Could I get a link on the Vietnam stuff? I just know he stopped the draft and bombed cambodia, I'm uneducated.
Peace in Vietnam would've been huge for the Democrats, and the Vietnams were moving towards a compromise. It was an "everyone hates this equally" compromise, because each side thought that the cost and uncertainty of war was too high to keep going. Nixon told the South Vietnamese that if he were elected, he would make sure they would get a better deal, and so they ended up stalling the peace talks. That stalling meant no peace deal, and helped Nixon get elected. But the opportunity was lost, and they didn't end up with a deal. Nixon's meddling meant the war went on for seven more years and ended up with the South Vietnamese losing anyway.
Solomaxwell6 on
0
Options
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
it was basically treason but because that information was gathered by questionable means (basically an illegal wiretap), LBJ decided just to give it to Nixon's opponent in the campaign, who opted not to use it
I feel like even true blue evangelicals will see right through this kind of crass, incredibly transparent, sanctimonious bullshit Cruz is trying to sell to them.
Dark_Side on
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I feel like even true blue evangelicals will see right through this kind of crass, incredibly transparent, sanctimonious bullshit Cruz is trying to sell to them.
Go read some Facebook comments on a news article about him sometime.
I saw one lady claiming Cruz was sent by Jesus himself.
Could I get a link on the Vietnam stuff? I just know he stopped the draft and bombed cambodia, I'm uneducated.
Peace in Vietnam would've been huge for the Democrats, and the Vietnams were moving towards a compromise. It was an "everyone hates this equally" compromise, because each side thought that the cost and uncertainty of war was too high to keep going. Nixon told the South Vietnamese that if he were elected, he would make sure they would get a better deal, and so they ended up stalling the peace talks. That stalling meant no peace deal, and helped Nixon get elected. But the opportunity was lost, and they didn't end up with a deal. Nixon's meddling meant the war went on for seven more years and ended up with the South Vietnamese losing anyway.
That vaguely reminds me of something that may or may not have happened recently. And been about doing roughly the opposite if someone was elected. And apparently hasn't worked, thank fuck. But still.
"There’s been more pressure this week to put sanctions on Indiana than Iran," Huckabee said. "The reason that those corporations put the pressure on Indiana and Arkansas was because the militant gay community put the pressure on them. The left has gotten very good at creating a crisis, something to divide the country. Well, it won’t stop until there are no more churches, until there are no more people who are spreading the gospel. And I’m talking now about the unapologetic, unabridged gospel that is really God’s truth."
I feel like even true blue evangelicals will see right through this kind of crass, incredibly transparent, sanctimonious bullshit Cruz is trying to sell to them.
evangelicals are the easiest to dupe group in existence
Could I get a link on the Vietnam stuff? I just know he stopped the draft and bombed cambodia, I'm uneducated.
Peace in Vietnam would've been huge for the Democrats, and the Vietnams were moving towards a compromise. It was an "everyone hates this equally" compromise, because each side thought that the cost and uncertainty of war was too high to keep going. Nixon told the South Vietnamese that if he were elected, he would make sure they would get a better deal, and so they ended up stalling the peace talks. That stalling meant no peace deal, and helped Nixon get elected. But the opportunity was lost, and they didn't end up with a deal. Nixon's meddling meant the war went on for seven more years and ended up with the South Vietnamese losing anyway.
That vaguely reminds me of something that may or may not have happened recently. And been about doing roughly the opposite if someone was elected. And apparently hasn't worked, thank fuck. But still.
Could I get a link on the Vietnam stuff? I just know he stopped the draft and bombed cambodia, I'm uneducated.
Peace in Vietnam would've been huge for the Democrats, and the Vietnams were moving towards a compromise. It was an "everyone hates this equally" compromise, because each side thought that the cost and uncertainty of war was too high to keep going. Nixon told the South Vietnamese that if he were elected, he would make sure they would get a better deal, and so they ended up stalling the peace talks. That stalling meant no peace deal, and helped Nixon get elected. But the opportunity was lost, and they didn't end up with a deal. Nixon's meddling meant the war went on for seven more years and ended up with the South Vietnamese losing anyway.
That vaguely reminds me of something that may or may not have happened recently. And been about doing roughly the opposite if someone was elected. And apparently hasn't worked, thank fuck. But still.
