Santorum Drops Out of Presidential Race

Oh yeah, soooo private. Until they want tax-payer subsidization of contraception/abortion, of illegitimate children, of the prisons needed to later house those children at higher rates, for expensive public education that those children take little to no advantage of at higher rates, until they run out of tax payers capable of shouldering an exploding entitlement state, healthcare and public clinics to treats their STD’s. So private, until they’re bemoaning generational poverty worsened and worsened by the breakdown of the family and loosening sexual norms. ETC.

Save your juvenile quote. This is a subject for big boys and girls.

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Oh yeah, soooo private. Until they want tax-payer subsidization of contraception/abortion, of illegitimate children, of the prisons needed to later house those children at higher rates, for expensive public education that those children take little to no advantage of at higher rates, until they run of tax payers capable of shouldering an exploding entitlement state, healthcare and public clinics to treats their STD’s. [/quote]

We’ve already had this debate in another thread. I’m ready to get back to the OP.

If we keep the insults and accusations to a minimum perhaps this thread can stay on topic.

[quote]therajraj wrote:

“It’s the strange thing about this church: it is obsessed with sex, absolutely obsessed. Now they will say, we with our permissive society and our rude jokes are obsessed – no, we have a healthy attitude: we like it, it’s fun, it’s jolly. Because it’s a primary impulse, it can be dangerous and dark and difficult. It’s a bit like food in that respect, only even more exciting. The only people who are obsessed with food are anorexics and the morbidly obese, and that in erotic terms is the church in a nutshell.”[/quote]

That silly little quip from some left-wing wit would be more appropriate to Islamic fundamentalists or women in chastity belts in the middle ages. Not wanting “Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender/Questioning” groups led by extremists in schools and government subsidised everything for everyone/questioning is NOT an unreasonable or “obsessive” position to take.

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Romney
Mormon. Instantly disqualified.[/quote]

They said that in 1960 about a Massachusetts Senator only it was about being Catholic. Up to that time there had never been a Catholic President. He won.

Wrong again, you’re two for two! Evangelicals would vote for just about anyone over Obama. I am very confident of that. Almost 30% of the right wing of the republican party (most evangelicals) think that Obama is a Muslim. They’ll turn out in large numbers not FOR Romney but AGAINST Obama.

Bet?

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Romney
Mormon. Instantly disqualified.

Gingrich
Serial adulterer who still wants to be the shining paragon of morality.

Paul
Doesn’t think abortion, contraception, or gay marriage should be banned at the federal level. To social conservatives, he talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk.

Obama
Democrat, instantly disqualified.

TL;DR: Social conservatives/Christian evangelicals won’t vote for anyone this year. Santorum’s gone which means they are too.[/quote]

Alright everybody take a VERY deep breath here, I think Raj was trying for some satire here.

Granted I think everybody would have gotten it had he gone for some more outlandish claims on themm all, but notice he did disqualify everybody

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Almost 30% of the right wing of the republican party (most evangelicals) think that Obama is a Muslim.
[/quote]

Only 30% of them are that dumb? I thought it would be more.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I love this.

This not only makes the debate more enjoyable but also exposes this fraud for who he is.

He spent months trying to distinguish himself from his rivals and now he will just wave his hand, undo everything he previously said, and anoint the victor.

Ah, politics…[/quote]

How does that “expose” him for the “fraud…who he is?” Do you expect him to endorse Obama? Have a hissy fit and endorse no one? Endorse Newt who’s bouncing checks and living in fantasy land? Paul’s circus? What’s he supposed to do? How does it make him a fraud?[/quote]

He should keep his big mouth shut because anything he says is a lie.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I love this.

This not only makes the debate more enjoyable but also exposes this fraud for who he is.

He spent months trying to distinguish himself from his rivals and now he will just wave his hand, undo everything he previously said, and anoint the victor.

Ah, politics…[/quote]

How does that “expose” him for the “fraud…who he is?” Do you expect him to endorse Obama? Have a hissy fit and endorse no one? Endorse Newt who’s bouncing checks and living in fantasy land? Paul’s circus? What’s he supposed to do? How does it make him a fraud?[/quote]

He should keep his big mouth shut because anything he says is a lie.
[/quote]

Anything?

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
I love this.

This not only makes the debate more enjoyable but also exposes this fraud for who he is.

