Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $33,055
Woo hoo!! And the first 37% is in!! Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Posts by aruanan

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Customer says party store employee refused to fill balloon order after learning it's for officer

    10/03/2016 5:58:55 AM PDT · 9 of 26
    aruanan to rightwingintelligentsia

    Fire the clerk’s ass immediately.

  • Pope Francis Calls Woman with Sex-change Operation a ‘Man’ and Calls Partners ‘Married’

    10/03/2016 5:50:02 AM PDT · 32 of 65
    aruanan to BlessedBeGod

    Looks like the gay mafia the previous pope fought and got the boot over is having its way with this guy.

  • The Clinton BS Files: Who is Chelsea Clinton’s real dad? A mystery spun out of nothing

    10/03/2016 5:40:58 AM PDT · 38 of 57
    aruanan to simpson96

    Hey, Yoko Ono said she had sex with Hillary. And Chelsea looks NOTHING like Bill but everything like Web Hubbell.

  • Giant freezer may be a solution to Montreal’s intractable bed bugs infestation

    09/04/2016 7:15:06 PM PDT · 64 of 70
    aruanan to ameribbean expat
    Inside, bins hold carpets and plastic bags filled with bed bug-ridden clothing for four days, which Sanche says is the minimum time needed to make sure the insects are dead.

    They were nearly eradicated during the 1940s due to the widespread use of DDT. They have increased greatly since 1995 due to government bans on effective pesticides.
  • Giant freezer may be a solution to Montreal’s intractable bed bugs infestation

    09/04/2016 7:12:29 PM PDT · 63 of 70
    aruanan to ameribbean expat

    Here’s how to end bed bug infestation:


  • CNN Media Panel: Clinton vs. Trump Is Apples vs. 'Rancid Meat'

    09/04/2016 7:10:40 PM PDT · 63 of 66
    aruanan to Nachum

    Those who claim to FEAR what Trump COULD do but turn a blind eye to 40 years of what Hillary actually HAS DONE are folks with some serious problems.

  • Pence on Clinton: 'Most dishonest candidate...since Richard Nixon'

    09/04/2016 7:06:50 PM PDT · 68 of 81
    aruanan to digger48

    Pence is overlooking Obama.

  • Quasar Found 420 Trillion Times Brighter Than Our Sun

    07/29/2016 3:50:29 PM PDT · 30 of 50
    aruanan to blam

    Actually, it should read this way:

    “A quasar, recently ejected from its relatively nearby parent galaxy, has such an extreme intrinsic redshift that, if indicative of recessional velocity rather than age, would put it at such a distance that its intrinsic brightness would make it appear to be 420 trillion time brighter than our sun.”

    Funny how much trouble the simple but wrong interpretation of redshift as indicative of recessional velocity in the early days of modern astronomy can cause.

  • Ted Cruz Tries, Fails to Explain ‘New York Values’ to Actual New Yorkers

    04/07/2016 9:17:45 AM PDT · 163 of 552
    aruanan to xzins

    I guess this must mean that liberal New Yorkers are pretty stupid. I understood what he said about New York values. And obviously Trump understood him or he would not have busily started to spin and obfuscate.

  • A Hypothesis That Will Make You Uncomfortable

    09/10/2015 1:23:38 PM PDT · 23 of 48
    aruanan to Rusty0604
    It's simply that

    1) If your caloric intake is greater than your caloric expenditure, no matter WHAT you eat, you will gain weight.

    2) If you are not actively building muscle, that weight gain will be in the form of stored dietary fat.

    3) If your fat stores grow above a sufficient point and you have a decrease in physical activity below a certain point

    you will start looking pre-diabetic and more likely than not eventually develop type II diabetes.

    But regular physical exercise (and not very much is required) is sufficient in men to offset the bad effects of obesity, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol.

    Eur Heart J. 2013 Feb;34(5):389-97. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs174. Epub 2012 Sep 4.

    The intriguing metabolically healthy but obese phenotype: cardiovascular prognosis and role of fitness.
    Ortega FB1, Lee DC, Katzmarzyk PT, Ruiz JR, Sui X, Church TS, Blair SN.

    Current knowledge on the prognosis of metabolically healthy but obese phenotype is limited due to the exclusive use of the body mass index to define obesity and the lack of information on cardiorespiratory fitness. We aimed to test the following hypotheses: (i) metabolically healthy but obese individuals have a higher fitness level than their metabolically abnormal and obese peers; (ii) after accounting for fitness, metabolically healthy but obese phenotype is a benign condition, in terms of cardiovascular disease and mortality.

    Fitness was assessed by a maximal exercise test on a treadmill and body fat per cent (BF%) by hydrostatic weighing or skinfolds (obesity = BF% ≥ 25 or ≥ 30%, men or women, respectively) in 43 265 adults (24.3% women). Metabolically healthy was considered if meeting 0 or 1 of the criteria for metabolic syndrome. Metabolically healthy but obese participants (46% of the obese subsample) had a better fitness than metabolically abnormal obese participants (P < 0.001). When adjusting for fitness and other confounders, metabolically healthy but obese individuals had lower risk (30-50%, estimated by hazard ratios) of all-cause mortality, non-fatal and fatal cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality than their metabolically unhealthy obese peers; while no significant differences were observed between metabolically healthy but obese and metabolically healthy normal-fat participants.

    (i) Higher fitness should be considered a characteristic of metabolically healthy but obese phenotype. (ii) Once fitness is accounted for, the metabolically healthy but obese phenotype is a benign condition, with a better prognosis for mortality and morbidity than metabolically abnormal obese individuals.
  • Glenn Beck: "Sarah Palin Has Become A Clown," I'm Embarrassed I Ever Supported Her

    09/10/2015 1:08:04 PM PDT · 113 of 174
    aruanan to Hojczyk

    I guess Glenn is going for the “I have grown” award.

  • Mars Rover Snaps Picture of Two Floating Spoon Rocks

    09/10/2015 1:04:49 PM PDT · 36 of 47
    aruanan to Sir Gawain

    I guess with almost no atmosphere and no precipitation you can get some weird stuff eroded out over the millennia.

