Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NewsMax)   Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because he failed to stand with Chick-fil-a like Ronald Reagan would have   (newsmax.com) divider line 176
    More: Unlikely, Mitt Romney, Ronald Reagan, elections in 2012, Bill Donohue, Alan Dershowitz, Richard Viguerie, moral clarity, Massachusetts Governor  
•       •       •

1930 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 Aug 2012 at 6:16 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



176 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-06 03:55:30 PM  
Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.
 
2012-08-06 04:17:09 PM  
I can just see Bill, sandwich in one hand, waffle fries in the other, watching these ladies and trying to feel their...pain.

wizbangblog.com
 
2012-08-06 04:17:55 PM  
He told Newsmax in an exclusive interview that social conservatives will now have to decide whether to sit out the race.

Oh yes, please do that.
 
2012-08-06 04:18:39 PM  
Catholic League Chief 'Astonished' By Romney Chick-fil-A Stance

Gay politics aside, that's really how dumb Bill Donohue is. Romney? Stance? Oil and water.
 
2012-08-06 04:19:21 PM  

ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.


He used chicken grease for lube.
 
2012-08-06 04:20:36 PM  
Ronald Reagan is too liberal for today's GOP.
 
2012-08-06 04:22:37 PM  
Romney's aides have explained that while the presumptive GOP presidential nominee favors the traditional definition of marriage, he is trying to structure his remarks to keep the focus solely on the economy in order to have the best possible chance of defeating President Barack Obama in November.

No core. No values. Only saying and doing things that will advance his personal ambitions.

I'd say those reasons are much more important than than gays and fast food when deciding whether to elect the guy.
 
2012-08-06 04:23:48 PM  
An article about the opinion of the head of the Catholic League? Oh good, I don't have to read it.
 
2012-08-06 04:23:56 PM  

Aarontology: Ronald Reagan is too liberal for today's GOP.


While true, I think it's important to be fair. He didn't care for the gays at all.
 
2012-08-06 04:24:14 PM  
I welcome anyone who would vote according to what they believe a Bronze Age war god would want to sit out all elections.
 
2012-08-06 04:25:02 PM  

Diogenes: Aarontology: Ronald Reagan is too liberal for today's GOP.

While true, I think it's important to be fair. He didn't care for the gays at all.


You've got me there.
 
2012-08-06 04:25:27 PM  

exick: An article about the opinion of the head of the Catholic League? Oh good, I don't have to read it.


The only reason to read it is schadenfreude.
 
2012-08-06 04:26:13 PM  
Romney will lose because he's a non-conservative that even hard-core repubtards can see through. His conservative "bona fides" are pretty much non-existant and the (R)s have done everything they can to ignore that fact. He's not a Christian and thats grated on many nerves and for the fundys who are trying to ignore it he's not making it easy. Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian). He's alienating the voters that he absolutely needs to have in order to win and if he doesn't take a strong stand against -something- in the next couple months the electoral is going to remain where it is: 290 Obama, 190 Romney, 50-60 tossup.
 
2012-08-06 04:33:53 PM  
farm5.static.flickr.com
 
2012-08-06 04:34:02 PM  

xynix: Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).


you don't think their deep, visceral hatred of obama won't turn them out to hold their noses and vote for romney?
 
2012-08-06 04:34:12 PM  
Isn't "Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because..." pretty much a mad libs/magic 8-ball sort of question at this point?
 
2012-08-06 04:37:18 PM  

miss diminutive: Isn't "Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because..." pretty much a mad libs/magic 8-ball sort of question at this point?


i45.tinypic.com
 
2012-08-06 04:37:54 PM  
Uh, right. Back in the Reagan days, the GOP wasn't the party of anti-gay hatemongers that they are now. Really, the GOP wasn't that socially conservative back then if compared to today.
 
2012-08-06 04:45:17 PM  

slayer199: Uh, right. Back in the Reagan days, the GOP wasn't the party of anti-gay hatemongers that they are now. Really, the GOP wasn't that socially conservative back then if compared to today.


No. Reagan is just the one who started it.
 
2012-08-06 04:47:42 PM  
"I don't understand why Mitt Romney doesn't just get his Secret Service detail and take his press corps down to a Chick-fil-A and show solidarity with these people," Buchanan said, adding: " . . . Reagan would have walked right on down there naturally."

I think there's something to this and Misters Donahue and Buchanan make a good point. On Chick-fil-a Appreciation Day, I heeded the advice of Governor Huckabee and headed down with my younger brother to the franchise in Northridge, not far from the final resting place of President Reagan.

Of course, the wait was nearly 90 minutes. We all knew it would be totally worth it, both for the delicious chicken and to make a stand for traditional marriage. The atmosphere was amazingly positive. We laughed, told stories and sang our favorite Christian songs.

About 75 minutes in, after I had finally gotten into the store, amid this festive atmosphere, a sudden hush fell over the crowd. It was caused by a noticeable chill in the air. The older ones among us knew almost instinctively. My brother looked up at me and started to ask what it was, but I gave him a sly smile and put my finger over his mouth to shush him before he could finish the question. I said, "I'll tell you when we get out of here."

The rest of us looked at each other knowingly. We all understood what happened. The Gipper was there with us that day.
 
2012-08-06 04:47:50 PM  

FlashHarry: xynix: Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).

you don't think their deep, visceral hatred of obama won't turn them out to hold their noses and vote for romney?


I would say thats going to depend strongly on who Romney picks as his VP. If the person is an evangelical than he will get a decent turn out.. IF he chooses someone in the gray area of religion then he'll lose about 20% of the evangelical vote. I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..
 
2012-08-06 04:48:25 PM  
In Reagan's day the GOP was the party of, "As long as it doesn't need my tax dollars, do what you want, in your own house, on your own time. It's not the government's job to be some nanny state and tell you how to live your life. Also, don't be a farking communist, because that's treason and we will kill you."
 
2012-08-06 04:52:07 PM  

JerseyTim: The Gipper was there with us that day.


So that's what they use in those sanwiches!

Pft. "Chicken". Yeah right.
 
2012-08-06 04:53:03 PM  

FlashHarry: xynix: Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).

you don't think their deep, visceral hatred of obama won't turn them out to hold their noses and vote for romney?


I think many will sit it out. I know my grandmother is.

"Those farkers had over 4 years to find someone to unseat that ni-bong, and the best they could come up with is Romney. I'm staying home."

Which will be funny, since she volunteers at the polls ;-)
 
2012-08-06 04:55:11 PM  

Makh: In Reagan's day the GOP was the party of, "As long as it doesn't need my tax dollars, do what you want, in your own house, on your own time. It's not the government's job to be some nanny state and tell you how to live your life. Also, don't be a farking communist, because that's treason and we will kill you."


Um, it was in Reagan's day that the unholy alliance with Christian "values voters" really gained traction. It was the birth of the Christian Conservatives.

They were always there but much quieter, preferring to pull at the levers of power in private. Reagan changed that.
 
2012-08-06 04:55:25 PM  

JerseyTim: I heeded the advice of Governor Huckabee and headed down with my younger brother to the franchise in Northridge, not far from the final resting place of President Reagan.


That's actually the closest one to Ronnie's resting place. Thank the Great Chicken above for that place so now I don't have to go to Torrance or, worse, USC to get my fix. I only wish it had been there when I was in college. That location is like a mecca of fast food. There's a Chick Fil A on one side of the street, an In N Out on the other, and a Five Guys and Pinkberry catty-corner.
 
2012-08-06 05:01:17 PM  

ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.


Oddly enough, Bubba is a vegan now.
 
2012-08-06 05:02:21 PM  
More likely than you think subby
 
2012-08-06 05:04:03 PM  
Yeah, I say go with this.
 
2012-08-06 05:04:09 PM  

xynix: I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..


i thought evangelicals had come around to accepting mormons as christians.
 
2012-08-06 05:04:24 PM  
Obama might win because stupid people will vote for stupid politicians for stupid reasons.
 
2012-08-06 05:09:39 PM  
Oh, please don't stay home, Teatards. We liberals would be so happy if everyone would come out and vote. Don't make us unhappy!

/And whatever you do, don't throw me in the briar patch
 
2012-08-06 05:09:44 PM  

GAT_00: slayer199: Uh, right. Back in the Reagan days, the GOP wasn't the party of anti-gay hatemongers that they are now. Really, the GOP wasn't that socially conservative back then if compared to today.

No. Reagan is just the one who started it.


Realize that Reagan was born in 1911 and the world was a different place. Until 1973 homosexuality was considered a mental disorder by the brainiacs in the medical world. Even though this was the case Reagan was a child of Hollywood which was pretty gay in 50s and 60s. If anything he was accepting and open to homosexuality. I think the reason people view him as anti-gay was because he stated, in regards to AIDS, that "maybe the Lord brought down this plague because illicit sex is against the Ten Commandments." He was not discriminatory in this thought though feeling that anyone having sex out of wedlock or that had pre-marital sex was clearly a sinner. History would put an anti-gay spin on that though.