"There’s been more pressure this week to put sanctions on Indiana than Iran," Huckabee said. "The reason that those corporations put the pressure on Indiana and Arkansas was because the militant gay community put the pressure on them. The left has gotten very good at creating a crisis, something to divide the country. Well, it won’t stop until there are no more churches, until there are no more people who are spreading the gospel. And I’m talking now about the unapologetic, unabridged gospel that is really God’s truth."
See, I'm actually glad he's saying shit like that. Back in '08, I remember Hucklebee was the charismatic everyman outwardly and the creepy theocrat in person. Talking about the evil gays and women's libidos will ruin that image.
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
Good thing he's working so hard to court the Jewish vote with that.
Why? We all know Jesus was a straight white Christian man.
Look, we can't scuttle deals with Iran without fellating Israel. And we can't fellate Israel without shoring up support from jews at home. And you can't shore up support from jews at home by telling them about the transformative power of christ!
There's a miles wide difference between someone who identifies as Christian and someone who identifies as Evangelical/Fundamentalist Christian.
The latter happily buy in to just about anything saying good things happened because of Jesus and God and bad things because of a lack of Jesus and God.
As a christian I'd just like to point out how utterly appalling and borderline heretical I find the latest crop of GOP ads.
On the positive side: It ammuses me to no end that in 2015 suppressing gay rights is the hill a bunch of these bastards have decided to die on.
honestly, me too, considering it was one of the defining issues of the last election (albeit not THE defining issue), and it seemed liked there was some real soul searching in the aftermath of the 2012 blowout the GOP suffered. It seemed like the mechanisms of the old guard (ginning up fear and resentment through outright lying) lost handily to the politics of optimism and inclusion, and some of the youngsters in the GOP (like Rubio and Jindal) were ready to come to terms with that and rebuild the party in a new mold.
But no, apparently doubling down on derp is, again, the gameplan. I hope they lose every state in the electoral.
As a christian I'd just like to point out how utterly appalling and borderline heretical I find the latest crop of GOP ads.
On the positive side: It ammuses me to no end that in 2015 suppressing gay rights is the hill a bunch of these bastards have decided to die on.
honestly, me too, considering it was one of the defining issues of the last election (albeit not THE defining issue), and it seemed liked there was some real soul searching in the aftermath of the 2012 blowout the GOP suffered. It seemed like the mechanisms of the old guard (ginning up fear and resentment through outright lying) lost handily to the politics of optimism and inclusion, and some of the youngsters in the GOP (like Rubio and Jindal) were ready to come to terms with that and rebuild the party in a new mold.
But no, apparently doubling down on derp is, again, the gameplan. I hope they lose every state in the electoral.
I'm seriously wondering what the hell it's gonna take for the Republicans to change course at this point; while some of them have made some extraordinarily flaccid gestures of out reach to the hispanic community, none of them appear to be willing to ditch a toxic base element in order to reach out to more demographics.
Take this stupid outreach to the fundies; there was absolutely no need to do this since they aren't going anywhere and it stands to alienate gays and moderates. Hell, at this juncture Ted cruz could probably use a baptismal font as a be-day and still have a lock on the fundie vote.
Could I get a link on the Vietnam stuff? I just know he stopped the draft and bombed cambodia, I'm uneducated.
Peace in Vietnam would've been huge for the Democrats, and the Vietnams were moving towards a compromise. It was an "everyone hates this equally" compromise, because each side thought that the cost and uncertainty of war was too high to keep going. Nixon told the South Vietnamese that if he were elected, he would make sure they would get a better deal, and so they ended up stalling the peace talks. That stalling meant no peace deal, and helped Nixon get elected. But the opportunity was lost, and they didn't end up with a deal. Nixon's meddling meant the war went on for seven more years and ended up with the South Vietnamese losing anyway.
That vaguely reminds me of something that may or may not have happened recently. And been about doing roughly the opposite if someone was elected. And apparently hasn't worked, thank fuck. But still.
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
edited April 2015
It strikes me as unfortunate that Republicans have been able to capture the religious high ground, despite--as Gaddez points out--the fact that there are traditions even within Christianity that would recoil at their casual self-anointing.
It is also disappointing that the message sells so well, even though it's so vapid.
MrMister on
+4
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Why would anyone have hope that the younger republicans would be more sensible? Rubio only ascended on the tide of the tea party, and was behind plenty of nefarious and reactionary nonsense in Florida before his national afterbirth.
