Is shedding theatrical tears a Principle or a Value?

Aren't these two statements in conflict?

4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.

5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.

If the government is not the ultimate authority, how can you say no one is above the law? Unless you're talking about some other kind of "justice."

re: #2 Charles

Can Beck supporters keep two statements in their minds at the same time and analyze them? I say thee nay. Beck has perfected that art of "truthiness."

re: #2 Charles

Point 7 appears to be a disguised statement in support of tax revolt.

From the 9/12 page:

"Thank You to Mr. Glenn Beck for articulating the values America might have otherwise forgotten."

I mean really, Thank GOD for Glenn Beck, without his tears and list America would have forgotten theses things.
No wonder we voted for President Obama...
/

re: #2 Charles

Aren't these two statements in conflict?

If the government is not the ultimate authority, how can you say no one is above the law? Unless you're talking about some other kind of "justice."

Stop using logic, it hurts Glenn and makes him cry.

That's the worst layout I've seen outside of Gellar's.

re: #6 webevintage

That and Vicks.

re: #6 webevintage

Stop using logic, it hurts Glenn and makes him cry.

Invest in Vicks mentholatum rub.

After reading number two on this 912 list and seeing that the GOP is easily being drawn towards this I think the GOP has their acronym backwards. Instead of the GOP it should be changed to POG -- as in Party of God.

I hope all the buttons in the "In Office" column stay white after Tuesday.

re: #9 MandyManners

Invest in Vicks mentholatum rub.

And the makers of Xanax.
:)

It's just insane to think that politicians are now pledging allegiance to TV show hosts.

Wait. Value number 8 is moderation. I call shenanigans.

I wonder what they say to someone who agrees with them on all the issues but just doesn't happen to believe in God. And as for number 3, the honesty part is a joke considering all this fear-mongering about Obama and how he's a dictator.

And they accuse Barack Obama of creating a cult of personality. Glenn Beck is basically the L. Ron. Hubbard of politics.

"I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. The government cannot force me to be charitable."

Shorter 7th Value: "I won't do it and you can't make me!" Glenn Beck everyone: the boy who never grew up.

re: #13 Killgore Trout

It's just insane to think that politicians are now pledging allegiance to TV show hosts.

Incredible.

re: #14 JasonA

Wait. Value number 8 is moderation. I call shenanigans.

I think that means the holder of Value #8 is against other people overindulging themselves in something they might enjoy too much.

re: #13 Killgore Trout

So this is what the end of a national political party looks like.

Number 7 sounds like just an excuse not to pay their taxes on things they don't want their taxes spent on. Newsflash, we all have our taxes spent on things we don't want them spent on.

re: #13 Killgore Trout

It's just insane to think that politicians are now pledging allegiance to TV show hosts.

Hoffman was on Glenn Beck (TV), early in the week. He appeared star-struck. I was embarassed by the conversation.

Forty five out of how many GOP politicians in the nation?

Does Doug Hoffman believe (like Beck opined last week on his show) that Net Neutrality is an Obama plan to take control of the Internet and censor free speech?

(I'm still laughing at Crazy Beck Town for that one).

re: #2 Charles

Aren't these two statements in conflict?

4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.

5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.

If the government is not the ultimate authority, how can you say no one is above the law? Unless you're talking about some other kind of "justice."

I suppose #4 may refer to what an individual may deem what is right, or moral, in whatever sense that may entail.

#5 implies what is legal.

re: #19 Ginsu

So this is what the end of a national political party looks like.

Not yet. If we start to see political violence or domestic terrorism from these folks them that will be the end. I seriously doubt the Republican party can successfully distance themselves from the nuts. At the very least they're going to have to change their name and reform with cosmetic changes.

I'd love to get my hands on some of the questionnaires Hoffman had to fill out for some of his PAC endorsements.

For example Government Is Not God PAC "does not support any candidates who do not return a questionnaire that affirms that they are pro-life, pro-family and stand firmly against the unbiblical welfare state that is destroying the spiritual and economic greatness of our nation."

Here's the PDF of their questionnaire:
[Link: www.gingpac.org...]

Some samples of the questions asked:

2. Do you believe that an unborn child is a person under the 14th amendment?

4. Would you vote to prohibit abortion in all cases?

12. Do you oppose laws allowing homosexuals to adopt children?

13. Do you favor laws that restrict the production, sale, and distribution of pornography?

14. A. Do you believe clergymen should have the right to express views from the pulpit on legislative issues?

15. B. Do you believe clergy should have the right to support or disapprove of candidates for political offices from the pulpit?

16. Do you support the right of students and teachers to publicly acknowledge the Creator?

17. Do you support full freedom of speech in public schools including "religious" speech?

18. Should federal involvement in public education be eliminated, including eliminating the U.S. Department of Education?

35B In reference to question 35A, Intel Corporation supports “equal rights for gays” and offers benefits to “partners” of homosexual employees. Would you refuse funds from this corporate PAC?

Anything he sent to Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum would also be interesting.

re: #13 Killgore Trout

It's just insane to think that politicians are now pledging allegiance to TV show hosts.

Was looking at the about-us webpage of this 912-Candidate site and surprise, surprise! The guy that runs it links to Atlas Shrugs and Jihad Watch.

re: #27 Gus 802

Kooks of a feather...

I believe in God. She loves everyone.

The worst of it is the mix or what should be personal belief and government. Not any particular line the overall message.

When you look close, its a fortune cookie. I sense a rip off of a certain other goals of conduct from Asian Culture. They distilled the principles of behavior to just a few words. I offer these in contrast, as they are intended as personal guides.
Not for politics.
Not for wearing on your sleeve.
Honesty
Sincerity
Humility
Benevolence
Filial Piety. (Respect for parents)

I personally find it amusing that it takes a vast law library to bring these few words into society via the law. No one should be ripping these off for politics. This is for the heart not the voting booth.

No moderation, no return to power.
[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

They say that the family is the ultimate decision making body and not the government but why are these people often than not strong supporters of things like banning gay marriage, abortion, gambling, etc.

re: #16 Merryweather

Glenn Beck is basically the L. Ron. Hubbard of politics.

I grok it.

re: #30 Rightwingconspirator

No one should be ripping these off for politics. This is for the heart not the voting booth.

1,000 updings for that.

re: #2 Charles

Aren't these two statements in conflict?

If the government is not the ultimate authority, how can you say no one is above the law? Unless you're talking about some other kind of "justice."

These loons should break away and rename themselves the "Party of God", or perhaps "Hezbollah 2.0" for short.

Well I don't see anyth... wait, this guy is running in NY?

re: #35 Jimmah

These loons should break away and rename themselves the "Party of God", or perhaps "Hezbollah 2.0" for short.

Ouch. Nicely done!
:)

re: #34 Ojoe

Why Thank You Ojoe!

re: #32 HappyWarrior

It's really a weird mix of conservative political values, such as limited government and not making taxation a wealth redistribution scheme, mixed in with socon values which are decidedly intrusive and the opposite of limited government. A recipe for political irrelevance.

re: #36 brookly red

Well I don't see anyth... wait, this guy is running in NY?

Well, it's the far north of NY. Far far away from the city. I'd be really surprised if he won, but I can't say it's impossible.

re: #35 Jimmah

These loons should break away and rename themselves the "Party of God", or perhaps "Hezbollah 2.0" for short.

Is that ideal for a future GOP? I am asking in earnest. Can the GOP maintain a competitive percentage of US support without this segment? What does sort of party do you ideally imagine the GOP being in five or ten years?

I still sit left of the the progressive sides of the GOP so it is not really my concern but I have to wonder how others see things shaping in an ideal world.

re: #38 Rightwingconspirator

You are welcome.

re: #2 Charles

4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.

