Azalin

I know you're not saying anything with regard to my question, so I'll ask it again, but rephrased: since there are Methodists, United Methodists, Lutherans, Catholics, Pentecostals, Seven Day Adventists, Mormons, and a host of others - all still Christian faiths but having different beliefs, are you saying that republicans have cooked up some kind of amalgamated version of Christianity and spoon-feed it to their masses who use it to try to control other peoples' lives? That sure sounds to me like what you're trying to say.

Think big picture. Really, really big picture. dev has it right - cattle. Nora was supposed to make it until the end of the series, and Bolivar until nearly the end. Don't count on anyone being too important for the series, especially with the series being truncated.

I was saying the same thing with a coworker of mine today. I know that his life is tied directly to that of the Master, but what good is that if you've been blown to thousands of tiny bits?

"Don't wait! Prices will skyrocket after Crooked Hillary gets in."

I'm aware of states rights vs constitutional law. My query was based on the fact that the state already had it's own version of government health care/insurance, so it seemed obvious that it would be easy to whip up support against a national version.

But didn't the people of Massachusetts have Romneycare? If so, why would they support replacing it with a national version that was so obviously flawed?

The republicans were barely a party of conservatism outside of the Goldwater faction that eventually led to the Reagan administration. In fact, in my lifetime they are the ones that gave us Earth Day, the EPA, and Nixonian price controls, hardly policies that can be considered conservative. And despite bringing the dixiecrats into the fold, it was the republican party that gave LBJ the congressional support during the civil rights era, while his own party largely fought it. To pretend that one side or another holds a monopoly on racism couldn't be further from the truth; which side has exploited minorities for the last 55 years or so for political gain without actually doing a thing to help lift them out of poverty or dependence?

You're the one that started this little tangent regarding Key, so don't act like you're trying to keep on topic now. You were being critical of Key and the national anthem, and attempted to diminish Key's work due to perceived character flaws and the fact that his lyrics were put to a drinking song. I pointed out that although the framers were also flawed individuals, their legacy - specifically the constitution - has been the basis for the greatest nation in human history. Disagree if you want, ignore it altogether - I don't care. I'm certainly not going to start a separate thread just to argue a point that's already being argued here. They are not "my guys", they're the founders of the nation, which makes them yours as well as mine.

In my opinion, yes. When you finish laughing, feel free to give me an example of a better one.

Yep, that's the way I see it. I figured by replying in one brief sentence, I'd be speaking his language, and more likely to receive something more substantive than the usual smarm.

Their morality is frequently scrutinized, especially these days. Who among them has not had everything they sacrificed and stood for ridiculed because many were slave owners? Anyone with intellect knows that despite their moral failures, their legacy is probably the greatest in human history.

We all knew that Trump was a douche before he ever ran for the nomination, and his behavior before and since surprises no one. He's providing sound bites to go along with the exact same type of trashing that's been done against the republicans for years. You may not agree, but that seems obvious to me. Sorry, but I think it's a cop out to blame the base's discontent with leadership on anything other than the leadership. The base put them there, right wing radio or no, and if they fail to appease the base, or otherwise adequately represent the concerns of the voters, it's on them. Whether it's a fair assessment or not, Cruz's popularity with the base is for his admittedly futile, but defiant stand against Obamacare, which earned him the ire of the party. You don't need a talk radio Svengali to open peoples' eyes to the contrast between Cruz and the likes of McConnell. I do not deny that people seek sources of news that display their own confirmation bias, but to put as much onus on that as you seem to be doing looks to me as if you're looking at one side of a polyhedron and dismissing the others. I don't think the GOP will ever recover from this, if "recover" is to be defined as "going back to the way things were before". One way or another, the party is changed. Most republicans I know gravitate toward libertarian values anyway - I know I do. An exodus to a party that more accurately represents limited government and constitutional liberties is a good thing in my book. Why don't you try contributing something some time?

Get off my lawn, you whippersnapper.

I'm not doing that at all. I'm only pointing it out because far fewer people are offended by his antics than can even be explained by blind partisanship. The only difference in this case between previous elections and this one is that Trump continually hands them quotes and sound bites to use against him. And stop putting this all on the republican base. The party leadership is every bit as responsible for this mess as the base - if not more so (as an independent in Texas, I'm ineligible to vote in the primary, so I can say I had nothing to do with his nomination). You, me, and every other right-of-center poster in this forum have bitched and moaned about how the republicans have shown no spine whatsoever in recent years, being cowed by the news organizations for fear of being portrayed as heartless, racist, bigots - which is exactly how they're portrayed anyway, regardless of how true or untrue it may be. The base has been frustrated over this, in my opinion rightly so. The leaders haven't been leading, they've been in duck & cover mode. This is what we get when we don't have leaders - a wealthy, connected, egotistical, uncouth opportunist with a big mouth and nationalistic bravado. The biggest reason that he has the following he does is only because he's not Hillary Clinton. But he's there because the republicans, both the base and it's leadership, put him there.

If accuracy is the concern, then it's safe to say that Jefferson, Adams, Madison, Washington, Hamilton, Franklin, Paine, etc, etc, etc all believed in (or stood for if you prefer) a completely different America than the one in which we live today.

But the accusation of racism would have come regardless, simply because he's running as a republican. Had this not been a constant and hackneyed tactic of the democrats, it wouldn't so easily and widely dismissed.

Didn't think so

Well, if it was all about genitals, I like to think I'd at least be in the running.

If something like that could ever happen, I suspect this would be the year for it.

Nothing teaches like life experience.

But are you honestly surprised at all that they wouldn't pursue charges?

I guess you haven't heard: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/10/14/ken-bone-linked-to-questionable-past-comments-on-reddit.html

I'm not saying that I think you're wrong, I'm just not convinced that what you're saying is right. I suppose it doesn't much matter either way though since Obamacare is such a piece of trash.