1 Not first.

2 me neither

3

I refuse to click on MoFoJones.

4 Yes, the public is in favor of "niceness." They are not, however, in favor of having their wallets lightened for the sake of "niceness."

What do they know?  We'll just make them until they see the error of their ways, and come around to our way of thinking.

5 I was nice once...I hated it, and people thought I was a schmuck.

6 as I said previously, the Repubs could win elections with the same simple message:

You're under forty and expect to collect Social Security? Bankrupt.

You're under fifty and expect to get Medicare? Bankrupt.

College loans? Bankrupt.

Food stamps? Bankrupt

7 Nice guys finish last.

8 Did I spell schmuck wrong? lets see..."shmuck"...I think that's it.

9 One huge issue with the "stop the flow of illegals" talk. The flow has *already* stopped, thanks to our crappy economy. People left here to go back, for goodness sake. I know that's not what we mean, but it doesn't help that's how we are talking when the Democrats could simply point out that the flow has stopped, or even gone the other way.

10

My pissed off niceness is shrinking.

11 What I think it has to do if it wants to stop alienating otherwise-natural-GOP voters is to stop sounding like they're anti-gay. It's slightly tricky to oppose gay marriage while not sounding anti-gay -- that of course is always the immediate claim by the pro-gay-marriage people-- but it can be done. And should be done, anyway. somewhere today I read the Pope actually whispered this... he is okay with gay unions... just not marriage if this is true, wow

12 RE: What the public thinks about Amnesty...

Let me post this from the Corner by Mark Krikoriana about this subject...

-----
[b/]Adventures in Manipulative Polling
By Mark Krikorian

Brookings has put out the latest example of bogus immigration polling. HereÂ’s the New York Times lede:

    Nearly two-thirds of Americans favor giving illegal immigrants in the country an opportunity for legal status with a path to citizenship, according to a poll published Thursday by the Public Religion Research Institute and the Brookings Institution. Support for an earned path to citizenship for those immigrants came from 71 percent of Democrats and also a majority, 53 percent, of Republicans, the poll found.

Oh, my. I guess our goose is cooked, the end is near, weÂ’ve reached the tipping point for amnesty.

But, before starting to look for a new job, just for giggles I decided to see what the actual question said. You have to get to p. 53 of the report to find it, and here are the only options offered to respondents:

    -- The best way to solve the countryÂ’s illegal immigration problem is to secure our borders and arrest and deport all those who are here illegally

    -- The best way to solve the countryÂ’s illegal immigration problem is to both secure our borders and provide an earned path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the U.S.

You remember the presidential candidate proposing that we “arrest and deport all those who are here illegally,” don’t you? No? That’s because there wasn’t one. And yet almost every establishment poll asks the question this way, contrasting cattle cars full of weeping babies to the option of “earning” status by working hard, paying back taxes, and rescuing stranded kittens.

We did a poll last month with more neutral and honest wording. (I’m afraid it wasn’t featured in the New York Times.) Here’s the wording of our comparable question: “Would you prefer to see illegal immigrants in the United States go back to their home countries or be given legal status?” The results were 52-33 for going back home.

-----

13 fuck

14 Don't expect a movie review afterwards, I'll be in my basement reloading all night.

15 The flow has *already* stopped, thanks to our crappy economy. People left here to go back, for goodness sake.

Yeah, Obama has inadvertantly solved immigration in one sense: nobody wants to come here anymore because the jobs dried up.  Which is what makes it even more of a farce that politicians are pushing this as an urgent thing.

16 I could (and have) sit down and rationally discuss my reasons for opposing amnesty and gay "marriage". No foaming, no ranting, no insults or epithets. The other side just doesn't hear it, and their media lapdogs go along. We're all xenophoic homophobes. And racist to boot.

Did I mention crazy?
 

17

The polls that they cite are so bogus. "__% of GOP voters support a path to citizenship." The only people that say no to that are people who don't think anyone should ever immigrate for any reason ever. Yes a support a path. I think some people should eventually be allowed to become citizens.

I bet if the GOP came down with a firm plan, even if it was harsh, it would help the party more than this current crap.

18 Similarly, on immigration, sure, offer the "niceness" of a potential future plan for a pathway to citizenship. But demand that we get border crossings down to a trivial level first. Do not permit the former without having the latter. I really think this has been Rand's strategy. He said we already have a defacto amnesty, and we need to do something about more coming in illegally.

19 Get off the anti-gay BS. We understand that marriage is between a man and a woman and that the State has a vested interest in recognizing that union because of the offspring that will naturally occur. Not in every instance of course, but more often than not. The State has a desired interest in protecting the next generation and having a stable environment for their growth. The same can NEVER happen in a homosexual union.

20 7 "Nice guys finish last."

The 'ettes are grateful for that.

21 Fuck it. LIB.

22 ::::I don't think the GOP has to be pro-gay marriage. What I think it has to do if it wants to stop alienating otherwise-natural-GOP voters is to stop sounding like they're anti-gay. It's slightly tricky to oppose gay marriage while not sounding anti-gay -- that of course is always the immediate claim by the pro-gay-marriage people-- but it can be done. And should be done, anyway.::::: Finally! A voice of reason! ***smooches pickle***

23 We need to engage the GOP leadership, and each other, to see what is both palatable to conservatives on the right, and *possible* in wider America.

24 The flow has *already* stopped, thanks to our crappy economy. People left here to go back, for goodness sake.


Home Depots have been opening up across Mexico so there are lots of new places for unemployed people to stand down there.

25 Don't you just love how Liberals are so eager to "Help" the Republicans regain or acquire a wider base and ensure they win more elections?

My. How thoughtful and kind they are to go out of their way to provide the Republican party with advice GUARANTEED to help the Republican party.

*snort*

26 Scott Walker.

27 Yeah, you 'Social Cons' shut up so elections can be won .
Institutional penile-fecal matter society now rules, wingnutz.

28 Leave it to the legislatures. Leave it to democratic decision-making. Empower citizens. Take it out of the hands of the judges. Who could be against that?

---------------


Me.

29

It doesn't matter what changes the GOP makes nor  how nice they are.  The Left and the MSM (BIRM) will simply continue to cast  each and every R   as The Devil Incarnate - and 50%+ of the population will believe it. 

 

Why do  they believe it?  Because half the population is fucking stupid and cannot generate the brain activity necessary  to question what Dianne Sawyer slurs at them at 7pm every night.

