Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Wow, didn’t see that coming! [Darleen Click]

Polygamist family applauds Obama’s evolution on same-sex marriage

In the wake of President Obama declaring his support for gay Americans’ right to marry each other, prominent polygamists the Brown family of TLC’s “Sister Wives” – consisting of Kody and his wives Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn – gave their 10 thumbs up to same sex nups.

“It is something I have thought about a lot, and I feel very blessed that I have been able to chose love and the life that I want to live and be married to the people that I want to be married to. It’s not for me to decide or stop anyone else from marrying the person they love,” Kody told FOX411’s Pop Tarts column, while Janelle added that she too feels blessed to have chosen love from deep in her heart, and wishes the same for others regardless of sexual orientation.

When the demand that civil marriage is a “right” and is based, not on what is the ideal configuration of a public-sponsored institution, but only on who (or how many) you love, then anything goes.

96 Replies to “Wow, didn’t see that coming! [Darleen Click]”

  1. cranky-d says:

    Hater.

  2. EBL says:

    Well Mitt’s great grand father was a polygamist (but the Mormon Church gave that up at Statehood)…but Barack Obama’s dad was one. So Obama should be good with it.

  3. Pablo says:

    Love is love! Big Love is bigger love!

    ‘Course, dude isn’t actually married to all those women, and yet, he seems to think he is. It’s like a Coming Out Day miracle!

  4. dicentra says:

    All my great-great grandparents were poligs, too, but I’m not down with seeing it go mainstream At. All.

  5. dicentra says:

    Also:

    1) There is no sexual-orientation test to get married. The most flaming homo queen and the bullest dyke can get married to each other, even if they’re in full drag and singing “we’re gayer than an Easter parade” during the entire ceremony.

    2) There is no love test to get married. Two people who hate each other’s guts can get legally hitched.

    ERGO, the definition of marriage does not and cannot include orientation OR love, so insisting that “people who are gay should be able” or “people who love each other should be able” means that you’re introducing criteria into marriage that weren’t there to begin with.

    ERGO, you’re asking that the definition of marriage (not the dictionary definition, which is mere linguistic convention) but the nature of the thing itself be changed.

    ERGO, the issue is not and cannot be fairness or equality or bigotry or discrimination but rather the nature of and purpose for an ancient human institution. (Aside: Gays have been around since forever, and yet no society has permanently sanctified same-sex unions as the equivalent of opposite-sex unions. That includes non-Biblical societies such as the Greeks and Chinese and Africans. Why is that? Is it bigotry? Or perhaps it’s been tried and has never yielded desirable results.)

    If the first group of people to request a redefinition of marriage were animal-rights activists who wanted to marry their cats, would resistance to such a change be bigotry against critters? If the first group to request a redefinition were poligs, would resistance constitute bigotry against… what? Numbers larger than two? Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? What about folks who want to marry their Japanese robots? Are we suddenly bigoted against machinery?

    The left wants to destroy family life by messing with sex and marriage as much as possible (and from as many angles as possible), and the tactics are always the same: ridicule those who resist as being either Puritans or bigots or both.

    And as we’ve seen before, the ability to ridicule doesn’t mean you’re right; it just means you’re a bully.

  6. cranky-d says:

    The Frankfurt School would consider the gay marriage issue a great triumph for their cause.

  7. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Sentimentalists are imune to your reason jedi mind tricks

    Bene Gesserit witch!

  8. DarthLevin says:

    No, no, no, dicentra! You just don’t get it!

    Getting married is, like, going steady, but for REELZ!! Like, it means you soooooper luuuuuuvv somebody!

    And it gets your fam to throw a totally kick ass party for you, and win lotz of presents!

  9. dicentra says:

    Darth:

    Good thing you’re not confusing “marriage” with “wedding,” or I might have to go all @SmugAcademic on you.

  10. BuddyPC says:

    A thought occurred to me, so striking that it can’t be originally mine, and must have been also observed elsewhere.
    The opponents of the North Carolina ballot initiative seem to nearly universally also claim to possess that enlightened pro-environmentalist view, which seeks to return the rest of us to some pre-industrialized, agrarian, bucolic ideal. Yet, now that it passed, the way they’ve reacted is to lash out at those who oppose them for being…..rural, rednecked, dirt-farming hayseeds. I mean, like it’s a bad thing.

