Will "values voters" finally catch on?

hgc · 9th October 2006, 08:00 AM

I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party.

The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused?

DavidJames · 9th October 2006, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party.

The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused?

There may be a percentage who get fed up and stay away, but for those who feel the government should implement (legislate) their values, the Republican party is the only game in town.

marksman · 9th October 2006, 08:31 AM

Where would they go?

Tricky · 9th October 2006, 08:33 AM

Originally Posted by DavidJames

There may be a percentage who get fed up and stay away, but for those who feel the government should implement (legislate) their values, the Republican party is the only game in town.

Not true. Laws are nothing more than the codification of values. Anti-segregation laws are an attempt to legislate the value of tolerance and fairness.

You just have to pick which party's values most closely resemble your own. For me, it is more often the Democrats, but there are exceptions.

Cleon · 9th October 2006, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by marksman

Where would they go?

That's kind of the key question.

Those who vote "values" really have no other alternative, and even if they did, all the GOP has to do is start pounding the table about gay marriage or some such to get them back in line.

If the people who vote GOP based on "small government" conservatism are still planning on voting for them in November, I really don't see the Christian component going anywhere.

Of course, I've been wrong before. A cow-orker of mine--a conservative, church-going, Hannity-listening type of guy--is fairly fed up with the Republican incompetence and is planning on voting Democrat. Not out of love of the Democrats, of course, but because after the Foley scandal, the gross financial incompetence, etc. he's come to realize that for all the GOP talk of "values" and "small government," it's essentially BS on a massive scale.

I would say I hope more people realize the same, but then, the Democrats sell a similar--if differently-worded--brand of BS that smells just as bad.

Charlie Monoxide · 9th October 2006, 10:11 AM

I was watching the "News Hour With Jim Lehrer" on PBS last Friday and miss mumble-mouth (I'm blanking on her name), was talking about this very topic. She was reading emails or phone calls from viewers. (paraphrasing) One from (where else?) Florida stated that they are Republican and feel even more strongly to vote Republican again because of all of this power grabbing from the Democrats. ??!!??

I can't even make this stuff up ...

Charlie (Charlie Manson Family Values) Monoxide

IXP · 9th October 2006, 10:21 AM

As I understand it, the Republicans have managed, in the last few elections, to motivate a segment of voters who did not vote before with their "values" platform. Even before the Foley situation, they were losing these people because they were not delivering what these new voters thought they were voting for, i.e. abortion is still legal, no gay marriage amendement, not even a flag burning amendment.

IXP

hgc · 9th October 2006, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by Charlie Monoxide

I was watching the "News Hour With Jim Lehrer" on PBS last Friday and miss mumble-mouth (I'm blanking on her name), was talking about this very topic. She was reading emails or phone calls from viewers. (paraphrasing) One from (where else?) Florida stated that they are Republican and feel even more strongly to vote Republican again because of all of this power grabbing from the Democrats. ??!!??

I can't even make this stuff up ...

Charlie (Charlie Manson Family Values) Monoxide

Oy. Well that person represents the zombie class of values voter. I wonder what portion of those religious conservatives are sentient beings, and among them, who will call BS. Obviously, I'm pretty much asking rhetorically, since there is no way to quantify it at this point, and little chance of quantifying it even after an election.

hammegk · 9th October 2006, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

I wonder what portion of those religious conservatives are sentient beings, and among them, who will call BS.

As previously mentioned, their only choices remain; vote Repub & hope (er, pray) for the best, or don't vote.

fuelair · 9th October 2006, 10:35 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party.

The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused?

No, "They're the salt of the earth, the common clay, they're anal orifices" (rule 8 adjusted quote from Blazing Saddles.).

hgc · 9th October 2006, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by hammegk

As previously mentioned, their only choices remain; vote Repub & hope (er, pray) for the best, or don't vote.

hammy, I'm glad you joined in. As a homophobia-motivated voter, how do you feel about this situation? Is it just as you said? You'll continue to vote Republican and hope that they will indeed find a way to lock up the queers? Even now that you know their ranks are swollen with them?

hammegk · 9th October 2006, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

As a homophobia-motivated voter,

Thta's news to me. Sexual preference doesn't show up on my radar when I'm voting for politicians.

Quote:

how do you feel about this situation?

It's totally, completely, irrelevant.

Quote:

Is it just as you said? You'll continue to vote Republican and hope that they will indeed find a way to lock up the queers?

Do you have a hangup concerning queers? I haven't suggested locking them up.

Quote:

Even now that you know their ranks are swollen with them?

Did you see Novak's comment? "House GOP leaders, who had started the week shooting at each other, now were on the same page."

Who cares?

hgc · 9th October 2006, 11:03 AM

You've let me down yet again. Not willing to cop to your position, and nothing to contribute. Too bad. You had so much potential.