Does this candidate believe that G-d is not the ultimate authority? If someone wrote a book about the right-wing, they could call it G-dless.

re: #39 Ginsu

It's really a weird mix of conservative political values, such as limited government and not making taxation a wealth redistribution scheme, mixed in with socon values which are decidedly intrusive and the opposite of limited government. A recipe for political irrelevance.

I guess someone wasn't paying attention to Goldwater.

BBL

re: #40 JasonA

Well, it's the far north of NY. Far far away from the city. I'd be really surprised if he won, but I can't say it's impossible.

not far enough, anything in the polls?

re: #46 brookly red

not far enough, anything in the polls?

I don't think there's been anything since Dede dropped out so it's hard to gauge right now.

re: #43 Stuart Leviton

Does this candidate believe that G-d is not the ultimate authority? If someone wrote a book about the right-wing, they could call it G-dless.

I wanted to think that means in regards to "family matters", but now I am not so sure...

re: #44 HappyWarrior

I guess someone wasn't paying attention to Goldwater.

They paid attention to Goldwater alright...they're the "preachers" he warned about in 1994.

re: #35 Jimmah

These loons should break away and rename themselves the "Party of God", or perhaps "Hezbollah 2.0" for short.

Gus, you're quite a decent person. I was curious to see how you handle honoring creativity. Thanks for demonstrating virtue.

re: #29 Ojoe

I believe in God. She loves everyone.

Hera-tic!

re: #47 JasonA

I don't think there's been anything since Dede dropped out so it's hard to gauge right now.

and Dede pledged support, no? (or am I thinking of another race?)

re: #52 brookly red

Check out the last post ;)

re: #50 Stuart Leviton

Gus, you're quite a decent person. I was curious to see how you handle honoring creativity. Thanks for demonstrating virtue.

Do you mean Jimmah?

re: #41 Alexzander

Is that ideal for a future GOP? I am asking in earnest. Can the GOP maintain a competitive percentage of US support without this segment? What does sort of party do you ideally imagine the GOP being in five or ten years?

I still sit left of the the progressive sides of the GOP so it is not really my concern but I have to wonder how others see things shaping in an ideal world.

Nor mine - however I will say that this seems to me to be a similar question to one that the Labour Party here in the UK had to ask itself following Thatcher's landslide election win in 1979. Initially, their reaction was to appease the extreme left wing 'core'. They made Michal Foot their leader, and embraced a whole raft of fringy positions, ignoring all advice about the changing nature and attitudes of the electorate. They spent the next 18 years in the political wilderness. It was not until Tony Blair modernised and reformed the party and brought it to a much more electable, centrist position that they returned to power. I imagine the GOP is going to have to go through a similar process, and as with the UK labour party, it may take a long time to come back from where they are at the moment.

/I think I will pick up the laundry now... it's still too early to start drinking.

this is sooo disturbing.

re: #56 brookly red

/I think I will pick up the laundry now... it's still too early to start drinking.

this is sooo disturbing.

Forty five out of how many candidates across the nation?

re: #55 Jimmah

I think you hit this on the head. It may not take as long as we fear. Politics has accelerated with 24/7 coverage.

re: #55 Jimmah

Nor mine - however I will say that this seems to me to be a similar question to one that the Labour Party here in the UK had to ask itself following Thatcher's landslide election win in 1979. Initially, their reaction was to appease the extreme left wing 'core'. They made Michal Foot their leader, and embraced a whole raft of fringy positions, ignoring all advice about the changing nature and attitudes of the electorate. They spent the next 18 years in the political wilderness. It was not until Tony Blair modernised and reformed the party and brought it to a much more electable, centrist position that they returned to power. I imagine the GOP is going to have to go through a similar process, and as with the UK labour party, it may take a long time to come back from where they are at the moment.

We might want to compare their position with that of the Tory Party, which was run out of power by Blair's new Labour twelve years ago and is still blundering around in the wilderness, looking for direction and unable to come up with any major political successes even against a Labour Party that is losing popularity...

re: #2 Charles

Aren't these two statements in conflict?

If the government is not the ultimate authority, how can you say no one is above the law? Unless you're talking about some other kind of "justice."

Charles - please stop trying to inject reason into a sloganeering campaign. The two just don't go together.

re: #60 SixDegrees

Charles - please stop trying to inject reason into a sloganeering campaign. The two just don't go together.

These are no conflict to a Dominionist, one who believes that God's Law has precedence over the Constitution. And that is behind what is being implied here.

Question for any candidate who signs on to this-Will you pledge to support the separation of church and state?

My candidate for the Darwin Award: GOP.

re: #55 Jimmah

Nor mine - however I will say that this seems to me to be a similar question to one that the Labour Party here in the UK had to ask itself following Thatcher's landslide election win in 1979. Initially, their reaction was to appease the extreme left wing 'core'. They made Michal Foot their leader, and embraced a whole raft of fringy positions, ignoring all advice about the changing nature and attitudes of the electorate. They spent the next 18 years in the political wilderness. It was not until Tony Blair modernised and reformed the party and brought it to a much more electable, centrist position that they returned to power. I imagine the GOP is going to have to go through a similar process, and as with the UK labour party, it may take a long time to come back from where they are at the moment.

Curious but on what issues did the Labour party change on that made them more acceptable to the public. To me from the outside looking in on the GOP, it looks like their problems are on issues like gays, abortion, and immigration though in the latter there were some steps in the recent President Bush's years to be more open minded on that but now they sound closer to Tancredo than they do Bush on immigration.

re: #62 Rightwingconspirator

Question for any candidate who signs on to this-Will you pledge to support the separation of church and state?

I think more than a few would ask what kind of gosh-darn Commie question is that.

re: #63 enoughalready

My candidate for the Darwin Award: GOP.

Irony!
/Heh.

re: #65 MandyManners

Thomas Jefferson was a commie? Who knew?
/

re: #59 ralphieboy

We might want to compare their position with that of the Tory Party, which was run out of power by Blair's new Labour twelve years ago and is still blundering around in the wilderness, looking for direction and unable to come up with any major political successes even against a Labour Party that is losing popularity...

We could do and I'm sure there are lessons to be taken from that as well. However, the Tories have not embraced a set of extremist positions since their defeat; they have merely been ineffective and lacking decent leadership. It is widely predicted that they will probably win the next election though.

re: #2 Charles

Aren't these two statements in conflict?

If the government is not the ultimate authority, how can you say no one is above the law? Unless you're talking about some other kind of "justice."

Just to be ornery, I tried to figure out a way to explain these statements to show that they are not in conflict.

I couldn't do it.

Actually, #4:

4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.

just makes no sense whatsoever. It's not even really a complete thought. He and his spouse are the ultimate authority under what circumstances? All? Family issues (as seems to be implied by the "the family is sacred" part). What? It's just a sound-good sound-bite that doesn't even really mean anything.

re: #55 Jimmah

Nor mine - however I will say that this seems to me to be a similar question to one that the Labour Party here in the UK had to ask itself following Thatcher's landslide election win in 1979. Initially, their reaction was to appease the extreme left wing 'core'. They made Michal Foot their leader, and embraced a whole raft of fringy positions, ignoring all advice about the changing nature and attitudes of the electorate. They spent the next 18 years in the political wilderness. It was not until Tony Blair modernised and reformed the party and brought it to a much more electable, centrist position that they returned to power. I imagine the GOP is going to have to go through a similar process, and as with the UK labour party, it may take a long time to come back from where they are at the moment.

Thanks for the answer and an interesting analogy - I should know more about this given that I was born in the UK under Thatcher.

Perhaps I am a minority opinion here. I consider myself a moderate Republican, but I too considered Dede S. selection to run as the R candidate awful because she was in favor of card check and had accepted support in the past from the working people's party (which is the Acorn outfit). If I lived in the district, I would vote for Hoffman, even though he is a social conservative, which I am not.

re: #66 Killgore Trout

Irony!
/Heh.

