January 09, 2014
— Ace He's not seeking to make oral sex broadly illegal, just specifically illegal in certain cases. For example, prostituted genital sex is a misdemeanor, but he wishes to make prostituted oral sex a felony.
He wants to make oral sex with a minor a felony in all cases -- including in the case of minors having sex with minors. 15-17 year olds are allowed to have sex with each other (no crime), but if they have oral sex with each other, that would be a crime.
There is a certain contingent in the Republican Party that insists on defending this nonsense. Not everyone who defends it actually supports it; I think the idea is rather that just as the left observes the rule No Enemies to the Left, so should we refrain from knocking allies on the right.
I don't support this rule. I used to see in the value in it but I no longer do. Things like this are embarrassing and counterproductive. I am tired of being associated with the Party That Really Wants To Patrol Your Private Sexual Choices Because We Know Better Because It's In the Bible.
d, yes, I realize that some people, presumably including Delegate Garrett, view nongenital sex as immoral — but even those people, I assume, are uninclined to outlaw things (unkindness, dishonesty, not honoring your father and mother, coveting your neighbor’s wife or property, and the like) just because they are immoral. Indeed, even people who view premarital sex generally as immoral tend not to be inclined to pass new laws banning all fornication. What is there about nongenital sex that makes it more properly subject to outlawing, especially given the perverse incentives that such a prohibition would create?
To not criticize this crap -- which, by the way, cost us all of the statewide posts in Virginia just a few months ago -- is to send the signal that we're broadly supportive of it, and hence to encourage more of it.
We should not. Social infractions should be punished by social means -- stigmatization, speeches, opinion columns, sermons in church. This insistence that The Law shall be the place where we announce, promote, and ultimately enforce our personal belief systems (in all cases, not just a few absolutely required ones) will be our undoing.
What makes these arguments especially tedious is that those pushing this sort of backdoor-recriminalizaiton-of-sodomy crap usually deny they're doing that, no matter how obvious it is that's precisely what they're seeking to do:
[T]his proposal is a response to a MacDonald v. Moose (4th Cir. 2013), which applied Lawrence v. Texas to strike down the ban on the grounds that the ban covered private noncommercial adult sexual conduct. Delegate Garrett is trying to revive that old law in those areas — prostitution, sex involving minors, and sex in public places — where Lawrence might not apply. But even though this revival might be constitutional, that doesn’t make it smart.
So they're looking for corner-case situations where a court may permit a reinstatement of the ban, in particular cases.
Why?
The proposed bill, by the way, is headlined:
§ 18.2-361. Crimes against nature; penalty.
We often goof on the left for being unserious -- for ignoring issues requiring serious work in order to indulge in cheap tribal sexual politics gesturing.
How is this any different?
Milton Friedman observed that it is wrong to say "We need to elect the right people into office." Politicians are insecure, emotionally-broken, pandering attention-monsters (rather like bloggers, you know) who will do whatever they believe will make them popular.
The right way to get the right law is not to elect better politicians; such things are as rare as black swans.
The right way to get the right law is to make it such that the right thing to do is the thing that makes the politician popular.
And to make it unpopular to do the wrong thing, the stupid thing, the anti-freedom thing.
Continuing to just let this agenda fester in silence is to tacitly bless it. Obviously this guy, Garrett, feels that being an idiot on oral sex will make him popular with some; it's about time we on the right stopped falsifying our own preferences in deference to a fringe minority and openly declared our real preferences, which is that this nonsense must stop.
It's time for the right's own in-caucus preference cascade. I think we've all been silently going along with this stuff because of our mistaken belief that a large number of conservatives agree with this and to speak out against it would be to fissure the party.
That's how preferences get falsified -- people wrongly believe their opinions are unpopular, or minority, and thus suppress them.
And cascades happen when people start admitting "Hey this is total bullshit and I'm against it' and other people start saying, "Holy crap, so am I; I just assumed everyone else was on board."
I do not believe anything close to a majority of even the harder-conservative primary-voter population favors new legislative adventurism into specifying, by Force of Law, that Gynie Sex is better than other types of sex.
The product sells itself, doesn't it? Do we really need so much conservative legislative boosterism for PIV?
Posted by: Ace at
10:35 AM
| Comments (1137)
Post contains 897 words, total size 6 kb.
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at January 09, 2014 10:38 AM (+Ifkm)
Posted by: JRS at January 09, 2014 10:39 AM (xLs90)
Posted by: ghostofhallelujah at January 09, 2014 10:39 AM (XvrTA)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 10:39 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 10:39 AM (LSJmV)
I want to control it as a business, to keep it respectable. I don't want it near schools -- I don't want it done with children!
Posted by: Don Zaluchi at January 09, 2014 10:40 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 10:40 AM (9PrpA)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 09, 2014 10:41 AM (XWw96)
To the moon!
I cannot begrudge you your preference choices in winnowing out party direction but I will say....
My break is away the Christie and the GOP media all-stars...
I mean yes I *could* argue "but the donks are never called on their lunatics" but hey that is "media" not your problem.
The GOP is still barely my problem.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 10:41 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Cal-OSHA at January 09, 2014 10:41 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: Vic[/i] at January 09, 2014 10:41 AM (T2V/1)
I am tired of being associated with the Party That...
And I get to say again, I no longer have a party....wahoo...
but also kinda unfortunate.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 09, 2014 10:41 AM (n0DEs)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 10:41 AM (9PrpA)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at January 09, 2014 10:42 AM (nUH8H)
No, really -- lots of people in the VA socon wing of the GOP would look at Todd Akin and say "nah, I don't like social moderates like that."
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 10:42 AM (ewYO6)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 10:42 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at January 09, 2014 10:42 AM (HVff2)
Now, these stupid fucks are outlawing blowjobs.
Jeeeeebus! we got the fucking Dems on the run with this Obamacare bullshit and still the fucking GOP has to go full on 100% stupid again.
I fucking give up.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at January 09, 2014 10:42 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at January 09, 2014 10:42 AM (8ZskC)
So, you're saying that they want to ban PIM and MOP, but PIV and PIH and PIA are all still okay?
Acronyms. Is there anything they can't do?
Posted by: Sharkman at January 09, 2014 10:42 AM (TM1p8)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 09, 2014 10:43 AM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at January 09, 2014 10:43 AM (pginn)
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 10:43 AM (DV/pZ)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 09, 2014 10:44 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: kathysaysso at January 09, 2014 10:44 AM (6H6o8)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 10:44 AM (9PrpA)
Posted by: Mama AJ at January 09, 2014 10:44 AM (SUKHu)
Well. There's a whole bunch of SCOAMF-voters who are never getting laid again.
Posted by: HR at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: Washington Nearsider at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (fwARV)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (rsudF)
it's about time we on the right stopped falsifying our own preferences in deference to a fringe minority and openly declared our real preferences, which is that this nonsense must stop.
---------
Well put, which is why I don't vote for RINOs.
Posted by: @JohnTant at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (eytER)
Posted by: Meghan McCain at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Beagle at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: california red at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (7jrCM)
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Iasonas at January 09, 2014 10:45 AM (RUraj)
Posted by: Defroomius Bandersnatch at January 09, 2014 10:46 AM (w45V0)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 09, 2014 10:46 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: Roy at January 09, 2014 10:46 AM (VndSC)
Yes, except for the fact that they control both chambers of the statehouse (well, the Senate is up for grabs right now, but next time 'round they'll get the whole thing) and regularly elect non-socon GOP governors there.
The intrusion of federal government employees in NoVA is a problem, to be sure, but for fuck's sake all you really need to do is stop talking about criminalizing blowjobs and jamming fiber optic cables up women's vajayjays before they get an abortion and you can fucking win this state. IS THAT SO HARD TO DO?
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 10:46 AM (ewYO6)
Herpes, the gift that keeps on giving forever. But at least you're not punished with a free abortion.
Posted by: HR at January 09, 2014 10:46 AM (ZKzrr)
You know that's part of the abortion procedure, right? So they can see where to stab.
Posted by: HR at January 09, 2014 10:46 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 02:45 PM (RJMhd)
They're already illegal. Why the need for this new law?
Posted by: Washington Nearsider at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (fwARV)
Posted by: B at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (VC56G)
Former Army Captain in the Artillery.
Calls himself a Constitutional Conservative.
Served as Assistant AG in VA.
Law School grad from U of Richmond.
State Senator in VA.
On a crusade against beejers.
Weird.
=======================
That's how his GF got pregnant and trapped him in marriage.
Kid took after his Ma, they say.
Posted by: Bigby's Pantomime Hands at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (Hw3Gh)
Posted by: Bullwinkle at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (Ua6T/)
Posted by: rdbrewer at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (Iyg03)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 10:47 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at January 09, 2014 10:48 AM (nUH8H)
Posted by: Zombie Mr Hands at January 09, 2014 10:48 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: Paranoidgirlinseattle at January 09, 2014 10:48 AM (RZ8pf)
Well that's one reason the GOP barely has any credibility left.
Posted by: Iasonas at January 09, 2014 10:48 AM (RUraj)
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 09, 2014 10:48 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Iasonas
.........
Apparently not. *sigh*
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at January 09, 2014 10:48 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Ken Cuccinelli at January 09, 2014 10:48 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: maddogg at January 09, 2014 10:49 AM (xWW96)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 10:49 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 10:49 AM (Hw3Gh)
Posted by: Vic at January 09, 2014 02:41 PM (T2V/1)
------------------------------------------------
Only if it has national implications. Otherwise, it's a local story except for Huffpo and their like.
Has this bill passed in their state legislature? If not, then this is just an exercise in fortune telling.
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 10:49 AM (DV/pZ)
Posted by: real joe at January 09, 2014 10:49 AM (IphbY)
Posted by: naturalfake at January 09, 2014 10:49 AM (0cMkb)
Posted by: The Whigs at January 09, 2014 10:50 AM (7ObY1)
Goes along with the whole getting-bent-out-of-shape-over- something-sourced-by-Kos-or-Maddow- without-double-checking-if-it's-true-because-it-conforms-to- your-existing-biases.
I still don't know the term for that, btw, but I'm pretty sure there is one among people who study these things.
Posted by: HR at January 09, 2014 10:50 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 10:50 AM (FciyD)
Posted by: NeverEvermore at January 09, 2014 10:50 AM (hRV3r)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 10:51 AM (FsjuI)
Posted by: JohnJ at January 09, 2014 10:51 AM (TF/YA)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 10:51 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at January 09, 2014 10:51 AM (nUH8H)
Posted by: katya the designated driver at January 09, 2014 10:51 AM (DoZD+)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 10:51 AM (/FnUH)
>>They're already illegal. Why the need for this new law?
.
.
.I have a feeling this is directed mostly at Gays.
Posted by: Registered Voter at January 09, 2014 10:51 AM (AHX9J)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (XWw96)
Posted by: Todd Akin at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (VndSC)
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (DV/pZ)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (RJMhd)
@20 B. Any person who performs or causes to be performed cunnilingus, fellatio, anilingus, or anal intercourse upon or by his daughter or granddaughter, son or grandson, brother or sister, or father or mother is guilty of a Class 5 felony. However, if a parent or grandparent commits any such act with his child or grandchild and such child or grandchild is at least 13 but less than 18 years of age at the time of the offense, such parent or grandparent is guilty of a Class 3 felony.
------------------
Oh, this is just GREAT. You realize what this idiot has done? He's set conservatives up for a double-pronged attack.
If you support the bill, then the question is, "Why can't you stay out of our bedrooms!?"
If you oppose the bill, then the question is, "Why do you support sexual abuse of minors and incest!?"
Posted by: junior at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (UWFpX)
Posted by: Fellatio Hornblower at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (g4TxM)
See "Why The Fuck is Mike Huckabee Getting Any Votes?"
The problem is, we don't have a robust defense or advocacy of the concept call "It's Not The Government's Damned Problem, Never Should Be, and You Are a Fucking Retard for Thinking It Was."
We passed the point a long time ago where the exact opposite is now the position of 70% or more of this country.
Remember: There are whole counties in this country--in 2014!--where you can't even by a can of beer. Moral scolds have a long history of passing laws that are not the business of government.
See also, smoking bans.
Which, makes me wonder: Instead of attacking our kooky brothers, why not say, "that's as stupid as the Democrats always trying to find new places to ban smoking."
Because, truth be told, restricting sex will have as much a positive impact upon the treasury via public health expenditures as banning smoking.
Posted by: RoyalOil at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (VjL9S)
I thought the Democrats were teh Party with the Private Sex Life Patrol? You know, the one that searches out those who do not Celebrate all the types of sex available and then tries to have them fired. And I am content to leave them to that little task.
(No - I really do not want to know what goes on in your bedroom, thank you very much.)
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Death Capades - ObamaCare on Ice! Sponsored by the Outrage Outlet at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (hLRSq)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 02:49 PM (/FnUH)
And there are still people who wonder why Virginia (my state of residence) continues to go blue...
Posted by: Washington Nearsider at January 09, 2014 10:52 AM (fwARV)
***
VA is 12th out of 50 in line of electoral votes with 13 electoral votes. So yeah, Ace has a big point here. This guy and his Hallelujah Corner needs to take a pill and lie down.
Posted by: B at January 09, 2014 10:53 AM (VC56G)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 10:53 AM (/FnUH)
When sentence is read, this will be known as the Squeakhole Enhancement.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at January 09, 2014 10:53 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at January 09, 2014 10:53 AM (OPzNA)
Posted by: Mandy P., lurking lurker who lurks at January 09, 2014 10:53 AM (qFpRI)
Posted by: Y-not on the phone at January 09, 2014 10:54 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at January 09, 2014 10:54 AM (nUH8H)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at January 09, 2014 10:54 AM (+Ifkm)
Posted by: rdbrewer at January 09, 2014 10:54 AM (Iyg03)
Only thing I know about all this is Ace never seems to get the vapors quite as seriously as he does when the topic of sausage smoking comes up.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 09, 2014 10:54 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 09, 2014 10:54 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 09, 2014 10:54 AM (7ObY1)
ah perspective is for pussies...
anyway it is just and sound that *my* party is responsible for the bad un-pc WW2 stories my grandpa used to tell on occassion but Barack Obama is not responsible for his own cabinet instructions.
I love it, I am sure rejecting state house members trying to do the business ideally they got elected on is dumb.
Hey remember when that stuttering dumb fuck from Harvard Law spoke passionately on infanticide in Illinois' State House?
Yeah neither does anyone else.
But I do get it, it *is* a time for trying to force a preference cascade in the GOP.
I'm ready
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 10:55 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 10:55 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Socratease at January 09, 2014 10:55 AM (SZUi2)
How quickly people forget that Akin even SAYING something like this got Republicans destroyed electorally...
Whether or not it's been passed is a secondary issue. The primary issue is that there are still Republicans publicly saying things like this.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider at January 09, 2014 10:55 AM (fwARV)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 10:55 AM (FsjuI)
Posted by: Fellatio Hornblower at January 09, 2014 10:55 AM (g4TxM)
Sorry Ace, but your statement that "not criticizing this crap" cost us every statewide office in Virginia is total and absolute fucking bullshit. Indeed, quite the opposite is true. In addition to many other key factors, of course.
Incessant focus on this kind of shit cost us VA. Us spewing dem attack ads on these non fucking issues cost us VA. Leaving our candidate out to dry and letting him get outspent 25 to 1 cost us VA. Not pointing out in every available fucking media that the "third party" candidate was an Obama/dem plant cost us VA.
If you are asking us to become consistent in calling out these "sex" issues, then let us at least not fudge the analysis and actual, real fucking facts to fit the narrative of the post.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 10:55 AM (tVTLU)
>>>Go Whig!
Ya know, once you look up what they were actually about there's an awful lot of appeal. Shame they went from the Enlightenment to a punchline, innit?
Posted by: Bigby's Pantomime Hands at January 09, 2014 10:55 AM (3ZtZW)
You could be doing it wrong.
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 02:39 PM (RJMhd)
See? Right there - I Did Not Need To Know That. Now I have that knowledge trapped in my mind.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Death Capades - ObamaCare on Ice! Sponsored by the Outrage Outlet at January 09, 2014 10:56 AM (hLRSq)
Posted by: B Clinton at January 09, 2014 10:56 AM (FciyD)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 10:56 AM (RJMhd)
The bill proposed would appear to cover oral sex with minors who are also members of your immediate family -- you know -- incest.
The editorial staff of Reason Magazine aside, that doesn't appear to be an outrageousness evil SoCon position to take.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 10:56 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 10:56 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: The Whigs at January 09, 2014 10:56 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Ken Cuccinelli at January 09, 2014 10:57 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Plaintiff Pug at January 09, 2014 10:57 AM (Qev5V)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 10:57 AM (FsjuI)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 10:57 AM (qyfb5)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 10:57 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 09, 2014 10:57 AM (NKBxV)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 09, 2014 10:57 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 10:58 AM (yICtd)
Posted by: Dixie Normous at January 09, 2014 10:58 AM (RqqAn)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 10:58 AM (FsjuI)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (E+teJ)
Nope, not at all. Least not from me. You should stress what you think are the most vital issues of the day from your POV.
If the best use of your time and resources is steeple-chasing VA on a binary-trigger "fuck you" tack on harassment law I welcome the information.
True I will NEVER vote in VA barring some unforeseen circumstance, but perhaps being exposed to Huff-PoKos' analysis of "Why YOU SUCK" will in fact lead to the epiphany that breaks down the dam of competition in the retarded newly purple/blue locust hives...
Have at it...
Me? I am wondering how the fuck running another soft on liberty, Jihadi adoring, tax raising, SCOAMF neutral NE GOP is the call of destiny for my party. We all have our hills to climb.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: DangerGirl at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (4+PCd)
Posted by: Woody Allen at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (FciyD)
Posted by: gp at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (mk9aG)
Posted by: Max at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (huMoW)
Justice Roberts will support it-- after all, if it involves keeping the change, it must be a tax.
Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (Vb7de)
Posted by: Mike Douglas's drool cup at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (R6JT1)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (9PrpA)
We need these big government types out of the GOP.
Posted by: Iasonas at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (RUraj)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 10:59 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: Ken Cuccinelli at January 09, 2014 11:00 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: DCPensFan at January 09, 2014 11:00 AM (ma/2m)
Posted by: akula51 at January 09, 2014 02:57 PM (FsjuI)
only 'incest incest'. not like far down the gene pool incest. A friend told me.
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 11:00 AM (yICtd)
In my weak minded opinion, the right way to get the right law is to not try to legislate things that shouldn't be legislated. If there exist 'items' in society that run contrary to what a segment of society believes should exist in society, it should be that group's responsibility to convince the rest of society that their belief has merit. They shouldn't insist that government impose their belief on the rest of society.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 09, 2014 11:00 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: Heywood Jablowme at January 09, 2014 11:00 AM (jsWA8)
Well, to be fair, sodomy does seem to spread a lot more disease than PiV sex...
Let's call it a public health issue that Obama should be all over, because outlawing the buttsex would lower medical costs...
Posted by: GMan at January 09, 2014 11:00 AM (sxq57)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:00 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: JeffM at January 09, 2014 11:00 AM (LIc41)
Posted by: logprof: 'Noles! at January 09, 2014 11:01 AM (X3GkB)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 11:01 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 09, 2014 02:54 PM (zOTsN)
---------------------------------------------
Just got through reading it. That's my impression too. I'm sure most states (except CA) already have laws such as this. I don't see the big deal.
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 11:01 AM (DV/pZ)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 11:01 AM (RJMhd)
as much as I have over Christie and yet CW Cooke thinks I must answer for the Governor of New jersey....
I do not understand it, but I acknowledge it.
I've said some harsh things about Christie, but I have always acknowledged NJ can back who it will.
The wheels fell off somewhere in the right punditry, BUT I do not think Ace is holding the pin.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 11:01 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:02 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:02 AM (FsjuI)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:02 AM (FciyD)
******
LOL!
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 11:02 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 09, 2014 11:03 AM (U1Tts)
-
So you're saying we should kneel to conquer.