Charlie Monoxide · 9th October 2006, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

You've let me down yet again. Not willing to cop to your position, and nothing to contribute. Too bad. You had so much potential.

Hope springs eternal ....

Charlie (hoping you have a nice day) Monoxide

Dorian Gray · 10th October 2006, 09:55 PM

Originally Posted by hgc

I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party.

The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused?

NO sir. Denial is one of the most important tools in the Republican toolbox.

peptoabysmal · 10th October 2006, 10:11 PM

That's amazing.
Four sentences... four conspiracy theories.
Flat out amazing.

hammegk · 11th October 2006, 05:50 AM

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/c...11/2006&page=1

Quote:

Some people say that there is no point voting because there is no difference between the two major parties, and the other parties have no chance of winning. However, there is a difference: the Republicans are disappointing and the Democrats are dangerous.

Quote:

The Democrats are in Washington pushing for the kinds of things their supporters want: more spending, more immigration, more liberal judges.

But the Republicans have finally stopped nominating liberal judges, after years of putting liberals like David Souter and John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court.

Quote:

The most that can be said for the current Republicans is that they want to throw away less money than the Democrats. In general, Democrats are the only real reason to vote for Republicans.

hgc etal and the miniscule fraction of voters his mindset represents will never 'get it'.

Hutch · 11th October 2006, 06:12 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party.

The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused?

In a (probably futile) attempt to keep on topic before ham-man and hgc go spiraling off to who-knows-where, I think that it will cause the religious conservatives who are now the backbone of the Republicans not to desert the party, but to take even stronger action to dominate it, to 'cleanse' it (my terminology) of those who corrupt it, both politically and morally, so that a truly Christian leadership can take over running the Republicans and restore true Moral and Christian leadership to the United States as the Founding Fathers had intended...

For the record, the above is what I think they want to do--NOT what I want to see happen, in fact I think it would be the beginning of the end of the American experiment if that was to happen.

But that is how I think they will react. We shall see.

IMHO as always.

marksman · 11th October 2006, 06:37 AM

I agree with Hutch. The lesson the religious right will learn is not to abandon the Republicans but to work even harder to get rid of "RiNOs" like Foley, who was not only semi-secretly gay, but also pro-choice.

daredelvis · 11th October 2006, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party.

The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused?

They will continue to vote Republican because the GOP is the party of "personal responsibility"... ...as long as that person is Clinton.

Daredelvis

ponderingturtle · 11th October 2006, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by IXP

As I understand it, the Republicans have managed, in the last few elections, to motivate a segment of voters who did not vote before with their "values" platform. Even before the Foley situation, they were losing these people because they were not delivering what these new voters thought they were voting for, i.e. abortion is still legal, no gay marriage amendement, not even a flag burning amendment.

IXP

But then what would the pull out in election years?

You really have to respect how much the republicans have mannaged to be about pure naked power and little else at the moment

ponderingturtle · 11th October 2006, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by daredelvis

They will continue to vote Republican because the GOP is the party of "personal responsibility"... ...as long as that person is Clinton.

Daredelvis

I like the unofficial motto of the administration "the buck never stops here"

Darth Rotor · 11th October 2006, 07:38 AM

Originally Posted by Hutch

I think that it will cause the religious conservatives who are now the backbone of the Republicans not to desert the party, but to take even stronger action to dominate it, to 'cleanse' it (my terminology) of those who corrupt it, both politically and morally, so that a truly Christian leadership can take over running the Republicans and restore true Moral and Christian leadership to the United States as the Founding Fathers had intended...

But that is how I think they will react. We shall see. IMHO as always.

If what you predict does happen, I suspect the non gun owning urban elites will start to feel a bit nervous about sectarian violence in the US. The red staters tend to be armed. If the Jacksonian strain of US polity is aroused, it tends to calm down only after exacting a blood debt.

So, I am with you in desiring that continued polarization not accelerate. Per Rodney King: "Can't we all just get a bong (hit)?" (I don't think I got that right.)

DR

marksman · 11th October 2006, 08:34 AM

Quote:

I suspect the non gun owning urban elites will start to feel a bit nervous about sectarian violence in the US. The red staters tend to be armed.

dr,

Are you seriously suggesting America is on the brink of a civil war, with red staters using their guns against blue staters?

Darth Rotor · 11th October 2006, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by marksman

dr,

Are you seriously suggesting America is on the brink of a civil war, with red staters using their guns against blue staters?

At present? No. There is some hope that American cultural schism over the past generation can be healed.

If the polarization continues without mitigation, however, I expect a civil war, or at least civil strife like a Rodney King riot X 10 in a number of large cities. I"d predict ruptures along predominantly ethnic-cultural lines. The ugliest of prospects is a multi sided, race/ethnicity based war on our soil.