  • Ex-NBC anchor Brian Williams returns to TV for Pope visit

    09/10/2015 12:47:57 PM PDT · 15 of 36
    aruanan to TexasCajun
  • Ex-NBC anchor Brian Williams returns to TV for Pope visit

    09/10/2015 12:35:55 PM PDT · 5 of 36
    aruanan to PROCON

    Williams: “I remember sitting in the Pontiff’s chemistry class and thinking, “Yes, one day he will become the pope who will turn our hearts back to the environment and fight the evil of human-generated CO2.”

  • Rare King David-Era Inscription Discovered in Biblical City

    06/20/2015 8:54:46 PM PDT · 5 of 10
    aruanan to lbryce
    Palestinians virulently deny any Jewish presence, existence ever in the Holy Land. They probably claim it's all faked.

    The pot calling the kettle black.
  • Dem Strategist: ‘Cannot Imagine Horror That Could’ve Occurred’ if Charlston Churchgoers Were Armed

    06/20/2015 8:52:48 PM PDT · 66 of 79
    aruanan to SeekAndFind

    We have now the spectacle of fools like the president of the Southern Poverty Law Center bloviating about racist killings while ignoring the 200 million murdered by his socialist political soul mates of the 260 million murdered by government types between 1917 and 1987? Or ignoring the 1,300 million abortions committed by his socialist political soul mates around the world since 1980?

    The biggest risk to life and liberty any citizen faces is from his own government or, if unborn, from his own mother. And yet they try to ramp up the hysteria about “lone wolf” killers whose body count over the past century is literally less than a millionth of those put to death in the name of socialism and womyn’s empowerment.

    If the Jews and the Kulaks and the Chinese murdered by Mao were sufficiently armed and willing to use it, they wouldn’t be dead not except for natural causes.

    And how many abortions would there be if the unborn could exercise their right to self-protection in such a way that if mommy dearest offed them, then mommy dearest would follow them down the tubes shortly thereafter?

    It is the weak, the unarmed, and the unwilling to fight that are ground to dust by the political opportunists and the self-centered.

  • Pope Francis Goes Off the Rails

    06/20/2015 8:38:30 PM PDT · 7 of 54
    aruanan to 2ndDivisionVet

    This is a demonstration of how thoroughly society has been undermined by progressivist thinking. The fundamental transformation took place back in the 19th century and we’re finally seeing the more resistant portions of society wicking up the poison.

  • Dear GOP: Show, Don't Tell

    12/27/2014 2:32:04 PM PST · 6 of 12
    aruanan to SeekAndFind
    Here's what I wrote to Jeb:
    Jeb, your dad won the first time because of Reagan and lost the second time because of himself, even though he was running against a venal Southern Democrat horndog sink-wanker.

    Then Bob "It's my turn" Dole, in spite of all the corruption and insanity of Clinton's first term, could not pull in enough votes to overcome the venal Southern Democrat horndog lip-biting, cigar-moistening, Waco-burning sink-wanker.

    Your brother, though a nice guy according to those who know him, barely scraped by against two of the most buffoonish, lying, poorly-educated dolts ever to run for the presidency up to that point and then profligately laid the Hoover-like groundwork for the unbelievable excesses of the next president.

    McCain, the Maverick against everything but folks like Ted Kennedy (an example of the Stockholm Syndrome which he displaced in time and space to his political captors) lost to a grinning, The Gods Must Be Crazy, red-diaper baby, Marxist, newbie about whom Tom Brokaw said five days before the election that nothing was really known about him.

    Gee, Tom, it's true that there are none so blind as those who refuse to see, because there were a lot of us who knew a great deal about him in spite of his efforts to cover things up.

    And then, after most of the rest of the country finally caught on about Obama, loser Romney, son of loser Romney, and architect of the prototype of Obamacare, sycophant in the most alarming John McCain way to Ted Kennedy and other Democrats, lost to the first guy in U.S. presidential history to get millions fewer votes in his reelection because even his supporters finally saw the petulant, pissy, condescending, lost without a TelePrompTer, promise anything to get elected, race-baiting grandiosity on a stick either for what he actually was or because he had not yet made the extreme leftward thrust into the heart of world capitalism his thoroughly Marxist pedigree from birth to adult seemed to have promised them.

    All of these Republicans lost or just barely (and embarrassingly) won by the skimpiest of margins, not because they were running against strong and principled candidates but because they, the Republican nominees, were the antithesis of what won the massive, unprecedented Republican gains at all levels of government in 2010 and 2014.

    And yet you want private lessons from the losers about how to fight against those responsible for 2010 and 2014 (and also the presidential electoral blowouts of 1980 and 1984, the candidate of which was bitterly opposed by your dad and Romney's dad in 1976 and by your dad leading up to 1980)!

    Dude, you have GOT to be the bottom of the Bush barrel. Why don't you become Crist-like and run as the Democrat loser you appear to want to be?
  • Patrick Henry on Kings and Presidents

    08/08/2014 7:43:25 AM PDT · 10 of 11
    aruanan to Jacquerie

    Barry says the Republicans are mad at him because he is “trying to do something.”

    Our poor, deluded (or deliberately obtuse) president.

    Barry, remember the Supreme Court’s reasoning when striking down the law passed by Congress and signed by Clinton that gave him a line item veto? The opinion said that the Constitutional provision is for Congress to pass a law and then for the president to sign it, veto it. If vetoed, then Congress can override his veto. There is no provision in the Constitution for a president to pick and choose the parts of a law passed by Congress that he does or not like. If so, that makes the concept of a vote to override the veto nonsensical since the president could then say, “Well, I still don’t like that part so I just won’t enforce it.”

    Everything in the opinion applies directly to the executive orders you use to arrogate to yourself the power of legislation that belongs only to the Legislative Branch.

    It applies to your selective enforcement or non-enforcement of laws passed by previous Congresses and signed by previous presidents to arrogate to yourself the power of judicial review that belongs only to Judicial Branch in order to make things go the way YOU want them to, regardless of what the Peoples’ representatives say.

    It applies to your postponing various parts of various laws, such as Obamacare.

    It applies to your giving waivers to various people and organizations for your own private or political reasons.

    It applies to your instructing the EPA and other agencies to do what Congress, by refusing to pass legislation you want, forbids them to do.

    It applies to your belief that an executive order is something that allows you, the chief executive, to do with legally binding force whatever you want regardless of what Congress directs or forbids rather than being a tool the chief executive may use to direct members of the Executive Branch to fulfill their duties in helping him to keep good on his word to faithfully execute his office in the enforcement of the laws passed by Congress and defending the Constitution.