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 09, 2014 11:03 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: The Palm Beach Agorist at January 09, 2014 11:03 AM (7AyPg)
Speaking of crimes against nature, the question I had earlier, about the broad who claimed she said she knew who their nominee was going to be long before the primaries started was Georgette Mosbacher.
That link goes to Gateway Pundit.
This is a correction of another error made by the illustrious Beff J, who claimed it was the Madame de la Robispierre, who whatever it was he said.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 09, 2014 11:03 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: 7 Days in May at January 09, 2014 11:03 AM (j6DTo)
Posted by: Dixie Normous at January 09, 2014 11:03 AM (RqqAn)
Posted by: Michael Scott at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (X3GkB)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Ken Cuccinelli at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Couch Fucker at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (qpvOM)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: Roy at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (VndSC)
Posted by: whence wince at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (R6JT1)
What was it?
-
Debbie Does Dallas (But Not Virginia)
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Book at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (qWES6)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (9PrpA)
Posted by: wooga at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (GfS/y)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (FsjuI)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:04 AM (FciyD)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (LSJmV)
>>>Whigs were Prohibitionists. So, fuck no.
Wrong, as a matter of fact. Whigs were already extinct by that time.
Posted by: Bigby's Pantomime Hands at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (DRG6e)
Also, minors.
The text of the bill is two clicks away. As written, if a 17 year old high school senior who gets a BJ from his 17 year old high school sweetheart, they're both guilty of a felony.
Anybody who believes that to be consistent with the proper role of government needs to get the fuck out of my party.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (NKBxV)
Posted by: 7 Days in May at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (j6DTo)
I'm even against a government reach around.
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (yICtd)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (FciyD)
Even assuming we stick by these weird issues, which I totally sympathize with your view Ace that we should not be getting into the nitty gritty of WILLING participants, even in prostitution, etc., who GIVES A FUCK?? Rape/child molestation, entirely different matter and any attorney will tell you you want higher penalties for certain conduct, and I don't give a fuck what any misinformed "libertarian" idiot tells me, sometimes in those heinous circumstances they are used quite well.
Who doesn't love BJs and anal sex?
But, even if I was a prude, the choice is, as I see it, as follows:
You can sleep well in knowing you won't get an enhanced felony for your soliciting charge as your child waits 4 months to see a cancer specialist.
Yay Dems!!!
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 11:05 AM (tVTLU)
Posted by: JohnJ at January 09, 2014 11:06 AM (TF/YA)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:06 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 09, 2014 11:06 AM (NKBxV)
So a class 5 felony is punished more lightly than a class 3.
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 02:57 PM (/FnUH)
But I believe a felony is a felony as far as gun rights and voting are concerned. And it may determine whether you're required to register as a sex offender.
Posted by: Mætenloch at January 09, 2014 11:06 AM (XkotV)
***
We're going to need a bigger prison...
Posted by: B at January 09, 2014 11:06 AM (VC56G)
Posted by: New York Sun at January 09, 2014 11:07 AM (X3GkB)
Sounds like R Landslide 2014 to me!
Posted by: gp at January 09, 2014 02:59 PM (mk9aG)
Why is she now my problem? Why should she be the Republican Party's problem? I prefer the stance that we aren't in favor of criminalizing her behavior, nor are we in favor of subsidizing the likely results of her behavior.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Death Capades - ObamaCare on Ice! Sponsored by the Outrage Outlet at January 09, 2014 11:07 AM (hLRSq)
-
Reverse cowgirl?
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 09, 2014 11:07 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:07 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: a good catholic at January 09, 2014 11:07 AM (SO2Q8)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 11:07 AM (DRG6e)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:07 AM (9PrpA)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:07 AM (FsjuI)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (Gm2CM)
Posted by: Emily Litella at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (1Y+hH)
Yet pot is legal.
-
And, in this case, I think pot is a gateway drug.
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (Hx5uv)
The left sees guys like this and says "See! See! The GOP is a bunch of backwards Bible-thumping prudes!" And they get mileage on this stuff.
Posted by: Iasonas at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (RUraj)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:08 AM (FciyD)
Posted by: Dr Spank at January 09, 2014 11:09 AM (P1WNR)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 03:06 PM (gXRIG)
You're the dunce who smears Cuccinelli all the time, yes?
I like how you describe it: "GOP fetishes"
Only a complete childish asshole would say such a thing. Yeah, it's the Conservatives who are all wild about fetishes! You fool.
Posted by: soothsayer at January 09, 2014 11:09 AM (gYIst)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:09 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:09 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 11:09 AM (rsudF)
Posted by: wooga at January 09, 2014 11:09 AM (GfS/y)
Posted by: Inspector Cussword at January 09, 2014 11:10 AM (xJS2Q)
Posted by: Emily Litella at January 09, 2014 11:10 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:10 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:10 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 09, 2014 11:10 AM (NKBxV)
***
yes.
Posted by: a devout Baptist at January 09, 2014 03:09 PM (VC56G)
----
Nuts!
Posted by: a good catholic at January 09, 2014 11:10 AM (SO2Q8)
I think everyone here reading this post and these comments can, however, agree that:
"not criticizing these positions cost us every statewide office in VA".
That is simply not true. The opposite, plus several other major factors, is true.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 11:10 AM (tVTLU)
...........
Sooo.. the takeaway here is always have a camera handy?
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at January 09, 2014 11:11 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 11:11 AM (hFL/3)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at January 09, 2014 11:11 AM (oFCZn)
Posted by: Emily Litella at January 09, 2014 11:11 AM (1Y+hH)
But this begs the question....
Under the proposed legislation, how many of us Morons would still be able to legally own a firearm?
OK,now how many would if this had been applicable law when you were a teenager?
Posted by: Village Idiot's Apprentice at January 09, 2014 11:11 AM (GcYmn)
Posted by: gwelf at January 09, 2014 11:11 AM (+7Usq)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:11 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:12 AM (ZPrif)
A question or two Ace.
1) you say "fringe position" which nationally may well be true, BUT the gentleman was so far as is known elected by his seat's riding?
2) If the preceding is yes, and given that(and yes I do agree this is a stupid law since it is a binary-trigger harassment law) the area of impact is the State of VA if the VA GOP allows it brought it must have *some purpose* would it not?
3) At some point in my opinion, there has to be some latitude for the locals to have their say about their laws, how do we allow non extra-constituional laws to be passed by locals if the locals are "too stupid" to realize they have beliefs and desires and preferences not compatible with "the 21st century?"
I do not think the gent is running this up the national GOP flag pole....
I wonder if our pointing out things like PIV AVenger impacts Kos, PuffHo or Jharles Chonson's PoV at all?
I am not saying you cannot have an opinion, I am not trying to silence you, I am sort of failing to see a few ethical, philosophical, and tactical points but hey we need the byline.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 11:12 AM (TE35l)
No DECENT person would want to put their mouth there.
It goes back to the anti pleasure of the puritans and the association of "that area" with excretion.
And back in the puritans day, when soap was a luxury and/or painful to use (thus used less often) I can see how that might be a problem.
These days, we can get pretty sanitary in that area.
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Unexpurgated Edition) at January 09, 2014 11:12 AM (LSDdO)
Posted by: Kinley Ardal at January 09, 2014 11:12 AM (4PpNg)
......We'll they are WRONG!
Posted by: Woody Allen
"the heart knows what it knows!"
A bit more background from the lefties at Think Progress. It appears that an old morals act went under the Court's wheels, conservatives are trying to revise it to bring it into compliance, while the gay/left wants to kill it to allow open season on anything standing still. Quotin':
Senate Bill 14, authored by State Sen. Thomas A. Garrett (R), would “amend and reenact” the law, attempting to use the old law’s language to continue prosecuting cases of anyone who commits “crimes against nature” in public, with minors, with animals, or for money. As a result, this bill would allow oral and anal sex between consenting adults (in the privacy of their own homes) — but would still treat any oral and anal sex in those categories differently from vaginal intercourse, thereby continuing to unfairly distinguish same-sex sexual behavior for harsher punishment.
http://tinyurl.com/nfdjazz
This is apparently an outrage, stuffed with outrage, with a side of outrage dipping sauce.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 11:12 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:12 AM (FciyD)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (g4TxM)
Daughters. Posted by: rickb223
Mothers don't care about their daughters? Please.
Seems like its men who just have weird hang-ups about sex or somesuch.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (U1Tts)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (ZPrif)
I don't support this rule. I used to see in the value in it but I no longer do. Things like this are embarrassing and counterproductive. I am tired of being associated with the Party That Really Wants To Patrol Your Private Sexual Choices Because We Know Better Because It's In the Bible."
-------------------------------------------
I reached this point after Huckabee's "Jesus wants me to win" bullshit years ago, and it was reinforced by Santorum's opposition to "radical individualism". These motherfuckers may be Republicans, but they aren't conservative. They're theocrats deep down, and Christian statists at the least.
Posted by: YourPoopyPants at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (Y/HG5)
OK,now how many would if this had been applicable law when you were a teenager?
***
Speaking for myself, I wouldn't be allowed to be in possession of a pointy stick by now.
Posted by: B at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (VC56G)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Matryr at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (R6JT1)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (gXRIG)
The bill is titled "Crimes against nature; penalty."
That pretty much says it all. He wants to double down on old Blue Laws while trying to get around Lawrence v Texas.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: a good catholic at January 09, 2014 11:13 AM (SO2Q8)
>>Basically proportionality and relativity--are to be considered.
Everybody gets proportionality wrong. Especially in wars.
It doesn't mean 'measure your response to the stimulus'
it means 'act in a measure that furthers your goals'
Hence, nuking Japan *was* proportional. We wanted that war over, it got the job done after only 2 hits.
Posted by: Bigby's Pantomime Hands at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Colonel Barney Kilgore Frank at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (oFCZn)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (hFL/3)
Ahhh, so it's the homos whining about this.
Posted by: GMan at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (sxq57)
Incidentally, if you're a "good" dad, you have small testicles.
It's true; there's a study that says so.
Posted by: soothsayer at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (gYIst)
Well after all, we can crucify an AG for defending the state's law in court while he was AG.
Wait a sec, what is the AG's job description again?
Those dem attack ads are so persuasive, ELEVENTY!!
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (tVTLU)
Posted by: JDW at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (MofJb)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (9PrpA)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Amanda Marcotte at January 09, 2014 11:14 AM (Gm2CM)
Posted by: Guy Who Doesn't Give a Shit at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: wooga at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (GfS/y)
Posted by: Walter Bishop at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (H84UO)
Posted by: Roman Polanski at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (sOtz/)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (ZPrif)
Vaginal sex is gross. That's where cheese comes from.
Besides, PIV is rape all day, every day, 24/7/365, bringing you the hottest hits in patriarchal tyranny.
Posted by: YourPoopyPants at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (Y/HG5)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (g4TxM)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (nUH8H)
Posted by: PersonFromPorlock at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (lILC0)
Posted by: Emily Litella at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Purity Republican at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (P1WNR)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Death Capades - ObamaCare on Ice! Sponsored by the Outrage Outlet at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (hLRSq)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 03:08 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (yICtd)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 11:15 AM (rsudF)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:16 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at January 09, 2014 11:16 AM (oFCZn)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:16 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 11:16 AM (eNZFc)
And yet, over at Drudge there's a report of the clap and syphillis on the rise in this nation. Teens (or for that matter, anyone) having sex, oral or otherwise, just propogate the burden of taxes I have to pay to treat them.
And there's the kicker. There's really nothing private anymore if everyone expects me to pay for their actions.
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 11:16 AM (DV/pZ)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:17 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:17 AM (FciyD)
So ... If I am driving through Virginia, and promise the wife a new house in return for a BJ ... and she consults her notes to refresh her memory on how to perform one ... is that a felony ?
Also, how does the resulting chill from Hell Freezing Over compare to the Polar Vortex ?
Posted by: ScoggDog at January 09, 2014 11:17 AM (+XxPY)
Posted by: Max at January 09, 2014 11:17 AM (huMoW)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 11:18 AM (E+teJ)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 11:18 AM (RJMhd)
This is I think, an example of the media "shaping the overall story arc" Ace.
For example, somehow the GOP could not get the media to address Obama backing the Gosnell Maneuver in either 08 or 12....
I am fairly certain the majority position of the United States is "closet babies"....but hey I may be wrong, I don't quite understand the nation much anymore.
Not saying "shut up" just asking you to ponder, "how do WE land these blows across the aisle as well?"
This little exercise is called "splinter splitting" and I am NOT suggesting your silence I am simply pointing out "we either can't or won't do the same."
The GOP will never win a national election again if we are held to absolute total and subject to media hyping standards wars with the media controlling the mike volume.
If this issue is a big enough deal you feel it merits your passion that is your right as the owner/proprietor and a citizen.
My own evolution to "LEGALIZE IT ALL!" is sincere, I am not mocking your epiphany just wondering if a fellow listless soul has answers to any of those tactical/strategic points?
I myself, I fear am short on answers the GOP would find "acceptable."
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 11:18 AM (TE35l)
never ever in the history of the world have women had hang-ups about sex. Posted by: Flatbush Joe
They do, all the time, but it does seem that modern anti-sex legislation is being pushed by men -- and it seems, men who've done what they're trying to outlaw.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:18 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:18 AM (UAMVq)
Merovign - 262. This X 100000000.
Crazy statements, stupid positions, and fucking criminal behavior are always isolated to the man or woman for the dems.
Someone says some crazy shit who is a Rep, the headlines blare GOP LAWMAKER CUNT PUNTS 90 YEAR OLD WOMAN!!!! Refuses to back down from crazy statements!!!
Yes, some bumblefuck in nowheresville VA state rep speaks for the entire GOP, you know, a national party.
Last time I checked oral sex or anal sex weren't even mentioned in the platform. The right, correct response is simply, the GOP wants govt out of our lives, including our bedrooms, and this guy's goofy statements support of some state law have nothing to do with us and we don't endorse them in any way.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (tVTLU)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (g4TxM)
Posted by: VJay at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (g0rx9)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: gp at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (mk9aG)
You want to discuss the sense or efficacy of sodomy laws in general? Fine. You want to harangue state level legislators over laws that have no impact on your state? Go fuck yourself.
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 03:09 PM (rsudF)
So we're not allowed to criticize NY gun laws or MA state health care plans if we don't live in those states?
I must have missed that addition to the style guide.
Federalism means that residents of states get to make laws as they see fit. It does NOT mean that those laws are beyond criticism or mockery.
Posted by: Mætenloch at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (XkotV)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (GaqMa)
If you think they don't latch on to this kind of nonsense, you're wrong.
Posted by: Iasonas at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (RUraj)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:19 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 11:20 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: toby928© blurts at January 09, 2014 11:20 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: orgasmic diplomacy at January 09, 2014 11:20 AM (R6JT1)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:20 AM (UAMVq)
252 -
No, what you are doing is criticizing large swaths of the religious right when you say the religious right are conflating your position into an attack on all the religious right.
You ARE hung up about all Christians, and this is how you get them riled up. It's a lousy trick you play, Ace, and you did it all through the primaries, when you deliberately misrepresented Rick Santorum's positions.
You should be more honest on your on blog, dude.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 09, 2014 11:20 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:20 AM (ZPrif)
Not OK. Not with me.
Again- felony. I'm not defending prostitution, but getting a beejer from a whore should not rise to the level of a felony.
There are too many felonies on the books as it is; it should be reserved for serious crimes.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 11:21 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:21 AM (gXRIG)
The Chicago Mob would like to thank the Women's Temperance Society and Anti-Drunkenness League of Morality for all their help. Posted by: Flatbush Joe
I was going to refer to Prohibition, but I deleted it because: 1) it's not sex; 2) and it was almost 100 years ago and thus not modern. Don't just blame women for Prohibition, though; a lot of men had their hands in that travesty too.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:21 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:21 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Darth Randall at January 09, 2014 11:21 AM (Zswg6)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 09, 2014 11:21 AM (g1DWB)
Thank you for your support.
Posted by: Jeb Bush (and his mutant amnesty loving son) at January 09, 2014 11:22 AM (kxSZr)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at January 09, 2014 11:22 AM (7kkQJ)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:22 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 11:22 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 11:22 AM (Gm2CM)
Posted by: DangerGirl at January 09, 2014 11:22 AM (U7Ivf)
Are they kidding with this or what? 117 minutes wasn't enough for them. They have to cover this during the trading day?
Posted by: think at January 09, 2014 11:22 AM (OroYa)
Posted by: Emily Litella at January 09, 2014 11:22 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Y-not (@MoxieMom) at January 09, 2014 11:22 AM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:23 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:23 AM (FsjuI)
>>>You are attacking *everyone* over what this dipshit is doing, not just attacking the dipshit.
Nope. Just calling a dipshit a dipshit and making the larger point that people in the party ought to stop being dipshittery.
Posted by: Bigby's Pantomime Hands at January 09, 2014 11:23 AM (3ZtZW)
Sorry Seamus but...
A US study Monday measuring fathering habits and testicle size suggested that bigger may not be better when it comes to the day-to-day raising of small children.
The research involved 70 U.S. men of varying ethnicities -- most were Caucasian, five were Asian and 15 were African-American.
All were the fathers of children aged one to two.
The larger the volume of their testes, the less the men were involved in daily parenting activities like changing diapers, said the study by researchers at Emory Un
Posted by: soothsayer at January 09, 2014 11:23 AM (gYIst)
Sorry Seamus but...
A US study Monday measuring fathering habits and testicle size suggested that bigger may not be better when it comes to the day-to-day raising of small children.
The research involved 70 U.S. men of varying ethnicities -- most were Caucasian, five were Asian and 15 were African-American.
All were the fathers of children aged one to two.
The larger the volume of their testes, the less the men were involved in daily parenting activities like changing diapers, said the study by researchers at Emory University in Georgia.
In comparison, men with smaller testes showed more nurturing activity in the brain when shown pictures of their children, and also were more involved in their children's upbringing, according to surveys answered separately by both the fathers and their female partners.
All the men in the study were aged 21-55 and lived with the biological mothers of their children. Most were married.
from September 2013
Posted by: soothsayer at January 09, 2014 11:23 AM (gYIst)
If you are going to equate the two, required sonogram prior to abortion and illegal BJs then yes. I will side with looney tunes before I give up my pro-life stance. Any questions on that?
What faith outright forbids BJs? You aren't supposed to go "all the way" with them in Catholicism, but who says they're verboten?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 11:23 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:24 AM (ZPrif)
Why don't you enlighten me on how I'm historically ignorant rather than just vaguebooking.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:24 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:24 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:24 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 11:24 AM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: gwelf at January 09, 2014 11:25 AM (+7Usq)
Are you equating commenting on laws being pushed for in state that undermine an enumerated law with one that merely skirts a precedentary point that turned over many previously upheld precedents for point of clarity?
There is a dedicated assault on the NATIONAL 2d amendment that runs the risk of ANY state running up whatever retardation they can pass and have it codified by the appellate process.
I agree with your overall point, my point is there is a distinction between the two LEVELS of "interference" IMHO.
YMMV
regards,
sven
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 11:25 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 11:25 AM (Gm2CM)
First thing women did upon getting the vote is inflict one of the worst public policies America has ever experienced.
The Chicago Mob would like to thank the Women's Temperance Society and Anti-Drunkenness League of Morality for all their help.
Posted by: Flatbush Joe
I was going to refer to Prohibition, but I deleted it because: 1) it's not sex; 2) and it was almost 100 years ago and thus not modern. Don't just blame women for Prohibition, though; a lot of men had their hands in that travesty too.
***
"...Nearly a quarter of the voters in Tuesday's election were unmarried women – and Obama captured more than two-thirds of their votes, 67%, according to research released on Thursday by the Women's Voices Women Vote Action Fund.
"Unmarried women were the drivers of the president's victory," said Page Gardner, the president of WVWVAF..."