To quote F. Murray Abraham in the rather crappy "An Innocent Man":

"Ain't life a motherf---er"

re: #69 reine.de.tout

Ruby Ridge. That's what it winds up becoming.

re: #19 Ginsu

So this is what the end of a national political party looks like.

For what it's worth, Hoffman is a Conservative Party candidate. The GOP has already lost with Soccofava's withdrawal - there is no GOP candidate in the race anymore.

That the GOP seems to be lending Hoffman their support is disturbing in the extreme, but it's important to note that, for the moment anyway, he's not running as a Republican, and even if he wins the GOP will wind up losing one more member of their House minority.

re: #69 reine.de.tout

I'm pretty sure it's tied into some offshoot of Mormon theology. It probably makes sense once traced back to original scripture.

re: #73 Rightwingconspirator

Ruby Ridge. That's what it winds up becoming.

You are unfortunately correct sir.

re: #73 Rightwingconspirator

Ruby Ridge. That's what it winds up becoming.

I was thinking more public education. The parents get to decide what's taught in the schools - not the govt.

re: #75 Killgore Trout

I'm pretty sure it's tied into some offshoot of Mormon theology. It probably makes sense once traced back to original scripture.

The 'the family is sacred" part was the only part that made any sense to me.
The rest of it just wasn't connected to anything else.

re: #70 Alexzander

I was born in the UK under Thatcher.

I was going to make an awful joke here, but even the limited self-respect I have will not allow it.

re: #64 HappyWarrior

Curious but on what issues did the Labour party change on that made them more acceptable to the public. To me from the outside looking in on the GOP, it looks like their problems are on issues like gays, abortion, and immigration though in the latter there were some steps in the recent President Bush's years to be more open minded on that but now they sound closer to Tancredo than they do Bush on immigration.

They moved away from supporting unilateral nuclear disarmament, opposing trade union reform, opposition to any welfare reform, failed economic policies etc.

re: #61 ralphieboy

These are no conflict to a Dominionist, one who believes that God's Law has precedence over the Constitution. And that is behind what is being implied here.

Actually, the two statements listed in #2 are completely incompatible with one another.

Did I really need to add a sarcasm tag to my post?

re: #69 reine.de.tout

I *think* No. 4 refers to sex education, birth control and abortion for minor girls.

re: #73 Rightwingconspirator

Ruby Ridge. That's what it winds up becoming.

For those who signed up, forty five candidates.

re: #69 reine.de.tout

just makes no sense whatsoever. It's not even really a complete thought. He and his spouse are the ultimate authority under what circumstances? All? Family issues (as seems to be implied by the "the family is sacred" part). What? It's just a sound-good sound-bite that doesn't even really mean anything.

You need to read it as dog whistles.

re: #77 Stanley Sea

I was thinking more public education. The parents get to decide what's taught in the schools - not the govt.

Isn't that why people elect representatives to their local school boards?

re: #80 Jimmah

They moved away from supporting unilateral nuclear disarmament, opposing trade union reform, opposition to any welfare reform, failed economic policies etc.

Thanks. I remember seeing in the Ben Wattenberg documentary on the history of Socialism that prices were really high in the 70's in the UK and that many wanted the unions reformed but labor would not budge on that issue. I think the problem with today's GOP is they're not building a party for tomorrow and are instead sticking with the same things that won them votes in the 80's or even 90's for that matter. The electorate is changing like it was in Britain.

re: #82 MandyManners

I *think* No. 4 refers to sex education, birth control and abortion for minor girls.

Ah.
But no one forces families to participate in sex education, birth control or abortion.

re: #77 Stanley Sea

The first gets you the second. First they get evolution against their wishes. Then they choose to take a stand... For the record I'm a huge critic of the way the government handled Ruby Ridge. That fact only enhances my revulsion for acts that would precipitate such an action again. Slippery slope with minefield added.
[Link: www.seattlepi.com...]
[Link: www.encyclopedia.com...]

re: #77 Stanley Sea

I was thinking more public education. The parents get to decide what's taught in the schools - not the govt.

Aren't schools governed by local elected school boards?

re: #89 reine.de.tout

Hence the fight in Texas read about so much.

re: #87 reine.de.tout

Ah.
But no one forces families to participate in sex education, birth control or abortion.

Yep, I remember vividly that you had the option of opting out of sex education if your parents objected. And as we know you have a choice not to get an abortion or use birth control.

re: #87 reine.de.tout

Ah.
But no one forces families to participate in sex education, birth control or abortion.

Can kids in some districts get it from the school nurse?

re: #92 MandyManners

Can kids in some districts get it from the school nurse?

Birth control pills, that is.

re: #89 reine.de.tout

Aren't schools governed by local elected school boards?

Now they are. I think it's important to look at this declaration as a letter of intent, a declaration of guiding principles that will form the basis of any political standpoint. If you believe in the cra^H^H^Hthings lined out in that document then a substantial change would be in order when it comes to how schools are governed.

Beck: a fry short of a happy meal.
Those principles, however...while not everyone may agree with every one of them, are not in themselves evil or a problem for the United States.
Reasonable people may of course, disagree.
As for the controversial number four, it's apparent to me that he means minor children are subject to the mores and tenets of their parents**, rather than the ones they may be exposed to in school that may conflict with what they are taught at home. This does not mean that parents are not subject to civil law.
** as long as this does not conflict with the civil law. For example, just because some whackjob parents believe that children can be beaten until black and blue does not mean that the state does not have the ability to prosecute them for child abuse.

re: #92 MandyManners

Can kids in some districts get it from the school nurse?

I don't know, Mandy.
My daughter goes to a Catholic school; so I honestly don't know what the public schools do.

re: #93 MandyManners

Birth control pills, that is.

and condoms.
I think some schools do, but once again like sex ed, you can probably opt your kid out of being allowed to get BC so that instead of a teen having protected sex you can have one that ends up pregnant or with an STD or even AIDS.

re: #96 reine.de.tout

I don't know, Mandy.
My daughter goes to a Catholic school; so I honestly don't know what the public schools do.

I don't, either but, I don't see public schools in this area giving them out.

He lists "Humility" among his twelve values.

It's the greatest effing thing about me. My humility is fantastic!

re: #92 MandyManners

Can kids in some districts get it from the school nurse?

Well NYC has it's own brand of condoms (I kid you not) any they are distributed free by many bussiness... so who knows what you can get in school.

Anybody hear Rush this morning on Fox? Has it already been discussed?

re: #87 reine.de.tout

Actually some do. My boss has a daughter in school. The parent could request she not participate in certain lessons. UNLESS she wanted to against her parents wishes. This at 14 years old. Beverly Hills School District.

re: #101 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Anybody hear Rush this morning on Fox? Has it already been discussed?

I hear it was very fair and balanced...
///

re: #92 MandyManners

There are some public schools, I believe, that are set up with complete clinics dispensing birth control and I am not sure that parents have any rights when it comes to notification. There are also schools with day care centers, which would seem to question the effectiveness of the birth control dispensing. ///

re: #99 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

He lists "Humility" among his twelve values.

It's the greatest effing thing about me. My humility is fantastic!

Whew! For a soggy moment there, I thought you typed "humidity".

re: #95 tradewind

. . .
As for the controversial number four, it's apparent to me that he means minor children are subject to the mores and tenets of their parents**, rather than the ones they may be exposed to in school that may conflict with what they are taught at home. This does not mean that parents are not subject to civil law.
** as long as this does not conflict with the civil law. For example, just because some whackjob parents believe that children can be beaten until black and blue does not mean that the state does not have the ability to prosecute them for child abuse. . .

Why does he have that as one of his priniciple? Has anyone said that children should NOT be subject to the influence of their parents?

Kids, heck, people, all of us, are exposed every day to things that conflict with our personal beliefs. Parents need to make sure they teach, including teaching by example, the values they want their children to hold.

re: #101 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Anybody hear Rush this morning on Fox? Has it already been discussed?