30 Me. Posted by: mama winger at March 22, 2013 05:41 PM (P6QsQ) You have Scott Walker. You don't get to have a say when you're living in paradise.

31 In AZ, everyone jumped on the free education for illegals...don't ask don't tell, and now the schools are emptying with the crappy economy even with all the free shit they get, and now people are refusing to fund bonds because everyone is broke, and and and...yeah lets do THAT some more.

32 Home Depots have been opening up across Mexico so there are lots of new places for unemployed people to stand down there. Posted by: Cicero, Semiautomatic Assault Commenter at March 22, 2013 05:40 PM (8ZskC) Mexican unemployment rate is half ours.

33 Where kin I git me one of them huntin' licenses?

34 The State has a desired interest in protecting the next generation and having a stable environment for their growth.

I don't think "It benefits the state" is a strong sell around here.  How about "it benefits all of us", and leave the damn state out of it.

35 Republicans are poised to lose so badly in 2014 it will make history. Turnout will be so low, many of elections will look like forfeits. I know this because Republicans have lost me, the reliable jerk who always comes out to vote R. So if they lost me...

36

Leave it to the legislatures. Leave it to democratic decision-making.
Leave it to Beaver.

37 Ace,

You're wrong. Republican economics are popular. What makes them UNpopular is when a Republican is proposing them. People want to cut spending.

We simply need better PR. Yeah, there MSM. Fuck it. A good message will get through that. Problem is the GOP simply does not know how to sell an idea. Romney was god awful at it and he was supposedly the best guy of the bunch.

38 Nice is picking up the poop when your dog craps on somebody's lawn. Beyond that, niceness is highly over rated.

39 Oh the GOP ain't fer me, those dirty sonuvabitches,
Siding with the Democrats and shittin' in their britches
I don't like a bit where this country they're a'takin
It don't sound like anything that ever come from Reagan.

40 Here's a compromise: The only "path to citizenship" is via gay marriage. Consummated. From below. That way, everybody gets something.

--

Yes, the public is in favor of "niceness."

No. They're in favor of absolutely fucking brutal un-niceness to Losers.

The tens of millions of crackaz and black guys who've lost their scraping-by Loser jobs to Mexicans are Double Losers.

The hundred and fifty or so million crackaz and black guys who, against the express wishes of the television, are still various degrees of not entirely down with the transformation of public life into a list of things we all have to do for the gays and their fat-white-girl fans are Losers.

And they will be brutalized.

All officially recognized Losers are, always.

41 Mexican unemployment rate is half ours.

That's because selling Chiclets from a blanket on the sidewalk in the Zona Rosa beats starving.

42 You have Scott Walker.

You don't get to have a say when you're living in paradise.

Posted by: CAC at March 22, 2013 05:42 PM (nH733)

-----------

And one of the reasons that this is so, is because of the fact that Scott Walker is a SoCon.

People wanting to leave it to the electorate may be forgetting that the electorate does not get a say in whether or not religious institutions and people of faith get to practice their faith, with or without their vote.  It is an inalienable right, and not subject to a referendum.

43 Will the Democratic Party continue to win after Barack Obama runs into his term limit?

44 I notice that most people call their politics "middle of the road". I call it ignorance of current affairs and government and too damn lazy to bother, which sounds sorta harsh, so I call it "middle of the road". *drool*

45 Americans DONT want to cut spending. That is a hilarious lie. If they did people would be praising Rand's 5 year plan to get rid of the deficit. Instead they got afraid of Ryan's 20 year plan because they were afraid tampons would be taken off the shelves.

46 That's because selling Chiclets from a blanket on the sidewalk in the Zona Rosa beats starving. Posted by: pep at March 22, 2013 05:44 PM (6TB1Z) Sounds like something we should emulate here.

47 How nice should I be to the folks who have decided to squat in my living room, eat out my substance, and crap on my rug? Should I offer them up my first-born as well?

48 Sounds like something we should emulate here.

Posted by: HoboJerky at March 22, 2013 05:46 PM (hlwt5)

Can't.  Zenning laws and licensing make such business models impossible.

49 It's a trap?

50 *Zonning* laws...

51 Yes, the public is in favor of "niceness." They are not, however, in favor of having their wallets lightened for the sake of "niceness." ....which, of course, they are too stupid to realize until they throw the empty wallet away, shaking their heads in confusion.

52
I'll be voting local elections only.  No national gop for me.  But then again I believe the national gop and the national dems are on the same team.  I haven't seen anything to prove differently.

53 How nice should I be to the folks who have decided to squat in my living room, eat out my substance, and crap on my rug?

So, in-laws, huh?  Sucks to be you.

54

Americans DONT want to cut spending.

They want to cut spending on the other guy.
Just like they hate congress except for their congressman.

55 52...lol. Is that the approved term for the llegals now?

56 Ace, It's more simple than you make it out to be. Apply my previously described viewing lens. Who is advocating x and y in the GOP? Why are they doing it? SHOCKA! It's the folks that always advocate anything that advances the cause of liberalism, because liberals are always liberals first. The proper GOP response, on a national level, us this "it's time for the religion of liberalism to stop forcing their beliefs on America via Washington. It's a 10th amendment states rights issue.". And that's the message that can holds national coalition together and deliver national electoral success. Immigration is a different bag, but it's, again, primarily those who are liberals first that ate supporting this. Persons that, in their core, reject things like the rule of law, because it represents a check on their power. All of these issues, and where DC elites stand on them, are clearly understood once one acknowledges that the divide is primarily theological in nature. Liberals want liberalism. And a certain portion of the GOP elite want liberalism, and make all their decisions based solely on the criteria of "which option advances the cause the most?" It explains 100% of the evidence 100% of the time.

57 evidently the Republicans lost Guy Mohawk, too 2014 is gonna be ugly

58 Core of pissed off white guys, other wise known as employers and taxpayers.

59 Totally OT: Just finished watching "Olympus Has Fallen". What a great action movie. Good good guys. Bad bad guys. Continuous action and tension. Great violent action ala Die Hard You will be entertained. No sucker punches. And best of all(and probably why some MSM critics are giving it less than good reviews)- WARNING---MINOR SPOILER A traitorous character gives as his reason a short OWS-style rant. SPOILER OFF Check it out. You'll have a great time.

