There's a show on HGTV I think it is, with a petite blond lady who restores ancient decrepit houses and then resells them. The promo for the show includes a clip with her and her son and her talking about it being tough doing that and also being a single mom.

The obvious reaction, it seems to me is, "who's fault is that?" She's attractive and, obviously is doing okay financially, so it seems like it's completely within her power to change that. If she really wanted to. So I don't buy the "woe is me" line.

Unparsable. Fail.

I'm getting pretty close to treating your journal as write-only.

Which part are you having a problem with, that he was lying about being Christian or that his like-minded knew he was lying about it?

I'm sorry Mr. Happy Thoughts, but BHO is not a Christian. He's provided ample evidence of that, post the 2008 campaign.

No more so than most every other nation. The U.S. lags the general world-wide trend Leftward, so pretty much everywhere else is to the Left of this country.

And I am a pretty far Right person, in which despite being much further to the Right than generally the rest of the world, the U.S. has become way too far Left for me.

So that's where I'm coming from, in full disclosure. We're looking at the same reality, I just come at it from a, these days, rather minority and quite unpopular perspective. But I am what I am.

I'm as dismissive on the ones you've dismissed, but I'm more of a Paul, Carson, Cruz person, in that order, I think. I guess I'm attracted to "bad boys" now; I'm just so over the establishment, nation-building, mass-surveilance neocon type of Republicans. I hate Progressivism so much, I even hate it in that party.

...more apropos for Slashdot (i.e. going up against a-hole neckbeard types):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

That sounded like you were trying for a rebuttal. But you ended up just repeating the position I conceded in the special case and was making an argument against in all other cases. Oh well.

And what do you imagine could cause that? (And if you're thinking about just saying "God", well, then "oh no, sorry, we were looking for what could possibly cause mankind these days, of its own volition, to turn back to God".)

We obviously know God will be victorious in the end, but if revivals are all Him (which would clash with my belief in Free Will/IANACalvinist), what makes you think He necessarily has another one planned?

Wow. That's hardly refutation, because his side knew he was lying about that, and they're the ones who suggest that Christians shouldn't be considered. So of course they'd zipper that argument, for BHO. Because they knew it didn't apply to him.

That was too easy.

Other countries aren't formally Right-of-center undergoing an attempted takeover by its internal Left. The U.S. has checks and balances and intentional slowdowns built into its political processes, so it would take a near-king to overcome in a timely fashion those holdovers from our prior traditional past.

Not to an extreme. People should be free to swing their fists, too, but there are limits to that. I think you should get to elect whatever bastard you want, you just shouldn't get to elect the same bastard in perpetuity.

But I do feel some discomfort in holding this position, because like regulating money in elections (which I'm against), it is infringing on political speech.

Beyond this, your "just think of the restraint that would come from endless power" doesn't exactly sway me.

FDR was a communist and enemy of America. Just like the current office holder. The problem is, I figure about a third of this country is the same, so occasionally we're going to get people in the White House who have absolutely no business representing the country. As long as America has a significant population of Americans who hate what America stands for, all the more reason for term limits, to limit our mistakes.

Because we don't want the office of president turned into what its current occupant thinks it is?

Sure, to students, in a philosophy classroom, it's okay to say that, as a personal challenge to voluntarily accept for the duration of the course. Outside of that one special case, a 3-part FU to the author:

1) FU for suggesting I don't have a right to my own thoughts, just because "all too often" it leads to something you don't like. People have a right to be wrong, and a right to confuse the subjective with the objective.

2) FU for the lame climate change denier reference.

3) FU for the lame vaccine refuser reference. (And after these two is where I stopped reading.)

Man you are some bad AI. For the 3rd fucking time:

p.s. You had said:

The court of public opinion says Christians should be considered ineligible for public office. The problem with the public, is that they can be bullied into supporting anything. So we have an era of ultra Political Correctness on our hands, where what's chided is the "negative behavior" of expressing Conservative thought. TLDR: Try again.

p.s. As a reference point, I answered 13 Y's out of 39 Q's. I guess that makes me a "convinced conservative".

p.p.s. Re: The talking about one of your Leftie pals doing the "honorable" thing: ROTFLMAO! You're so cute. Keep gripping that hope!

So Jesus is going to save America from becoming a communist shithole? That's certainly not what my Bible says. I guess you just don't like to face the tough issues/reality. It's your prerogative.