In fact the first openly gay couple to stay a night at the White House was under Reagan's administration (his interior decorator + boyfriend). In the 70s he fought a dangerous political battle where he strongly opposed a ballot that would keep gay teachers out of the classroom as he was gearing up to run for pres. As Lou Cannon, one of his biographers, points out: ["respectful of the privacy of others" and was "not the sort of person who bothers about what people do in their own bedrooms." This attitude was consistent with Reagan's larger philosophical commitment to individual liberty and limited government.] The repubs could use some non-polarized leadership like that now.. And a lot less derp.

Reagan has been unfairly judged and the political risk he took when many of the nation considered homosexuality an abomination was tremendous. For Obama or Romney to say they support homosexual rights takes practically no risk these days. Consider that..
 
2012-08-06 05:10:35 PM  

exick: An article about the opinion of the head of the Catholic League? Oh good, I don't have to read it.


Good ol' Bill? Has this one-man "league" apologized for being an anti-Semite yet? And why is Newsmax publishing the writings of an anti-Semite in the first place? Are they friendly with antisemitic figures?
 
2012-08-06 05:16:06 PM  

EnviroDude: Obama might win because stupid people will vote for stupid politicians for stupid reasons.


*yawn*

I realize it's Monday and all, but if you're just going to phone it in spare yourself the minimal effort.

Article: Even Romney's biggest single donor wishes he'd take firmer stances (from Newsmax no less)

EnviroDud: B-b-but Obama is a poopyhead!
 
2012-08-06 05:16:32 PM  
www.theage.com.au
 
2012-08-06 05:16:40 PM  

xynix: He's not a Christian and thats grated on many nerves and for the fundys who are trying to ignore it he's not making it easy. Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).


You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon. I take your point that many evangelical Christians have been taught that Mormonism isn't part of their sphere but don't let a group of Protestant heretics whose religion was invented in the 17th and 18th centuries be the gatekeepers of 2000 years of "authentic Christianity?" Don't grant them that bullshiat status in the first place. Evangelical Protestants are very much a minority of worldwide Christians. They don't set the rules and they shouldn't be allowed to claim they do. Every time one of them does it they should be called out and exposed for the tiny minority they are.
 
2012-08-06 05:20:45 PM  

Somacandra: Good ol' Bill? Has this one-man "league" apologized for being an anti-Semite yet? And why is Newsmax publishing the writings of an anti-Semite in the first place? Are they friendly with antisemitic figures?


Considering the piece also quotes Pat Buchanan, I'm going to have to answer in the affirmative.
 
2012-08-06 05:29:03 PM  

EnviroDude: Obama might win because stupid people will vote for stupid politicians for stupid reasons.


Nah. Obama WILL win because the stupid people will divide their votes among Romney, a Libertarian or two, and a few assorted Teabaggers.

In 2004, Bush won easily because the stupid people were united behind him.
 
2012-08-06 05:33:38 PM  

FlashHarry: xynix: I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..

i thought evangelicals had come around to accepting mormons as christians.


Evangelicals have strict beliefs and there is no room in them for Mormonism. Look at the history so far.. Newt Gingrich who has thrice married/cheated/probably has a bunch of kids running around got 46% of South Carolinas voters where Romney got 10%. To me that's saying "I'll take a crappy Christian over a non-Christian anyday." Mormonism is considered a false religion and though many won't say it out loud being in the Mormon religion is the same thing as being a follower of David Koresh.

From a social stand-point its interesting to note that our first president was a Diest and most likely didn't even believe in Christ. Jefferson was also along these lines.. The reason Christian conservatives try to act like our founding fathers were uber:christians is because they both belonged to the mega-church of their day. Basically if you wanted to have influence in society in pre-colonial America you became involved in the church. Didn't mean you were Christian though. However even before our first political battles as a fledgling democracy politicians were using God as a tool to amass votes.
 
2012-08-06 05:37:47 PM  

Somacandra: xynix: He's not a Christian and thats grated on many nerves and for the fundys who are trying to ignore it he's not making it easy. Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).

You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon. I take your point that many evangelical Christians have been taught that Mormonism isn't part of their sphere but don't let a group of Protestant heretics whose religion was invented in the 17th and 18th centuries be the gatekeepers of 2000 years of "authentic Christianity?" Don't grant them that bullshiat status in the first place. Evangelical Protestants are very much a minority of worldwide Christians. They don't set the rules and they shouldn't be allowed to claim they do. Every time one of them does it they should be called out and exposed for the tiny minority they are.


The problem being that the majority of the evangelicals you cite are right here in our voting districts. I have no opinion on Mormons vs Christians. In fact my best friend is Mormon and his parents are spectacular people who have never drank, adopted 4 kids, raised them, sent them to college, etc etc. It's irrelevant though because the evangelicals believe what they believe and they make up about 20% of the Christian vote.
 
2012-08-06 05:40:32 PM  
"No one's going to be allowed to speak at any great length on this issue," [Huckabee] predicted in regard to the convention. "All we're going to hear is that marriage is between a man and a woman. That's flatulent."

Yeah, too much Cick-fil-A will do that
 
2012-08-06 05:42:24 PM  

xynix: FlashHarry: xynix: I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..

i thought evangelicals had come around to accepting mormons as christians.

Evangelicals have strict beliefs and there is no room in them for Mormonism. Look at the history so far.. Newt Gingrich who has thrice married/cheated/probably has a bunch of kids running around got 46% of South Carolinas voters where Romney got 10%. To me that's saying "I'll take a crappy Christian over a non-Christian anyday." Mormonism is considered a false religion and though many won't say it out loud being in the Mormon religion is the same thing as being a follower of David Koresh.

From a social stand-point its interesting to note that our first president was a Diest and most likely didn't even believe in Christ. Jefferson was also along these lines.. The reason Christian conservatives try to act like our founding fathers were uber:christians is because they both belonged to the mega-church of their day. Basically if you wanted to have influence in society in pre-colonial America you became involved in the church. Didn't mean you were Christian though. However even before our first political battles as a fledgling democracy politicians were using God as a tool to amass votes.


On the other hand these people don't exactly have a history of intellectual consistency or logical integrity.
 
2012-08-06 05:43:03 PM  

"I don't understand why Mitt Romney doesn't just get his Secret Service detail and take his press corps down to a Chick-fil-A and show solidarity with these people," Buchanan said, adding: " . . . Reagan would have walked right on down there naturally."

Read more on Newsmax.com: Catholic League Chief 'Astonished' By Romney Chick-fil-A Stance
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!


No, Reagan would have said something clever and everyone would laugh and then he would then change the subject to whatever he wanted to talk about and it would work.
 
2012-08-06 05:44:37 PM  

Sgt Otter: ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.

Oddly enough, Bubba is a vegan now.


just the occasional tuna taco, from what I hear.
 
2012-08-06 05:45:49 PM  
We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.
 
2012-08-06 05:54:01 PM  
The more precisely the position of Mitt is determined, the less precisely his momentum can be known, and vice versa.

/this is referred to as the Heightenedderp Uncertainty Principle
 
2012-08-06 05:55:22 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: The more precisely the position of Mitt is determined, the less precisely his momentum can be known, and vice versa.

/this is referred to as the Heightenedderp Uncertainty Principle


When to we get to use magnets to smash him into stuff?
 
2012-08-06 05:57:02 PM  
but what are you going to do about it, it's a two party system, you have to vote for one of them!

AHAHAHAHAHA
 
2012-08-06 05:58:36 PM  

Krieghund: I can just see Bill, sandwich in one hand, waffle fries in the other, watching these ladies and trying to feel their...pain.

[wizbangblog.com image 480x720]


That is far and away the hottest couple I've seen kissing in front of a Chick-fil-a sign.

Went to Chick-fil-a Saturday, sad that I didn't get a free show.
 
2012-08-06 06:01:27 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: "No one's going to be allowed to speak at any great length on this issue," [Huckabee] predicted in regard to the convention. "All we're going to hear is that marriage is between a man and a woman. That's flatulent."

Yeah, too much Cick-fil-A will do that


I'd be surprised if Huckabee actually had a problem with that
 
2012-08-06 06:02:02 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: The more precisely the position of Mitt is determined, the less precisely his momentum can be known, and vice versa.

/this is referred to as the Heightenedderp Uncertainty Principle


We call him the Quantum Dip
 
2012-08-06 06:02:27 PM  

Dead for Tax Reasons: but what are you going to do about it, it's a two party system, you have to vote for one of them!

AHAHAHAHAHA


2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-06 06:03:38 PM  

give me doughnuts: We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.


Eisenhower wasn't even sure if he was a repub when asked to run. He was close to originally going on a Democrat ticket.
 