60 >>>And a certain portion of the GOP elite want liberalism, and make all their decisions based solely on the criteria of "which option advances the cause the most?" >>> I think it's because they go for whatever's trending, or in other words the politician's form of job security...

61

 

If the gay marriage issue is sooo popular, with a 'majority' of people...then why did Barky have to lie about it for so long?

 

62 Obamacare is just starting to kick in.  It really hits the fan in 2014.

Obama owns it.  His little dems own it.

Let it burn.  Consider it a teaching moment.  This is why we can't have nice things.

63 That's precisely my rationale, too. What's the point in electing R's when all they do is end up doing the same as Democrats.

64 If your principles include family values, I suppose that homosexuality does not comport with that principle. I won't meander through the philosophy- we'll be here all day.

But I am a bit confused how if another philosophical pillar is your humanism, you reject or belittle someone because of their sexual preference.

As for homosexual politics, I believe "gay marriage" is an ugly, divisive canard.

Let's be frank, there has never been in the traditional sense of the word "marriage" between two people of the same sex in all of recorded history since Sumeria. It is an affront and heretical to people of many faiths. It's destructive to existential society. It is not reproductive or based on traditional "love" which is a basis for all lasting marriages.

So frankly, we should embrace homosexuals who share more of our principles than the opposition. But we should honestly agree to disagree where we don't.

I am a little sick of people within the party alienating others because they are diametrically opposed to one aspect of their lifestyle. That's not tolerant or intellectual. It's divisive and intemperate.

65
...that the things I feared would flow from it haven't really flowed all that much




The large states have only recently enacted gay marriage, and the big get of California is still up in the air.

Too soon to be certain what the effects will be, until they've had some time to work. Remember when abortion was going to safe and rare? How about no fault divorce?

66 Getting rid of the housing deduction isn't popular, but it's clearly conservative. Same with college loans. The conservative message just aint that popular because we will be "taking away stuff". We have to be forceful and up front about our reasoning, and contrast it with what will happen if we don't deal with it.

67 You write what a lot of us are thinking, Ace. Nice piece, between tweets and breitbart, this piece is born. *hugs it's tgif time with my best friend *cheers all

68 Niceness can often be turned around—and when it’s the left defining “niceness”, turning it around will probably make it more nice. For example, being “nice” to illegal immigrants—people who break the law—is being “nasty” to legal immigrants. Our policy should be, be nice to legal immigrants. (Bush actually made some headway on that, as I understand it, partially reforming the INS.)

69 Let me propose the heretical thought Burn the witch!

70
Also:

This fucked-in-the-head idea of shitting on the so-cons so we can get the smegmatic libertarians is insane.

Posted by: Flatbush Joe

71 To complete my thought: I don't think *any* person is a natural conservative. It needs to be taught.

72 Want to know how talk about gay marriage? Read USA Today, today's edition, Archbishop Salvitore Cordileone of San Francisco explains it all for you. Page 4a, right sidebar.

73 The only Republican I have any intention of voting for in the future is one who has a proven track record of actually implementing conservative policies.  Words mean nothing to me anymore. Rhetoric and speeches and stunts on the floor of Congress mean nothing to me anymore.  Party affiliation means nothing to me anymore.  Meaningless "show" votes in the House or Senate mean nothing to me anymore.

One test and one test only:

"Have you been successful in achieving conservative goals in a measurable way?"  If not, I am not bothering with you.

There is only one person that meets my criteria. 

74 60
If the gay marriage issue is sooo popular, with a 'majority' of people...then why did Barky have to lie about it for so long?

Posted by: wheatie at March 22, 2013 05:52 PM (UMBJ2)

__________________

You could ask the question the other way. If gay marriage is sas unpopular as so-cons claim, why would Obama come out in favor of it in an election year?  The fact that he switched his views in an election year towards backing SSM should tell you where the country stands. No politician makes that kind of switch unless he/she knows which way the wind is blowing.

I think part of it is as well that there has been a huge shift in support of SSM in a very short period of time.  Being anti-SSM was a good idea 2007/2008. In 2012/2013 that's no longer the case.

75 Yoshi, Which means, liberalism. No principles except a shared desire for power to be wielded against those with principles. It's a theology and a religion, and it recognizes that natural law beliefs (embodied primarily in Christianity) are the enemy of liberalism. Which is why it always uses the institutions of culture and government to attack natural law beliefs.

76 You write what a lot of us are thinking, Ace.

Nice piece, between tweets and breitbart, this piece is born.

*hugs

it's tgif time with my best friend

*cheers all Posted by: artisanal 'ette


It's like his tongue is in my ear.

77 @ 62 Yep, it's getting harder to drag my ass to the polls to vote for these two-faced losers. They should simply run on the "Hey, we want to do exactly the same things as the Dims but we'll keep the unreasonable spending and graft and corruption to a more reasonable level" At least, that way I'll have no expectation of a better, freer future for my kids or the silly belief that my vote actually matters.

78

When your traction slips on the road, what do they always tell you not to do? Overcorrect. Do not violently turn the wheel. Sure, turn into the skid a little, but don't overcorrect.

 

There's another reason to follow this sound advice, and that is that those to whom you're trying to appeal may well change in their perspective once they see the consequences of their earlier views.

 

Try to get a partygoer to dial back the booze, and you're a stick in the mud. The next morning, when dealing with a raging hangover, you're likely to have a lot more luck.

 

In time, the electorate may (only "may;" I'm not entirely sanguine about the prospects) come to regret their fondness for free shit, tax and spend policies, and being "nice." Think of Jimmy Carter, who was elected because as a "Mr. Clean" type to sort out DC. Four years later, the electorate couldn't wait to get rid of that sanctimonious jackass.

79 Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 22, 2013 05:57 PM (HDgX3)

I'm sure that the well-publicized fact that gays weren't contributing to his campaign coffers due to his lack of endorsement had nothing to do with that decision.

80 "Yep, it's getting harder to drag my ass to the polls to vote for these two-faced losers."

And we wonder how Obama won a second term.

81 Soooooo dramatic in here. Have fun with the nihilism guys.

82 Home Depots have been opening up across Mexico so there are lots of new places for unemployed people to stand down there. Posted by: Cicero, Semiautomatic Assault Commenter at March 22, 2013 05:40 PM (8ZskC) Mexican unemployment rate is half ours. Louder please. Hint: If they don't self deport, it was never about the dinero, but about the free shit.

