After Lugar Loss, Indiana G.O.P. Calls for Unity
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/us/politics/after-lugar-loss-indiana-gop-calls-for-unity.html?pagewanted=all

*facepalm*

Be sure to reads the article as it shows that Conservatives are excited about this, more so than anything reported concerning Willard to date.

I’d bet that the DNC will rule that Judd’s ineligibility as a convict will allow them to strip him of whatever delegates he does win, but it’s going to be a little embarrassing nonetheless.

Actually, Judd is not ineligible for a federal office. The only ineligibility that exists on the federal level is if he were impeached, convicted, and then had the Senate specifically apply the “future ineligibility” punishment.

Of course, the House could “play games” and refuse to accept him as either a House member if he ran for that or President. Similarly, the Senate could “play games” and refuse to accept him as either a Senator or Vice President.

That’s what we thought in California, too, that if we amended our state’s constitution, the change would be unassailable. That was when we were naive and still thought there were rules and stuff.

Burke on May 9, 2012 at 2:10 PM

IMHO NC took lessons learned from you guys …
since gays could have civil unions the judge determined they also had
to be able to have gay marriage …

NC took the step in only allowing marriage between 1 man and 1 woman
no civil unions … less chance for a judge to
over turn it like in CA …

“It ain’t over ’till it’s over.”

But isn’t an amendment to the state constitution unassailable by the state or federal supreme courts? I think this one’s in there solidly.

Prufrock on May 9, 2012 at 9:52 AM

That’s what we thought in California, too, that if we amended our state’s constitution, the change would be unassailable. That was when we were naive and still thought there were rules and stuff.

I don’t remember any exact numbers but I seem to recall it being in the 52-53% neighborhood. Certainly nowhere near the 61% it actually got.

Bitter Clinger on May 9, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Thanks, that’s what I was thinking.

He’s a fake.. A figment of the MSM’s imagination.

RockyJ. on May 9, 2012 at 11:41 AM

which is why the MSM covers for him and carries his water for him.
they have too much invested in him ….

A bad day for obama is a GOOD DAY for AMERICA!

Pork-Chop on May 9, 2012 at 12:42 PM

.
Ain’t it the truth. : )

Can African American be Rednecks also? Cause 61% of them voted for the Marriage Amendment.

So the Question Liberal need to ask themselves is, who they want more: Wealthy Gays or the African American GOTV?

The way your Congressional leaders vote is a reflection of your views – because you put them there to represent you!

inthemiddle on May 9, 2012 at 11:00 AM

“

That is plain horse crap.

One word. Obamacare.

Obama won only 79.2% of the vote, with slightly more than a fifth of all Democratic voters (20.8%) expressing “no preference.”

Why is this so difficult to understand and why is this even news? What the numbers above mean is that even if these morons have to vote for a dead and buried person, as long as there is a D next to their name on a ballot, they will vote for that person. This is what “no preference” means to them. And to us.

Well, actually, that liberal bigot inthemiddle just showed up.

Right Mover on May 9, 2012 at 9:53 AM

What exactly is he “in the middle” of?

Gladtobehere on May 9, 2012 at 11:45 AM

O’bama’s descending colon?

Del Dolemonte on May 9, 2012 at 12:28 PM

I thought a gay samwich, but your answer is good too.

I just worry about Julia in all this. What’s going to happen to her if Obama loses?

dirtseller on May 9, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Hopefully Mittens will find her a job.

second I just saw an “obama sucks” bumper sticker, anybody know where I may buy one?

tee hee

noVote4obama! evah.