying condoms dont prevent AIDS,”
So if I put a condom on my winky then shoot heroin into my eyeball using a needle I found on the floor or a junkie crack house, I’m not at risk for AIDS?
IIRC, condoms have a 3-5% failure rate, even in the best of circumstances, so it’s Russian Roulette.
Liberals like to insist that we are democracy, when in fact, we are a "Constitutional Republic". Probably because they have trampled on the Constitution so much, they forgot we have one!
Still dont see how this wave could take our democracy with it.
By “Democracy” they mean voter fraud schemes, amnesty for illegals, public union payoffs for votes along with any other way they can steal elections to push their agenda through.
If there was an award for tired lame jokes...
Let's see if we can help the liberal out on this one (and anyone with a probabilities background is welcome to join in).
According to planed parent hood, a condom is 90% effective at preventing pregnancy.
A woman can only become pregnant approximately 6 days out of every month.
That means a condom only has to work 20% of the time, and during that time, it is only successful 90% of the time.
AIDS is transmissible 100% of the time. My statistics and probabilities haven't been used since college, but I put a condom at about 18% successful at preventing AIDS.
Hardly a ringing endorsement, but it hasn't stopped the government from spending millions to promote “safe” sex!
And this is from Obama's CDC.
LOL...remember when Sarah quit her governorship and all the “experts” in both parties said that was the end of her influence in politics? Yes, they are proving that they can be wrong all the time.
Mayby so--but the nuts of the Tea Party are nothing compared to the hate-filled, bigotted, greedy, intolerant, un-liberal, America-hating psychos who make up the Leftist Freakshow.
“Shes on record saying condoms dont prevent AIDS, that AIDS victims shouldnt be called victims, and that masturbation is bad, bad, bad.”
What planet do these people live on? Condoms might retard the spread of AIDS, but they don’t prevent it. AIDS-infectees, with the exception of people like those who got it long ago from blood transfusions, are not “victims”, any more than people who get herpes are “Herpes victims”. As for masturbation, last time I checked, it was still considered a moral indiscretion by almost everyone, even if it’s a commonplace one. If there’s nothing wrong with it, we wouldn’t sneak off to the bathroom or wherever to do it :P
I sure as hell hope so, we need to restore a constitutional Republic.
“IIRC, condoms have a 3-5% failure rate, even in the best of circumstances, so its Russian Roulette.”
The “best of circumstances” is key to that statistic. Really, it means they don’t count the malfunctions that can happen if the product is not “deployed” just right, which is not uncommon.
I love it that conservative women are winning. Conservative women have spent decades in the wilderness preparing for this. The insults and belittling should just run off our backs.
If you are a lawyer, and the person that you wish to discredit is female, employment of the "Nuts and Sluts" strategy has some success with juries. It is a chavenistic technique to discredit the female opposition without actually having to address relevant issues related to credibility. First provide some irregularity in the female opponents history; it doesn't have to be related to the present. Then find a sexual irregularity, no matter how trivial. The jury will then draw their own conclusions.
Read what this guy wrote again. He even gets it in the right order. First a paragraph about nuts, then sex.
It's rather vapid when you know the motive.
And as someone e-mailed me, people that have unprotected sex with and HIV positive person don't ALWAYS become infected - so maybe I need to increase the probability of condom protection for that (although I don't know how you'd factor such a possibility).
Bottom line to me is this: if I had a choice between reliving my youth and spending another year in Viet Nam, or having sex with a known HIV infected person for a year (with or without a condom) - I'd take Nam. I had more confidence in the guys I was with keeping me safe than a thin plastic doohickey.
I really don't understand how people feel so indestructible just because they use a condom.
So what exactly is happeing today with the likes of Obama as president and Reid/Pelosi as the leaders in Congress?
Author of this article is a moron.
People usually 'sneak off' to the bathroom in order to have a dump as well, there is nothing morally wrong with it, its just that kind of thing is best done behind closed doors...
>>Still dont see how this wave could take our democracy with it<<
He was talking about their version of democracy. His expression of our didnt include us and our version of democracy.
After all, she took out a Castle...
“People usually ‘sneak off’ to the bathroom in order to have a dump as well, there is nothing morally wrong with it, its just that kind of thing is best done behind closed doors...”
Ok, then why do people who masturbate in public have to register for life, while people who take a dump in public only have to pay a fine?
> “Shes on record saying condoms dont prevent AIDS, that AIDS victims shouldnt be called ‘victims’
This is a big one to the leftists and the pharma poison vendors.
“AIDS” is a much bigger hoax than global warming or ozone depletion. Dr Duesberg established that AIDS is not itself a transmissable disease, and pretending that it is is a multi-billion dollar per year hoax that empowers numerous scammers world wide.
Chris Coons Facebook’s members 2:27 AM
Christine O’Donnell Facebook members 2:27 AM
I’m pretty sure having sex with your wife in public would also get you in serious trouble. In any case, since when has the law been the ultimate arbiter of what is morally right or wrong?
“Im pretty sure having sex with your wife in public would also get you in serious trouble. In any case, since when has the law been the ultimate arbiter of what is morally right or wrong?”
The law isn’t the ultimate arbiter. There are 2 common schools of thought on how to judge morality. The first requires reference to a universal standard of morality, traditionally the Bible in Western civilization. By that standard, masturbation can be judged immoral simply by virtue of it being a symptom of lust. The other method is to appeal to a public consensus of the society.
Now, we could take a poll and see if the majority of people think masturbation is immoral, but I doubt that would be very telling, since it’s a subject people might not answer honestly and openly about. Or, we can just look at the law, which already is a sort of measure of the public consensus as to what behavior is considered unacceptable in a society.
By any applicable measure of morality I can think of (besides the Thelemic/Satanist “do whatever you feel like”), masturbation comes up short. If you have some other standard you’d like to appeal to, by all means make your case.
The general secular morality standard would be ‘do no harm’. By this standard, if an activity is dangerous to others or harms others, then it should be illegal. Masturbating in public is pretty threatening around others, but not in private. As to why taking a dump in public is treated as a less serious offence, that is probably a combination of the influence of traditional judeo-christian morality and the fact that, unlike masturbating in public, defecating in public is merely disgusting, rather than an indication that someone is a dangerous sexual pervert who is a hairs breadth away from progressing on to committing a serious sexual assault or rape...
“The general secular morality standard would be do no harm.”
I’d take issue with this reasoning. This is not the general secular morality standard, it’s nothing more than Alistair Crowley’s “Do What Thou Wilt” philosophy restated. Most people don’t agree that this is the only standard, because we don’t accept that things which cause harm to one’s self are morally acceptable.
I’m not sure secularists would say that masturbation is harmful. If you don’t believe it is a sin that will damn you for all eternity, there is no harm caused as far as you are concerned...
“Im not sure secularists would say that masturbation is harmful. If you dont believe it is a sin that will damn you for all eternity, there is no harm caused as far as you are concerned...”
I’m sure you are right for a lot of secularists, but at the same time that doesn’t mean masturbation does no harm to a person. Indulging in masturbation can result in some psychological and sexual issues that are not beneficial, especially if it’s done in concert with pornography.
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.