Team Fairfax:

Now that the election is behind us, I want to inform you that I will not seek a third term as Chairman of the Fairfax County Republican Commiittee.

I do intend to serve out the remainder of my term through the exchange of the gavel to the next duly elected Chairman at the Fairfax Republican Convention in late March or early April 2012.

I cannot thank you enough for all you have done to support the FCRC. It has been an honor and a privledge to serve as your Chairman over the last three years.

Sincerely,

Anthony Bedell
Chairman

New Republicans Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Team Fairfax:
>
> Now that the election is behind us, I want to
> inform you that I will not seek a third term as
> Chairman of the Fairfax County Republican
> Commiittee.
>
> I do intend to serve out the remainder of my term
> through the exchange of the gavel to the next duly
> elected Chairman at the Fairfax Republican
> Convention in late March or early April 2012.
>
> I cannot thank you enough for all you have done to
> support the FCRC. It has been an honor and a
> privledge to serve as your Chairman over the last
> three years.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Anthony Bedell
> Chairman

I think Catherine Lorenze would be a wonderful replacement! (I'm a Democrat).

How about Mike Shanahan. Losers like losers.

Republicans wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for

- their predisposition to viewing everyone who isn't a white Christian as some sort of opponent or competitor to be dealt with through some sort of control and/or legislation

- their insistence on sticking with the 20+ yr old idea of trickle down economics, which has been proven a failure. It sounds good in theory but it fails to take into account good old fashion human greed & the fact that there's no legislative or moral requirement for the money to trickle downward.

- their general insistence on mandating controls over personal matters based on the Christian faith. Not everyone is a Christian, nor are they wrong for not being one.

- their general stick-in-their-ass disposition

- their desire to feed us to their corporate masters via things like privatizing social security etc.

- their predisposition to be adamently and fiercly anti-homosexual. It kinda goes along with #3 & #4 but seriously... who gives a shit? Let it go control freaks.

I can get with the whole bootstraps ideology and tough on crime blah blah blah but seriously... the typical republican ideology is some shit my grandmother, in all her backwoods, racist, limited world-view, close-minded glory would preach.

Update guys. Reagonomics failed & you can't pray away the gay.

Move on.

The FCRC doesn't need younger leadership they need someone who isn't a lazy douche. And they need real staff not desperate housewives of ffx county or gmu slackers who spend all day on facebook

Way to throw a bunch of stereotypes together there, duhhhhh. According to Democrats, we're still the party of white old Christian men who sit around scratching themselves and telling folks to get off their lawns.

It's BS. Just look at the candidates we fielded this cycle - by my count we had over a dozen women, hispanics, asians, muslim, jewish and Christians like, and we had a gay candidate who got hit with anti-gay smears from the Democrats, of all people. The stereotype of who Republicans are is exploding, especially here in NOVA.

Nobody is honestly trying to create some kind of theocracy. That's just stupid. And I've found just as many sticks in the asses of some Democrats as I have folks on our side of the aisle. Neither party has a monopoly on nerds.

As for the homosexual thing, for the most part, it didn't come up in most races, but I was always forthright about keeping government out of the bedroom and as I noted before, we actually ran an openly gay candidate for State Senate. He didn't lose because he was gay. He lost because he ran against an entrenched incumbent who drew her own district.

It's time for everyone to wake up and realize that the crap they said about Republicans ten or twenty years ago doesn't work anymore. Reaganomics? That was 30 years ago. Quit living in the past.

Oh snap. Brian S coming in and KNOCKING YOU THE HELL OUT.

BAM -- NEED THIS GUY IN THE VA HOUSE ASAP

duhhhhhh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Republicans wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for
>
> - their predisposition to viewing everyone who
> isn't a white Christian as some sort of opponent
> or competitor to be dealt with through some sort
> of control and/or legislation
>
> - their insistence on sticking with the 20+ yr
> old idea of trickle down economics, which has been
> proven a failure. It sounds good in theory but it
> fails to take into account good old fashion human
> greed & the fact that there's no legislative or
> moral requirement for the money to trickle
> downward.
>
> - their general insistence on mandating controls
> over personal matters based on the Christian
> faith. Not everyone is a Christian, nor are they
> wrong for not being one.
>
> - their general stick-in-their-ass disposition
>
> - their desire to feed us to their corporate
> masters via things like privatizing social
> security etc.
>
> - their predisposition to be adamently and
> fiercly anti-homosexual. It kinda goes along with
> #3 & #4 but seriously... who gives a shit? Let it
> go control freaks.
>
> I can get with the whole bootstraps ideology and
> tough on crime blah blah blah but seriously... the
> typical republican ideology is some shit my
> grandmother, in all her backwoods, racist, limited
> world-view, close-minded glory would preach.
>
> Update guys. Reagonomics failed & you can't pray
> away the gay.
>
> Move on.

Your post is funny as hell. You had so many comments about the perceived behaviors of Republicans. Yet, you probably think of the Democratic party as the superior party. When will you finally face reality?

- Sharing the wealth is B.S.

- National healthcare is B.S.

- Spending $447 Billion on some phony jobs bill is B.S.

- Getting your jet upgraded to fly all the way from D.C. to California without stopping for fuel ... and at the taxpayer's expense is B.S.

Shall I continue?



------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm the real H.I.D. If you question my identity, just hit the quote button on one of my posts and look for any of the "L" characters that have been replaced by the uppercase "I" character. That will tell you who the fake is.

I hope a gay muslim join the organization. Just to see them flip the fuck out. Lol.

They had two young Muslim staff members therÉ entire Summer before they returned to school. Other than that, the daily staff members were quiet about religious convictions.

Not only that, they did a great job of attracting many other minority volunteers and making them a part of the team.

A couple of the GOP candidates were really ungrateful. They made tens of thousands of calls out of that FCRC- several of the candidates were quick to blame them if something went wrong...even worse, they really thought it was the FCRC's fault. I asked the so called "housewives" and "slackers" how they handle it. They said they simply have to laugh it off and keep pushing as hard as they can.

The FCRC deserves a lot of credit for the work they did. Bottom line was that we had simply too many candidates, too many campaigns and too many different ballot configurations for the county party to handle. They got overwhelmed and that's not their fault. Simply the nature of the outcome.

It's easy for folks to get frustrated and take out their frustrations on others during a campaign, I know I did it. But in the end, those of us on the ballot are the ones finally responsible for the final outcome. Anybody who says they lost because of FCRC is being ridiculous.

