Comments Posted By Quilly Mammoth
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 24 Comments
DOES A BROWN VICTORY POSE A DANGER FOR THE GOP?
I think the Republican Brand is about to change. It's called Tea Party. Despite not having a major name or a billion dollar benefactor it's working. I, like many of the Founders, have faith in the common man.
What was that article you wrote about the Tea Party, Rick? You'd join it when?
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 19.01.2010 @ 22:34
SCOTT BROWN BITES THE HEADS OFF LITTLE CHILDREN AND DRINKS THEIR BLOOD
BTW: being a curmudgeon doesn't make you right. It's either a shield that allows you to go out front when you see clear victory and be grumpy about doing so or covering your backside as an Eeyore.
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 19.01.2010 @ 21:07
It was the Tea Party Movement that just won Mass...and...and...I was going to put something in that was nasty. But victories by the Real Roots of Conservatism, that part which doesn't require big names and big money to be successful, make me giggle about some of the sanctimonious posts you have made, Rick.
LOL! :giggle:
Do you really think you have a part in the future of conservatism? And if you do...why?
QM
And you're the one who's going to tell me I don't? Kinda impressed with yourself, no? And you might note that 12 year old little girls giggle. Adults don't giggle.
In 6 months you will be trashing Scott Brown for being a filty RINO, Love to hear you "giggle" then.
Besides, I am smarter, prettier, richer, and have a bigger dick than you. That alone, gives me a better perspective on conservatism than you will ever have.
ed.
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 19.01.2010 @ 21:02
ON FAILURE - OBAMA'S AND AMERICA'S
Rick, you've glossed over the fundamental difference between the liberals opposition to the war and conservative opposition to Obama. We aren't afraid to say that the consequences of Obama's failure will have painful results...not so the Opposition to Iraq. They were dishonest and we are not.
In the best case scenario Obama putters along until we can get a _Conservative_ majority in the Congress. More realistically we prepare to pull America back from the ashes of a depression that makes the last one look like a rexxession.
But to hope for our own comfort to be secured at the cost of our children's future sacrifice is cowardice. We are indenturing our children because we lack the moral fiber to take our own medicine. It's repugnant. I hope Obama fails regardless of the consequences.
Meanwhile 8-15000 people were at a Tea Party in California. That, Rick, is how we keep Obama on the ropes until we can get a new Congress. Care to join in yet?
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 8.03.2009 @ 16:15
"When you get some money, organization, professionalism, and a little more realism, come back and see me."
No, Rick, you come see us. Because we'll have no need of you. What a condescending turd you have become. Guess that happens when you start getting on the morning slots in talk radio.
BTW: How, exactly, did you think ACORN came about? And now _they_ have the Presidency. Every movement needs a starting place.
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 28.02.2009 @ 22:40
IF ELECTED, OBAMA WILL BE MY PRESIDENT
1.3 million voters registered by ACORN. Some precincts in the nation are over 100% registration. Because of that alone I intend on opening a Cafepress that sells "Impeach Obama" bumper stickers and t-shirts.
Being nice, refusing to expose Obama for the empty suit socialist he is, is probably going to cost MCCain the election.
Being nice may cost us our country. Can we hate more than the left? YES WE CAN!!!
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 14.10.2008 @ 09:52
OBAMA DROPS PRE-EMPTIVE RACE BOMB
Obama is not setting this argument up for the General election. He has that in the bag. He is setting this up to stop criticism of him when he is President. Obama knows that the press will, at least to some degree, eventually start to publish negative reposts...particularly when he begins to press for the more socialist of his agenda. They'll be racists if they do so, and as good liberal myrmidons it will stop them in their tracks.
He will also shut down blogs that are critical of him by directing his Department of Justice to investigate any negtive posts by major bloggers as Hate Speech. He'll make the kangaroo courts of Canada's HRC look like the high school moot court.
If some people think that portions of FISA violate the 4th amendment they ain't seen nothing yet!
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 22.06.2008 @ 14:25
"YOU VILL DO VUT I SAY AND BE HEALTHY, EH <em>SCHWEINHUND?"</em>
Rick, a "lifetime benefits" maximum. One which no doubt the "right" people will be excluded from.
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 4.09.2007 @ 22:02
Sorry, Dresden, but this is _exactly_ the sort of analogy that needs to be made. Frankly, I think that most of the time Nazi references (BusHitler forex)demean the monsterous crimes committed against Jews and others. Not so here.
This is exactly the first step that was called for by backers of the Eugenics Movement in the early 20th century. To create a healthier society in which society's resources were best used people should be tested. _Forced_ to undergo examination.
Alexander Graham Bell thought that he saw a disproportinate rate of deafness in Martha's Vineyard. He thought that the best way to insure the public health was to prvent people who came from families with a high rate of deafness from getting married. In those days that meant no children. Today's eugenics enthusiasts tout embryonic testing and gene testing. Now it's a woman and a couple's choice. How long before that became The State's choice? Particularly inlight of Edward's comments?
Neither Bell nor the proponents of pre-natal testing are evil people. None would ever envisage the horrors that Eugenics turned into.
No one ever thinks about the slope before they slide down it. Which is why remembering history is _so_ important.
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 4.09.2007 @ 12:36
The point, however, is simple. It’s not a question of “abandoning†Iraq. It’s a question of what more good our military can do that the Iraqis cannot do for themselves. And the answer is not too damn much. Right now, we’re more or less in the way of Iraq evolving, in my opinion. We’ve carried them far enough. We’ve done all that we can. Time to concentrate on a mission where we can do some good.
Not so, Rick. The fact is that it is only now that the Iraqi forces are able to carry much of the weight in the heavily disputed areas. They have a way to go but are showing signs of being a competent military force. The question is solely whether creating a secure environment will allow the Iraqi government to progress and solve real issues that are dividing the country.
Simply put: do the Iraqis need to be allowed to descend into a sectarian bloodbath in order to facilitate the type of political compromise required for a sustainable governmental relationship?
And who is going to be the instigator and will Iran be another Vietnam that occupied Cambodia for over a decade in the wake of that killing field?
Yes, the "Surge" is providing a more secure Iraq. Yes, the political leadership is _not_ using this opportunity to create a lasting political unity amongst the Iraqi people. But also, yes, there are other outside influences which must be taken into account.
While the best road to reduced violence throughout the Middle East may be a properly targeted spread of 10KT birds into Tehran the diplomatic road cannot succeed without continued military pressure against Tehran's puppets. How long does it take for the tribal leaders in Iraq to begin to pressure their national political representatives to begin to cooperate as they themselves have only just now begun to do? How hard must they press to get national political leaders to back away from positions bought and paid for by Iran or Saudi Arabia?
And what is our role in fixing this broken state?
None of which will be properly debated because politicians are reacting to public pressure that is often misinformed. If I only had reports from the AP and other MSM sources I would be far more pessimistic about Iraq. The question should be: If Iraqis have a more secure environment what pressure should be placed on them to make the political progress required for a successful state?
The military and political component cannot be addressed separately. Simply leaving as Murtha and company wants will not spur the Iraqis into political compromise; nor will maintaining the same level of troops, as some Bush supporters want,create the sense of urgency on the Iraq national political leadership. Somehow a rational plan of troop commitment must be emplaced.
However, I suspect that in September of this year Gen. Petraeus will report that while the Surge has created a safer environment the concommittant political reform has not taken place. At that time we will bail out of Iraq and it will become the world's next Killing Field.
And this time the effects of those Killing Fields on America will be real and lasting.
Comment Posted By Quilly Mammoth On 6.07.2007 @ 21:15