The "red staters" would be less likely to slaughter the "urban elites" than such crooks already in the urban areas -- red state or blue state is irrelevant in this sense -- who have guns, and who will exploit their ability to use force if the "thin veneer" cracks. If you look at the thinly veiled racialism in the CT mindset, and the alleged appeal that holds on the storied "x % of the population" I'd say there is fertile mass psychological ground for a nasty acting out along those lines. What I can't fathom is what a catalyst, or series of catalysts, would be that line the factors up.

Hell, marksman, some street gangs already subjugate people via armed means in LA and Dallas now. Likewise in most major urban areas.

The information age seems to have had the effect of reinforcing tribal behavior -- generically -- and across the board social balkanization, an outcome at odds with the vigorous attempts to exploit the capacity to bring people closer together. The internet is a fascnating example of that dynamic in action each day.

Tipping point not yet reached in either direction, and I am not sure how far from one we are.

If civil strife turns to civil war, I suspect you'll see the US National Guard fracture the way the Iraqi National Guard and Army fracture, and dissolve as an effective fighting force. Mass desertions and AWOL counts would be the first symptom of that internal collapse. What would happen in the US regular Army would likely be what happened in the civil war: some would remain true to the colors, and some would take R. E. Lee's course, and return home.

DR

marksman · 11th October 2006, 08:50 AM

Believe it or not, Rodney King was ten years ago and we haven't seen violence like than in half a decade. New York subways are as safe as they have been in a half-century on an absolute measure and are safer than they've ever been on a per capita basis.

The idea that America is falling apart socially at the seams is not evidenced anywhere except the fact that half the nation keeps voting for GOP candidates and half keep voting for Democrats and pundits for each side likes to fling mud.

America is not falling apart. Gangs are not tearing the country apart. Blue staters are not seceding from the Union. In two years there will be a new President, blue or red, for half the nation to despise. Life goes on. This is not 1972. Heck, its not even 1852.

Darth Rotor · 11th October 2006, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by marksman

Believe it or not, Rodney King was ten years ago and we haven't seen violence like than in half a decade. New York subways are as safe as they have been in a half-century on an absolute measure and are safer than they've ever been on a per capita basis.

The idea that America is falling apart socially at the seams is not evidenced anywhere except the fact that half the nation keeps voting for GOP candidates and half keep voting for Democrats and pundits for each side likes to fling mud.

America is not falling apart. Gangs are not tearing the country apart. Blue staters are not seceding from the Union. In two years there will be a new President, blue or red, for half the nation to despise. Life goes on. This is not 1972. Heck, its not even 1852.

I sincerely hope your assessment is correct.

I don't want the US to have another civil war, nor civil strife as I outlined.

Yes, this isn't 1972, but I don't find that any reason to applaud your optimistic assessment. It is difficult in the extreme to measure what is in people's hearts, and what symbols and stimuli they actually respond to. That is why I am both uncertain, and not sanguine, about prospects for healing some of the social rifts our society currently shows.

DR

Ziggurat · 11th October 2006, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia.

I don't think it is - sure, that element may occassionally be present, but that's really not at the heart of religious conservative support for Republicans. Which is why the religious right isn't going to abandon the Republican party over Folley, and why your speculation to that effect is really just wishful thinking on your part.

marksman · 11th October 2006, 09:13 AM

History serves as a pretty good guide and does not support the idea that the sky is falling. It took a lot to get America to enter a civil war, which was eighty years in the making. We didn't have a civil war over Viet Nam. We're not going to have one because the GOP have been controlling Congress for a mere 12 years.

Darth Rotor · 11th October 2006, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I don't think it is - sure, that element may occassionally be present, but that's really not at the heart of religious conservative support for Republicans. Which is why the religious right isn't going to abandon the Republican party over Folley, and why your speculation to that effect is really just wishful thinking on your part.

Foley resigned. Whatever his ethical errors and crimes, at least he got that part right. He knew he was wrong, and rather than bluster or demand someone prove it, he mea culpa'd, tossed out some chaffe and flares via his shark (drink/abused by cleric) and went to ground in rehab.

I don't think (absent the chaffe and flares move, which I found pathetic) he could have done much more to say "my bad" and by resigning salvage a trace of his honor, after having behaved so dishonorably.

DR

Darth Rotor · 11th October 2006, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by marksman

History serves as a pretty good guide and does not support the idea that the sky is falling. It took a lot to get America to enter a civil war, which was eighty years in the making. We didn't have a civil war over Viet Nam. We're not going to have one because the GOP have been controlling Congress for a mere 12 years.

How is the GOP in congress the issue? The silent majority has been around since before Nixon, and they began to find their voice with Reagan. Values voters are but an aspect of the fracture. I am as concerned by those so alienated (about 35% of the voting public) by the system that they place themselves outside of it. It only takes a small, violent minority to stir up serious trouble. (Note the problems the Islamic world is having with modestly sized, but vigorously active persons.) Sam Adams' Sons of Liberty, and for that matter the leaders of the Revolution, were hardly a majority, but were energetic and willing to use violent means.