Any Republican who has rose to prominence in the last twenty years has done so on the fundie gay bashing invade everyone drill baby drill if we talk about abortion enough God will give us power who needs legal protections anyway we're all white enough movement that has solidified into the Tea Party.
The GOP isn't going to change for another decade at least, if then.
It strikes me as unfortunate that Republicans have been able to capture the religious high ground, despite--as Gaddez points out--the fact that there are traditions even within Christianity that would recoil at their casual self-anointing.
It is also disappointing that the message sells so well, even though it's so vapid.
It's not even that, so much as the fact that all the things that I grew up learning to value from church seems to simply not exist in the fundie base; concepts like forgiveness, compassion, charity, love and an understanding of scripture in the context of the time when it was written are completely absent from these peoples messages. Instead I see anger, xenophobia, judgement and a complete failure to grasp that the bible was written by a pre-industrial agrarian society of semi nomads living in a region that was mostly desert (and thus can't really be applied 1:1 to our society).
These people are as far removed from what I know as christian as Sufi muslims.
It strikes me as unfortunate that Republicans have been able to capture the religious high ground, despite--as Gaddez points out--the fact that there are traditions even within Christianity that would recoil at their casual self-anointing.
It is also disappointing that the message sells so well, even though it's so vapid.
The left-wing has been traditionally been very hostile towards organized religion. First it was a pushback against religion from Marxists, then in the 60s it was a pushback from the free-love hippies, and then in the 90s it was the ACLU suing local governments to remove Christmas decorations on behalf of the easily-offended. In the brave new world we live in it's gotten stupider of course, but the Democratic party is definitely not the party you think of when you hear "organized religion".
To the business owners, popular opinion is forcing them to provide service to something as religiously abhorrent to them as a pornographer's convention (most of them are totally fine with gay people, just not gay weddings), and the First Amendment protects the practice of religion. Would you pass a law forcing Muslim butchers to handle pork?
On the other hand, being singled out for discrimination is definitely a slap in the face to gay people, and so I'm leaning towards "no discrimination" here. But if you're going to crack down on refusal of service based on religious beliefs you should crack down on all of it including crap like this.
I also don't consider expecting the government treat Christianity like it does all other religions being hostile towards organized religion. Generally speaking the left in America treats organized religion just fine. They generally just don't treat mainstream Christianity as something special like most Republicans would prefer.
Quid on
+16
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
It strikes me as unfortunate that Republicans have been able to capture the religious high ground, despite--as Gaddez points out--the fact that there are traditions even within Christianity that would recoil at their casual self-anointing.
It is also disappointing that the message sells so well, even though it's so vapid.
The left-wing has been traditionally been very hostile towards organized religion. First it was a pushback against religion from Marxists, then in the 60s it was a pushback from the free-love hippies, and then in the 90s it was the ACLU suing local governments to remove Christmas decorations on behalf of the easily-offended. In the brave new world we live in it's gotten stupider of course, but the Democratic party is definitely not the party you think of when you hear "organized religion".
Marxists and free-love hippies were always only ever a minority wing of the left in the United States. I would also note that the ACLU's 1st amendment cases come not just from atheists, but from religious minorities including Christian sects--Jehova's Witnesses, notably, are religiously forbidden from saluting the flag. This is part of what I'm sad about: there are strains of Christianity out there which break strongly from Republican policy preferences. Jehova's Witnesses are in the world, but refuse to be of it--it is anathema to them that the government be in the religion business. Quakers and Shakers are absolute pacifists. These doctrines are, as a matter of demographic numbers, not particularly popular, nor are these sects particularly wealthy or politically connected. As a consequence, they get forgotten about in our national consciousness of what it is to be 'religious,' and we lose track of the fact that the nationalist/religious patois of the Southern Evangelicals is not the only authentic expression of religious conviction.
Why would anyone have hope that the younger republicans would be more sensible? Rubio only ascended on the tide of the tea party, and was behind plenty of nefarious and reactionary nonsense in Florida before his national afterbirth.
Any Republican who has rose to prominence in the last twenty years has done so on the fundie gay bashing invade everyone drill baby drill if we talk about abortion enough God will give us power who needs legal protections anyway we're all white enough movement that has solidified into the Tea Party.
The GOP isn't going to change for another decade at least, if then.