@Brian -

Just curious, but how much energy/money did McDonnell spend in Fairfax trying to get your guys elected? I was speaking with a colleague (who worked with quite a few of the candidates this election cycle) who indicated McDonnell basically ignored Fairfax (both in time and money). How much did he (or the state R party) spend on your campaign? Do you think more money/time from Richmond would've made a difference in your outcome?

Just curios.

Brian-I do agree with you about the stereotyping of Republicans. However I do believe it is fair to point out that Republicans are happy to do the same thing towards Democrats. It is every bit as unfair to label Democrats as tax and spend socialists as it is to tag Republicans as the party of rich old white Christian men who want to protect and expand their tax cuts. If you want us to try to discipline our attack dogs, you need to do the same. DEAL?

Sorry, Bill,

The Republicans face a media that is incredibly biased. If you don't think so just read Weingarten in WAPO Magazine today. I haven't seen any Republican pundit write anything this mean.

Shadow, on terms of cash, I received $1k from the governor. He also did a robocall for us. The Governor hosted fundraisers for most of the state Senate candidates as well as for some of the incumbent Delegate candidates. I know at least one candidate who got a $25k check, as I was there when it was delivered. The Governor did the best he could, as did the LG and AG. All of them were in NoVA multiple times during the cycle. I am not sure how much more he could have done. While I know a few races didn't get the kind of monetary support others did and that was a sore subject for some, I don't really know if more money would have made much of a difference.

Bill, you have a deal.

read Weingarten Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry, Bill,
>
> The Republicans face a media that is incredibly
> biased. If you don't think so just read
> Weingarten in WAPO Magazine today. I haven't seen
> any Republican pundit write anything this mean.


So let me get this right - the party of the Koch Brothers, the Scalia/Roberts' court, Glen Beck and the Murdoch empire is whining because a not particularly funny comic columnist said something upsetting? The myth of the liberal media is another right wing invention (along with the idea that rules against poisoning peole kill jobs - any one ever been to Germany or Switzerland?)- who the hell do you think owns the press? At least they've stopped leaving the execrable Washington Examiner on my drive

The democrats don't need attack dogs - the GOP is in the process of mutilating itself. Who in their right mind can take Cain, Bachman, Palin, Paul, Perry etc seriously?

Why would anyone vote for a party that has these sort of loons as potential leaders? Or anyone parroting the ALEC matra's bought and paid for by the Kochs - or the AIPAC 'bomb-now' groupies?

The underlying truth is that the Bush years screwed the country so badly, economically, militarily, socially and internationally, that no sensible GOP candidate for president ran last time or will run this time around.

Madder than a bucket of frogs Wrote:

> The underlying truth is that the Bush years
> screwed the country so badly, economically,
> militarily, socially and internationally, that no
> sensible GOP candidate for president ran last time
> or will run this time around.


So were back to the blame Bush game. Eventhough libs had the house since 07 and a tie in the senate in 07, then took control of both in 08 till now. Its just a blessing that the two years where they had the house senate and presidency they did such great things to get the country going in the right direction..................oh wait

Madder than a bucket of frogs Wrote:

>
> So let me get this right - the party of the Koch
> Brothers, the Scalia/Roberts' court, Glen Beck and
> the Murdoch empire is whining because a not
> particularly funny comic columnist said something
> upsetting? The myth of the liberal media is
> another right wing invention (along with the idea
> that rules against poisoning peole kill jobs - any
> one ever been to Germany or Switzerland?)- who the
> hell do you think owns the press? At least they've
> stopped leaving the execrable Washington Examiner
> on my drive
>
> The democrats don't need attack dogs - the GOP is
> in the process of mutilating itself. Who in their
> right mind can take Cain, Bachman, Palin, Paul,
> Perry etc seriously?
>
> Why would anyone vote for a party that has these
> sort of loons as potential leaders? Or anyone
> parroting the ALEC matra's bought and paid for by
> the Kochs - or the AIPAC 'bomb-now' groupies?
>
> The underlying truth is that the Bush years
> screwed the country so badly, economically,
> militarily, socially and internationally, that no
> sensible GOP candidate for president ran last time
> or will run this time around.

The party isn't whining. Someone who doesn't like Gene Weingarten is pointing out that he doesn't like him. As for the Koch Brothers, Murdoch, Beck, etc. the Democrats have their own equivalents in Soros, Maddow and plenty of others. Trotting out boogeymen is dumb. Both sides have them.

The media isn't liberal or conservative - it's a business. It's bias is towards whatever creates conflict, drives advertising and makes money. If that's bashing Democrats, they do that. If it's bashing Republicans, they do that. The idea of the courageous newsman taking on the establishment and fighting for truth, justice and the American way is Hollywood creation. There's no point in complaining about the media's bias.

The Democrats have fielded just as bad a batch of candidates in their primaries before, too. Remember 2004? The Democratic 2004 field is as bad as our 2012 field. We have Ron Paul, they had Dennis Kucinich. We have Rick Perry, they had John Edwards. We have Rick Santorum, they had Howard Dean. We have Michele Bachmann, they had Al Sharpton. In the end, the field ended up picking the least offensive candidate in John Kerry. We'll do the same thing with Mitt Romney.

The 2004 Democratic field and 2012 Republican field are really similar. It's kind of scary, to be honest.

It's too simplistic to blame Bush for everything that happened during his presidency. Much of the bad stuff that people remember most was the result of responses to things that were out of anyone's real control.

keep dreaming Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> So were back to the blame Bush game.

We're not back in the 'blame bush game' - we're still in it. At the time many of us said that the damage would take a decade to fix and that looks about right

While the US was busy burning money and talent in an unjustified and poorly managed end-of-empire war in Iraq (which took our eye off of the war which needed fighting), China and Korea were busy building the future

Since Obama was elected the GOP has done exactly what it promised - to fight an obstructionist war of 'no' aimed at enlivening the craziest extremes of the party.

Ask yourself why is there not a single sane electable politician in the front pack of the presidential hopefuls at the moment (perhaps excluding Romney who's done a pretty decent job in Massachussetts but has been forced to recant everything that's worked there and stands no chance of getting the tea-paty endorsement required for nomination)

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Madder than a bucket of frogs Wrote:

I agree with a lot of what you said - although I really disagree with...

> It's too simplistic to blame Bush for everything
> that happened during his presidency. Much of the
> bad stuff that people remember most was the result
> of responses to things that were out of anyone's
> real control.

The Iraq war, Abu Ghraib, warrentless wiretap, Roberts in the supreme court were in someone's real control


BTW - my favorite quote of the day


... "I prayed and prayed and prayed," Cain told about 100 members of the Georgia Young Republicans in Atlanta on Saturday. "I'm a man of faith, I had to do a lot of praying for this one, more praying than I'd ever done before in my life. And when I finally realized that it was God saying that this is what I needed to do, I was like Moses. 'You've got the wrong man, Lord. Are you sure?'"...