83 "Now, a version of it could have passed. I don't know if it could still pass. Probably not. But a version of it would at least have a better chance of passing. The version of it I'd suggest is not the unattainable full ban of gay marriage, but the more-attainable (but perhaps now out of reach) ban of judge-imposed gay marriage.

 

Leave it to the legislatures. Leave it to democratic decision-making. Empower citizens. Take it out of the hands of the judges. Who could be against that?"

 

This is probably the best approach, especially now that Obama wants to do just the opposite - he wants to federalise gay marriage and impose it on every state in the union.

 

Frankly, the "inevitability" of gay marriage is overstated.  The only reason it seems to be trending up right now is because most all of the states that were dead set on opposing it have already passed amendments/laws/what have you against it, and all that's left are the much smaller subset of states who now will go about affirming it. 

 

Sure, the 18-29 crowd supports it overwhelmingly...for now.  But they will also eventually get older, many of them will marry, many of them will have kids, many of them will see publik edyukashun that increasingly forces "gayness" off onto their kids, and the natural reaction against the gay agenda will begin to set in.  Couple this with the fact that the gay lifestyle is largely a product of decadent urban prosperity in a country that is fast losing the "prosperity" part of that equation, and the idea that the country is inevitably heading towards gay marriage across the board is as nonsensical as are any other end-of-history dialectic.

84 "Have you been successful in achieving conservative goals in a measurable way?" If not, I am not bothering with you.

There is only one person that meets my criteria.

Posted by: mama winger at March 22, 2013 05:57 PM (P6QsQ)

Dr. Ben Carson through his scholarship foundation?

http://carsonscholars.org

85 This current crop of R's will not take a hint, will not listen to reason, and they will not stop putting their political "careers" ahead of all else. Our only recourse is to let them swing in the wind on election day. Maybe then they'll learn they need to shape up.

86 As for homosexual politics, I believe "gay marriage" is an ugly, divisive canard. It was intended to be.

87 I say we be as nice as the liberals are. Deal?

88

73 60 ....I think part of it is as well that there has been a huge shift in support of SSM in a very short period of time. Being anti-SSM was a good idea 2007/2008. In 2012/2013 that's no longer the case.

 

 

His vote totals were a lot less in 2012, than in 2008.

 

Our problem was...we went through a clusterfuck of a primary season, and ended up with a Candidate that a majority of conservatives couldn't bring themselves to vote for.

 

89

I think part of it is as well that there has been a huge shift in support of SSM in a very short period of time. Being anti-SSM was a good idea 2007/2008. In 2012/2013 that's no longer the case.

Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at March 22, 2013 05:57 PM (HDgX3)

 

Californians - Californians, minid you - voted against SSM twice, until some Federal judge (right after blowing his live-in boyfriend, as it turned out) invalidated their decision with a stroke of pen. So SSM is not that popular, even here in CA. And I doubt things have changed that much in the last few years.

90 Several segments of the 'Pub coalition support this bogus immigration reform because they need a ready supply of low cost labor - agriculture, small businesses like restaurants, etc. Very few actually believe that electoral crap. Put together an temporary worker program, and try to pass it without the "comprehensive" crap. My preference is for bonded, private firms empowered to administer the provision of labor under conditions of a visa. They would have to resolve problems with remittances, a basic healthcare plan, documentation, local transportation, housing, and transport to and from home. Solve the illegals problems, like getting ripped of by contractors, paying thousands to coyotes, and the shadow life of false ids and gangs - and you might have something. Why the need another path to citizenship is beyond me. Fix the one we have.

91 Dr. Ben Carson through his scholarship foundation?

----------------


No.  I was referring to Scott Walker.  He is steady, fearless, and moves the conservative agenda forward one item at a time exactly as he stated when he ran for each of the offices he has held.

92 If we ban warning signs and labels, maybe in 500 years people will be smarter, if there are any.

93 Honestly, my attitude towards teh gheys is reactionary. I don't sit around thinking about them all day (this goes for any "aggrieved" group). I find the practice disgusting and would never participate of it voluntarily, but I could care less what consenting adults do in their abodes. If you're cool towards me, I will reciprocate. Don't get in my face and then expect me to approve.

  This, to some on this forum, is the epitome of bigotry.

94 I agree that the best move is to become neutral (or appear to be that way) rather than become pro- with issues that will alienate the base.  Things like gay marriage are destined to become the law of the land by force of nature.  We don't need to be seen as the people standing in the way.  An added benefit is that it can lead to fewer pro- laws because people won't see the need for them if there is no active opposition.

95 Further, applying the test that explains 100% of the evidence 100% of the time reveals other interesting data... Like... Jeez it isn't that hard to put together winning messaging strategies and political strategies that will produce winning national coalitions... Why doesnt the GOP leadership do that?... We apply the test... It wouldn't advance liberalism, and those in power make all their decisions based only on what advances liberalism. Scary isn't it? And then, who do those same persons use the institutions of culture and politics that they control to attack, blame, and marginalize? SoCons! SHOCKA! Those that adhere to natural law principles in their lives and political worldviews! The conflict. Its theological in nature.

96 I'm glad I picked Ace in my bracket

97

Home Depots have been opening up across Mexico so there are lots of new places for unemployed people to stand down there.
Posted by: Cicero, Semiautomatic Assault Commenter at March 22, 2013 05:40 PM (8ZskC)

 

Hey, we need to get a bunch of gringos to hang around their parking lots. Turn about and all that.

98 They are still killing us over abortion, and it's LEGAL. Personally I think the GOP needs to dump any of it's "values" bullshit and become the Math Party.

99 >>>Which means, liberalism. No principles except a shared desire for power to be wielded against those with principles. >>> Yes, I suppose liberalism has a bolshevik elite manipulating a lumpen proletariat of true believers, just like communism.

100 40 Mexican unemployment rate is half ours.

That's because selling Chiclets from a blanket on the sidewalk in the Zona Rosa beats starving.

Posted by: pep at March 22, 2013 05:44 PM (6TB1Z) *****   OK, LMAO and I agree, but I also, had kids pulled out of our Title 1 schools because their Mom was  a teacher in Mexico, or had some other professional position and is now going back to teach because well now there are jobs there. Isn't that a kick in the nuts.

101 Titus, exactly.

102

Want to know how talk about gay marriage? Read USA Today, today's edition, Archbishop Salvitore Cordileone of San Francisco explains it all for you.

Page 4a, right sidebar.

