In response to:

Jim Nabors and How Liberalism May Win Its Way to Defeat

AZhot Wrote: Feb 02, 2013 9:32 AM
You're absolutely correct. Republitards allow themselves to get sucked into these social issues and into a no win situation. They just beg to be painted as the mean, cruel, greedy and hateful bad guys. If an individual thinks we need to get back the constitutional republic we are meant to be, I could care less about sexual orientation. If we continue along the path we are currently on, we will ALL be in a world of hurt.
AZYaateeh Wrote: Feb 02, 2013 10:48 AM
"Couldn't" care less.

And your ideas are as laughably counterfactual as Mao's agricultural theories. Libertarian social policies destroy the sole bulwark against the power of the state, the family, because their fetish for individualism won't allow ANY institutions, state or private, except for corporations. Only, in the fight between the atomized individual and the collective state, the state wins, every time, having thousands of times as much resources as even the richest individual—especially since the corporations know which side their bread is buttered on, and it ain't individual liberty.

Is Gomer Pyle one of the Four Horseman of the Liberal Apocalypse?

The superficially surprising thing about last week’s announcement that Jim Nabors had married his boyfriend of four decades was not so much the nuptials themselves – I always felt Gomer was just going through the motions with Lou-Ann Poovie. Rather, it was the cultural reaction to the news that a huge star back in his day had decided he would tell even if we didn’t ask.

There was no reaction. America, including conservatives regardless of their feelings about gay marriage, collectively shrugged their shoulders and generally wished the elderly...