The Iraq War was a result of 9/11. As was Abu Ghraib and warrantless wiretapping (which President Obama has continued). Abu Ghraib is kind of an outlier in your list there because what happened there wasn't an actual policy of the Administration, and the folks responsible were removed and some went to prison.

Roberts on the Supreme Court has been a good thing - the Court has been fairly even handed since he took over.

What's wrong with praying?

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Iraq War was a result of 9/11. As was Abu
> Ghraib and warrantless wiretapping (which
> President Obama has continued). Abu Ghraib is kind
> of an outlier in your list there because what
> happened there wasn't an actual policy of the
> Administration, and the folks responsible were
> removed and some went to prison.
>

which planet are you on?

The iraq war was not a result of 9-11 - its very clear that AQ was never involved with the Iraqi regime and that there were no WMD, and had not been for many years

9-11 was used as an excuse for the Iraq war - it was in no way causal. That's pretty well documented

I don't think that many of the public are at all convinced that those responsible for Abu Ghraib went to jail - a couple of low level thugs went down, but it seems to have been directly in line with admininistration policy. Rendering innocent people from the streets of European cities for torture by third world secret police and imprisonment in secret US prisons seems to suggest that this was very much in line with policy.

Senior administration figures got a free pass when the current administration took over - VP Cheney (inventor of a previously unheard off independent arm of government) in particular - something many people think was a serious miscarriage of justice.

> Roberts on the Supreme Court has been a good thing
> - the Court has been fairly even handed since he
> took over.
>

again - say what?

see Citizens United vs the Federal Election Committee - the right wing supreme court judgement that sold our election process to the highest bidder

> What's wrong with praying?

where to start...

a) there's no god - and if there was one, do you seriously think it would pick Herman Cain to run for office? That would show a macabre sense of divine humor
b) who would elect someone who claims that god offered them regular advice? You'd have thought if god was offering adice it would be 'let go of that woman, you'll regret it'

this is the 21 century, not the 14th.

Had 9/11 not occurred, there would have been no Iraq war. That is my point. Any arguments to the contrary are conspiracy theory nonsense.

And, again, all of those policies that you don't like regarding rendition have been extended by the current administration. Cheney didn't crate some unheard of branch of government. He simply tried to make an argument that the VP's office is unique in that it has both executive and legislative powers. He was being too cute by far, but there was nothing sinister about it.

Citizens United represents a return to the first amendment in politics. Both sides have more than enough money, so no one is disadvantaged by letting folks spend their money as they choose to. Again, nothing sinister.

We can agree to disagree on the praying issue, but it's unfortunate that you can't respect the man's faith, even if you think he's wrong. I don't get why some folks seem to think that anti-religious bigotry is okay. Might as well attack him for being black while you're at it.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Had 9/11 not occurred, there would have been no
> Iraq war. That is my point. Any arguments to the
> contrary are conspiracy theory nonsense.
>
> And, again, all of those policies that you don't
> like regarding rendition have been extended by the
> current administration. Cheney didn't crate some
> unheard of branch of government. He simply tried
> to make an argument that the VP's office is unique
> in that it has both executive and legislative
> powers. He was being too cute by far, but there
> was nothing sinister about it.
>
> Citizens United represents a return to the first
> amendment in politics. Both sides have more than
> enough money, so no one is disadvantaged by
> letting folks spend their money as they choose to.
> Again, nothing sinister.
>
> We can agree to disagree on the praying issue, but
> it's unfortunate that you can't respect the man's
> faith, even if you think he's wrong. I don't get
> why some folks seem to think that anti-religious
> bigotry is okay. Might as well attack him for
> being black while you're at it.


Dont bother trying to waste your time having an intelligent discussion with that guy. Its very clear that unless your an extreme anti religious leftist that he think youre evil. Anti religious bigotry is acceptable in society now as long as its against Catholics and Christians. Their values must represent some threat to the extreme left.

That guy will never admit that not only have Bush policies been extended but some have been implemented even further. Just like with the campaign financing he forgets to mention that Obama had more wall street funding than anyone and that law hes complaining about didnt change a single thing.

He just wants to blame Bush and the right for everything and is blinded by hatred. Unfortunately with all our freedoms comes the right for people to be wackjobs and still be allowed to vote.

I know. I just haven't had an excuse to argue with anyone on the Internet in a while. It's an amusing way to pass the time while I watch my kid run round like he's wild before bed.

By all means knock yourself out then just dont get frustrated by his responses lol. I know my brain hurt a little bit trying to make sense of his flawed logic. Maybe Ill prey that he lets go of all his anger

Dear VA Volunteer,

While the slackers and housewives of the FCRC laugh and continue to fuck up, they don't realize everyone else is laughing AT them not with them. Operations was a joke this year. I got FCRC calls from giggling kids telling me "promise you'll go vote? Cool." Whisky Tango Foxtrot.

Keep laughing,

Derf

dont waste youre time Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Dont bother trying to waste your time having an
> intelligent discussion with that guy. Its very
> clear that unless your an extreme anti religious
> leftist that he think youre evil. Anti religious
> bigotry is acceptable in society now as long as
> its against Catholics and Christians. Their
> values must represent some threat to the extreme
> left.
>
>

This is the sort of stupidity I love - the US doesn't have an extreme left -it doesn't even have a real union movement. I tend towards well regulated markets myself, old imperialist running dog that I am, but I guess to the current GOP that makes me a maoist

You don't even have to be leftist to be anti-religion, you just have to wake up and think about it. Personally, I'm equally against all religions (they're all equally bogus), but that's just me (well actually its not just me)

Anyway, who mentioned catholics? Not me. Sore nerve? They must be PO'd, they thought they had exclusivity on organised coverups of child abuse and now it looks like its major sports as well

Madder than a bucket of frogs Wrote:

> This is the sort of stupidity I love - the US
> doesn't have an extreme left -it doesn't even have
> a real union movement. I tend towards well
> regulated markets myself, old imperialist running
> dog that I am, but I guess to the current GOP that
> makes me a maoist
>
> You don't even have to be leftist to be
> anti-religion, you just have to wake up and think
> about it. Personally, I'm equally against all
> religions (they're all equally bogus), but that's
> just me (well actually its not just me)
>
> Anyway, who mentioned catholics? Not me. Sore
> nerve? They must be PO'd, they thought they had
> exclusivity on organised coverups of child abuse
> and now it looks like its major sports as well


The only stupidity is what you are saying. Saying the US doesnt have a far left says a lot about how far left you personally are. Youre in the extreme when everyone seems to be to the right of you.