2012-08-06 06:05:54 PM  

give me doughnuts: We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.


What is Republican about Eisenhower?
 
2012-08-06 06:06:47 PM  
Oh, its Bill Donohue.
 
2012-08-06 06:19:25 PM  
DAMMIT enough with the Chick-fil-A threads already. I'm talking morning, day, night, afternoon-- it's Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick.
 
2012-08-06 06:20:30 PM  
Eat Chiks dog food and see how long you'll be standing ( or breathing ).
 
2012-08-06 06:23:13 PM  
The Catholic League is a couple of guys and a fax machine.
 
2012-08-06 06:24:05 PM  

GAT_00: give me doughnuts: We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.

What is Republican about Eisenhower?


His Vice-President.
 
2012-08-06 06:25:31 PM  
Are we still talking about whether or not the guy who runs a fast food joint is in favor of gay marriage? Why?
 
2012-08-06 06:27:05 PM  
Already conceding defeat conservatives?

Pussies, the whole lot of you.
 
2012-08-06 06:27:56 PM  
The evangelicals and tea party SHOULD stay home this election. If Romney wins they will have 4-8 years of a RINO that will never satisfy their agenda. If Obama wins they can ensure the next GOP candidate is a real conservative and will not be facing an incumbant.

Of course that strategy would almost guarantee another 4-8 years of a democrat in the White House and move the GOP closer to a complete implosion and reformation without evangelicals and extremists controlling the agenda but that'll be our secret.
 
2012-08-06 06:29:33 PM  

EnviroDude: Obama might win because stupid people will vote for stupid politicians for stupid reasons Democracy only works when my guy wins


FTFY Phil.

crybaby
 
2012-08-06 06:33:14 PM  
Good ol' Catholic League.

Give us this day our daily derp...
 
2012-08-06 06:33:29 PM  
Still a long way from the election. These stupid things can turn on a dime.
 
2012-08-06 06:37:52 PM  

Diogenes: Aarontology: Ronald Reagan is too liberal for today's GOP.

While true, I think it's important to be fair. He didn't care for the gays at all.


It didn't care about the gays so much he didn't pen an editorial asking California voters to vote against banning gays as teachers. He also didn't care enough about them not to ask Hayes and his partner to redo the Ambassadors residences in the UK or invite any to the White House. Ever.

/if you are talking about the AIDS crisis - it should be important to note both parties blew it
 
2012-08-06 06:38:29 PM  

netweavr: Still a long way from the election. These stupid things can turn on a dime.


Don't turn to hard. The dog might fall off.
 
2012-08-06 06:39:12 PM  
FTFA Reagan would have walked right on down there naturally.

No. He wouldn't. Reagan was a politician and a damn good one at that. He knew that this would of been a stupid move.
 
2012-08-06 06:39:58 PM  

Bag of Hammers: Already conceding defeat conservatives?

Pussies, the whole lot of you.


Pretty much - the smart money was always on 2016.
 
2012-08-06 06:42:33 PM  

DeltaPunch: DAMMIT enough with the Chick-fil-A threads already. I'm talking morning, day, night, afternoon-- it's Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick.


How many chicks is that?
 
2012-08-06 06:45:29 PM  
Ronald Reagan would have enjoyed their famous gaybasher sandwich with a side of freedom fries as eagles admired him in all his majestic glory.
 
2012-08-06 06:47:33 PM  

Geotpf: Are we still talking about whether or not the guy who runs a fast food joint is in favor of gay marriage? Why?


What was a minor talking point in the ongoing culture wars, became amplified by the right wing persecution complex. It ceased to have any connection to "who cares" and became a war on the freedom of conscience. This enragaged a signifigant fraction of people who firmly believe in their bigotry to give, what can only be described charitably, an awful chicken sandwich shop their best sales day ever. I would say that I am boycotting it myself, but that is like saying I am boycotting stubbing my toe. Yet this has now become the front in the battle of why don't you mind your own farking business and don't like things that I don't like. But don't worry, this will disappear like a fart in the wind as soon as we get told what the next minor talking point needs to be raged at.
 
2012-08-06 06:48:11 PM  

slayer199: Uh, right. Back in the Reagan days, the GOP wasn't the party of anti-gay hatemongers that they are now. Really, the GOP wasn't that socially conservative back then if compared to today.


Baloney. Homophobia was just less of an issue because it was more widely tolerated. That, and more young urban professionals who were homosexual remained in the closet and didn't stand up for their rights.
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2012-08-06 06:49:27 PM  
"Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because he failed to stand with Chick-fil-a like Ronald Reagan would have"

No, he'll lose because he's a rich habitual liar who has become extremely rich by literally putting Americans out of jobs.
 
2012-08-06 06:50:16 PM  
Well, I ordered me a sandwich, handed over a sawbuck
Told the Mex cashier Big Ron was settin' me up
Aw!, you coulda heard a pin drop, it got deathly quiet
And the gal's face turned kinda white.

Well, did I say something wrong? I said with a halfway grin
She said: "Naw, this happens every now and then
Every chicken slinger in here knows Big Ron
 
2012-08-06 06:50:49 PM  

FlashHarry: xynix: I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..

i thought evangelicals had come around to accepting mormons as christians.


Nope. I've got some evangelicals in my extended family and they absolutely think mormons are heretics.

//They might think Obama is worse and still vote Romney, but they don't accept mormons as christians, at all.
 
2012-08-06 06:52:17 PM  

give me doughnuts: GAT_00: give me doughnuts: We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.

What is Republican about Eisenhower?

His Vice-President.


Saying you want more Republicans like Eisenhower is like saying you want more turtles like a puppy. It's nonsensical.
 
2012-08-06 06:55:40 PM  

give me doughnuts: We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.


No.

Eisenhower delayed our entrance to space and was the one that put "In God We Trust" on our money and added "Under God" to the Pledge. He was one of the first that got elected via what we now call the Religious Right.

Teddy Roosevelt would be a better choice. Bill Weld may be more contemporary.
 
2012-08-06 07:00:18 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: //They might think Obama is worse and still vote Romney, but they don't accept mormons as christians, at all.


This. Racism trumps religious bigotry.
 
2012-08-06 07:01:09 PM  

enry: give me doughnuts: We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.

No.

Eisenhower delayed our entrance to space and was the one that put "In God We Trust" on our money and added "Under God" to the Pledge. He was one of the first that got elected via what we now call the Religious Right.

Teddy Roosevelt would be a better choice. Bill Weld may be more contemporary.


Seriously who cares about the phrase being on money or in the pledge? He invested in massive public works i.e. the Interstate Highway System, he was Republican but understood what Government can do for the economy via investment. I'm an atheist and I could care less about whatever religious beliefs he had, he got stuff done.
 
2012-08-06 07:03:51 PM  

dletter: He told Newsmax in an exclusive interview that social conservatives will now have to decide whether to sit out the race.

Oh yes, please do that.


This.

Also: No, Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because he's unqualified and nobody likes him.
 
2012-08-06 07:05:55 PM  

JerseyTim: a sudden hush fell over the crowd. It was caused by a noticeable chill in the air.


That was me. I left the door open to the walk-in freezer when I went in for more "chicken". The cold drifts straight out into the dining room. My bad.
 
2012-08-06 07:06:34 PM  

enry: Eisenhower delayed our entrance to space and was the one that put "In God We Trust" on our money and added "Under God" to the Pledge. He was one of the first that got elected via what we now call the Religious Right.


Eisenhower continued the New Deal policies and prevented the right wing fringe from taking over the GOP (at least for a while). He also pushed through the Interstate Highway System and forced the integration of the arm forces (which Truman started but didn't complete). He was the very definition of a moderate - hell even progressive. After all - this was the guy that the right wing of the time was calling a fark'n communist.

/so much presidential fail in this thread
 
2012-08-06 07:06:37 PM  

GAT_00: Saying you want more Republicans like Eisenhower is like saying you want more turtles like a puppy. It's nonsensical.


Cute, though.

acimg.auctivacommerce.com
 
2012-08-06 07:08:41 PM  

Emracool the Aeons Hip: Seriously who cares about the phrase being on money or in the pledge? He invested in massive public works i.e. the Interstate Highway System, he was Republican but understood what Government can do for the economy via investment. I'm an atheist and I could care less about whatever religious beliefs he had, he got stuff done.


I'm religious (and liberal) and I care. I'm secure enough in my faith that I don't need proof of it shoved in my face or yours. He did do the IHS, but that was because of ZOMG THE REDS. At least it has a lot more practical use than the TSA.
 
2012-08-06 07:10:03 PM  

Krymson Tyde: DeltaPunch: DAMMIT enough with the Chick-fil-A threads already. I'm talking morning, day, night, afternoon-- it's Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick.

How many chicks is that?


www.kickingwind.com

ALL NIGHT LONG HE 'CHICK CHICK CHICK'! HE TRICK ME!
 