Why do you assume that "it can't happen here?"

DR

daredelvis · 11th October 2006, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

How is the GOP in congress the issue? The silent majority has been around since before Nixon, and they began to find their voice with Reagan. Values voters are but an aspect of the fracture. I am as concerned by those so alienated (about 35% of the voting public) by the system that they place themselves outside of it. It only takes a small, violent minority to stir up serious trouble. (Note the problems the Islamic world is having with modestly sized, but vigorously active persons.) Sam Adams' Sons of Liberty, and for that matter the leaders of the Revolution, were hardly a majority, but were energetic and willing to use violent means.

Why do you assume that "it can't happen here?"

DR

Can you inform me about this "silent majority"? Specifically, could you elaborate about the majority part?

Daredelvis

Darth Rotor · 11th October 2006, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by daredelvis

Can you inform me about this "silent majority"? Specifically, could you elaborate about the majority part?

Daredelvis

No.

You are invited to look up Richard Nixon, and his remarks on the "Silent Majority" on your own time." Google is your friend.

Happy reading.

DR

hgc · 11th October 2006, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I don't think it is - sure, that element may occassionally be present, but that's really not at the heart of religious conservative support for Republicans. Which is why the religious right isn't going to abandon the Republican party over Folley, and why your speculation to that effect is really just wishful thinking on your part.

Hard to prove one way or the other. "The central theme" was probably a little hyperbolic on my part. But I wouldn't downplay the importance to many, many people. And there's no doubt that the party plays it up -- witness the gay marriage constitutional amendment attempt.

My speculation is certainly wishful thinking, but it may also may coincide with real impact. Lots of noises of disappointment are being made. Where else where they go? They could stay home. That's not my most preferred outcome, but it'll do in a pinch.

ponderingturtle · 11th October 2006, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

How is the GOP in congress the issue? The silent majority has been around since before Nixon, and they began to find their voice with Reagan. Values voters are but an aspect of the fracture. I am as concerned by those so alienated (about 35% of the voting public) by the system that they place themselves outside of it. It only takes a small, violent minority to stir up serious trouble. (Note the problems the Islamic world is having with modestly sized, but vigorously active persons.) Sam Adams' Sons of Liberty, and for that matter the leaders of the Revolution, were hardly a majority, but were energetic and willing to use violent means.

Why do you assume that "it can't happen here?"

DR

And why would you assume that current gun ownership patters would matter in such a situation?

The idea that people need guns to fight off the government is the dumbest arguement I have heard for handgun and such issues. Look at Iraq, there is a real successful war with the government there and the prime weapons are suprisingly not handgund and small arms. They are bombs and RPG's.

Anyone who really believes in that as an arguement must believe that I should be able to have RPG's and claymore mines in my posession to defend myself from the government.

ponderingturtle · 11th October 2006, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

No.

You are invited to look up Richard Nixon, and his remarks on the "Silent Majority" on your own time." Google is your friend.

Happy reading.

DR

Please show that this majority makes up more than 50% of the american populace.

Darth Rotor · 11th October 2006, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

And why would you assume that current gun ownership patters would matter in such a situation?

The idea that people need guns to fight off the government is the dumbest arguement I have heard for handgun and such issues. Look at Iraq, there is a real successful war with the government there and the prime weapons are suprisingly not handgund and small arms. They are bombs and RPG's.

Anyone who really believes in that as an arguement must believe that I should be able to have RPG's and claymore mines in my posession to defend myself from the government.

I think you mistake people fighting each other, civil strife, with people fighting the government. Your post doesn't fit what I am talking about. You seem to assume an insurrection "against the government." I am positing a different problem. At some point, you run out of national guard units and cops, some of whom have deserted or gone AWOL.

DR

Darth Rotor · 11th October 2006, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

Please show that this majority makes up more than 50% of the american populace.

Please tell me why your pointless semantic distinction makes a bit of difference? Majorities aren't required for political action, energetic minorities are. The sheep then follow, get shorn, or slaughtered.

While you are at it, educate yourself on Nixon's context in framing that remark, oh deliberately obtuse one. You are old enough to do your own homework, get reading.

ETA: Here's an example of what I am talking about:

The Texas 2005 - Special, November (Constitutional Amendment election)
Registered Voters 12,577,545
Voting Age Population (VAP) 16,351,396
Percentage of VAP Registered 76.9
Turnout 2,260,695
Percent of Turnout to Registered Voters 17.97
Percent of Turnout to VAP 13.8

Texas found out what a minority felt about those 8 Amendments (including the much discussed "marriage is one and one woman" bit) but about 80% of those eligible, a silent majority, remained silent. What happens if and when they speak up, or act out?

DR

Luke T. · 11th October 2006, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party.

The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused?

Yes, the House leadership clearly screwed up by not bashing the gay within their ranks as soon as they became aware of his existence.