Yea religion is all fake right so how was everything created with no god? Right the big bang so what made that. You can keep going down the line and at some point you have to say things formed out of a vacuum of nothing (aka space) on their own if youre really trying to say there is no god.

Futhermore only assholes are anti religion. You can not believe in something or disagree with it, but to be antireligion and belittle people who do believe in it is just being an asshole.

dont waste youre time Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The only stupidity is what you are saying. Saying
> the US doesnt have a far left says a lot about how
> far left you personally are. Youre in the extreme
> when everyone seems to be to the right of you.
>

This is typical of the inbred state of the current GOP. The space of rational political views is not bounded by what we see in the US. This country has been sliding progressively to the right for years and is now so far out of the global norm that its bizarre - and explains many of our economic, social and international woes.

If you look at somewhere like Germany which recognises workers rights, promotes a diverse political street, value manufacturing and engineering yet has strong ecological protections, you see a very sucessful economy with a high quality of life. In fact a more sucessful country than the US with a higher qualty of life for the bulk population - and that after having re-integrated east germany and acting as the euro's banker.

The current GOP is a global outlier along with the european hard right, a few despots and military regimes


> Yea religion is all fake right so how was
> everything created with no god? Right the big
> bang so what made that. You can keep going down
> the line and at some point you have to say things
> formed out of a vacuum of nothing (aka space) on
> their own if youre really trying to say there is
> no god.
>

of course all religion is fake - where have you been for the last 400 years? Centuries of scientific discovery, which underpin our previous economic sucess, have filled in pretty much all of the gaps which we used to explain with vodoo, tree spirits, gods of war and superstitions

All of the arguments for a god are childish - its like flat earthism - or purely manipulative and are used mainy to impose particular social views (see the US christian right). The fact that you don't understand the math of physics or biology doesn't give the right the right to force religous views on society


> Futhermore only assholes are anti religion. You
> can not believe in something or disagree with it,
> but to be antireligion and belittle people who do
> believe in it is just being an asshole.

The only intellectually sustainable stance is to be anti-religion. This is not some nat geo program where we get to watch blue painted natives in some bizarre ceremony - this is a country where men-who-would-be-king like Herman Cain claim that they commune personally with a none existant god and then use that to justify views and policies that most people find repugnant (see his advocacy for torture last night)

It always makes me laugh that Ayn Rand, the rights's annointed libertarian market saint, was strongly anti-religion

Although Reagan consulted psychics so perhaps that makes up for her

While loons like the current crop of gop-hopefuls wrap themselves in the flags of the religious right then they have to held up to ridicule

The US has its own political culture and there's no real point in trying to bring in worldwide perspectives. We've narrowed down the wide spectrum of politics to a rational middle and there are extremes on both sides. There's no point moving the goalposts to an international definition of left and right because we're not talking about international politics. We're talking American politics.

Germany's high quality of life is being eroded - don't believe me, ask anyone over there. Merkel's government is dealing with rising unemployment (for the first time in a while), a very real culture war between ethnic Germans and new immigrants, and they've yolked themselves to the EU, which is failing economically. We still out manufacture them, even in our economic slowdown our economy is growing faster than theirs and we don't have the kinds of crippling strikes they do - remember 2008?

The current GOP remains a center-right party, as it has been since the late 1960s. There's nothing outlying about it.

When you talk about "intellectually sustaining" and religion, you don't sound educated or intelligent. You sound like an elitist bigot. This country was founded on religious tolerance, not bigotry. Being anti-religion and concluding that everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot is no better than being racist and concluding that everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot. In the end, you don't come off looking smarter or better educated than anyone else. You just look like an asshole.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The US has its own political culture and there's
> no real point in trying to bring in worldwide
> perspectives. We've narrowed down the wide
> spectrum of politics to a rational middle and
> there are extremes on both sides. There's no point
> moving the goalposts to an international
> definition of left and right because we're not
> talking about international politics. We're
> talking American politics.


what?

this is typical right wing xenophobic claptrap

its like saying slavery is okay because its okay here - or we have a different gravity here than anywhere else

its a globalized world - you have to stand up to international comparisons

>
> Germany's high quality of life is being eroded -
> don't believe me, ask anyone over there. Merkel's
> government is dealing with rising unemployment
> (for the first time in a while), a very real
> culture war between ethnic Germans and new
> immigrants, and they've yolked themselves to the
> EU, which is failing economically. We still out
> manufacture them, even in our economic slowdown
> our economy is growing faster than theirs and we
> don't have the kinds of crippling strikes they do
> - remember 2008?

sure Germany has difficulties - but which do you think is going to emerge strongest? Germany or the US?

The only way we out manufacture them is that we are much much bigger - per capita they're well ahead of us and they export.


>
> The current GOP remains a center-right party, as
> it has been since the late 1960s. There's nothing
> outlying about it.

its not center right - it hasn't been since the 70's

on a global scale or even a US historical basis, the dems are probably center-right

>
> When you talk about "intellectually sustaining"
> and religion, you don't sound educated or
> intelligent. You sound like an elitist bigot. This
> country was founded on religious tolerance, not
> bigotry. Being anti-religion and concluding that
> everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot is no
> better than being racist and concluding that
> everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot. In
> the end, you don't come off looking smarter or
> better educated than anyone else. You just look
> like an asshole.

fine - actually I typed 'sustainable' which I stick by

I'm not claiming to be better educated or smarter than anyone. All I would suggest is that I try to be more rigorous than some.

What science shows us is that atheism is the only intellectually rigorous position unless you willfully ignore many of the facts we understand

atheism doesn't imply anti-religion. You're only forced into anti-religion if you think that religion and its abuse is in fact a social problem- which I do. If that makes me an a-hole and a bigot fine - but at least I'm not self-delusional which seems to be a common factor amongst the right at the moment

don't get me wrong, I'm pro-markets and pro-liberty and pro the role of elected governments in supporting and enforcing them - but I'm against them being used by the few to subjegate and impoverish the many - and against the use of religion to enforce those inequities

To "Madder"--Have you been in Germany? Do you know that your future in Germany is determined when you are 10 years old? That is when you take a test that determines whether you will go to Gymnasium (high school leading to college), follow a "commercial course", or follow a course which leads to a trade.

As far as economics, the Germans work very hard--it is part of their culture. They do not like slackers. When the Iron Curtain fell, there was great rejoicing--but also resntment in the west of the hand outs that the Easterners expected after years of communism. To compare West (capitalism) and East (communism/socialism), you didn't need a map--you could tell by the broken down structures in the East vs the well-cared for buildings in the west. It was vastly different. Capitalism is better than socialism--there was the proof.

