The Lightbulb Disinformation Conspiracy

http://www.fpcr.org balloonjuice

I wonder.

DerKrieger

…are starting to remind me of Paulbots/Paulnuts in their rabid support of her. If she doesn’t run or if she runs but loses the nomination will they sit home with their toys and refuse to come out and play? Will their discontent help Obama.
I like Sarah and know that she at least will enthustically support the nominee even if her worshippers don’t.

acat

The economics of Gore’s corkscrews never made sense….

Mew

DerKrieger

…Curly Fry Lightbulbs

drshatterhand

What on earth are these people going to do when they realize she’s not running?

For someone who was absolutely thrilled with her selection as McCain’s running mate, I’m so tired of these games…

gawken

The author of the piecde is obviously upset with our own Leon WOLF. No doubt he perceive Leon as the proverbial “WOLF in sheep’s clothing..” but remember the LAST time the GOP any GOP candidate attempted an “ovine” reference, we ended up with Carlyh’s “Demonic Sheep” commerical..which still obviously perturbs this person.

There..got it?

pineros

Face it, the majority of the C4P post was close to the truth. Argue all you want… but I have been following this site for several years now and you can’t avoid the fact that this site slews to certain candidates versus others and whether that is good or bad, who cares.
But, I definitely have noticed that in the last few months there are a lot more snarky posts and comments re Palin (especially her supporters) versus what I saw re Daniels or recently Perry.
Hey, if you like certain candidates… fine. But don’t sit there and try to play the “we are neutral” song. That is baloney and if you don’t admit it, then the C4P is more than close, it is dead on.

I see Eric is taking this personally and as some sort of attack directly to Red State. If you read the C4P post, it explains their complaints about what is going on here.

To pull out a comment on a site that gets thousands of comments per day to prove something to help your side is not a good tack to take. If I were to troll through this site, do you think I could find a lot of stupid posts, jerk off comments, idiotic ideas? I guarantee you I could because I have read a lot of them over the last few years.

So, Eric…. how about stepping back and maybe being a little more open about the themes advanced by this site through the main posters to the front page.

http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

You have to at least be prolific to be called a hack.

http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

nt

Repair_Man_Jack

You see, the big, bad WOLF eats the 3 little pigs and that is how we here at RS.com plan to end gubbermint pork.

aesthete

is the one you spent all day rubbing while thinking of Sarah.

Oh, and you earned it, big guy:

funwithknives

They seem to have a great deal of difficulty spelling and editing for corrections.The general tenor is seemingly RAH-RAH and kinda “Varsity” high school, in tone. How many *ringers*, do you suppose there are? The reason I ask is that I do not know of one conservative who is as ‘breathless’, as this. Am I just seeing it wrong or is there too much Cynic in Me?
Oh,and they really do not like Erick. He must be doin’ it RIGHT. (This, from someone with few real admirers, but they always do listen!)

Whacker77

These comments illustrate the major problem with the potential Palin campaign. She and many of her supporters operate on the belief that non-stop combativeness is the only course of action. Palin seems to believe she is at her best when she is lashing out.

It seems every little slight is cause for a major dust up with her and her supporters. It’s one thing to like Palin personally, but buyer beware of a potential campaign. It’s Pandora’s box. As combative as she can be, her ferverent supporters are that much more combative. It’s a recipe for a major electoral disaster.

I wrote yesterday my big concern with her campaign was she and her supporters wouldn’t know when she was beaten. Just the fact she might not be the nominee could cause many to stay home or support a third party just to get at the “establishment”. If you don’t believe me, just look at the comments from C4P.

The sooner she realizes she can’t win, the better the chances of Republicans winning in 2012. Don’t for one second underestimate the hold she has on a sizable following.

http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

I was amused by that one.

Tom Anderson

In the couple of years I’ve been reading RS, I’ve seen front page bloggers – and many others – supporting a wide variety of candidates in their posts.

About the only time I’ve seen near 100% agreement on any candidate it’s been the (deserved) dismissal of Ron Paul and the Paulbots.

Your perception of the snark aimed at your favored candidate shows more about your mentality than it does about the supposed lockstep mentality of RS in general.

BTW, the comment Erick highlights from the C4P site was a direct personal attack on him, not a commentary on RS site content. When attacked personally, he is free to – and in my opinion encouraged to – respond to it.

J. Leg

Palin, her supporters, and I woud venture to say the C4P crowd are NOT like this at all.