DanishDynamite · 11th October 2006, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by marksman

Where would they go?

Not that I want to in any way interfere with "internal" affairs of the US, but perhaps having more than two eligable parties would be a start.

9th October 2006, 08:00 AM	#1
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 12,986	Will "values voters" finally catch on? I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party. The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused?
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

9th October 2006, 08:30 AM	#2
DavidJames Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Front Range, CO Posts: 7,083	Originally Posted by hgc I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party. The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused? There may be a percentage who get fed up and stay away, but for those who feel the government should implement (legislate) their values, the Republican party is the only game in town.
	__________________ I will no longer respond to those who choose to have tools of murder as their avatars. Everyone is a skeptic except, of course, for the stuff that they believe Beaver Hateman: Is your argument that human life loses value proportionate to the number of humans available? Malcolm Kirkpatrick: That's part of the argument. Value is determined by supply and demand.

9th October 2006, 08:55 AM	#5
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,504	Originally Posted by marksman Where would they go? That's kind of the key question. Those who vote "values" really have no other alternative, and even if they did, all the GOP has to do is start pounding the table about gay marriage or some such to get them back in line. If the people who vote GOP based on "small government" conservatism are still planning on voting for them in November, I really don't see the Christian component going anywhere. Of course, I've been wrong before. A cow-orker of mine--a conservative, church-going, Hannity-listening type of guy--is fairly fed up with the Republican incompetence and is planning on voting Democrat. Not out of love of the Democrats, of course, but because after the Foley scandal, the gross financial incompetence, etc. he's come to realize that for all the GOP talk of "values" and "small government," it's essentially BS on a massive scale. I would say I hope more people realize the same, but then, the Democrats sell a similar--if differently-worded--brand of BS that smells just as bad.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

9th October 2006, 10:11 AM	#6
Charlie Monoxide Wag Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: London, Ontario Posts: 2,761	I was watching the "News Hour With Jim Lehrer" on PBS last Friday and miss mumble-mouth (I'm blanking on her name), was talking about this very topic. She was reading emails or phone calls from viewers. (paraphrasing) One from (where else?) Florida stated that they are Republican and feel even more strongly to vote Republican again because of all of this power grabbing from the Democrats. ??!!?? I can't even make this stuff up ... Charlie (Charlie Manson Family Values) Monoxide
	__________________ Major General Wag of JREF

9th October 2006, 10:21 AM	#7
IXP Muse Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 832	As I understand it, the Republicans have managed, in the last few elections, to motivate a segment of voters who did not vote before with their "values" platform. Even before the Foley situation, they were losing these people because they were not delivering what these new voters thought they were voting for, i.e. abortion is still legal, no gay marriage amendement, not even a flag burning amendment. IXP
IXP Muse Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 832	__________________ "When reason sleeps, monsters are produced" -- Goya, title of etching that is my avatar

9th October 2006, 08:31 AM	#3
marksman Reality Checker Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 5,003	Where would they go?

9th October 2006, 08:33 AM	#4
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,345	Originally Posted by DavidJames There may be a percentage who get fed up and stay away, but for those who feel the government should implement (legislate) their values, the Republican party is the only game in town. Not true. Laws are nothing more than the codification of values. Anti-segregation laws are an attempt to legislate the value of tolerance and fairness. You just have to pick which party's values most closely resemble your own. For me, it is more often the Democrats, but there are exceptions.

9th October 2006, 10:23 AM	#8
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 12,986	Originally Posted by Charlie Monoxide I was watching the "News Hour With Jim Lehrer" on PBS last Friday and miss mumble-mouth (I'm blanking on her name), was talking about this very topic. She was reading emails or phone calls from viewers. (paraphrasing) One from (where else?) Florida stated that they are Republican and feel even more strongly to vote Republican again because of all of this power grabbing from the Democrats. ??!!?? I can't even make this stuff up ... Charlie (Charlie Manson Family Values) Monoxide Oy. Well that person represents the zombie class of values voter. I wonder what portion of those religious conservatives are sentient beings, and among them, who will call BS. Obviously, I'm pretty much asking rhetorically, since there is no way to quantify it at this point, and little chance of quantifying it even after an election.
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

9th October 2006, 10:33 AM	#9
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422	Originally Posted by hgc I wonder what portion of those religious conservatives are sentient beings, and among them, who will call BS. As previously mentioned, their only choices remain; vote Repub & hope (er, pray) for the best, or don't vote.
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422

9th October 2006, 10:35 AM	#10
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,881	Originally Posted by hgc I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party. The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused? No, "They're the salt of the earth, the common clay, they're anal orifices" (rule 8 adjusted quote from Blazing Saddles.).
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,881