Didn't see it but read about it. Limbaugh calling anyone a narcissist is hilarious. What was it that Rush called himself in the 90's? Something about God's voice?

re: #106 reine.de.tout

Has anyone said that children should NOT be subject to the influence of their parents?

Oh hell yes. Haven't you read ' It Takes a Village' ?
Seriously, yes. There are those who believe that children can only thrive when removed from the toxic influence of their parents. I'd have to google some quotes. Lots of marxist stuff, which I know always raises big red flags.

re: #86 HappyWarrior

Thanks. I remember seeing in the Ben Wattenberg documentary on the history of Socialism that prices were really high in the 70's in the UK and that many wanted the unions reformed but labor would not budge on that issue. I think the problem with today's GOP is they're not building a party for tomorrow and are instead sticking with the same things that won them votes in the 80's or even 90's for that matter. The electorate is changing like it was in Britain.

Yep. They times they are a changin' - and they ain't changin' back. (would have posted Bob Dylan here but youtube appears to be down)

BBL

Not eactly a contract for America. More like an anti-Obama temper tantrum.

re: #110 swamprat

Not eactly a contract for America. More like an anti-Obama temper tantrum.

couldn't just take the contract for America back out & dust it off, huh?

re: #110 swamprat
I have a feeling Obama wouldn't like it if someone equated those principles to everything he stands against.///

re: #109 Jimmah
Yeah, and cue up the dixie chicks' "gone".

re: #108 tradewind

Oh hell yes. Haven't you read ' It Takes a Village' ?
Seriously, yes. There are those who believe that children can only thrive when removed from the toxic influence of their parents. I'd have to google some quotes. Lots of marxist stuff, which I know always raises big red flags.

Hm. Yes, I guess there are those who believe that.
re: #102 Rightwingconspirator

Actually some do. My boss has a daughter in school. The parent could request she not participate in certain lessons. UNLESS she wanted to against her parents wishes. This at 14 years old. Beverly Hills School District.

While I think it's stupid for a parent to opt their kid out of certain classes (my guess is it's those classes dealing with sex education), that simply isn't right.

re: #108 tradewind

Oh hell yes. Haven't you read ' It Takes a Village' ?
Seriously, yes. There are those who believe that children can only thrive when removed from the toxic influence of their parents. I'd have to google some quotes. Lots of marxist stuff, which I know always raises big red flags.

Well, I can point to one or two examples where kids would be a lot better off if they were removed from their parents.

re: #115 enoughalready

Well, I can point to one or two examples where kids would be a lot better off if they were removed from their parents.

We all probably could think of one or two examples.

Are you suggesting that, in order to avoid having one child's mind poisoned by his parents, there should be a general policy ensuring that children are removed from their parents' influence?

re: #112 tradewind

The Republicans ship has not run aground. They have lost sight of their principles and the shore, and are doubling speed to make up time. They are at sea.

re: #115 enoughalready

Well, I can point to one or two examples where kids would be a lot better off if they were removed from their parents.

There will always be cases where this is true, but I don't think you can use that as a case against all parenting in general.

re: #43 Stuart Leviton

Does this candidate believe that G-d is not the ultimate authority? If someone wrote a book about the right-wing, they could call it G-dless.

It's really a bit warped with fundamentalists in politics. They think God is the ultimate authority, and yet only they fully understand God's Will, therefore their way of doing things is the Godly way and the rest of us are Godless, even though they are the ones falsely use God to establish their authority.

re: #114 reine.de.tout

While I think it's stupid for a parent to opt their kid out of certain classes (my guess is it's those classes dealing with sex education), that simply isn't right.

Indeed.
Teens have a right to the knowledge that helps them protect themselves.
Some will use that knowledge and some will not.

If just saying "don't have sex" worked then there would never be pregnant teens who have been raised fundamentalist evangelicals who go to private schools instead of public schools.

re: #77 Stanley Sea

I was thinking more public education. The parents get to decide what's taught in the schools - not the govt.

Uh - not to be a nudge, but statements like this were commonplace on the left during Bush's term, and they bother the shit out of me now just as much as they did then. They treat "the government" as some sort of separate, adversarial entity opposed to the interests of the public.

In fact, in the United States more than anywhere else, the parents are the government, and vice-versa.

Bite my shiny metal ass, wannabe theocrats.

re: #121 SixDegrees

Uh - not to be a nudge noodge, but statements like this were commonplace on the left during Bush's term, and they bother the shit out of me now just as much as they did then. They treat "the government" as some sort of separate, adversarial entity opposed to the interests of the public.

In fact, in the United States more than anywhere else, the parents are the government, and vice-versa.

re: #122 Ojoe

go Bender!

re: #122 Ojoe

Calm down, Bender...

re: #43 Stuart Leviton

Does this candidate believe that G-d is not the ultimate authority? If someone wrote a book about the right-wing, they could call it G-dless.

The problem is that this isn't actually a code of conduct, it's a series of coded expressions that all refer to different things.

re: #126 SanFranciscoZionist

The problem is that this isn't actually a code of conduct, it's a series of coded expressions that all refer to different things.

a coded code? deep.

re: #99 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

He lists "Humility" among his twelve values.

It's the greatest effing thing about me. My humility is fantastic!

I'M MORE HUMBLE THAN YOU!

re: #121 SixDegrees

Uh - not to be a nudge, but statements like this were commonplace on the left during Bush's term, and they bother the shit out of me now just as much as they did then. They treat "the government" as some sort of separate, adversarial entity opposed to the interests of the public.

In fact, in the United States more than anywhere else, the parents are the government, and vice-versa.

Couple of responses to my statement, so to clarify...in my elementary way I was saying that that's what I THINK the Beck is trying to state "I'm the parent, I'm in control, not the government or the school".

Regardless that the school is run by the ed board etc. etc. I'm just trying to interpret a vague phrase. Who knows, he may elaborate in one of his books, but I'm not going there.

re: #125 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Calm down, Bender...

"Kill all humans. Destroy all humans.. Ha ha...
Oh was I sleeping? I had the greatest dream!"

re: #115 enoughalready
Really?
Wow. Bet I can come up with three or four.
/Goes without saying/

re: #67 abolitionist

Thomas Jefferson was a commie? Who knew?
/

Toby Keith warned us:

Separate church and state, that's what some liberal said
I say it's time we separated him from his head
You can call me un-Christian but that's not true
Buddy I got a present for you

Could have used the boy scouts...

"Loyal"

No, that wouldn't work.

re: #131 tradewind

Really?
Wow. Bet I can come up with three or four.
/Goes without saying/

You were just saying to me that there are those who want to be sure children aren't infected with their parents' noxious views . . .

I've some problem with girls being able to get the Pill in school because it can have serious side effects and a parent needs to know to look out for them. Also, the Pill prevents pregnancy, not STD's and I would hope that whoever prescribes them hammers home that fact. Not all STD's can be cured with a shot of penicillin.

re: #82 MandyManners

I *think* No. 4 refers to sex education, birth control and abortion for minor girls.

I suspect it also provides cover for child abuse, but that could just be me being suspicious as hell.

re: #114 reine.de.tout

It truly depends on the class and its details. My feelings go as follows-I object to children of pre sexual age being made to deal with all that at all. Its bad timing. A 14 year old has more need of "Sally has two mommies" or whatever it was than a eight year old. 1st grade is not the place for detailed aids awareness. Of course this makes us confront who is in charge of the child's education beyond the three R's. Wealthy families have more choice than those who depend on public schooling. OT but the whole voucher thing... Another hot button issue in education.

re: #136 SanFranciscoZionist

I suspect it also provides cover for child abuse, but that could just be me being suspicious as hell.

I cannot think of anyone who's against teachers, school staff and other madatory reporters being required by law to report suspected child abuse.

re: #93 MandyManners

Birth control pills, that is.

Honestly, I don't know. I think in some areas, condoms are available, but I don't know if that's true, or something I heard from someone who was upset about it without proof.