    So Congress won’t pass or even introduce legislation you want passed?

    Well, tough crap, Barry. You don’t have the Constitutional authority to do it yourself.

    So Congress has passed a bill that was signed into law by a previous president that you don’t like and that you don’t want to enforce?

    Well, tough crap, Barry. You don’t have the Constitutional authority to veto, by refusing to enforce, or to amend, by selective enforcement, a law already passed by Congress and signed into law by a previous president.

    Your contempt for our system of government demonstrates to us that you are one of the guys the Founders and Framers warned us about.

    Your refusal to enforce immigration law, for instance, demonstrates that you are a clear and present danger both to the country, our Constitution, and to our form of government.

    The Republicans aren’t mad that you’re doing “something.” The real Republicans are angry that you’re doing something illegal and unconstitutional, that you’re violating your oath of office and trashing our country in order to pimp your statist ride.

    Fundamentally transform us?

    Screw you, buddy. You don’t have the right.

    Now if Boehner and the establishment GOP would collectively grow a pair, we could start to reverse the mess you and folks like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have made of things.

    In the spirit of Islam that you evidently like so much:

    We renounce you. We renounce you. We renounce you.

  • ISIS Threatens America: "We Will Raise The Flag Of Allah In The White House"

    08/08/2014 7:37:36 AM PDT · 59 of 65
    aruanan to Biggirl

    Why worry about the flag when their agent already occupies the Oval Office?

  • (Vanity) God, Free Will, and Chess

    06/22/2014 6:56:45 PM PDT · 31 of 31
    aruanan to grey_whiskers; MarkBsnr
    All things whatever arise from, and depend on, the divine appointment; whereby it was foreordained who should receive the word of life, and who should disbelieve it; who should be delivered from their sins, and who should be hardened in them; and who should be justified and who should be condemned.
    -- Martin Luther

    This and other similar sentiments by Calvin have got to be examples of some of the most outrageous heresies in the history of Christianity. They aren't piddling little matters like unitarianism versus trinitarianism or Paul versus the "you must obey the Jewish law to be a good Christian" crowd because they aren't merely disagreements about certain interpretations within a common context but, rather, a wholesale redefinition of the entire enterprise resulting in the necessity to give entirely novel definitions to commonly understood terms as well as, basically, to cause certain things to be understood in a way that completely contradicts what their meaning has to be for them to continue to have any meaning whatsoever.

    Again, it must be stressed that there is no way around the problem that Calvin and Luther pose to free will and, thus, to the essence of both the scriptures and everyday life except to engage in irrationality. And I will posit right here that the source of Western materialistic determinism is Calvinism. Calvin posited God making a clockwork universe. The materialistic determinists simply eliminated the cause. And why? Because since the effect is the same, why bother to retain the theological cause? It makes as much sense to say that a materialistic universe has existence in and of itself and that appearances of meaning and choice are illusions as it does to say that a knowing, thinking, planning, loving God created a universe that is as entirely inexorable in the unfolding of events as the strict atheist materialist proposes and as ludicrous in its treatment of human purpose, love, and free will as the materialist universe.
    Theological determinism, that is, predestination, posits a cause (God) that determines the nature of all things, the effect. That is, everything that happens in creation does so, not because of preceding natural events (that is, contingency, mocked by Luther, or the human will, claimed by Luther and others to have no effective capacity, ie., to be an illusion) but because God had, before the beginning of creation, decreed that it should all be just this way and no other. God: the cause. The creation and everything about it: the effect. Given the cause, the effect could not have turned out any other way. And since it is claimed that God is unchangeable, there could not even be any change in initial conditions to cause a different, though still determined, effect.
    In such a system there is no room for free will. But there is also no room for the concept of free will because the only one willing, God, would be causing the belief that there exists a capacity for something that simply does not exist. In other words, God is causing something much worse than a lie and the belief of a lie. He is somehow causing humans, who, under the scheme, are not and can never be agents, to believe (if that were even possible epistomologically) that they are other than what they are or that they could be other than they are, whatever that is, because, in such a system, there is no possibility of ever being able to determine the truth from a lie because the means by which that can be done simply does not exist. That is, in this system, the great deceiver is God himself.

    Actually, the materialist version is an improvement on the Calvinist model because although the concepts of love, self-sacrifice, free will, sin, and suffering are equally as meaningless and absurd in both, in the materialist universe they are simply without ultimate meaning, but in the Calvinist universe, they are caused by a "holy" God doing it all for his greater glory. But before whom? Ha ha ha. An audience of one?

    Again, from a long time ago, the World According to Calvin:
    Once upon a time, before anything was created, when God in three persons dwelt happily in and of themselves, God the Father said, "Hey, I've got a great idea. We're going to create a universe by and through you, God the Son, and I am, before you create anything at all, going to determine how every single bit of it, from start to finish, from the beginning to the end, from the least quark to the biggest bang, is going to go. We will create an entire human race from an original male and female that I will cause to be tempted and sin and, because of that, subject the rest of the human race to untold millennia of misery and suffering and death and tell them it's their own fault, all for my greater glory because it seemed good to me, all the while promising them a means of salvation from that misery I've imposed on them as a result of their sin against me that I will have preordained.

    And a really neat thing is that we will tell them that if they listen to what they are told and follow it faithfully, we will hear them and answer them and heal their land, but they won't know that in actuality they won't be able even to try unless we make a few of them do it and the vast majority we will keep in the bondage of sin and degradation and then hold them responsible for not doing what we created them to be unable to do.

    And the best thing of all, God the Son, is that because the sin (that I will ordain and set into motion to the very degree and extent that is my good pleasure according to the unfathomable counsel of my will) cannot be forgiven without a sacrifice and since none of them is able or capable or even willing because I will have made them unable, incapable, and unwilling, YOU are going to have to enter the human race and grow up among those who, but for the few I will have made to act to the contrary, won't listen because I will have made them unable to hear, who won't see because I will have blinded them to the truth, and who won't ask for forgiveness for something they were hopeless to avoid doing because I will have made them incapable of doing so and then have the ever loving crap beaten out of you, scourged to within an inch of your life, before being made to carry the instrument of your torture before crowds jeering at you, because I will have made them do so, to the place where others, because of my decree before the foundations of the earth according to my own good counsel, will drive spikes through your wrists and hoist you up to hang between criminals--and the best part of all, at that moment, just as you are about to die, I'll turn my back on you!