Posted by: B at January 09, 2014 11:25 AM (VC56G)
If you think the most important contributions of fatherhood are made between the ages of 0 - 2 years, you don't know much about raising kids at all.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 11:25 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:25 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: The Palm Beach Agorist at January 09, 2014 11:25 AM (7AyPg)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:25 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 11:26 AM (qyfb5)
Posted by: toby928© blurts at January 09, 2014 11:26 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:26 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 09, 2014 11:26 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 03:21 PM (9CBig)
---
One other little fact about the Temperance Movement. One they realized the carnage Prohibition cased in the way of rum-rnning violence, the Mob etc.... most of them were supportive of doing away with prohibition.
Posted by: fixerupper at January 09, 2014 11:26 AM (nELVU)
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at January 09, 2014 11:27 AM (/Crba)
Posted by: Judge_Roy_Bean at January 09, 2014 11:27 AM (OiAIj)
My own evolution to "LEGALIZE IT ALL!" is sincere
fascist!
...
kidding.
Default to a state of anarchy prior to rebuilding? huh. It may be the only option left that results in freedom. Or death.
Either way , I have to agree with Ace. Every time the New Puritans attempt to legislate morality , the lawlessness seems to increase proportionally.
Posted by: mythical GOP establishment[/i] [/b] at January 09, 2014 11:27 AM (5ikDv)
These things are all connected. The lunacy of the VA GOP's Jesus Squad is why a vile piece of shit like Terry McAuliffe actually managed to get himself elected despite the fact that virtually everyone hates him, even on the left. It's why we have two Donk senators and why a useless leftist clown like Mark Warner gets to play-act at being a "sensible moderate".
And I'm a Virginian, so I have the right to say all that, right?
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 11:27 AM (eNZFc)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 11:27 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Daybrother at January 09, 2014 11:27 AM (XjARm)
Posted by: toby928© blurts at January 09, 2014 11:27 AM (QupBk)
So The bill is really aimed at gays giving BJs in public?
Posted by: Thunderb
That looks like the spin from the liber-left. Quotin' again from TP:
And the law’s disparate treatment of those engaging in public sex (a misdemeanor, at most) and those engaging in public oral and anal sex (a felony under the Crimes Against Nature law) would also be a concern. A same-sex couple spotted by law enforcement in a park, engaged in oral sex, would be each be guilty of a felony — while an opposite-sex couple having vaginal sex in the same park would not.
Any restriction on buggery amid the philodendrons, of course, being an outrage burger on an outrage bun with special outrage sauce.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 11:27 AM (kdS6q)
I read the proposed code. From what I can gather, it makes public blowjobs (and anal sex, et al) felonies. Presumably, heterosexual sex not involving oral or anal sex remains a misdemeanor if done in public. On those grounds alone, I'd be against such a law since the proposed punishment outweighs the crime. A hooker (and logically the john) catching felonies for a back-alley blowjob? Really?
Insofar as the delegate's motives are concerned, I'd say the proposed law is clearly targeting hookers and (secondarily) gay males who have sex in parks and public restrooms and the like. It doesn't read like a screed against 'unnatural acts' since, according to the draft, it doesn't pertain to consenting adults engaging in such fun and frolic at home or otherwise in-private. The delegate evidently doesn't like seeing prostitutes servicing clients while on his morning jog by the park or his drive into work. Me neither. It grosses me out but I don't think people should get felonies for it.
So should we as conservatives support the guy because he's (presumably) a conservative? No, because (1) the law, if passed, would illogically transform a comparatively low-level misdemeanor into a felony; and (2) he's aiding and abetting Democratic efforts to paint Republicans as puritannical busybodies.
Posted by: troyriser at January 09, 2014 11:27 AM (2jF2B)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:28 AM (UAMVq)
I never said otherwise, but while womens suffrage was a necessary condition, it was not a sufficient condition. There were plenty of men who were behind Prohibition. If there were no material support for Prohibition by men, it would never have passed.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:28 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: Iasonas at January 09, 2014 11:28 AM (RUraj)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 11:28 AM (mtjSE)
oh and remember 20 yrs ago when Coconut Oil was bad for you and you shouldn't eat buttered popcorn at movie theaters because of it?
now coconut oil is good for you!
Bonus: it makes your testicles larger!
Posted by: soothsayer at January 09, 2014 11:28 AM (gYIst)
This Ace's blog and he can do whatever he wants about it. Shit like this frustrates me as well because it's not helpful. But there are always shit about both parties we don't like.
What troubled me most about this post is that it's intellectually dishonest and it's based completely on untruths.
We lost VA b/c of Merovign's frustration. B/c every fucking nonissue is blown up, including by us against ourselves, which is a major fucking problem.
My question is, Ace, are you going to rant so heavily against a President who supports Don't Ask Don't Tell policy.
Here's a hint folks, socons walk from the party and you will never win another election, ever. Obamacare will be the least of your worries. lol.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 11:28 AM (tVTLU)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 09, 2014 11:29 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:29 AM (UAMVq)
Maybe he thought: well fuck, you can't just not steal something after crashing into a building like a moron!
Posted by: fb at January 09, 2014 11:29 AM (1Zoh4)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 11:29 AM (LSJmV)
Bottom line is though, it never had majority or even close to majority support of men. Don't be shy, take credit where credit is due.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 11:29 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 11:29 AM (5xmd7)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channeling Breitbart at January 09, 2014 11:29 AM (nUH8H)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 11:29 AM (rsudF)
***
Boehner thinks a lot of things. Most of it in Dr Seuss prose.
Posted by: B at January 09, 2014 11:29 AM (VC56G)
Posted by: The People's Republic of Virginia at January 09, 2014 11:30 AM (DLu2s)
Not sure that's a good thing. Testicular hypertrophy doesn't mean more virility.
Posted by: EC at January 09, 2014 11:30 AM (GQ8sn)
As I said upthread. If I have to pay out of my pocket for peoples' actions/consequences, then I have a voice in how people conduct themselves. I don't like having this attitude, but this is what this nation is turning to. It's the main purpose of socialism/marxism. Privacy is out the window.
If the majority of Americans want this then there will HAVE to be laws legislated to control every fucking aspect of our lives. Get used to it. We're on that road.
I truly hate the direction this nation is moving.
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 11:30 AM (DV/pZ)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 09, 2014 11:30 AM (ZPrif)
He is getting a magnified exposure here, and our infighting is likely being wargamed by the activist left.
Not flattering you, you are on the cusp of mainstream acceptance and I could NOT be happier Ace.
That was my LONG(for which I apologize for the lack of brevity by eloquence) line of query.
You can do as you will, I just don't see an upside from the battle that allows counter-volley.
Yesterday I explained about my anger at Cooke that I do not shave Christie's face in the morning and he is not my guy and I meant it.
I understand your frustration and your wanting to break us out of the "cover down-PHALANX!" demands.
My only concern on that point is it often feels(and I am not aiming this ire at YOU) that the moderate wing never can be reflected ON and our foe is constantly in a phalanx.
I hope you are well, I know you had taken ill.
Regards,
sven
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 11:30 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 11:30 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:31 AM (/FnUH)
Well, given that I said "modern" anti-sex legislation, which clearly excepts "yesteryear", and given that you've referenced "historical" sex legislation and alcohol prohibition, which is a non-sequitur, then I'm neither historically wrong nor have any of your posts gainsaid my initial observation.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:31 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:31 AM (9PrpA)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:31 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: rdbrewer at January 09, 2014 11:31 AM (Iyg03)
Don't defend it. But why discuss it?
We don't make it go away by ignoring it.
How do you think this will get portrayed?
1. Local legislator in VA proposes making oral sex between minors a felony.
2. Republicans are trying to criminalize sex again.
If you answered #1, try again.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 11:31 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 02:43 PM (DV/pZ)
Well, you shouldn't. Ace is right, we lost Virginia because of yahoos like this guy and Ken Cuccinelli who give lazy voters every reason to believe the Republican Party in Virginia simply wants to be the Sex Police.
It's arguable that Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election the day the Virginia Assembly passed that stupid vaginal ultrasound bill.
I'm with Ace 100% here.
Posted by: rockmom at January 09, 2014 11:32 AM (Q4elb)
The big problem is having an asshole like this as an office holder. By his very existence, he taints the party to the vast sea of low information voters who only know some idiot republican wants to ban oral sex.
So every republican wants to imprison blow job participants.
That's what have to deal with. Posted by: jwest
Heh heh, you said "taint".
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:32 AM (9CBig)
I do love how BJs and anal are somehow the death knell for the GOP.
But killing babies born alive during a botched abortion are simply VOGUE MOTHER FUCKERS, BECAUSE WE, YOUR MEDIA OVERLORDS, SAY SO.
When GOP pols finally have the balls to walk up to a microphone and ask an opponent why they support killing live babies (botched abortions) or fully developed babies (partial birth abortion), then we'll know we've got some actual leaders back.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 11:32 AM (tVTLU)
OT: Just one more reason why people are fed up with the Repub establishment:
And then they blame tea partiers for fomenting strife within the party. They're no different from Dems. Jackasses.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at January 09, 2014 11:32 AM (BZAd3)
Who's kidding Whom ... Regarding a law pertaining to BJs, public or private ... How many of us have Legal Standing ?
Be honest ...
Posted by: ScoggDog at January 09, 2014 11:32 AM (+XxPY)
I was going to refer to Prohibition, but I deleted
it because: 1) it's not sex; 2) and it was almost 100 years ago and thus
not modern. Don't just blame women for Prohibition, though; a lot of
men had their hands in that travesty too.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 03:21 PM (9CBig)
There are two sides to the story regard to Prohibition. Most people have only latched onto the 'it was a complete failure and only supported by repressed christians trying to legislate behaviour".
I would not have been a supporter of Prohibition but I believe people should know the facts which don't support that it was a total failure.
Posted by: polynikes at January 09, 2014 11:33 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 11:33 AM (hFL/3)
BTW - this won't go over well, but hwatever -
Whenever I see a lot of "I'm sick of the infighting" commentary increasing, I know of a certainty that that particular worm is turning. We needed to remake our party after the 2012 defeats and infighting is the way we do it. Saying you're sick of it is screaming Uncle.
Good, is all I have to say.
Posted by: Bigby's Pantomime Hands at January 09, 2014 11:33 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:33 AM (gXRIG)
I'm pretty certain that a real Republican Crime Against Nature Bill should cover a few more outrages; may I suggest circumcision bans and HPV vaccination?
Hahahahaha.
Posted by: The Palm Beach Agorist at January 09, 2014 11:33 AM (7AyPg)
Posted by: toby928© blurts at January 09, 2014 11:34 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: Komissar Vladimir at January 09, 2014 11:34 AM (sBegS)
Posted by: J. Moses Browning at January 09, 2014 11:35 AM (61Cnj)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:35 AM (FciyD)
Whole movie summed up: a friend will fuck you over with time travel.
Posted by: EC at January 09, 2014 11:35 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: rightwingva at January 09, 2014 11:35 AM (kCnae)
That logic is extremely strained. Since group X had at LEAST some support for policy A group Y that had a strong majority support can't be held accountable. With that logic you could absolve radical progressivism of responsibility for abortion on demand because SOME Catholics supported it.
No sorry. Temperance was a women's movement, they started it, pushed it, and eventually made it the law of the land. The fact it involved some men was incidental.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 11:35 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:35 AM (/FnUH)
Thereare two sides to the story regard to Prohibition. Most people have only latched onto the 'it was a complete failure and only supported by repressed christians trying to legislate behaviour".
I would not have been a supporter of Prohibition but I believe people should know the facts which don't support that it was a total failure. Posted by: polynikes
Prohibition was supported by all kinds of people for all kinds of reasons: morality, worker productivity, workplace safety, stuff that excessive drunkenness leads to, etc. Big Laws often have all kinds of supporters interested in their own little chunk of what it can do for them.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:35 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 11:35 AM (Gm2CM)
Women weren't allowed to vote when Prohibition was enacted, but somehow it's their fault.
Just like the defense giving up seven TDs is Peyton Manning's fault.
Posted by: HR at January 09, 2014 11:35 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:36 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:36 AM (gXRIG)
Please keep that in mind regarding these types of pols too.
Posted by: Iasonas at January 09, 2014 11:36 AM (RUraj)
toby, I was confused too by PRIMER and I blame the film's director and editor for it.
It's a great amateur film, I'll say that. But it's not a great movie, or even a good movie.
Posted by: soothsayer at January 09, 2014 11:37 AM (gYIst)
Sort of a consumer protection clause?
Posted by: gwelf at January 09, 2014 03:25 PM (+7Usq)
So, like a blow job warranty?
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 03:25 PM (UAMVq)
OK now I get it...and I'm all for this. So sensible. Now i gotta go beat Flatbush to the Tongina patent...Mine's going to look like a fucking squid.
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 11:37 AM (yICtd)
Posted by: Sandra Fluke at January 09, 2014 11:37 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 11:37 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 11:37 AM (mtjSE)
Posted by: alexthechick - Come to us, oh mighty SMOD at January 09, 2014 11:37 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 09, 2014 11:37 AM (GaqMa)
Rockmom,
Don't you wildly support Paul "fuck our troops/amnesty" Ryan??? Yeah, did we avoid a huge catastrophe with that fucking guy.
So your point is duly noted, but we should probably rely on strategy advice from other corners.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 11:38 AM (tVTLU)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 11:38 AM (DRG6e)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 11:38 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:39 AM (UAMVq)
But killing babies born alive during a botched abortion are simply VOGUE MOTHER FUCKERS, BECAUSE WE, YOUR MEDIA OVERLORDS, SAY SO.
When GOP pols finally have the balls to walk up to a microphone and ask an opponent why they support killing live babies (botched abortions) or fully developed babies (partial birth abortion), then we'll know we've got some actual leaders back.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 03:32 PM (tVTLU)
“I love quotations because it is a joy to find thoughts one might have, beautifully expressed with much authority by someone recognized wiser than oneself.”
―Marlene Dietrich
Posted by: Kinley Ardal at January 09, 2014 11:39 AM (4PpNg)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:39 AM (gXRIG)
That would be news to Theobald Mathew. Probably to Neal Dow and Andrew J. Volstead as well.
and eventually made it the law of the land.
It was enacted in the Glorious Golden Age of Male-Only Sufferage.
Newsflash: Men are dipshits, too. It's not gender-specific.
Posted by: HR at January 09, 2014 11:39 AM (ZKzrr)
Some woman already did it in the "monster pr0n" link from the Dump.
Posted by: EC at January 09, 2014 11:39 AM (GQ8sn)
I'm a bit mystified myself, but I suspect teeth are involved somehow.
Posted by: pep at January 09, 2014 11:39 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 09, 2014 11:39 AM (GaqMa)
If you don't want people to say you're attacking all Christians...maybe you could leave one-liners like this:
I am tired of being associated with the Party That Really Wants To Patrol Your Private Sexual Choices Because We Know Better Because It's In the Bible
out of your argument. I mean, you know, that line right there...and there are other things you say later in the thread give people that impression that you might be blaming Christians...
Just sayin'
Posted by: GMan at January 09, 2014 11:40 AM (sxq57)
Posted by: JohnJ at January 09, 2014 11:40 AM (TF/YA)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:40 AM (/FnUH)
Has anyone mentioned that the ultrasound is part of the procedure? They have to see where to stab.
They miss a lot, but they do try.
Posted by: HR at January 09, 2014 11:40 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 11:40 AM (rsudF)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 03:35 PM (9CBig)
Exactly. Worker productivity and safety was as big a reason as any at the time. There are some positive numbers that resulted from prohibition and positive practices that fortunately remained even after it was overturned.
Posted by: polynikes at January 09, 2014 11:41 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 09, 2014 11:41 AM (zOTsN)
I had THOUGHT that by allowing myself to be verbose I was going to communicate more effectively.
My lines of query on why broadcast it are that we are unable to control or form ANY narrative without luck, and a hail mary use of Media Aikido on spilnter splitting the Donks.
The National Party officials seem to REFUSE to even try these last 5 years, they constantly glom on to ONE issue and win a foot race with a biased referee officiating the event.
The Democrat party SUPPORTS Kermit Gosnell how hard is that to say or make stick?
Have you EVER seen this kind of splinter on the left that carried through to voter apathy on any splinters since 2006?
I am NOT saying "shut the fuck up you CANNOT discuss anything, I am saying that from my initial analysis of the problem we face from an engineering systems failure stand-point we once AGAIN come back to "THE MEDIA."
Until IMHO we address this paradigm this is likely mostly an exercise in caucus breaking of our own camp. That's okay since my epiphany to "legalize it all!" I am certain I have bewildered some of the more So-Conish people here I ran with. Just pointing out that in shaking the foundations of our own camp while lacking the power to disrupt theirs we are bleeding.
regards,
sven
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 11:42 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: toby928© attempts to look on the bright side of life at January 09, 2014 11:43 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:43 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:43 AM (/FnUH)
Not that rule no. Not at least as an absolute.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 11:43 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at work at January 09, 2014 11:43 AM (8v/hq)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at January 09, 2014 11:43 AM (oFCZn)
Posted by: BSKB at January 09, 2014 11:43 AM (4KWOY)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at January 09, 2014 11:43 AM (0C8xx)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:43 AM (UAMVq)
I think what the esteemed Ace is getting at is that Sparky the Jeenuis Legislator should have run this draft past someone sentient who would have pointed out that this is just the kind of thing that will get rammed up the entire party's exhaust pipe by the Dems and their media minions, rather than just blunder into the great whirling blades and expect people like us to help with absorbing the fallout. It's called 'politics' for a reason.
If Delegate Garrett wants to run through a minefield with clown shoes on yelling DERP DERP DERP it's very unreasonable to expect me and like-minded citizens to go scrape him up after detonation.
Posted by: Sort-of-Mad Max at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (DLu2s)
Who's just making shit up now?
Posted by: DaveA[/i][/b][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (DL2i+)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (GVFlJ)
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at January 09, 2014 02:47 PM (8ZskC)
You'll shoot your eye out
Posted by: The Jackhole at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (nTgAI)
I sure hope this wasn't referring to me, because 1.) I'm no 'moderate'; 2.) I'm pro-life; 3.) I neither think 'all' social conservatives want this nor have I claimed otherwise. I have pointed out again and again that you keep seeing stupid shit like this crop up specifically in the VIRGINIA GOP because that particular state has a very loud, very aggressive (and very powerful w/r/t internal state GOP politics) ultra-so-con faction. It always has, and it's increasingly out-of-step not just with national political norms but within the state itself.
You ever notice how nobody's pushing legislation like this in states that are far, far more "red?" Why is that?
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (ewYO6)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (/FnUH)
We had a local legislator a few months back who introduced legislation that would have made it a crime to introduce legislation that restricted gun ownership.
Kind of a nutty thing to try to legislate, but hey, people do nutty things at times.
He's an otherwise effective legislator, and one I would think most people around here would vote for if you were in his district.
I don't see this as too very different from the guy Ace is trying to string up by his gonads here.
By the way, the guy's legislation went nowhere. As will this thing in Virginia.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (TOk1P)
Traffic guy on another channel just said "it's an early rush hour today or something" and then proceeded to show a lot of roads in Brooklyn and Queens all backed up already.
Would be too funny if Christie is stuck in traffic on his way to Fort Lee to apologize to the mayor and the townsfolk.
This is bordering on a bad reality show now.
Posted by: think at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (OroYa)
He has to be in there somewhere.
It always turns out the people who yell the loudest about something are into it more than anyone. I'll guarantee he's got a video of his wife rimming him while he's shoving an eggplant up her ass.
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 03:38 PM (u2a4R)
So does this mean you attend anti-euthanaisa rallys?
Posted by: polynikes at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette: Winter Borscht at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (DRG6e)
Posted by: toby928© attempts to look on the bright side of life at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 11:44 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 11:45 AM (E+teJ)
Posted by: toby928© attempts to look on the bright side of life at January 09, 2014 11:45 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 03:35 PM (9CBig)
Exactly. Worker productivity and safety was as big a reason as any at the time. There are some positive numbers that resulted from prohibition and positive practices that fortunately remained even after it was overturned. Posted by: polynikes
Thank you.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:45 AM (9CBig)
***
The KKK (Hi, Democrats!)was part of Prohibition too. They campaigned and had a big "yute" movement campaign to get kids to sign up to be a teetotaler. They managed to get several million kids to sign up.