    Somebody help me out with this.

  11. cranky-d says:

    They can have all the weddings they want, I don’t care. They can have all the legal rights and responsibilities, all wrapped up in some kind of catch-all contract just like marriage is now.

    Having it officially called marriage, and being able to force churches to accept having their nuptials, not so much.

  12. cranky-d says:

    I can help you, BuddyPC. You are attempting to ascribe logical and consistent tendencies to progressives, who are apparently at heart whiny, bitchy, spoiled children.

    So, basically, that won’t work.

  13. Ernst Schreiber says:

    that’s easy. Liberals think the swinging double doors at the back of the grocery store lead to a magic food fairy named “Stock Room.”

  14. happyfeet says:

    everybody’s talkin bout gay marriage gay marriage gay marriage it’s “trending now” as they say… It’s just part of the culture now I guess

  15. bh says:

    I’m gay marriaged out.

  16. happyfeet says:

    We need to focus on the economy at some point this afternoon… It’s not performing. We have an economic nonperformance problem.

    We should all meet in the conference room at 4.

  17. happyfeet says:

    We gotta take a look at this economic nonperformance thing then after that we can whiteboard on the gay marriage stuff. Once we get a framework up on the board we can christmas tree it over the next week or so.

  18. bh says:

    I thought maybe we could just laugh at Tom Brady for a minute.

  19. Abe Froman says:

    I’m gay marriaged out.

    Well, Jeff is away, so get used to the Jesus.

  20. sdferr says:

    Great Texan and climate murdering great American Carroll Shelby has died.

  21. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    We should all meet in the conference room at 4.

    Sounds good, but please don’t wear one of these to the meeting.

    Brady looks at his pillow before night-night, and declares, “You, sir, will design my hair style for tomorrow.”

  22. dicentra says:

    They can have all the weddings they want, I don’t care. They can have all the legal rights and responsibilities, all wrapped up in some kind of catch-all contract just like marriage is now.

    Having it officially called marriage, …

    Yes, society will definitely accept that line, exactly where you want it drawn, and nobody will go ahead and call it marriage anyway, nor will they insist that the new contractual arrangement not being marriage makes them second-class citizens anyway.

    Also, the idea that gender is irrelevant to parenting will NOT proceed under the arrangement you propose.

    </sarc>

    Me, I’m very much against any law, societal trend, or practice that increases the acceptance and incidence of turkey-baster dads or incubator moms.

    A gay man can be a perfectly good father but he cannot be a mom; a lesbian can be a perfectly good mother but she cannot be a dad.

    Kids need both. And besides, marriage is not designed for the happiness and welfare of adults but rather to provide the healthiest social arrangement possible for our growing offspring, which are the inevitable consequence of coitus.

    Which is itself inevitable as long as hormones exist.

  23. dicentra says:

    We gotta take a look at this economic nonperformance thing then after that we can whiteboard on the gay marriage stuff.

    Strong families are the primary bulwark against the State. Healthy, well-adjusted kids are far less likely to grow up unto parasitism than those who grew up with missing or abusive parental care.

  24. dicentra says:

    Which is why the marriage and family and socon stuff is actually at the ROOT of our economic problems, because it’s them consarned “entitlements” and the entitled people what’s entitled to them what make the debt so unmanageable.

    If you simply rearrange the flow of capital or trim back the gubmint bureaucracies or adjust the money policy, you’re just running a lawnmower over the weeds instead of destroying them down to the root.

  25. happyfeet says:

    it’s ok if people get gay married though dicentra

    ain’t no thang sista

  26. McGehee says:

    it’s “trending now” as they say

    Damnedest thing about “they say” it’s “trending now.” That almost always means it’s over.

  27. happyfeet says:

    but not always

  28. McGehee says:

    Near enough. You marketing types help make it that way too.

  29. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    I like that Scott Brown remembers his Sun Tzu (well, he’s let one or two low level staffers take a few light public jabs). But his campaign hasn’t run any ad I’ve seen on Fauxchahontas.

    If he has I can’t find it.