    But that's cool, because in three days, I'll raise you from the dead so that we can say that this proves you are who we already know you are without ever the necessity of our even creating a universe or a human race and then use faith in that as the ostensible means by which we confer saving grace on the humans without telling them, until John Calvin comes along, that what they think is turning to us in faith to freely receive the gift of forgiveness and salvation is, in actuality, every bit as programmed and inevitable as the majority of the human race on their way to burn and suffer eternally in the lake of fire for refusing to believe that which I will have made them unable to believe since before the foundations of the earth and all for my praise and glory. How does that sound?"

    And does God the Son say, "Wait a second, you're going to create a universe with a world of conscious beings made in our image, screw them over in the most horrendous ways imaginable, hold them responsible for what you're going to compel them to do, and then, near the end of the whole shebang, make ME suffer for every sin they ever committed without their ever having had the capacity to decide otherwise, and die so that those who don't even have the capacity to make anything but a faux choice will be "saved"? And that will make the relationship that you and I and the Holy Spirit share right now better how?" or does he say, "Hey, that sounds great and we'll call that the GOOD NEWS!"
  • Dick Cheney: Rand Paul Is Wrong On Foreign Policy

    06/22/2014 6:10:40 PM PDT · 145 of 168
    aruanan to jwalsh07
    There was a reason why the Founders designed the system so that control of the military would be by civilians. It is just weird, considering their reasoning (which is far more insightful than almost anything else since then, especially lately), that someone would believe that military experience gives anyone any sort of particular advantage as Commander-in-Chief or makes one candidate for the office necessarily better than another.

    The purpose of the armed forces is to protect the country from foreign enemies. The president doesn't at all need to know anything about operational matters in the military to be able to direct them to fulfill the goal any more than I need to know the mechanics of the internal combustion engine to be able to drive down to the store for a gallon of milk.

    Thinking otherwise is really just a variation on the mistaken notion that the chief executive is supposed to be some kind of wonk who knows everything about everything so he can tinker and fiddle with things in order to effect a solution. He is supposed to know the Constitution and the role provided for him by it and then confine himself to that. His job is not "to run the economy" or "to run the nation" or anything else.

    The economy is not the government. The nation is not the government. Both are to be protected by the government from enemies both foreign and domestic. But when people in the government start believing because they definitely have the power to eff up both the economy and the nation that they therefore have some sort of responsibility or right to decide how the economy is to be run or what the goals of the nation should be, then they have demonstrated that they are unfit for office and have become enemies both of the nation and its economy.

    George Washington said that we are to consider the government as an untrustworthy servant, necessary for accomplishing certain tasks, but never to be given control of the house. Increasingly since the founding we have been screwed over by untrustworthy servants spending our money and commandeering our time for their own purposes. It's time they were all fired.
  • Hubble unveils a colorful view of the universe

    06/04/2014 6:46:31 AM PDT · 90 of 95
    aruanan to Red Badger; VanDeKoik
    You do. It's called 'The Bible'........................

    The Bible, though it contains some general background of creation, is, as far as the rest of the universe is concerned, in the same relationship as a pamphlet on the history of Hamtramck compared to everything ever written about world history, probably even less. It doesn't mean it isn't true. It just isn't exhaustive, either with respect to the universe at large or to the earth in particular, much less anything to do outside its stated scope.
  • Hubble unveils a colorful view of the universe

    06/04/2014 6:39:29 AM PDT · 89 of 95
    aruanan to Mr. K
    It would not surprise me if there was life in every single one of those galaxies

    It should surprise you that there is life in even a single one of them, given the standard explanation of things. Here's how you should look at it from that standpoint: The chances that a single celled organism could, through natural selection of random mutations, develop into a world full of life forms such as found here is essentially little different from zero.

    The chances that inorganic chemical reactions could result in the formation of a self-replicating single cell are such that, by comparison, the chances that that single cell could result in a world full of life forms such as found here are a dead certainty.

    For something like that to happen even a second time you have to have the improbably of the first time squared and so on for each successive time. If life arose here on earth strictly by chance and naturalistic processes, there has not been enough time since the big bang, if there ever was one, or enough places with even near to the right conditions for it to have happened a second time.

    All observations, based on a naturalistic scenario, point to the likeliest scenario that we, as sentient beings, are entirely alone in the universe and that we will never find anything even as "simple" (ha ha ha) as a bacterium anywhere else.
  • Aliens Are Almost Definitely Out There, SETI Astronomers Tell Congress

    05/23/2014 12:18:06 PM PDT · 151 of 152
    aruanan to Las Vegas Dave
    "In the last 50 years, evidence has steadily mounted that the components and conditions we believe necessary for life are common and perhaps ubiquitous in our galaxy," said Werthimer in his written testimony, adding: "The possibility that life has arisen elsewhere, and perhaps evolved intelligence, is plausible and warrants scientific inquiry."

    The problem here is their reasoning. Just because there are conditions without which life cannot exist doesn't mean that, given those conditions, life must exist.

    Though most life on earth cannot exist without oxygen, carbon dioxide, or water and though their disappearance would cause almost all life to perish, the presence of those three does not necessitate the appearance of life.

    Given, for the sake of argument, the evolution of all life on earth from a single life form, the chances for that happening is a virtual certainty compared to the likelihood of that single life form arising through abiogenesis. And the likelihood of it happening anywhere else in the universe is a product of that improbability multiplied by itself.
  • Kerry: If We're Wrong on Climate Change, "What's the Worst That Can Happen?"

    05/23/2014 12:05:24 PM PDT · 56 of 57
    aruanan to Biggirl

    Oh, John, at least you are brilliantly illustrating what the Founders warned us about:

    Government, especially with the venal or ideologues in charge, is public enemy number one. On average, no nation on earth has been more completely devastated by natural disaster or by disease (which, I suppose, could be called a natural disaster) than by government.

    Since 1900, governments or government types trying take over their existing governments (of all, the major killers being socialist; of the socialists, the major killers being Marxists) have killed more of their fellow citizens (over 260,000,000) than anything else since the Black Death (about 100,000,000), the 1918 Spanish flu (50-100 million), abortion (about a billion since 1950), or the 1972 DDT ban (over 100,000,000 in Africa alone). And note that the latter two are the product of the same statist (mostly socialist) mentality as the first.