Posted by: B at January 09, 2014 11:45 AM (VC56G)
Don't blame Christianity for a belief that isn't widely held by Christians ace. Christians don't believe as a whole that *all* oral sex is immoral. What you are doing in that would be the same as blaming Christianity for the WBC.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 11:45 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: rdbrewer at January 09, 2014 11:45 AM (Iyg03)
Posted by: Weird Lady at January 09, 2014 11:45 AM (aDwsi)
Further, do the prostitution laws currently include oral and anal as part of the definition? If not, then this law would cover those angles.
Maybe those questions should be asked and answered before a summary judgement.
Posted by: grognard at January 09, 2014 11:46 AM (/29Nl)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:46 AM (gXRIG)
I'm a church going, conservative-libertarian voters who lives in the state of Virginia and I think that this idiot's position is absolute bullshit and should be called out as such. Do I want my soon to be teenage daughter giving blowjobs to her future boyfriends in the school parking lot or behind the bleachers after a game? Of course not, and I'm hoping that as her father I will be able to show her that you don't have to kneel before Zod to catch and keep a guy, current societal proclamations aside. However, should she at some point do so because of raging teen hormones and such, I will fucking beat to death the asshole who opines that she is deserving of a felony record because of that action.
Living in Virginia, I will say that even amongst the socons I know this guy would be considered a loon. However, asshats like him make it really, really hard to try and have a serious conversation with women and/or my left of center friends. People who should really know better won't shrug it off as "what an idiot". Instead, they'll use that jackasses position as reason to vote for someone like McAuliffe and Obama. Trust me: you would not believe how many otherwise sane and intelligent women in the Old Dominion voted for McAuliffe and craptastic agenda because War On Women. And yes, I know that this is due in large part to outfits such as the WaPo and its eternal series of macaca page 1 articles. That does not make such comments/positions any smarter.
Posted by: physics geek at January 09, 2014 11:46 AM (MT22W)
Posted by: alexthechick - Come to us, oh mighty SMOD at January 09, 2014 11:46 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 09, 2014 11:46 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at January 09, 2014 11:46 AM (0C8xx)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: rightwingva at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (kCnae)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (FciyD)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (GVFlJ)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (LSJmV)
There is some pretty strong allusion to it in Song of Solomon, and not in a bad way IYKWIMAITTYD.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (0q2P7)
Did I make that claim anywhere?
I'm saying that if you don't want people to have the impression that you're attacking Christians, maybe it'd be best to, you know, not attack Christians, or attack even this nutjob for BEING Christian, which is kind of what you've done in several places in this thread.
Again, just sayin'
Posted by: GMan at January 09, 2014 11:47 AM (sxq57)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 11:48 AM (HJcb1)
Posted by: polynikes at January 09, 2014 11:48 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 11:48 AM (hFL/3)
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 11:48 AM (yICtd)
Ace has some of the best commenters/thoughts/posters out there. This blog is second to none.
But imho this is worth a laugh and a "we need to get these bedroom types to shut the fuck up already b/c this kind of stuff is bullshit". Not a huge tirade as to why this is symptomatic of a party problem. Newsflash, it's not.
But if we can't figure out that differing on marginal positions means nothing and the true focus of all of us is: 1) stopping amnesty; 2) smaller fed govt; 3) obamacare; 4) restoring Constitution and guns; 5) NSA, again govt spying; and 6) jobs, then we are done anyway.
If the GOP fucks us over on something like amnesty, I'll mark that day as the death of the country as we know it and certainly the death of the GOP.
But Anon, you just keep fucking chasing the "single" voter, that's the winning ticket right thereio. I've got an idea, let's force nuns to provide the pill and perform gay fucking marriage, that's the fucking ticket to WINNING!!!
Not focusing on the big picture and smearing our own party with the ideas of one individual fucking STATE rep is not helpful and frankly very unfair.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 11:48 AM (tVTLU)
Posted by: Daybrother at January 09, 2014 11:48 AM (O+vS4)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:48 AM (UAMVq)
Nobody like a bragger Akula.
Last time I hit it in public, I think the GOP controlled all three houses.
Posted by: ScoggDog at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (+XxPY)
Posted by: toby928© attempts to look on the bright side of life at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (GVFlJ)
Posted by: toby928© attempts to look on the bright side of life at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: toby928© attempts to look on the bright side of life at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: Lava palaver at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (R6JT1)
Posted by: Spot at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (qyfb5)
One of the things that I always remembered was when they discussed the fact that teenage boys and girls are allowed to spend the night together, in what is known as "bed courtship". This big, bearded, straw hat wearing Amish motherfucker who was busily engraving some furniture, said "Well, I mean, they're teenagers. You stick a boy and a girl in a room together and leave em alone...things are gonna happen. They have to find out for themselves."
This was an AMISH DUDE.
When you're advocating policies that even Amish people would consider restrictive and archaic, take a goddamned step back and think about the world in which you live.
Posted by: YourPoopyPants at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (Y/HG5)
Posted by: toby928© attempts to look on the bright side of life at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at January 09, 2014 11:49 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at January 09, 2014 11:50 AM (7kkQJ)
You ever notice how nobody's pushing legislation like this in states that are far, far more "red?" Why is that?
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0
I grew up in NoVa and Va always struck me in that sense. My mom said that when we first moved here in 1973 (my father was stationed in Thailand as part of AID) restaurants couldn't serve liquor. I cannot come to grips with going out for a juicy, perfectly-cooked, steak, and not having scotch or bourbon.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 11:50 AM (9CBig)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:50 AM (FciyD)
I'm just trying to hurry him along to that point.
Posted by: GMan at January 09, 2014 11:51 AM (sxq57)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at January 09, 2014 11:51 AM (0C8xx)
Posted by: Toby the Beagle at January 09, 2014 11:52 AM (UAMVq)
Honestly haven't gone past the title, too buy monitoring CNBC's Christie Chronicles. But, my thought after reading the headline was "well that's an interesting approach to get more revenue." After all, they know all this data is being collected maybe the person figures let's use the data like traffic cameras to generate revenue for the state.
Posted by: think at January 09, 2014 11:52 AM (OroYa)
Posted by: Daybrother at January 09, 2014 11:52 AM (Zzs75)
Posted by: Concern Troll at January 09, 2014 11:52 AM (4KOF2)
Don't you wildly support Paul "fuck our troops/amnesty" Ryan??? Yeah, did we avoid a huge catastrophe with that fucking guy.
So your point is duly noted, but we should probably rely on strategy advice from other corners.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 03:38 PM (tVTLU)
First of all, I don't recall "wildly supporting" anyone, though I was semi-pleased with Romney's selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate because I thought he was the least-bad option and if used correctly could actually have helped Romney win some younger voters and more blue-collar men.
Second of all, I opine on this issue because I lived in Virginia for over 20 years and got up close and personal with the wackjob socons there in a camapign that I ran, and I despise them. They are loonier than most people here understand and they are very definitely giving Democrats way too much ammunition to use against all conservatives and Republicans, and they don't care. This guy would not be offering this bill unless he had a lot of people at home pushing for it. These are the same people who forced the RPV into a convention and picked Cuccinelli but also picked that totally crazy Rev. Jackson for Lt. Gov. These are the people who gave Todd Akin the idea that women who are raped really can't get pregnant.
Posted by: rockmom at January 09, 2014 11:52 AM (NYnoe)
Well if you didn't leave peck marks maybe we could go that route. Alas...Brace yourself!
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 11:52 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:52 AM (FciyD)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at work at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (8v/hq)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 03:09 PM (rsudF)
Oh. So Aiken didn't appear in any liberal ads in Florida or Ohio?
Good to know that state politics never bleed into national politics.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (fwARV)
@ 465: Ace needs a smoke.
Posted by: Bigby's Pantomime Hands at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (qyfb5)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: price is right at January 09, 2014 11:53 AM (HfKLk)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 11:54 AM (LSJmV)
Posted by: Eton Cox at January 09, 2014 11:54 AM (q177U)
Posted by: flounder at January 09, 2014 11:54 AM (Kkt/i)
Certainly not!...seeing as it's rape - not rape rape aka legitimate rape, but nevertheless
Posted by: ed gibbon at January 09, 2014 11:54 AM (4eNxd)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:54 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 11:54 AM (gXRIG)
I'll play the part of Mysterious Dave Mather
http://youtu.be/ZnXk11hqn1k
Dave Mather-Shootist and Lawman of the west
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 11:55 AM (TE35l)
...........Please tell me it can't talk for fucks sake. That's been the problem since day one.
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 03:50 PM (FciyD)
I tell Mrs. Guido that ALL THE TIME. I Also have been threatening to become Muslim. "hey babe, you'd look great in a burka. Here let me see how your eyes look peeking out through this scarf." Really, someone fucking help me.
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 11:55 AM (yICtd)
Posted by: RioBRavo at January 09, 2014 11:55 AM (MJ2yn)
Posted by: Emily Litella at January 09, 2014 11:55 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Christie can suck my throbbing cock at January 09, 2014 11:55 AM (KOp/H)
Posted by: The Couch at January 09, 2014 11:56 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: CAC at January 09, 2014 11:56 AM (4htUE)
You're not the source of any infighting, of course our contingent of SoCons probably is not to blame for this relatively local matter either.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 11:56 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 11:56 AM (FciyD)
I've had consensual oral sex, and it didn't taste like trout as described by the despicable conservatives.
Posted by: Rachel Maddow at January 09, 2014 11:57 AM (pJF+c)
Posted by: Eton Cox at January 09, 2014 03:54 PM (q177U)
If he had just posted the Flaming Penis, we would have been prepared. but it came out of left field.(heh)
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 11:57 AM (yICtd)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 11:57 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 11:57 AM (/FnUH)
Duh, they're trying to get laid. Why feminists have boyfriends.
vaginas with tongues
It's in there, li'l fella. Go deeper.
Posted by: Stringer Davis at January 09, 2014 11:57 AM (xq1UY)
My guess is that he's got a skank daughter and he wants to legislate her into not being one.
Half-kidding.
And if this person's district has enough inbreeding that he has to specifically call out grandparent/grandchild incest, well - bless his heart.
Posted by: grognard at January 09, 2014 11:57 AM (/29Nl)
Anyway, this guy is a red herring. No I don't support that, and I'm Catholic, we have some of the most stringent rules on sex period. 1. BJs aren't explicitly banned (So long as not deliberately to completion) 2. I wouldn't support this if they were. So what's with the huge straw man that you are slaying? You are going to have some crazees. If you wish to divorce yourself from them, your caucus is going to be very VERY small. Otherwise the best we can do is identify them and get rid of them. But a lot of them seem pretty normal until they do something like this.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 11:57 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 11:57 AM (E+teJ)
Speaking of guys who understand gobbling things...in Christie's case entire fucking kielbasas...
How's the penis in Moonbat land?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 11:57 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 09, 2014 11:58 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 11:58 AM (5xmd7)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 11:58 AM (Gm2CM)
oe's Law to the maxPosted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 11:58 AM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 11:58 AM (RJMhd)
Forced transvaginal ultrasounds before an abortion? Yeah, I'm not a fan. I'm not a fan of abortion, either, but I'm also both turned off on a gut level by the weird state-compulsion aspect of a vaginal shame-probe. Fact is, if you're at the abortion clinic ready to terminate your pregnancy, you've already crossed the line as it stands; I think you've almost certainly made a tragic, awful decision (except in cases of rape, incest, and danger to the life of the mother), but you've made the choice as is your right by law, whether I like it or not. At that point it's just an exercise in last-minute shaming.
And even so, I don't actually object to ultrasound laws like the one Scott Walker recently signed into law in WI, where a non-invasive ultrasound is performed and the woman has the right to look at it or not look at it. But an invasive transvaginal probe, with a woman forced to look at it, mandated by the state? No, I can be pro-life and still think that smacks of creepy statist imposition of my personal view upon the masses. And that was the bill that Cuccinelli initially signed onto in VA (even though he backed away from the transvaginal aspect of it late in the game, as he realized how much it was hurting his campaign among women of all political persuasions).
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 11:58 AM (ewYO6)
Posted by: wooga at January 09, 2014 11:59 AM (GfS/y)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 11:59 AM (mtjSE)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 03:50 PM (9CBig)
Shit, we STILL can't buy liquor anywhere but the state-run ABC cartel. It's 20-fucking-14, and the Commonwealth of Virginia still holds a monopoly on the sale of distilled spirits.
I love my state. I really do. But those of you who've never been here truly have no idea how insane a big chunk of the VA GOP is. They've driven a helluva lot of people away, and if you think all of those people are leftish LIVs you're sorely mistaken.
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 11:59 AM (eNZFc)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 11:59 AM (qyfb5)
They are loonier than most people here understand
Serious question: You both seem to have some insight. Can you provide some (other) anecdotal evidence of the VA special SoCon loony issue? Thanks.
Posted by: noone, really [/i] [/b] at January 09, 2014 11:59 AM (5ikDv)
You forgot the Republican Reformation led by Martin Luther Rove that says socialists as GOP candidates are not to be besmirched....
it's okay if you haven't gotten the memo he wrote his 17 trillion Theses on a Subway Napkin....
you may have thrown it away(like he has thrown the party away)
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:00 PM (TE35l)
Rockmom:
Who are "these people"? Mormons? I mean they have quite the reach eh? From Akin in MO to all over Virginia. Wow. Can we attend one of their secret meetings and tell them to chill the fuck out.
Candidates say stupid shit, some have dumb positions, some may have an obsession about oral sex.
I blame us, the fucking GOP, for letting Richard Murdock get destroyed in the media.
Akin was just a bad candidate, all the fuck over. We move on.
Elizabeth Warren claimed to be a fucking Indian ("Native American" to you pussies) and PROFITED OFF OF THIS LIE, and somehow she was given a pass by her whole fucking party.
It's called unity people. The GOP could learn from it. Our main problem is that I'd say 35% of GOP is progressive liars or they just don't give a fuck. Whereas the dems are pretty much all 100% statist leftists (blue dogs have been purged).
All comes back to Reagan's 11th commandment. But what does he know, he was an extremist. lol
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 12:00 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 09, 2014 12:00 PM (1Y+hH)
Yeah, so...this guy. Right. Whatever.
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 12:00 PM (ewYO6)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:00 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:00 PM (/FnUH)
Oh put down the hammer and stop nailing yourself to the cross. You want to say this guy is wrong? Fuck yeah he's wrong! You want to say it's because of Christianity? I'm not buying. This guy came by his statist crazy honestly, and if he didn't have Christianity (Which again as a whole doesn't think BJs are intrinsically evil) he would have found something else. Probably Progressianity. You can use that. You're welcome.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 12:00 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 12:01 PM (9PrpA)
Posted by: rightwingva at January 09, 2014 12:01 PM (kCnae)
Posted by: Meremortal at January 09, 2014 12:01 PM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 12:02 PM (hFL/3)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:02 PM (/FnUH)
Free birth control!!
War on Women!!
..
Are we a serious people? This is happening again? For real?
WE. ARE. FUCKED.
STOP. PLEASE
Posted by: Goodbye asshole at January 09, 2014 12:02 PM (TcDKW)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:02 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:02 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 12:03 PM (iO3BG)
575 -
You're arguing with somebody posting by the name of Eton Cox?
Maybe that should give you a clue you're not thinking rationally here?
Posted by: BurtTC at January 09, 2014 12:03 PM (TOk1P)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 12:03 PM (u2a4R)
Hush, we're getting to the good part, where he shouts to the room that he will Not Be Silenced by Cotton Mather Puritan Death Squads.
Posted by: Empire of Jeff
How about when he slowly walks away, then turns and mutters "Eppur si muove", all sotto voce like.
Never fails to bring a tear to the libertarian eye....
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 12:04 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 12:04 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 12:04 PM (FciyD)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 12:04 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 03:57 PM (/FnUH)
Why would you want to disparge anyone that agrees with you 90% of the time?
Why can't you just disagree?
Posted by: polynikes at January 09, 2014 12:04 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: toby928© attempts to look on the bright side of life at January 09, 2014 12:04 PM (QupBk)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 12:04 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 12:05 PM (NbLfu)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 12:05 PM (iO3BG)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:05 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Todd Bridges, first to go bad, last to go down at January 09, 2014 12:05 PM (HWgnC)
Posted by: YourPoopyPants at January 09, 2014 12:05 PM (Y/HG5)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 12:05 PM (UAMVq)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:05 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 12:05 PM (yICtd)
They are loonier than most people here understand
Serious question: You both seem to have some insight. Can you provide some (other) anecdotal evidence of the VA special SoCon loony issue? Thanks.
Posted by: noone, really
My wife's cousin is a full-blown, snake-handling, God's a-gonna smite you So-Con (and a nice guy, too). High-test old-time religion. He married his kids off while they were still teens because he didn't want to risk premarital sex. However, I also heard him tell them that once married, they could do whatever they wanted in to bedroom, God would be cool with it. No real point, I just think it's interesting.
Posted by: pep at January 09, 2014 12:06 PM (6TB1Z)
You get it.
Legalize it ALL! and find cover.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:06 PM (TE35l)
"He's trying (as Cuccinelli did) to find ways to re-enforce sodomy laws."
Ace is just doubling and tripling down on untruths here. But remember folks "not talking about these issues" is what lost us the Governor's seat.
Don't pay attention to going up against a 25 to 1 funding ratio.
Don't pay attention to going up against a stalking horse dem plant lib candidate who took double the margin of victory of McAuliffe in votes.
Don't pay attention to the fact that the estab. GOP said fuck you to Ken C. and then we formed a circular firing squad and parroted dem attack ads INCESSANTLY.
No, this unwinnable race was lost solely because we ignorant GOP'ers did NOT, EVER criticize Ken C. for supporting a law on the books, which, after all, was the man's fucking job. That's the real truth here people.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 12:06 PM (tVTLU)
They are loonier than most people here understand
Serious question: You both seem to have some insight. Can you provide some (other) anecdotal evidence of the VA special SoCon loony issue? Thanks.
Posted by: noone, really at January 09, 2014 03:59 PM (5ikDv)
Well, there was Jamie Radtke hijacking the Richmond Tea Party to turn it into a crusade about abortion, for one thing.
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 12:06 PM (eNZFc)
>>>yes it's a strawman, this problem doesn't exist, there are no fringe actors on the right, ANYWHERE, and I should just shut up instead of "doing the left's job for them."
Hey you want to say we need to get rid of them. FINE I AGREE. But it isn't that big a deal. We have how many pols? Some of them are going to have teh crazee. You want to say their problem is religion? No that's not it. They're problem is they think they can legislate goodness into humanity. That's pretty widespread and not in any way GOP trademarked.
You can fight the crazee but it's always going to be around. Getting hot and bothered about icky Christianity over this is really a not the issue. Christian ethics do have some place in the law structure of a Republic, but the majority of it has to be individual initiative. Regulating particular sexual contact falls into the latter category.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 12:06 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 12:06 PM (CJjw5)
Posted by: rightwingva at January 09, 2014 12:06 PM (kCnae)
Free birth control!!
War on Women!!
..
Are we a serious people? This is happening again? For real?
WE. ARE. FUCKED."
===============
Yeah, it's a lost cause. It's George Snuffleupagus opening January 2012 GOP debates with questions about birth control all over again.
We're boned. Get ready for at least 4 years of Hillary.
That's okay, though; my sister assures me that Hillary's "wonderful."
Posted by: Kensington at January 09, 2014 12:07 PM (H84UO)
Posted by: toby928© attempts to look on the bright side of life at January 09, 2014 12:07 PM (QupBk)
Shit, we STILL can't buy liquor anywhere but the state-run ABC cartel. It's 20-fucking-14, and the Commonwealth of Virginia still holds a monopoly on the sale of distilled spirits.