  30. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    but not always

    No. Not always. However…

    Obama “came out” Wednesday, followed by MSM fawning, swooning, and “It’s HISTORIC!”….just in time to fly to LA and pick up his $15 mil at Clooney’s “99 Percent” party. And don’t get me wrong, I’m sure he’ll continue to milk this cow on all four tits as long as it’s beneficial to HIM. I mean he’s merchandized it in a day. He must’a had a talk with the other George (Lucas) at the party.

    But…it’s Friday (that’s two days later for anyone paying attention)…and the LGBT community (through WH Press Corps questions) is already being asked by Jay Carney to refer the the DNC on whether Obama would call for the repeal of DOMA and endorsement of pro-gay marriage language in the party platform.

    Refer to the DNC now?! In just two days? Yeah ‘cuz there’s absolutely NO DNC Senators or Congressmen (state or US) up for re-election in crucial swing states that might want nothing to do with this particular thermite potato.

    Refer to the DNC and wait by the phone. Let me know how that works out.

    Maybe I’m wrong. Just saying. If you’re great that it’s being talked about. Ok. That’s cool. Otherwise? Charlie Brown/ Lucy/ Football.

  31. newrouter says:

    But his campaign hasn’t run any ad I’ve seen on Fauxchahontas.

    save it for october. this drip, drip, drip will due now.

  32. happyfeet says:

    when you can’t argue the economy it’s ok to revel in gayness Mr. Lamont

    it sure seems to work for putin

  33. Pablo says:

    The fuck?

    Mother’s Day idea from Kirsten Gillibrand: Why not donate to a pro-choice group?

    “This Mother’s Day, I can’t think of a better way to honor all the mothers in the country — past and present — than with a contribution to EMILY’s List,” Gillibrand writes. “They’re the ones working tirelessly to elect the pro-choice Democratic women who are making sure that our freedoms are protected for generations to come.”

  34. bh says:

    That’s a great ad.

  35. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    Lol, ‘feets.

    Pablo, I’d seen some of that various coverage, but not the MA GOP spot.

    Mother’s Day idea from Kirsten Gillibrand: Why not donate to a pro-choice group?

    Yes, yes.

    “For Mother’s Day, cut a check for abortion rights.”

    BREAKING NEWS : Kristen Gillibrand, Secret Great Grand Daughter of Yogi Berra.

  36. bh says:

    Kirsten Gillibrand is 1/32 sentient.

  37. bh says:

    Btw, here are a couple posts to bookmark for use in future austerity arguments, 1 and 2.

    (Via an Insty fill-in.)

  38. LBascom says:

    Totally OT, but I need help. Actually, I need a new wireless router, and some advice. The one I got is a Netgear circa 2005, and under performing I think. Anyway, I have HughesNet, and up to three laptops working. Someday I might want a wireless printer.

    So I go to Amazon, and I’m baffled by the selection. They go for $20 up to hundreds. What do I need?

  39. happyfeet says:

    you should get one that matches your speakers

  40. newrouter says:

    What do I need?

    sumthing that handles 3 laptops and a printer;)

  41. newrouter says:

    mother’s day special: partial birth abortion with flowers.

  42. LBascom says:

    Thanks guys, that helps a lot.

    I was hoping for a web page with pictures and shit, but maybe I needed to be more specific in my plea, more then NEWOUTER fer Chrisco’s sake.

    Cranky…help…

  43. LBascom says:

    I mean newrouter.

  44. happyfeet says:

    if my network manager friend P comes back up on messenger I will ask him

  45. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    bh, I think the whole problem maybe with the word austerity.

    Sure we all get it. But it doesn’t sell to the masses (even the synonyms all suck).

    Mark Steyn, your office is on line two.

  46. newrouter says:

    The Netgear N600 Wireless Dual-Band Router offers the high-performance wireless Internet access needed for demanding applications, such as streaming multimedia and multiplayer gaming. Dual-band technology avoids interference, ensuring top speeds and the greatest range from their Netgear wireless router.

    link

  47. happyfeet says:

    he says get this one

  48. Pablo says:

    Lee, I’m currently rocking a Belkin N750 which supports 3 desktops, my laptop, Kindle, Droid, a couple of Roku boxes and some other shit I won’t remember until I have to enter the frigging passcode again. I can’t complain.

  49. happyfeet says:

    i think those are the same ones, so there you go

  50. happyfeet says:

    instead of austerity we should call it tasty flame-broiled hamburgers

  51. newrouter says:

    bh, I think the whole problem maybe with the word austerity.

    well there was 1921 but still:

    When the U.S. Really Did Try Austerity, it Worked!