It’s not really about Palin, but the ideas she represents and her record in taking on the establishment, which is going to be DESPERATELY needed in our next president. Now I’m waiting to hear HOW she plans on doing this before I throw my final support towards her.

Now if she chooses not to run, or there is a candidate who’s got a better plan (Perry perhaps) I’ll probably support them. And I gather if that candidate convinces the Republican electorate that they have the best ideas and win the nomination, Palin will endorse the said candidate and her supporters, including the C4P crowd will line up behind her.

As for you assertion that Palin can not win, let’s take a look at Time Magazine from March of 1980: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,921912,00.html // Now of course, I’m not saying Palin is Reagan, no one can ever be Reagan. What I am saying is there is a precedent for someone being WAY behind in polling (as you’ll see in the article, Reagan was over 20 points behind Carter at the time) coming back and winning.

I have no doubt that Palin would endorse the GOP nominee, that her fans would line up behind them, etc. The real question based on what you and others who write about Palin the way you have is, if Palin is the nominee would you support her?

pineros

Keep going with the Wolf. Follow that idiotic thinking process and adios as you head into irrelevancy for the next year or so.

Change Jar Conservative

I’m sort of meh on Sarah Paliln (except for the fact that I know conservative Republicans who won’t vote for her and we’d probably need those people).

Either she will run or she won’t. Her number are what they are. They are not some misinformed guess. They are a sceintific sample of the population.

http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

Palin supporters are so full of anger all the time, every little imagined slight is evidence of some anti-Palin conspiracy. Honestly, what the hell is wrong with you?

http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

who would hand the keys to 1600 Pennsylvamia Avenue back to a Marxist for four more years no matter which Republican got the nomination?

pineros

I see Eric says he is a true blue Conservative and won’t sacrifice his staunch conservatism.
Well, I know that Sarah Palin is a true Conservative. One of the best Conservative examples in the national political person list.
Yet, “Conservative defending” Eric allows dolts like Wolf and others post negative articles on a true Conservative – Sarah Palin.

Now, this wouldn’t have anything to do with the personality trait that was revealed by Eric when Tucker “Bowtie” Carlson made his own personality trait evident with the milfistan tweet, would it? I seem to recall Eric liking it and revelling in it… until the heat got too hot and there was some deleting going on.

Yes, Red State is a conservative site. Yes, I agree there should not be potshots taken by Red State at C4P and vice versa. But lets not start this “Red State is pristine” baloney.

Red State can promote Perry or Daniels or any of the others. C4P is strictly a Palin supporting site…. I guess that is why its called Conservatives4Palin.

And just for some history…. the reason that C4P was created in the first place…. because almost all the so-called Conservative supporting bloggers, politicos, pundits, Republicans, etc. did not defend Sarah Palin when she was attacked in 2008 after the election and all through most of 2009. Take a little google trip if you don’t believe me. It was only when they realized how much influence she had with the Tea Party and others as well as the ability to raise money that they finally got off their lazy fat buttocks and started to speak up.

Ask Eric who really made sure that Nikki Haley made it through the personal attacks… even when the worst of it was being thrown out there just before the election. And no, I don’t think Eric can be credited with that.

Aaron Gardner

b

http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

to others.

Let me give you a hint:

. Blah Blah Blah SARAH! Blah Blah Blah Sarah! Blah Blah Blah turncoats! Blah Blah Blah evil ones. Blah Blah Blah Saint Sarah! (let us kiss her blessed feet)

Blah Blah Blah fat asses, Blah Blah Blah he hate me, Blah Blah Blah Sarah! let us worship her with our sacred tears!

onemovoter

That he gets all the time from the Palinista’s? He said on his radio station that he could deal with the Ronulan’s (had to borrow that term kyle), but he has lost all respect for the Palin supporters and their nastiness they have displayed.

Erick’s mild post on RS in response to what C4P is saying, to me anyway, is more than warranted. I’d be more than happy to hand some reality checks to the C4P folks.

azaeroprof

Though I am a self-labeled Palinite, I confess that I read RS much more than C4P. I personally don’t have a problem with “fan sites”, but I’m already sold so don’t need that. I didn’t agree with Leon’s column, but it was definitely wrong of them to equate that to RS and to you personally.

But in a way, you can count your blessings. At least they didn’t accuse you of typing one-handed….just sayin’.