I love my state. I really do. But those of you who've never been here truly have no idea how insane a big chunk of the VA GOP is. They've driven a helluva lot of people away, and if you think all of those people are leftish LIVs you're sorely mistaken. Posted by: radar
Speaking of retail liquor, back in Nov. when I was here I bopped in to an ABC store. Holy crap! Dewar's 12 was $33 whereas I can get it at Trader Joe's (with better hours) for $22. Everything was 1/3 to 1/2 more expensive than *San Francisco*. This is not a small-c conservative state.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 12:07 PM (9CBig)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 12:07 PM (LSJmV)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:07 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: None's Habit at January 09, 2014 12:07 PM (R6JT1)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 12:07 PM (Gm2CM)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 12:07 PM (9PrpA)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 12:07 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at January 09, 2014 12:08 PM (0C8xx)
No he's a control freak that found a medium of expression. If you take away one, he would have just found another. It's like blaming the gun for the shooting ace.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 12:08 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Insomniac at January 09, 2014 12:10 PM (UAMVq)
Look on the bright side she gets tired easier...
I really do support our abandoning all principle if we are to force the christians and the Fi Cons both to abandon theirs and just run the "Fuck YEAH!" platform....
nominate Aurora Snow or Jenna Haze and try to drag enough of the freaks in....
no promises just blow the fucking coffers on Conservapaloozas and get the party caucus out....
fuck it it worked for the mules.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:10 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 12:10 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 12:11 PM (u2a4R)
Posted by: rightwingva at January 09, 2014 12:11 PM (kCnae)
Anyone who has worked at any level on VA GOP campaigns, either national or state or local (as apparently rockmom, anon e mouse, and I all have), understands this. VA is/was the home of both Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, and ground zero for the "Moral Majority" version of ultra-conservative "Christian values" evangelical politics, which by definition made major inroads into the downstate (i.e. everything outside of NoVA, but even there too) GOP in particular. Both major parties in VA have a lot of very arcane internal rules, and ballot access/fundraising is a labyrinthine bitch in the state, so a well-organized cadre that can bring money and "boots on the ground" to bear in a race can exercise a hugely outsized influence, hence the power of the socon wing in VA GOP politics. That's why Cuccinelli played HARD to them after securing election as AG -- he always had a personally socially conservative outlook, but when he was a state Senator in Fairfax County (and I did gruntwork for two of his campaigns) he completely downplayed that because he knew it was a losing angle.
OTOH, once he had a statewide profile he knew that the best way to leapfrog the squishy-yet-electable Bill Bolling (who can go fuck himself, incidentally) in the informal 'GOP line of succession' was by making a play for the VA socon base, which is why he glommed onto the anti-sodomy law cause and the ultrasound bill. Then he got the socon operators within the VA GOP to switch the pre-scheduled primary for the 2013 nominations back to a convention, which enabled those committed activists to dominate the process and ensure his nomination. (The irony is that he probably would've won a primary anyway...it was so unnecessary.)
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 12:11 PM (ewYO6)
Posted by: Roadrunner at January 09, 2014 12:11 PM (X4I+5)
Low-church retards who think god hates blow-jobs are under attack here. Try moving up to high-church ethics, and worry more about evil and less about blow-jobs, OK?
If you are such a bible-thumper that BJs make you ill, then do us all a favor, and get behind the pulpit instead of dragging conservatism down and losing elections with your personal bonnet-bee.
Posted by: Kristophr at January 09, 2014 12:11 PM (c6N69)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 12:11 PM (9PrpA)
"insane a big chunk of the VA GOP "
That is a GOP issue? Wow. You would really go crazy if you had to go to a BLUE state, where you can *only* buy *beer* from an ABC store, not uh, I don't know, at the local grocery store in crazy Virginia. Somebody needs another drink and relax.
Posted by: rightwingva at January 09, 2014 04:06 PM (kCnae)
If the GOP is serious about limited government *snicker*, hell yes, it should be a GOP issue. I mean, we have ABC undercover stings swarming a UVA coed in a Harris Teeter parking lot because they thought she was carrying a case of beer. Oooops, it was bottled water, our bad! How much is ABC's budget, anyway?
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 12:12 PM (eNZFc)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:12 PM (gXRIG)
Effective July 1, 2013, legislation enacted by the General Assembly increases the state sales tax by 0.3% statewide. An additional 0.7% state sales tax has been added to localities in the Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads regions. Distilled spirits retail prices include 20 percent state tax.Wine retail prices include 4 percent state tax and $.40 per liter wine tax.A 6 percent sales tax will be added at the register to the retail price of wines and distilled spirits in the Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads regions.A 5.3 percent sales tax will be added at the register to the retail price of wines and distilled spirits in all other regions of the state.Secular progressivism + religious Conservatism = yikes.
Oh, turns out they've raised the price of Dewar's 12. It's now just shy of $40.
004876 Dewar's Special Reserve 750ml 12YR 80 $39.90
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 12:12 PM (9CBig)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 12:12 PM (LSJmV)
I'm gonna join the fucking barbarian party. They got mead halls and hot chicks serving drinks out of big fucking vats in really big fucking mugs.
Posted by: Berserker- Dragonheads Division at January 09, 2014 12:12 PM (FMbng)
648 -
This is the part Ace doesn't seem to understand, because he's too blind by his freaking out over the discussion of "legislatin' his bedroom."
Big statists come in all sorts of shapes and sizes. If he were to simply criticize that, and leave the gnashing of teeth over the Bible thumpings, he'd have most of us agreeing with him. But this is personal, and he WANTS to have this fight.
Maybe his therapist knows why, but I sure don't.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 09, 2014 12:13 PM (TOk1P)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 12:13 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: Plaintiff Pug at January 09, 2014 12:13 PM (Qev5V)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 12:13 PM (9PrpA)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette: Winter Borscht at January 09, 2014 12:13 PM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 12:14 PM (Gm2CM)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:14 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:14 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at January 09, 2014 12:15 PM (G5cc0)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 09, 2014 12:15 PM (FciyD)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 12:15 PM (qyfb5)
I am just about fed up with a party that can't manage to add 1+1=? to fruition on the media bias and the democrat fissure points....
we are letting soccer mom be comfy with donkey
We are stupid may as well campaign stupid too since we lack a doctrine, message discipline, and discipline in the elected...
so fuck it Asia Carrera 2016!
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:15 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Crazy VA SoCon at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (3wrJ+)
Anyone notice that study that found that 50% of black males and 40% of white males, by age 23 have been arrested at least once.
Yeppers, what we need is some more laws. 100% busts or bust.
Posted by: GnuBreed at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (cHZB7)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (yICtd)
Well, we can all dream, can't we?
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 04:14 PM (gXRIG)
Not anymore. My dreams have been permanently dashed. Virtually no politicians are serious about strangling the Leviathan, and most of those who ARE serious about it are loony cranks like Ron Paul.
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (eNZFc)
Posted by: Roadrunner at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (X4I+5)
I know you city dwellers don't like to hear it, but that shit you saw on WWZ? Yeah, that. Get ready. Your votes won't save you because they don't mean shit and haven't meant shit for quite some time now. Get out or get ready to fight your way out.
This has been a public service announcement from The Lunatic Fringe. Who was correct, yet again, when they thought that bubble ass Christie was worthless from the get-go, even as many of you hailed him as a rising star of a Conservative Avenger.
Posted by: Todd Bridges, first to go bad, last to go down at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (HWgnC)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (LSJmV)
Posted by: Mike Castle at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (YmPwQ)
I agree that conservatives should deal with this sort of thing privately ... he needs to be quietly told to chill the fuck out on the blow-job thing by the Virginian GOP org, or go start his own party.
Posted by: Kristophr at January 09, 2014 12:16 PM (c6N69)
Posted by: Austin in TX at January 09, 2014 12:17 PM (/6EeB)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:17 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:17 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at January 09, 2014 12:17 PM (0C8xx)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 12:17 PM (Gm2CM)
Posted by: The Plumber at January 09, 2014 12:17 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 12:18 PM (CJjw5)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:18 PM (/FnUH)
"I cannot come to grips with going out for a juicy, perfectly-cooked, steak, and not having scotch or bourbon."
Why Bordeaux exists.
Posted by: P.M. at January 09, 2014 12:18 PM (MCVbD)
Posted by: Austin in TX at January 09, 2014 04:17 PM (/6EeB)
OK one more...and grind your teeth amphetamines were "diet pills'...yabba dabba do.
Posted by: Guido 'H8tr extraordinaire' at January 09, 2014 12:19 PM (yICtd)
I have just gotten up to speed on the Ken C. issue, and may I just say one thing:
Fuck all you Ken C. haters straight up the fucking ass.
You tell me just exactly what now did he do fucking wrong???
I can't wait to hear this shit. THIS FUCKING NONISSUE IS WHAT WE HYPERVENTILATE ABOUT???????????????
That's some crazy shit right there.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 12:19 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: MTF at January 09, 2014 12:19 PM (F58x4)
Ace he would have ran the ads ANYWAY or hey get this...a fucking liberal media type would have asked the Q at the debate....
I think the lesson we can all take from this is "FUCK YEAH!"
and I concur...I have dibs on the Ginger at the Conservapalooza next fall at the Capital.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:19 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 12:19 PM (Gm2CM)
Did he? I have no idea. I didn't see any such ads in Michigan. If there were I would have wondered what those who made the ad were hoping to accomplish. Nobody in Michigan had the opportunity to vote for Aiken, and he never set or helped set national policy.
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 04:00 PM (rsudF)
And yet Mitt Romney was forced to condemn Akin's comments, and some MSM commentators even suggested it was within his power to force Akin out of the race and the fact that he didn't meant War On Women or something.
Posted by: rockmom at January 09, 2014 12:20 PM (aBlZ1)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 09, 2014 12:20 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 12:20 PM (eNZFc)
690 -
You're missing the point. The point is, Ace isn't going after this non-entity for his big state ways, he's going after him for being an icky religion guy.
If he did the former, we'd all agree. But he's doing the latter. Hence, the blog blow-up we're having.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 09, 2014 12:20 PM (TOk1P)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:20 PM (gXRIG)
Are you more concerned about purely evil people in office, like Obama?
Or are you more concerned about some high school kid getting a blow job?
The answer to that question will help you figure out the answer to your question in regards to the difference between high and low church.
Posted by: Kristophr at January 09, 2014 12:20 PM (c6N69)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 12:21 PM (9PrpA)
Christians are not under attack here.
If you are such a bible-thumper that BJs make you ill,
Posted by: Kristophr at January 09, 2014 04:11 PM (c6N69)
Douche. And no that's not an attack if you are wondering.
Posted by: polynikes at January 09, 2014 12:21 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 09, 2014 12:21 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 12:22 PM (CJjw5)
We COULD organize an old fashioned Sit-In on the Virginia Capitol steps to protest.
But I have a better idea ...
Posted by: ScoggDog at January 09, 2014 12:22 PM (+XxPY)
Posted by: akula51[/b][/i][/s] at January 09, 2014 12:22 PM (NbLfu)
Ace, we've been typing at the same place a LONG time.....
I have morphed away from more SoCon on domestic things than not...
We're still losing b/c we do not control the microphones.
Now, this is either on purpose or because the RNC is staffed by people too fucking retarded too breathe without mechanical aid.
Chillax and let's run as "Fuck Yeah!" party in rural southern areas...
that'll work out for us.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:22 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Ken Cuccinelli at January 09, 2014 12:22 PM (Gm2CM)
So you really couldn't box him in with pointed questions about his beliefs.
Posted by: rdbrewer at January 09, 2014 12:22 PM (Iyg03)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 12:23 PM (qyfb5)
"Unfortunately apparently a decent number of conservatives aren't so much against paternalism as they are against paternalism from liberals. "
^^^^THIS^^^^ + I don't know, a million? A billion?
A helluva lot of purported conservatives are just fine with an actvist government so long as they agree with the goals of it.
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 12:23 PM (eNZFc)
He is going after him for being a stupid fucking retard, who lets the lowest common religious denominator make decisions for him, and making statements about blow jobs that make your average voter giggle at him and dismiss him as an idiotic Billy Sunday who should never be allowed secular power.
Posted by: Kristophr at January 09, 2014 12:23 PM (c6N69)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 12:24 PM (9PrpA)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:24 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 12:24 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:24 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 12:24 PM (CJjw5)
You're missing the point. The point is, Ace isn't going after this non-entity for his big state ways, he's going after him for being an icky religion guy.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 09, 2014 04:20 PM (TOk1P)
I'm waiting for ace to answer one of the comments on whether he would have a problem if this delegate would have submitted a bill to legalize prositution all other things being equal.
Posted by: polynikes at January 09, 2014 12:24 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 12:24 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 12:24 PM (RJMhd)
This.
If we ever get into power again, we need to run through NPR with an axe, and fire everyone who isn't a technician, and replace them with sane people.
Then we can work on the rest of the media.
Posted by: Kristophr at January 09, 2014 12:25 PM (c6N69)
Posted by: Ken Cuccinelli at January 09, 2014 12:25 PM (gXRIG)
Zere vill be NO capering here. It is verboten!
Posted by: Obersturmbahnfuhrer Garrett at January 09, 2014 12:25 PM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 12:25 PM (Gm2CM)
It's all going to burn anyway. Whether one believes in God or not, there's a judgement coming. This nation can't survive the road we're on.
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 12:25 PM (DV/pZ)
The tragedy is that the Ken Cuccinelli who won election twice as a state senator in Fairfax County, and won the AG's office in 2009, would have absolutely trounced Bolling in a primary AND MacAuliffe in the general if he had just shut his trap about social issues shit, kept his head down, run on Obamacare and law-and-order, etc. He didn't need to have his allies maneuver the GOP out of a primary and back into a convention (this would have kept Jackson off the ticket as Lt. Gov as well). He would have won the primary anyway. He didn't need to indulge in all that cynical pandering to the state's religious right faction in order to get the support of the hardcore base -- they already recognized him as "one of their own." He could have run with a McDonnell-esque profile: socially conservative (McDonnell was a Liberty U. graduate!), but focused first and foremost on the business of the state. That's actually who he is in real life: a very focused, wonky guy.
But he overdid it. He thought the atmosphere of 2009-2010 (where it seemed like almost anything would go, because hatred of Obama and the Democrats was so high) would last forever. And the environment turned on him in a flash and left him out on an island.
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 12:26 PM (ewYO6)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 12:26 PM (CJjw5)
718 -
I don't like you, and I'm not going to bother arguing with you. Don't ask me to explain why, because I won't.
Bye, asshole.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 09, 2014 12:26 PM (TOk1P)
Meanwhile, for those of you who like it when we actually ask people what they're trying to do, not just immediately discerning it by reading their evil SoCon minds:
Sen. Tom Garrett has filed a bill that seeks to keep convicted child predators in prison after federal courts overturned the anti-sodomy law that put them behind bars.
Garrett said his anti-sodomy measure, Senate Bill 14, seeks to reinforce existing laws that protect children from adult sex predators.
The bill clarifies that consensual oral or anal sex acts between adults in private are not crimes, provided that prostitution is not involved, Garrett said. Previously, Virginia law prohibited those acts, and federal courts overturned the state law.
Garrett said SB 14 seeks to keep adult sex predators in prison. “There are over 100 convicted child predators in Virginia prisons whose convictions are arguably no longer valid” because a federal appeals court rejected Virginia’s argument that the state law still is valid when the victims are minors.
The ruling, by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in March, “eliminated every law that referenced the sodomy law, and created a scenario where it is conceivable and perhaps likely that convicted child molesters will be released,” Garrett said.
One incarcerated offender already has filed an appeal under the ruling, and a court decision is awaited, Garrett said.
“This bill would save the laws currently on the books intended to protect children,” while complying with the federal court rulings that shield adults’ privacy, Garrett said.
http://tinyurl.com/m9q9y3e
Outrage! No justice! No peace!
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 12:26 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: CAC at January 09, 2014 12:26 PM (4htUE)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 04:24 PM (rsudF)
It may not hurt HIM politically, but it sure as hell will be a terrific belated Christmas present to the Virginia Dems and hurt the state GOP.
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 12:27 PM (eNZFc)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at January 09, 2014 12:27 PM (0C8xx)
There's the matter of "age requirement"...
I know what you're thinking...Sven what the fuck YO Bambi gave some third rate hacked out Birth Certificate and hides all his docs...!>!
Well true but we still HAVE to follow rules...ask Ted Cruz....
http://tinyurl.com/oud66y4
Asia Carerra SFW Wiki
I'd still hit it...
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:27 PM (TE35l)
What if you clicked the fucking link and discovered that the proposed bill isn't primarily an anti-prostitution measure?
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 12:27 PM (SY2Kh)
Actually, that would be illegal if the anti-sodomy laws he was in favor of as AG had been kept on the books.
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 12:27 PM (ewYO6)
Faster, please.
Posted by: Instapervert at January 09, 2014 12:27 PM (1Rgee)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:27 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at January 09, 2014 12:28 PM (9PrpA)
Please how many die hard Christians are *here* defending this legislation? Who here is part of the anti-BJ brigade? I mean sure I saw some folks I don't recognize drop some crazy in. But seriously, where is this overwhelming Radical Christian anti-BJ caucus infesting your blog comments silencing your opinion with the bile that the ANTI-BJ law is GOOD becuase GOD AND STUFF and SHUT UP? 'cause I don't see them.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 12:28 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at January 09, 2014 12:28 PM (G5cc0)
Now LDC there is NO WAY you can frame THAT ruling to splinter the left...
NONE!
BWAHAHA so do you want the blow-up unicorn or eagle at Conservapalooza next year?
The RNC is on the phone taking orders...
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:29 PM (TE35l)
When someone says something incredibly stupid, and still wants my support for his bid for office, then yes, I get to attack his position if I think his position is incredibly stupid and counter productive.
You can be religious without turning your brain off.
Posted by: Kristophr at January 09, 2014 12:29 PM (c6N69)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 09, 2014 12:29 PM (ZshNr)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:30 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Chef Mojo at January 09, 2014 12:30 PM (Bhlkl)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:30 PM (rsudF)
I'm not saying don't hold him accountable. I'm saying don't blame Christianity for it. This guy decided to freebase teh crazee on his own. Christianity just became it's expression.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 12:31 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 12:31 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:31 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Fritz at January 09, 2014 12:31 PM (TKFmG)
I didn't have to read his mind. I read his bill, and it doesn't do what he says it does.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 12:31 PM (SY2Kh)
Now wait a second....
Colorado Alex and a few others explained to me that it was hunky dory for a village in the state of MN to basically steal 70% of renters' houses they are letting because Barney Fife and Duh Mayah can't be assed to give citations...
if we are attacking "lazy ass fucking elected officials" for a thousand please Mr. trebek can I please get THAT notion taken care of first?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:31 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 12:31 PM (LSJmV)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 09, 2014 12:32 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 12:32 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 12:32 PM (Gm2CM)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:32 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 12:32 PM (hFL/3)
Let's make a felony, just so they know we are serious about it.
Posted by: GnuBreed at January 09, 2014 12:32 PM (cHZB7)
Yeah champ, but here's the thing....I'm a Christian just a horrid one.
My Kingdom is in heaven and I am just about ready to let this barge rocket sled into the mountain and go into "endure and witness" mode anyway....
in other words "not a threat"
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:33 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at January 09, 2014 12:33 PM (G5cc0)
Posted by: Gman at January 09, 2014 12:33 PM (UkbKS)
Posted by: think at January 09, 2014 12:34 PM (OroYa)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:34 PM (gXRIG)
Over criticism for some guy that's proposing more intrusion in people's personal lives?
No, over being the constant whipping boy for the jackasses that like to take it in the squeakhole...i.e. "moderates".
Posted by: Gman at January 09, 2014 12:34 PM (UkbKS)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 12:34 PM (CJjw5)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:35 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 12:35 PM (u2a4R)
Let's make a felony, just so they know we are serious about it.
Posted by: GnuBreed at January 09, 2014 04:32 PM (cHZB7)
How about we just not provide incentives with my tax dollars.
Posted by: polynikes at January 09, 2014 12:36 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 09, 2014 12:36 PM (1gdVS)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 12:37 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 09, 2014 12:37 PM (ZshNr)
Seeing Matt Fariss' name reminds me - you want another example of the loony-toon fringe of the VA GOP? And this one goes back two decades.....in 1993, George Allen and Jim Gilmore cruised to victory as governor and AG, respectively. I mean, Allen won by 15+ points in that one. Somehow, the Dems won the LG race. You know why? Because the GOP nominee was a nutjob named Mike Farris who believed that the Wizard of Oz was a satanic book that should be banned from school libraries. Even in a GOP gubenatorial rout, that idiot lost.