Yes, the Germans have large social programs, but as Brian said, it is causing great problems with their people. I just heard on the radio today about the rise of Neo-Nazis in Germany. Social unrest breeds extremes on both sides.

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Shadow, on terms of cash, I received $1k from the
> governor. He also did a robocall for us. The
> Governor hosted fundraisers for most of the state
> Senate candidates as well as for some of the
> incumbent Delegate candidates. I know at least one
> candidate who got a $25k check, as I was there
> when it was delivered. The Governor did the best
> he could, as did the LG and AG. All of them were
> in NoVA multiple times during the cycle. I am not
> sure how much more he could have done. While I
> know a few races didn't get the kind of monetary
> support others did and that was a sore subject for
> some, I don't really know if more money would have
> made much of a difference.
>
> Bill, you have a deal.


More money would have made a huge difference for Brown Kaplan.

She had hardly any street/yard signs, far fewer than Lolita, and still came within 6,000 votes of Velkoff finishing first among R at large and 20,000 votes ahead of Lolita who obviously had lots of money and lots of yard signs.

Thomas More Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------
>
> More money would have made a huge difference for
> Brown Kaplan.
>
> She had hardly any street/yard signs, far fewer
> than Lolita, and still came within 6,000 votes of
> Velkoff finishing first among R at large and
> 20,000 votes ahead of Lolita who obviously had
> lots of money and lots of yard signs.


Signs would not have helped Brown-Kaplan, her ties to the reform movement and Red Apple Mom's endorsement were the fatal flaws of her campaign.

Maybe when the face of the Virginia GOP isn't some Catholic extremist like Ken Cuccinnelli or Regent University's own Bob McDonnell I can consider voting GOP.

Lose the Christian puritanism, the crusade against science, and go back to fiscal conservatism/libertarianism. That doesn't include $4B in debt for road construction so you can say you didn't raise taxes. That kind of "progress" is for suckers. Young people should be especially disgusted by the Boomer generation continuing to pile debt on our backs. I believe Goldwater was technically "pro-choice" since he thought the government had no business regulating abortion. William F. Buckley supported the legalization of pot. These guys would trashed by the "family values" GOP of today.

I guess I see fiscal conservatism as paying for things with "real" money. Not 2025 money your kids get to pay off. Raise the gas tax if you need roads. Debt isn't the answer and it is extremely irresponsible to future generations.

The difference in the school board election was that the Dems got out the vote. Many voters pay no attention at all to the school board race.

Schultz-a great candidate-won in Springfield district which also elected Herrity.
Would she have won in another district? Probably. She ran a terrific campaign and really knows the issues. Would she have won in all districts? Probably not in one of the districts that is very strongly Democrat.

Could she have won in a district like Dranesville? Possibly. But for all the talk about the "negative" Epstein campaign--don't sell the Strauss campaign short. Someone really schemed that whole thing out. A couple of unfortunate comments by Lorenze should not have tanked Epstein--and I don't think they did. It was the "spin" and propaganda campaign by Strauss that won for her. Her record was awful--but, remember, she spent tons and tons of money and had help from Bulova as well. She paid thousands and thousands to an advisor in Ohio and also paid over $20,000 to two full Day K supporters. The latter has never been explained by the Strauss campaign and was never noted in Patch or WAPO--but is a matter of public record.

the difference Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Schultz-a great candidate-won in Springfield
> district which also elected Herrity.
> Would she have won in another district?


No way she would have won as an at large candidate. She had the support of her local area due to the school closing controversy, but if she had gone up against the wider county and the Korean voting bloc that propelled Moon to his victory, she would lost. And let's face it, Wittman did not do very well with his campaign.

Brian-

"Bottom line was that we had simply too many candidates, too many campaigns and too many different ballot configurations for the county party to handle. They got overwhelmed and that's not their fault. Simply the nature of the outcome."

Seems like the Democratic Fairfax Coordinated Campaign managed to pull it off-

They ran all of Fairfax county, parts of Loudon county, and managed to protect (all the?) incumbents with safe margins. They were not overwhelmed- They were organized.

Hummmm . . .

(one more thing)

Spike Williams: Bad candidate, bad results, waste of time and money.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2011 02:13PM by curious.

Madder than a bucket of frogs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dont waste youre time Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------

> This is typical of the inbred state of the current
> GOP. The space of rational political views is not
> bounded by what we see in the US. This country has
> been sliding progressively to the right for years
> and is now so far out of the global norm that its
> bizarre - and explains many of our economic,
> social and international woes.
>
> If you look at somewhere like Germany which
> recognises workers rights, promotes a diverse
> political street, value manufacturing and
> engineering yet has strong ecological protections,
> you see a very sucessful economy with a high
> quality of life. In fact a more sucessful country
> than the US with a higher qualty of life for the
> bulk population - and that after having
> re-integrated east germany and acting as the
> euro's banker.
>
> The current GOP is a global outlier along with the
> european hard right, a few despots and military
> regimes
>

>
> of course all religion is fake - where have you
> been for the last 400 years? Centuries of
> scientific discovery, which underpin our previous
> economic sucess, have filled in pretty much all of
> the gaps which we used to explain with vodoo, tree
> spirits, gods of war and superstitions
>
> All of the arguments for a god are childish - its
> like flat earthism - or purely manipulative and
> are used mainy to impose particular social views
> (see the US christian right). The fact that you
> don't understand the math of physics or biology
> doesn't give the right the right to force religous
> views on society
>
> The only intellectually sustainable stance is to
> be anti-religion. This is not some nat geo program
> where we get to watch blue painted natives in some
> bizarre ceremony - this is a country where
> men-who-would-be-king like Herman Cain claim that
> they commune personally with a none existant god
> and then use that to justify views and policies
> that most people find repugnant (see his advocacy
> for torture last night)
>
> It always makes me laugh that Ayn Rand, the
> rights's annointed libertarian market saint, was
> strongly anti-religion
>
> Although Reagan consulted psychics so perhaps that
> makes up for her
>
> While loons like the current crop of gop-hopefuls
> wrap themselves in the flags of the religious
> right then they have to held up to ridicule




Right far left really helps out economies. Look success stories like the USSR, Cuba, Greece, Spain, Italy, Ireland ect ect. Im glad you live in such a bubble that you cant even understand like 3 countries are keeping the EURO afloat and that will not go on much longer. You are an extreme leftist period.

Again you are just a miserable asshole. I feel sorry for you that you feel the need to try and belittle peoples beliefs to make you feel better about youre self. Why is it that the party of "acceptance" and "open arms" like the liberals call themselves are only accepting of people with the same beliefs they have. Just like most anti-religious people try and belittle those who arent.