Finrod

Commenters get out of hand, it happens on every site that gets comments. Why highlight it by putting it on the front page?

Almost everyone here that has a long enough comment history has probably posted something equally as bad. I don’t see the value of highlighting things like this.

Aaron Gardner

Everyone needs to lighten up and have a sense of humor once in a while.

perry4prez

I would gladly support Sarah Palin if she were the nominee (and she would be loads better than Romney), because she is a Christian, a Constitutionalist, and a Conservative, which is my litmus test. However, she is not my first choice for the nomination because of the reality show atmosphere surrounding her family, which demeans the presidency and our Nation. Our president should not have a son-in-law posing for pornographic magazines. I realize that this is not entirely under Palin’s control, but it is still demeaning.

If Palin were the only Conservative in the race, things would be different, but we have great candidates like Perry and Bachmann.

perry4prez

Now just a minute there . Fervent supporters are what got us the House in 1994 and 2010. We need them and shouldn’t scare ‘em off. Palin’s problem is her reality-show family, not her supporters.

azaeroprof

Funny how fervent supporters are seen as a liability if your name is Palin (or Paul for that matter, though I agree that he is kooky). The truth is that fervent supporters are somewhat of a prerequisite to get elected on a national scale.

But I take a little issue with your characterization of her family. Yes, they are a “reality-show family”, but only because they actually were on a reality show. Otherwise, they seem pretty normal and down-to-earth to me. And even with Bristol’s pregnancy, her kids seem to be turning out better than a lot of kids of people I know.

Quixote

I’ve been suspicious of Ron Paul almost from the first minute I heard of him, from some sign twirler standing on the corner screaming about Ron Paul and how he’s the solution to all of our ills. My first thought was, “Well, now I know where the Lyndon LaRouche crowd ended up.”

With Mrs. Palin, it’s more complex. I have an enormous depth of admiration for her and her family (especially her husband). It can’t be easy to be the bit players when the media decides to go Full Monty Python Flying Circus on your wife or mother.

I don’t think the media, nor the left will allow her to escape her box right now. And like many here, I don’t think she’s going to run, and if she did, I don’t think she’d win, even though she would have my vote. I think she has a longer term plan in place.

WarEagle01

What with his contraptions and whatnot. T’aint natural.

Raven

He’s not her son in law.

toothpick

If you replace “invention” with “banning” in your excerpt it might make more sense.

Raven

As with the snarks at Paul are due entirely to the fanboys who never learn how to shut up.
Because of folks like yourself, Palin supporters like myself get splashed by your indiscriminate idiocy.

She’s not running. Get over it.

Raven

Because she’s not running and therefore does not need a plan.

So who are you supporting since she’s not available?

Raven

that she Could win. IF she were running.

Doesn’t matter. She’s not running. So who are you going to support?

Now, scenario 2:
Assume for the sake of argument that she Does run and she loses the primary. Now what?

SoFiMil

Romney is no conservative nor constitutionalist, but he’s definitely a Christian. Are you a troll like Romney4Prez is, and perhaps even the identical troll? You do no service to Perry and the conservative cause.

rightwingmom52

I like Palin and if she chooses to run and is the nominee, I will work for her election. However, just like Ron Paul, she has some supporters who are a little, shall I say “rabid,” and a lot of them are at C4P. A couple of commenters there today implied that if Palin doesn’t run, they’ll stay home. If she doesn’t run, I certainly hope she can convince all of her supporters to vote for the GOP nominee because whoever that is will be better than Obama.

I’ve answered your question. Now, answer mine. if Palin doesn’t run, will you support the GOP nominee?

Darin_H

Pretty sure Romney’s a Mormon.

YnotNOW

Then you need to take a longer-term approach to change the circumstances, so that the next time a candidate meets your “preferred” criteria, there is the ability for broad support among the public.

That means getting involved to change the Party. That means getting involved to infuence the Culture (a generational issue often).

Here are my thoughts in more detail:
http://www.redstate.com/ynotnow/2011/08/18/what-to-do-about-the-dilemma-of-voting-for-the-less-bad-candidate-vs-the-3rd-party-protest-vote/

Darin_H

A. That’s NOT funNY.

A. None, but it takes 15 to write a blog entitled “coping with darkness”

A. Four. One to change the bulb, and three to write about how the bulb is biased against the socket.

A. Two. One to change the bulb, and one to write a blog about what a true conservative the old light bulb was.

A. One. He holds the bulb while the world revolves around him.

SoFiMil

Besides that, you will drive people away from your cause by pursuing this line. Keep the discussion to political and moral issues. If youust, find a blog for strictly religious doctrines.

