roflmmfao

I care about my country and support causes I believe in. I believe that is important.

bluegill on February 5, 2013 at 8:25 AM

.
You don’t believe “Jesus Is Lord” though, do you?

tommy71 on February 5, 2013 at 9:11 AM

Rove is not “going after” the Tea Party. It sounds like he is going to be supporting competitive Republicans in races where an untested, ultraconservative probably wouldn’t do so well in the general. That is a GOOD thing. How you twist that to mean “going after” the Tea Party is beyond me.

Nominating the most ultra conservative candidate in every race with little regard for anything else is not a sound strategy.

You are tiresome. Broad brush in your right hand all the time and assumptions.
btw..I do not listen to Mark Levin or Rush.
I liked and support Palin but don’t worship the woman.
Your obsessions and spasms are off putting. Perhaps if you changed your attack mode and nutty insults to posters- people would actually converse/debate with you. So, you lose.
Too bad you don’t recognize that.
I have work to do. Not waste my time.
Have a splendid day.
bazil9 on February 5, 2013 at 9:04 AM

When did I ever attack you? All I did was repost a comment written by crosspatch.

And when I post negative things about Sarah Palin, often I am doing it to counter the absurd worship that she gets on here. I’m sorry, but I think she would be a disaster as the nominee. It is nothing personal against her.

bluegill on February 5, 2013 at 8:53 AM

You are tiresome. Broad brush in your right hand all the time and assumptions.

btw..I do not listen to Mark Levin or Rush.

I liked and support Palin but don’t worship the woman.
Your obsessions and spasms are off putting. Perhaps if you changed your attack mode and nutty insults to posters- people would actually converse/debate with you. So, you lose.
Too bad you don’t recognize that.

I have work to do. Not waste my time.
Have a splendid day.

As someone who isn’t far right socially- that wasn’t my problem with Mitt.
I am not a Bush fan, what so ever. His So/Con creds weren’t why I voted for him either.
For many-it isn’t a So/Con problem but the nutty ones they put up.
Just my opinion.

No, he didn’t. Most of the SoCons never backed Romney. Stating that something is a fact doesn’t make it one.
tommy71 on February 5, 2013 at 8:48 AM

Yes, they did! I don’t have time to find all the sources for you. You should do some research and educate yourself a bit by going over the 2012 polls again. Let me guess, Mark Levin told you they didn’t support him. Sigh

Well put.

I wrote about this yesterday.

Although, you appear to care more about insulting fellow cons here
and obsessions then articulating your beliefs and causes you find important.
bazil9 on February 5, 2013 at 8:32 AM

My main problem here is with the people who simply parrot Mark Levin and rail against any Republican who isn’t 100% ideologically pure. They call everything a RINO. Such people also tend to worship the gimmicky former governor who is now nothing but a punchline (Palin). Honestly, it is like group think with these people. I guarantee you that each and every one listens to Mark Levin and has to hear his show to know what to think about anything.

Those are the ones I can’t stand here. They’re like all the same person. So, when I see an actual thoughtful commenter like crosspatch, I want to commend them and draw attention to their postings.

The divisiveness, as I see it, comes mostly from the Mark Levin parrots and the Palinistas who insist on predictably framing things as a TruCon – Establishment dichotomy in every single race. And then they quickly turn on the TrueCon once he gets elected, IF he gets elected, because they believe only Palin is a pure conservative.

Wrong again, gill. Both McCain and Romney said the words, but weren’t perceived as SoCons.
tommy71 on February 5, 2013 at 8:34 AM

I beg to differ on that one, at least with regard to Romney. Romney may not have been defined by his positions on social issues, but he was most certainly viewed as socially conservative, and he got the support of socially conservative voters. That’s just a fact.

@Happy ‘I heart illegals’ ain’t a SoCon position.

tommy71 on February 5, 2013 at 8:19 AM

I don’t think you read my post clearly enough. I was referring to Jindal, Rubio, among others who are out there embracing the left’s position on these social issues in order to pander for votes among the single issue (i.e. greedy stupid unamerican parasites) who will vote for one candidate over another simply so that their abuelo Carlos or Tia Maria will be given citizenship ahead of people that are trying to do it the legal way.

I care about my country and support causes I believe in. I believe that is important.

bluegill on February 5, 2013 at 8:25 AM

As do I.
Although, you appear to care more about insulting fellow cons here
and obsessions then articulating your beliefs and causes you find important..
Should give it a try something.

Yeah blue, I know. ZZZZ
Like the word quitter, I see.
Why don’t you try it-quit HA.
I like quitters!
Fools part with their $-I am not stunned you
are all steamy over Rove super duper PAC.
They count on the common folk like you.
bazil9 on February 5, 2013 at 8:23 AM

I care about my country and support causes I believe in. I believe that is important.

Yeah, gill, we saw McCain and Romney win, didn’t we? Lol. Keep dreaming that you can divorce the fisc cons from the SoCons and win. And why reference Akin?
tommy71 on February 5, 2013 at 8:11 AM

I’m not sure where you got this fixation on SoCons from right now. Crosspatch’s comment was about the Tea Party and Karl Rove’s effort.

And, by the way, Romney was socially conservative, but he wasn’t seen as a hardcore SoCon like Akin or Santorum were. And Romney also outperformed each and every so-called Tea Party candidate, FYI, including Ted Cruz in TX.

Anyway, if Rove can beat back and keep some wackadoodles like Akin and Angle from getting the nomination, then I’ll be happy. Seriously, the whole “let’s nominate an ultra conservative in every state for emotional satisfaction and who cares if we lose since we stuck it to the establishment bogeymen we’ve built up in our heads and that Mark Levin always talks about” approach must end.

Blue, you gonna send $ to Rove’s Pac?
Send all you got! Even your $ earmarked for
your I phone bill and the Net. :P
I think I will send Pain some $ today.
Just for you.
bazil9 on February 5, 2013 at 8:00 AM

I very well might. Won’t send any to Palin, though. She is a quitter and a self-promoting, divisive quitter that I simply don’t trust that much.

The Republican Party, whether tea party or est has to remember one thing- the foot soldiers of the party are SoCons, not fisc Cons. Even in these fiscally irresponsible times, without the foot soldiers (SoCons), the pubs won’t win jack.

tommy71 on February 5, 2013 at 7:47 AM

With all due respect, the foot soldiers of the GOP includes SoCons and FiscCons (Dem foot soliders consist mainly of the regular kind of con). The problem IMO is that the left/radicals/Dems have managed to divide the SoCons from the FiscCons in order to win.

It wasn’t for nothing that they appealed to greedy stupid people with wombs or a same-sex partners when setting up the debate. Single issue voters and people that won’t even consider a candidate because of their religion are just as much part of the parasite class as any supporter of the rat-eared wonder. The GOP needs to unite in a way that will get the support of both SoCons and FiscCons.

We spent this last election being told that social issues don’t matter in this economy and to many voters that isn’t true. Conversely the current trend by the so-called frontrunners for 2016- pandering to single issue voters by running around with “I heart Illegals” t-shirts is not going to win the hearts and minds of FiscCons.