Free Republic

They're liars in service to our enemies -- that's even worse.

It was fun watching Wolfie's own ambush get turned on him, though. Clearly a lightweight compared to Cheney.

Wolfie directly contradicted himself on the sniper tape. When Lynne refers to it as "terrorist propaganda" at 4:15 on the tape, Wolf gets defensive and says "it was not terrorist propaganda". That's at about 4:15 on the tape. Then at about 4:55, after getting slapped around a bit by Lynne, he says that CNN "clearly identified the tape as propaganda".

The poor guy was clearly outmatched.

This is a good one. And YDR -- is that true about the Germans?

Quit being so reasonable. It disturbs the rantings of the frothing at the mouth crowd.

Does that imply that the active duty Marine Corps has just 24 infantry battalions?

Yes, and that's correct. Three battalions per regiment, three regiments per division, three divisions. That would total 27, except 3rd MarDiv has only two regiments rather than three, giving a total of 24 active-duty infantry battalions. 9th Marines were deactivated in the early '90's, and essentially replaced by three LAV battalions.

That count of 24 omits reconnaissance battalions, which some might count as infantry as well, artillery, engineers, LAV's, anti-tank, etc. And all the reservists. Btw, all of this is extremely public information.

I don't think its possible for a teacher to carry a gun to class every day and have kids not figure it out. Sooner or later, there will be a clothing issue or something, and some kids will see it.

I like the overall concept of some teachers in the school being armed. I don't like the idea of carrying a firearm in the actual classroom. If you're carrying a gun in a crowd like that, you've got to be constantly vigilant to ensure its security, and I think that need to be vigilant interferes with the primary duty of teaching.

But there are plenty of teachers/administrators who have non-classroom time during the day, and that would seem to be the most logical time for them to carry weapons, or at least have access to them.

There is a legitimate point about a teacher carrying a firearm in a classroom. In some of those schools, I could see something escalating to the point where a student got one of those weapons.

Perhaps the rule should limit carrying to either administrators, or to teachers while they are not actually in a class, but rather have office time, etc. I could just see a scenario where some kid grabs that gun from a teacher....

Do you mind telling me which issues you believe alienate the voters?

Primarily, the social issues he emphasized during the primary. I know a good number of folks who vote Republican, but were turned off by the emphasis on issues such as gay marriage. It was like Ken hadn't yet gotten passed 2004. Anyway, the point is that he really ran to the right hard during the primary, and I don't think he's been able to overcome that.

Lower taxes? Job creation? Better schools? Those are the issues he's emphasized the most, IMO.

Those are the winning issues, IMHO, and he's emphasized them almost exclusive coming down the stretch. But that's not the campaign he was running earlier this year. At least, its not what I heard.

Great win against MSU, but Michigan is loaded with talent. I actually think Michigan has more talent than the Buckeyes, but its in the Shoe and the Buckeyes have Tressel. Should be a phenomenal game, and I suspect our Buckeyes will pull it out.

You make Ken Blackwell sound a lot like Ronald Reagan.

In terms of principals, that's probably true, but not in terms of message. The difference is that Reagan emphasized those conservative principles that had the widest appeal, and Blackwell emphasized those with the most narrow appeal. I think he's now doing much better, but the initial message coming from his campaign focused (wrongly, IMHO), on issues that alienated too many voters.

He may still be able to pull is off, but its going to be tough.

Although many suggest otherwise,China isn't bothered in the least by the actions of Kim.

I disagree. China doesn't fear Kim (much), but I suspect they fear the reaction to Kim by other countries.

Japan is one country that definitely does worry China, and China would prefer that Japan play as passive a role in that region as possible. Kim's saber-rattling and nuclear threats have forced Japan to take an increasingly stronger stance, and have strengthened calls within Japan to increase its military presence. It also may result in the U.S. and other countries playing a more visible role in that region, another thing that China would prefer to avoid.

My problem is your use of the words 'Blackwell people'

That's a fair point. The nutjobs who rail against RINO's may all be Blackwell supporters, but the Blackwell supporters are not all nutjobs. Else I'd have to sign myself up as a nutjob too. I should have been more clear that it was only some of his campaign workers/supporters that were the problem.

It's pretty clear to me that Blackwell's views are to the right of most of the Ohio electorate, and even to the right of the party establishment in the state. It also appeared to me that the Blackwell campaign, especially early on, choose to emphasize those issues that were most controversial rather than emphasizing the common ground. A lot of moderate Republicans I know were really turned off by some of those early commercials, and I don't think Blackwell ever got them back.

So I guess that's also part of my impression of the campaign -- what seemed to be a conscious effort to emphasize those issues most likely to alienate RINO's.

Sorry no links. That's from my personal experiences talking to folks. I know some staunch Blackwell supporters who approach this election as if it is our big chance to effect a sea change in Ohio politics. One in my own office convinced that we don't need the "RINO's" to win.