2012-08-06 07:12:23 PM  

mainstreet62: ALL NIGHT LONG HE 'CHICK CHICK CHICK'! HE TRICK ME!


Excellent. *slow claps*
 
2012-08-06 07:18:35 PM  
Romney will lose because people who have voted for a (R) for president every election for the last 25 years have had enough of the lunatic fringe that is running the GOP at this point and would rather vote for Obama than have the Tea Party be able to dictate legislation like they were reciting a letter to their secretary.
 
2012-08-06 07:26:29 PM  

Bag of Hammers: Already conceding defeat conservatives?

Pussies, the whole lot of you.


Not only that, they refuse to see the obvious: that Romney's appointment to be the Republican nominee was a sign that social conservatives need to learn their place at the back of the Party and looking pretty. The Money of the Party will only put up with the Jesus bullshiat long enough to seize power. And if the social conservatives don't like that, they can take it on the arches outside. The Republican Party exists to do one thing: make the rich richer. And everything else is just methods to do that.

The Teatards refuse to see this because--much like everything--they only choose what they want to believe. It makes for very good sycophants, but not a long-term solution to voting. fark, look at Gary Johnson: most of the Republican Party is pulling away from the Teatards simply because they're insane and they're being isolated because the Useful Idiots have now become useless.
 
2012-08-06 07:26:49 PM  

DeltaPunch: DAMMIT enough with the Chick-fil-A threads already. I'm talking morning, day, night, afternoon-- it's Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick.


teddykgb.jpg
 
2012-08-06 07:30:44 PM  

gingerjet: enry: Eisenhower delayed our entrance to space and was the one that put "In God We Trust" on our money and added "Under God" to the Pledge. He was one of the first that got elected via what we now call the Religious Right.

Eisenhower continued the New Deal policies and prevented the right wing fringe from taking over the GOP (at least for a while). He also pushed through the Interstate Highway System and forced the integration of the arm forces (which Truman started but didn't complete). He was the very definition of a moderate - hell even progressive. After all - this was the guy that the right wing of the time was calling a fark'n communist.

/so much presidential fail in this thread


"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."

Dwight D. Eisenhower, From a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1953

Eisenhower was compassionate and wise which would make him obviously ineligible for today's Republican party.
 
2012-08-06 07:31:52 PM  
rmoney will lose due to the simple fact he sent me a letter, calling me an excellent republican and asking for 5000. Thats like the Southern Poverty Law Center sending a similar letter to the Westboro folks telling them what a good jorb they have done to advance tolerance.
 
2012-08-06 07:34:39 PM  
This bag of excrement makes $400K/year by simply sending out angry faxes, most of which center around sexuality -- the mechanics of gay intercourse, defending the systematic rape of children by the Catholic Church, women and their dirty birth canals, teaching Africans that Jesus hates contraceptives, and on and on. Just some f*cking fool sending out faxes from his garage. Only in America.

mumbailaity.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-08-06 07:35:33 PM  
All hollywood leading men in old cowboy movies got with each other at least once or twice.
 
2012-08-06 07:35:35 PM  
Romney told reporters he does not intend to address the controversy

Yeah, color me shocked...
 
2012-08-06 07:36:19 PM  

alienated: rmoney will lose due to the simple fact he sent me a letter, calling me an excellent republican and asking for 5000. Thats like the Southern Poverty Law Center sending a similar letter to the Westboro folks telling them what a good jorb they have done to advance tolerance.


Do you have a common name? My partner does, he's more liberal than I am, but he got the same thing, while I get OFA stuff every three days or so.
 
2012-08-06 07:37:51 PM  
www.russell-johnson.com
 
2012-08-06 07:38:30 PM  

ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.


Yeah, if by "good" you mean the "good taste" of Clinton who also liked McDonald's food.
 
2012-08-06 07:40:04 PM  

ariseatex: Do you have a common name?


Until i change it, I share the same name as a gay porn star and a baseball player.
Surname is german, a composer obsessed with Valkries.

I am registered as having no political party, have always been so .
 
2012-08-06 07:40:26 PM  
The way the Romney campaign has been going, he'd probably walk up to the Chick-Fil-A counter and order a Whopper, and then extoll the benefits of two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, and onions on a sesame seed bun.
 
2012-08-06 07:41:29 PM  

ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.


Clinton signed DOMA, after pushing it through Congress.

Despite his beliefs today, they were very different then.
 
2012-08-06 07:41:29 PM  

alienated: Until i change it, I share the same name as a gay porn star and a baseball player.


A Rod?
 
2012-08-06 07:43:05 PM  

mainstreet62: alienated: Until i change it, I share the same name as a gay porn star and a baseball player.

A Rod?


That's funny, right there.
 
2012-08-06 07:44:47 PM  
"I don't understand why Mitt Romney doesn't just get his Secret Service detail and take his press corps down to a Chick-fil-A and show solidarity with these people," Buchanan said, adding: " . . . Reagan would have walked right on down there naturally."

No, he wouldn't have.
 
2012-08-06 07:46:42 PM  

alienated: ariseatex: Do you have a common name?

Until i change it, I share the same name as a gay porn star and a baseball player.
Surname is german, a composer obsessed with Valkries.

I am registered as having no political party, have always been so .


If you live in a blue state, they may assume "no political party" = closet Republican. My partner's registered as a Dem, but he used to live in Texas, so I guess they figured he must be conservative.

/BTW, definitely a fan of your namesake
//and I don't mean the baseball player
///slashies come in threes
 
2012-08-06 07:49:00 PM  

REO-Weedwagon: This bag of excrement makes $400K/year by simply sending out angry faxes, most of which center around sexuality -- the mechanics of gay intercourse, defending the systematic rape of children by the Catholic Church, women and their dirty birth canals, teaching Africans that Jesus hates contraceptives, and on and on. Just some f*cking fool sending out faxes from his garage. Only in America.

[mumbailaity.files.wordpress.com image 429x299]


Looks like a closet case, who couldn't get laid in prison, with a bar of soap, and a signed pardon.
 
2012-08-06 07:49:04 PM  

JerseyTim: "I don't understand why Mitt Romney doesn't just get his Secret Service detail and take his press corps down to a Chick-fil-A and show solidarity with these people," Buchanan said, adding: " . . . Reagan would have walked right on down there naturally."

I think there's something to this and Misters Donahue and Buchanan make a good point. On Chick-fil-a Appreciation Day, I heeded the advice of Governor Huckabee and headed down with my younger brother to the franchise in Northridge, not far from the final resting place of President Reagan.

Of course, the wait was nearly 90 minutes. We all knew it would be totally worth it, both for the delicious chicken and to make a stand for traditional marriage. The atmosphere was amazingly positive. We laughed, told stories and sang our favorite Christian songs.

About 75 minutes in, after I had finally gotten into the store, amid this festive atmosphere, a sudden hush fell over the crowd. It was caused by a noticeable chill in the air. The older ones among us knew almost instinctively. My brother looked up at me and started to ask what it was, but I gave him a sly smile and put my finger over his mouth to shush him before he could finish the question. I said, "I'll tell you when we get out of here."

The rest of us looked at each other knowingly. We all understood what happened. The Gipper was there with us that day.


So you two then went home and gave each other a handjob? Even the mist liberal amongst us (me included) think that is a littler perverted.

Sorry, I had to bite.
 
2012-08-06 07:57:20 PM  

GAT_00: give me doughnuts: We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.

What is Republican about Eisenhower?


The Xtian coup of 1955
 
2012-08-06 08:01:02 PM  
Year Romeny Pushed up and ski birche and keep scheming.
But all of his Little Mormon friends aren't gay and the keep screaming
"OMG! I'm feeling like some chick-fila what do I do?"
and ROmeny pulls up in a Benz and says fark YOU!
 
2012-08-06 08:02:15 PM  

NFA: "Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because he failed to stand with Chick-fil-a like Ronald Reagan would have"

No, he'll lose because he's a rich habitual liar who has become extremely rich by literally putting Americans out of jobs.


No, he'll lose because everything about him and his campaign friggin' sucks. I don't think most of the general population even know what a shiatty human being he is yet.
 
2012-08-06 08:03:43 PM  

ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.


'Cept he's vegan now.
 
2012-08-06 08:04:03 PM  
If you google 'patriotism "Chick-fil-a" is says there are About 2,280,000 results.

2,280,000 results!. How is eating chicken made by a gay bashing company patriotic? Such language frames homosexuals and those who oppose Chick-fil-a's actions automatically as anti-patriots - people guilty of treason. And treason still carries the death penalty.

The right-wing notion of "patriotism" has mutated to the point that it mainly consists of labeling a large number of USA-loving people as internal enemies of the USA.
 
2012-08-06 08:05:07 PM  

Diogenes: Aarontology: Ronald Reagan is too liberal for today's GOP.