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 12:38 PM (eNZFc)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 12:38 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: Todd Bridges, first to go bad, last to go down at January 09, 2014 12:38 PM (HWgnC)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:38 PM (gXRIG)
READ. THE. FUCKING. BILL.
It is not primarily an anti-pedophile, anti-prostitution, anti-rapist bill. Him claiming it is doesn't make it so.
Your first clue should be the "crimes against nature" title. It's an anti-sodomy bill that exempts consenting adults, but does not exempt minors.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 12:38 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 04:24 PM (rsudF)
Hey neither Ace nor Garrett are in your state so it's none of your concern. So butt out. Because sovereignty or something.
Posted by: Mætenloch at January 09, 2014 12:39 PM (XkotV)
So, tell me again, what did Ken C. do that was wrong?
What position, statement or campaign slogan did he have that was incorrect or objectionable??
Or are we just going to keep taking the dem strawman argument and run with that for our winning strategy???
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 12:40 PM (tVTLU)
I'm having a hard time as seeing what we are doing with this football right now as "advancing" it. Maybe there should be a law against what we are doing to this football.
Anyway. Easy post. "Crazee Republican Pol wants to ban BJs. That's teh crazee right morons."
Hard Core Baptist "Damn straight."
Hard Core Lutheran "WTH No blow jobs? Run him out on a rail"
Hard Core Catholic "excommunicate the bastard"
Hard Core Methodist "What's a blow job?"
Dude you made this the way it is by implicitly suggesting this is a mainstream view. It's not.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 12:40 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 12:40 PM (Gm2CM)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:40 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i][/b][/s][/u] at January 09, 2014 12:40 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: jaysus christ at January 09, 2014 12:40 PM (yhJhK)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 04:35 PM (rsudF)
Again, you fail to acknowledge that whether or not it hurts this bozo, it sure as hell will hurt the state GOP.
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 12:41 PM (eNZFc)
Posted by: ScoggDog at January 09, 2014 12:41 PM (+XxPY)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:42 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at January 09, 2014 12:42 PM (CJjw5)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 12:42 PM (hFL/3)
This is the point. This was also the point with the silly "we need more tools to prosecute rapists!" excuse that Cuccinelli's defenders retroactively proffered for his defense of the state's anti-sodomy laws: no, you DON'T need these tools. Rape is already fucking illegal. (Actually, spousal rape wasn't officially recognized as a sub-category until shockingly recently in the state...but that's a question to ask Dick Black.) The rape/sexual assault/indecent exposure statutes already on the books are perfectly sufficient for the entire spectrum of conceivable offenses.
Which is the point, of course: the only reason laws like these are proposed (or, in the case of Cooch and the old anti-sodomy laws on the books, defended) are as signals to the state GOP's socon faction (which indeed comprises ALMOST ALL of Tom Garrett's voting base: he's the delegate from Lynchburg, VA, aka the home of Jerry Falwell's Liberty University). We joke about how the MSM hears racist "dog whistles" in every criticism of Obama, right? Well, here's a real example of a dog whistle: this legislation probably isn't even meant to pass. It's just fanservice to Garrett's Liberty U. constituency, albeit at the expense of the state and national GOP's reputation.
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 12:43 PM (ewYO6)
I hate that I have to ask, but- are you retarded?
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 12:43 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 12:43 PM (LSJmV)
Non So-Con "Fi-cons" I'mma be balancin't that deficit any day but firs' y'all need 2 put your hands together for caving on AMNES-TEE!
//R "Burro Show" Ino Moderately Electable Torally Worthless Pol
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:43 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:44 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:45 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 12:45 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:46 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 12:47 PM (dZQh7)
The problem is that, in 2014, Lynchburg is a major outlier from the rest of the state in terms of its social politics. Heck, it was ALWAYS something of an outlier. (Truth is, Virginia has never really been big on social conservative "brand" GOP candidates in statewide races: even in its redder days it was a John Warner/George Allen sort of state, not a Ollie North/Mike Farris/Jerry Kilgore one.)
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 12:48 PM (ewYO6)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 12:48 PM (hFL/3)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:49 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 09, 2014 12:49 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 12:49 PM (5xmd7)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 04:44 PM (rsudF)
You keep asserting this but can you please cite where Ace calls for Garrett to be 'politically assassinated' or even implies it?
Because in my version of the post Ace is just calling for VA Republicans to push back against Garrett's bill and let him know that this kind of stuff is Not Helpful to the party at large.
Posted by: Mætenloch at January 09, 2014 12:49 PM (XkotV)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 12:49 PM (dZQh7)
With almost no support from the butthurt Militia wing of the GOP in VA and outspent 25-1...
man his fucking views must be toxic he lost by....
a narrower margin than Romney lost IIRC?
http://tinyurl.com/9w9fzam
VAGov 2013
http://tinyurl.com/pc9shcd
VAPotus 2012
GODDAMN I was right.... IMAGINE that....
yeah this was in no way an own goal by the RNC not being able to deduce the DNC was running a fucking ringer in NJ...
no sir-ee-bob
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:49 PM (TE35l)
So, tell me again, what did Ken C. do that was wrong?
Besides running the stupidest, silliest, most "smokefilledbackroom" campaign in the Commonwealth since the days of Harry Byrd?
Posted by: Anon a mouse
Which caused him to get crushed in a 47.75% to 45.23% landslide....
Wait.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 12:50 PM (kdS6q)
If nothing else it'll be fun to watch from our Church refugee camps I guess....
"Legalize it ALL!"
Why try to slow down the slide into communist abyss?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:50 PM (TE35l)
Anon a mouse:
That's all you can say? He ran a shitty campaign?
I'm talking about the sodomy issue. Where was he wrong on that issue? Since you're the sodomy freedom expert, I look forward to reading your wisdom.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 12:50 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 12:51 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:51 PM (gXRIG)
Sorry, Anon. I was a year too young to vote in that one, but I remember volunteering for Farris' campaign because his office was down the street from my house.
And then, very quickly, I realized that this guy wasn't really the kind of politician I wanted to promote to other people.
Posted by: radar at January 09, 2014 12:51 PM (eNZFc)
He's a Republican.
His bill is offensively stupid.
His bill has gotten national attention already.
His bill therefore reflects badly on Republicans nationally.
Us ignoring it does not change any of the above.
Simple enough?
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 12:52 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Plaintiff Pug at January 09, 2014 12:52 PM (Qev5V)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 12:52 PM (dZQh7)
How did the bill get on the floor to be voted on?
Is the sin bringing the bill(representing his riding)? or is the sin in our not blocking it by procedural order?
I'm at a loss, I am pretty sure this has as much chance of passage as well outlawing Marijuana in CO....
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:53 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:53 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:53 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 12:53 PM (LSJmV)
In legal usage, however -- Sodomy. Anal or oral intercourse between human beings, or any sexual relations between a human being and an animal, the act of which may be punishable as a criminal offense.
Posted by: GnuBreed at January 09, 2014 12:54 PM (cHZB7)
I'd say the circle of "CAST OUT THE EVIL XIANIST!!! NOM NOM" is enough to make Ray Maddow orgasm hard enough to rethink her gender choices...
That's just me though you keep hammerin' that splinter loose.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:54 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 12:54 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:55 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 12:55 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: jwest at January 09, 2014 12:55 PM (u2a4R)
Right. The party of "throw your 17 year old in prison for having oral sex" has a bright future ahead of it.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 12:56 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 12:56 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:57 PM (/FnUH)
Ace, is there no difference between the GOP's Federal Senate Leader and a state Rep?
Running against the speaker is a long tradition in house races for the oppo party.
The Turtle is ostensibly our minority leader up there in the senate, or as I like to call it Searchlight Stalker's Condom...
Just a thought.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 12:57 PM (TE35l)
a narrower margin than Romney lost IIRC?
Yes, in an off-year election with a Democrat in the presidency (two factors which majorly favor Republicans and indeed were thought, in terms of past empirical history, to GUARANTEE a GOP victory in Virginia), with Obamacare unfolding as a massive clusterfuck.
And running against a thoroughly loathsome scrunt of a Democratic nominee who was actually DISLIKED by a significant number of the people who voted for him. (No foolin': MacAuliffe won despite his fav/unfavs being underwater...Cuccinelli's socon brand was just that much more unpopular).
Incidentally, Bob McDonnell won in 2009 by nearly twenty fucking percent despite the fact that Obama carried Virginia the year before by a greater margin than he did in 2012. Which only proves my point that off-year gubernatorial elections in VA are an entirely different beast than Presidential ones.
The fact that it was a closer-than-expected race is attributable to the factors mentioned above. The fact that it was a loss for the GOP is entirely down to Cuccinelli and the profile he foolishly cultivated after securing the AG position. The man would have actually made a damn fine governor, IMO, but he was fucked from the jump by the socon positioning he unnecessarily adopted in preparation for his run at the GOP nomination. He didn't need to do it, he still could've won. But he miscalculated, in multiple ways, and we're all paying the price now.
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 12:57 PM (ewYO6)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:58 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: The Political Hat at January 09, 2014 12:58 PM (XvHmy)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 09, 2014 12:58 PM (g1DWB)
Gee, you're right. It was those stupid voters who elected McAwful.
Posted by: Anon a mouse
Or perhaps the Republican Party not adequately helping financially in what's supposed to be a critical swing state?
Or GOP insiders like George Will and Jennifer Rubin endorsing the Libertarian spoiler candidate because *ick* X-tians?
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 12:59 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 12:59 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 12:59 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 12:59 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:00 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 01:00 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 01:02 PM (KHo8t)
So, it's radio silence. No one can come up with one example of what Ken C. did wrong a la the great issue of our time - anal fucking.
And Jeff B., exactly how much did the "libertarian" get of the vote? What happened when McDonnell won his landslide? Was that gov vote after obamacare passed? Yeah, I thought so.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 01:02 PM (tVTLU)
Yeah, I am telling you if there's one thing my body of work here says it is "Sven is a moral Crusading Biblical Gestapo Backing Fella."
While disliking the law, and the "NOW NOW NOW" totally unprioritized rush to "libertarianize!" every indulgence under the sun while actually FURTHER restricting the you know fucking economy I am now on board with letting the Libertine wing of the GOP go as far as it likes...
well BARRING the expulsion of the SoCons or FiCons....
the great SoCon purge of 20XX ill have me leave the party or continue voting pedal to the fucking floor.
I figure somehwere between the blowjobs(that I have had in VA from my wife) and the pot frito connexion we MIGHT accidentally ARGUE FUCKING ECONOMIC LIBERTY so I can buy some fucking light bulbs of my choice and if inclined BURN FUCKING COAL.
That's just me though you keep on beating those imaginary friend Puritan fucking hordes you see.
Empire of Jeff and I have goatskin fucking leggings and rosaries and baseball bats randomly breaking into houses and vigilante copping guys and gals getting and giving hummers.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:02 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 01:03 PM (rsudF)
I'm sure there will be the usual chorus of:
"quit using the talking points of the Left",
"don't make this a big deal, it's not, what about Obama and his baby killing", and "if you talk bad about SoCons, I'm leaving the Party and going to help Democrats win to teach you heathens a lesson and show you we run the show"
SoCons should be the one policing these morons, the problem is, many of them secretly like this sort of legislation because they think the purpose of politics is some sort of constant Culture War.
You can't blame this nonsense on Democrats when Republicans are actually introducing legislation like this. Sort of like Cuccinelli trying to overturn sodomy laws "for the children'. Sort of like every Socialist entitlement is "for the children" It's a smokescreen. Somehow, child molesters in all 50 states are able to be convicted without these strange, antiquated laws.
This stuff reverberates well beyond the office these idiots occupy. Make examples of them and end their careers. They can then follow their passion in some sort of Ministry.
Posted by: McAdams at January 09, 2014 01:04 PM (XU2Z0)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 01:04 PM (hFL/3)
Posted by: Komissar Vladimir at January 09, 2014 01:04 PM (sBegS)
Right. Jennifer Rubin is the very definition of Republican Kingmaker, her powers legendary. Voters from across the country hinge on her every word, waiting for her sage advice before daring to cast their ballots.
That the candidate in question ran a shitty campaign and sucked at fundraising must never, ever be mentioned under penalty of blasphemy.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 01:05 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:05 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:05 PM (dZQh7)
Hey Jeff I know this is hard to wrap your head around....
25-1 spending allows fucking Clinton's Half-Pint jockstrap to set the music....
This was a realtively high turnout middie...
a few more commercials targeted at The Punk ass Clinton bagman's black support may have swung it.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:05 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 01:05 PM (5xmd7)
Ace,
Not to pop your bubble here, but a DEMOCRAT VA WOMAN state rep years earlier pretty much proposed the same kind of fucking legislation this guy has now, w/o the enhanced sentences on a hooker bust.
So, where are the outcries, the handwringing on such a bill?? lol
And I still await "the facts" with regard to exactly what did Ken C. do wrong on the anal fucking issue? Thanks
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 01:05 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:06 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:06 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 01:07 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 01:08 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:08 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:09 PM (gXRIG)
Without laws to punish sodomy, it's like the government is encouraging the children to go on wild buttsex sprees with their Labrador. Or something.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 01:09 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:10 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 05:07 PM (rsudF)
Um are you reading the same blog as the rest of us?
Posted by: Mætenloch at January 09, 2014 01:10 PM (XkotV)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:10 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:11 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:11 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 01:11 PM (rsudF)
Right. Jennifer Rubin is the very definition of Republican Kingmaker, her powers legendary. Voters from across the country hinge on her every word, waiting for her sage advice before daring to cast their ballots.
Posted by: Hollowpoint
"Who are the Washington Post's "conservative" columnists?"
"Right! Choose again."
"US States for $400"
"And the answer is: This state has a Sunday Washington Post paid circulation of over 780,000."
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 01:12 PM (kdS6q)
Odd, that. Apparently only one side is permitted to press its agenda.
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 04:59 PM (/FnUH)
Federal office vs. state level office.
Posted by: buzzion at January 09, 2014 01:12 PM (LI48c)
Posted by: Rev. Lovejoy at January 09, 2014 01:12 PM (XvHmy)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:13 PM (/FnUH)
Know who has the primary responsibility for raising campaign funding? The candidate and his campaign.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 01:13 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 01:14 PM (KHo8t)
This is surreal...
we can't beat a party openly allied with and trying to nominate Nambla members to education positions...
Ok you're right I am an extremist.
My bad no sodomy laws, as a matter of fact let's let Penis in Vagina Avenger have a swing at the pinata I am certain she'll do just ducky...
You know why I snapped so bad at that bint?
The left wears their lunatic fringe and I am not saying that even THIS guy is a lunatic like a fucking miner's helmet, they go to parades have pictures taken with men who want to fuck little boys without the force of law to interdict.
You know what set of Americans ought to have unbesmirched access to the political process?
NAMBLA....
I disagree with the guy, were I in the House of Burgesses I would vote, unless the floor fight had a compelling argument against this frippery. He should perhaps have been confronted prior to submission but I REFUSE to pretend this guy is engaged in some unilateral assault on "freedom" whose moral repulsiveness is not FAR superceded by the left.
Now back to your pin the tail on the idiot xians festivities.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:15 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:15 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:16 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Countrysquire at January 09, 2014 01:16 PM (LSJmV)
and the motherfucker to blame is the butthurt asshole who lost his stupid fucking primary not the guy who won...
when your "2d place winner" goes to work for the other team...
sub fucking optimal.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:16 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:16 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: NotCoach at January 09, 2014 01:17 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: Y-not (@MoxieMom) at January 09, 2014 01:17 PM (zDsvJ)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:17 PM (gXRIG)
He probably shouldn't have done it if his heart wasn't in it.
You misunderstand either me or Cooch's political career. I worked as a grunt (i.e. door-to-door, phone-banking, etc.) for KC's state senate campaigns in Fairfax County during my young and glorious days as a college kid back in '02 (special election) and '03 (full term). He had a very different profile back then, as he needed to in order to win in a county that turning as rapidly blue as Fairfax -- socially conservative, to be sure, but he never talked about that stuff to voters. (And believe me, he talked to voters: his ability to get out there and mix it up on a one-on-one basis was legendary...we joked that he probably did more door-to-door work than any of us on his volunteer staff, and we probably weren't wrong. Hugely impressive and admirable. Guy is smart and ridiculously hard-working.)
So my heart was in it, even as a Maryland resident who was basically just living vicariously through the competitive races of a neighboring state (that's MD for you). Hell, my heart was in it this November -- I would have LOVED to see Cooch beat Terry Mac, not just because I'm a Republican and a conservative, or because Mac is a loathsome sleazebag political fixer with no qualifications, but because the only thing I enjoy more than having Republicans win is watching Democrats lose.
But he didn't win. He was never going to win. Not in the Virginia of 2013, not with the enemies he needlessly made within the state GOP, not with the socon profile he assiduously cultivated for several years and then foolishly thought he could drop like it never happened once the time came to run for Governor. And it broke my heart. He's not a bad guy. He would have made a fine governor. But he screwed up, and screwed some people over in the process.
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 01:19 PM (ewYO6)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 01:19 PM (5xmd7)
What's your point?
It's unfair, but the extremism of the left does not get the exposure that extremism of the right does. Yes, it's a double standard, but it's also reality.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 09, 2014 01:20 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at January 09, 2014 01:20 PM (m0h0I)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 09, 2014 01:20 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:20 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:21 PM (3wrJ+)
I said mainstream Christian not mainstream Conservative. Those two are non-congruent in case you're curious. I didn't say majority Christian either, I said mainstream. Ace kept insisting on Biblical inspiration. And while that may be true to a small extent, there is no place in the Bible where there is an explicit, or even implicit ban on oral sex; Furthermore it seems Song Of Solomon implicitly says it's OK. The *most conservative* of the mainstream views is it's OK but you have to make sure you finish PIV with a cream pie. That's the *MOST* you can blame on Christianity. Anything beyond that is definitely off the reservation.
Yes he's right that he will always get the shut-up contingent that don't want to speak ill of any of ours. But that's true on both sides of the conservative fence. Including those defending Christie. So the manufactured (Because it's in the Bible (it's not)) outrage seems a bit misplaced.
This didn't need to be Socons VS everyone else. But the fight got picked right off the get go.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 01:21 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:21 PM (gXRIG)
Part of the problem or circumstance of this is the preponderance of mass media and communication. Everyone knows everything about everything in the click of the mouse or remote. One of the reasons it's so hard for states to be independent is that now everyone in the nation wants to chime in and tell them they have to stop, for whatever reason.
Well that and an un-Constitutional overreaching of the fed.
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 01:23 PM (DV/pZ)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:23 PM (dZQh7)
If the Libertarian candidate (Robert Sarvis) hadn't been on the ballot in 2013 then MacAuliffe would have won by a larger margin than he did. People unfamiliar with the state are deluding themselves if they think that Sarvis' vote was mostly or even majority GOP/right-leaning. It largely came from people disgusted by MacAuliffe (with good reason!) who would either have held their noses and voted for him or otherwise abstained.
It gives me no pleasure to point this out, but it's true.
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 01:24 PM (ewYO6)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:24 PM (gXRIG)
Yes, not being a SoCon, I realize I'm not the right person to stage an intervention. I"m a casual acquaintance, rather than a close friend or family member.
But the SoCons themselves won't do it-- they argue with me until they're blue in the fact that we must not upset the applecart. They're enabling this.
So yes it falls to those outside socon circles to call for the intervention.
Posted by: ace
I'm exacerbated to the point where I think the sensible wing of the Party needs to just go ahead and have a Civil War and get this over with, because it's going to just keep costing us elections until we deal with it forcefully.
When someone pops up like this, conservatives should treat it like David Duke when he tried to run for office. If it pisses off some in our camp, fine, leave. I'd much rather have some freak 1% Theocrat leave than alienate 90% of voters.