And of course, their base still votes. Maybe not enough to get them the White House, but enough to win them the Senate and the House.
The party ain't gonna change as long as they can win enough to push an agenda.
To the business owners, popular opinion is forcing them to provide service to something as religiously abhorrent to them as a pornographer's convention (most of them are totally fine with gay people, just not gay weddings), and the First Amendment protects the practice of religion.
I don't buy it. Refusing to sell your services for a wedding between two women says a great deal about your opinion of gay people.
Would you pass a law forcing Muslim butchers to handle pork?
Not offering one kind of meat to anyone and not offering anything to one kind of person are two different things.
Why would anyone have hope that the younger republicans would be more sensible?
Ostensibly, because they are hopefully capable of reading simple poll figures and demographic projections. I mean, I loathe populism generally, but it's usually an easy ticket to ride on.
But the GOP is going the exact opposite tack, and appealing to the populism within a small contingent of people who are ardently opposed to the mainstream.
I mean, this is an elementary school-grade critical thinking problem.
Christian private school curricula, at least the sort used in the schools that produce these kinds of conservative Christians, aren't very big on teaching critical thinking.
Christian private school curricula, at least the sort used in the schools that produce these kinds of conservative Christians, aren't very big on teaching critical thinking.
Why would anyone have hope that the younger republicans would be more sensible?
Ostensibly, because they are hopefully capable of reading simple poll figures and demographic projections. I mean, I loathe populism generally, but it's usually an easy ticket to ride on.
But the GOP is going the exact opposite tack, and appealing to the populism within a small contingent of people who are ardently opposed to the mainstream.
I mean, this is an elementary school-grade critical thinking problem.
Indeed; while some of them have deluded themselves into thinking that 2014 was turning the tide or some such drivel, the fact remains that not only did tradtional voting trends favor them for a second mid term election, they also had citizens united, voter registration laws and gerrymandering in their favor.
Those are only short term treatments for a long term problem though; gerrymandering will eventually lead to other districts being saturated with democratic voters. Voter registration laws are unconstitutional and will be struck down. Citizens united can't turn a crappy candidate into something people actually want.
So again the question becomes: how much longer can the republicans keep running to the right before the party collapses under it's own weight?
"There’s been more pressure this week to put sanctions on Indiana than Iran," Huckabee said. "The reason that those corporations put the pressure on Indiana and Arkansas was because the militant gay community put the pressure on them. The left has gotten very good at creating a crisis, something to divide the country. Well, it won’t stop until there are no more churches, until there are no more people who are spreading the gospel. And I’m talking now about the unapologetic, unabridged gospel that is really God’s truth."
Unabridged gospel. Right.
Insert obligatory The West Wing Leviticus clip here.
It strikes me as unfortunate that Republicans have been able to capture the religious high ground, despite--as Gaddez points out--the fact that there are traditions even within Christianity that would recoil at their casual self-anointing.
It is also disappointing that the message sells so well, even though it's so vapid.
The left-wing has been traditionally been very hostile towards organized religion. First it was a pushback against religion from Marxists, then in the 60s it was a pushback from the free-love hippies, and then in the 90s it was the ACLU suing local governments to remove Christmas decorations on behalf of the easily-offended. In the brave new world we live in it's gotten stupider of course, but the Democratic party is definitely not the party you think of when you hear "organized religion".
To the business owners, popular opinion is forcing them to provide service to something as religiously abhorrent to them as a pornographer's convention (most of them are totally fine with gay people, just not gay weddings), and the First Amendment protects the practice of religion. Would you pass a law forcing Muslim butchers to handle pork?
On the other hand, being singled out for discrimination is definitely a slap in the face to gay people, and so I'm leaning towards "no discrimination" here. But if you're going to crack down on refusal of service based on religious beliefs you should crack down on all of it including crap like this.
In the first half of the 20th century, there was a strong association between liberal politics and Christianity, even evangelical Christianity. The current conservative Christian phenomenon is pants-on-head bizarre. My favorite bit of dark comedy in modern politics is the group of congressional Republicans who identify as both Christian and Objectivist.
"There’s been more pressure this week to put sanctions on Indiana than Iran," Huckabee said. "The reason that those corporations put the pressure on Indiana and Arkansas was because the militant gay community put the pressure on them. The left has gotten very good at creating a crisis, something to divide the country. Well, it won’t stop until there are no more churches, until there are no more people who are spreading the gospel. And I’m talking now about the unapologetic, unabridged gospel that is really God’s truth."