He spent months trying to distinguish himself from his rivals and now he will just wave his hand, undo everything he previously said, and anoint the victor.

Ah, politics…[/quote]

How does that “expose” him for the “fraud…who he is?” Do you expect him to endorse Obama? Have a hissy fit and endorse no one? Endorse Newt who’s bouncing checks and living in fantasy land? Paul’s circus? What’s he supposed to do? How does it make him a fraud?[/quote]

He should keep his big mouth shut because anything he says is a lie.
[/quote]

Anything?[/quote]

Name one thing he says that isn’t at least a little bit distorted, exaggerated, or just completely made up.

He said Obama spends too much.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
He said Obama spends too much.[/quote]

Yes but he would just end up being a hypocrite because he won’t change anything…so?

Who was the last republican president who didn’t spend too much?

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Almost 30% of the right wing of the republican party (most evangelicals) think that Obama is a Muslim.
[/quote]

Only 30% of them are that dumb? I thought it would be more.[/quote]

It’s just a smear put out last week by the leftist machine(Huffington, Daily Kos, Talking Points Memo etc.) based on a survey of Alabama and Mississippi Republicans. It’s fodder for the left and elitist northerners. In actual fact:

"The same percentage of Illinois Republicans offered the opinion that Obama was not born in the United States (36%) as those who said he was (36%).

Before President Obama provided his actual birth certificate, political science professor John Sides discovered that many Republicans with high education levels were willing to go on the record and tell a pollster that Obama was not born in the United States. The percentage of well-educated people who said so rose at a much higher rate, during the Obama presidency, than it did among people who were less educated. The same trend (in reverse) was seen in the percentage who expressed the opinion that Obama was a Christian."

Demographics, evangelicals: Religion in America: U.S. Religious Data, Demographics and Statistics | Pew Research Center

Case closed.

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Almost 30% of the right wing of the republican party (most evangelicals) think that Obama is a Muslim.
[/quote]

Only 30% of them are that dumb? I thought it would be more.[/quote]

And about 30% of the far left think that George Bush had something to do with 9-11, or that he made money by invading Iraq.

So…there you go pal. The far right had nothing on the far left when it comes to stupidity.

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Who was the last republican president who didn’t spend too much?[/quote]

Thanks I got a chuckle out of that considering that Obama has spent more than the previous three republican Presidents combined. And it only took him just a little over three years.

You should post more you’re easy.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Almost 30% of the right wing of the republican party (most evangelicals) think that Obama is a Muslim. They’ll turn out in large numbers not FOR Romney but AGAINST Obama.

Bet?[/quote]

is that a party you want to be apart of?

[quote]optheta wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Almost 30% of the right wing of the republican party (most evangelicals) think that Obama is a Muslim. They’ll turn out in large numbers not FOR Romney but AGAINST Obama.

Bet?[/quote]

is that a party you want to be apart of?[/quote]

We can win over the other 70% :wink:

EDIT: And, BTW it’s from a poll by the Democratic Party group Public Policy Polling. They provide no methodology whatsoever(although they say you can email them for “basic” methodology questions.)

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Who was the last republican president who didn’t spend too much?[/quote]

Thanks I got a chuckle out of that considering that Obama has spent more than the previous three republican Presidents combined. And it only took him just a little over three years.

You should post more you’re easy.[/quote]

So your answer is, as long as Obama spends more, republicans are doing a good job even if they still overspend.

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Who was the last republican president who didn’t spend too much?[/quote]

Thanks I got a chuckle out of that considering that Obama has spent more than the previous three republican Presidents combined. And it only took him just a little over three years.

You should post more you’re easy.[/quote]

So your answer is, as long as Obama spends more, republicans are doing a good job even if they still overspend.[/quote]

I dont get that.

If I was stabbed I wanted it done quickly, no slowly, inch by inch.

The end result is just about the same, but with far less drama.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
Who was the last republican president who didn’t spend too much?[/quote]

Thanks I got a chuckle out of that considering that Obama has spent more than the previous three republican Presidents combined. And it only took him just a little over three years.

You should post more you’re easy.[/quote]

So your answer is, as long as Obama spends more, republicans are doing a good job even if they still overspend.[/quote]

I dont get that.

If I was stabbed I wanted it done quickly, no slowly, inch by inch.

The end result is just about the same, but with far less drama. [/quote]

Well if you could pass the stabbing to a future generation I could see the logic in that, but no moral person would admit that.