While true, I think it's important to be fair. He didn't care for the gays at all.


Except that Reagan was a lifesaver by coming out against the Briggs Initiative in California in 1978 that would have made it illegal to be a gay teacher in California, mandatory firings. It was likely to have passed on the wave of Prop 13 until former Governor Reagan spoke out against it.

/credit where credit is due
 
2012-08-06 08:11:53 PM  

HairBolus: If you google 'patriotism "Chick-fil-a" is says there are About 2,280,000 results.

2,280,000 results!. How is eating chicken made by a gay bashing company patriotic? Such language frames homosexuals and those who oppose Chick-fil-a's actions automatically as anti-patriots - people guilty of treason. And treason still carries the death penalty.

The right-wing notion of "patriotism" has mutated to the point that it mainly consists of labeling a large number of USA-loving people as internal enemies of the USA.


Have you ever listened to Rush Limbaugh and hate radio at all since the 1980s? Just being a member of, or voting for the "Democrat Party" (sic) ie half the country means you're a socialist a communist an America-hater hysterical ad nauseum.
 
2012-08-06 08:17:35 PM  

dletter: He told Newsmax in an exclusive interview that social conservatives will now have to decide whether to sit out the race.

Oh yes, please do that.


Oh, I think the social conservatives can find a reason to swallow hard and vote for Romney. Even if he came out FOR gay marriage.

For many of them, this issue is so blah and white.
 
2012-08-06 08:30:45 PM  
The author is right, Rmoney needs to be more like Reagan.

For example, Reagan released his tax returns. Twice.
 
2012-08-06 08:32:45 PM  

exick: JerseyTim: I heeded the advice of Governor Huckabee and headed down with my younger brother to the franchise in Northridge, not far from the final resting place of President Reagan.

That's actually the closest one to Ronnie's resting place. Thank the Great Chicken above for that place so now I don't have to go to Torrance or, worse, USC to get my fix. I only wish it had been there when I was in college. That location is like a mecca of fast food. There's a Chick Fil A on one side of the street, an In N Out on the other, and a Five Guys and Pinkberry catty-corner.


I'm looking forward to visiting it on my presidential grave pissing tour.

I wish W and Cheney would hurry up and die so I can get started.
 
2012-08-06 09:01:32 PM  

Somacandra: You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon.


If that's the case, why don't they preach that instead of dragging out all this Angel Moroni hogwash?
 
2012-08-06 09:04:23 PM  

Kurmudgeon: Somacandra: You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon.

If that's the case, why don't they preach that instead of dragging out all this Angel Moroni hogwash?


And who cares what their fantasies are, anyway?
 
2012-08-06 09:09:27 PM  

xynix: give me doughnuts: We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.

Eisenhower wasn't even sure if he was a repub when asked to run. He was close to originally going on a Democrat ticket.


Eisenhower knew. No one else knew and Eisenhower kept it quiet. December 1951 Meet the Press, Senator Kennedy said "Eisenhower would make a great president, whichever party he decides to run with". Finally someone asked if he was from Texas (birth state) or Kansas (grew up state). By answering Kansas, he signaled him being a Republican.
 
2012-08-06 09:14:46 PM  

HairBolus: If you google 'patriotism "Chick-fil-a" is says there are About 2,280,000 results.

2,280,000 results!. How is eating chicken made by a gay bashing company patriotic? Such language frames homosexuals and those who oppose Chick-fil-a's actions automatically as anti-patriots - people guilty of treason. And treason still carries the death penalty.

The right-wing notion of "patriotism" has mutated to the point that it mainly consists of labeling a large number of USA-loving people as internal enemies of the USA.


Chick-fil-A descended into bigotry and it is my understanding that descent is the highest form of patriotic.
 
2012-08-06 09:37:40 PM  
Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because he failed to stand with Chick-fil-a like Ronald Reagan would have
 
2012-08-06 09:51:46 PM  

exick: JerseyTim: I heeded the advice of Governor Huckabee and headed down with my younger brother to the franchise in Northridge, not far from the final resting place of President Reagan.

That's actually the closest one to Ronnie's resting place. Thank the Great Chicken above for that place so now I don't have to go to Torrance or, worse, USC to get my fix. I only wish it had been there when I was in college. That location is like a mecca of fast food. There's a Chick Fil A on one side of the street, an In N Out on the other, and a Five Guys and Pinkberry catty-corner.


That 5 Guys is horrible. I don't know if they're all like that, but it doesn't mak me want to try another.
 
2012-08-06 10:01:38 PM  

andersoncouncil42: Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because he failed to stand with Chick-fil-a like Ronald Reagan would have


I think it'll get real rough for him after the conventions and when the debates start up. Most people don't care about the election until then and a lot of people haven't been exposed to Romney and don't know that much about him.
 
2012-08-06 10:20:35 PM  

andersoncouncil42: Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because he failed to stand with Chick-fil-a like Ronald Reagan would have


Five-Thirty-Eight.com would agree with you.
 
2012-08-06 10:22:03 PM  

ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.


That and heterosexual women that would blow him would more likely attend the heterosexual rally.

Plus guys trying to blow him like George Stefanoupoulicks kind of creeps him out. Remmeber, Clinton is the one that signed laws for federal workers that defined marriage as between a man and a woman. And Don't Ask Don't Tell. This is why he never had any trouble hitting on the spouse of married men and never worked the miitary. Heck he even setn Linda Tripp to the Pentagon. It's not like he chose women that you could tell were female unless they had a husband that married them.
 
2012-08-06 10:28:07 PM  
Theocratic fascists social conservatives are not going to sit this one out, no matter how hollow Rmoney is. Their turnout at the polls this year is going to be unprecedented. They may biatch and whine now, sure, but the quality of their candidate is meaningless. They're driven by hatred of the other. That's all that matters. Their candidate this year isn't Romney. Their candidate is Not Obama, who in their eyes is a more appealing than a hundred foot tall, eight-headed mecha-Reagan that shoots bibles and assault rifles out his ass.
 
2012-08-06 10:33:15 PM  

Diogenes: Aarontology: Ronald Reagan is too liberal for today's GOP.

While true, I think it's important to be fair. He didn't care for the gays at all.


Ironic, given that he worked in Hollywood and hung out with Cary Grant a lot.
 
2012-08-06 10:34:50 PM  

TheJoe03: I think it'll get real rough for him after the conventions and when the debates start up.


You're making the assumption that there's going to be debates. I give it 50/50 odds at best. Republicans are pussies.
 
2012-08-06 10:41:35 PM  

Somacandra: You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon. I take your point that many evangelical Christians have been taught that Mormonism isn't part of their sphere


"Son of God" in a decidedly different sense than 1700+ years of trinitarian Christianity understand it. Not 'God the Son'. This distinction between a trinitarian and a non-trinitarian creed (even ignoring all the golden plates, angel Moroni, John the Baptist fishing in the Great Lakes, Hie to Kolob, etc stuff) is not some modern American Evangelical splitting of hairs. It's been a splitting of hairs (and burning at stakes) for most of the history of the Church.

/ functional athiest
// just saying
 
2012-08-06 10:45:49 PM  

Fart_Machine: The Catholic League is a couple of guys and a fax machine.


There is another guy now?
100% growth sweet.
 
2012-08-06 10:46:58 PM  

Sgt Otter: ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.

Oddly enough, Bubba is a vegan now.


Clinton is a vagitarian?
 
2012-08-06 10:53:36 PM  

Aarontology: Ronald Reagan is too liberal for today's GOP.


4.bp.blogspot.com
Is also too liberal for today's GOP

/Let's get a meme going here, people.
 
2012-08-06 10:53:38 PM  

Johnny Swank: TheJoe03: I think it'll get real rough for him after the conventions and when the debates start up.

You're making the assumption that there's going to be debates. I give it 50/50 odds at best. Republicans are pussies.


Interesting possibility. Romney does practically no interviews and the ones he does are carefully set-up or with Conservative-friendly news organizations. It would stands to reason that he doesn't want a real debate with Obama.
 
2012-08-06 10:55:47 PM  

FlashHarry: xynix: I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..

i thought evangelicals had come around to accepting mormons as christians.


Uh what?

There are many evangelicals who don't consider Catholics to be Christian.
 
2012-08-06 10:57:41 PM  

Richard Roma: Theocratic fascists social conservatives are not going to sit this one out, no matter how hollow Rmoney is. Their turnout at the polls this year is going to be unprecedented. They may biatch and whine now, sure, but the quality of their candidate is meaningless. They're driven by hatred of the other. That's all that matters. Their candidate this year isn't Romney. Their candidate is Not Obama, who in their eyes is a more appealing than a hundred foot tall, eight-headed mecha-Reagan that shoots bibles and assault rifles out his ass.