J. Leg

I mentioned that in my initial post. In fact, I may end up supporting someone else, because I have not heard a plan from Palin.

gjohnson

hey, who cares!? why are we wasting our time on this people? it is a whole bunch to do about nothing! i would go so far as to say Erick shouldn’t have ever posted a response about it. we have an election to win not a beef to pick with some Palin fan-site!

Get it together folks! What we are fighting is much bigger than this crap!

J. Leg

She has not said she is not running…. You’re just making assumptions.

J. Leg

I’d support the GOP nominee…

gjohnson

and especially the liberal media would love nothing more than to break a story about how there is a break in the tea party. I can hear David Gregory now. So, Ms. Palin, here is an excerpt from C4P and Redstate. “Looks like we have a juicy story folks!” is what those liberal media-type creeps would say. But, just like always it is much ado about nothing.

Adjoran

With Paul, I can understand how he gets that sort of devotion because so many of his fans have just never been exposed to any market theory or economics before, and many are in school and young and impressionable.

But Palin’s natural constituency would seem to be more stable people. Yet they act like stalker-bots and react like spoiled brats at anything less than fawning over their Queen.

It makes little sense, and it is disturbing.

J. Leg

… yet no one calls them freaks, like some of the commentators on this post.

oldbird77

um, didn’t Reagan’s daughter pose for Playboy?

oldbird77

I’m not pro-Palin (I don’t dislike her either) just wanted to point this out.

DerKrieger

…a Curly Fry Lightbulb if it got the nomination. Ain’t gonna happen though.

Green_Lantern

because they don’t think you’re Conservative enough to have them! Hey, for a hack you are holding it down pretty well. Better than, say… oh, I don’t know… Bill Kristol?

perry4prez

@SoFiMil, I don’t have time to go into a theological dispute now, but I do not see how you can separate political issues from religious issues. I certainly do not see how you can separate moral issues from religious issues. Morality and religion are almost the same thing. And Liberty flows from faith, because we are endowed by our Creator with natural rights.

I do not see how you can be a Conservative if you do not believe this. The reason we have rights is because of God. Without God you are relying on the Government to defend your rights (indeed, they are not rights so much as guarantees). And we know how that goes.

perry4prez

Someone who disagrees with you is not a “troll.” And I have no idea who other posters are.

I have a simple question for you. Would you vote for a Scientologist for president?

Darin_H

He himself claims to be a Mormon. You’re denying this?

http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

Reagan’s fans didn’t trash the other candidates in the Republican primary, and didn’t engage in a ad hominem attacks against conservative pundits. I can promote the candidate of my choice without tearing someone else down; can you?

The radical lefties have been predicting a civil war between the establishment Republicans, the Tea Party, the Paulistas and the Palinites. I would rather not see that happen, because if it does, it guarantees that we lose the House, and don’t win the Senate or the Presidency.

I personally adore Sarah Palin. I refuse to trash her or her supporters, and her supporters need to feel the same way about those who support other candidates. Otherwise all we have to look forward to is the apocalypse predicted by the lefties. Let’s not let it happen.

With all sincerity.

rgarrell

I deleted this douche’s comment and banned him. He can apply for reinstatement via the contact form. I wouldn’t count on it, though, douche. Buh bye. – Caleb

gekster

nt

acat

So far, perry4prez, you’ve shown yourself to be an anti-mormon bigot.

I want to know, is it just Mormons who get under your skin?

What about Bhuddists? What of Jehovah’s Witnesses? How do you feel about Catholics? Where do you stand on atheists?

Mew

izoneguy

You know he caused the earthquake in D.C. today – right!

Scope

n/t

SoFiMil

Faith/works is doctrinal (even if that doctrinal belief is a fact.)
Abortion, stealing, bearing false witness are universal moral facts in which as you correctly state governments have the right and duty to invoke as authority in implementing policy.

acat

Fortunately for me, I know the difference between honor and reputation.

Mew

Aaron Gardner

Flagstaff

That Mormons are Christians, or that they are not?

It seems odd to argue that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is not a Christian church.