  52. newrouter says:

    instead of austerity we should call it tasty flame-broiled hamburgers

    or the bill clinton years

  53. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    Lee,

    Don’t know if this helps, but this one and, this one, have words, pictures, ratings, and stuff.

    Cheers.

  54. BT says:

    Lee,

    The router happy’s friend recommended looks good. Probably overkill. Your limitations are dependent on the networking speeds of your laptops as well as the limitations built into HughesNet. But you will be ready if you ever switch services or change machines.

  55. Pablo says:

    Oh. HughesNet. Don’t overspend. Unless it’s become better than I’ve heard.

  56. bh says:

    I use the one that has a row of green blinking lights on the front. Hope this helps.

  57. newrouter says:

    I was hoping for a web page with pictures and shit, but maybe I needed to be more specific in my plea, more then NEWOUTER fer Chrisco’s sake.

    looking for router pORn. your type is well known)

  58. bh says:

    bh, I think the whole problem maybe with the word austerity.

    Sure we all get it. But it doesn’t sell to the masses (even the synonyms all suck).

    I think we need to pitch in terms of making a necessary choice between two kinds of austerity. You can have government austerity where they make do with less or you can have private austerity where you make do with less. Choose one.

  59. LBascom says:

    K, thanks guys. And I mean that sincerely this time.

    Yeah, not overspending was my goal (Lamont…you big dummy). = )

    Looks like $70-80 range then.

  60. bh says:

    An argument I make to people who like government cheese is to point out that you really don’t get all that much from the government through welfare and entitlements. And it’s impossible to get more because there simply aren’t enough rich people to cannibalize.

    But, when the economy is doing well and you’re not taking government checks you’re earning far more than the government could even theoretically pay you.

    If you want to live above the poverty line, you simply don’t have a government option. That’s the basic argument against the “once 51% decide to live off the others” mentality. When you live off of others you’re deciding to live on less money. Not more.

    Now, obviously for some small percentage of people, the government can pay them more than they could earn in an unencumbered free market but it’s nowhere near 51%.

  61. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    Didn’t say I knew what in the hell I was doing Lee!

    Lol. I think my router says “Comcast” on it.

  62. geoffb says:

    I’ve been using one of these for a couple years now. Two desktops, one laptop, voip and 2 kindles run on it and it seems to handle it ok. Every router I’ve ever had has to be rebooted every once in a while this is no exception. I call it kicking Al Gore in the ass.

  63. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    If you want to live above the poverty line, you simply don’t have a government option.

    I (politely) call bullshit. You just get a whole cloth created, government job (in oh…just pick a bureaucracy). On average, 10% higher pay grade than private sector counter-part (not counting the tax-payer funded retirement bennies). But, I get you’re point. Only so many scraps from the table.

    But that’s the progressive mantradon’t ya’ know. From Obama to Pelosi on down. If you include the disenfranchised, with the BS unemployment number?” Obama knows how drugs work. Give ’em a looong taste & get ’em hooked. “Here’s another 27 weeks unemployment benefits. I told you, the State will take care of you, baby. Here, we even got Food Stamp debit cards now. It’s no big deal. Just like a bank card. You can even use ’em at liquor stores and strip clubs. It’s all good baby!…Now go to sleep.”

    In Cinderella Man James Braddock walked into the Welfare office and paid back all the money he’d been given once he was back on his feet.

    That’s our current Administration’s worst nightmare.

  64. newrouter says:

    please don’t buy a “newrouter”. bad deal.

  65. bh says:

    I’ll give you that group, LYBD. That’s around 3 million out of 141 million or around 2% during one of the largest spending sprees in history.

    For the other 98% and then the unemployed, that’s still not an option. An argument that works for 49 out of 50 people isn’t bad.

  66. geoffb says:

    Obama proves that he can demand that you give your all, even unto that last full measure, for his benefit.

  67. bh says:

    (Quick note, that’s federal employees. I’m seeing 4.4 million state employees. Add those two together and you get about 5% of currently employed and 2.4% of total population.)

  68. bh says:

    (2010 numbers.)

  69. bh says:

    My point is simply that for the vast majority of people, the government can give you far less than you can go out and get for yourself.