    So in spite of increased longevity, better health, better nutrition, decreasing food costs, increasing wealth over the past century, the biggest killers out there have been governments and those using them to push transformationalist theology in their attempts to retrofit humanity for their idea of paradise.

    You, John Kerry, and all the other statist ideologues from Barry on down to the chattering tools like Barbra Streisand who support you in your attempts to scare the public into turning everything over to you, are the true enemies of humanity.

  • George Will: ‘I’m an amiable, low voltage atheist’

    05/15/2014 8:27:31 PM PDT · 484 of 583
    aruanan to HMS Surprise
    Assuming there is no underlying, unseen, life force out there, what are the odds that the universe was born with the capacity to generate self-aware beings from the matter... that seemingly...came from nothing... in the first place?

    Well, given your assumption and given the indisputable existence of self-aware beings, one would have to say that, whatever the odds, it happened, and once it happened, the odds that it is highly unlikely to occur become completely irrelevant, unless you're positing that it happen spontaneously a second time, in which case, I believe, the odds are whatever they were originally but squared; and for each additional instance, the odds are raised to the next power.

    03/20/2014 8:01:09 PM PDT · 338 of 803
    aruanan to CynicalBear; vladimir998; redleghunter
    It’s the lurkers who God is reaching who understand that Catholics completely miss the Spirit of scripture.

    "Spirit of scripture." Sounds like you're doing to scripture what Henry Blackmun did with emanations and penumbras of the Constitution, ignoring or redefining what was there in order to get what he wanted to be there.

    And certainly, for your polemical purposes, you could come up with something a little more persuasive than talking about a solitary meaning of "Lord." You made an assertion. So come up with a table showing actual examples of "Your definition of "Lord" is not found in scripture" and demonstrate, not just assert, that there are no supporting examples found in scripture.
  • Obama birth record, citizenship, unraveled for Alabama Supreme Court?

    03/17/2014 5:04:03 PM PDT · 176 of 229
    aruanan to Tennessee Nana
    Not with that foreign born father he wasn’t...

    Yes, according to If you were born in the United States, whether to a married or unmarried mother, to parents who are not U.S. citizens, or to parents either of which is a U.S. citizen, you are a U.S. citizen by birth.

    Please note that USCIS does not issue Certificates of Citizenship in cases where the person became a U.S. citizen based on birth in the United States. USCIS only issues Certificates of Citizenship to those individuals who were born abroad but are U.S. citizens at birth through their parents, or who became citizens after birth but before the age of 18.

    The specific cases regarding married or unmarried and married foreign national father are covered in my post above, but reproduced below:

    “He (BHO) was a natural born American on the date of his birth,

    There are two interesting bits here from about people born outside the U.S. and territories:

    1. One parent is a U.S. citizen at the time of birth and the birthdate is before November 14, 1986 but after October 10, 1952

    The parents are married at the time of birth and the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. or its territories for a period of at least ten years at some time in his or her life prior to the birth, at least five of which were after his or her 14th birthday.

    2. I am claiming citizenship through my mother. My parents were not married at the time of my birth. Does this affect whether I automatically acquired citizenship?

    It may. You acquired U.S. citizenship at the time of your birth if you were born out of wedlock after December 23, 1952 and your U.S. citizen mother was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for at least one year prior to your birth.

    So according to this a bastard born outside the U.S. to a 14-year-old U.S. citizen mother who had lived in the U.S. or its outlying possessions for at least a year prior to his birth is automatically a citizen, but if he is born to a 18 year old U.S. citizen mother who was, at the time of his birth, married to a foreign citizen then he is not a citizen because she had not been "physically present in the U.S. or its territories" at least 5 years after her 14th birthday.

    And from another page:

    Born in Wedlock

    Child of U.S. Citizen Parent and Foreign National Parent[8]

    A child born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions acquires citizenship at birth if at the time of birth:

    One parent is a foreign national and the other parent is a U.S. citizen; and
    The U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States for at least 5 years, including at least 2 years after 14 years of age.

    Out of wedlock

    A child born out of wedlock outside of the United States and its outlying possessions acquires citizenship at birth if:

    The child was born after December 23, 1952;
    The child’s mother was a U.S. citizen at the time of the child’s birth; and
    The child’s U.S. citizen mother was physically present in the United States or outlying possession for one continuous year prior to the child’s birth.[12]

  • Obama birth record, citizenship, unraveled for Alabama Supreme Court?

    03/17/2014 4:42:50 PM PDT · 175 of 229
    aruanan to Oldpuppymax
    “He (BHO) was a natural born American on the date of his birth,

    There are two interesting bits here from about people born outside the U.S. and territories:

    1. One parent is a U.S. citizen at the time of birth and the birthdate is before November 14, 1986 but after October 10, 1952

    The parents are married at the time of birth and the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. or its territories for a period of at least ten years at some time in his or her life prior to the birth, at least five of which were after his or her 14th birthday.

    2. I am claiming citizenship through my mother. My parents were not married at the time of my birth. Does this affect whether I automatically acquired citizenship?

    It may. You acquired U.S. citizenship at the time of your birth if you were born out of wedlock after December 23, 1952 and your U.S. citizen mother was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for at least one year prior to your birth.

    So according to this a bastard born outside the U.S. to a 14-year-old U.S. citizen mother who had lived in the U.S. or its outlying possessions for at least a year prior to his birth is automatically a citizen, but if he is born to a 18 year old U.S. citizen mother who was, at the time of his birth, married to a foreign citizen then he is not a citizen because she had not been "physically present in the U.S. or its territories" at least 5 years after her 14th birthday.

  • Boeing Source: Missing Plane in Pakistan

    03/17/2014 3:37:14 PM PDT · 48 of 222
    aruanan to cicero2k
    Hard to believe that of the 239 cell phones on the plane, even with dead owners; not one has pinged on the ground or on the way to the ground.

    I suppose if they were close enough to a cell tower they could get a call through, but not if they're more than 22-45 miles away.
  • TD Jakes Tells Church Leaders 'If You're Not Making Any Change, You're Taking Up Space'

    03/11/2014 7:42:34 PM PDT · 24 of 24
    aruanan to Gamecock

    They’re taking up space regardless. How about this: TD Jakes, folks who are heterodox like you passing yourself off as Christian are diluting the message.

