Local Political News is Awesome!!!

A solid Republican seat that doesn't have a serious democratic contender. IL-15 has been a GOP seat since 1939, except for one term in the mid-70's.

FTFA (in bold no less): Angela Michael is not a legitimate candidate for public office.

Well, that settles it then. Obama is automatically reelected as President and Sara Palin has to swim to Russia.

Your blog sucks.

I love how not being lockstep with your party is a "fail." Conservatives really can't comprehend that people from the same party can disagree on issues. It's incredible.

Oh boy, Freeper Friday. Thanks Freepermod and all the Freeperfans for Freeping up Fark. Freep on Freepamaniacs.

I'm not sure what it is, but there's something about this headline that totally sucks. It's not funny, it has the "teh" thing from 2003, and it uses the word "blasts" which is a hyperbolic tabloid verb used to grab the attention of retards.

Rapmaster2000: I'm not sure what it is, but there's something about this headline that totally sucks. It's not funny, it has the "teh" thing from 2003, and it uses the word "blasts" which is a hyperbolic tabloid verb used to grab the attention of retards.

I also like the description of the author as a diarist, implying that she is only writing for herself/himself. I am surprised that Democrat wasn't spelled Dem-o-rat.

It's not like the Kos kids have a history of activism to turn the Democratic Party further to the left...

for some people a single issue is enough.

Like for republicans its fark the poor. Don't fark the poor, you're not a true republican.

jake_lex: When a candidate only has one position

Missionary?

YAY! It's still FARK TROLLWEEK!!!!!!

We've got two entire political parties that have defined themselves based on 3-4 points of disagreement. Falling out of step on one of them is a quarter or the damn platform!

BravadoGT: coeyagi: twat_waffle: It's not like the Kos kids have a history of activism to turn the Democratic Party further to the left...

You mean, away from the center which is where the GOP has dragged them? Lemme see if I can find a Kleenex for you...

Remember when it was ok to be a pro-life Democrat? Nowadays, you might as well declare yourself a child molester for the scorn that will be heaped upon you...

Remember when it was ok to be a pro-choice Republican? Nowadays, you might as well declare yourself a child molester for the scorn that will be heaped upon you...

BravadoGT: coeyagi: twat_waffle: It's not like the Kos kids have a history of activism to turn the Democratic Party further to the left...

You mean, away from the center which is where the GOP has dragged them? Lemme see if I can find a Kleenex for you...

Remember when it was ok to be a pro-life Democrat? Nowadays, you might as well declare yourself a child molester for the scorn that will be heaped upon you...

If I had my way, it wouldn't be scorn being heaped upon anybody who's still anti-choice. My first thought is pig vomit, followed closely by camel semen.

So we can't paste Freeper comments on here without being asked to leave but some random DKos diary written by an unknown is greenlight worthy?

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOKAY

BravadoGT: Philip Francis Queeg: BravadoGT: coeyagi: twat_waffle: It's not like the Kos kids have a history of activism to turn the Democratic Party further to the left...

You mean, away from the center which is where the GOP has dragged them? Lemme see if I can find a Kleenex for you...

Remember when it was ok to be a pro-life Democrat? Nowadays, you might as well declare yourself a child molester for the scorn that will be heaped upon you...

Remember when it was ok to be a pro-choice Republican? Nowadays, you might as well declare yourself a child molester for the scorn that will be heaped upon you...

But I thought the Democrats were supposed to be different than those evil, Nazi Republicans? I thought the Democrats were tolerant of diverse opinions, cultures and attitudes? But now all you can say is essentially ""But the Republicans...." (i.e. "We're no different than Republicans when it comes to one-issue litmus tests?")

Congratulations, pat yourself on the back.

Yep, the Democrats are just exactly like the Republicans in their intolerance for differences of opinion on abortion.

That's why a pro-life Democrat is Senate Majority leader.

I think the main concern is that she has NO other stances.

If all anyone cares or works on is abortion, they won't be fit for public office -- as there is more to representing your district then ONE social issue.

There are two people here who are obsessed with one issue.

1. Angela Michael
2. Subby

HellRaisingHoosier: I think the main concern is that she has NO other stances.

If all anyone cares or works on is abortion, they won't be fit for public office -- as there is more to representing your district then ONE social issue.

How so?

A couple or three ago years I registered as Republican so I could vote for the bad guy's opponents in the Primaries. My criteria were that they had to support free speech and separation of church and state, oppose the ongoing wars and support women's right to abortion. If that was too tall an order I made abortion rights the most important factor, Kentucky being in "Jesusland."

When the non-fascist Republican candidates kept lost resoundingly not only here but elsewhere I gave it up. Now I'm back to being a non-voting purist. That might change when America is ready for democracy, if that's can ever happen.

I still say the way to restore the USA is to push the Republican party as far to the left as you possibly can. Ignore the Democrats: leftists have been trying that with them since the New Deal and look where it got us -- a "socialist" President whose policies are way to the right of Nixon's.

It would be better if a few states or parts of states seceded into their own new country. For a start several million citizens to the left of center might colonize North Dakota and implement a progressive system there.

But if y'all insist on keeping on like you have you can do so without my participation. Regardless of which candidate is worse I refuse to vote for ANY evil.

