See this before it's forced off youtube!!

[Russell J. Hensel]

Well said William and James...I can see the Republican views on how in the hell can people stand by an insane man...I thought the EXACT same thing when we went to a war that was not justified and took a leader or a country and pretty much killed him. I wondered how so many people could just sit and take this. I guess its just a view and about 50% are going to like Obama and about 50% are going to hate him...I do not understand economics enough to know the best solution to the problem. I do think doing NOTHING was not going to work and I do know that I am doing about 5 inspections a day and am booking for next week already....SOMETHING is moving Real Estate in SW Florida....this is about 40% higher than usual...we usually have about 3 a day...now its five...........something caused this to happen...I don't know what.

[William J. Decker]

See below

Originally Posted by jbushart

Our little nation has grown through a series of internal revolutions that have put certain groups at odds with others and...because of the genius of those who wrote it...our constitution remains intact and relevant.

Until a packed Supreme court over turns the basics, like they have with abortion, homosexual marriage, earmarks, interstate commerce, etc.

Originally, only white men who owned land could cast a vote. They swore that the country would be ruined and lost should those with nothing at stake...the renter, the sharecropper, or even worse...the woman...should ever be allowed to vote. The "rush Limbaughs" of their day predicted doom and gloom should these conservative values ever give way to the radical, leftist liberals who wanted to change it.

Please, do not confuse Rush with conservatism or conservatism with evil. The right to extend the franshise to others was properly and legally done via amendments to the Constitution.

Then...there was the issue of the conservative American businessman who feared that the bleeding heart liberals would come into power and remove from him his own personal property that his very livelihood hinged upon. Would the federal government ever grow in power to the degree that my own property could be removed from me without my will? This was the question that plantation owners throughout the southern states asked themselves the day the news of Lincoln's election to President reached their towns. Surely, the previous rulings of the Supreme Court would be upheld and my property would remain my property, they hoped....as the "Rush Limbaughs" of their day preached the doom and gloom of the bleeding heart liberal abolitionist movement that threatened to change our very nation from the traditions of its founders.

Don't you just love it when people who have never listened to Rush, and do not understand his positions on things start putting up all the straw man arguements. Kinda like what Obama is doing now.

And abolitionists were not like today's liberals. Yesterday's "liberals" are considered conservative, today. Jack Kennedy, if he were alive today, would be a conservative. He started and escalated the Vietnam war, along with LBJ. Pre-civil war abolitionists were, mainly, radical Christians. (although John Brown was just a wack job).

When the "Rush Limbaughs" of the Fifties and Sixties argued against drinking from the same water fountain as black people and the loss of social status that was being gradually removed from the White Race by a liberal federal government....they were no less wrong than they were before...and since.

Again, most of the segregationists of the 50s and 60s were Democrats. Lincoln was a Republican. You must try and understand the deeper values and meanings of the politcal philosophy involved, and quite being so ignorant of history and its context.

Life goes on, for some of us. Get over it and move on. Nothing you will ever publish on this message board will affect what President Obama does or does not do.

True. But I still have the right to do so, and the duty to correct errors.

[James H. Bushart]

Will Decker is ignorant of..or chooses to ignore...that the segregationist Southern Democrat left his party and became a "conservative Republican" when the Democrats embraced the civil rights issues of the sixties. When Lyndon Johnson betrayed his fellow southerners by following through with the agenda of the dead yankee liberal he replaced (and whose death was celebrated in Dallas) ....he was not allowed to run for re-election by his own party.

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Will Decker is ignorant of..or chooses to ignore...that the segregationist Southern Democrat left his party and became a "conservative Republican" when the Democrats embraced the civil rights issues of the sixties. When Lyndon Johnson betrayed his fellow southerners by following through with the agenda of the dead yankee liberal he replaced (and whose death was celebrated in Dallas) ....he was not allowed to run for re-election by his own party.

Proves my point and I rest my case.

Johnson chose to not run for a second term because of Vietnam.

Kennedy lowered the tax rate (highest bracket) from 90% to 70%. Lower tax rates for the rich? A very conservative thing.

Hey, don't take my word for it (or Jim's ). Do your own research. Listen to Rush (at least 2 whole shows) and judge for yourself.

As Jefferson said, an educated electorate is necessary for a free Republic.

Nuff said.

[Michael Larson]

This is not about racism James as deplorable as that is.

And for you to camp on that issue when we now have a sitting president of black heritage is ridiculous. I think most of us have moved well beyond that issue a long time ago.

Is that all you got?

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by rhensel

I do not understand economics enough to know the best solution to the problem.

You could start pretending like Larson, Lott and Haynes.

[klott]

Originally Posted by kpierce

You could start pretending like Larson, Lott and Haynes.

I can't speak for the other two, but at least I know you can't just write checks if there is no money in the account! Do you?

[klott]

Originally Posted by wdecker

Keyes has some good things to say, but he is not credible. He ran for office may times and has not been abe to get elected once.
What a way to determine if someone is credible or not!
Third parties are a joke. You can be totally right, but is you cannot convince enough people to get elected, then you are not running on all cylinders.
What a way to determine if someone is running on all cylinders!
Ron Paul, although I disagree with him on many things (and also agree with him on some things) at least ran as a major party candidate.
But he was not running on all cylinders...right?
You have to get elected, first. Work with the system and change it. Reagan did so and look at what he accomplished. Same thing with Lincoln, Jackson and others. You mean like obama just did...right?

America is a two part country. This works well because it assures that, most times, the elected official has a majority, rather than just a plurality.
Really. I thought it was by who won the most electoral votes, not the majority!
Just my opinion.

Judging from your above quotes, you could never get elected...therefore are not credible...and are definitely not running on all cylinders! So which part of this two part country, do you belong to...the screwed up part or the screwed up part?

[nwagner]

Originally Posted by mlarson

You base this on what a single republican said?

Please think a little harder Nick.

Sorry, I was hard pressed to find a single Republican or one of their millions of sympathizers distancing themselves from the comments. If I am not mistaken, I actually see folks on this thread applauding the childish remarks of the perpetual campaign loser.

There is no better of a time for the Republican Party to return to its conservative roots. Yet day after day they continue to reinforce the notion that they are politically bankrupt. RIP mainstream conservatism.

It couldn't be more obvious that they expect to win by default when the DemocRATS do themselves in, instead of actually earning it. Could that be why all I hear is whining on the GOP side, instead of bold yet feasible conservative alternatives? Same old shell game.

[Michael Larson]

Why would you expect to see Republicans distance themselves from Alan Keyes when he is a non factor.

He's washed up and his rant is as meaningful as you trying to stop a tornado by whistling at it.

[nwagner]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Why would you expect to see Republicans distance themselves from Alan Keyes when he is a non factor.

He's washed up and his rant is as meaningful as you trying to stop a tornado by whistling at it.

The GOP would be smart to distance themselves from Keyes after those comments. The last thing they need is yet another wing nut amongst their ranks to personafy all that is now wrong with the GOP.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by nwagner

The GOP would be smart to distance themselves from Keyes after those comments. The last thing they need is yet another wing nut amongst their ranks to personafy all that is now wrong with the GOP.

You don't get it Nick.
He's not in the news and no one is paying attention to what he says so there is no reason to.