    If we’re worried about Uncle Sugar hooking all the kids on free candy bars we should be pointing out that Uncle Free Market doesn’t give away chickenshit prizes like that. It’s handing out houses and cars and the occasional vacation to some place sunny.

  70. jdw says:

    bh, you didn’t say (or I didn’t read) but do you also have a cable or DSL modem handling your internet-deciphering tasks? The reason I ask is that I’ve combined the two (router and modem) into a single unit that forces the two disparate devices to actually communicate with each other. What a relief that’s been!

  71. bh says:

    I believe I might have one of those fancy objects, jdw.

    Maybe Lee’s HughesNet doesn’t use them?

  72. bh says:

    With Comcast you just use their unit and plug the coax in the back.

  73. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    bh,

    It’s not simple stats. Look, I was in Texas after the “migration” from Katrina, and saw the “Government swipe card” fraud first hand. Fucking helluva “consumer” spending spree after Katrina too. You, I, and every other tax-payer cut the check. And, it’s not friggin’ racial. It’s the concept. Those cards went full-on black market. Watch Obama take it national.

    Let’s go another way. Give me a guy with 20yrs of TIG, Stick, & Mig welding experience that was laid off from a job he had for 15yrs in this economy, that has tried for 18 straight months to land a full time gig and couldn’t. He works where he can (not much), covers 30% of his nut. Wife works, another 21%, but their still eligible for an “Obama handout” to cover just most of what they got now and no more. That goes on for two years. Obama wants it that way. Get comfortable with just that. “More Gub’ment cheese later, if you just vote for us. We promise. After we settle with our victim groups.” And if you can find full time job at your old rate or better four counties or a whole state over? Well, you’re upside down on you’re small house. How are you gonna afford a move and stay with your family?

    Granted, we may not be those folks. But they’re damn sure more than a few like ’em in my extended family. (BTW, I can’t weld for shit-harder than it looks).

  74. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    No full albums. That’s weak. Find your song, and “press play”.

  75. newrouter says:

    Your Time Is Gonna Come-Led Zeppelin

    link

  76. bh says:

    I hear what you’re saying, LYBD. (Your handle still cracks me up, btw.) I’ve eaten government cheese and lots of my high school friends went into trades that tanked with home building. Lot less duct work needs doing lately.

    I suppose I’m still thinking in terms of your thoughts about the word austerity. It seems that when we argue in terms of government handouts we’re helping direct people’s thoughts on what that might provide them. That seems like their terrain. When we focus people’s thoughts on what the free market can provide we’re moving to our terrain.

    Maybe every time they want to extend unemployment benefits we attach approval for the Keystone pipeline and then we talk about which option would pay more without requiring a nickel in taxes. Maybe every time they want to expand the food stamp pool we attach approval for some other job creator and again talk about the difference in what those two approaches would result in for the individuals.

    Just seems to me that we too often let them create the perception that the government has the ability to hand out real goodies rather than focusing people’s attention on the actual reason that people have telephones, automobiles, air-conditioning, televisions, internet connections, plentiful food, dishwashers, etc.

    Their shitty EBT cards can’t compete — it’s a thing that everyone can observe with their own eyes everyday — and we should talk about that every single time they promote them.

  77. bh says:

    I’ve already been crazily long winded so I may as well not stop now.

    Quick example of this. Here in Wisconsin we made the conscious decision to go to the mat to try and open up iron mining. It’s like our miniature Keystone. Rather than compromising or getting distracted by BadgerCare or refighting the union benefits we put our efforts into getting lots of new high-paying jobs.

    We lost that vote but we forced them to block high-paying blue collar union jobs.

    Now they’re gonna try and go after Scott Walker on the jobs front or how working families are hurting. But, it’s too late, we forced them to go on the record as a party against new high-paying jobs.

    We’ll now win the recall. If we got into an argument about any random benefit this stupid state provides we’d probably have lost.

  78. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    bh,

    We’re on the same page. Just reading different paragraphs. It’s between what “they” are trying to do (and since LBG’s “Great Society” have been doing), and our side ought to be doing.

    Jeff has talked 100 times about “our” asshats in Washington always excepting “THIER” premise for negotiation. Nah. Done with that.