  • 11 of the best captions for this photo of Obama getting a "checkup" from this kid

    03/11/2014 7:38:43 PM PDT · 5 of 5
    aruanan to The Looking Spoon

    “Is this how Frank Marshall Davis started out with you?”

  • DNA and The Book of Mormon Explained full-length video

    02/28/2014 8:00:16 PM PST · 606 of 775
    aruanan to Tennessee Nana

    Motorcycles: David’s triumph was heard throughout the land.

  • Sustainable nuclear fusion breakthrough raises hopes for ultimate green energy

    02/13/2014 6:22:13 PM PST · 25 of 27
    aruanan to SeekAndFind
    Fusion energy has the potential to become a radical alternative power source, with zero carbon emissions during operation and minimal waste,

    Already true of regular old nuclear energy, especially when compared to coal.
  • Two New Executive Orders Will Change Who Can Buy Guns

    01/04/2014 10:23:53 AM PST · 63 of 86
    aruanan to lbryce
    Too many Americans have been severely injured or lost their lives as a result of gun violence," the order reads.

    Too many? Meaning "more than you think is acceptable" Barry, you lexical slob? I think the number of Americans being severely injured in terms of jobs and health insurance as a result of Obamacare is probably at least an order of magnitude greater than those injured or killed through the felonious use of firearms.

    Most counties in the United States have only a few murders each year, if that. Most of the murders occur in a relatively small number of counties, the majority of them dominated by Democrat political machines, the majority of the murders being tied in one way or another to the illegal drug trade, created and maintained by the federal government.

    The administration's own estimates are that over 100 million will lose their health insurance they were promised they could keep. Period. So where's the executive order limiting access to Obamacare, Barry? Where's your executive order limiting the Democrat Party's access to government, Barry, and to the horrendous damage they do to the nation through it?

    In your executive order about access to guns, you were worried about mentally ill people, but the economically and politically insane, also congenital liars, were the ones that wrote and passed and altered at will and defended Obamacare.
  • Two New Executive Orders Will Change Who Can Buy Guns

    01/04/2014 10:05:00 AM PST · 61 of 86
    aruanan to lbryce
    The White House issued two executive actions on Friday that aim to beef up background checks for would-be gun buyers and keep the weapons away from those at risk of harming themselves or others.

    The continued abuse of the executive order by using it to implement law as an end-run around Congress instead as the means to order changes in procedure or policy within the Executive Branch. Barry's not the first to misuse the executive order, but he's the most brazen. The only ones who can stop this, Congress and the courts, are loath to do it, citing separation of powers, but really, given the current occupant of the White House, because they are afraid of being called racists.
  • Video: MSNBC's Melissa Harris-Perry Cries During Romney Apology

    01/04/2014 9:52:49 AM PST · 25 of 68
    aruanan to absentee

    Was she crying because she realized what insensitive, gauche, rude, racist, bigoted haters the Left are or because she felt pressured into apologizing and was offended to tears over what she believed to be the trampling of her First Amendment rights?

  • Marijuana Overdoses Kill 37 in Colorado On First Day of Legalization

    01/03/2014 10:21:12 PM PST · 156 of 220
    aruanan to Libloather
    It's a hoax. Here's St. Luke's official response:
    Presbyterian/St. Luke’s Medical Center has been the victim of a satiric, hoax story posted today on “The Daily Currant,” an online satirical newspaper.

    We are clarifying for anyone who has read this story that there is no such doctor as “Jack Shepard” on our medical staff and that there have been no deaths due to marijuana at our hospital. The article is a completely fabricated work of fiction created by “The Daily Currant.”

    This online publication’s website states that “Our stories are purely fictional….they are meant to address real-world issues through satire.” We regret any confusion or concern that this fictitious posting may have caused.
  • Marijuana Overdoses Kill 37 in Colorado On First Day of Legalization

    01/03/2014 10:16:05 PM PST · 154 of 220
    aruanan to trisham
    I’ve never heard of this. First, is it possible? Second, is it common?

    Not smoking the actual product as grown. You could probably harm yourself by drinking a large amount of hash oil. But you can also kill yourself more easily with an overdose of vitamin A.
  • Former Fla. Gov. Charlie Crist Apologizes for Backing State's Ban on Gay Marriage

    01/03/2014 9:59:39 PM PST · 30 of 37
    aruanan to massmike
    "I'm sorry I did that. It was a mistake. I was wrong. Please forgive me," Crist told the publication. "I made a mistake. I'm not perfect … That's the journey I'm on … and I'm still..

    Shouldn't this actually read:

    "I'm thorry I did that. It wath a mithtake. I wath wrong. Pleathe forgive me," Crist told the publication. "I made a mithtake. I'm not perfect … That'th the journey I'm on … and I'm thtill.."
  • President Obama: 'I Don't Want Them Punished With A Baby'

    01/03/2014 9:56:49 PM PST · 21 of 24
    aruanan to grundle

    But we don’t want to be punished with a teratogenic presidency! Can we Constitutionally abort it?

  • U.S. Department of Energy Invites Submission of LENR Proposals

    01/03/2014 9:53:05 PM PST · 3 of 13
    aruanan to Kevmo
    "But we know this proves LENR can't be real because the federal government is all bullsh-t."

    Do I get the best non sequitur precognition award?
  • World's climate warming faster than feared, scientists say

    01/03/2014 7:10:50 AM PST · 119 of 127
    aruanan to Foolsgold
    The “scientists” are off the ship, the ship is still 11 miles away from open water in the middle of Summer?, yeah, right.

    Because the tourists dawdled and wasted time getting back to the ship when the captain was urging that they had to leave immediately. And this over a week after the tourists saw similar instances of change on a dime into threatening conditions. Their global warming fantasies were what got this ship into trouble. I hope the owner of the ship and the captain can sue their asses off.
  • World's climate warming faster than feared, scientists say

    01/02/2014 3:38:43 PM PST · 116 of 127
    aruanan to SeekAndFind
    Poor, poor, guys. The temperature trend of the past 9000 years has been downward. The temperature trend of the past 3000 years has been steeply downward, ever cooler warm periods, ever colder intervening cold periods. Look at the Greenland ice core temperatures. The last cold period, the Little Ice Age, following the Medieval Warm Period was the coldest period of time since the last glaciation over 10,000 years ago. It was during that time that the Antarctic ice shelf reached its maximum extent. We are still only barely near the 10,000 year average in our warm-up from from that and we are far, far below the temperatures of the preceding major warm periods of this interglacial.