Posted by: The littl shyning man

Some of the good stuff...

Q: How would the allegation that opponents are bigoted lead to their rights being abridged?

A: Notice the first right being taken away: the right of 7 million Californians who devoted time and treasure to the democratic process, to vote for our shared vision of marriage. Taking away people's right to vote on marriage is not in itself a small thing.

But the larger picture that's becoming increasingly clear is that this is not just a debate about what two people do in their private life, it's a debate about a new public norm: Either you support redefining marriage to include two people of the same sex or you stand accused by law and culture of bigotry and discrimination.

If you want to know what this new public legal and social norm stigmatizing traditional believers will mean for real people, ask David and Tanya Parker, who objected to their kindergarten son being taught about same sex marriage after the Massachusetts Supreme Court legalized it in that state and wanted to pull him out of class for that lesson. He was arrested and handcuffed for trying to protect his son's education, and they were told they had no right to do so.

Ask the good people of Ocean Grove Methodist camp in New Jersey that had part of its tax-exempt status rescinded because they don't allow same-sex civil union ceremonies on their grounds. Ask Tammy Schulz of Illinois, who adopted four children (including a sibling group) through Evangelical Child Family Services — which was shut down because it refuses to place children with same-sex couples. (The same thing has happened in Illinois, Boston and Washington, D.C., to Catholic Charities adoption services). ... Ask the doctor in San Diego County who did not want to personally create a fatherless child through artificial insemination, and was punished by the courts.... Ask Amy Rudnicki who testified in the Colorado Legislature recently that if Catholic Charities is shut out of the adoption business by new legislation, her family will lose the child they expected to adopt this year. ... Nobody is better off if religious adoption agencies are excluded from helping find good homes for abused and neglected children, but governments are doing this because the principle of "anti-discrimination" is trumping liberty and compassion. ...

When people say that opposition to gay marriage is discriminatory, like opposition to interracial marriage, they cannot also say their views won't hurt anybody else. They seek to create and enforce a new moral and legal norm that stigmatizes those who view marriage as the union of husband and wife. ... It's not kind, and it doesn't seem to lead to a "live and let live" pluralism.

103 Obama could "evolve" in an election year because...he could. Blacks and minorities (in general) are incredibly anti-gay. But they weren't gonna vote for Romney over Obama for ANY reason.

104 Sure, the 18-29 crowd supports it overwhelmingly...for now. But they will also eventually get older, many of them will marry, many of them will have kids, many of them will see publik edyukashun that increasingly forces "gayness" off onto their kids, and the natural reaction against the gay agenda will begin to set in. Agree, but....... ...the indoctrinational pogrom will be much worse for their kids than it was/is for them now. Unless the school system checked and reversed, it will be game over until the collapse and that is just a matter of time without serious reversal in the school system.

105 >>>You could ask the question the other way. If gay marriage is sas unpopular as so-cons claim, why would Obama come out in favor of it in an election year?>>> It's popular, but it's probably a nonissue. nobody remembers Obama was against it in 2008, in fact, most of those coveted 18-29 year olds literally do not remember this unless they are gay.

106

I dont think niceness is the problem, ace. Obummer won and he was anything but nice. Did he try to be nice about Baine? Or about Willards efforts to get more wymyns into his cabinet?

 

 

And in case of the GOP: sounding nice about things, which they claim to oppose, sends ambiguous signals to a base and an electorate that is already extremely distrustful of Republican politicians.

 

 

Maybe we should consider that not only popularity or political positions, but things like confidence decide elections. Obummer was willing to show teeth throughout the campaign, while Willard was busy looking nice and competent and making sure that everybody knew that he wouldnt set his hair on fire.

 

Who knows, if Willard had actually campaigned on his position against illegal immigration, instead of burying it quietly as soon as Perry quit in the primaries, it might have done some good with workers in Oh and Pa.

 

 

107 Posted by: Jay Guevara at March 22, 2013 06:03 PM (IDSI7)

Mr. Moo Moo was dropped on his head a few times by dear mommy.

Engaging him should be for purposes of amusement.

108

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at March 22, 2013 06:04 PM (YmPwQ)

 

I'm with you 100%. I just don't want to be forced to recognize this shit as A-OK (and not the public health menace male homosexuality actually is), or to have ti taught to my kids (as it now is in California, which mandates teaching of LGBTCIABBQSWAKBYOB contributions to society, presumably omitting mention of AIDS).

109 >>>Yes, the public is in favor of "niceness." They are not, however, in favor of having their wallets lightened for the sake of "niceness." Bingo. One of the great things about liberalism is that it allows for saintly behavior without actually doing anything. 'My vote is my charity.'

110 >>>many of them will see publik edyukashun that increasingly forces "gayness" off onto their kids, and the natural reaction against the gay agenda will begin to set in. >>> Although I would have a large schadenboner were this to happen, I don't see it coming. I guess some people are more pessimistic than others.

111 "The conflict. It's theological in nature." Bingo.

112 Yep another lecture on gay marriage.

113 Obama could "evolve" in an election year because...he could. Blacks and minorities (in general) are incredibly anti-gay. But they weren't gonna vote for Romney over Obama for ANY reason. Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at March 22, 2013 06:07 PM (YmPwQ) I wish I knew how many examples of fucked up they needed. The race industry has done it's job well.

114
Damn, it's a good week for movie reviews.

115 Ace, How about a thread on Abp. C's piece in USA today? That's got to be good for at least 500 comments, and you'll have a chance to further flesh out how liberalism is fundamentally a religion seeking to impose it's moral judgements upon the nation, and punish those who disagree by stripping them of freedom.

116 it comes down to this tho:
why trust the gop for anything?

oblahblah should have been impeached 4 times now, and they haven't even mentioned it...
they ran a country club dipshit from the northeast for prez yet again (mccain basically fits that description)...
they ran a crappy campaign, and knowingly used consultants that sandbagged their own vp in 08...
they have not defunded any of the statists' programs, especially oblablahtax...
they did not stand tall on any of the debt ceiling oppotunities...
they did not challenge any of the democong voter fraud...
they did not challenge the perennial suppression of the military vote...
they have not punished a single journalist for national security leaks...
nor do they confront the media for it's lying in any meaningful way.

they have not done a damn thing to earn our trust; yah I know one comes out  and makes placating sounds once in a while, but then another goes out and votes with the democong to undermine whatever the first one says...then they rotate and do the same damn thing on the next issue.

