Posted on 06/30/2010 1:09:09 PM PDT by UCAL
You obviously don't know Kristi Noem, who beat out the Secretary of State for the nomination!
Andy Barr getting listed is interesting. I wasn’t sure if we were making a serious run at Ben Chandler this year. Glad to see he’s getting some attention.
Some of the “Young Guns” lost in their primaries. (Thank you Tea Partiers!!!)
“You obviously don’t know Kristi Noem, who beat out the Secretary of State for the nomination!”
Not really surprising if one slipped through the cracks, since the pubbie elite is as incompetent as they are unreliable.
“Uh, yes, actually I do.”
Uh, no, actually you don’t.
“I’m sure you’re a nice person”
There you go with those assumptions again.
“but unless you live in Wyoming or Idaho, not every Republican candidate and office holder will pass your conservative litmus test. Please do join us in the real world one day.”
The real world of RINO backstabbers? The real world where getting a Republican elected is more important than getting a decent person elected—than getting a conservative elected? The real world where principle is denigrated as a “litmus test,” because people don’t want to admit how despicable it is to casually violate fundamental principles? The real world where the governor of Idaho is a RINO who exerts himself only to raise taxes? The real world where the only conservative among Idaho’s legislators lost to a leftist swine like Minnick? The real world where someone who claims to belong on a conservative site uses a term like “litmus test?” The real world where Republicans are as stupid as Demonrats are evil?
Sounds to me like a world that needs a good slap across the face.
“Yes, your “they are supported by the NRCC and must therefor all be RINO’s argument”
Gee, it’s awfully liberal of you to restate my position into an absurdity that is easy to attack.
You are the one that started ranting about “all” and “must therefor (sic).” There is nothing in my remarks that justifies that distortion. People of good faith don’t argue like that. And by “like that” I mean trying to “win” rather than trying to arrive at the truth.
My argument is based on lengthy observation of the Republican elite and the candidates they support, not on any of your “must therefore all” nonsense. You have offered nothing in rebuttal of the opinions I have formed on the basis of this observation, or the ensuing discussion and contemplation. Instead, your response has been that described by Thomas Sowell: “It is amazing how many people think that they can answer an argument by attributing bad motives to those who disagree with them. Using this kind of reasoning, you can believe or not believe anything about anything, without having to bother to deal with facts or logic.”
“I quiver before your rhetorical brilliance.”
I don’t doubt that you quiver, but it has nothing to do with rhetoric and everything to do with having it pointed out (by several posters) that the endorsement of the NRCC in no way indicates that things are looking up for conservatism.
“They at least, want to get the gavel out of the hands of Nancy Pelosi.”
They don’t want it badly enough to take any risks to make it happen. No cojones.
They are not conservatives, and cannot be trusted to do the right thing. They have stabbed us in the back time and time again, and when they weren’t doing that they were getting pimp-slapped by the Demonrats simply because they are incompetent, stupid, and timid.
To Hell with them. When they had the power all they did was spend like Demonrats (who are more profligate even than the proverbial drunken sailor).
No more second chances. Or five-hundred and thirty-second chances. They are as dangerous to the Constitution as all the Obama Zombies together. They must go down. The ash heap of history is calling.
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.