Late to the game here, but according to Huckabee it was the militant gay community who forced the republican Indiana legislature and Governor to draft and sign the Let-Christian-discriminate-against-gay-people bill?
I know that republicans love blaming liberals for their own words and actions but that is some impressive accusation gymnastics.
Posts
politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/yes-nixon-scuttled-the-vietnam-peace-talks-107623.html#.VSCy0vnF_RY
Not strictly on topic, so I'm PMing you a link.
Peace in Vietnam would've been huge for the Democrats, and the Vietnams were moving towards a compromise. It was an "everyone hates this equally" compromise, because each side thought that the cost and uncertainty of war was too high to keep going. Nixon told the South Vietnamese that if he were elected, he would make sure they would get a better deal, and so they ended up stalling the peace talks. That stalling meant no peace deal, and helped Nixon get elected. But the opportunity was lost, and they didn't end up with a deal. Nixon's meddling meant the war went on for seven more years and ended up with the South Vietnamese losing anyway.
I feel like even true blue evangelicals will see right through this kind of crass, incredibly transparent, sanctimonious bullshit Cruz is trying to sell to them.
Go read some Facebook comments on a news article about him sometime.
I saw one lady claiming Cruz was sent by Jesus himself.
That vaguely reminds me of something that may or may not have happened recently. And been about doing roughly the opposite if someone was elected. And apparently hasn't worked, thank fuck. But still.
Steam | XBL
"There’s been more pressure this week to put sanctions on Indiana than Iran," Huckabee said. "The reason that those corporations put the pressure on Indiana and Arkansas was because the militant gay community put the pressure on them. The left has gotten very good at creating a crisis, something to divide the country. Well, it won’t stop until there are no more churches, until there are no more people who are spreading the gospel. And I’m talking now about the unapologetic, unabridged gospel that is really God’s truth."
evangelicals are the easiest to dupe group in existence
Why? We all know Jesus was a straight white Christian man.
Well there was the rumor that Reagan told the Iranians to stall on the release of the hostages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Surprise_conspiracy_theory
I think he was talking about Bibi.
See, I'm actually glad he's saying shit like that. Back in '08, I remember Hucklebee was the charismatic everyman outwardly and the creepy theocrat in person. Talking about the evil gays and women's libidos will ruin that image.
Look, we can't scuttle deals with Iran without fellating Israel. And we can't fellate Israel without shoring up support from jews at home. And you can't shore up support from jews at home by telling them about the transformative power of christ!
On the positive side: It ammuses me to no end that in 2015 suppressing gay rights is the hill a bunch of these bastards have decided to die on.
The latter happily buy in to just about anything saying good things happened because of Jesus and God and bad things because of a lack of Jesus and God.
That being said, dominion theology (look it up!) is a thing. And this particular candidate is certainly involved. Be extremely wary.
honestly, me too, considering it was one of the defining issues of the last election (albeit not THE defining issue), and it seemed liked there was some real soul searching in the aftermath of the 2012 blowout the GOP suffered. It seemed like the mechanisms of the old guard (ginning up fear and resentment through outright lying) lost handily to the politics of optimism and inclusion, and some of the youngsters in the GOP (like Rubio and Jindal) were ready to come to terms with that and rebuild the party in a new mold.
But no, apparently doubling down on derp is, again, the gameplan. I hope they lose every state in the electoral.
Ah yes, because it worked so well for the Anabaptists in Munster.
I'm seriously wondering what the hell it's gonna take for the Republicans to change course at this point; while some of them have made some extraordinarily flaccid gestures of out reach to the hispanic community, none of them appear to be willing to ditch a toxic base element in order to reach out to more demographics.
Take this stupid outreach to the fundies; there was absolutely no need to do this since they aren't going anywhere and it stands to alienate gays and moderates. Hell, at this juncture Ted cruz could probably use a baptismal font as a be-day and still have a lock on the fundie vote.
And his 'pubby mates, natch.
Steam | XBL
It is also disappointing that the message sells so well, even though it's so vapid.
Any Republican who has rose to prominence in the last twenty years has done so on the fundie gay bashing invade everyone drill baby drill if we talk about abortion enough God will give us power who needs legal protections anyway we're all white enough movement that has solidified into the Tea Party.