If the only thing keeping some in the conservative movement is the idea that politics is the way to bring about Biblical values to the nation, those hopes need to be dashed ASAP.
It might mean we have to carve out a new electorate (I think it's a very small, loud minority) but things are not going to move into the weirdo direction of more laws against sodomy, oral sex, and birth control.
Posted by: McAdams at January 09, 2014 01:24 PM (XU2Z0)
Yeah yeah it is and we should police that shit...
hey remember when Obama tried to nominate this guy?
Kevin Jennings?
Who now since Reid is in fuck filibuster mode would have been confirmed answering no questions?
http://tinyurl.com/aspmsmc
That real enough?
NAMBLA is not shy about their goals. That the media is silent about it does not mean it is not there. I am not saying the "Libertine" GOP is condoning this fucked up democrat excess...
I am saying in pretending like SoCons do not have valid concerns you are again "splinter splitting"
The UK has had quite the scandal of Labour allied celebs engaged in predatory behavior lasting decades.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:25 PM (TE35l)
Ace,
Holy fucking shit. THE BILL HAS HAD THE SAME FUCKING NAME SINCE ELEVENTY!!!!
Look up Think Progress' opposition research on Ken C. that's all you need to know and read.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 01:25 PM (tVTLU)
Sounds like a progressive, using terms for the opposite of their meaning.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 01:26 PM (9CBig)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 09, 2014 01:27 PM (T0NGe)
Ignore the poorly written story and read up on the various links, esp to those concerning the specific legislation.
http://tinyurl.com/kj5yz3m
Posted by: Anon a mouse
No doubt many will find the links in this article by Amanda Marcotte at Slate informative and objective. Especially the ones from MSNBC and Huffpo.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 01:27 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 09, 2014 01:28 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 01:28 PM (0BDj9)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:29 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:29 PM (3wrJ+)
...
>>>And do you think the Left won't notice if we pretend not to?
Anti-Sodomy is a little different than anti-BJ. It is explicitely in the Bible and is widely regarded as sin. Kind of changing the topic there.
THAT SAID NOT I DON'T SUPPORT POLITICIANS THAT HAVE THAT IN THEIR PLATFORM. IT'S NOT A LAW COMPATIBLE WITH A FREE REPUBLIC.
That said. I'm still pro-life, and will likely remain unabashedly so. And I will continue to be anti-gay marriage. So now what?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 01:29 PM (0q2P7)
Ace,
You said this: "Secret's out, guys. Cuccinelli ran on the reinstate-sodomy thing in the primary to win socon votes and, get this, *THE LEFT HEARD ABOUT IT.* "
Where? When? Do we just now say shit. You should be able to provide 3 quotes with cites if this is the case. Lefties would have been all the fuck over this.
I've read the cert petition. Do we understand what the job of AG is? Not one fucking shred of evidence has been provided by you to support the claim that
CUCCINELLI RAN ON THE REINSTATE-SODOMY THING IN THE PRIMARY TO WIN SOCON VOTES.
The tea party has nothing to do with anal sex, btw.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 01:29 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:30 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 01:30 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 01:31 PM (5xmd7)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:31 PM (dZQh7)
Which part of "concerning the specific legislation" didn't sink in, given the context?
Posted by: Anon a mouse
One tends to find MSNBC and Huffpo's evaluation of proposed legislation less than compelling.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 01:31 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:31 PM (gXRIG)
Holy sweet fuck Anon a mouse and Ace:
Consider this hard. You are citing an article written by Amanda fucking Marcotte to "prove" a dem talking point on Ken C.
Wow. Just fucking wow.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 01:32 PM (tVTLU)
Yes Sexypig...
When I write:
I disagree with the guy, were I in the House of Burgesses I would vote, unless the floor fight had a compelling argument against this frippery. He should perhaps have been confronted prior to submission but I REFUSE to pretend this guy is engaged in some unilateral assault on "freedom" whose moral repulsiveness is not FAR superceded by the left.
Let me keep 17 year olds from having sex at gunpoint by the police department is PRECISELY what I meant...
You caught me.....
What the fuck are you missing in my rather long, and for the most part cogent point that the hubris in the GOP Libertine faction right now seems to be that if you can just eject those blasted SoCons flocks of people will rush to you since "wow man the GOP REALLY AIN'T GONNA SEND NUNS INTO MY HOME TO KEEP ME AND MY BABE FROM FUCKING MAN..."
is just there hanging....
The 52% could not evidently be calved on ANY point we made on the economy...
now how much of this was our "brilliance" in nominating ObamaCare's Grandpa and how effective our message got through is well "THE WHOLE GODDAMNED POINT" to figuring out what to do.
You want to blow the GOP's right or left foot off before finding a prosthesis that's your call.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:32 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:32 PM (gXRIG)
No gay marriage sanctioned by government. No abortion on demand. If we can't agree on those we are going to have a serious problem.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 01:32 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 09, 2014 01:32 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:33 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:33 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:33 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:34 PM (dZQh7)
Bullshit, anon a mouse. Don't play that fucking game. You're making an affirmative statement. You're only fucking citation is to that cunt Amanda Marcotte???
I've read it all, including the Think Progress report. And I think it's fucking shameful that the very intelligent people on here, including Ace, are completely misrepresenting Ken C.'s position on this.
If there's some other quote from him which says he can't wait until the homos are considered illegal again and anal sex and BJs are banned for all, I'm waiting on that one. Please, provide some actual fucking facts to back these statements up.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 01:34 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:36 PM (gXRIG)
I am saying acting like that guy engaged in probably parlor show theatrics for his riding is like nominating Kebin Jennings to set "Safe School" Doctine which involves setting the tine of PSAs across the nation in our schools was a bigger fucking deal.
Again for the love of god..
I disagree with the guy, were I in the House of Burgesses I would
vote, unless the floor fight had a compelling argument against this
frippery. He should perhaps have been confronted prior to submission but
I REFUSE to pretend this guy is engaged in some unilateral assault on
"freedom" whose moral repulsiveness is not FAR superceded by the left.
If you are gonna argue with imaginary friends at least imagine me a nice back-pack and rocket sled.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:36 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:36 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: sexypig at January 09, 2014 01:36 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:37 PM (/FnUH)
citing an article written by
No, I specifically mentioned it due to a number of links, several of which back up to data.
Posted by: Anon a mouse
There is one link to a CDC study from which Mandy pulls a chart to spin.
Every other link appears to be a left site.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 09, 2014 01:37 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:38 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:38 PM (3wrJ+)
If we can't agree those are allowable goals, I won't join. You don't have to agree personally. But you have to give me room to believe and lobby for those objectives within the movement.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 01:38 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 09, 2014 01:38 PM (T0NGe)
Ace,
I'm not talking about "anyone finding out" or even this idiot's legislation. I am talking about the fact that the statement that Ken C. was on some campaign to re-ban sodomy among consenting adults
HAS NO SUPPORT WHATSOEVER IN FACT. If I am wrong about this, fair enough.
But I have read the Marcotte piece, I have read the Think Progress piece on Ken C. (not the one you linked). There is no fucking evidence in either citation that supports the claim that Ken C is an anti-sodomy among consenting adults in the privacy of their home crusader.
None.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 01:39 PM (tVTLU)
Discussion of this is fine. But I think calling for "interventions" from people from out of state is anti-republic.
Let VA pass this law if they wish. In three years we can look at the results, good or bad, or point-blank ask them, "how's that law working out for you"? Not having lived there, I don't know if this is a good law for VA. Maybe it is. Maybe it's not. I let VA decide that.
The national consequences? We deal with them and point out VA is within their rights as a state to do this.
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 01:39 PM (DV/pZ)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 09, 2014 01:40 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:40 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:41 PM (gXRIG)
Yeah?
There's been a massive outcry for sodomy laws here? I must have missed it, Political Hat did make an intellectual argument that setting limits doesn't mean they are the Taliban but...
Like I said *I* have made my peace, I am okay with everything the Libertine Right could want from "legalize DIS" diversions that does not harm another.
To the MOON! To the MOON!
That kind of "SoCons(of which I personally try to live as one with comic failure) want Sodomy laws"
Keep it in the age of consent and not in the incest zone and "game on!"
Maybe after 20-45 years we'll get to get some economic liberty passed...
*looks at George Bush signing a light bulb ban*
ohhh
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:41 PM (TE35l)
Eh, maybe so, but not in this case. VA 2013 was a lot more like Oregon in 2000: Bush came within a razor-thin margin (0.4%!) of taking the state from Gore (who held it), but it wasn't because the national GOP brand was suddenly stronger there than at any time either before or afterwards. Rather, it was because Ralph Nader siphoned off a ton of votes (5%) that would have otherwise gone to Gore.
Similarly, a two-man ballot test of Cooch v. Mac in 2013 (where Sarvis won a authentically shocking 6.3% of the vote as a third-party candidate) would have almost certainly been more like a 53-47 victory for Mac than the actual 48-45 outcome.
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 01:42 PM (ewYO6)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 01:42 PM (0BDj9)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 01:43 PM (9CBig)
and by caving to the media and never confronting it hard we will defeat it....
while uh it continues aiding the democrats in splinter splitting...which is precisely what Jim "Gacy" Messina was bragging about.
I'd love for the media to have their dental team on speed dial.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:43 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:43 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Eton Cox (yes, I need to change my sig) at January 09, 2014 01:43 PM (q177U)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:44 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:45 PM (/FnUH)
Guys,
Just calling for a breather here. But I find it highly disturbing that there is not one piece of evidence, at all, that Ken C. 1) made anti-sodomy-among consenting-adults-in-private even a sliver of a campaign issue; 2) took any action or made any statement that is not wholly defensible and/or was his job.
I have read the evidence cited by anon a mouse (a piece by Marcotte, with links). It does not support that claim in the slightest.
Again I ask, why are we so worked up over something that was only made an "issue" by the dem spin machine?
And this latest legislation proposed by a VA delegate that forms the basis of Ace's post, is essentially the exact same legislation proposed by a Dem female VA senator almost a decade ago, same caption for the law as well (w/o sentence enhancements for prostitution sodomy). I guess she was a radical socon as well.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 01:45 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: Lauren at January 09, 2014 01:46 PM (hFL/3)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:46 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 09, 2014 01:46 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:47 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 01:47 PM (mtjSE)
I've been thinking about this sort of thing a lot lately.
It started when the Left declared that..."Everybody Lies!"...in order to excuse Barky's lies about ObamaCare.
If it is true, that 'everybody lies', then the voracity of everything that Man has written is in question.
Science, Religious Texts...everything...everything that has been written by Man, could contain lies that thus render them false and useless.
The Bible has been traditionally used as something 'sacred' that a person must swear an oath of truthfulness upon.
The oath of office, the oath taken in a courtroom...this is done to make a person swear on what is sacred to them, that they will tell the truth and/or faithfully do their duty.
Personally, I don't think that "everybody lies".
But if a person does not hold the Bible sacred...then their swearing an oath upon it is not something that binds them to that oath.
All this path towards 'nothing is sacred' is eroding our premise of Self-Rule.
And it will not end well.
Posted by: wheatie at January 09, 2014 01:47 PM (1ScqE)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 01:47 PM (9CBig)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:48 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: Dr Spank at January 09, 2014 01:48 PM (DpEwG)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:48 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 09, 2014 01:48 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:49 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:50 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:50 PM (3wrJ+)
No gay marriage sanctioned by government. No abortion on demand. If we can't agree on those we are going to have a serious problem.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches.
The problem is, once you open that door, it seems for many (unfortunately) there's no sensible line to be drawn afterwards. Once you go down the road of "abortion should be illegal because it's immoral" logical endpoint is no rape exception, certain birth control being outlawed, and then all other sorts of morality laws.
If the social conservative movement were confined to reasonable limits on abortion and marriage being between one man and one woman, I don't think it would spook the electorate, even those that disagree on those points. But it's not.
I'm against gay marriage, I'll always vote against gay marriage when it comes on the ballot, but I have no doubt that in a few very short years, Republican candidates are not going to be able to run on overturning gay marriage laws and nullifying those unions. What then? Do social conservatives start a new party that runs on that platform?
Posted by: McAdams at January 09, 2014 01:50 PM (XU2Z0)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 09, 2014 01:51 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:51 PM (gXRIG)
SoCon my ass. That's a SoStatist.
Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at January 09, 2014 01:52 PM (kUgpq)
but wait Jack Straw or some other Moderate Avenger will explain "don't be PISSSED OFF AND RAGING OVER THE MODERATES MODERATEY ACTIONS!"
You get it?
The media wanted that idiocy so they are quiet, so now we get patted on the head....with a 15 pound sledgehammer on the "Chimpy Stagnation!" in 2007.
Your "not supporting" the light bulb ban while laudable sorta speaks to the point and the reason I brought up Dr. NAMBLA Safe School Czar....
In the same sense I am told the media is the media suck it up buttercup, I am telling you Reid just proved that the left will set the agenda using that media bias to justify it.
That is why I, who have seldom brought up NAMBLA brought it up when Reid broke the filibuster and now.
You are going to get a LOT of libertine liberty through "maybe" alienating your "sqaures man" social values voter.
I happen to agree with the case for liberty, BUT you are going to witness the PERVERSE magic capability of the Donks being able to run Keith Richards as a Values Voter candidate if Windy Davis as the most Child Friendly Family Values Gal in Texas is an indicator.
THAT is why I am leery of this little exercise in "purge the heretic XIANIST!"
The Xian is trying to use his power to protect against something(I'll grant is an overreach on his part) he thinks is a threat.
I'd prefer to talk 'em down rather than jettison them into space.
"Sorry"
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 01:52 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:52 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 01:54 PM (9CBig)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:54 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:54 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:55 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:56 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at January 09, 2014 01:56 PM (kUgpq)
Posted by: Soona at January 09, 2014 01:57 PM (DV/pZ)
Posted by: Anon a mouse at January 09, 2014 01:58 PM (gXRIG)
Posted by: BSR (aka Rifle) at January 09, 2014 01:58 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 09, 2014 01:58 PM (g1DWB)
Hey, all I want socons to do is recognize that the rest of us in their coalition won't support law that purport to felonize the private sexual behavior of consenting adults (or, in the present case, parties of equal age).
If you've got a problem with that, then guess what: we're gonna have to disagree, and strongly so.
Posted by: Jeff B. 2.0 - newly upgraded with fiancee! at January 09, 2014 01:59 PM (ewYO6)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 01:59 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 01:59 PM (5xmd7)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 02:00 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 02:01 PM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Jenny Hates Her Phone at January 09, 2014 02:02 PM (0BDj9)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 02:02 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 02:02 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette: Winter Borscht at January 09, 2014 02:03 PM (IXrOn)
Posted by: VW Van Bumper Sticker at January 09, 2014 02:03 PM (3wrJ+)
Posted by: VW Van Bumper Sticker at January 09, 2014 02:04 PM (3wrJ+)
Winner, winner, chicken dinner.
Posted by: FITP
That's news to me.
Posted by: SFGoth at January 09, 2014 02:06 PM (9CBig)
Posted by: Dr Spank at January 09, 2014 02:08 PM (DpEwG)
Yeah and hey don't worry because "laws"...oh?
Oh yeah laws...like the ACA and the Pot laws up in NY....
I mean why the fuck are we even arguing this it is not like legislatures mean shit anyway now right?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:08 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i] [/b] [/s] [/u] at January 09, 2014 02:09 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 02:10 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 02:10 PM (5xmd7)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 02:11 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 02:14 PM (/FnUH)
Oh now...that's where we get the schizoid and must be experienced to be believed"
1) CW Cooke types(ostensibly a right leaning down the middle straight shooter) saying "if this were Rahm you'd be pissed"
yeah no shit imagine that hey its Christie I am pissed do I get the "what a very modern model of the very mobile moderate major general" badge?
2) SE Cupp saying "eh if he did it resign!"
Housepet versus old tigress kitty thanks SE
3) Kurt Schlichter saying (and I agree) fuck him throw him under the bus run as ethical reformers
and the M$M reporting Christie is wildly popular with conservatives and we are defending him
while Politico says "(evil) conservatives are using this as an opportunity to tee off on a moderate they dislike"
But yeah I totally believe that after this internal winnowing of who "is allowed" to be elected in the GOP we will get right on grabbing X% of "really good but scared by*insert icky x* type of GOPers we got to go to the back of the bus"
Yup yup
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:14 PM (TE35l)
Again the Yasser Arafat analogy occurs to me. I'm wondering if it's a case of some things only being intended for some audiences, while the rest of us are supposed to pretend we didn't hear it.
Posted by: ace
It's almost like African-Americans in this country, they circle the wagons, even around the idiots, because it's always us vs them. The end result is T-Shirts with Trayvon Martin on them.
What I don't understand is, is there an epidemic of child molestation cases being lost in criminal court because the victim was sodomized or there was oral sex involved?
I don't buy it for a minute, it's simply no different than "we need more food stamps so children won't starve to death" even though there's actually an obesity epidemic among poor children. It's all about misdirection.
Posted by: McAdams at January 09, 2014 02:15 PM (XU2Z0)
Hey man...the moderate wing not attacking the EPA regulatory fiat hyperstate at EPA and Interior and H+HS was just an oversight man...they'll get on THAT liberty later.."
The moderates get a fistful of indulgences to destroy the soundness of this coalition....
they have pissed off Fi-Cons and So-Cons both but because the media hates them least they escape blame....
It's like being 8 years old in a house of drunks again.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:17 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Big Ol Fat Guy at January 09, 2014 02:17 PM (BpQmM)
Abortion should be illegal because it harms another person that has rights. Just like every other positive law. Bright line, you missed it.
Gay marriage should be not government sanctioned because marriage can only logically exist in a Republic in one of two states. Under the control of government because concerns about human reproduction trump human freedom to associate how they please, Oh BTW as a Republic, said control must be limited conceptually to that design in order to limit intrusion. OR Not under government control whatsoever. Government records name changes, next of kin, but does not recognize anyone as being "married" to anyone else. Let them draft their own marriage contracts privately. No middle ground where any human coupling relationship sexual and non-sexual is potentially the governments interest for regulation and control. If you want the libertarian route the second approach is appropriate.
Third if I can't lobby for these things. My interest drops WAAAAAY down.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 02:17 PM (0q2P7)
The President of the United States tried to put a NAMBLA type in charge of the literature and guidelines for teaching "safety" and "normalcy" to the public schools and it was only through the efforts of the web and a slice of the GOP that was stopped...
Nambla openly consorts with the media's designated heroes, I can't understand why the crazy Xianists are a little bit nervous about normalcy.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:19 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 02:19 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 02:20 PM (5xmd7)
Posted by: The Political Hat at January 09, 2014 02:20 PM (XvHmy)
yeah..I've been generally "pro-sex" and hey I had multiple partners before age 18 including a 27 year old woman...
I am absolutely a prude.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:20 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 02:21 PM (5xmd7)
I don't understand why it is "last shot" I guess they signed a contract in blood?
This is what makes me wary of the repeal of ObamaCare even with it 48% for outright repeal...
over time the lobbyist who gets their cookie starts buying the moderates on the other side.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:22 PM (TE35l)
Why is that exactly? Oh that's right for the Children....
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 02:23 PM (0q2P7)
Hat "Liberty" means "do whatever I want" that's why the founders had no sodomy laws, no public executions, no fraud laws and no restrictions on sufferage...
We've lost the argument, now do you understand "to the moon?"
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:24 PM (TE35l)
Nice flippancy toward 2000 years of philosophy written by folks much smarter than anyone here.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Laughing Maniacally While Throwing Matches. at January 09, 2014 02:26 PM (0q2P7)
Ace said use the google machine, so I did:
After the Sup Ct's ruling on sodomy, in Jan. 2004, the VA House passed a bill which would have changed their "crimes against nature" law to make it explicit that it only applied to such acts committed in public, as it applied to consenting adults.
that was approved in the VA House 96-1. Quite a few dems in that tally. Must be dem socon taliban dems...
When it moved to the Sen., I cannot figure out what happened with this House version. But apparently it stalled and did not pass the VA Sen., which is described by Think Progress as moderate - so likely dem/RINO controlled.
