Free Republic

I also normally try to steer clear of threads such as this, and am usually successful.

Eaker was unusally obtuse, hence the finale. Drop dead is my way of saying that I’ve had enough of his sanctimonious crap, and don’t wish to hear from him anymore. I’m not wishing him dead; I’m wishing him to go away.

I didn’t start there. I ended there after giving him chances to back off and try a different approach. He may be a wonderful fellow. But, I wouldn’t know it because he jumped down my throat from my first introduction to him, and hasn’t stopped accusing me of being what I’m not since then.

He is not a reasonable fellow, and seems capable of neither learning nor explaining himself like an intelligent man. If he’s a conservative stalwart, we’re in big trouble. And, by we, I mean conservatives. He’s behaved like a yahoo, and written like a monkey. I don’t have time to swing on a vine with him or his fellow apes. I’d rather read Curious George to my children.

Your post reeks of liberal hyper-sensitivity, and reminds me of far too many lefties whose response to something they don’t like is “I’m offended.” (I read it to my wife in the voice of Major Cassius Starbuckle from The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence.) As you know from my handle, I’m sick of lefties.

Quoting from The Sweet Smell of Success, “You’re dead son. Go get yourself buried.” My apologies if that offends you.

“Write on FR.”

Do you mean vanity posts? Is there some other way?

“I just don’t think we should be tearing any one of our candidates down unnecessarily.”

Amen, brother.

No, he’s not a RINO. He’s so far right that he’s left.

He’s so consistent that he lines up with the Left on everything but the size of federal government.

They’ll nod yeah on his overseas and social initiatives to de-federalize the few things they haven’t won, and then spend the savings on bigger government.

Just my fear.

A tea party that spends $25,000 to give a conservative a forum to speak and woo the common people he is looking to draw is not just “somebody.” It is a crucial constituent that he should do everything possible (and impossible) not to disappoint.

He’s my man. But, it’s a mistake. He needs all the support he can get, and these people want to give it to him.

Given his fidelity to the Party, and the suspicion that the Party—which is inexplicably biting the hand that fed it—wanted him to decline, it looks especially bad.

I hate politics. Rick is a good man. I wonder who has his ear besides God.

I hope not. But, I fear so.

He believes it. He said it. At least we know where he stands.

BO made derisive remarks about bitter clingers to guns and religion. He believes it. He said it. At least we know where he stands.

W/r/t Santorum’s comments, Richard John Neuhaus used to make nearly identical comments about the mainline churches. He also wrote disparagingly about the Jesuit order, and Lefty-overrun institutions wherever he found them.

Santorum’s opinion can be best viewed as a conservative’s about liberals, rather than a Catholic’s about protestants.

IMHO Liberal Christianity follows the NYT’s editors more devotedly than it does Jesus Christ. While it may be impolitic to point it out—even in a closed, insular audience—it’s his right.

I don’t think protestants, or anyone, have anything to fear from a Santorum presidency. He’ll have to make that case for himself, however. And, I hope he can. We can all help by demanding that BO explain what he means about the bitter clingers, the teabaggers, etc.

We all have a great deal to fear from another four years of an Obama presidency. So, I hope we’re all prepared to give Santorum the benefit of the doubt.

Very good. I shared it.

Is that why people choose WordPress?

I didn’t know about the MySpace connection. MySpace means Charlie Sheehan’s Anthony Weiner to me.

I’m glad to live in a world that allows everyone to publicize their ideas. In case you hadn’t noticed, the other side controls most of the mainstream outlets. You’ve got to begin somewhere.

I’ll just have to distinguish myself from the smacktard set by the quality of my writing. I’m glad that some people like it.

I’m also glad that of the 2,000+ hits I get per month (humble, I know), 40% of them come from overseas and places that are so remote as to make me shake my head in wonderment. It may be too late to influence America, even FR. But, I can warn people in other countries not to make our mistakes.

If you have some constructive advice about how to distinguish my blog, I’m happy to listen. I like learning, even from non-educators.

Yes, and no.

The question of what business it is of the federal government’s to order anyone to do anything about contraception is fundamental. It points to why ObamaCare, and every federal entitlement is a bad idea: the cost is too high in terms both of liberty surrendered and ruinous public expense.

