Funny! I thought the mythbusters thing funny because I know that I would never do that. It’s not so much about prettiness, but trying to be classy. I don’t burp in public either.

Call me weird.

Grab a set of cojones men! Stop analyzing and utilize your vote. Vote for what you believe in and the person that most represents that philosophy. Whoever ends up on top after that will be good to go and you won’t smell the stench as you’re leaving the booth.

Sultry Beauty on January 8, 2008 at 7:14 PM

I’d start the recriminations of the country in about 2-3 months, when we have two liberals competing for the crown. Huck and any leftie will represent no philosophy for conservatives. McCain? Giuliani? Will require compromises. As I and others have said, we see more nobility in staying home and not selling our soul to keep the GOP in the White House. For some of us, unless that name is Hunter or Thompson (or, god forbid, Bolton as veep), there really is no point but to wait for the country to wake up from its spoiled dream of freedom without sacrifice.

Even sadder is the hem-hawing, unpricipaled mass of conservatives that let two states dictate to them who they’re going to let compromise their conservative principals, dragging their tails between their legs, and holding their noses while they pull the lever. The compromising and pondering on whose less worse, a hand of boogers or a hand of crap. Then all I’ll see here for the next four years is the complaining about how bad the country’s going down the toilet because our conservative philosophy isn’t being practiced.

Grab a set of cojones men! Stop analyzing and utilize your vote. Vote for what you believe in and the person that most represents that philosophy. Whoever ends up on top after that will be good to go and you won’t smell the stench as you’re leaving the booth.

Ot, but if you guys want to see an funny video I found.

Quid pro quo (from a Brit comedy show).

As a side note, did you guys hear Glenn Beck today? He was still on pain medication and he was making fun of the Hillary “cry” and it was HILARIOUS. OMG! I almost fell out of my car laughing.

Ot, but if you guys want to see an funny video I found. “Do pretty girls poot?” it’s pretty funny. From Mythbusters.

Wow. For a moment, you steer back the conversation to sanity, and while I’m responding, you drag it back to your own personal vindiction over my remembering your hypocrisy from thread to thread. The hell with it, I’m done with your games.

MadisonConservative on January 8, 2008 at 6:24 PM

You’re right. I tried to do that, but no sooner had I posted my on topic comment, I saw you second disgusting hotel room allusion for the day. It must be my fault that you made those comments in the first place!

As for your response to the original question, I still don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. Why do you care if Mitt decides to “fritter” away his own fortune? You can always donate to his campaign if you don’t like the idea of candidates spending their own money. The idea that having candidates who have earned great fortunes is endangering the reputation of the Republican Party is fatuous and sounds like an argument to elect Huck or Edwards.

I also disagree with your assessment of why Giuliani is running. Rudy was a miraculously effective mayor and I have no doubt that he is motivated by a desire to do more great things for this country.

MadisonConservative on January 8, 2008 at 6:33 PM

Yes, I understand that. That is one of the problems with the web, a lack of accountability which removes the social boundaries people use in public. Which brings up an interesting question on whether that is a compensation for real-world frustrations or the true personality that is hidden in the real world. Frankly, I’m curious, but I digress.

I’d like to see…

Precisely. Your desire – for vicarious purposes.

Then we can finally see Allah on Olbermann, ripping him to bits.

That would be awesome. Fun for the whole family!:) But when Michelle was insulted earlier last year, he said one of his only regrets was the blog (respectability, etc I imagine) kept him from responding as he, to our entertainment, would like to.

Where were yall discussing Beck?

Rightwingsparkle on January 8, 2008 at 6:29 PM

There was a headline with an update on his status. The number of people who found the gall to lament his “whining” over his apparent waking up during an operation was mildly disturbing.