Va Sen. Patsy Ticer introduced a different bill, the provisions of which we only have one quote, provided thanks to Think Progress. But Ticer's bill had language that stated as follows, amending the Crimes Against Nature (note this crazy dem kept the same title) statute:
"shall not apply where all persons are consenting adults who are not in a public place and who are not aiding, abetting, procuring, engaging in or performing any act in furtherance of prostitution"
As to the sodomy among consenting adults in private issue: it appears that the VA House bill is the same as Ticer's bill. So my guess is that there is something else in Ticer's proposed bill that Ken C. opposed.
Perhaps thru some legislative quirk, the rabid socon bill prohibiting anal sex in public never became law, or was blocked by VA Sen dems who wanted broader sodomy protection.
But by using Occam's razor (i.e. take the opposite position of A. Marcotte and you are bound to be right) it turns out that lo and behold the smear against Ken C of kicking in the doors to your next swinger's party of consenting adults is totally fucking bullshit.
This Crimes Against Nature statute, perhaps by some legislative fluke, but was never adjusted to simply ban public sodomy. And of course, it was never used ever to prosecute consenting adults, but was connected to a ton of other statutes, one purpose was to get sentence enhancements for child predators.
And on that basis, Ken C. defended the statute, as was his job as AG. GWB's lawyers SUPPORTED THE FUCKING DC HANDGUN BAN, even though they may not have wanted to. All the way to the Sup Ct. Discretion much? Ken C. was worried, rightly so, that a declaration of facial invalidity might let child predators on the loose. Now did he also think that the religious right might like his stance, sure, I suppose that's a consideration and maybe in his dark heart it was equal to child rapists walking the street.
But I prefer to get the fucking facts before I help Kos, Think Progress, and a. Marcotte build the strawman and accuse Ken C of wanting to impose sharia law. And the facts do not support such a conclusion, not in the least.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 02:27 PM (tVTLU)
Well not smarter than Gerg, Gerg gets volcanoes into finished and processed movies.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:27 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 02:28 PM (RJMhd)
This is why Obama's overreaches are "the new normal" prescient...
people forget...it was their job to enforce and defend the law...like that whole oath thing...
Before MomJeans made fiat the new "breathe"
If the SoCons are somehow a bigger enemy than the media and the left it is a neat place we're in.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:29 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 02:30 PM (KHo8t)
SoCons - um I'm confused. I don't know any of these fringe radical kooks. Why are you pointing at me?
Dems - Gay Marriage - LEGALIZED , Pot - LEGALIZED, DADT - GONE, Obamacare - UP YOUR ASS, Sheila Jackson Lee , Sexualization and homosexual indoctrination of children, NAMBLA , Harry Reid.
Libertine FiCons - Damn SOCONS!
Posted by: noone, really [/i] [/b] at January 09, 2014 02:32 PM (5ikDv)
Sure they are, that's why they threw their Luap Nor fit and in some states cost us seats in 2006 by sitting out or write ins...
because nothing says "Liberty" like Nancy Pelosi.
Look I get it nothing comes in importance before the diversions...it is VITAL as we set up this Mos Eisley Hedonist Anarchy that you prioritize your santa list to alienate a big party of the base.
It is that kind of genius thinking that damn near cost us 2004 and didn't exactly help in 2008.
If SoCons get to shut the fuck up and just vote baby what precisely are you giving up?
Fi-Con firsters have given up well hope, breathing, dreams, critical thinking skills, their self-respect...
What precisely will LIBERTY AVENGER allow to be further down the list of to do items for harmony?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:34 PM (TE35l)
Hey you get it.
You forgot //Luap Nor Kult care of Knott's Berry Farm
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:35 PM (TE35l)
dick and dope
Posted by: noone, really [/i] [/b] at January 09, 2014 02:36 PM (5ikDv)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 02:37 PM (RJMhd)
and that is why I have started making the case for "To THE MOON!"
If we're doomed to be fucked we may as well buy the Libertines a great time with our Barry Bucks.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:37 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 02:38 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 02:39 PM (RJMhd)
Hey you get it.
Yeah I am preparing for my run for election as Chief Theocrat of my local hive-mind.
I am hoping at some point to attain the post of U.S. Pastor-General .
Posted by: noone, really [/i] [/b] at January 09, 2014 02:39 PM (5ikDv)
Posted by: AMinVA at January 09, 2014 02:40 PM (KaofE)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 02:40 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Rich Fader at January 09, 2014 02:40 PM (pZ0kE)
Sven:
I could not agree more. What troubles me most is the intellectual dishonesty here.
I am staunchly opposed to regulating bedroom behaviour between consenting adults. But at the same time I also know what a smear campaign is and this one reeked of it.
And when you get down to the actual facts, there are none. So why are we the ones up in arms about this? Why aren't we leading Ken C.'s defense?
Ace seems to imply that of course Ken C. was lying when he said it was for the CHILDRENZ, but that has no basis except for conjecture. Now I'm sure some motivation was to appease/appeal to the religious right by fighting for the statute, sure, but can we at least apply a "rational basis" standard of review before we go killing members of our own party???? Is it our job to impugn horrible motives to our candidates?
Not one shred of evidence I have seen indicates that Ken C. ever intended to use the sodomy statute against consenting adults in the privacy of their own home.
In fact, I challenge anyone to find such a "prosecution" in the last 50 years. The Lawrence case was a total fucking setup. Defendants were actors, the police and prosecutors were the directors, and the Supreme Court the stage.
Other than this "fake case", use the google machine folks, and find me one other such case.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 02:41 PM (tVTLU)
And you, of course, will decide who is who.
Posted by: noone, really [/i] [/b] at January 09, 2014 02:42 PM (5ikDv)
That's right because "Freedom" well unless you want to you know have a strong military, or uh you know have the Fed or uh...
Champ changing the law to no law is changing the law, and totally unrestricted freedom is not freedom it is license.
I'll ask again since none of the Luap Nor FREEDOM AVENGERS answered...
the founders they didn't have any sodomy laws, no blue laws, no habit of surveillance when warranted?
Ia m a libertairan a small "l" libertarian and weed and other intoxicants...
way down the priority list, Luap Nor Kult empowered the democrats with their butthurt starting in 06 to try to force the SoCons out.
What precisely are YOU willing to reprioritize to forge a coalition Freedom Avenger?
I had to give up Fiscal COnservatism to fight a thankless war a lot of libertarians acted out against almost to the extremes of code pink while watching the economic liberty I cherished drip away....
That is what I ceded....
what does Luap Nor fan cede?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:43 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Obama Administration at January 09, 2014 02:43 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 02:44 PM (KHo8t)
Finally, to summarize, the sodomy warriors here have pointed to Ken C.'s vote on one bill in the VA Sen in 2004 (I am excusing his appeal to the Sup. Ct. b/c that was his job).
After Lawrence, 2 versions of bills were going around in VA. All we know about the VA House version is that it banned sodomy in public. This is the rabid socon VA House. That bill passed 96-1.
All we know about the VA Sen bill, the one Ken C. voted against in committee, is that it banned sodomy in public. Hmmmmm. Perhaps there were other things in that bill.
I guess the VA House bill never passed the seante and the VA Sen bill never passed the house, so we were stuck with the old bill that was now unconstitutional per the Sup. Ct.
Unfortunately, that bill was connected to a lot of other provisions/statutes and if it was struck down in toto Ken C.'s publicly stated motivation was that it could really unleash a lot of child predators that still were prosecuted, or sentences enhanced, under that provision. That's some real sharia law shit right there. Wow.
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 02:48 PM (tVTLU)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 02:48 PM (mtjSE)
right but you make the judgement call on what to about each....
To a San Francisco Democrat I probably am the Taliban, to a person from Many Louisiana I am psychotic free market hippy, to a New yorker a rube, to a rural Pennsylvanian I am a city slicker...
but Luap Nor cult gets to decide what the SoCon demarcator is...well along with the always happy to lead FREEDOM AVENGER around by the nose Infotainment Media complex....
Like a cow with a ring through its nose.
I'll ask again what do YOU cede?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:49 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 02:50 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at January 09, 2014 02:53 PM (m0h0I)
You should try Hari Krishna it has as much chance of ever getting done all at once.
What will YOU cede?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:54 PM (TE35l)
and that is where it all falls apart....
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:54 PM (TE35l)
and economic freedom.....uh after a few things like....
uh dope and dope
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 02:58 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 03:01 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 03:02 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 03:05 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 03:07 PM (mtjSE)
I live on a US military base having been chasing the spouse for going on 17 years now...
*if* there is dope smoking going on in mil housing its subtle, AND oddly I don't inquire.
This is the MOST important fallen liberty there is to pick up is it?
"Ok"
I helped a buddy who is an ATC up north get off the pot, he helped me kick my kicks....
I'll ask again.
1) what will you cede?
2) you never did get around to explaining why *my* former kicks should not be legal
See there's always limits with libertarians because of differing morals the narcissism is they each mentally think THEY draw the line but never speak of the line openly.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 03:08 PM (TE35l)
Got any real life successful examples of your version of libertarianism that are NOT in a book?
Posted by: noone, really [/i] [/b] at January 09, 2014 03:09 PM (5ikDv)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 03:10 PM (5xmd7)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 03:10 PM (KHo8t)
Well Dr. Paul says....
I still haven't gotten an answer on whether or not the founders of the mythical FREEDOM AVENGER past that we have betrayed had sodomy, blue, or espionage laws....
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 03:11 PM (TE35l)
Recreational use of amphetamines and depressants without a prescription while a minor.
I was told by the peanut gallery, no man meth is too far and coke is too far one of y'all said pills are bad for you man
well yeah that's why "quit" but I am dying to know why YOUR kicks are the prime issue on the planet and why my former kicks are verboten and how that squares with painting your face blue and yelling FREEEEEDDDDOOOOMMMM!
while trying to deny representation to "So-statists" as a libertarian virtue.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 03:14 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at January 09, 2014 03:16 PM (m0h0I)
Western state Amerindian tribes used peyote and mushrooms...for religious purposes!
What a bunch of Sostatists.
Posted by: noone, really [/i] [/b] at January 09, 2014 03:18 PM (5ikDv)
I love it when I am called a so-statist, statist, fascist...
you know me DDR, am I am "Talibanish SoCon?"
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 03:19 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 03:20 PM (KHo8t)
In my "no really the spliff guy is the MORE libertarian!" reset on AmerInds...
I'd accept being put on a rez similar to the Natives if I could get a nice cup of "leave me the fuck be" from the goddamned Pelosi wing.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 03:20 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at January 09, 2014 03:22 PM (m0h0I)
My line is that that is a freedom that is supposed to be a reward for using economic liberty to create stability.
I don't go around dropping dime I am not a hypocrite.
My line now is as I said "to the MOON!"
Since the Libertines and the Hedonists of both parties want to get the rewards before the chores I am fully in favor of ANYTHING goes for intoxicants.
Your body you call....
I'll even back subsidy though those that have put up with me here these years KNOW how much I hate them.
Ounces, pounds, or tons?
The worse your economic circumstance gets the cheaper I'll sell 'em to you for until finally FREE delivered by the USPS right to your door since FREEEDDDDOOOOMMMM.
I am all in X what are YOU willing to cede since you couldn't be assed to get a sound economy first it must be something else that's big...
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 03:24 PM (TE35l)
Anyway, it's good to see you DDR.
I've missed you around since I took the trip.
I hope all is well.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 03:25 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 03:30 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 03:35 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 03:35 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 03:37 PM (mtjSE)
YES "sorta"...I am not yet in a position to execute but there is definitely the presence of the materials necessary at a not too prohibitive price point.
When wife settles on a locale and I get the haulin' biz going I will slowly husband my resources towards that goal and eventually I hope generator rental.
I have a plan for interlocking economic activities if I can get it going.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 03:38 PM (TE35l)
Prescient, this argument is absurd.
What you're saying is: it's silly to criticize and object to awful legislation (awful, looking at the letter of the law and its clear implications, awful ways it can legally be enforced), because of course we can and should trust instead the GOOD INTENTIONS, the promises, the words of a POLITICIAN (the spirit of the law in Cucc's heart). Silly to worry about seemingly awful law, when of course can and should trust a politician (one of "ours", after all) who promises the law will be interpreted/ enforced only in a "good" way, not a "bad" way.
(And he can guarantee this how, and for how long? NB a politician with a finite term, vs. legislation apt to remain on the books for decades. I'm sure we can always trust that future AGs will be just as well-intentioned, right? And all of law enforcement, all prosecutors in the state, too. Silly not to trust their good intentions.)
How paranoid of us, to worry about the consequences of the actual letter of a law, upset how it abridges and infringes on individual freedom, when we should know better and trust in the good intentions of a "good guy" ("one of us") like Cucc.
What philistines we are, who look only at the (terrible) letter of a law instead of its (oh so righteous, well-intentioned) spirit, i.e. the good intentions of the politicians who drafted and advocated the law (it's for the children!).
By that logic, all the Dems were correct to bash conservatives who've long opposed Obamacare, the letter of the law itself, when we could and should rely and trust the spirit of Obamacare, Obama's promises and good intentions about what the law means, its motives and intentions, and how it would be interpreted and enforced.
Absurd.
Posted by: lael at January 09, 2014 03:39 PM (yrklk)
Posted by: DamnDirtyRINO at January 09, 2014 03:39 PM (m0h0I)
No no see I contend you took your cookie first as cause and demand piety from it or you seed discord in the caucus champ I didn't say what is Santa's list I said what are you willing to cede for party harmony?
I'll keep waiting.
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 03:40 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: Malcolm Tent at January 09, 2014 03:41 PM (BKHpB)
Posted by: grammie winger at January 09, 2014 03:49 PM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 03:51 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 03:54 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 03:55 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: Malcolm Tent at January 09, 2014 03:56 PM (BKHpB)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 03:59 PM (KHo8t)
everybody on this board has surrendered something on their gift list for party harmony...
I have been relatively silent on the spending and our refusal to undo the intrusions on the market...
SoCons have watched their mores lose protection and abortion not get controlled.
What does Luap Nor give?
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 04:01 PM (TE35l)
I've been credited with being the sexual police for not supporting a bill I would never have wrote...
it was an interesting thread ma'am..
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 04:03 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 04:03 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 04:07 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 04:08 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 04:10 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: grammie winger at January 09, 2014 04:12 PM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 04:17 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i] [/b] [/s] [/u] at January 09, 2014 04:18 PM (qyfb5)
They don't care to know the truth Grammie.
That would disabuse them of the boogey man they use to explain why we keep losing.
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 04:18 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 04:21 PM (5xmd7)
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 04:24 PM (mtjSE)
My favorite is "dismantle or reduce by 86% the US military"...
yeah we're not at war with a genuine Theocratic Death Cult or anything....
I'm sure they'll just calm right the fuck down like they did when we elected our first closeted Muslim President...
Posted by: Sven 10077 at January 09, 2014 04:30 PM (TE35l)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 04:32 PM (KHo8t)
So.....what you are saying is that the Libertarians can't even agree on a platform?
Hell, the GOP at least agrees on a platform......many don't actually "follow" it, but they at least agree to one.
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 04:37 PM (mtjSE)
You're in favor of laws against sodomy and don't mind people "expressing their traditional beliefs through force of law."
I'm tired of it.
I don't care what the Bible says about sodomy. I certainly don't care what it says about sodomy in the context of making *LAWS* that carry *PRISON SENTENCES.*
You think this is just jake. Fine. But I depart.
Posted by: ace at January 09, 2014 02:56 PM (/FnUHt)
Guess why murder's against the law? 'Cause it's in the Bible. Sorry, but America's entire foundation of what is right and what is wrong is based on the Bible. Judeo-Christian values. And guess what else? There are *LAWS* against murder that carry *PRISON SENTENCES*, too, and it's because of the Bible.
Posted by: Aslan's Girl at January 09, 2014 04:39 PM (KL49F)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 04:45 PM (KHo8t)
Posted by: X at January 09, 2014 04:49 PM (KHo8t)
think most GOP politicians small government talk is bullshit
THIS is the real problem. As I've said before, SoCons were willing to take a back seat before in exhange for incremental work on their issues coupled with Fiscal sanity. The compact has been broken....SoCons feel "you won't work towards my goals, you've proven yourself irresponsible in financial matters, and you are getting involved in shit you have NO business doing (No Child Left Behaind, Immigration Reform etc). So WHY in the hell am I turning out to vote for you again? On top of that, they are blamed for every ill that has befallen a party that they have loyally contributed time and money too and turned out to vote for.
I think the GOP is in for a very rude awakening. I KNOW that I will vote in the primaries (something I never used to do). And I KNOW that if my guy doesn't win, I will not vote for the R (Lamar Alexander will NEVER get another vote from me...In fact, I may vote Dem.
But you can't get anyone here OR in the GOP to listen....You've got nowhere else to go, they say. Well, yes I do....right here on my couch or to the dark side. The GOP is pushing some of its most faithful into the corner and daring them to jump.
Posted by: FITP at January 09, 2014 04:55 PM (mtjSE)
Posted by: line and squiggle at January 09, 2014 04:56 PM (R6JT1)
Posted by: Corona at January 09, 2014 05:19 PM (fh2Y7)
Posted by: Mr Estrada at January 09, 2014 05:31 PM (5piqN)
I was only talking about America's founding, which was AFTER the Bible.
Not sure about all societies before the Bible, but there were plenty of cultures where leaving an unwanted baby to die from "exposure", sacrificing virgins to the gods, cannibalism, etc was most certainly legal and encouraged. There are cultures today where murder is legal (Sharia law).
Posted by: Aslan's Girl at January 09, 2014 05:44 PM (KL49F)
Posted by: The Hobo Hooker, Waitress, Model, Actress, Wears Prada at January 09, 2014 07:02 PM (GeVLX)
Posted by: I'd rather be surfin at January 09, 2014 07:15 PM (npokn)
Posted by: prescient11 at January 09, 2014 07:27 PM (l5ZHm)
There is no 11th Commandment demanding one put their trust in big gubermint to deal with people's minor sins.
Nor is there a 12th Commandment that allows one to cherry pick some Commandments and ignore others...
If one feels some devilish perversion that makes it difficult to focus outside of other people's bedrooms -- learn to ignore it. It's just the devil distracting one from the more important stuff going on.
The relevant issues of the day are replacing Obamacare and promoting main street jobs through economic liberty (not more big gubermint spending).
Posted by: Seipherd at January 09, 2014 09:06 PM (AortR)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 09, 2014 10:09 PM (d6Cvf)
Posted by: Tom at January 09, 2014 10:55 PM (UGZV0)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 10, 2014 02:31 AM (TE35l)
Posted by: grammie winger at January 10, 2014 04:02 AM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: anon a mouse at January 10, 2014 04:43 AM (gXRIG)
Posted by: X at January 10, 2014 06:29 AM (KHo8t)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at January 10, 2014 09:50 AM (il1Hy)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at January 10, 2014 10:04 AM (il1Hy)
Earlier in the 20th Century, most SoCons were populists, completely on board with government economic intervention, and in the Democratic Party.
They are in the Republican Party because the socialist kicked them out of the Democratic Party.
Posted by: Kristophr at January 10, 2014 10:08 AM (c6N69)
Like you were kicked off this website?
I enjoy how you and your Paultard ilk paint Socons with your superior asshole attitude and giant sweeping kook brush.
Good luck with your next candidate's failure. It will be spectacular.
Posted by: noone, really [/i] [/b] at January 10, 2014 11:22 AM (5ikDv)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at January 10, 2014 12:21 PM (5xmd7)
"I don't support this rule. I used to see in the value in it but I no longer do."
I've never liked the "ignore your principles for power" thing either, but serious Ace when was the last time you didn't leap first in line to kick the pills of a Republican for saying something the culture thought was dumb or wrong?
If you ever thought you should stand by Republicans for the sake of unity, you hid it really well.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at January 10, 2014 01:21 PM (zfY+H)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3265 seconds, 1265 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at January 09, 2014 10:37 AM (XWw96)