9th October 2006, 10:43 AM	#11
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 12,986	Originally Posted by hammegk As previously mentioned, their only choices remain; vote Repub & hope (er, pray) for the best, or don't vote. hammy, I'm glad you joined in. As a homophobia-motivated voter, how do you feel about this situation? Is it just as you said? You'll continue to vote Republican and hope that they will indeed find a way to lock up the queers? Even now that you know their ranks are swollen with them?
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

9th October 2006, 10:53 AM	#12
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422	Originally Posted by hgc As a homophobia-motivated voter, Thta's news to me. Sexual preference doesn't show up on my radar when I'm voting for politicians. Quote: how do you feel about this situation? It's totally, completely, irrelevant. Quote: Is it just as you said? You'll continue to vote Republican and hope that they will indeed find a way to lock up the queers? Do you have a hangup concerning queers? I haven't suggested locking them up. Quote: Even now that you know their ranks are swollen with them? Did you see Novak's comment? "House GOP leaders, who had started the week shooting at each other, now were on the same page." Who cares?
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422

9th October 2006, 11:03 AM	#13
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 12,986	You've let me down yet again. Not willing to cop to your position, and nothing to contribute. Too bad. You had so much potential.
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

9th October 2006, 11:49 AM	#14
Charlie Monoxide Wag Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: London, Ontario Posts: 2,761	Originally Posted by hgc You've let me down yet again. Not willing to cop to your position, and nothing to contribute. Too bad. You had so much potential. Hope springs eternal .... Charlie (hoping you have a nice day) Monoxide
	__________________ Major General Wag of JREF

10th October 2006, 09:55 PM	#15
Dorian Gray Hypocrisy Detector Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Dayton, Ohio Posts: 20,193	Originally Posted by hgc I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party. The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused? NO sir. Denial is one of the most important tools in the Republican toolbox.
	__________________ "A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka "Rational arguments don't work on religious people. If they did, there wouldn't be any religious people." - House Additionally to Carlin being funnier than Izzard, I think Dorian is funnier than the Marquis. - Ron Tomkins

10th October 2006, 10:11 PM	#16
peptoabysmal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 3,467	That's amazing. Four sentences... four conspiracy theories. Flat out amazing.
	__________________ OBAMA: It's not that I want to punish your success; I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you that they've got a chance to success, too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.

11th October 2006, 05:50 AM	#17
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422	http://www.townhall.com/columnists/c...11/2006&page=1 Quote: Some people say that there is no point voting because there is no difference between the two major parties, and the other parties have no chance of winning. However, there is a difference: the Republicans are disappointing and the Democrats are dangerous. Quote: The Democrats are in Washington pushing for the kinds of things their supporters want: more spending, more immigration, more liberal judges. But the Republicans have finally stopped nominating liberal judges, after years of putting liberals like David Souter and John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court. Quote: The most that can be said for the current Republicans is that they want to throw away less money than the Democrats. In general, Democrats are the only real reason to vote for Republicans. hgc etal and the miniscule fraction of voters his mindset represents will never 'get it'.
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422

11th October 2006, 06:12 AM	#18
Hutch A broken man on a Halifax pier, the last of Barrett's Privateers Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: About 7 Miles from the Saturn 5B Posts: 6,533	Originally Posted by hgc I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party. The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused? In a (probably futile) attempt to keep on topic before ham-man and hgc go spiraling off to who-knows-where, I think that it will cause the religious conservatives who are now the backbone of the Republicans not to desert the party, but to take even stronger action to dominate it, to 'cleanse' it (my terminology) of those who corrupt it, both politically and morally, so that a truly Christian leadership can take over running the Republicans and restore true Moral and Christian leadership to the United States as the Founding Fathers had intended... For the record, the above is what I think they want to do--NOT what I want to see happen, in fact I think it would be the beginning of the end of the American experiment if that was to happen. But that is how I think they will react. We shall see. IMHO as always.
	__________________ If sheer righteous fury could accomplish anything worthwhile, Wolverines would have inherited the Galaxy long ago." -Web DuHavel, David Weber's "Honorverse" Series

11th October 2006, 06:37 AM	#19
marksman Reality Checker Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 5,003	I agree with Hutch. The lesson the religious right will learn is not to abandon the Republicans but to work even harder to get rid of "RiNOs" like Foley, who was not only semi-secretly gay, but also pro-choice.

11th October 2006, 06:38 AM	#20
daredelvis Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 1,865	Originally Posted by hgc I am wondering if one of the significant outcomes of the Foley fiasco is if religiously motivated (from the Christian "right" evangelical point of view) Republican voters will finally figure out that they've been played for fools by the Republican party. The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. But the religious nutters have often been suspicious that their agenda is not priority one. Now that their eyes are being opened to the gay men in the Republican ranks, and the moves by the leadership to protect same, will they come to think that they've been used and abused? They will continue to vote Republican because the GOP is the party of "personal responsibility"... ...as long as that person is Clinton. Daredelvis

