Take that, you slackers in Minnesota and Oklahoma. You know what else we didn’t have in Arkansas? Disastrous Hurricanes. Take note, Jindal. And terrorist-hijacked planes flying into skyscrapers? Not part of the Huckabee record, unlike others on this p…

El amor de la madre…para su hijo.

Also, please get better at sarcasm, or else Mark Twain will come and git you.

Please tell me this farce of a campaign run for him is going to be ending soon.

LOL. That was not an obscene note to you! I hit the “submit comment” button by mistake.

What I meant to say was – For someone who admires Mark Twain as much as you do, you are certainly weak at recognizing sarcasm.

My point was that you are making no sense.

F

I have no idea what your point is.

Buy Danish on December 15, 2007 at 11:46 PM

Why am I not surprised.

There is probably nothing he has ever done or ever could do that you could not explain away to yourself.

La madre del amor es verdaderamente ciego para su hijo.

Thank you.

You have just helped to make her, and my, point. Good job!

MB4 on December 15, 2007 at 7:37 PM

No, I most certainly did not! Anna Quindlen’s point is that it is impossible to be “pro-choice” and be in favor of “strict constructionist judges”. Apparently Ms. Quindlen believes that if one is pro-choice (as she is) then abortion rights must be protected “by any means necessary” and judges should legislate from the bench.

I have no idea what your point is.

MB4 likes Romney and Fred so he is not invested in only one candidate, but his positions on Rudy are so out of whack they may require an exorcist’s help.

Buy Danish on December 15, 2007 at 6:52 PM

I think that it is Rudolfo who may need the exorcist. He is the one who behaves like Sybil and in front of the whole nation!

suffice it to say that the cross-dressing argument is really silly

It is not silly at all as it is a metaphor for him and his positions, like “I voted for it before I voted against it” was for J F’ing and that tank ride was for Dukakis.

It’s too difficult to imagine that someone could be “pro-choice” and still want to appoint a judge who follows the constitution!

Thank you.

You have just helped to make her, and my, point. Good job!

One Rudy seems to think that pro-choice, including partial birth abortion, is constitutional, unless you think that he would want something unconstitutional to be done, and the other Rudy seems to be pro-life by the justices he claims he would appoint, unless you think that he would want to appoint someone who would do what he thinks unconstitutional.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Giuliani.

Which is real and which is the impostor?

I think I know.

But then I am not Rudy’s mother.

I’m on the way out the door, and really don’t want to get into a debate about how much of a sinner Rudy is, but suffice it to say that the cross-dressing argument is really silly, and Reagan was twice-married, although not a Catholic.

You and MB4 can discuss that. As I have said many times, as a long-suffering New Yorker who really does know what a liberal is, Rudy was a great Mayor and judging from his performance, which featured conservative ideas, he would make a fine President.

Buy Danish on December 15, 2007 at 7:06 PM

I don’t have any trouble with Rudy’s competence nor his rational faculty, it’s his moral judgement I find lacking. Perhaps if he picks a pro-life VP to balance him and his court picks out I shall consider voting for him. Otherwise I would be hard pressed to choose between a fratboy/Marxist jackboot fembot and the cross-dressing thrice-married lapsed Catholic.

You assume stares’ rights are paramount. They are not. Try again.

Big S on December 15, 2007 at 6:38 PM

They are in some cases, and aren’t in others. That’s the point. You don’t want them to be in the case of abortion, but you undoubtedly do in some other cases.

And, that’s my Spirit of 1776 :)

Entelechy on December 15, 2007 at 6:58 PM

To be sure, that was in response to your 6:46 comment. All the best, always,

Rudolpho has far too many skeletons in his closet and his idea that religion needs to be more inclusive of sin (as opposed to sinners) is a non-starter.

BKennedy on December 15, 2007 at 6:58 PM

You and MB4 can discuss that. As I have said many times, as a long-suffering New Yorker who really does know what a liberal is, Rudy was a great Mayor and judging from his performance, which featured conservative ideas, he would make a fine President.

Huckabee is to conservatism what Al Gore is to energy conservation.

Huckabee is to conservatism what Rosy O’Donnell is to beauty.

Huckabee is to conservatism what Bill Clinton is to honesty.

MB4 on December 15, 2007 at 6:38 PM

How can you not like this? How can you argue against this?

And, JiangxiDad, thanks for reminding us that we’re not a democracy. I can always count on your good reasoning :)

Buy Danish on December 15, 2007 at 6:52 PM

Romney is my top pick with Fred as a reliable second and McCain a distant, distant third. Mike is the least viable pro-life candidate and his other credentials are sorely, sorely lacking.

Rudolpho has far too many skeletons in his closet and his idea that religion needs to be more inclusive of sin (as opposed to sinners) is a non-starter.

And, that’s my Spirit of 1776 :)

Entelechy on December 15, 2007 at 6:31 PM

Have a great time! I don’t care that you mistook me for a gentleman, I just wasn’t sure if that comment was meant for me or not.

MB4 likes Romney and Fred so he is not invested in only one candidate, but his positions on Rudy are so out of whack they may require an exorcist’s help.

I am not overly invested in any one candidate, although I prefer Rudy and Romney, and do not want McCain or Huckabee (and Paul who does not count) to be the candidate. Indeed, I have been as fair as I can be about Huckabee but not a day goes by where he does not disappoint – and worse.