Its funny that you mention science as a rational for not believing but dont admit that even science has no answer for why anything formed in the vacuum of space. It is absolutely pathetic how you just pick and choose things that help your argument while completely ignoring everything else. The only thing more pathetic than your lack of intellectual honesty is your belief that it is okay to attack religious people for being religious.

Normal human beings would be perfectly fine with others beliefs and just say they disagree but to each their own. You go out of your way to attack them for disagreeing with you showing your insecurities and is evident of a conflict within you. You know your views on everything are wrong but have to stay on the offensive all the time to try and reassure your self that your decision to be against the man is the right one. I really do feel sorry for you that youre so insecure you have to attack people for believing in god.

class warfare Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To "Madder"--Have you been in Germany? Do you
> know that your future in Germany is determined
> when you are 10 years old? That is when you take
> a test that determines whether you will go to
> Gymnasium (high school leading to college), follow
> a "commercial course", or follow a course which
> leads to a trade.
>
> As far as economics, the Germans work very
> hard--it is part of their culture. They do not
> like slackers. When the Iron Curtain fell, there
> was great rejoicing--but also resntment in the
> west of the hand outs that the Easterners expected
> after years of communism. To compare West
> (capitalism) and East (communism/socialism), you
> didn't need a map--you could tell by the broken
> down structures in the East vs the well-cared for
> buildings in the west. It was vastly different.
> Capitalism is better than socialism--there was the
> proof.
>
> Yes, the Germans have large social programs, but
> as Brian said, it is causing great problems with
> their people. I just heard on the radio today
> about the rise of Neo-Nazis in Germany. Social
> unrest breeds extremes on both sides.




Ill answer for him, no he hasnt. He just honestly hates America as you can see by his responses and hates anyone with religion. Hes just a miserable person who thinks hes better than everyone else and some huge intellectual but in reality has no clue what hes talking about. He actually said that the democratic party is a center to right party. The fact that he thinks the dems are a right wing party shows just how far left this guy is. Anyone who makes that statement alone loses any credibility in a political discussion.

Cut the nonsense Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe when the face of the Virginia GOP isn't some
> Catholic extremist like Ken Cuccinnelli or Regent
> University's own Bob McDonnell I can consider
> voting GOP.
>
> Lose the Christian puritanism, the crusade against
> science, and go back to fiscal
> conservatism/libertarianism. That doesn't include
> $4B in debt for road construction so you can say
> you didn't raise taxes. That kind of "progress"
> is for suckers. Young people should be especially
> disgusted by the Boomer generation continuing to
> pile debt on our backs. I believe Goldwater was
> technically "pro-choice" since he thought the
> government had no business regulating abortion.
> William F. Buckley supported the legalization of
> pot. These guys would trashed by the "family
> values" GOP of today.
>
> I guess I see fiscal conservatism as paying for
> things with "real" money. Not 2025 money your
> kids get to pay off. Raise the gas tax if you
> need roads. Debt isn't the answer and it is
> extremely irresponsible to future generations.

No one - not a single candidate in Northern Virginia - focused exclusively on social issues in this election. No one in Northern Virginia is "crusading against science."

$4 billion in bonds is exactly the right way to be financing construction - that's what most of that money is going for. You don't pay cash for new construction, just like you don't pay cash for a house. In the long run, it's cheaper to pay over time, and that's the fiscally prudent thing to do.

There is good debt and bad debt. Good debt - bonds tied to a real asset. Bad debt - transfer payments like medicare and medicaid. Being a fiscal conservative isn't just about cutting. It's also about spending wisely. $4 billion for roads is spending wisely.

Republicans in NoVA aren't the same as the ones in Texas. You can't apply national gripes about some of the wackos out there to us up here.

As for Brown-Kaplan - she has plenty of signs. She had probably 50+ 4x8s at our Sully headquarters and she put them all up.

The FCDC didn't have to be doing all the coordinating. They had all of the Senate races and control of the county wide incumbencies, like the Board Chairman. They had existing organizations that were proven and effective. We didn't, because we held no countywide incumbencies and no Senate seats. And since we have little party organizaton in the eastern part of the county, that's where we get beat. The Dems have always had top notch GOTV efforts and this year was no difference. Money really wasn't the issue. And our future campaigns can't solely rely on FCRC. They're useful, but they can't do everything for everybody.

"Since we have little party organizaton in the eastern part of the county, that's where we get beat. The Dems have always had top notch GOTV efforts and this year was no difference. Money really wasn't the issue. And our future campaigns can't solely rely on FCRC. They're useful, but they can't do everything for everybody."

Time to run for FCRC board Brian S. . .

Better build up that organization now.

If the VA 'Publicans turn on the crazy switch come January in Richmond you'll see a slew of strong Democratic candidates for Delegate in 2012. This new Republican supermajority is not endless.

curious Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Time to run for FCRC board Brian S. . .
>
> Better build up that organization now.
>
> If the VA 'Publicans turn on the crazy switch come
> January in Richmond you'll see a slew of strong
> Democratic candidates for Delegate in 2012. This
> new Republican supermajority is not endless.


A good portion of Nova will vote dem regardless of who is on the tickets or what organization there is

BrianSchoeneman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> No one - not a single candidate in Northern
> Virginia - focused exclusively on social issues in
> this election. No one in Northern Virginia is
> "crusading against science."
>
> Republicans in NoVA aren't the same as the ones in
> Texas. You can't apply national gripes about some
> of the wackos out there to us up here.
>

Loudoun's Dick Black isn't a NoVA Republican? The guy sent fetuses to people last time he was in Richmond. His entire support base was due to social issues. Didn't he win again? What about Loudoun's Halloween gag?

Cuccinelli is also from here, and serves as leadership for the Commonwealth's GOP activities. Since taking office he has taken on global warming research, making sure everyone knew that GLBT state employees aren't protected from discrimination, and started putting up road blocks for abortion providers. Is there anything Ken has done as AG that wasn't blatantly political? He uses the Commonwealth's AG office is like the official litigation arm of the far right of the GOP. Maybe he should be joining the 4 other AGs in not buying into the mass settlement being attempted with the big banks over the "robo-mortgage" mess that lets everyone off the hook.

I know that a decision for a Board of Supervisor member shouldn't be directly influenced by Mitch McConnell, Jim DeMint, or even a state-level pol, but it certainly makes it harder to support a local GOP candidate when they are so closely affiliated with a state-level party that embraces Cuccinelli, Dick Black, and Eric Cantor.

