Defending Lynn Jenkins

Yes Christopher, it's there inside of you, screaming to come out. Your sense of justice you cannot deny. Liberalism is about feeling good, not about doing good. In fact, they are typically the purveyor of evil. It's consservatives that will allow someone to say something many times without judgement, turning the other cheek, refusing to prosecute or label. There are still many conservatives that refuse to call Obama a Marxist! My God, what more does he have to do, abolish all private property? Yet tey say "don't be to hard to judge him. Now liberals! You have one slip of the tongue and they will label you, prosecute you, and violate you. heck, you need not even say anything... Ya see Tea Partiers are racist because if they don't agree with the messiah, it must be a race thing, right? I mean, he can't be wrong or we can't have a different opinion then the messiah Obama, we must all let him think for us or we are racist. Ever notice when you beat a liberal in debate, or corner them on a lie they attack you personally and with vileness and vulgarity? The thing you will learn which will always set you apart is that liberals have double standards. Remember, the ends justify the means, there is no such thing as high crimes and treason whe nyou are a liberal.

Stay on the RIGHT path my young apprentice. lol

Rush Limbaugh is not a racist and I doubt seriously that you can offer a quote where he EVER said anything racist.

I missed that somehow! Rush definately is NOT a racist. I guessing you've not listened to him more then just a "casual stent". All these quotes you hear are taken out of contxt as if that should surprise you. Maybe you should listen to him before you critisize him.

I have been disappointed in so much of the media where they focus on the one or two idiots with the openly racist signs and ignore the vast majority of people there making a legitimate point (many of which I disagree with).

And I know a little bit of what you talking about in terms of debating a true liberal (I'm just a fake one). My pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-amnesty self has been called more names by the left than I care to recall.

Ah the Limbaugh lovers unite! (I mean that in a good way). I'm use to this, but even when I was much more conservative I never really liked Limbaugh though I did listen to him frequently. I was a much more loyal Ingraham and Hannity listener. And in your defense I haven't listened to conservative talk radio for about two years.

Here's the case aganist Limbaugh:

1.) Said the NFL represents the blood and the crips without the weapons
2.) Said that Colin Powell only endorsed Barack Obama because they were both black quote "what other reason could there be?"
3.) Talked of two black teens who beat up a white teen and said "this is what happens in Obama's America"
4.) PLAYED BARACK THE MAGIC NEGR* ON HIS SHOW!

I get Rush's humor, I know when he's making crap up to get a reaction, and I know he doesn't have a problem with all black people and that he would vote for Condi. But I also know he says a lot of stupid crap. I may disagree with Ingraham, Hannity, Bennett (yes I defend William Bennett), and co. but I don't think they're racist but I have to call out Rush.

Also if he ever apogolize I would give him the benefit of the doubt.

First and foremost, Rush is an entertainer, not a racist. From last to first, Barack the magic ngro was taken from the LA Times a very left leaning publication to be sure authored by David Ehrenstein. Yes the quote and the premise for the LA Times Editorial was turned into one of Rush's trademark parodies by comedian Paul Shanklin but in the context of the quote, moreover the racism on display by David Ehrenstein and the LA Times was never made an issue by the media, since they used it to smear white Americans. Rush was not a racist for saying the words, nor for having the parody which exposed the racism of the left play on his show.

In the context of Powell's endorsement, Rush was pointing out the reverse racism that was occurring nation wide, which was a great many generally center right republicans were in fact supporting Obama because of skin color, not the content of his character. And on the subject of the two black teens beating up a white teen on the school bus and Obama's America, Rush was referencing Newsweek cover story which stated on the COVER: OBAMA'S AMERICA - Who We Are Now? THE COUNTRY THAT ELECTED BARACK OBAMA ON A PLATFORM OF CHANGE IS ITSELF UNDERGOING A RAPID AND MOMENTOUS TRANSFORMATION. Rush said [so] "You put your kids on a school bus, you expect safety but in Obama's America the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering, "Yay, right on, right on, right on, right on,"

END PART 1

Though the NY Times, Newsweek and virtually every left publication since election has canonized him, and the Nobel committee awarded him a peace prize, it seems strange that the peace and racism Obama had supposedly set asunder by his election has Since election day been on the rise from radical "Black" America.