A kid who was in my class insisted that you could just 'get' birth control pills from the school nurse at her old school, without having to get a checkup or anything, but this is the same kid who told all her friends that she was pregnant and being forced to have an abortion by her ex boyfriend, and that wasn't true either. I take anything from that kid with a big grain of salt.

re: #139 SanFranciscoZionist

Honestly, I don't know. I think in some areas, condoms are available, but I don't know if that's true, or something I heard from someone who was upset about it without proof.

A kid who was in my class insisted that you could just 'get' birth control pills from the school nurse at her old school, without having to get a checkup or anything, but this is the same kid who told all her friends that she was pregnant and being forced to have an abortion by her ex boyfriend, and that wasn't true either. I take anything from that kid with a big grain of salt.

She sounds more than a bit unhinged. Is she a drama queen all around?

re: #116 reine.de.tout

We all probably could think of one or two examples.

Are you suggesting that, in order to avoid having one child's mind poisoned by his parents, there should be a general policy ensuring that children are removed from their parents' influence?

No. But as far as I am aware neither does marxism. It has however been far from an uncommon practice to remove children from their parents for various reasons in an almost industrialized manner in certain countries. In certain cases (USSR, China) for re-education purposes, in other (1930's Germany) for very nasty reasons and IIRC I think there was some talk about this in Israel in the 50's as well? (Someone here would probably know, I seem to remember reading an article about it somewhere).

What I mean is that removing children from their parents is not necessarily a "marxist" thing, it happened in certain marxist countries, under certain rulers but not in others.

re: #141 enoughalready

No. But as far as I am aware neither does marxism. It has however been far from an uncommon practice to remove children from their parents for various reasons in an almost industrialized manner in certain countries. In certain cases (USSR, China) for re-education purposes, in other (1930's Germany) for very nasty reasons and IIRC I think there was some talk about this in Israel in the 50's as well? (Someone here would probably know, I seem to remember reading an article about it somewhere).

What I mean is that removing children from their parents is not necessarily a "marxist" thing, it happened in certain marxist countries, under certain rulers but not in others.

Totalitarian govenrments?

re: #138 MandyManners

I cannot think of anyone who's against teachers, school staff and other madatory reporters being required by law to report suspected child abuse.

Me neither, but I also suspect that if I report one of these guys for beating on their kids, it will immediately turn into the liberal teacher-minion of the nanny state against the God-fearing parent.

re: #143 SanFranciscoZionist

Me neither, but I also suspect that if I report one of these guys for beating on their kids, it will immediately turn into the liberal teacher-minion of the nanny state against the God-fearing parent.

At that point I'd not give a flying fuck what the parent said.

OT - Scozzafava officially endorses Owens.

[Link: watertowndailytimes.com...]

re: #140 MandyManners

She sounds more than a bit unhinged. Is she a drama queen all around?

Oh. Yes.

I just remember that particular stunt, because her friends were understandably outraged, and almost lynched the ex-boyfriend, who sought shelter in the office. When the drama queen's mom showed up to take her to the 'abortion' appointment, she got pulled aside by a concerned principal, who learned that this was for a dental appointment. Tooth cleaning, abortion, same thing, innit?

re: #143 SanFranciscoZionist

Me neither, but I also suspect that if I report one of these guys for beating on their kids, it will immediately turn into the liberal teacher-minion of the nanny state against the God-fearing parent.

{sfz}
honestly - there's not enough money in the world to convince me I'd ever want to be a teacher.

re: #141 enoughalready

No. But as far as I am aware neither does marxism. It has however been far from an uncommon practice to remove children from their parents for various reasons in an almost industrialized manner in certain countries. In certain cases (USSR, China) for re-education purposes, in other (1930's Germany) for very nasty reasons and IIRC I think there was some talk about this in Israel in the 50's as well? (Someone here would probably know, I seem to remember reading an article about it somewhere).

What I mean is that removing children from their parents is not necessarily a "marxist" thing, it happened in certain marxist countries, under certain rulers but not in others.

Also the Spartans!

The early kibbutzim practiced communal child-rearing, for reasons both practical and ideological. There's still a lot of argument over how it worked out.

re: #101 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Anybody hear Rush this morning on Fox? Has it already been discussed?

I watched some of it. I also just refreshed my memory and saw some of what I missed with Media Matters clips.

Limbaugh basically:
* whined about his failed NFL bid and advanced some crazy theory that it was really Obama through an intermediary that was persecuting him,
* claimed Obama and his administration were launching daily threats to liberty and freedom,
* said he doesn't think Obama cares about Afghanistan, and only pays lips service to it since it might interfere with health care reform or make him appear weak on defense,
* suggested that Obama went to Dover only as a political photo op and faked any concern he showed for the returning dead,
* said if he had the opportunity to interview Obama, the first question he would ask would be, "Why are you doing this? Why?? What do you not like about this country that makes you want to inflict this kind of damage on it?"
* accused Obama of doing nothing "for the country", only to it. That his administration has the economy and the private sector under seige, and Limbugh believes they're intentionally destroying them.

Maybe my memory is shoddy, but I feel like Chris Wallace used to be better than this...

re: #144 MandyManners

At that point I'd not give a flying fuck what the parent said.

Nor I, but I do suspect that there's some issues about home discipline wrapped up in #4. Doesn't impact me, doesn't change my mandated responsibilities.

re: #142 MandyManners

Totalitarian govenrments?

Not necessarily. There is however a strong social engineering component to this type of thing and in order to be able to pull that off I think a totalitarian government helps. Generally however I think this is something that is more akin to forced sterilization/lobotomy etc, something that wasn't that uncommon just 80 years ago and continued well into the 1960s in many countries.

re: #147 reine.de.tout

{sfz}
honestly - there's not enough money in the world to convince me I'd ever want to be a teacher.

Ah, it's mostly fun. On good days!

re: #117 swamprat

Not sure what that has to do with my post, but the electoral situation today is remarkably similar to the one preceding the Republican midterm coup in Clinton's presidency. Then as now Republicans won governorships that had been held by Democrats in two states and subseequently, Clinton was practically unable to get anything done .
There are plenty of Republicans running excellent campaigns. Bob McDonnell is the poster child. When Democrats tried to smear him with an old college paper re abortion he wrote while a student , guess what? The voters yawned, because they realize that the economy is more important that single issue ideology voting. Obama is having to send his top campaign man to NJ to resuscitate what should have been a walk for Corzine to re-buy.
You may want to hold the obit for the RNC until after the midterms.

re: #82 MandyManners

I *think* No. 4 refers to sex education, birth control and abortion for minor girls.

The problem is, it isn't specific, and is presented as an absolute statement.

And discussions here over the last few months related to vaccination point up how ridiculous such a stance is. Sometimes, the well-being of society - and the child - are better determined by the state. Vaccination is one of these cases. And so are all the children who've died because their parents decided to pray their diabetes or hemophilia or appendicitis away or who starved to death because their parents decided to put them on some bizarre "alternative" diet or who've been outright murdered by parents who thought they were possessed by a demon.

All rare cases, to be sure (although the anti-vaccination morons are growing alarmingly of late) but nowhere near rare enough. Even parental rights have limits when the parent's actions wind up causing harm to children too young to make decisions for themselves. In such cases, the state clearly must step in, and has been granted the authority to do so by the citizenry. We live in a society where individuals are granted extremely wide latitude to act without interference from the state, but the reality is that the state's authority trumps that of the individual and family, and that such an arrangement is a necessity for a well-ordered society. Putting the family's authority ahead of that of the state leads to chaos, and the sort of existence exemplified in works of fiction such as The Lord of the Flies, Mad Max or The Treasure of the Sierra Madre - none of which are anything to be wished for.

re: #146 SanFranciscoZionist

Oh. Yes.