11th October 2006, 07:21 AM	#21
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,417	Originally Posted by IXP As I understand it, the Republicans have managed, in the last few elections, to motivate a segment of voters who did not vote before with their "values" platform. Even before the Foley situation, they were losing these people because they were not delivering what these new voters thought they were voting for, i.e. abortion is still legal, no gay marriage amendement, not even a flag burning amendment. IXP But then what would the pull out in election years? You really have to respect how much the republicans have mannaged to be about pure naked power and little else at the moment

11th October 2006, 07:24 AM	#22
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,417	Originally Posted by daredelvis They will continue to vote Republican because the GOP is the party of "personal responsibility"... ...as long as that person is Clinton. Daredelvis I like the unofficial motto of the administration "the buck never stops here"

11th October 2006, 07:38 AM	#23
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,225	Originally Posted by Hutch I think that it will cause the religious conservatives who are now the backbone of the Republicans not to desert the party, but to take even stronger action to dominate it, to 'cleanse' it (my terminology) of those who corrupt it, both politically and morally, so that a truly Christian leadership can take over running the Republicans and restore true Moral and Christian leadership to the United States as the Founding Fathers had intended... But that is how I think they will react. We shall see. IMHO as always. If what you predict does happen, I suspect the non gun owning urban elites will start to feel a bit nervous about sectarian violence in the US. The red staters tend to be armed. If the Jacksonian strain of US polity is aroused, it tends to calm down only after exacting a blood debt. So, I am with you in desiring that continued polarization not accelerate. Per Rodney King: "Can't we all just get a bong (hit)?" (I don't think I got that right.) DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

11th October 2006, 08:34 AM	#24
marksman Reality Checker Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 5,003	Quote: I suspect the non gun owning urban elites will start to feel a bit nervous about sectarian violence in the US. The red staters tend to be armed. dr, Are you seriously suggesting America is on the brink of a civil war, with red staters using their guns against blue staters?

11th October 2006, 08:45 AM	#25
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,225	Originally Posted by marksman dr, Are you seriously suggesting America is on the brink of a civil war, with red staters using their guns against blue staters? At present? No. There is some hope that American cultural schism over the past generation can be healed. If the polarization continues without mitigation, however, I expect a civil war, or at least civil strife like a Rodney King riot X 10 in a number of large cities. I"d predict ruptures along predominantly ethnic-cultural lines. The ugliest of prospects is a multi sided, race/ethnicity based war on our soil. The "red staters" would be less likely to slaughter the "urban elites" than such crooks already in the urban areas -- red state or blue state is irrelevant in this sense -- who have guns, and who will exploit their ability to use force if the "thin veneer" cracks. If you look at the thinly veiled racialism in the CT mindset, and the alleged appeal that holds on the storied "x % of the population" I'd say there is fertile mass psychological ground for a nasty acting out along those lines. What I can't fathom is what a catalyst, or series of catalysts, would be that line the factors up. Hell, marksman, some street gangs already subjugate people via armed means in LA and Dallas now. Likewise in most major urban areas. The information age seems to have had the effect of reinforcing tribal behavior -- generically -- and across the board social balkanization, an outcome at odds with the vigorous attempts to exploit the capacity to bring people closer together. The internet is a fascnating example of that dynamic in action each day. Tipping point not yet reached in either direction, and I am not sure how far from one we are. If civil strife turns to civil war, I suspect you'll see the US National Guard fracture the way the Iraqi National Guard and Army fracture, and dissolve as an effective fighting force. Mass desertions and AWOL counts would be the first symptom of that internal collapse. What would happen in the US regular Army would likely be what happened in the civil war: some would remain true to the colors, and some would take R. E. Lee's course, and return home. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis Last edited by Darth Rotor; 11th October 2006 at 08:51 AM.

11th October 2006, 08:50 AM	#26
marksman Reality Checker Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 5,003	Believe it or not, Rodney King was ten years ago and we haven't seen violence like than in half a decade. New York subways are as safe as they have been in a half-century on an absolute measure and are safer than they've ever been on a per capita basis. The idea that America is falling apart socially at the seams is not evidenced anywhere except the fact that half the nation keeps voting for GOP candidates and half keep voting for Democrats and pundits for each side likes to fling mud. America is not falling apart. Gangs are not tearing the country apart. Blue staters are not seceding from the Union. In two years there will be a new President, blue or red, for half the nation to despise. Life goes on. This is not 1972. Heck, its not even 1852.