Recall the Black Panthers telling the white election observer on election day, “You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.” Rush's point was that the media has been letting us know for months what a great man Obama is, how he's bringing the races together, yet Black on white racism in America was on the increase in Obama's America. Rush was using this as an example of of racism and the Newsweek cover to demonstrate the larger issue that any criticism of Barack Obama, his policies and failures was being called racism by the left. And you Chris are a perfect example of what he means.

Colin Powell was among many formerly thought to be conservative republicans that are naturally opposed to the ideology of the far left who inexplicably came forward and endorsed Obama. The point Rush was making is that some things ARE about race in America with some people. Many people black and white voted for Obama exactly because they wanted to show America was not racist. They were using the color of his skin not the content of his character as their guide. The left called this an Historic Election, precisely because Obama was Black. They and you are the ones bringing "race"ism into this. Rush was just pointing that fact out.

END PART 2

Bloods and Crips. Another social commentary Chris. The NFL has a different gene pool now as Mercury Morris pointed out recently. Most of the talent has come from places where drugs, gang affiliation and violence along with intimidation ruled their day in school and in the neighborhood. As opposed to the 60's where that was not prevalent in American schools as today. That's the talent/gene pool where the greatest talent is coming from, and Rush's observation was they're carry some of that attitude with them into the game, which is making the game appear more gangland, more "UnCivil". It's leading to more on-field confrontations that are mostly verbal though with some turning into violence.

So much so that some games are being won or lost because of un-necessary un-sportsman like and taunting penalties for that type of behavior. Poor choice of locution, perhaps, but factual not racial.

I stand by what I said and think. I truly believe Rush is a racist and have no sympathy for him at all. Maybe Gov. Sanford can spare a tear.

That being said, I was very harsh about the Iowa voting system that lead to the Obama rush to voting. By taking out the privacy of voting and instead cacausing, white Democrats felt pressure to get on the Obama train. I don't think this was some big conspriacy but just human nature.

I decided to switch from McCain to Obama after McCain's ad saying that the reason Obama didn't visit troops over in Europe was because cameras weren't allowed. It was a cheap shot and worse a lie coming from a man who was my hero in politics. He loss my vote rather than Obama gained it. I do realize that Obama was able to play nicer because of his position in the polls but at the end of the day, I agreed with Obama more than McCain and voted on issues not race as Hillary Clinton was and still is my prefered Democrat.

One of the most fundamental contradictions in dialectics is that between form and substance. Form is useless without substance and substance cannot exist without form. However it is more dangerous to be fixated on form without substance than vice versa.

Your fixation on Form has gotten you confused about Jenkins, Limbaugh, Powell, conservatism, etc. You tend to get distracted by the trivialities inherent in the jargon you miss the more important content of the communication.

Try focusing on substance and you'll be happy to discover that it is impossible for Limbaugh to be a racist. He is a purveyor of information which in its purest form is devoid of racial content.

On Powel, cf, http://parallaxadhoc.blogtownhall.com/2008/10/25/some_anti -mlk_moments.thtml

Otherwise, the more important to ask is this: on what basis are you a conservative? And why do you bother to want to be a conservative in the first place?

Now that you know that Obama is a Marxist, a liar, that he lied to get elected, that he is destroying our country by dismantling the Constitution piece by piece, that he is destroying healthcare to gain power, that he is desolving the first amendmentby spanking Fox, taking controll of the internet and working to impose deastating regulations on the media and since he may sign the UN's Global Warming (take over the United States and strip it's wealth, redistribute it and regulate them back into the dark ages) UNFCCC treaty. Now you know that he is hell bent on controlling us proletariat and making us all equally poor...
Would you vote for the Marxist-in-Chief again?