I just remember that particular stunt, because her friends were understandably outraged, and almost lynched the ex-boyfriend, who sought shelter in the office. When the drama queen's mom showed up to take her to the 'abortion' appointment, she got pulled aside by a concerned principal, who learned that this was for a dental appointment. Tooth cleaning, abortion, same thing, innit?

I'd hope that her mom got her some help. There's typical teenage histrionics and then there's borderline personality disorder.

re: #113 swamprat

re: #134 reine.de.tout
I was answering a post that took exception to mine by saying that there were times when children should be removed from abusive parents, which inspired a Duh. There are always exceptions.

re: #149 simoom

ahhh, gotta love radio talker hyperbole. I've told you a million times, Limbaugh, don't exaggerate!

re: #154 SixDegrees

The problem is, it isn't specific, and is presented as an absolute statement.

And discussions here over the last few months related to vaccination point up how ridiculous such a stance is. Sometimes, the well-being of society - and the child - are better determined by the state. Vaccination is one of these cases. And so are all the children who've died because their parents decided to pray their diabetes or hemophilia or appendicitis away or who starved to death because their parents decided to put them on some bizarre "alternative" diet or who've been outright murdered by parents who thought they were possessed by a demon.

All rare cases, to be sure (although the anti-vaccination morons are growing alarmingly of late) but nowhere near rare enough. Even parental rights have limits when the parent's actions wind up causing harm to children too young to make decisions for themselves. In such cases, the state clearly must step in, and has been granted the authority to do so by the citizenry. We live in a society where individuals are granted extremely wide latitude to act without interference from the state, but the reality is that the state's authority trumps that of the individual and family, and that such an arrangement is a necessity for a well-ordered society. Putting the family's authority ahead of that of the state leads to chaos, and the sort of existence exemplified in works of fiction such as The Lord of the Flies, Mad Max or The Treasure of the Sierra Madre - none of which are anything to be wished for.

Beautifully said.

re: #152 SanFranciscoZionist

Bless you, you deserve combat pay... at least if you teach in the public school system.

re: #150 SanFranciscoZionist

Nor I, but I do suspect that there's some issues about home discipline wrapped up in #4. Doesn't impact me, doesn't change my mandated responsibilities.

I'll never forget the time when The Kid said I couldn't make him do something or he'd report me for child abuse. I picked up the phone, handed it to him and told him to call 9-1-1.

re: #157 tradewind

I was answering a post that took exception to mine by saying that there were times when children should be removed from abusive parents, which inspired a Duh. There are always exceptions.

Gotcha.

re: #155 MandyManners

I'd hope that her mom got her some help. There's typical teenage histrionics and then there's borderline personality disorder.

She was working on getting her some counseling. This was the Crazy Little Hippie School In The Ghetto, and we tended to end up with some students who had some real interesting issues.

I'm so glad I'm back in Catholic education.

/Out to see if I can catch a glimpse of the little bro and family running/.

re: #160 tradewind

Bless you, you deserve combat pay... at least if you teach in the public school system.

I bailed. Catholic high school now.

re: #151 enoughalready

Not necessarily. There is however a strong social engineering component to this type of thing and in order to be able to pull that off I think a totalitarian government helps. Generally however I think this is something that is more akin to forced sterilization/lobotomy etc, something that wasn't that uncommon just 80 years ago and continued well into the 1960s in many countries.

Forcing those are totalitarian actions.

re: #166 MandyManners

Forcing those are totalitarian actions.

Lasted into the 70s in some cases in the United States, I believe.

re: #154 SixDegrees

but the reality is that the state's authority trumps that of the individual and family

Now, that attitude when applied to every situation makes me more than a bit squeamish.

re: #161 MandyManners

I'll never forget the time when The Kid said I couldn't make him do something or he'd report me for child abuse. I picked up the phone, handed it to him and told him to call 9-1-1.

I've done the same thing.

My fave story, though, was when my daughter was, oh, 5 I guess, and decided she needed to run away from home. I got her suitcase out and handed it to her and said, OK, here, you can pack up if you really want to leave.

So I go into her room in a bit, and she's packed a suitcase full of toys - no clothes, no anything other than all the toys she wanted to take with her.

And she ended up deciding to stay.

The annual campaign in the 13th year of the War of the Leaves is underway, currently I'm fighting the Eastern front along my backyard fence.

re: #149 simoom

yep. Pretty much it.

re: #163 SanFranciscoZionist

She was working on getting her some counseling. This was the Crazy Little Hippie School In The Ghetto, and we tended to end up with some students who had some real interesting issues.

I'm so glad I'm back in Catholic education.

Did you have a bunch of Indigo Children?

re: #167 SanFranciscoZionist

Lasted into the 70s in some cases in the United States, I believe.

Yep.

re: #168 MandyManners

but the reality is that the state's authority trumps that of the individual and family

Now, that attitude when applied to every situation makes me more than a bit squeamish.

It's a balance. Has to be.

re: #166 MandyManners

Forcing those are totalitarian actions.

If memory serves something like 10 000 lobotomies were performed in the US in the post-war period. Worldwide we are talking about many tens of thousands. Few of these were necessary, many were used to curb unwanted behavior. (I seem to recall that one of the Kennedy sisters was subjected to this extraordinarily barbaric procedure for very unclear reasons)

re: #2 Charles

If the government is not the ultimate authority, how can you say no one is above the law? Unless you're talking about some other kind of "justice."

I submit that the government is not the ultimate authority, and the individual is. The government cannot force you to do something that is against your conscience, but that does not mean that any individual is above the law. The government's law can be unjust, but it is still the law. You can stand on principal in front of a firing squad.

I am fascinated by the story of the death of Socrates so I offer it as sort of an example. Socrates was charged with the questionable "crime" of corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens. He was convicted by a jury, mainly because he offended the jurors with his irreverence. At the age of about 70, Socrates was sentenced to death. Socrates was actually offered an escape to some rival Greek city state, away from Athens, but he voluntarily accepted his death sentence by drinking poison hemlock. The State had always provided for Socrates, and he felt he owed absolute loyalty to the State even in that final matter.

The government was wrong. Socrates was not wrong, but he was not above the law.

re: #169 reine.de.tout

I've done the same thing.

My fave story, though, was when my daughter was, oh, 5 I guess, and decided she needed to run away from home. I got her suitcase out and handed it to her and said, OK, here, you can pack up if you really want to leave.

So I go into her room in a bit, and she's packed a suitcase full of toys - no clothes, no anything other than all the toys she wanted to take with her.

And she ended up deciding to stay.

The Kid once said he was gonna' run away. A few minutes later, he asked me for my Visa so that he could book a plane ticket to Denver.

re: #170 Thanos

Really woody neighborhood where I am. Push the leaves off of the sidewalk, keep the gutters clear, and let it blow baby!

re: #170 Thanos

The annual campaign in the 13th year of the War of the Leaves is underway, currently I'm fighting the Eastern front along my backyard fence.

Yep. I bagged 12 battalions of them yesterday. My arms are still sore. And the wind just blew more from the neighbor's tree into our yard.

re: #174 SanFranciscoZionist

It's a balance. Has to be.

Who determines that balance?

re: #175 enoughalready

If memory serves something like 10 000 lobotomies were performed in the US in the post-war period. Worldwide we are talking about many tens of thousands. Few of these were necessary, many were used to curb unwanted behavior. (I seem to recall that one of the Kennedy sisters was subjected to this extraordinarily barbaric procedure for very unclear reasons)

I think it was because she was sexually permissive.

re: #181 MandyManners

I think it was because she was sexually permissive.

Just like a certain brother then.

re: #168 MandyManners

but the reality is that the state's authority trumps that of the individual and family

Now, that attitude when applied to every situation makes me more than a bit squeamish.

It's not an attitude. It's reality. That's how things work.

The rest of my post touches on this matter in more detail.

