Forums | MacLife

yay for 'opposite marriage!'

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/ … raige.html

Her ad is embedded.

If she wants to support marriage, shouldn't she start by opposing divorces and folks rushing into marriages they're not prepared for?

Tallgeese wrote:

looool

How many times have we heard conservatives complaining about "airhead celebrities" using their popularity to push a leftist agenda?

it's only ok if they do it. duh.

There are conservative intellectuals out there. Why on earth doesn't the GOP consult them. Oh yah. It's because they might be forced to think.

Well, George Will and Bill Kristol are both Ivy League PhD's. Unfortunately Will is agnostic and Kristol is a Jew. Intellectualism has no home in the GOP because common sense and reason have no home there. It's all about religion now - or more specifically fundamentalist Protestant Christianity. There will be a few token conservative Catholics and Orthodox Jews, but mostly conservative Protestant Christians - like Ms. Prejean. Palin isn't exactly bright. Sanford, Cantor or Jindal haven't exactly been astounding anyone with intelligent insight. This is the party of Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck - college dropouts all three.

Actually thinking and seriously and thoughtfully considering another perspective is heresy. They've let their religious dogmatic thinking spill over into other parts of their brain. Free market capitalism, like Jeebus, is the universal savior and answer to all ills. America is always right - even if it's wrong. And it's never OK to admit any flaws or mistakes. Welcome to the new Dark Ages courtesy once again, of powerful religious nuts.

Or, these folks are in a shrinking minority and they know it and are desperately grasping onto any hope they may have of their morally and intellectually bankrupt policies surviving the next decade or two...

Pithecanthropus wrote:

She's a coddled 21 year old beauty queen, what the smurf does she know about anything anyway?

Beauty queen, or not. She's 21. That means that she knows nothing.

As a 21-year-old myself, I represent that remark.

Chickenhawk wrote:

Hank Rearden wrote:

Pithecanthropus wrote:

She's a coddled 21 year old beauty queen, what the smurf does she know about anything anyway?

Beauty queen, or not. She's 21. That means that she knows nothing.

I'm a cynical old man. Don't mind me.

Hank Rearden wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

Hank Rearden wrote:

Beauty queen, or not. She's 21. That means that she knows nothing.

I'm a cynical old man. Don't mind me.

I don't want to dis Chickenhawk, who has demonstrated his intelligence in these forums, and who is clearly very informed on many issues. However, I have to say that Hank is mostly right. After being a teacher to teenagers, taking classes with twenty-somethings, and working with people who are both plus and minus my age by ten years or more, there's just so much to be said for the experience that comes with age.

It would take a truly exceptional 21-year-old for me to invest in that person as a political leader of any sort, even as a political figurehead for a movement on a narrow issue. Letting this chick be the "face" of "Saving Marriage" is like letting those NYU students be the representatives for "No More Corporate Water." You know they're just too smurfing stupid to take seriously.

I would assume with a generous salary.

Last edited by Pariah (2009-04-30 4:24 pm)

sturner wrote:

Yeah, no entry level salary for her.

But then they aren't paying her for any real skills.

She has a really pretty mouth