    Now they're talking about clouds when their computer models, of all the things they were incapable of accurately modeling, were least capable of modeling clouds and their long term effects on climate. And recent research has shown that cloud formation, as controlled by the interplay of solar magnetic field flux and incoming cosmic rays has a greater influence on global atmospheric temperatures than anything arising from human activity, especially when combined with naturally-occurring cycles like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and North Atlantic Oscillation, the 200 year de Vries cycle, and other even longer cycles. And the interplay between the de Vries cycle and the PDO/NAO cycles can back-cast temperature trends over the last 300 years with a tightness of fit that can only make the Hadley CRU folks groan with scientific lust.
    STRONGER SOLAR MAGNETIC FIELDS --> decreased cosmic ray influx --> decreased cloud nucleation activity --> decreased cloud cover --> increased insolation --> increased warming of the earth's surface --> increased warming of the earth's atmosphere

    WEAKER SOLAR MAGNETIC FIELDS --> increased cosmic ray influx --> increased cloud nucleation activity --> increased cloud cover --> increased albedo --> increased reflection of incoming light --> decreased insolation --> decreased warming of the earth's surface --> decreased warming of the earth's atmosphere
    The most recent grand solar maximum, the strongest in at least a couple of millennia, occurred during the 20th century, as did--since the late 1800s--several cycles of the PDO (their positive phases coinciding with the three nearly equal periods of nearly equal modest warming over that time span). The last positive phase of the PDO ended in the 1990s at the same time the positive phase of the 200 year de Vries cycle was coming to an end, all while coming off the grand solar maximum and entering into a period of unusually quiescent solar magnetic activity. Now we are in the negative phase of the PDO, at the beginning of the long down slope of the negative phase of the 200 year de Vries cycle, and heading downward toward the grand solar minimum. These are not indicators that predict increasingly warmer atmospheric temperatures.

    People whining about increasing amounts of atmospheric CO2 portending a threat of dangerous global warming really should get a little perspective. The greatest effect of CO2 on atmospheric temperature is between 0 and 100 ppm and most of that between 0 and 60 ppm. After that, because of the logarithmic relationship between CO2 and temperature, the temperature grows slightly higher with vastly increasing amounts of CO2. Considering the long-term trend of falling temperatures, they should hope that an increase of anthropogenic CO2 could offset the cold and sent thank-you notes to China and India.

    The problem, though, is that increases in atmospheric CO2 show up as a result of increased atmospheric temperatures and with a lag of 400-1000 years. Want to see what the effects of our current small blip of warming will have on atmospheric CO2? Wait for another 400-1000 years. Want to know where our current tiny increase of atmospheric CO2 came from? Go back between 400-1000 years. Hmm, what was happening then? Oh, yeah, it was the Medieval Warm Period, detected in all parts of the world from the Antarctic to the Arctic.

    For those hyperventilating about what they think are dangerous levels of atmospheric CO2: in the geological time frame, the amount of atmospheric CO2 is near an all time low, vying with the Carboniferous and Permian Periods for the lowest atmospheric CO2 in over 500 million years. Its decline over the past 150 million years from a high of about 2500 ppm has been almost linear and completely unconnected with any sort of human activity, as was its abrupt increase at the end of the Permian Period from about where it is now, barely above the amount necessary to sustain life, to over 2500 ppm.

    If we are heading into an increasingly colder global climate, increased amounts of atmospheric CO2 are crucial to maintain agricultural productivity as the output of higher latitude farmlands is decreased by shorter growing seasons. Want to know more about that? Ask the Vikings about their settlements in the New World or the owners of vineyards in Great Britain or farmers throughout Europe in the years of increasing cold following the Medieval Warm Period. And if we are not heading into a globally colder climate as the last 9000 years indicate, well, warmth kills a lot fewer people each year than cold does.

    Besides, increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO2 also dramatically decreases agricultural water requirements and we're constantly being warned by these same folks of the threat posed by the increasing scarcity of water. If they get decreased atmospheric CO2, they get decreased agricultural productivity and increased water use. If they get increased atmospheric CO2, they get increased agricultural productivity and decreased water use. Either way, increased levels of atmospheric CO2 will only benefit us.

    So you've really got to wonder what these anti-CO2 folks are up to. Oh, wait, I think we know that:
    "I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis."--Al Gore

    "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."--H.L. Mencken

    "We are close to a time when all of humankind will envision a global agenda that encompasses a kind of Global Marshall Plan to address the causes of poverty and suffering and environmental destruction all over the earth."--Al Gore

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the urge to rule it."--H.L. Mencken
    The most accurate, though, is this:
    "It is a campaign not for abundance but for austerity. It is a campaign not for more freedom but for less. Strangest of all, it is a campaign not just against other people, but against ourselves."--George Monbiot
  • World's climate warming faster than feared, scientists say

    01/02/2014 10:06:06 AM PST · 92 of 127
    aruanan to SeekAndFind

    Poor dumb effs. The temperature trend of the past 9000 years has been downward. The temperature trend of the past 3000 years has been steeply downward, ever cooler warm periods, ever colder intervening cold periods. The amount of atmospheric CO2 is around an all time low, vying only with the Carboniferous and Permian Periods for the lowest atmospheric CO2 in over 500 million years. It’s decline over the past 150 million years from a high of about 2500 ppm has been almost linear and completely unconnected with any sort of human activity as was its increase at the end of the Permian Period from about where it is now, barely above the amount necessary to sustain life, to over 2500 ppm.

  • I Knew Chicago Was A Great City, But I Had No Idea It Looked This Stunning

    01/02/2014 9:34:27 AM PST · 109 of 159
    aruanan to vekzen
    The Chicago political establishment has tacitly — and sometimes not so tacitly — supported segregation of the city. So, not very far from the downtown are some pretty dangerous and ugly ghettos. It’s been that way for years.