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

lousy conservative because you like cats.

acat

(fin)

DerKrieger

…stayed on his horse.

perry4prez

@acat, “lousy” is a strong word. I would not say you are a “lousy” conservative if you’re an atheist. I would however say that you are an incomplete conservative, and you set the stage for liberals to broaden the scope of government.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

A single-candidate troll whining about other single-candidate trolls with a title like “Palinistas.”

acat

christianity.

Jimmy Carter.
Bill Clinton.
Barack Obama.

All, just like every other male, red-blooded, bipedal person to win the white house, are Christians. Not a one is conservative.

I find your metric flawed, and your continued bashing of those whose beliefs do not match yours to be both foolish and insulting.

Mew

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

I happen to be an evangelical Christian and I would suggest (but not here) that the choice to not believe in Jesus as the Savior is a poor eternal choice.

That said, the idea that any choice of spiritual belief (or non-belief) has much of anything to do with broadening the scope of government is without any foundation in fact or logic. I could make the opposite case, in fact.

GWB is a committed Christian and I happen to believe that he makes every effort to put Christ first in his life and in his decisions. He also was steward of one of the largest expansions of the scope of government on record. You’ve got Med Pt D, NCLB, signing SCHIP, saying (approximately) “where people are hurting the government needs to be there” and “faith based” social program spending.

You are busily carving yourself an indefensible position. Don’t go there.

perry4prez

@acat, I asked you whether you would vote for a Scientologist. You reply that Mormons are not Scientologists, which implicitly says that no, you would not vote for a Scientologist. So logically, all I need to do is show that Mormons are more like Scientologists than mainstream Christians and I will have made my point. Right?

perry4prez

It rolls off the tongue more easily than “Palin supporters”. I wish I could think of a similar name for Romney supporters.

rightwingmom52

Christians who are not conservative than I do with conservatives who are not Christian. acat is a better conservative than many Christians I know both personally and politically. By that I mean, I have friends whom I generally cannot comprehend how they can claim to vote their conscience while voting for liberals who support abortion, gay marriage, government confiscation of citizen income, etc. And acat already named a few politicians who claim to be Christians, yet their records and words prove otherwise.

perry4prez

If all conservatives are Christians, it does not follow that all Christians are conservatives. This is basic logic (although I recognize that you dispute the premise.)

I would also disagree that Clinton and Obama were Christians (viz., Flowers, Lewinsky, Wright, etc.) Carter was, so far as I know, but he was not a constitutionalist nor a conservative, of course, so I wouldn’t vote for him.

You also criticize me for “bashing those whose beliefs do not match mine”. Just what do you think politics is? If we think abortion is murder, we say so, and we bash liberals who say otherwise. If we think that increasing taxes is wrong, we say so, and we bash libs who say otherwise.

If you do not agree with what I have to say, you’re free to vote Romney or Huntsman or McCain or Ron Paul. Or even Obama. Look at where your feel-goodism got you in 2008.

perry4prez

Again, if all conservatives are Christians, it does not follow that all Christians are conservatives. GWB may have been a Christian, but that does not mean he was a conservative.

The question you should be asking is “of Presidents who have been genuine conservatives (e.g., Reagan) have any of them been non-religious?

Finally, I want to say: in Rick Perry (and Michele Bachmann) we have candidates who are Christians AND Constitutionalists AND Conservatives. That is basically the trifecta. Why would you be unhappy with that?

JSobieski

does not speak highly of your analytical skills.

What exactly does the admonition to render onto Caesar what is Caesar’s and to render onto God what is God’s if poltiics and religion are inseparable?

Seems to me that your position in not supported from a Christian standpoint. A person can be good Christian while living in a sinful land. This is actually a key difference between Christianity and Islam as I understand Islam.

If other people can distinguish things that you cannot, maybe the fault lies with you and not with them?

JSobieski

nt

runner12

NT

Finrod

Trying to compare present-day with 30 years ago is kind of pointless, at least as far as political fans go, because there wasn’t the online presence back then for folks to go at each other with. If there had been I’m sure that the Reagan fans and the Bush (Sr) fans and the Howard Baker fans and the John Anderson fans would have gone at each other tooth and nail.

acat

Let’s assume two sets. Call one “conservatives” and another “christians”.

Is there overlap? Yes. Quite easily proven. See evidence in this thread.

Are there parts that don’t overlap for either set?

Also, quite easily proven for set “christian”. Do you know Obama’s heart? Clinton’s? Last time I checked, y’all were cautioned against knowing what’s in anothers’ heart.