No, standing up for Beck is fine, great even. Assuming the authority to tell people to get lost on a blog that’s not moderated by you – yeah, that beta. Saying things like ‘I don’t have final say but’ when you have no say – yeah, that’s beta. That’s thumping your chest like a peacock. Not have magnanimity to shut down your feud with BD – yeah, that’s beta. Ain’t no thing, there’s tons of betas in the world, I’m just pointing it out ’cause you said you implied you were not. Cheers:)

Spirit of 1776 on January 8, 2008 at 6:11 PM

Amazing timing, bolded bit above. Aside from that, people who take full advantage of their anonymity to act like the most obnoxious twit possible tend to annoy me, especially when the last time someone did that, it ended up on C&L. I’d like to see this blog garner enough legitimacy that it’s more referenced than Kos. Then we can finally see Allah on Olbermann, ripping him to bits.

Buy Danish on January 8, 2008 at 6:18 PM

Wow. For a moment, you steer back the conversation to sanity, and while I’m responding, you drag it back to your own personal vindiction over my remembering your hypocrisy from thread to thread. The hell with it, I’m done with your games.

That’s thumping your chest like a peacock.

lol, English foul. Mixed metaphor by me!

What do you mean when you say you’re questioning whether it was wise? Do you mean to say that it would have been wiser if he had spent less money? Do you think he’s just a loser and shouldn’t have bothered? Or is it something else?

Do you agree with r2b when he says, “If he doesn’t win, he is just another Perot, or Forbes…a ego driven rich man throwing his money away” or might it be possible that this is a man who is is driven to spend his own money out of concern for this country’s future, and the future of our children and grandchildren?

I look forward to an explanation.

Buy Danish on January 8, 2008 at 6:08 PM

My focus is not on the ego. I think Romney has an ego, though well deserved through his success in business. I don’t think this run is about his ego, as I think Giuliani’s is, for example. I think it was the natural progression for a Governor with his financial resources, family, and background.

What I agree with is the observation that someone like Perot ran, and made a damn good show of it. He garnered the most votes we’ve seen in some time for a third-party candidate, but it didn’t net him much. Not even a cabinet consideration, which surprises me. He never really came back from that. I’m not expecting Mitt to do the same, because he’s not going alone. However, Perot was a billionaire. He could throw around cash rather easily. If Romney really does set new bars for spending, especially at primary time, then there are two problematic results of it. First, it will influence future elections and reaffirm the “most money wins” theorem that I personally find repugnant. Secondly, he, like Bush, suffers the “rich white elitist” label that has dogged a lot of candidates, and it hardly helps.

My concern is actually strangely sympathetic. If Mitt pours extra millions into pushes that garner him fractions of a percent, that’s up to him. I simply see it as wasteful, and obviously his resources would be wrongly focused. As I would very likely vote for him versus Obama, Edwards, or Clinton, I’d like to know he’s not frittering away his resources in the wrong way come the general. I have enough respect for his positions versus a true socialist that it’s rather important. Plus, Clinton can ALWAYS get more. Obama can too, I’m sure.

At the end of the day, less than 4% of the delegates will have been awarded. Talk of anyone- Dem or GOP- being ‘done’ should really hold off until Feb 6th. This is especially true in the GOP, where we likely will have a 3-way split, none have more than 30 delegates or so. In that scenario, no one is toast yet. The Mitt people could sure use Thompson to get out of the fray, but it would be silly to do so before Feb. 6th. Of course, we FredHeads could use Mitt to get out of the fray- and hand over his bankroll- but one set of dreams is as likely as the other.

I already had mine. The alpha male leaves once he’s through.

MadisonConservative on January 8, 2008 at 5:26 PM

Missed that one. Ralph. I’m thinking you’re not even beta. More like Omega.

You must be very proud of it too because it’s the second time you’ve made that allusion. Jeez. And to think that you think that suggesting that someone might be loony is “slander”, and that using question marks is the same thing as calling someone a liar.

I guess “Moonbat” is off the table at Hot Air.