They are basically the "loyal opposition" that is happy to mouth slogans that oppose the democong, end up going along with whatever tyrannical/treasonous crap the demong pull.  They are also happy to collect any campaign contributions along the way.

i'm done with the lesser of two evils

117

To complete my thought:

I don't think *any* person is a natural conservative.

It needs to be taught.

Posted by: HoboJerky at March 22, 2013 05:56 PM (hlwt5)

 

My response to a friend's BIL who said he's pretty liberal: "Everybody's born a liberal." Then I changed the subject. Point taken.

118 New thread up on strategically nude dem lawmaker

119 Look I got nuttin against da gays. I think everyone should own one. My house would be so tidy, and the place settings divine. Is that so wrong?

120 Well, it comes down to this: The Democrat party would love nothing more than to add Hispanics to their Communist-Fluke-Homo-Black coalition and rule America with an iron fist until the "End of History" (which would arrive sooner rather than later). At the same time, birth-right citizenship, anchor babies, "deportations are H1tler," etc. At the same time, the Media will keep mortaring the Republican party as "teh Party of Uncool Crackers." So... (But keep this in mind: CNN doesn't run "When Minorities will be the Majority" documentaries to do us any favors. And all the Diversity Officers in the Media don't overlook the fact that there are very few Hispanics on TV, and TV doesn't look "like America" to do us any favors. They're baiting us.)

121 >>>Obama could "evolve" in an election year because...he could. Blacks and minorities (in general) are incredibly anti-gay. But they weren't gonna vote for Romney over Obama for ANY reason. >>> One hundred percent true. Obama is political superman. I kept on telling everyone who wanted to know that I was pretty sure he would lose because of the misery index...but then he went and overturned precedent.

122 @101
Posted by: Dang at March 22, 2013 06:06 PM (R18D0)



Thank you for that, Dang.  People seem to think that the end game is gay marriage.  It is not.  That is just the mechanism.  To approve the mechanism is to invite the intended consequences.

Folks who are okay with the GOP embracing gay marriage are tacitly agreeing, perhaps unwittingly,  with the same tactics that the government is currently using against Hobby Lobby, Christian bookstores, and Catholic colleges.  Is that your intention?  Because that will be the outcome.  Make no mistake.

For instance, there are several Christian colleges and universities right now in danger of losing their accreditation because of their stance against the contraception  mandate. What do you think will happen when gay marriage is the law of the land, and discrimination laws are enforced against such institutions?

123 As for the Gays, maybe they could stop telling everyone how to dress, how to speak, how to decorate, how to think, etc and stop trying to use Government power to socially-engineer society. Maybe that would be a good start.

124 As for homosexual politics, I believe "gay marriage" is an ugly, divisive canard.

It was intended to be.

Posted by: 98ZJUSMC Waiting for the Sun at March 22, 2013 06:01 PM (Xh6NV)

Exactly; it's a tool of the left and the homos have let themselves be co-opted by it.  Tammy Bruce is pro homo marriage but she doesn't make a big deal about it because there are other more important things to concentrate on and doesn't want it to be a wedge issue to divide efforts against the left.  She realizes that a lot of her listeners won't agree with her on that and thinks that's fine; she says it's only normal for people not to agree on everything.

125

If we don't win the senate in 2014, gay marriage is going to be the last thing on people's minds when 2016 rolls around.

 

If events keep unfolding as they have since  Baraka started his second term, I don't think it's  even going to be a  big thing in  2014  either.

 

The butt-fucking of Ocare will cure a lot of this.

126 Although I would have a large schadenboner were this to happen, I don't see it coming. I guess some people are more pessimistic than others.

Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 22, 2013 06:09 PM (csi6Y)

------------

Perhaps you missed the item in the news a couple of days ago where the California Dept of Public Instruction has now put LGBT reading material on the curriculum list for all grades elementary thru high school.

127 >>>I don't think *any* person is a natural conservative. I think they are. People are born with the instincts of self-preservation, competitiveness, desire, etc. I'd say these traits are far more conservative than liberal. From a young age, they are taught that these impulses are BAD BAD BAD and it's NICE NICE NICE to be fair, equal, and giving.

128 Give us this day, our daily gay marriage indoctrination. Lead us not into DOMA But deliver us from salad tossing. A-men

129

The conservative message just aint that popular because we will be "taking away stuff".

 

I think the trick is to set FSA constituencies against each other. So, for example, we allocate a certain amount of money for teachers' salaries, and let THEM decide how to parcel it out between retirees, veteran active teachers, and new teachers. Watch the shit fly then.

130 "125 Although I would have a large schadenboner were this to happen, I don't see it coming. I guess some people are more pessimistic than others. Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at March 22, 2013 06:09 PM (csi6Y) ------------ Perhaps you missed the item in the news a couple of days ago where the California Dept of Public Instruction has now put LGBT reading material on the curriculum list for all grades elementary thru high school. Posted by: mama winger at March 22, 2013 06:15 PM (P6QsQ) " Yes. Things will keep getting worse and worse. Gay adoptions, Gay parents, and de facto official Antichristianism.

131

Perhaps you missed the item in the news a couple of days ago where the California Dept of Public Instruction has now put LGBT reading material on the curriculum list for all grades elementary thru high school.

 

Thank you. This is what I was referring to above. It is now legally required, per state law. (Probably one of the few that will actually be enforced.)

132 Our country is on a freight train to hell, gay marriage, illegal immigration, spending like there is no tomorrow, even if we wanted to stop the burning, we can't. FYLIB

133 >>> How about a thread on Abp. C's piece in USA today am I terribly stupid to say I've tried to decode "Abp. C" for five minutes and cannot think of a single name to go with the code?

134 We haven't had a presidential candidate really articulate conservative principles since 1984 - when we also we won in a landslide.

Why don't we try that again in 2016 and see if it works before claiming that we need to go even further left then Romney to win an election?

135 someone please tell me who Abp. C is, it's bothering me.

136 I think the trick is to set FSA constituencies against each other. So, for example, we allocate a certain amount of money for teachers' salaries, and let THEM decide how to parcel it out between retirees, veteran active teachers, and new teachers. Watch the shit fly then. ^^^^^^^^^^ This. x1000

137 >>>Perhaps you missed the item in the news a couple of days ago where the California Dept of Public Instruction has now put LGBT reading material on the curriculum list for all grades elementary thru high school. >>> If you thought I was saying LGBT material wouldn't infiltrate into schools, then I'm sorry for the misunderstanding but I was talking about the idea that the current 18-29 year old generation would push back against creeping gay indoctrination in the future. I don't think they will.