The GOP isn't going to change for another decade at least, if then.
It's not even that, so much as the fact that all the things that I grew up learning to value from church seems to simply not exist in the fundie base; concepts like forgiveness, compassion, charity, love and an understanding of scripture in the context of the time when it was written are completely absent from these peoples messages. Instead I see anger, xenophobia, judgement and a complete failure to grasp that the bible was written by a pre-industrial agrarian society of semi nomads living in a region that was mostly desert (and thus can't really be applied 1:1 to our society).
These people are as far removed from what I know as christian as Sufi muslims.
But of course this crap sells well to them. Fundie's love nothing more then to get attention since it makes them go like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl0ISLqVOc8
The left-wing has been traditionally been very hostile towards organized religion. First it was a pushback against religion from Marxists, then in the 60s it was a pushback from the free-love hippies, and then in the 90s it was the ACLU suing local governments to remove Christmas decorations on behalf of the easily-offended. In the brave new world we live in it's gotten stupider of course, but the Democratic party is definitely not the party you think of when you hear "organized religion".
To the business owners, popular opinion is forcing them to provide service to something as religiously abhorrent to them as a pornographer's convention (most of them are totally fine with gay people, just not gay weddings), and the First Amendment protects the practice of religion. Would you pass a law forcing Muslim butchers to handle pork?
On the other hand, being singled out for discrimination is definitely a slap in the face to gay people, and so I'm leaning towards "no discrimination" here. But if you're going to crack down on refusal of service based on religious beliefs you should crack down on all of it including crap like this.
Oh I didn't mean the two are the same. Just that both groups generally tend to love that sort of ideology.
Marxists and free-love hippies were always only ever a minority wing of the left in the United States. I would also note that the ACLU's 1st amendment cases come not just from atheists, but from religious minorities including Christian sects--Jehova's Witnesses, notably, are religiously forbidden from saluting the flag. This is part of what I'm sad about: there are strains of Christianity out there which break strongly from Republican policy preferences. Jehova's Witnesses are in the world, but refuse to be of it--it is anathema to them that the government be in the religion business. Quakers and Shakers are absolute pacifists. These doctrines are, as a matter of demographic numbers, not particularly popular, nor are these sects particularly wealthy or politically connected. As a consequence, they get forgotten about in our national consciousness of what it is to be 'religious,' and we lose track of the fact that the nationalist/religious patois of the Southern Evangelicals is not the only authentic expression of religious conviction.
And of course, their base still votes. Maybe not enough to get them the White House, but enough to win them the Senate and the House.
The party ain't gonna change as long as they can win enough to push an agenda.
Ostensibly, because they are hopefully capable of reading simple poll figures and demographic projections. I mean, I loathe populism generally, but it's usually an easy ticket to ride on.
But the GOP is going the exact opposite tack, and appealing to the populism within a small contingent of people who are ardently opposed to the mainstream.
I mean, this is an elementary school-grade critical thinking problem.
wish list
Steam wishlist
Etsy wishlist
They teach being critical about thinking.
Were they backed by a national cable network and represented by an egomaniac presenting a narrative that is problematic to debate?
Indeed; while some of them have deluded themselves into thinking that 2014 was turning the tide or some such drivel, the fact remains that not only did tradtional voting trends favor them for a second mid term election, they also had citizens united, voter registration laws and gerrymandering in their favor.
Those are only short term treatments for a long term problem though; gerrymandering will eventually lead to other districts being saturated with democratic voters. Voter registration laws are unconstitutional and will be struck down. Citizens united can't turn a crappy candidate into something people actually want.
So again the question becomes: how much longer can the republicans keep running to the right before the party collapses under it's own weight?
Unabridged gospel. Right.
Insert obligatory The West Wing Leviticus clip here.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
In the first half of the 20th century, there was a strong association between liberal politics and Christianity, even evangelical Christianity. The current conservative Christian phenomenon is pants-on-head bizarre. My favorite bit of dark comedy in modern politics is the group of congressional Republicans who identify as both Christian and Objectivist.
Late to the game here, but according to Huckabee it was the militant gay community who forced the republican Indiana legislature and Governor to draft and sign the Let-Christian-discriminate-against-gay-people bill?
I know that republicans love blaming liberals for their own words and actions but that is some impressive accusation gymnastics.