11th October 2006, 08:56 AM	#27
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,225	Originally Posted by marksman Believe it or not, Rodney King was ten years ago and we haven't seen violence like than in half a decade. New York subways are as safe as they have been in a half-century on an absolute measure and are safer than they've ever been on a per capita basis. The idea that America is falling apart socially at the seams is not evidenced anywhere except the fact that half the nation keeps voting for GOP candidates and half keep voting for Democrats and pundits for each side likes to fling mud. America is not falling apart. Gangs are not tearing the country apart. Blue staters are not seceding from the Union. In two years there will be a new President, blue or red, for half the nation to despise. Life goes on. This is not 1972. Heck, its not even 1852. I sincerely hope your assessment is correct. I don't want the US to have another civil war, nor civil strife as I outlined. Yes, this isn't 1972, but I don't find that any reason to applaud your optimistic assessment. It is difficult in the extreme to measure what is in people's hearts, and what symbols and stimuli they actually respond to. That is why I am both uncertain, and not sanguine, about prospects for healing some of the social rifts our society currently shows. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

11th October 2006, 09:10 AM	#28
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 26,176	Originally Posted by hgc The central theme of the Republican appeal to this block is homophobia. I don't think it is - sure, that element may occassionally be present, but that's really not at the heart of religious conservative support for Republicans. Which is why the religious right isn't going to abandon the Republican party over Folley, and why your speculation to that effect is really just wishful thinking on your part.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

11th October 2006, 09:13 AM	#29
marksman Reality Checker Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 5,003	History serves as a pretty good guide and does not support the idea that the sky is falling. It took a lot to get America to enter a civil war, which was eighty years in the making. We didn't have a civil war over Viet Nam. We're not going to have one because the GOP have been controlling Congress for a mere 12 years.

11th October 2006, 09:14 AM	#30
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,225	Originally Posted by Ziggurat I don't think it is - sure, that element may occassionally be present, but that's really not at the heart of religious conservative support for Republicans. Which is why the religious right isn't going to abandon the Republican party over Folley, and why your speculation to that effect is really just wishful thinking on your part. Foley resigned. Whatever his ethical errors and crimes, at least he got that part right. He knew he was wrong, and rather than bluster or demand someone prove it, he mea culpa'd, tossed out some chaffe and flares via his shark (drink/abused by cleric) and went to ground in rehab. I don't think (absent the chaffe and flares move, which I found pathetic) he could have done much more to say "my bad" and by resigning salvage a trace of his honor, after having behaved so dishonorably. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

11th October 2006, 09:19 AM	#31
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,225	Originally Posted by marksman History serves as a pretty good guide and does not support the idea that the sky is falling. It took a lot to get America to enter a civil war, which was eighty years in the making. We didn't have a civil war over Viet Nam. We're not going to have one because the GOP have been controlling Congress for a mere 12 years. How is the GOP in congress the issue? The silent majority has been around since before Nixon, and they began to find their voice with Reagan. Values voters are but an aspect of the fracture. I am as concerned by those so alienated (about 35% of the voting public) by the system that they place themselves outside of it. It only takes a small, violent minority to stir up serious trouble. (Note the problems the Islamic world is having with modestly sized, but vigorously active persons.) Sam Adams' Sons of Liberty, and for that matter the leaders of the Revolution, were hardly a majority, but were energetic and willing to use violent means. Why do you assume that "it can't happen here?" DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

11th October 2006, 09:29 AM	#32
daredelvis Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 1,865	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor How is the GOP in congress the issue? The silent majority has been around since before Nixon, and they began to find their voice with Reagan. Values voters are but an aspect of the fracture. I am as concerned by those so alienated (about 35% of the voting public) by the system that they place themselves outside of it. It only takes a small, violent minority to stir up serious trouble. (Note the problems the Islamic world is having with modestly sized, but vigorously active persons.) Sam Adams' Sons of Liberty, and for that matter the leaders of the Revolution, were hardly a majority, but were energetic and willing to use violent means. Why do you assume that "it can't happen here?" DR Can you inform me about this "silent majority"? Specifically, could you elaborate about the majority part? Daredelvis

11th October 2006, 09:31 AM	#33
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,225	Originally Posted by daredelvis Can you inform me about this "silent majority"? Specifically, could you elaborate about the majority part? Daredelvis No. You are invited to look up Richard Nixon, and his remarks on the "Silent Majority" on your own time." Google is your friend. Happy reading. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

11th October 2006, 09:33 AM	#34
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 12,986	Originally Posted by Ziggurat I don't think it is - sure, that element may occassionally be present, but that's really not at the heart of religious conservative support for Republicans. Which is why the religious right isn't going to abandon the Republican party over Folley, and why your speculation to that effect is really just wishful thinking on your part. Hard to prove one way or the other. "The central theme" was probably a little hyperbolic on my part. But I wouldn't downplay the importance to many, many people. And there's no doubt that the party plays it up -- witness the gay marriage constitutional amendment attempt. My speculation is certainly wishful thinking, but it may also may coincide with real impact. Lots of noises of disappointment are being made. Where else where they go? They could stay home. That's not my most preferred outcome, but it'll do in a pinch.
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

11th October 2006, 09:35 AM	#36
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,417	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor No. You are invited to look up Richard Nixon, and his remarks on the "Silent Majority" on your own time." Google is your friend. Happy reading. DR Please show that this majority makes up more than 50% of the american populace.