Unless of course the right to abortion is so endangered that my moral code demands my sacrifice.

coeyagi:

twat_waffle: It's not like the Kos kids have a history of activism to turn the Democratic Party further to the left...

You mean, away from the center which is where the GOP has dragged them? Lemme see if I can find a Kleenex for you...

No no no, the center is too far to the left for the Democratic National Committee.
Nixon was a centrist in 1968.

BravadoGT:


Remember when it was ok to be a pro-life Democrat? Nowadays, you might as well declare yourself a child molester for the scorn that will be heaped upon you...

And justly so. I even scorn Republicans, Stormfronters, militant lesbians and Trotskyists who oppose abortion rights.

twat_waffle: It's not like the Kos kids have a history of activism to turn the Democratic Party further to the left...

coeyagi You mean, away from the center which is where the GOP has dragged them? Lemme see if I can find a Kleenex for you...

"I've signed a public letter calling for the Democratic Party at the next convention to espouse my position on abortion which is to minimize the need, requirement for abortion and limit it only to women whose life are in danger or who are pregnant as a result of rape or incest. I think if the Democratic Party would adopt that policy that would be acceptable to a lot of people who are now estranged from our party because of the abortion issue" Jimmy Carter 3/29/12

jake_lex: When a candidate only has one position, then, yeah, it's hard to cite more than one reason for your disagreement with him or her.

And Randall Terry is currently running for President as a Democrat. So I guess the Daily Kos should take his candidacy seriously too, huh?

If either of these dupes had any balls at all, they'd run third party. The fact that they're abusing the Machine to get their anti-woman agenda out there shows just how big a problem the Machine is, and just how much a part of the problem they are.

coeyagi: MFL: twat_waffle: It's not like the Kos kids have a history of activism to turn the Democratic Party further to the left...

coeyagi You mean, away from the center which is where the GOP has dragged them? Lemme see if I can find a Kleenex for you...

"I've signed a public letter calling for the Democratic Party at the next convention to espouse my position on abortion which is to minimize the need, requirement for abortion and limit it only to women whose life are in danger or who are pregnant as a result of rape or incest. I think if the Democratic Party would adopt that policy that would be acceptable to a lot of people who are now estranged from our party because of the abortion issue" Jimmy Carter 3/29/12

Even farking Jimmy, thinking like a Tard / GOPer. Root cause analysis eludes them.

How about Safe Sex Education? Boom, done.

//how farking hard is this?

Old Southern Democrat has a conservative stance on abortion? Shocking!

coeyagi replied to me, The One True TheDavid:

But if y'all insist on keeping on like you have you can do so without my participation. Regardless of which candidate is worse I refuse to vote for ANY evil.

Unless of course the right to abortion is so endangered that my moral code demands my sacrifice.

coeyagi: CSB, so basically YOU need to run since you are the only one who can conform to YOUR principles and not be "evil".

Fortunately you're wrong. As far as I'm concerned, a candidate need only be against imperialist war, against stomping on the 99%, against the "War on Terror" and supportive of basic human rights like free speech, free love and reproductive freedom.

Unfortunately the vast majority of politicians fail on at least two of those fundamental criteria, and people still elect them. "He's anti-gay but at least he's anti-war" or "she's economically egalitarian but supports the War On Terror." And voting for "the lesser evil" is how the country got dragged so far to the right in the first place. Hint: if you keep losing it's not compromise, it's surrender.

I pick abortion rights because it's the most endangered item on my list right now. As far as I'm concerned Americans will surrender their right to abortion over my dead body.

And by the way, abortion is a "men's issue" also. As straights should support gay rights and Gentiles should oppose anti-semitism, one cannot be a progressive man without protecting women's right to control their own bodies.

As for running for office, the big problem is money: voters can't refuse to vote for "that nutcase" if they've never heard of me. With an advertising budget of a few hundred million dollars a decent publicist can even make my having been on SSI since 1986 a virtue.

I'd have to run as a Democrat or a Republican of course, because US voters are unwilling to vote for a third-party candidate because their TVs tell them a third party candidate can't win. Of the two major parties I'll run as a Republican because that party hasn't been immune sine 1973 to input from the the left; indeed the rightists would have a hard time co-opting a socialist pro-gay pro-abortion Republican. Can you imagine a bunch of teabagger toadies burying me in the Republican primaries by claiming to be more anti-corporate and "anti-Jesus" than me?

In the extremely unlikely event that I get nominated the Republican candidate I'd most likely be to the left of the Democrat as well; as southern Democrats voted for Nixon in '72, truly progressive Democrats would have the option of voting for me. And the good thing is it's such a long shot that I'd have a better chance by sticking to my socialist pro-gay pro-abortion views than by being publicly "washed in the blood of the Lamb," if only because I'd be such an off-the-wall novelty that I'd easily stand out from any other Republican.

It would probably be easier not to begin by running for the U.S. Senate though: I might be a nutcase but I'm no Rand Paul.

Philip Francis Queeg:

a pro-life Democrat is Senate Majority leader.

Hence the right to abortion continues to become more and more endangered.

Democrats should be as offended by that as Republicans would be by a pro-choice Republican. Unless, of course, there's really not enough difference between those parties to justify more effort to choose than flipping a coin.