But if you want support, just look at the threads on FR from Blackwell supporters, including this one. It's hard to find one where the RINO tag isn't broken out. "RINO's? We don't need no stinkin' RINOs!" RINO's are dismissed with contempt, but nevertheless expectedto vote for Blackwell. That ain't too smart, in my book. If you want more examples, check out the Ohio forum with all the conservatives who swore they'd never support DeWine because he's a "RINO". They are intentionally dividing the party at a time when we need to pull together.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying you are one of those people. But there are a lot of them out there, unfortunately. Would rather lose standing alone than win with a RINO. In my book -- and I suspect in yours too -- A RINO is better than a Dem. But for some conservatives, that's not the case.

Any conservative who doesn't actually want Blackwell to WIN is a posseur.

Agreed. The problem is that conservatives are NOT a majority in Ohio.

And any Republican who doesn't care if Strickland does, is no friend of the State of Ohio.

I agree with that as well. But being able to say to someone that "you're no friend of the state of Ohio" the day after Blackwell loses is little comfort for me. After the election was the time for some fence-mending and maybe a bit of butt-kissing. It's too bad that's the way the system works, but that's the electoral reality in which we live. And hearing "RINO" used as a expletive by many Blackwell supporters wasn't exactly the way to unify the party.

It's still uphill but he can make it because he is EXACTLY what Ohio needs after Taft.

Whether you believe Ohio needs Blackwell after Taft is completely irrelevant to Blackwell's chances of winning. What matters isn't what his staff/volunteers/Freepers think, but what the majority of the electorate think. He's head and shoulders above Strickland in every single way, and he's the best thing to come along in Ohio politics in a very long time.

If you're a staunch conservative....

...but the Blackwell people have had to fight the establishment because he's too far to the right. (Which is where YOU ought to be).

Where Freepers are on Blackwell doesn't matter on election day if the votes aren't there. The fact is that Blackwell may very well be the right guy, but Ohio is NOT a state that generally supports hardline conservatives. Seriously, when was the last time we elected one? Look at our governors and senators over the last few decades: DeWine? Voinovich? Glenn? Metzenbaum? Taft? Rhodes? It's a rather pathetic collection of ideologies going from wishy-washy Republican to a far lefty like Metzenbaum. Not a single true conservative in the bunch.

The problem is that Blackwell's campaign really consisted of a grass-roots rebellion among conservative Republican, who unfortunately do not make up a majority of the electorate. The fight with Petro/Montgomery was pretty bitter, and many of the Blackwell supporters I know almost appeared gleeful at that prospect. They wanted a fight, they got it, and they won. The problem is what they won --the Republican nomination -- is very damaged goods. It's the winner, not the loser, who is supposed to be gracious, and the Blackwell campaign apparently forgot that.

Sorry if that pissed off your RINO buddies but let's face it, they despised Blackwell already.

There were a lot of those "RINO" votes Blackwell could have had if they hadn't run such a divisive campaign. The sneering at those "RINO" votes is one of the reasons Blackwell won't be getting those votes in November. And whether you like RINOs or not, a RINO's vote counts the same as one cast by one of the "base".

I'm voting Blackwell, but I know far too many of the RINO/country-club Republican set (and there are a LOT of them in this state), that aren't.

This is ridiculous. Nobody is saying that the lawyer shouldn't defend his client. They're saying that he shouldn't talk publicly about the facts of his case, which is perfectly appropriate. A military lawyer has the right to defend his client in a court of law. He does not acquire some sort of extra right to spout off about policy that other officers do not possess.

But humans are about the only creatures that have sex when the female is not fertile.

Then why does my dog hump my leg?.

I'm just saying....

Westerners reproduce at below replacement rates, and the USA is the only Western country of any size that is reproducing at a replacement rate.

Did you read that part of your own post?

Europe is being overtaken by Muslims because Europeans are no longer producing enough children to sustain their population.

How about that part?

If you wanted to argue that a European who has a vasectomy is ceding the long term future of his continent to the moslems, I suppose you would at least have the basis of an argument. It's a twisting of Steyn's argument, but at least the germ is there. Though from the perspective of that individual, his personal decision to have a vasectomy won't make any difference at all.

But with respect to this country, you can't even make that argument, because was are not drowning in a sea of hyper-fertile moslems. It's the other continent that's got that problem.

That said, if only we could genetically engineer "good girl in public, real bad girl in private," we'd be onto something.

So you're advocating something of a "Two-Face"?

Your five questions are bogus. Romney is currently a governor, and has not yet declared a Presidential candidacy. Yet, all five of your questions ask only about his announced positions on various federal issues. And of course he hasn't announced any specific position on those federal issues because to do so would be premature.

We do know that he balanced the budget in Massachusetts by cutting spending and not raising tax rates. He's also pushed repeatedly to lower the state income tax rate from 5.5% to 5.0%, but the Dem-dominated legislature has refused to do so. I heard him speak last year at the Federalist Society Convention, where he stated that the federal government could benefit from the same approach.

Maybe Romney's position on the issue you raised will not be sufficiently "conservative", but how about at least waiting until he's declared his candidacy and announced his position on those specific issues?

I probably have been a little louder than just "muttering" when behind slow drivers. Although if I pass the driver and see that he/she is older, I usually feel badly about it.

The worst ones are the ones who are on their cell phones and just not paying much attention. Other pet peeves of mine are driving slowly in the left lane, and, worst of all, the slow left lane hog who stays right next to a slow car in the right lane as if they are joined at the hip. Now THAT is annoying.