But, the crucial constitutional point for every American is our liberties guaranteed under the 1st Amendment. The issue of the federal government’s telling the Church what to believe, and fund, is chilling. It demonstrates what everyone who isn’t a lefty knows; that when the left talks about liberty, it means something that applies only to its own view of things. Everyone else’s beliefs and actions must conform to iron whim of left, or be crushed under the iron boot.

The subsidiary issue of whether the Church has a reasonable argument on contraception is worth having, not only because of the biological, environmental and social science that evidences the pill to be a very bad thing indeed. But, also because of the flimsy intellectual and legal pedigree of the Leftist position.

It was the left that pushed contraception onto the culture in 1965’s Griswold v. Connecticut. That decision was justified by the “sanctity of the marriage bedroom.” By Eisenstadt v. Baird three years later, the equal protection clause was deemed to render that sanctity moot. Contraception for everybody, whoopee!

By 1973, Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton made abortion on demand without apology the law of the land using the same reasoning, which incidentally, was the following. Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925) upheld parents’ right to educate their children; therefore, it gives prospective parents the right not to have them, even to kill them in the womb. How’s that for bull puckey?

In 1992’s Casey v. PP decision, the Supreme Court told us to shut up, and that we were being tested. Because of Ross Perot, Americans dutifully complied with their master’s command and elected a pro-abort’s pro abort as President. By 2003’s Lawrence v. Texas, the Court was ready to reverse its own 1986 decision in Bowers v. Hardwick on gay sodomy.

This is an entirely illegitimate intellectual pedigree. The Left has never had to answer its critics because the Court has always muzzled the Left’s critics and granted victory to the bad guys with a banging of the gavel and a few disingenuous sophistries on paper. Now that they’ve brought the issue up due to their oafish imposition, it’s opportune, and important IMHO.

I’m coming to see it your way, generally. We no longer have the conditions for a federal union as our disagreements are too fundamental.

You’re right that it was never meant for the federal government to arrogate so much power to itself. Things changed after the Civil War. The Supreme Court used the 13th and 14th Amendments to squash the states and turn the federal government into a hegemon for “good,” as defined by itself and the political power.

Since it’s in Lefties DNA to act collectively, it’s gone all their way. It’s time to smash this mother to bits—50 bits. Then, each bit can be smashed into the number of counties, municipalities, etc. If we’ve got to fight all the time just to be left alone and not be made to cooperate with evil, then we need to bring the fight closer to home, where it’s easier to show up and scream at their perfidy.

I don’t have a MySpace page. That, like everything else you’ve written, is a figment of your imagination. You are one sick puppy.

God help America.

Eaker, drop dead.

If you have a chance before doing so, grow up, and get some education.

Wow!!!

I would have loved to support Palin. I hope that Rick Santorum grows into the President I think he can be.

I’m going to have to re-read my post on McGurn’s article, which I don’t think was Romney cheerleading. Maybe I missed something. Perhaps it was his paragraph at the end that I quoted that triggered some of you off?

“Homeless guys at the public library can write blogs.”

Too true. I like to think you’ve sneaked a peak though.

Keep firing at the impious and pimpish.

Eaker, I pity your wife, unless you are one of those mild-mannered guys who turns into a jerk on the web.

I didn’t try to refute anything you said because you didn’t say anything; you got abusive at what you think you perceive (which is nowhere near the actual case); and because a mad dog cannot be refuted. It should be avoided, and if necessary, beaten.

For my money, you’re not very smart, just an outlandish big-mouth. You’re the kind of guy whose blog would not be worth reading because it would be quicker, and just as edifying, to burp.

Santorum in 2012. Any Republican if not him, because ABB—Anybody But Barack.

Humblegunner, is Eaker a friend of yours?

Glad to see you’re still watching. Have you read any Noman yet?

“That about cover it for you ya principle-less, spineless, moral lacking liberal tub of goo? “

Do you mean me?

Read any post on my blog, and tell me you don’t feel like a fool: NomanSays.blogspot.com.

Will he fight to repeal ObamaCare?

Will he fight to repeal or modify Dodd-Frank?

Will he lower taxes?

Can he be beaten back if he attempts to introduce a VAT?

If the answer to any of those questions is yes, he’s acceptable to me when push comes to shove.