This of course is just the first assault of the insipid imperialistic leaves, I can see battalions and divisions still hanging back waiting for the second wave -- which usually comes right as I'm expecting family to start showing up for Thanksgiving.

re: #179 Bloodnok

Yep. I bagged 12 battalions of them yesterday. My arms are still sore. And the wind just blew more from the neighbor's tree into our yard.

The Roi just mows up our leaves.

Funny thing about lobotomy and totalitarian governments: the first country to outlaw lobotomy was...

The Soviet Union. In the 1940s. (This is not a defense of stalinism in any way, shape or form but rather an interesting side note that perhaps certain things are not black and white.)

re: #182 enoughalready

Just like a certain brother then.

*rimshot*

re: #172 MandyManners

Did you have a bunch of Indigo Children?

That would have been its own kind of hell. No, we had kids from the Iron Triangle whose parents wanted to keep them safe, and we had wannabe gang groupies, and we had kids whose parents couldn't shut up about their kid's special needs, and we had kids whose parents refused to acknowledge that they had special needs, and we had kids who couldn't read.

We had the OCD kid, the pregnant kid, the kid who was a perfect gentleman in my class, but had apparently been forcibly hospitalized for attacking his teachers in the past. We had the girls who told me that I was trying to get them to 'not believe in God' when I mentioned the word 'science' in the context of teaching about poor old Copernicus and Galileo. And the alcoholic kid, who was on parole, and the kid who set fire to the school building...

It was the staff that were hippies. Mostly. They mostly also quit when the going got tough, leaving me and a motley crew of survivors under the leadership if an egomaniac having a nervous breakdown.

I LOVE Catholic education. Charter schools are for the birds.

re: #175 enoughalready

I remember how disturbed I was at the end of the movie "One Flew Over the Cukoo's Nest".

Hard to believe that stuff ever went on.

re: #183 SixDegrees

It's not an attitude. It's reality. That's how things work.

The rest of my post touches on this matter in more detail.

No. I am the utlimate authority over what happens to me and mine as long as I don't break the law.

re: #180 MandyManners

Who determines that balance?

Ultimately, a community of voters, I suppose.

re: #187 MandyManners

Thanks. I'll be here all week.

re: #182 enoughalready

Just like a certain brother then.

Men with high libidos get to be president. Women, at one time, anyway, got institutionalized.

re: #188 SanFranciscoZionist

My goodness. I'd have bailed, too.

re: #190 MandyManners

No. I am the utlimate authority over what happens to me and mine as long as I don't break the law.

That's the key issue. The law.

re: #194 MandyManners

My goodness. I'd have bailed, too.

It was, as my mother says, 'another GDF learning experience'.

re: #191 SanFranciscoZionist

Ultimately, a community of voters, I suppose.

Yep. Self-regulation beats having things imposed by one individual.

re: #196 SanFranciscoZionist

It was, as my mother says, 'another GDF learning experience'.

What's that?

Dede has now declared her support for Owens.

Yes, many will say this tilts the vote in Owns' favour.

I'd not be surprised if her statement has the opposite effect - underlining all the claims that she is a RINO.

I reckon Hoffman will win.

[Link: watertowndailytimes.com...]

re: #193 SanFranciscoZionist

Yeah, ain't misogyny grand? Today we don't even drill holes in their skulls. We just call them sluts and/or bitches.

re: #199 JohninLondon

Interesting.

re: #200 enoughalready

*whack*

re: #176 Lawrence Schmerel

Fair point. But do you give the 9/12 movement that much credit for careful thought?

re: #198 MandyManners

What's that?

GDF stands for for profanity. You can probably work it out...

re: #154 SixDegrees

...The Lord of the Flies, Mad Max or The Treasure of the Sierra Madre - none of which are anything to be wished for.

May I politely disagree. I wish for these things -- these movies -- for Hanukah.
//attempt at jaded humor tag

re: #169 reine.de.tout

So I go into her room in a bit, and she's packed a suitcase full of toys - no clothes, no anything other than all the toys she wanted to take with her.
And she ended up deciding to stay.

Mine got all the way to the end of the driveway, which is pretty long, when he realized he forgot to bring any food with him.
He was bitchin' about something the other day (17 now) and I said "you are more then welcome to leave, get a place to live on $7.50 an hour while still paying for internet, video games and a car to get your ass back and forth to work".

He'll live with us until he is at least 30 I think.
(not that I really care. He is, most of the time, a quite a decent human being to live with and we enjoy his company)
But he will be paying room and board...

re: #203 Rightwingconspirator

Careful thought is too rare to give anyone credit for it.

re: #206 webevintage

Mine got all the way to the end of the driveway, which is pretty long, when he realized he forgot to bring any food with him.
He was bitchin' about something the other day (17 now) and I said "you are more then welcome to leave, get a place to live on $7.50 an hour while still paying for internet, video games and a car to get your ass back and forth to work".

He'll live with us until he is at least 30 I think.
(not that I really care. He is, most of the time, a quite a decent human being to live with and we enjoy his company)
But he will be paying room and board...

Yeats lived with his family until he was thirty. He moved out because he wanted to lose his virginity, and needed his own place.

re: #207 Lawrence Schmerel

Hopefully not 'round here. :)
If I though the 9/12 principles had a Socratic level of application, as opposed to mere red meat for the easily propagandized I'd be more impressed with them. Held to the highest standard it's not so bad. Not bad at all. But the source gives us little hope for that.

re: #208 SanFranciscoZionist

Yeats lived with his family until he was thirty. He moved out because he wanted to lose his virginity, and needed his own place.

If only he was a genius.
I personally support the idea of multi-generational households as long as everyone respects each others space and boundaries. I feel for my poor late bloomer*, I hope that by thirty he will have had a least one girlfriend...or boyfriend (nothing wrong with that).

(not that I want him having sex...now)

Interesting reading the Hot Airheads comments on "Scozzafava endorses Owens". They are all calling her a traitor but they're missing the irony that they are the ones who sunk the Republican candidate. Oh, well. Saw that coming.

re: #190 MandyManners

No. I am the utlimate authority over what happens to me and mine as long as I don't break the law.

But it's your closing statement that we're talking about.

h/t From The Washington Independent:

[Link: washingtonindependent.com...]

Charles Johnson has an interesting catch here: In August, when he was still the struggling Conservative Party candidate lagging behind in a three-way race, NY-23 frontrunner Doug Hoffman signed the 9-12 Candidates pledge, based on the values of Glenn Beck’s 9-12 Project.

208 SanFranciscoZionist

You mention that Yeats lived at home until he was 30 - leaving home to lose his virginity. No wonder his poetry is so wet. John Keats had more passion in his short life, dying at 25 - and wrote better poetry !

re: #213 simoom

Great link.

re: #149 simoom

The show's going to repeat at 6:00pm EST today, if anyone's interested.

re: #204 SanFranciscoZionist

GDF stands for for profanity. You can probably work it out...

Oh, yes.

re: #2 Charles

Aren't these two statements in conflict?

If the government is not the ultimate authority, how can you say no one is above the law? Unless you're talking about some other kind of "justice."

# 2 answers this one:

2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.

Beck is referring to his god's law, albeit not overtly.

re: #212 SixDegrees

But it's your closing statement that we're talking about.

One can go too far when emphasizing or de-emphasizing the primacy of the individual. I think our Bill of Rights strikes a good medium.

re: #218 eclectic infidel

# 2 answers this one:

2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.

Beck is referring to his god's law, albeit not overtly.

I'm all for that as long as people don't try to force me to adhere to their verion of God.

Foo Fighters

re: #220 MandyManners

What about any version of God?

re: #208 SanFranciscoZionist

Been married for almost thirty years. I'll be moving out soon because I am afraid I am becoming a virgin again!

re: #220 MandyManners

I'm all for that as long as people don't try to force me to adhere to their verion of God.

Which is one reason I don't like the idea of politicians signing on to a statement that says anything about their religious life. As politicians, I mean.

re: #223 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Been married for almost thirty years. I'll be moving out soon because I am afraid I am becoming a virgin again!