Then explain to me how their fear of the Other is going to drive them to vote for an Other. Because right now I don't see them voting for Romney. The problem here is the Kerry Delusion: you have to put someone up that offers a valid counterpoint to an incumbent. Romney hasn't done anything: he keeps flipping on issues and shares very little with the Base that you mention.
 
2012-08-06 10:59:11 PM  

FlashHarry: xynix: I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..

i thought evangelicals had come around to accepting mormons as christians.


Nope . It's a cult.
 
2012-08-06 11:00:00 PM  

Aarontology: Ronald Reagan is too liberal for today's GOP.


suvudu.com

Is also too liberal for today's GOP.

"What's with that beard? Farking hippie."
 
2012-08-06 11:09:12 PM  

Lackofname: FlashHarry: xynix: I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..

i thought evangelicals had come around to accepting mormons as christians.

Uh what?

There are many evangelicals who don't consider Catholics to be Christian.


According to Evangelicals the following are not Christians
Catholics
Mormons
Seventh day Adventists
Jehovah's Witnesses
Quackers
Amish

Except when they need the numbers to prove that America is a Christian Nation.
 
2012-08-06 11:09:51 PM  
I thought the talking point was Obama = Reagan? Shoudn't Obama be eatin' the Chic-fil-a?

/B-B-B-But Bush!!
 
2012-08-06 11:10:58 PM  

Tumunga: I thought the talking point was Obama = Reagan? Shoudn't Shouldn't Obama be eatin' the Chic-fil-a?

/B-B-B-But Bush!!


Fixed that before you all started biatchin'.
 
2012-08-06 11:16:47 PM  
Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because he failed to stand with Chick-fil-a like Ronald Reagan would have because he is Mitt Romney.

/FTFY subby
 
2012-08-06 11:16:58 PM  

Guntram Shatterhand: Then explain to me how their fear of the Other is going to drive them to vote for an Other. Because right now I don't see them voting for Romney. The problem here is the Kerry Delusion: you have to put someone up that offers a valid counterpoint to an incumbent. Romney hasn't done anything: he keeps flipping on issues and shares very little with the Base that you mention.


Romney and the right-wing machine just need to spend the next three months swamping the airwaves with attack ads. The zombies will get worked up into such a spittle-spewing rage that Romney won't even be on their minds. It will be about getting Obama out, and nothing else. They'll view it like pushing an arrow out the other side after you've been shot -- sure, it hurts like hell, but it's necessary to prevent it from killing you.

Democrats didn't exactly stay home in 2004, despite Kerry's vacuity. Bush won because his supporters showed up en masse as well.

Romney may not get many swing voters (I sure hope he doesn't), but he's not going to be hurting in terms of support from the crazies that have taken over his party.
 
2012-08-06 11:25:25 PM  

Makh: In Reagan's day the GOP was the party of, "As long as it doesn't need my tax dollars, do what you want, in your own house, on your own time. It's not the government's job to be some nanny state and tell you how to live your life. Also, don't be a farking communist, because that's treason and we will kill you."



Not really.

www.mcarterbrown.com


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-08-06 11:26:35 PM  

Richard Roma: Guntram Shatterhand: Then explain to me how their fear of the Other is going to drive them to vote for an Other. Because right now I don't see them voting for Romney. The problem here is the Kerry Delusion: you have to put someone up that offers a valid counterpoint to an incumbent. Romney hasn't done anything: he keeps flipping on issues and shares very little with the Base that you mention.

Romney and the right-wing machine just need to spend the next three months swamping the airwaves with attack ads. The zombies will get worked up into such a spittle-spewing rage that Romney won't even be on their minds. It will be about getting Obama out, and nothing else. They'll view it like pushing an arrow out the other side after you've been shot -- sure, it hurts like hell, but it's necessary to prevent it from killing you.

Democrats didn't exactly stay home in 2004, despite Kerry's vacuity. Bush won because his supporters showed up en masse as well.

Romney may not get many swing voters (I sure hope he doesn't), but he's not going to be hurting in terms of support from the crazies that have taken over his party.


Conservatives have already blown their entire load on Hitler Fartbongo.

They've thrown every possible thing they have at him and they are 2 points behind even according to Rasmussen. Let me repeat that. Rasmussen has Romney behind by 2 points.

Short of an Ayers/Obama hardcore sex video, the writing is on the wall. Romney should focus on gracefully losing at this point.
 
2012-08-06 11:37:18 PM  

cretinbob: GAT_00: give me doughnuts: We need more Republicans like Eisenhower.

What is Republican about Eisenhower?

The Xtian coup of 1955


That coup didn't really happen until the 80's, and even then they didn't really have total control of the party until the late 90's.

Barry Goldwater very famously spoke out against their rising influence in 1981, and by 1994 he was still talking about "if" they ever take control of the Party.

Until Bush the Lesser was elected, they had a lot of power but weren't in the driver's seat.

The batshiat crazy Republicans we have now are what happens when a mix of Randian Plutocrats and Evangelical Dominionists wanting a Christian Theocracy run one of the two main parties of the US for a little over a decade.
 
2012-08-06 11:40:23 PM  

I Browse: Makh: In Reagan's day the GOP was the party of, "As long as it doesn't need my tax dollars, do what you want, in your own house, on your own time. It's not the government's job to be some nanny state and tell you how to live your life. Also, don't be a farking communist, because that's treason and we will kill you."


Not really.

[www.mcarterbrown.com image 405x594]


[upload.wikimedia.org image 150x225]


Why is he standing in front of a lady with her boobie hanging out denouncing pornography?
 
zez
2012-08-06 11:42:18 PM  

DeltaPunch: it's Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick, Chick.


i.ytimg.com

"Damn! Rommey must really be one rich bastard"
 
2012-08-07 12:06:03 AM  

spongeboob: Lackofname: FlashHarry: xynix: I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..

i thought evangelicals had come around to accepting mormons as christians.

Uh what?

There are many evangelicals who don't consider Catholics to be Christian.

According to Evangelicals the following are not Christians
Catholics
Mormons
Seventh day Adventists
Jehovah's Witnesses
Quackers
Amish

Except when they need the numbers to prove that America is a Christian Nation.


And yet there is a Christian on the ballot...as a main party candidate no less!
 
2012-08-07 12:07:43 AM  
Mitt Romney couldn't care less about Chik-fil-a because he does not own a stake in it.

/mooo
 
2012-08-07 01:11:28 AM  

Richard Roma: Guntram Shatterhand: Then explain to me how their fear of the Other is going to drive them to vote for an Other. Because right now I don't see them voting for Romney. The problem here is the Kerry Delusion: you have to put someone up that offers a valid counterpoint to an incumbent. Romney hasn't done anything: he keeps flipping on issues and shares very little with the Base that you mention.

Romney and the right-wing machine just need to spend the next three months swamping the airwaves with attack ads. The zombies will get worked up into such a spittle-spewing rage that Romney won't even be on their minds. It will be about getting Obama out, and nothing else. They'll view it like pushing an arrow out the other side after you've been shot -- sure, it hurts like hell, but it's necessary to prevent it from killing you.

Democrats didn't exactly stay home in 2004, despite Kerry's vacuity. Bush won because his supporters showed up en masse as well.

Romney may not get many swing voters (I sure hope he doesn't), but he's not going to be hurting in terms of support from the crazies that have taken over his party.


Emphasis mine. If Romney didn't really matter to the Base, then we would already be hip deep in Romney pandering to the moderates. The fact that he has stepped away from them to focus on the Base shows one thing that he has actually learned: the Base isn't going to tolerate any deviation from their sad Normal. We're talking about people who are voting out senior members of their own Party who are established Republicans. This group isn't going to take kindly to Romney's pandering in the slightest because he's still a hard sell.

The real battle here isn't against the Democrats, but the fate of the Republican Party. You have an angered Base who is slowly realizing they have been conned combined with a very deluded Rich who think they can still control minds with their media machine. Romney is getting slammed hard by a media that should be on his side. That says everything you need to know about this election right there. It's not about Obama--the Right blew that in a fit of pique that's lasted four years and topped in 2011 when the Republicans blew up the economy for the second time in a decade--it's about a purity test. The Republicans are getting introspective and from Gary Johnson's attempt to run (and lose), one can see the writing on the wall: the Republican Party has gone too far, so far that it's alienated a great number of people, and it's trying to take back positions that it has willed to the Democrats a very long time ago. And their Base will not let them.
 
2012-08-07 01:21:14 AM  

JerseyTim: "I don't understand why Mitt Romney doesn't just get his Secret Service detail and take his press corps down to a Chick-fil-A and show solidarity with these people," Buchanan said, adding: " . . . Reagan would have walked right on down there naturally."

I think there's something to this and Misters Donahue and Buchanan make a good point. On Chick-fil-a Appreciation Day, I heeded the advice of Governor Huckabee and headed down with my younger brother to the franchise in Northridge, not far from the final resting place of President Reagan.