A good portion of Nova will vote dem regardless of who is on the tickets or what organization there is

+1 unfortunately

Cut the nonsense Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Cuccinelli is also from here, and serves as
> leadership for the Commonwealth's GOP activities.
> Since taking office he has taken on global warming
> research, making sure everyone knew that GLBT
> state employees aren't protected from
> discrimination, and started putting up road blocks
> for abortion providers.


He did that because the law doesnt mention anything about sexuality. You cant just start inferring things that the law should mean and go off that. The law needed to be rewritten. His job is to clarify laws and even though the law probably was supposed to have that included it didnt and the law was being applied incorrectly. Yes it says on the basis of sex, sex is gender though and is not sexuality.

The problem with saying that bonds are OK for acquiring real assets is that it overlooks what is really happening. We are not talking about incurring debt today to acquire an asset whose income stream is going to pay for itself down the road through as we did with the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike or the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel. We are talking about tying up a portion of the future GENERAL income stream in the future for an asset that we want today. We don't know what the best use of those funds would be 5, 10 or 20 years down the road, and by tying them up with bonded indebtedness we are denying those future lawmakers and voters the chance to decide for themselves.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The problem with saying that bonds are OK for
> acquiring real assets is that it overlooks what is
> really happening. We are not talking about
> incurring debt today to acquire an asset whose
> income stream is going to pay for itself down the
> road through as we did with the
> Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike or the Chesapeake Bay
> Bridge-Tunnel. We are talking about tying up a
> portion of the future GENERAL income stream in the
> future for an asset that we want today. We don't
> know what the best use of those funds would be 5,
> 10 or 20 years down the road, and by tying them up
> with bonded indebtedness we are denying those
> future lawmakers and voters the chance to decide
> for themselves.


Theres some truth to that, but a lot of it depends on what it is for. In this instance roads were being discusses. We all know how bad the roads are now, if we wait 5 10 20 years the problem will be much worse and cost even more. Im not a huge fan of bonds and some of them have been misused, but sometimes they are necessary. The other thing with bonds is that you bank on inflation to cheapen it. If you have to pay it back 10 years from now 4 billion will be worth less than it is today, so you are actually saving some money doing it as long as you dont go overboard and just keep it to ones you know will be able to be repaid

too bad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A good portion of Nova will vote dem regardless of
> who is on the tickets or what organization there
> is

Not necessarily. Tom Davis has shown that a strong "good government" centrist can do well in NoVa/Fairfax even if he is a Republican. Cook won in a Democratic leaning district by providing good constituent services. And how many votes did John Warner use to haul in from NoVa? Being a Democrat in NoVa is a plus, but it is probably less so than being a Republican in other parts of the state.

curious Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> If the VA 'Publicans turn on the crazy switch come
> January in Richmond you'll see a slew of strong
> Democratic candidates for Delegate in 2012. This
> new Republican supermajority is not endless.

I don't think the crazy switch gets turned on, not now. McDonnell is on the short list for VP. As long as things don't get all crazy in Richmond, he maintains his appeal to the moderate center, and the conservatives already know he is 'one of them'.

"I don't think the crazy switch gets turned on, not now."

C'mon- Think how many extreme House of Delegates bills were tabled by the Democratic State Senate. Furthermore, McDonnell is far from being a centrist on anything, let alone social issues.

See McDonnell's record as a delegate:
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?991+sum+HB2108

He won't have a choice but to sign off on a blank bill to the Republican HOD and Senate. He risks his 'conservative credentials' by refusing to do so.

curious Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "I don't think the crazy switch gets turned on,
> not now."
>
> C'mon- Think how many extreme House of Delegates
> bills were tabled by the Democratic State Senate.
> Furthermore, McDonnell is far from being a
> centrist on anything, let alone social issues.
>
> See McDonnell's record as a delegate:
> http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?991+su
> m+HB2108
>
> He won't have a choice but to sign off on a blank
> bill to the Republican HOD and Senate. He risks
> his 'conservative credentials' by refusing to do
> so.


How does wanting to make it harder than just showing up to get an abortion make him an extremist? By the way thats not an issue that is split liberal conservative theres catholic liberals that are against it as well.

If were going to have abortion which it seems pretty obvious that we will in our society, it should be something that is thought out and weighed carefully. Not just someone anyone can go down and do as a form of birth control.

dont waste youre time Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> class warfare Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------

>
> Ill answer for him, no he hasnt. He just honestly
> hates America as you can see by his responses and
> hates anyone with religion. Hes just a miserable
> person who thinks hes better than everyone else
> and some huge intellectual but in reality has no
> clue what hes talking about. He actually said
> that the democratic party is a center to right
> party. The fact that he thinks the dems are a
> right wing party shows just how far left this guy
> is. Anyone who makes that statement alone loses
> any credibility in a political discussion.


Where do they find you people?

Just because someone isn't all 'my god, my guns, my bible - yehaa lets bomb some one' - they must hate 'murca'?

Thanks - you make me laugh!

If you compare many european center right parties you'll find that they are pretty much where the mainstream dems are. That having been said, they all ebb and flow - for example the british conservative party regularly swings between moderate centrist and slavering madness, just as the labour party swings between moderate centrism and equally unelectable madness, witness the last 25 years of uk politics

Madder than a bucket of frogs Wrote:

>
> If you compare many european center right parties
> you'll find that they are pretty much where the
> mainstream dems are. That having been said, they
> all ebb and flow - for example the british
> conservative party regularly swings between
> moderate centrist and slavering madness, just as
> the labour party swings between moderate centrism
> and equally unelectable madness, witness the last
> 25 years of uk politics


We arent Europe. Europe is a liberal continent. Why is this so hard to understand? We get it you want the socialism of Greece.

You clearly have no idea what youre talking about about anything. You just pick and choose things you like and use them to try and sound intelligent. Youve proven to at best not have an understanding of how things are working and to also just be a very disrespectful belittling person. The US economy right now is being hurt by the uncertainty of Europe because of their far left politics destroying their overall economy and proving what a bad idea the Euro was in the first place.

dont waste youre time Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Madder than a bucket of frogs Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > dont waste youre time Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>

> Right far left really helps out economies. Look
> success stories like the USSR, Cuba, Greece,
> Spain, Italy, Ireland ect ect. Im glad you live
> in such a bubble that you cant even understand
> like 3 countries are keeping the EURO afloat and
> that will not go on much longer. You are an
> extreme leftist period.


of course command economies are doomed to failure in the same way that ungoverned markets are doomed to damaging booms and busts

you need to seperate some of your examples - USSR and Cuba were core command economies - Ireland failed because of an inability to understand that it was in an unsustainable bubble and was killed by a poorly managed housing and banking sector - much like iceland and the us




>
> Again you are just a miserable asshole. I feel
> sorry for you that you feel the need to try and
> belittle peoples beliefs to make you feel better
> about youre self. Why is it that the party of
> "acceptance" and "open arms" like the liberals
> call themselves are only accepting of people with
> the same beliefs they have. Just like most
> anti-religious people try and belittle those who
> arent.
>

I have never set out to belittle those who rely on religious faith. I do point out that in doing so, they have to ignore most of the things that science shows us.