That leaves us with “are there parts of set conservative that are not overlapped by set christian”. I assert that the answer is yes, and that by being of small mind on this issue, you are missing out on allies at best, fellow travelers at worst.

I will say that you’ve proven you’re new here, as I’m provably not a “feel-good” type.

Mew

acat

I have spent decades now voting for people who I disagree with, in one way or another. Unless I decide to try brainwashing, it’s unlikely I’ll ever find a candidate I completely agree with.

Unlike you, I have no problem with this.

What actually applies is whether the scientologist is the most conservative – in a three-legged sort of way – who could be elected in the general.

I would have no problem voting for a mormon. The ones I know are all hard working, generally fiscally shrewd, and with good relationships with their families. So what if their beliefs don’t match mine?

Mew

Darin_H

n/t

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

First of all, there is a long standing theological debate about LDS and Christianity, I’m not getting into it, but it goes back about 70 years.

Secondly, while I have theological issues with Mormonism, I would have no problem voting for a conservative Mormon for any office.;

acat

It seems that every christian sub-group has a bone to pick with each other christian sub-group. In the ’60s, it was the protestants picking on the catholics, now it’s the protestants picking on the mormons.

It’s a losing argument *in the political arena*.

Mew

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

infuse the Declaration, the Founding and much of our history and certainly are conservative. There is no 1/1 correspondence in this as in most things in life but nearly all surveys show a great correspondence between church goers/faith and conservative views and GOP voters. Not close.

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

I have had dogs for most of my life. Have had a cat for over a year. A stray near newborn for over a year. First cat in 20+ years and only 3rd ever. But clearly cats are independent self starters. Dogs beg. Also, ever seen a clean stray dog? All cats are clean.

Repair_Man_Jack

I’d hate to think of poor Lassie as a Huntsman-like RINO. Dog forbid!

acat

Behaviour that is not rewarded does not continue.

My pit bulls don’t beg.

Mew

Flagstaff

I like cats too.

You are a good man for taking in a stray, and cats can be every bit as loving and responsive as dogs. Well, almost, anyway.

acat

I’m not denying that there is a large overlap between set “christian” and set “conservative”.

I acknowledge that the largest subgroup of set conservative is, in fact, that overlap.

That said,, there are members of set “christian” who are not conservative, and there are members of set “conservative” who are not christian, much to the apparent consternation of perry4prez.

I made no value judgement about any of the above sets, just observing the passing scene.

Mew

acat

Just a theory, mind. Sincerely misguided is running a close second.

Mew

Scope

That you have become a Dogophobe? LOL

http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

than the fanatic cult of personality folks who refuse to see the flaws in their chosen hero (or heroine) of the moment…

When they call you a hack it means you’ve hit them close to home in a way they don’t like. Keep up the good work!

Scope

when I read it elsewhere, I couldn’t stop laughing. The spurs are what caused the earthquake, because they tore into the tectonic plates.

BigRedConservative

Our founding fathers turning in their graves?

gekster

.

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

a “bone”.

And you’re absolutely right, it has no place in the political arena.

perry4prez

@acat, I don’t care how many fancy Harvard degrees you have – the statement “if A, then B, Therefore, if B, then A” does not follow.

So, let’s review. I say that all true conservatives must be Christians, you bring up examples of Christians who aren’t conservatives, which does not address my point in the slightest. Of course there are some (professed) Christians who are not conservatives – ever heard of Liberation Theology?

acat

I’m just observing the passing scene.

You, however, are deliberately ignoring the second conclusion I presented, that there are some conservatives who are not christians.

Plug the names Martin Knight and standardcandle into google, along with the site redstate.com and tell me whether or not they’re conservatives. Try it with my name as wel. You might be surprised.

Mew

hint: “martin knight” site:redstate.com
standardcandle site:redstate.com
acat site:redstate.com

perry4prez

@acat, it is obvious that some people who are not from the Judeo-Christian faiths nonetheless take conservative political positions. This is especially true when it comes to free market Economics.

This is good and we should work with these folks to achieve goals that we all agree on (cutting regulation).

Nonetheless I think these people are incomplete conservatives (not “lousy conservatives”, that is your word), because our political system is expressly predicted on the idea that men are endowed with natural rights BY THEIR CREATOR.