138 Yoshi, I'm in the same boat. I thought the SSM "evolution" would cost him some minority support (I wasn't deluded enough to think that the minorities would vote GOP over it) in the form of not voting. There were some black preachers who called Zero out on his switch, but ultimately, there is no way Zero was going to get less than 95 percent of the black vote.Even if he showed up at one of the debates wearing a Klan hood.

139 Do away with whatever "benefit" the IRS gives to married couples filing jointly, recognize civil unions for any 2 people as long as they are citizens, define marriage as a civil union between 2 individuals of opposite sex.

140 >>>For instance, there are several Christian colleges and universities right now in danger of losing their accreditation because of their stance against the contraception mandate. >>> While gay marriage is a part of this battle, it's not going to decide the battle because the crux of the issue is whether the federal government is going to respect Christianity's freedom under the First Amendment or not. It will get settled one way or the other at some point. But whether gay marriage is the law of the land at that point will not matter.

141 130 Perhaps you missed the item in the news a couple of days ago where the California Dept of Public Instruction has now put LGBT reading material on the curriculum list for all grades elementary thru high school. Thank you. This is what I was referring to above. It is now legally required, per state law. (Probably one of the few that will actually be enforced.) Good. I will submit my self published book titled: Ace Has Three Daddies" for their consideration. Seriously, when they passed this law, my immigrant friends were up in arms about it.

142 The GOP should not even put social issues in their platform unless it's something they plan to push actual legislation for.

Maybe I'm showing a Libertarian bent here, but I always thought conservatives in general don't want the government intruding in their lives.  Excluding capitol crimes and normal taboos, like pedophilia and rape, imposing social issues by law is a losing issue.

When asked about a social issue like gay marriage, the answer should be that it's not the government's business if it's not defined as a function of the government in the Constitution.

143 It's over. Period. The grand experiment that was this nation took it's mortal wound 100 years ago this year. A second, for good measure, followed closely on it's heels. Our children have been taught that science "proves" that they are nothing more than highly evolved monkeys for how long now? The slickest lie Satan ever came up with. And it makes everything so convenient. There is no God so you might as well get as much as you can and keep as much as you can for yourself. Eat, drink and make merry for tomorrow you may die.

144 We haven't had a presidential candidate really articulate conservative principles since 1984 - when we also we won in a landslide.

Posted by: 18-1 at March 22, 2013 06:19 PM (zPVBH)

In the first debate, which I didn't watch live, in some clips that I subsequently saw Romney spoke pretty well of conservative values imo.  The problem was that he didn't follow up with anything specific on how he'd reverse course on the JEF, he couldn't repudiate JEFcare because of RomneyCare, and he just wasn't a good candidate personality wise.

145 >>>There were some black preachers who called Zero out on his switch, but ultimately, there is no way Zero was going to get less than 95 percent of the black vote.Even if he showed up at one of the debates wearing a Klan hood. >>> Yep. You can't fight a cult of personality. FDR detained innocent Americans and tried to turn the judicial branch into a kangaroo court, and the worst thing is, these facts are generally known. But the hagiography continues on.

146
am I terribly stupid to say I've tried to decode "Abp. C" for five minutes and cannot think of a single name to go with the code?

Posted by: ace



Abp, is an abbreviation for archbishop.  So perhaps an article by Archbishop C-something?

147 >>>The problem was that he didn't follow up with anything specific on how he'd reverse course on the JEF, he couldn't repudiate JEFcare because of RomneyCare, and he just wasn't a good candidate personality wise.>>> All of them are problems but Romney's biggest problem was entirely out of his control. He happened to be a successful, older white businessman. In today's culture, older white businessman instantly = EVUL SWEATSHOP-OWNING CORPORATE THIEF!!!!1111 who is out of touch because, ipso facto, he is old and white damnit!!

148
Ah, think I found it:

Archbishop Cordileone states case against gay marriage
Richard Wolf
USAToday March 21, 2013

149 Archbishop Chaput?

150 ah thank you so much.

151 141 Careful, some people will try to argue that gay sex is on a par with pedophilia.and rape. Seriously.

152 Pederasts aren't gay! If you overlook my predilection to rape and sodomize children of my sex, I'm straight as an arrow! In more ways than one!

153 It's nice to be nice to the nice

154 Your point is moot. But, you already knew that didn't you?

Skip all the " polling data" and look at the voting since Reagan took the White House. This country doesn't like gay marriage, nor lesbian marriage. This country doesn't like universal healthcare. We don't like illegal immigration. We don't like amnesty.

This country really, really, really doesn't like the word republican. Don't shoot me I'm telling the truth and you know it.

So S. E., if everybody likes our views and nobody likes the name of our party, what can we do that we haven't already tried and failed at?

Sorry that was a trick question. The real question is 'Where do we go from here?' IOW: The party of Bush, Rove, and Cheney, is done. We need a knew home.

155 You could ask the question the other way. If gay marriage is sas unpopular as so-cons claim, why would Obama come out in favor of it in an election year? The fact that he switched his views in an election year towards backing SSM should tell you where the country stands. No politician makes that kind of switch unless he/she knows which way the wind is blowing.

I think it has nothing to do with how the country stands.  It has everything to do with where the Media stands.  And Obama knew that it was the Media that would ensure his re-election.

156 Here's my two cents, FWIW.  I'm a persuadable voter--not that gay-marriage is a social good (sorry, that's a bridge too far--I grew up in an adoptive family and adore adoption but have seen up close and personal what happens to people when children are unmoored from their biological parents accidentally, never mind intentionally (which is almost always what same-sex parenting and sperm-banking and single gals thinking it's the coolest to have babies that don't get daddies entail) and I just don't think that this moves the dial to getting more baby-daddies to man-up and raise their off-spring ("Hey," they're thinking, "If gay guys can do it, it must be super-manly!").
But I am persuadable that the barn door is already open and all the horses that matter a TON more than 2% of the population engaging in SSM have gotten out--gals that think having sex like a man will be consequence-less, the comoditization of nascent human life (surrogacy, sperm-banks, etc.), men that think that a family is a death sentence to fun...I just don't see how SSM is bigger than that.
But (here's my BUT), there are two things that irk me that the other side could do (but don't think they have to because they're self-righteous asses to a way greater degree than those commenters that reduce everything to 'God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve!'):
1) How about giving people with religious worries some lip service.  The crap people post about Boy Scouts (which my kid is in) on FB just pisses me off.  Let these semi-quasi-religious institutions alone to figure out an approach that is 'nice' and let's not compare people who are in them to racist segregated lunch-counter operators.  We're figuring out this Brave New World and everyone could use a bit of humility going forward.
2) How about if every time there was a debate about this, the other side didn't go straight to, "Your Flying Spaghetti Monster in the Sky makes you a bigot..."  Seriously.  I'm a reasonable person.  I don't think that sex is interchangeable with race.  Persuade me.  I'm waiting to be spoken to without being insulted. 