Good luck with avoiding that fate...

re: #223 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

{FBV}

re: #216 The Sanity Inspector

The show's going to repeat at 6:00pm EST today, if anyone's interested.

Or, the whole thing's on YT, of course.

re: #218 eclectic infidel

# 2 answers this one:

2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.

Beck is referring to his god's law, albeit not overtly.

So, where does one obtain the Secret Decoder Ring needed to decipher these covert statements?

re: #223 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Been married for almost thirty years. I'll be moving out soon because I am afraid I am becoming a virgin again!

Then will you change your nic to Fat Bastard Virgin Vegetarian?

re: #220 MandyManners

I'm all for that as long as people don't try to force me to adhere to their version of God.

Well, that's the clincher for me too. Unfortunately all too often I have heard politicians use "God's law" to justify things that just rub me the wrong way. Simply put, I don't trust people who promote their god's "law" from the political pulpit.

re: #219 MandyManners

One can go too far when emphasizing or de-emphasizing the primacy of the individual. I think our Bill of Rights strikes a good medium.

It's simply a matter of deciding what's legal, and falls within an individual's allowed sphere of action; and what's illegal, and falls within the state's power to intervene, curtail and punish.

The issue here is who holds ultimate authority, and that clearly belongs to the state. Where the line falls that divides legal from illegal behavior is another discussion.

re: #230 eclectic infidel

Well, that's the clincher for me too. Unfortunately all too often I have heard politicians use "God's law" to justify things that just rub me the wrong way. Simply put, I don't trust people who promote their god's "law" from the political pulpit.

I will go one step further & say I don't trust the politcal pulpit period.

re: #222 McSpiff

What about any version of God?

Of course not. One is not forced to believe in God in America.

re: #75 Killgore Trout

I'm pretty sure it's tied into some offshoot of Mormon theology. It probably makes sense once traced back to original scripture.

Reads more like Zany Day Platitudes than Latter Day Saints.

re: #224 SanFranciscoZionist

Which is one reason I don't like the idea of politicians signing on to a statement that says anything about their religious life. As politicians, I mean.

Yep.

re: #230 eclectic infidel

Well, that's the clincher for me too. Unfortunately all too often I have heard politicians use "God's law" to justify things that just rub me the wrong way. Simply put, I don't trust people who promote their god's "law" from the political pulpit.

One is tempted to ask whose version of God they are invoking.

Well, it's Glenn Beck (and others) on Hoffman's side, and Nancy Pelosi (and others) on Scozzofava's (she is endorsing the Democrat for a House seat).

Isn't it just as fair to hold up Pelosi as it is to hold up Beck?

If that is the choice, I'm against Pelosi no matter who it means siding with. She's a corrupt agent of leftist radicalism and should not be in a position of political responsibility (oh - and Glenn Beck is not in a position of political responsibility, so we can simply ignore him).

re: #228 SixDegrees

Well, you can skip the decoder ring thingy by simply dissecting statements on LGF or just wait for Beck to open his mouth again.

re: #231 SixDegrees

It's simply a matter of deciding what's legal, and falls within an individual's allowed sphere of action; and what's illegal, and falls within the state's power to intervene, curtail and punish.

The issue here is who holds ultimate authority, and that clearly belongs to the state. Where the line falls that divides legal from illegal behavior is another discussion.

I disagree. We are not made for the state. The state is made for us.

re: #214 JohninLondon

208 SanFranciscoZionist

You mention that Yeats lived at home until he was 30 - leaving home to lose his virginity. (snip)

About average for an early 20th Cent. Irishman--housing shortage and
all, y'know.

re: #236 MandyManners

One is tempted to ask whose version of God they are invoking.

It's a good question. Reading through Malkin's comment section today concerning the 23rd, and seeing the frothing, bubbling hatred being spewed at Scozzofava mixed in with avowals of belief, I can't help but notice the rustling of leathery wings behind many of the statements.

One can argue endlessly over the existence of God. But there is no question that there is evil in the world. And right now, a whole lot of evil has hold of a portion of the GOP.

re: #237 AuldTrafford

When's the last time you saw Pelosi weeping over an old Paul Anka tune? And the last time I checked, she's a supporter of Israel - something a radical leftist would never endorse.

re: #237 AuldTrafford

Well, it's Glenn Beck (and others) on Hoffman's side, and Nancy Pelosi (and others) on Scozzofava's (she is endorsing the Democrat for a House seat).

Isn't it just as fair to hold up Pelosi as it is to hold up Beck?

If that is the choice, I'm against Pelosi no matter who it means siding with. She's a corrupt agent of leftist radicalism and should not be in a position of political responsibility (oh - and Glenn Beck is not in a position of political responsibility, so we can simply ignore him).

I just wish that I could find someone to vote for instead of against.

* Trustworthy,
* Loyal,
* Helpful,
* Friendly,
* Courteous,
* Kind,
* Obedient,
* Cheerful,
* Thrifty,
* Brave,
* Clean,
* and Reverent.

* Duty to God and country,
* Duty to other people, and
* Duty to self

A person following the above would make a good citizen in any country.

re: #241 SixDegrees

rustling of leathery wings

Satan and his minions?

I plead guilty on the Hoffman issue. What I know about that I learned here and I'm Independent and in Florida, but where does this 9/12 stuff come from?

It sounds suspiciously like a spammer scum trying to weasel in on 9/11.

re: #230 eclectic infidel

Well, that's the clincher for me too. Unfortunately all too often I have heard politicians use "God's law" to justify things that just rub me the wrong way. Simply put, I don't trust people who promote their god's "law" from the political pulpit.

Appeals to "God's will" or "the will of the Founding Fathers" are just substitutes for real arguments based on reason and critical thinking. Thinking about what a supreme being or people who've been dead for 200 years would think about current events and disputes might make for a nice intellectual diversion, but don't add much to discussions about how to govern ourselves.

What's absolutely beyond the pale is using either of those things as a club to beat your opponents into rhetorical submission.

To run around believing in something is a pale reflection of actually apprehending it, Mr. Beck.

re: #239 MandyManners

I disagree. We are not made for the state. The state is made for us.

The state is made by us.

re: #244 Perplexed

Notice that clean is next to last. If you take a troop on a camping trip you will see why when you bring them back.

re: #181 MandyManners

I think it was because she was sexually permissive.

Actually, she was born mentally retarded. But the lobotomy essentially turned her into a vegetable, which might have been Joe Kennedy's goal: easier to institutionalize her and keep her out of sight. It was reprehensible either way.

re: #239 MandyManners

I disagree. We are not made for the state. The state is made for us.

Untrue. It's the state who decides, for example, the fate of a murderer - not the victim's family. And to revisit one of my earlier examples, if a child is murdered by their parent's withholding of proper medical care, or is threatened by such action, the state's authority clearly trumps the individual, not the other way 'round.

Again, I think you're confusing two separate issues: the fact that the state holds ultimate authority, and precisely where the line between state and individual action gets drawn.

re: #26 simoom

I'd love to get my hands on some of the questionnaires Hoffman had to fill out for some of his PAC endorsements.

For example Government Is Not God PAC "does not support any candidates who do not return a questionnaire that affirms that they are pro-life, pro-family and stand firmly against the unbiblical welfare state that is destroying the spiritual and economic greatness of our nation."

Here's the PDF of their questionnaire:
[Link: www.gingpac.org...]

Some samples of the questions asked:

Anything he sent to Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum would also be interesting.

HOLY CRAP, serious theocon alert. I hope the local newspapers pick up on this allegiance.

re: #240 Decatur Deb

About average for an early 20th Cent. Irishman--housing shortage and
all, y'know.

The Yeatses had money, so he could have been gone much earlier if he'd wanted--but it was a period when many Irishmen married late, so I imagine that played some role.

re: #244 Perplexed