MadisonConservative on January 8, 2008 at 6:04 PM

No, standing up for Beck is fine, great even. Assuming the authority to tell people to get lost on a blog that’s not moderated by you – yeah, that beta. Saying things like ‘I don’t have final say but’ when you have no say – yeah, that’s beta. That’s thumping your chest like a peacock. Not have magnanimity to shut down your feud with BD – yeah, that’s beta. Ain’t no thing, there’s tons of betas in the world, I’m just pointing it out ’cause you said you implied you were not. Cheers:)

We’re talking about record-setting spending on a pre-nomination campaign. It’s a relevant point. We’re not saying he can’t or shouldn’t be allowed to. We’re questioning whether it’s wise.

My answer makes absolutely no sense? I don’t know how much more clear to make it.

MadisonConservative on January 8, 2008 at 5:12 PM

Wow, we can finally address the original question, after I accede that you’re right about one thing – I said “a lot” not “some”, although neither of those words mean “all”.

What do you mean when you say you’re questioning whether it was wise? Do you mean to say that it would have been wiser if he had spent less money? Do you think he’s just a loser and shouldn’t have bothered? Or is it something else?

Do you agree with r2b when he says, “If he doesn’t win, he is just another Perot, or Forbes…a ego driven rich man throwing his money away” or might it be possible that this is a man who is is driven to spend his own money out of concern for this country’s future, and the future of our children and grandchildren?

I look forward to an explanation.

Dude. You are 100% beta. You and a few others yesterday complaining about newbies – that’s total beta to complain about sharing a toy that you don’t own with other people. I like you well enough, I’ve enjoyed chatting with you – but you are total beta.

Spirit of 1776 on January 8, 2008 at 6:01 PM

So me complaining about people coming on and calling Glenn Beck a “pussy” and a “flaming homosexual”, and me complaining about the number of Ronulans who have suddenly appeared calling people racists and part of the neocon war machine…this makes me a beta?

Riiiight…

I already had mine. The alpha male leaves once he’s through.

MadisonConservative on January 8, 2008 at 5:26 PM

Dude. You are 100% beta. You and a few others yesterday complaining about newbies – that’s total beta to complain about sharing a toy that you don’t own with other people. I like you well enough, I’ve enjoyed chatting with you – but you are total beta.

I could be wrong. But I grew up there. I know it pretty well. I just don’t think they will.

Remember, it is the older generation that votes the most. My parents generation is still prejudice no matter how hard they try not to be. My generation always shocks me when I am there. They don’t use the “N” word, but they say things like, “yeah they had to move out of that neighborhood because all the blacks were moving in.” They say it without a concern.

Heck, I’ve already gotten fowarding e-mails about his being a muslim, not really Christian. You don’t think that will stick in the south?

They won’t vote for Obama. I can’t see it.

I wish it was because he is a liberal socialist lightweight, but it isn’t. It’s because he’s black, pure and simple.

Rightwingsparkle on January 8, 2008 at 5:30 PM

I wish I could believe that. However, this isn’t Jesse Jackson. This isn’t Al Sharpton. This isn’t Julian Bond. This is a very clear-spoken socialist with a silver tongue. He’s got just enough charisma to overcome that latent bit of decision. Granted, Huck could charm more, but he’s still a threat, and between the two of them, Florida could be entirely up for grabs.

Hugh Hewitt and Michael Medved are going at it right now on air.

Hugh’s a total Mitt sycophant, and Medved (who until recently was licking Huck’s boots until he proved to be a complete buffoon) is a McCain kiss ass.

It ain’t pretty.

- it seemed germaine…

The awful truth is that the south will never vote for a black man. I hate that it’s true, but there it is. And it isn’t just the rednecks, I can assure you. All those southern Democrats talk a good game about tolerance and diversity, but they won’t vote for Obama, and they will never tell anyone they didn’t.

The black population of the south is not enough. Hillary was a problem because women were going to vote for her in droves. But white women in the south won’t vote for Obama either.

I wish it was because he is a liberal socialist lightweight, but it isn’t. It’s because he’s black, pure and simple.