    I've lived here since 1994. It is a pretty good city. I've also lived in New York. But the segregation comment is laughable. People tend to live with others of similar interests and ethnicity, whether in Little Italy, Greek Town, or Boys Town. Many places in Chicago that some may consider ghettos were once completely different in racial or ethnic composition and still have many examples of very fine buildings. The change in racial/ethnic characteristics of the inhabitants is merely an accident of history and economics, not any segregation policy of the city, tacit or otherwise.

    I am extremely familiar with Rogers Park, Albany Park, Hyde Park, Kenwood, and Evanston. The reason Rogers Park may have a lot of police sirens is because it is home to a very large police precinct. It is also home to Loyola University and one of the largest Jewish populations (especially West Rogers Park) outside of Skokie and New York. The crime isn't particularly high in Rogers Park compared to places like Englewood. The worst place up in that area is the north half of the little neighborhood north of Howard and south of the Catholic cemetery and east of Chicago after it changes from Clark, referred to in the past as Juneway Jungle. But even that is not too bad compared to some neighborhoods on the west side. But even Humboldt Park, though one of the bad ones, is mostly okay and safe if you're not a young black guy alone on foot, especially at night. But none of that is by design, tacit or otherwise, of the Chicago political establishment for this simple reason: No one is told that he cannot live in this place or must live in that place because he is or is not of one or another group.
  • I Knew Chicago Was A Great City, But I Had No Idea It Looked This Stunning

    01/02/2014 8:04:19 AM PST · 71 of 159
    aruanan to Borges

    Chicago is like a clean, miniature New York, except the corruption is worse. The political machine in control goes all the way back into the 1800s.

  • Historic Bible goes missing after de Blasio swearing in (update: found)

    01/02/2014 7:22:37 AM PST · 31 of 47
    aruanan to Libloather
    Historic Bible goes missing after de Blasio swearing in

    It wasn't missing. It was hiding in shame.
  • CNN/ORC Poll: GOP Lead Growing for 2014(happy days are here at last)

    12/26/2013 3:55:25 PM PST · 26 of 37
    aruanan to jjsheridan5; billhilly
    It is a close call as to which is the greater enemy of conservatism, but in general, a traitor does much more damage than an enemy is capable of.

    When you make up pronouncements simply for the purpose of using them to buttress your argument, you just end up sounding as ridiculous as any statist Democrat since this is their stock-in-trade.

    So, "in general," which did "much more damage" to all the nations that fell before the Assyrian armies, the Egyptian armies, the Babylonian armies, Alexander the Great's army, the Roman army, the Continental Army, Napoleon's army, as well as to the Confederacy, to Kaiser Wilhelm's Germany, to Hitler's Germany, to Mussolini's Italy, to Hirohito's Japan, to Gorbachev's Soviet Union, to Saddam's Iraq, to the Taliban's Afghanistan, to name a few, traitors in their midst or the enemy?

    The other will have an "R" next to its name, and will play the role of traitor, undermining those same principles at every opportunity.

    Most Democrats, especially the incumbent Democrats, are statists. Not all Republicans, especially those running for office in the primaries, are statists. It's the difference that makes the difference, something you and others are apparently unable to see.

    As I said before the last two elections in different forms and at different times to some who were bloviating about starting a "conservative" third party to run against Obama and almost salaciously eschewing "the lesser of two evils" concept to champion the "greatest of all losers" approach:
    1. The moral relativism of the “lesser of two evils” philosophy has been draining the heart and soul of America for decades.

    So begins an intellectually vacuous screed with a simple misstatement of fact. "Lesser of two evils" is not and has never been an example of moral relativism. You may as well say that any mention of "the greater good" is also moral relativism. That would be an equivalently whacked-out judgement. An example of moral relativism is this:
    The Muslims don't eat pork, this other group doesn't eat human flesh. Each system has its own proscriptions that are valid within their systems but have no reference to any overarching moral order because there is none. One may or may not eat pork or long pork as one wishes. Its degree of evil is relative only to the system in which it is found. Do your own thing, baby.

    2. "Don’t Get Suckered into Supporting the Republican Party" is exactly what folks like George Soros are saying. You can bet some of the biggest supporters (probably even financially if you could dig deep enough) of conservative third parties are liberal Democrats and other leftists who have taken over the Democrat Party and are busily working to take over the Republican Party. They know that dividing the vote amongst a variety of "Hey, I'm more conservative than you cause I didn't vote for any Republican" nitwits is one their most effective ways to destroy their opposition and to solidify a political hegemony.

    Over the past thirty years they have taken control of one of the two largest political parties in a country where winner takes all in elections and are busily working to fracture the only opposition they have by encouraging conservatives to leave the Republican Party in the hands of RINOS rather than working to take over the party apparatus as they, the Leftists, have taken over the Democrat Party. For those who say, "Well, I'm a proud member of the Constitution Party or the Declaration Party or the Conservative Party or the Southern Principled Conservative Party of Holy Ghost Fire on the Mountain Pre-Rapture Remnant of the Real Thing Party and someday we'll be big enough to replace the Republican Party, just like the Temperance Party or the Bull Moose Party did":

    Doofuses: we don't live in a parliamentary system where representation is divided proportionally between the losers!

    It's winner take all, baby, and the sooner you realize that and stop wasting time fighting like cats and Baptists to multiply the number of me-so-conservative parties the sooner you'll have turned back the liberal encroachment on the existing main opposition party to their main vehicle for political power, the Democrat Party, instead of complimenting yourself on just how wonderfully more conservative your loser party is going to be than the one you deliberately abandoned to leftist takeover.
    "Hey, I don't like these liberal bumper stickers on this fully functioning vehicle or the places its driver is taking us, right? So, I've got, like, this great plan to deal with that, 'kay? Instead of tossing the driver out on his butt and getting some more appropriate body detailing and then driving it wherever we want to go, we're going to get out at the next corner, wag our fingers really hard at the driver as he speeds off, and then from scratch build our own new most perfectly conservative vehicle and, someday, maybe, enter that into the race! And won't that glorious day be, oh, so grand?"
    And you think Jesus, or anyone other than a utopian statist, is going to say, "Well done, good and faithful servant for refusing to take back the existing opposition party and, instead, throwing your vote to something that couldn't possibly defeat a known enemy because you thought being considered a more nearly "true" conservative party than any other was more important than actually conserving and preserving the Republic against an ongoing enemy onslaught"?

    Dream on.
    We face far great danger from idiots than from traitors.