Of course, the wait was nearly 90 minutes. We all knew it would be totally worth it, both for the delicious chicken and to make a stand for traditional marriage. The atmosphere was amazingly positive. We laughed, told stories and sang our favorite Christian songs.

About 75 minutes in, after I had finally gotten into the store, amid this festive atmosphere, a sudden hush fell over the crowd. It was caused by a noticeable chill in the air. The older ones among us knew almost instinctively. My brother looked up at me and started to ask what it was, but I gave him a sly smile and put my finger over his mouth to shush him before he could finish the question. I said, "I'll tell you when we get out of here."

The rest of us looked at each other knowingly. We all understood what happened. The Gipper was there with us that day.


Dammit, don't do that. Now I'm going to see this twenty times from my relatives in Derpistan, only without the irony.
 
2012-08-07 01:22:01 AM  

Diogenes: Romney's aides have explained that while the presumptive GOP presidential nominee favors the traditional definition of marriage, he is trying to structure his remarks to keep the focus solely on the economy in order to have the best possible chance of defeating President Barack Obama in November.

No core. No values. Only saying and doing things that will advance his personal ambitions.

I'd say those reasons are much more important than than gays and fast food when deciding whether to elect the guy.


The Calculated Candidate.
 
2012-08-07 01:24:47 AM  

Sgt Otter: ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.

Oddly enough, Bubba is a vegan now.


That's because as president you're privy to the formula for the special sauce on a Big Mac.
 
2012-08-07 01:27:21 AM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Krieghund: I can just see Bill, sandwich in one hand, waffle fries in the other, watching these ladies and trying to feel their...pain.

[wizbangblog.com image 480x720]

That is far and away the hottest couple I've seen kissing in front of a Chick-fil-a sign.

Went to Chick-fil-a Saturday, sad that I didn't get a free show.


the baby jesus cries when you masturbate to lipstick lesbians

dark-sided!
 
2012-08-07 01:28:05 AM  

Somacandra: xynix: He's not a Christian and thats grated on many nerves and for the fundys who are trying to ignore it he's not making it easy. Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).

You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon. I take your point that many evangelical Christians have been taught that Mormonism isn't part of their sphere but don't let a group of Protestant heretics whose religion was invented in the 17th and 18th centuries be the gatekeepers of 2000 years of "authentic Christianity?" Don't grant them that bullshiat status in the first place. Evangelical Protestants are very much a minority of worldwide Christians. They don't set the rules and they shouldn't be allowed to claim they do. Every time one of them does it they should be called out and exposed for the tiny minority they are.


You mean entering thru the narrow gate minority? Yeah, I would agree with you.
 
2012-08-07 02:00:38 AM  

chewielouie: Somacandra: xynix: He's not a Christian and thats grated on many nerves and for the fundys who are trying to ignore it he's not making it easy. Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).

You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon. I take your point that many evangelical Christians have been taught that Mormonism isn't part of their sphere but don't let a group of Protestant heretics whose religion was invented in the 17th and 18th centuries be the gatekeepers of 2000 years of "authentic Christianity?" Don't grant them that bullshiat status in the first place. Evangelical Protestants are very much a minority of worldwide Christians. They don't set the rules and they shouldn't be allowed to claim they do. Every time one of them does it they should be called out and exposed for the tiny minority they are.

You mean entering thru the narrow gate minority? Yeah, I would agree with you.


They're welcome to the kingdom of heaven, but if they want a kingdom on Earth I will insist that they play by the laws of Earth.
 
2012-08-07 02:32:06 AM  

Mithiwithi: chewielouie: Somacandra: xynix: He's not a Christian and thats grated on many nerves and for the fundys who are trying to ignore it he's not making it easy. Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).

You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon. I take your point that many evangelical Christians have been taught that Mormonism isn't part of their sphere but don't let a group of Protestant heretics whose religion was invented in the 17th and 18th centuries be the gatekeepers of 2000 years of "authentic Christianity?" Don't grant them that bullshiat status in the first place. Evangelical Protestants are very much a minority of worldwide Christians. They don't set the rules and they shouldn't be allowed to claim they do. Every time one of them does it they should be called out and exposed for the tiny minority they are.

You mean entering thru the narrow gate minority? Yeah, I would agree with you.

They're welcome to the kingdom of heaven, but if they want a kingdom on Earth I will insist that they play by the laws of Earth.


Laws on earth vary by state, country and custom. And they are *gasp* changeable.

BTW, the expansion of human rights has been by those that have challenged the earthly law, not played by it. Well, maybe Jesus played by it. But Gandhia, MLK, Nelson Mandela, etc, etc, all challenged the earthly law of man in favor of a divine right of human beings. They didn't play by man's law for the earth.
 
2012-08-07 02:34:33 AM  

NFA: "Mitt Romney will lose the 2012 election because he failed to stand with Chick-fil-a like Ronald Reagan would have"

No, he'll lose because he's a rich habitual liar who has become extremely rich by literally putting Americans out of jobs.


Came here to say this.
Thank you.
 
2012-08-07 02:40:16 AM  

HairBolus: If you google 'patriotism "Chick-fil-a" is says there are About 2,280,000 results.

2,280,000 results!. How is eating chicken made by a gay bashing company patriotic? Such language frames homosexuals and those who oppose Chick-fil-a's actions automatically as anti-patriots - people guilty of treason. And treason still carries the death penalty.

The right-wing notion of "patriotism" has mutated to the point that it mainly consists of labeling a large number of USA-loving people as internal enemies of the USA.


Some people prefer to exercise their patriotism in small, meaningless actions that make them feel better about themselves but are still ultimately meaningless.
 
2012-08-07 02:49:57 AM  

Somacandra: xynix: He's not a Christian and thats grated on many nerves and for the fundys who are trying to ignore it he's not making it easy. Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).

You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon. I take your point that many evangelical Christians have been taught that Mormonism isn't part of their sphere but don't let a group of Protestant heretics whose religion was invented in the 17th and 18th centuries be the gatekeepers of 2000 years of "authentic Christianity?" Don't grant them that bullshiat status in the first place. Evangelical Protestants are very much a minority of worldwide Christians. They don't set the rules and they shouldn't be allowed to claim they do. Every time one of them does it they should be called out and exposed for the tiny minority they are.


Because a 19th century cult founded by a convicted con-man is in a better position to define the christian faith. I mean, Pay Lay Ale? Really?
 
2012-08-07 02:52:11 AM  

spongeboob: Lackofname: FlashHarry: xynix: I know two deeply conservative evangelicals who will not vote for a non-Christian no matter what though..

i thought evangelicals had come around to accepting mormons as christians.

Uh what?

There are many evangelicals who don't consider Catholics to be Christian.

According to Evangelicals the following are not Christians
Catholics
Mormons
Seventh day Adventists
Jehovah's Witnesses
Quackers
Amish

Except when they need the numbers to prove that America is a Christian Nation.


Pretty much this.

Anecdotal story (not used to illustrate a point): my grandparents are serious Evangelicals. I was raised that ALL of the aforementioned groups were imposters. The only exception given was to Quakers and that's because we lived in Ohio where there are some Quaker sects that worked closely with the Evangelicals.

Then . . . I started working for Mormons. My grandmother told me that they would try to convert me but they were BAD. Then Rmoney started campaigning and she's BIG into anything that's not blah. She called me up a few months ago to tell me about all the wonderful ties Mormons have to Christianity and that they're brothers to Evangelicals.
 
2012-08-07 02:53:51 AM  

Chimperror2: Mithiwithi: chewielouie: Somacandra: xynix: He's not a Christian and thats grated on many nerves and for the fundys who are trying to ignore it he's not making it easy. Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).

You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon. I take your point that many evangelical Christians have been taught that Mormonism isn't part of their sphere but don't let a group of Protestant heretics whose religion was invented in the 17th and 18th centuries be the gatekeepers of 2000 years of "authentic Christianity?" Don't grant them that bullshiat status in the first place. Evangelical Protestants are very much a minority of worldwide Christians. They don't set the rules and they shouldn't be allowed to claim they do. Every time one of them does it they should be called out and exposed for the tiny minority they are.

You mean entering thru the narrow gate minority? Yeah, I would agree with you.

They're welcome to the kingdom of heaven, but if they want a kingdom on Earth I will insist that they play by the laws of Earth.

Laws on earth vary by state, country and custom. And they are *gasp* changeable.

BTW, the expansion of human rights has been by those that have challenged the earthly law, not played by it. Well, maybe Jesus played by it. But Gandhia, MLK, Nelson Mandela, etc, etc, all challenged the earthly law of man in favor of a divine right of human beings. They didn't play by man's law for the earth.


That's all well and good, but we're discussing modern-day evangelical Christians who, in the main, campaign for the diminution of human rights, not its expansion.
 