First since you're attemping to bait by saying you were a supporter of McCain until he injected an opinion that Obama was posing for the camera's, all while ignoring the many cheap shots delivered by Obama and the left against McCain and the Bush Administration and conservatives that continue right to this day, not to mention Obama's substantive opposition to free enterprise and capitalist economics, or his use of ACORN to get elected; I'd have to conclude you're either very naive or simple a liar. I've had it with leftists like yourself that invade TH and other conservative sites. You have some people thinking you're sincere, I'm sorry they've been taken in by you. You voted for Obama? Well he's a Marxist and he's your guy, so stop tryin to pretend otherwise.

There's a fight being stirred up in this country, one conservatives didn't start and didn't ever want. It's presently being manufactured by the likes of you and your man Obama. This isn't about Rush Limbaugh it's about the far left radical race-bating disingenuous jerks that you and your ilk are. Stand by whatever you like, you're what you are and I believe most intelligent observers see right through your scam.

that was a stupid comment on Lynn Jenkins' part. How many of you can say you have never made stupid comment? Just look at the comment in this post about Rush being a racist.
People who call Rush a racist or say they hate Beck or Fox have pretty much never listened to anything but lefty press releases about them or 2 min. clips taken out of context and never the complete show.
If any of you have never made a stupid comment, you are better than anyone I've ever known or probably will know.

The list of public figures who have made dumb statements is long.
People are imperfect.
God and Jesus Christ are the only perfect beings alive and I don't think any of us are they.

Hello, Christopher, this is RME KRNL (Chuck) and I am nominally a Republican but really a conservative (actually, a Federalist and a Constitutionalist) at heart.

I used to be a Democrat (voted for JFK and Carter before you were born) but after getting older and (a) becoming a little more politically savvy, (b) the disaster that Carter proved to be and (c) with the advent of Reagan, I became a Republican.

And I say I'm only nominally a Republican nowadays partly because of so-called "young Republicans" like you, as well as some "older Republicans" (even some for whom I otherwise have a lot of respect), like John McCain and Lindsey Graham. You all seem to want to represent yourselves as "moderate Republicans," which I hate to tell you, my "young Republican" friend, regardless of your protestations to the contrary, translates into being a RINO. Research the history of the "real" Republican Party and hopefully you will see what I mean.

"A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." - Thomas Paine. Or, if you don't like that one, "As an example to others, and not that I care for moderation myself, it has always been my rule never to smoke when asleep, and never to refrain from smoking when awake." - Mark Twain. The one by Paine plainly speaks clearly for itself; the one by Twain humorously cautions against being confused about what moderation really is and what it can lead to. Or, to give it a Zen twist, balance and moderation are not the same, grasshopper.

You say you are a "young Republican" but you also say you are pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-amnesty, and your bio says you are a Collins/Snowe environmental Republican, support gun control to a point and that you want to see our party win again in the future, which you believe can only happen through a more moderate perspective.

Well, Chris, first, I have to ask if you've read the Republican Party Platform lately, or ever -- because some of the things you say you are aren't things "real" Republicans believe in. I want Republicans to win again, too, but I don't think we will until we return to our roots, to the Party we used to be. Even some of the "moderate" Republicans now admit that we lost Congress in 2006 mainly by acting too much like Democrats for years.

So, no, my young friend, we don't need to be more "moderate." We don't need to become less principled to "enlarge the tent" and include more people. We need only to return to being more truly Republican, which means more conservative -- fiscally, socially, federally, constitutionally and morally -- and then those who we have lost will return and those who fear what they now see the liberal progressives doing to our country will also come.

You say you're a college student, so I hope you will discover for yourself the greatest single lesson that my college and law school experiences taught me, and it was not how much I learned about various subjects. (You study much of that for the test, to get the grade, and then forget it anyway.) The real "life lesson" was the expansion of my vistas, that the more I learned, the more I realized how much there was "out there" that I still did not know.

If you are sincere in what you've said here, instead of a liberal in conservative clothing just trying to stir things up, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say that I think you must be idealistic, perhaps even ideological -- and there's nothing wrong with that, especially when you're in college -- if there's ever a "proper" time for "idealism" and "causes," college is it -- but, as another commentor suggested, you are confusing form and substance. Of course, that's what a lot of people, college or not, young or not, idealistic or not, who voted for Obama are now increasingly realizing they did also. They helped elect the soaring rhetoric without realizing there was no substance. They elected the Wizard of Oz without knowing he was a different man than he portrayed himself to be. Not having listened to those of us who were saying "caveat emptor," they now have voter's remorse.

Just remember, however, there's a big difference between being idealistic and being what Lenin called a "useful idiot." Don't be the liberal progressives' useful idiot by trying to be so "moderate" that you trade away what it means to be a real Republican.

"I would rather fight the good fight and lose a principled debate than win it by moderation, compromise and deceit."

You say you're a college student, so I hope you will discover for yourself the greatest single lesson that my college and law school experiences taught me, and it was not how much I learned about various subjects. (You study much of that for the test, to get the grade, and then forget it anyway.) The real "life lesson" was the expansion of my vistas, that the more I learned, the more I realized how much there was "out there" that I still did not know.

If you are sincere in what you've said here, instead of a liberal in conservative clothing just trying to stir things up, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say that I think you must be idealistic, perhaps even ideological -- and there's nothing wrong with that, especially when you're in college -- if there's ever a "proper" time for "idealism" and "causes," college is it -- but, as another commentor suggested, you are confusing form and substance. Of course, that's what a lot of people, college or not, young or not, idealistic or not, who voted for Obama are now increasingly realizing they did also. They helped elect the soaring rhetoric without realizing there was no substance. They elected the Wizard of Oz without knowing he was a different man than he portrayed himself to be. Not having listened to those of us who were saying "caveat emptor," they now have voter's remorse.

Just remember, however, there's a big difference between being idealistic and being what Lenin called a "useful idiot." Don't be the liberal progressives' useful idiot by trying to be so "moderate" that you trade away what it means to be a real Republican.

"I would rather fight the good fight and lose a principled debate than win it by moderation, compromise and deceit."

I don't claim to be a conservative, but rather a Republican. I do think of myself as a conservative person in terms of my personality but not in my politics. Also there's that question, that has lingered over the last decade in particular what is a conservative position? Paleo v. Neo, Liberation v. religious traditionalists, enviromentalists v. business. It's up in the air but I would be the first to say that the Hannity conservatism of today, I am far away from.

Wow, dude you have got to stop watching Glenn Beck. If I can play doctor for a second, I'm prescribing 4 George Will articles and 2 Peggy Noonans.

While no candidate is promised my vote, in all honesty I will probably vote for Obama again.

Again, you are entitled to your opinion. I've had this site since 2007, and have made plenty of friends more conservative than you on this site. I don't claim to be a conservative, in any traditional sense. Wouldn't it make sense for me to lie and say I voted for McCain to keep up this hoax? I'm very clear and honest about my voting and campaign work.

I would also say try to find a Democrat to defend Rep. Jenkins. Personally I like you but the fact that I criticize one person in one sentence (Limbuagh) along with his liberal conterpart (Miller) and this becomes the issue, is disappointing for me. But it is what it is.

A very good point, and I'll go on the record saying that I say stupid things all the time. :)

First of all thanks for coming by.

Now in full disclosure I have to tell you that bio was made in 2007 when I was a bit more conservative (I was still a huge part of the "pro-life" movement) and had rarely voted Democrat prehaps 5% of the time, so 95% Republican ain't bad. I try to change my bio to reflect my politics now, but as Chris Regal (the guy who seems to run the user blog section on TH), told me that changing the bio tab was permentatly broken and wouldn't be fixed.

As far as the future of the party, I truly think and using history as a guide that the party will become more moderate, espically on socail issues in the future. You cannot expect young voters to change and want women to die in abortion alleys or to deny equal rights to our gay friends. It will not happen. But I agree that we must be clear about the proper role for government and if the party is to win again it must stop the spending habits of the Democrats. But that will not happen, almost the entire party still uses federal dollars for pet projects back home smiling like idiots with big checks and doing only lip service to conservatism. Almost the entire southern GOP delegation is doing this and yet no one really targets them. I don't expect Alabama to start elected pro-choice, pro-gay marriage Senators but it would be nice if they replaced Sen. Shelby will a conservative who would walk the walk.

Wow Christopher! "you have got to stop watching Glenn Beck" You forgot to mention Rush Limbaugh! Boy I haven't heard that since the last 500 Obama Zombies posted to me. You just destroyed any possible respect I could ever have garnered for you. You are using the pre programmed lines used by all of the mindless Obama worshiper minions. All who read this will forever regard you as a common, ignorant, herdistic, dolt lacking any kind of self reliance. For you to question my integrity is beyond absurdity. For you to play "doctor" to me is ludicrous. I did my homework on Obama two years ago! And you did yours when? Obviously after the media brainwashed you into worshiping him. I've read HR 3200, I've read the Copenhagen Climate treaty, I've done my homework, have you? Of course you have not; you listen to the media and have allowed yourself to be programmed. I'm not here to deprogram a mindless Obama zombie; I have no further time for you.

I do try to convey some level of humor and scarcasm on my site. Life is too crazy to not poke a little fun into it. That being said, I do not like Glenn Beck but so what? If you do fine, I'm sure you're a smart guy but yeah he comes off like an idiot to me.

I love watching conservatives that challenge me and argue good points that make me a least concede to their side occasionally. George Will and Peggy Noonan the older writings of Buckley this is what keeps me a Republican.

Stop wasting your time with them Chris. Try Charles Krauthammer and Hugh Hewitt; try also John H. Hinderaker at http://www.powerlineblog.com

At least you're admitting you're not a conservative, and so far as the republican platform is concerned you aren't any more a true republican than Olympia Snowe or jumpin Jim Jeffords. Still there must be some hope for you.

You see I just started watching Glenn Beck last week after your comment. You see everytime I would find a FACT about the insane Marxist agenda being pushed by our Marxist-in-chief, and I'd post it some place, some leftist would say "You watch too much Glenn Beck" so I decided that I need to see what he has on his show. So I started recorcing it and watching it. Now I know why the Marxist hate it so! He's exposing the truth and they hate truth. I do have to thank you for getting me to watch it. At least from now on when someone says that, I know that what I said was absolutely true and the person who said that is absolutely wrong.

BTW, you never answered my question... Have you read HR 3200, the Copenhagen FCCC/AWGLCA Treaty, or any other legislation or policy this administration is backing?

Thanks A.S.

Sorry I haven't been around here lately but I will be posting something new soon.

To answer your question, no I have not read word for word the bill. Though I have read summaries of the bill and it's pros and cons put out by both sides. Do I support the health care bill despite it's flaws.

Yes. Although I'm wishing it had been broken down and voted on piece by piece as opposed to the monster that it is right now.

You are young and idealistic, but don't let others present to oyu what a fact is. Go read this stuff for yourself. I have. Do you realize that under Plousey's bill, you will have to pay about $3500.00 a year in premiums and if you refuse to pay it you can be fined $250,000.00 and put in prison for 5 years? Do you realize that the government would have the ability to shut down any insurence company they want. They can also remove someone from an insurance policy without reason. Do you realize that it will cost $83,000.00 per person not insured and it will only cover 40% of the uninsured? I could go on and on, it's horrible, the Dems keep lying to you about it, like they keep telling you there are no death panels in it, well everyone that I know that read it (me included) says there is! Backing this is just going to destroy your world and your kids world, I wouldn't care but my kids have to live there to and I want them to grow up in a free contry, not some Marxist run gulag.

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB100014240527487037923 04574504020025055040-lMyQjAxMDA5MDEwNjExNDYyWj.html