Your view, that we can ultimately implement conservative principles without religion, means that we rely on the government to enforce our rights. That means we have guarantees from the government, not rights. That is the first step towards Tyranny.

acat

Let me make this simple for you.

The less power given to any individual, regardless of race, color, beliefs, or species, the less damage that individual can do.

The founders of our country, for whatever reason, had the same idea, as evidenced by the initial Articles of Confederation, and the later Bill of Rights.

I don’t need to believe in any god, let alone yours, to see the wisdom in this.

Mew

perry4prez

@acat, No you’re ignoring me. I have repeatedly said that there are some people who take conservative positions but who do not profess faith. They are conservatives and we should work together. But they are ultimately relying on a magnanimous government to GUARANTEE their rights, rather than having the government RESPECT their rights as free men endowed with rights by God. So if you truly believe in limited government you need to be a person of faith.

I realize that this makes some people uncomfortable but does that mean we should all shut up? It also makes people uncomfortable to talk about tax cuts or getting rid of unnecessary social programs, so we don’t talk about them and look how broke we’ve ended up. If society as a whole does not acknowlege a higher power we are all going to end up as serfs. This is exactly what happened in Communist countries.

izoneguy

Those are two things that do not make me uncomfortable. The Feds should get out of the business of running ANY social programs.

perry4prez

@acat, you may not need to believe in God to see the wisdom of limited government. But who is going to hold politicians accountable when they overstep their authority? In the US we are fortunate to have ways to react to that like having solid conservative judges that can remove Unconstitutional laws. But suppose Obama appoints enough liberal judges who won’t hold the legislature accountable for things like Obamacare? Who holds leaders accountable in places like Libya? If a politician knows he is accountable to God he will think twice before becoming a Tyrant.

Look, I get it. You’re an economic conservative because you understand that it will get you more ipads and Porsches and other stuff. It will, so lets work on lowering taxes. But there is so much more out there, and I pray that you will discover it one day.

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

I want a competent conservative who will be able to get things, like reducing the size and scope of government dramatically, and I don’t give a rip if that individual is a gay warlock.

As of now, I have no big issues with Perry based on his performance as LtGov and Gov of Texas. I have no idea about, nor do I care about, his faith. With Bachmann, I’m OK with most of her positions, I happen to be very uncomfortable with her lack of executive experience and the fact that she may be a Christian is of no consequence.

perry4prez

I should have said that it makes SOME people uncomfortable to talk about getting rid of social programs. Those of us who know better should keep it up, though!

acat

since, actually, I’m not one. I’m more of a Strong Defense conservative, although DeVine Gamecock once called me a Social Conservative.

You, on the other hand, are talking out of the wrong end of your alimentary canal because the idea of someone who agrees with your goals, but not your reason for wanting those goals, has apparently stunned the reasoning centers of your brain.

No politician is responsible to anyone or anything but the will of the people, and if said will cannot be lawfully expressed at the ballot box, it shall be expressed in the streets with blood. This is what history shows, time and time and time again.

My goal is not to have more Porsches, they’re overrated. Wouldn’t mind an iPad. I don’t want to lower taxes either, although I do want them spread more evenly.

You, on the other hand, need to stop making assumptions.

Mew

acat

There is a difference.

Mew

perry4prez

I can accept that someone might not be a Christian but might take conservative positions generally. But you admit you don’t want lower taxes and you give us class warfare rhetoric about “spreading them more evenly”, This is just warmed-over Obamaism about “sharing the wealth”.

OK, so your’re not an economic conservative after all. It sounds to me like you’re what used to be called a “Scoop Jackson Democrat”, basically someone who is an economic and social lib but (rightly) believes in a strong defense and American Exceptionalism. The good shouldn’t be the enemy of the perfect but I don’t see how you can say you’er a conservative if you want more taxes.

Finrod

I was going to post the exact same thing until I saw your comment.

perry4prez

Then how come no Moslem country is free?

Finrod

A. They can’t. Every time her name is mentioned they get distracted and shout “SHE’S NOT RUNNING!” and forget about actually changing the bulb.

acat

if you’d quit trying to figure out how others think, quit putting labels on ‘em, and instead talk about what Perry is doing right.

I never said I wanted *more* taxes, I said I wanted taxes spread more evenly. I don’t think we can or should reduce overall taxes until the debt is reduced.

I also think that our current situation, where 45% of the adults in this country pay zero income tax, it creates instability. Does the phrase “when the mob realizes it can vote itself bread and circuses” ring any bells?