157

The Republican Party platform ought to be:

1) Tell the truth.

2) Propose and support policies that reflect (1).

3) Run on (1) and (2).

4) Be not afraid that if you do (1)-(3) you might lose, because

5) If you aren't doing (1)-(3), it doesn't matter whether you win.

Do this on every issue, from balancing the budget to entitlement reform to foreign policy to social policy to economic policy, and you'll have a Republican Party that will be worth fighting for.   Don't do it, and who gives a crap.

158 Beaner,

Why don't you think sexuality is like race?  (Well it's not.  Race is inherited from your parents and homosexuality does not seem to be, at least not like race)  But like race, homosexuality appears to be involuntary and immutable.  

Do you think it's a choice?  If so, did you choose to be straight?  I'm straight.  I sure didn't choose it.  I remember being nervous around pretty girls in the first grade.  I don't recall even considering if any of my boy friends were 'cute' or 'handsome' or whatever at any age.  They were just dudes.  I hung out with them because they were funny or good at sports or whatever.  I'd hang out with a hot girl for no other reason than she was hot.  Can't say I've done that with a dude.

I live in Seattle.  I know a LOT of gay people.  I don't know one that says they chose to be gay.  Understand that I grew up on Capitol Hill which is probably a top ten gayest neighborhood in the country.  Yet none of my childhood friends turned out gay.  All those gays that live on Capitol Hill came from somewhere else.  They moved there because they were gay.  Being surrounded by gay friendly businesses and gay people didn't make any of us gay.  It simply made us tolerant of gays.  Most gays I know grew up somewhere where it was incredibly inconvenient to be gay.  Many lost their families.  No one would choose to do that. 

If you can accept that there are gays (because there are) and accept that there will continue to be gays regardless of how we treat them (because there will be), I don't see any reason not to encourage stable monogamous relationships among them.  I'm married.  It's been a good thing in my life.  I don't know how letting dudes marry dudes harms my marriage.  It's been fully legal in Washington State now for several months.  It hasn't ruined anything here.  If you lived here, you would have had no idea anything had changed if you didn't own a tux rental shop or cake bakery.

You suggest it isn't your religion that informs your anti stance.  If so, what does?

159 What I hear is people like Rob Portman declaring their new position to the liberal media. What I don't hear them doing is making a cogent argument to conservatives, trying to get them to agree. Major political changes should be forged by agreement, not by ipse dixits. Posted by Ace at 05:28 PM Comments Gee, I'd heard that Portman changed his mind on gay marriage cause his son put him in an untenable position by exiting the closet.

160 Posted by: seattle slough at March 22, 2013 08:14 PM (mCz8+) Just don't call it marriage. Marriage is a sacred sacrament, not just a license. Yeah sure everyone in love should have a nice stable monogamous relationship. Nowadays it can be done using a nice contract. The next thing you know they'll be on the steps of the Catholic church demanding the sacrament. Couple of days ago would have thought Francis would have none of that but then he let nanny and uncle joe onto the Communion line. I know plenty of gay people too. A lot of them are not in favor of gay marriage. They are more in favor of a contract and a ceremony that's not religious and a dinner of some kind with their family and friends. Truth be told one even confided that so many assumptions are made about him because he's gay that he's hiding his gayness. He's tired of having to explain things to dumb people who want to put him in a nice little militant gay box when all he wants to do is live his life like everyone else. "I'm sick of the labels, I'm sick of the need for people to assume, because of my sexuality that I am something that I'm not, I'm an individual, a son, a brother, a significant other, a great friend and an art lover and all they want to see is their dumb concept of a gay man". That's an angry gay man, who is very unhappy with the way things are going lately.

161 What a spineless, unprincipled fag you are, ace.

162

Lovely.......

More dressing up anal sex into flowery civil rights language.

Good God man, our poor boys and girls are growing up listening to this deviant shit from morning till night, by the time they are in HS they are fighting the schools for Lesbian-Gay-Bi-Trans proms and the thumbs up to make-out at their lockers. 

Not to mention their parents are paying for their therapy and anti-depressants.  And all the serious medical issues that will ensue.

But at least they are protected from global warming, the Bible, the Constitution, sugar and trans-fats!

The commie-libs gave us "free sex" in the 60s, 70s, AIDS in the 80s, and now they have a "gay" mafia.

Like vampires they suck the life-blood out of everything decent and good in this country.

 

 

 

 

163

I was GOP chairman in a very red county about five years ago.  I was 58 and still almost the youngest person at our monthly committee meetings.  The activists were conservative on paper, but don't cut their SS or Medicare doncha know. 

When my term was over, I resigned and haven't been to another meeting since, and I was involved for over 40 years!

The Republican party is literally dying out and won't be coming back (at least at the presidential level) within our lifetimes, although I agree with the author here that it will still be a force at lower levels of government for quite a while. 

I don't think the issue is whether the GOP is a spent force in American politics, but what will happen to the Dems after the GOP demise.  The without the likes of Chimpy McHalliburton Bushitler to kick around, they'll be going after each other instead.  Stanley Kurtz writes in NRO today about the fissure within the Dem party over the Keystone pipeline between labor and environmental groups--which is only the tip of the iceberg.  Next up, turf wars (possibly involving actual violence) between blacks and Hispanics, Muslim opposition to gay marriage, and women overreaching in their quest for "feminist jurisprudence".  Should be quite interesting.

 

 

 

164 Good post, Ace.

165 Don't give in on the illegal immigration issue.  Citizenship for the illegals has to be non-negotiable.  If they win that point all else is lost.  When they elect a new herd of Democrats in 4 years they will completely undo any border security put into place now.