    You can “John McCain/ Dick Luger” bargain for this or that, and claim WE WON. But when has that actually worked out for American enterprise? That’s like, “give us taxes now and we promise we’ll cut regulations & entitlements later”, or “I promise, I’ll just stick the tip in, only for a second.”

    I’m no “Ditto Head”, but Rush said it best. “You are the Party of crippling entitlement. We are the Party of empowerment.”

    I say just draw the line in the sand right there, step back, and, say, “Come at me then!”

  79. bh says:

    (BadgerCare isn’t meant as a state stand-in for Obamacare. It’s not like our version of Romneycare, it’s more of a supplemental to Medicaid.

    Created by Tommy Thompson, btw, in case anyone was looking for another reason they shouldn’t vote for a 71 year old as their junior senator.)

  80. bh says:

    Ha!

    “Come at me, bro!” would be a shockingly straight forward motto for useful Republicans. Which is why they’d never use it. The Whigs 2.0 should consider it though.

    Yeah, we’re on the same page, LYBD.

  81. geoffb says:

    Jobs the Democrats don’t want anyone doing.

  82. bh says:

    Yeah, that’s definitely something that should be repeated a few times from the podium, Geoff.

    Makes me think about gay marriage. How many people are gay? About 2%, right? How many of them are looking to get married in any given election year? What’s the economic impact of that tiny fraction of a tiny fraction getting married?

    That’s gay marriage in economic terms* during a time of high gas prices, high unemployment, sluggish growth, and impending fiscal disaster.

    *I’m not debating the notion of social and economic issues being intertwined, I’m suggesting how easily a presidential candidate could swat away this nonsense if he felt like talking about something else.

  83. Dale Price says:

    “Big Love” was more honest than “Sister Wives.” Not that it would take much, but it was much, much more honest than the candy-coated propaganda of SW.

    One of the most pernicious shows ever to appear on the small screen.

    And, as predictable as the sunset, GM fanatics haven’t said boo about polygamy. Except to praise it.

    The corrosion continues.

  84. geoffb says:

    Guts runs in the family.

    Bristol Palin is sparking a social media backlash for disagreeing with President Barack Obama’s support of same-sex marriage.

    The former Dancing with the Stars contestant, author and unwed mother said in her blog: “We know that in general kids do better growing up in a mother/father home.”

    Bristol Palin is getting hammered by fellow celebs because she thinks Obama is wrong on gay marriage
    […]

    Reaction to her comments came swiftly.

    Samantha Ronson, celebrity DJ and former girlfriend of Lindsay Lohan said of Palin’s mother/father comment, “really bristol palin? how’s your kid doing?”

    Jersey Shore star JWoww first tweeted, “Bristol should keep her uneducated ignorant mouth shut. If Ur living in the past u wouldn’t have a kid w/out marriage #hypocrite. It’s 2012!”

    […]
    Women who know what it’s like to raise children alone are especially qualified to pronounce on the idea and the ideal that children need a mom and dad.

    It can’t be easy being media fodder because you’re (a) Sarah Palin’s daughter and (b) an unwed teen mom. Kudos to her for her courage in standing up for marriage.

  85. leigh says:

    Go Bristol! If she had married Levi Johnston, she’d be a divorced single mother. I think she made the wise move in kicking that douchebag to the curb. And, uneducated? JWoww (really?) makes a living swilling booze, rocking a bikini, knocking boots and giving New Jersey girls a bad name. Bristol is attending ASU last I read. While not the most academically rigorous school, to be sure, she’s giving it the old college try.

    It’s still America and we are all entitled to our opinions.

  86. TRHein says:

    Whig’s 2.0? Why not just the United States of America Party… platform: to actually support and defend the Consitution of the United States of America.

    I will admit in the past I voted for whom ever had the R™ behind their name. That changed after I started reading PW circa2002. At that point I actually started checking out what these pols stood for. Did I get it wrong, yes. I have I given up, no.

    I do not intend to vote for someone who intends only to slow the the bus just a bit to appease the crowd. Nor do I intend to vote for an admitted socialist. As has been stated by JG and others here, my not voting will not be a vote for the incumbent, rather a vote of no confidence in the inevitable republican severely conservative nominee.

    My only hope currently is that the delegates come to their senses, I however do not intend to hold my breath for that.

    /Rant Off… I have no idea what brought that on.

Comments are closed.