If you can't make a reasoned case why one unproven religion is better than the others, or even show that they provide good explanations for the areas where science is still working, or show any predictive abilities, then you deserve to be held up for misleading people - that seems pretty fair

if you want to sacrifice goats in your own home, fine - just don't try to ram religiously inspired laws on the rest of us





> Its funny that you mention science as a rational
> for not believing but dont admit that even science
> has no answer for why anything formed in the
> vacuum of space. It is absolutely pathetic how
> you just pick and choose things that help your
> argument while completely ignoring everything
> else. The only thing more pathetic than your lack
> of intellectual honesty is your belief that it is
> okay to attack religious people for being
> religious.

Science has very goods answers to what happens in the vacuum of spaec -in fact we have very good instruments for measuring it. Science has less to say, although some new theories which may be testable, about what happened before the vacuum of space



>
> Normal human beings would be perfectly fine with
> others beliefs and just say they disagree but to
> each their own. You go out of your way to attack
> them for disagreeing with you showing your
> insecurities and is evident of a conflict within
> you. You know your views on everything are wrong
> but have to stay on the offensive all the time to
> try and reassure your self that your decision to
> be against the man is the right one. I really do
> feel sorry for you that youre so insecure you have
> to attack people for believing in god.

:)

This I like - from the party of Glenn Beck and Bill O'reilly - the soft cuddly big tent party

Actually, I don't feel in the slightest conflicted around science and faith - but thanks for asking

Although I have always worried about the internal conflicts in the homophobic right and the righteous TV ministers so regularly caught up in illicit trysts and child molesting priests - but that's just me

"it should be something that is thought out and weighed carefully"

So you're telling me the government knows better than you on your own health decisions? What other medical procedure has a 'time out' for citizens prior to the operation?

Do you mean to say that, without the government telling you to think about it for 24 hours, people would not consider the pros and cons of having an abortion?

Fool.

You only believe in civil liberties when they're convenient to your own twisted world view. Next time you make a post in this thread, I'm gonna call McDonnell and tell him to put you on a 24 hour time-out before you click bitch.

oooooohhhhhhhhh no name some fox news pundit to show how evil the right is. i see weve been reading our talking points.

Science does have answers for what happens in vacuums where nothing exists. Nothing happens because there is nothing there. Science cannot ever explain why anything exists at all. It can get down to a small level and at some point it will always run into the problem of things cant become something from nothing.


"just don't try to ram religiously inspired laws on the rest of us"

Guess what sorry to break it to you all of our laws are based on a judeo-chritian law. If you dont want to go to church no one cares, but you cant just do whatever you want because you hate religion. Maybe if you believed in something bigger than yourself you wouldnt be such an angry person who is just looking to belittle others and complain about everything.

curious Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "it should be something that is thought out and
> weighed carefully"
>
> So you're telling me the government knows better
> than you on your own health decisions? What other
> medical procedure has a 'time out' for citizens
> prior to the operation?
>
> Do you mean to say that, without the government
> telling you to think about it for 24 hours, people
> would not consider the pros and cons of having an
> abortion?
>
> Fool.
>
> You only believe in civil liberties when they're
> convenient to your own twisted world view. Next
> time you make a post in this thread, I'm gonna
> call McDonnell and tell him to put you on a 24
> hour time-out before you click bitch.




Medical procedure? Abortion is killing a fetus for whatever reason not a life saving procedure. Get your facts straight. If you dont want a kid dont have sex. Or use the pill and a condom still pull out and shoot elsewhere. Pregnancy is one of the only things that is 100% preventable. I do believe in civil liberties just not in baby killing, but if that is going to legal then yes at the very least some laws should be in place making it not so easy to do on a whim.

No most women dont consider the consequences or risks of abortions fully and come to regret it latter in the their. The woman who was used to get Roe v Wade passed wants the decision overturned and doesnt believe abortion should be legal anymore. But that doesnt help your argument so you leave that out.

Yes please resort to name callings thats not extreme at all. All youve done is prove your lack of intelligence with how you reacted. Why is it that pro choice people arent actually pro choice theyre pro abortion. Setting up waiting periods to make someone really think about it or having 15 year olds have to tell their parents is a perfectly legitimate compromise where the choice is still there. The only extremism is the abortion proponents you want people to be able to go get one no questions asked under any circumstances like theyre just going out to get a hair cut.

This thread has gotten way too heavy. Can we go back to making fun of the retards at FCRC?

Frogs, come on.

How can you say "I have never set out to belittle those who rely on religious faith" when the whole reason faith came up is because you were mocking Herman Cain for saying he prayed before deciding to run for President?

I'm a fan of science and don't find anything in my religion that is anti-science. They aren't mutually exclusive. It is entirely possible to understand evolution, the big bang theory, quantum physics and all the rest while still maintaining a religious faith.

Regardless, the actual number of "religiously inspired laws" being introduced is pretty much close to zero. Again, nobody is trying to create a theocracy. Even Dick Black didn't emphasize social issues in his campaign.

Bob McDonnell represented a very conservative district when he was in the House. He's governed from the center right since elected statewide and there's no reason to expect that to change. There is a reason he's got close to a 70% approval rating across Virginia.

> ...you were mocking Herman Cain for saying he prayed before
> deciding to run for President?

I mock him not only because he was talking to a god to convince him to run for Prez, but he says a god talked back to him AND he compared himself to Moses.

That's mock-worthy!

Not to mention his total cluelessness that borders on Perry-like.

That's worth mocking.

Come to think of it, the whole damn Imploding Party lineup of candidates is more than worth mocking. So much so that Republicans mock them!

Now THAT'S mock-worthy!

curious Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> He won't have a choice but to sign off on a blank
> bill to the Republican HOD and Senate. He risks
> his 'conservative credentials' by refusing to do
> so.


I don't doubt that he's very conservative, but think that we won't see the hot button social bills come up this year. All it would take is a Mississippi-style abortion bill here to lose his appeal to the moderates. The Senate being even is probably the best thing that could have happened for McDonnell.

For the 'Publicans to beat Obama they need the independents, along with getting their base engaged. I think the best chance for them is a Mitt/McDonnell or Rubio ticket.