2012-08-07 03:10:33 AM  
Ok, I did not read the article nor the thread. I don't think Reagan would have given one fark about Chik Fil A. And I hate Reagan.
 
2012-08-07 03:39:41 AM  

Mithiwithi: Chimperror2:
BTW, the expansion of human rights has been by those that have challenged the earthly law, not played by it. Well, maybe Jesus played by it. But Gandhia, MLK, Nelson Mandela, etc, etc, all challenged the earthly law of man in favor of a divine right of human beings. They didn't play by man's law for the earth.

That's all well and good, but we're discussing modern-day evangelical Christians who, in the main, campaign for the diminution of human rights, not its expansion.


You say that but there has always been "modern-day evangelicals" since before the founding of the country. Only in hindsight have you seen the expansion of human rights. Saying "no, no, no these ones arre baddddd." doesn't make it so.
 
2012-08-07 03:41:43 AM  

Chimperror2: Mithiwithi: Chimperror2:
BTW, the expansion of human rights has been by those that have challenged the earthly law, not played by it. Well, maybe Jesus played by it. But Gandhia, MLK, Nelson Mandela, etc, etc, all challenged the earthly law of man in favor of a divine right of human beings. They didn't play by man's law for the earth.

That's all well and good, but we're discussing modern-day evangelical Christians who, in the main, campaign for the diminution of human rights, not its expansion.

You say that but there has always been "modern-day evangelicals" since before the founding of the country. Only in hindsight have you seen the expansion of human rights. Saying "no, no, no these ones arre baddddd." doesn't make it so.


My god, you are full of shiat.
 
2012-08-07 05:43:17 AM  

EnviroDude: Obama might win because stupid people will vote for stupid politicians for stupid reasons.


You sound Tired.

My guess is that after that post your going to go have a long lay down and vanish from the thread.
 
2012-08-07 07:53:07 AM  

JerseyTim: The Gipper was there with us that day.


Your post just filled me with so much PRIDE for my NATIVE LAND that I just read your words out to my small children and made them say THE PLEDGE with me and I yelled the UNDER GOD part.

cdn.uproxx.com
 
2012-08-07 08:55:28 AM  

dletter: He told Newsmax in an exclusive interview that social conservatives will now have to decide whether to sit out the race.

Oh yes, please do that.


They really should stay home and pray. After all, the election is about God's Will, and voting will just anger him.
 
2012-08-07 09:00:58 AM  

EnviroDouche: Obama might win because stupid people will vote for stupid politicians for stupid reasons.


RMoney might win because stupid people will vote for stupid politicians for stupid reasons.
 
2012-08-07 09:03:54 AM  
he is trying to structure his remarks to keep the focus solely on the economy in order to have the best possible chance of defeating President Barack Obama in November.

And just what are his economic policies??
 
2012-08-07 09:40:33 AM  

alienated: Until i change it, I share the same name as a gay porn star and a baseball player.
Surname is german, a composer obsessed with Valkries.


Would that be Gunter "Gary" Scheisse, former relief pitcher and fluffer for the minor-league team, the Arkansas Pigfarkers?
 
2012-08-07 11:37:08 AM  

Guntram Shatterhand: Not only that, they refuse to see the obvious: that Romney's appointment to be the Republican nominee was a sign that social conservatives need to learn their place at the back of the Party and looking pretty. The Money of the Party will only put up with the Jesus bullshiat long enough to seize power. And if the social conservatives don't like that, they can take it on the arches outside. The Republican Party exists to do one thing: make the rich richer. And everything else is just methods to do that.

The Teatards refuse to see this because--much like everything--they only choose what they want to believe. It makes for very good sycophants, but not a long-term solution to voting. fark, look at Gary Johnson: most of the Republican Party is pulling away from the Teatards simply because they're insane and they're being isolated because the Useful Idiots have now become useless.




i41.tinypic.com
 
2012-08-07 04:49:40 PM  

ImpendingCynic: Sgt Otter: ManateeGag: Clinton would have stood with Chik-Fil-A too, but that's because he liked a good chicken sammich.

Oddly enough, Bubba is a vegan now.

That's because as president you're privy to the formula for the special sauce on a Big Mac.


dealbreaker.com
Also knows
 
2012-08-08 02:10:20 AM  

Somacandra: xynix: He's not a Christian and thats grated on many nerves and for the fundys who are trying to ignore it he's not making it easy. Evangelical Christians are going to be a very hard vote for him to get on the surface alone (he's not Christian).

You'll never find a person more devoted to the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who came to Earth to die for the sins of Humanity so that humans could enjoy everlasting life--than a devout Mormon. I take your point that many evangelical Christians have been taught that Mormonism isn't part of their sphere but don't let a group of Protestant heretics whose religion was invented in the 17th and 18th centuries be the gatekeepers of 2000 years of "authentic Christianity?" Don't grant them that bullshiat status in the first place. Evangelical Protestants are very much a minority of worldwide Christians. They don't set the rules and they shouldn't be allowed to claim they do. Every time one of them does it they should be called out and exposed for the tiny minority they are.


Try more "Nineteenth and early-to-mid 20th century" for those really going for both the religionationalism AND the "Mormons Ain't Christians" angle.

The Southern Baptists split from the rest of the Baptists in the US in the 1850s over slavery; they're by far the largest of the groups calling for religionationalism today in the States. Trinitarian "Assemblies lineage" pentecostals (the OTHER major wing among Protestants calling for religionationalism, and portrayed in "Jesus Camp" et al) have at least three waves of development, all of which are in the 20th Century (early "Assemblies lineage" including Aimee Semple McPherson's Foursquare in the 1910s and 1920s, "Latter Rain" groups and those heavily influenced by them from about the 30s-50s onward to parts of the 60s, and "Third Wave"/"Joel's Army"/"New Apostolic Reformation" groups starting in the 60s and having consistent growth and evolution since; some would argue that modern NARasites might be a fourth wave) and ALL of which can be seen to be "spiritual successors" of the earlier movements in the "chain".

Even the predecessor movement to pentecostalism, the Holiness Movement, only really has a history dating back to the 1870s or so (though even then it would seem the earliest seeds of religionationalism were being planted in the form of "Christian temperance leagues" and "decency leagues" with foundations in the Holiness movement).

The other two movements worth discussing are:

a) ultramontaine Catholic groups (not just Opus Dei, but also Catholic-associated "right to life" groups and Catholic-linked "decency leagues")--even with these, though, most of the major activity in the US started from about the 30s to the 50s onward. Opus Dei may have had a SLIGHTLY earlier foothold in the US, but not by much.

b) Various groups (both NARasite-linked "parachurch" groups and by a group called the Institute for Religion and Democracy) that are devoted to basically attempting to take over mainline Christian churches and turn them dominionist by planting fake "lay ministries" that turn out to actually be cell-church "discipling and shepherding" groups (of the sort that the Boston Church of Christ and especially Maranatha/Morning Star International/Every Nation became outright infamous for; Campus Crusade for Christ (recently rebranded as "cru") also uses a similar structure) and that use a pyramidal structure to grow explosively. In many cases, the groups using these orgs to "steeplejack" mainline churches admit the tactic was borrowed from Bolshevik "People's revolutionary cells", which is very surprising to see (considering that much of how they got into politics was claiming to be anti-Communist). Steeplejacking only has a real history dating back to the late 40s at the very earliest in the US, and the late 1910s and 1920s in its earliest documentation elsewhere (it appears there was a "dry run" by American pentecostals at steeplejacking a Russian Baptist church during the brief window between 1917 and the mid-20s when religious groups suffered little official persecution)

The only other real dominionist groups of note are "pandenominational" political-dominionist groups like Focus on the Family--these have no less than SIX "generations", some of which literally date from Prohibition's establishment and (ironically) anti-polygamy DOMAs aimed at Mormons, but even then the earliest of these date from about the 1880s and the oldest remaining (The Family aka The Fellowship) having foundations in the 30s during one of the first big waves of modern dominionist-style religionationalism (aimed against FDR, of note, and portraying themselves as anti-Communist). The modern generation of these groups (some of which are from 'generation 5' like the AFA and Family Research Council but which were understudies of more well-known groups like Focus on the Family) are increasingly explicitly NARasitic, which IS a fairly major sea change in that they're no longer even bothering to keep a pretense of being truly "pandenominational"--this may lead to some very interesting friction with the Southern Baptists, assuming the SBC itself isn't NARasitised (and, sadly, even with the present steeplejacking by dominionist fundamentalists there is an effort to pretty much turn the SBC into the Assemblies of God Lite by a wing of "Charismatic Baptists" within the SBC).

In short--pretty much the friggin' Mormons not only have been around earlier than the BIGGEST player (the Southern Baptists) but have existed and had a cohesive theology for LONGER than the most dominant player (the NARasites and other Jesus Camper-type neopentes).
 
Displayed 176 of 176 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report