Look, I’m going to make a suggestion. Quit trying to find the right cubbyhole to file me under, go read this article at Ace of Spades, then let’s discuss what some of Perry’s “neutral goods” are.

I’m sure it will further both of our goals.

Mew

lineholder

not to make assumptions about them personally, and I think that’s probably good advice.

I understand where you are coming from in the line of logic that you have presented. Primarily, you are saying that a Christian who is a conservative who also respects God’s authority will not be likely misuse or abuse their authority if elected as President.

But the way you’ve presented this line of logic has included subtle implications of “true conservative vs. false conservatives” while throwing religion into the mix in the defining line between the two.

It’s setting up people’s backs, in case you haven’t noticed.

acat

Do you define “Muslim country” as Muslim-majority, shari’a law, Arab majority, or otherwise?

Have you visited all Muslim countries?

Are your views based on your visits to Morrocco, Bahrain, Turkey, and Indonesia?

Mew

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

A: None, they enjoy the dark.

luvnthebigsites

Permission to cut and paste?

My signature line was boosted from none other that Steven King… I think you got em beat.

acat

I grant you a Creative Commons license to reproduce my original works, provided you include attribution, and do not use them for financial profit.

Mew

aesthete

majority Buddhist, Shinto, atheist (lot of overlap with free majority Buddhist/Shinto, natch), and heretical Christian-offshoot countries. As far as free Muslim countries, I’d say that Turkey, Malaysia and Indonesia are relatively free (though all three are far from perfect, of course). At any rate, the sets, “country” and “individual” are, well, not equivalent.

luvnthebigsites

.

aesthete

not “non-religious”. AFAIK, every President that we have elected has affirmed some faith in the divine, so there cannot by definition be a conservative “non-religious” President when there has not been a liberal, moderate or any other kind of “non-religious” President. You are asserting without proof that Christianity is a necessary but not sufficient quality for conservatism (presumably of the American variety), and being fuzzy in your terminology. Given that a large part of conservative thought (and Western values) are rooted in pre-Christian Greco-Roman thought (and given the many non-Christian polities which are classically liberal; conservative, if you will), it is surely a conceit to believe that Christianity is essential to the formation of the social orders that conservatives tend to prefer.

aesthete

nt

luvnthebigsites

Larry McDonald—”We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box”.

http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

Granted, the new media has allowed us to communicate over greater distances, and brought folks from different regions into larger community forums like RedState, but our candidates and pundits were routinely trashed by the party of We-Haven’t-Grown-Up-Yet (democrats and liberals), but the members of the grown-up party respectfully disagreed (like you and I are doing now).

The fact that the Republicans didn’t talk trash about each other (unlike the Carter/Udall/Gephardt/Kennedy fans of 1976 and 1980 did) was one of the facets that attracted me to the Republican Party at an early age. And, yes, according to Winston Churchill, I didn’t have a heart at 20, because I was already a Conservative.

Finrod

Obama didn’t look good when he was picking fights with Rush Limbaugh, and Erick doesn’t look good taking potshots at commenters at other blogs, no matter the humor value.

Aaron Gardner

……………….

Finrod

In the 1980 primaries, Bush Sr. infamously called Reagan’s economic plan ‘voodoo economics’, which got picked up by both the MSM and a number of Bush’s supporters back then.

But you are correct that Reagan’s 11th Commandment seemed to be followed more then than now. I think we need a return to that, personally.

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

and very often also am caring for the dogs of others throughout the year while friends travel. I like to stay home with only short trips to Church on Sunday and Happy Hour a few days/week at my branch office, ie local pub!

So I love dogs and Democrats…have to, to get to Heaven.

The “news” is that for the first time in my life since my cat was killed when I was 9 yrs old, do I love cats due to the raising of the near-new-born stray my part-time girlfriend (I know, this is getting like a Faulkner novel…well, I am a product and still in, The South…go figure) found the little Huckleberry#88, that we call alternately: Kitty, Huch or Huckie. Its fun to say “kitty”, ain’t it! smile

Plus it is a male Tom Cat. Easier…

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

Huch….typo alert

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

agreed

Finrod

What about you? Do you have anything other than unwarranted conclusions to draw?

This is the point where, if I was you, I’d make some derogatory comment about your proclivities, but I’m not that kind of person.

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Lightbulb Disinformation Conspiracy

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL