« A new winter workout -- Wii golf!Golf on Election day? How irresponsible! »

23 comments

Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
Jason,

Why is it that you liberals think it is necessary to invent these imaginary confrontations with "drunken Republicans"?

Why don't you just admit that your euphoria over Barry's win simply isn't enough to satisfy your hatred for "W"?

Alex USMC 1969-73
11/06/08 @ 17:22
Comment from: Jason Scott [Member] Email
This encounter was so surreal I could not possibly make it up. As for being a liberal, I'm not even a full-fledged Democrat all the time. I just happened to vote Obama this time around.
11/07/08 @ 10:45
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Well, if you voted for the closet Marxist, it means you're very mixed-up. I have to laugh at you folks who vote for a so-called conservative one election and then an Obama the next. It means that you have no governing principles; instead, you just make decisions on an emotional basis. You may not realize it, but you do.
11/08/08 @ 10:59
Comment from: Brandon Tucker [Member] Email
Smails,

Voting just based on policy doesn't make much sense either, since both candidates will/ would have ended up doing much different things than their campaigns said. Sometimes you just have to vote based on how much you trust a candidate with the country and let the times decide the policies.

I will say that being in a foreign country at the moment, it's quite refreshing to hear how enthused the rest of the world is about America again. But they've set an almost unreachably high bar for Obama.
11/08/08 @ 12:27
Comment from: William K. Wolfrum [Member] Email
But voting based purely on ideology worked so well for the U.S. the past eight years. How could it fail us now?

Basically, saying that more than 60 million people have no governing principles is code for: I don't believe in democracy.
11/08/08 @ 13:34
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
Judge Smails,

It was a foregone conclusion to almost everyone that Barry was going to win the election.

After all, he had the power of the press and almost all of the television networks in his bag. These media had succeed in demonizing George Bush and McCain by association And he spent more than $600,000,000 collected from sources both legal and illegal to buy his way in.

So I was a little surprised at the hysteria which overtook his backers when he surpassed the 270 mark in electoral votes.

One crowd of Obama people, almost all African-American,
were laughing uproariously,screaming, and dancing and swaying, similar to those in a Haitian voodoo trance. Obama was really their hero.

Then it came to me. When was the last time, I thought, did a similar group go absolutely bonkers when one of their heroes won a decision? It was when O.J. Simpsom was acquited of the two murders he obviously committed.

OJ was and still is a hero to a great many black people.

Just yesterday, Jami Floyd, a commentator on TruTV, formerly CourtTV, was incensed that the judge at his request for a new trial didn't treat the Juice with more respect by allowing him to appear in court in a suit and tie rather than jailhouse garb. Jami claims to be a black woman although one can hardly tell it.

She actually invoked the Obama win into her argument.

Alex USMC 1969-73
11/08/08 @ 17:41
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Alex,

Well put, and the Simpson analogy is a good one. What you say about the media is also, of course, true. Bill O'Reilly said recently that the pablum peddlers would win Obama about five points, but he is naive. It's more like 20-30. This is because if the media actually told the truth and informed people, these soci*lists wouldn't stand a chance.

As for Bush, he may have stripped the titled for the most unfairly maligned individual from Joe McCarthy or Pope Pius XXII. While I consider Bush a weak sister with questionable ideology, he is not the demonic master of the Universe the loony left has painted him to be. But the media can make you or break you and lead the sheeple by the nose.

Brandon,

You sound like someone with a decent heart who, lamentably, has a very weak philosophical foundation. The problem is that just as much as the times shape the policies, the policies shape the times. Remember that "times" are determined by people, by the collective decisions they make, both in their personal lives and via voting.

As for the candidates, no, of course you don't vote based on what they say; you use discernment. You decide based on the policies you KNOW they will actually propose, and this is simple for any relatively wise person figure out. You look at their voting records, their histories, what they've said during unguarded moments. For instance, you don't believe a man who claims he opposes partial-birth abortion when in his state senate he supported infanticide. That is just an example off the top of my head.

Even more important than this, however, is a person's overall philosophy of governance. I could not have been sure about what Reagan would have done on every single issue, but I understood that his overall philosophy was relatively sound. Likewise, I wouldn't vote for Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong-Il or Vladimir Putin because I understand that their philosophy is fatally flawed. The details don't matter, and they're easily concealed anyway.

Obama is a closet Marxist; that sounds like a radical statement to most, but it's true. Unlike you, I run in circles where I've heard about personal experience with the man, and I can tell you that he is not what you think he is. He is a malevolent, deceitful creature and could be a pathological narcissist. Such individuals are extremely adept at adapting their behavior to fit their goals in the given situation; if it calls for charm, they will charm the pants off you; if it calls for humor, they will make you chuckle. They specialize in the facade.

Over time you will find out, the hard way, that your trust in this creature was misplaced. And that, my young friend, is not an emotional reaction. It's based on what I know.

11/08/08 @ 18:22
Comment from: William K. Wolfrum [Member] Email
Please note that in all the words in the comment above, there is only one flailing attempt at making a factual claim, which is "he supported infanticide."

Illinois state law already provides a law that physicians must protect the life of any fetus that has any chance at sustained survival outside the mother's womb. You can find that law here: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/documents/072005100K6.htm

You are allowed to have your own opinions, but not your own facts. As the good judge never really bothers with facts in any of his writings (and when he does they are generally embarrassingly wrong - such as claiming that:"(Politicians) are talking about corporations as if they are entities into themselves ... corporations comprise people.")

The fact: "A corporation is a legal entity separate from the persons that form it."

I've run in the same circles with countless Limbaughian, Wienerian clones like Judge, and they are always the same, embracing intellectual dishonesty and laziness while trying desperately to be noticed by appealing to the lowest possible denominator.

You can trust me on this. After all, I look way cooler in a Chuck Norris than most:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v642/shakespeares_sister/wolfrumtexasranger.png
11/08/08 @ 22:28
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
"Illinois state law already provides a law that physicians must protect the life of any fetus that has any chance at sustained survival outside the mother's womb."

Sounds like a big loophole to me. Obama opposed BAIPA, and that is a fact. He did this even though leftists such as Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy and organizations such a NARAL went neutral on it. Anyway, I'll trust a nurse who witnessed the murder Obama sanctioned. Her testimonial is here: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51121
11/09/08 @ 00:45
Comment from: William K. Wolfrum [Member] Email
Of course you trust her, you agree with her. Regardless of her making unsubstantiated claims and being as biased a source as humanly possible, she is on your side of an argument so she must be telling the truth. And, of course, you do this after trying to convince me that doctors are "pro-infanticide" also.

Seriously, you gave me a link to WorldNetDaily to show some type of validation for your argument. WorldNetDaily, for God's sake.

This is why I rarely bother with you. You just bring absolutely nothing to the table aside from your own hubris.

11/09/08 @ 06:58
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Wolfie,

You're projecting. The truth is, boy, you believe what you want to believe. A person has to use discernment, and I believe Stanek because I possess that quality and consider her to be a sincere person. Besides, Obama had no good reason to oppose BAIPA, and citing a loophole-filled law and "reproductive rights" doesn't qualify. Oh, and when did I try to convince you that doctors are pro-infanticide (although some are)?

I also say that you're a typical leftist. You dismiss any source that you brand as "right-wing" simply because it reveals truths you don't want to hear. It's why people like you remain profoundly ignorant.
11/09/08 @ 14:52
Comment from: William K. Wolfrum [Member] Email
Sorry, what was that you wrote again? I wasn't paying attention because I was watching some dude trying to talk about economics while wearing the most precious little cowboy hat you could imagine. Seriously, it's cuter than a puppy and a kitten fighting for a sock. And equally tough. Want the URL?
11/09/08 @ 19:21
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email


Smails,

Just a few of the outrageous campaign promises that Barry will find impossible to keep:
"My energy plan will create FIVE MILLION! new high-paying jobs." Never happen.

"95% of all people who work will get a tax cut." There is no way in hell that a 3.6% tax increase on the top 5% of wage earners will not only make up for that cut, it will have to exceed it by miles to pay for his spending increases.

"All these things will be accomplished with no additional deficit spending or inflation of the currency." Pure, unadulterated BS.

Speaking of inflation, the previous records of runaway inflation have recently been obliterated.

This absurdity just occurred in the African paradise of Zimbabwe. For the edification of the liberals on this site, Zimbabwe is the all-black run fiefdom of Robert Mugabe, tyrant par excellence.

Before being overrun by the murderous henchmen of Mugabe, Zimbabwe was formerly known as Southern Rhodesia, one of the most prosperous and peaceful nations in sub-Sahara Africa. British capital had built a thriving economy and European farmers had cultivated much of the fertile land.

Recently, the Zimbabwe economy has declined by an estimated 75%. But Mugabe did succeed in making BILLIONARES out of every single person in that ravaged country.

But their period as billionaires has come to an abrupt halt. In August, the renegade government devalued their currency, the new Zimbabwe dollar is now worth TEN BILLION of the old Zimbabwe dollars! And the new Zimbabwe dollar is still not worth one US cent.

You liberals will have to realize that the only money a government can create is with a printing press. We had better hope that Barry and his gang don't get that printing press down at the Bureau of Engraving working overtime.

Alex USMC 1969-73
11/10/08 @ 18:09
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Alex,

Extremely well put, once again. The truth is that Obama has had to lie thoroughly to obscure who and what he really is. He believes in Second Amendment rights, isn't radically pro-abortion, and didn't understand how bigoted Rev. Wrong was. Sure, and I worked on Nader's campaign staff.

He cannot give a tax cut to 95 percent of Americans because 40 percent don't pay federal taxes. Thus, he either means 40 percent of those WHO PAY TAXES or that 40 percent of citizens will get a handout.

11/11/08 @ 15:50
Comment from: Booger [Visitor] Email
Jim DeMint in 2012!!
11/13/08 @ 23:35
Comment from: Tim McDonald [Visitor] Email
My favorite Redneck Republictards:

Ted Stevens, the felon
Larry the restroom foot guy who got arrested and is still in the Senate
Ted Haggard, the gay hypocrite republictard pastor
James Dogson, pitiful idiot
George The Alcoholic Worst President Ever Bush
11/14/08 @ 09:23
Comment from: Booger [Visitor] Email
Jim DeMint in 2012!
11/14/08 @ 11:46
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Well, Tim, two can play that game, so here we go.

My favorite reprobate Democrats:

Gerry Studds, the homosexual who had an affair with a 17-year-old boy and was then re-elected by other Democrat reprobates.
Clinton the adulterer and coke user, the man with a "nose like a vacuum cleaner. Also re-elected by Democrat reprobates.
Barney Frank, a call-boy operation was being run out of his home. Again, re-elected by other Democrat reprobates.
Ted Kennedy, the drunken, philandering lout whose actions caused the death of Mary Jo Kopechne. Made no effort to save Kopechne and tried to cover up the event. Will be re-elected by other Democrat reprobates until he breathes his last.
Marion Barry, imprisoned on serious cocaine charges but then re-elected by other Democrat reprobates.
Dan Rostenkowski, a product of the Democratic Chicago machine, he was indicted on corruption charges and then imprisoned.
Eliot Spitzer, the great crusader who was caught up in a prostitution ring and had to resign.
James McGreevey, the homosexual ex-governor of NJ who had an adulterous affair with another man and had to resign from office.

OK, Tim, I saw your five and raised you three. Do you enjoy this game?
11/14/08 @ 12:23
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
Tim,

My list of Democrats who are the darlings of the liberal establishment:

Ladies first. Cynthia McKinney and Maxine Waters, moonbats of the first order.

Dennis"the Kook"Kucinich, the guy who bankrupted the once-great city of Cleveland and who now dispenses advice to Treasury Department officials.

Edward"Fat Teddy"Kennedy, aka "The Swimmer".

And last but not least, that venerable champion of civil rights and former Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan, Robert"Sheets"Byrd.

Alex USMC 1969-73
11/15/08 @ 10:23
Comment from: Alex [Visitor] Email
Judge Smails,

That's quite a trifecta of pansies there.

I know that Studds and Frank are both from Massachusetts.

I wonder which one is "Butch" and which is "Mary."

Alex USMC 1969-73
11/15/08 @ 17:45
Comment from: Booger [Visitor] Email
Jim DeMint in 2012!
11/15/08 @ 22:17
Comment from: Judge Smails [Visitor] Email
Yes, Alex, could you imagine if a Republican had been a member of the Klan? Oh, yeah, I forgot, it's wasn't his fault. The democrats were the party of the Klan.
11/17/08 @ 21:22
I like the posts here but the Rss feed has a handful of XML problems that you really should fix. Awesome site nevertheless!
12/20/10 @ 03:04

Leave a comment


Your email address will not be revealed on this site.
PoorExcellent
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Name, email & website)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will not be revealed.)

Simply select where you want to play, find a tee time deal, and golf now!

Dates: February 1, 2014 - December 31, 2014
Choose your length of stay and enjoy golfing at The Legacy Golf Resort. This exciting Golf Getaway includes: Minimum of one night accommodation, 18 holes of golf, unlimited use of Practice Facilities on days you play golf.
Price range: $148