One Third of all 'Likely voters' support the TEA PARTY!

[amicus]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...ikely-voters-support-Tea-Party-103705484.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-...s-republican-election-momentum-poll-says.html

Overall, about one-third of all likely voters in the poll conducted Oct. 7-10 by Selzer & Co. say they support the Tea Party.
Lower Taxes

~~~

The much maligned Tea Party members will be a major factor in the election just a week away.

More than that, Tea Party members have vowed to begin working on the 2012 General Election on November 3, 2010. This is the first time I can recall any political party speaking thus even before an election two years in the future.

The second link above outlines Tea Party principles and lists possible ways of reducing the size and budget of the Federal Government.

Weeks and weeks ago Conservative pundits have warned against over confidence in the outcome of the election.

Will it be 1994 all over again when the voters swept in both Chambers of Congress during Liberal Democrat Bill Clinton's term of office.

Interesting week ahead....doncha think?

amicus

 

[Carnevil9]

What I find most interesting about the TEA party is not how the elections will turn out. I'm fairly confident that they will result in a significant swing to the right.

What I find very interesting is how the Liberal Lunatic Left will SPIN the results in the days following the November 2 elections. They will basically eat their own faces in an attempt to spin it as a win for their "progressive" values.

As Rush Limbaugh likes to say, "It's when the Libs are out of power that they are at their most amusing!" I know I'll be in front of my TV with a huge bowl of Cheetos, chuckling my nads off.......Carney

 

[amicus]

The limping Left have no 'nads' to chuckle off, Carnevil, but I do recall pre election rhetoric ala November 2008, they were out in full voice on every thread, cutting and slashing the 'Yes We Can" motto...but...as everything soured, all of a sudden they were mounting an effort at squelching free speech on the forum because their Messiah actually sank when he tried to walk on water.

If this election gives the House and even comes close to a Senate majority and all of the past two years failed programs are repealed or defunded, I don't think the Liberal/Progressive crowd on this forum has the 'nads' to even try to spin it.

We shall see...

ami

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Notice how quiet the PILOT is about the coming massacre!

 

[Zeb_Carter]

He's out trying to drum up support. I think he over at Dick's Sporting Goods buying an athletic supporter so his nads don't fall off.

 

[Carnevil9]

The limping Left have no 'nads' to chuckle off, Carnevil, but I do recall pre election rhetoric ala November 2008, they were out in full voice on every thread, cutting and slashing the 'Yes We Can" motto...but...as everything soured, all of a sudden they were mounting an effort at squelching free speech on the forum because their Messiah actually sank when he tried to walk on water.

If this election gives the House and even comes close to a Senate majority and all of the past two years failed programs are repealed or defunded, I don't think the Liberal/Progressive crowd on this forum has the 'nads' to even try to spin it.

We shall see...

ami

Oh, I agree with you about this board. My mistake for being unclear; I was referring to the TV and other news pundits in the media going for the ludicrous spin.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Most of the Tea Party types are actually solid candidates, in my view. But I make an exception for Christine O'Donnell. The sheer scale of her ignorance about evolution and her hypocrisy about premarital sex, along with her overall Religious Right brand of conservatism bothers me.

For the record, I endorse most of the Tea Party candidates. But as one with strong libertarian leanings, I don't trust the social conservative wing of it completely and I have grave doubts about Ms. O'Donnell.

Nor do I believe that her case is like most of the female candidates who have been smeared. In Ms. O'Donnell's case, she invited reports by her hypocrisy and sanctimonious stance on premarital sex. If you're going to talk the talk, walk the walk. It's as wrong as Bill Clinton opposing vouchers and then sending Chelsea to a parochial school. It's a double standard.

But, again, I endorse most of the Tea Party. Just not Ms. O'Donnell. I urge my fellow members of the libertarian side of the Tea Party to vote Libertarian in Delaware.

 

[Handley_Page]

Erm . . .

Tea Party ?
With Jelly & Cake ?

Seriously, will some kind soul explain this in slow motion for me?.
It's even getting into the UK papers.

 

[wet_special]

What is the goal, if not victory on Tuesday?

Most of the Tea Party types are actually solid candidates, in my view. But I make an exception for Christine O'Donnell....

But, again, I endorse most of the Tea Party. Just not Ms. O'Donnell. I urge my fellow members of the libertarian side of the Tea Party to vote Libertarian in Delaware.

Well well, sounds like a fine stance to take -- you don't want to elect someone who doesn't believe in evolution. I believe in evolution too. I'm an atheist. I have to deal with many people on the right whose beliefs I disagree with. Ultimately if you take a close look at the person who will WIN if O'Donnell loses, one, it's not the third party candidate. Two, it's a democrat.

We've got a black robed taliban in the judicial system, SHREDDING the constitution, and O'Donnell's opponent would be a rubber stamp for the approval of even MORE of these judicial appointees throughout the federal benches to say nothing of the supreme court.

The Tea Party is trying to turn this mess around. I know you're suspicious of the social conservatives but don't you think that on fiscal issues, on judicial issues, on our debt, it's much more important to just send the democrat packing, and get the conservative? Get the Tea Party backed candidate? I do. There's no question.

For that reason alone, you gotta say.. Vote O'Donnell!

 

[Boxlicker101]

Well well, sounds like a fine stance to take -- you don't want to elect someone who doesn't believe in evolution. I believe in evolution too. I'm an atheist. I have to deal with many people on the right whose beliefs I disagree with. Ultimately if you take a close look at the person who will WIN if O'Donnell loses, one, it's not the third party candidate. Two, it's a democrat.

We've got a black robed taliban in the judicial system, SHREDDING the constitution, and O'Donnell's opponent would be a rubber stamp for the approval of even MORE of these judicial appointees throughout the federal benches to say nothing of the supreme court.

The Tea Party is trying to turn this mess around. I know you're suspicious of the social conservatives but don't you think that on fiscal issues, on judicial issues, on our debt, it's much more important to just send the democrat packing, and get the conservative? Get the Tea Party backed candidate? I do. There's no question.

For that reason alone, you gotta say.. Vote O'Donnell!

Most of us can't vote for her because we don't live in her state. I would if I could. I intend to vote against Brown for Gov. and Boxer for senator and the Dem. candidate for the House. Outside of that, I intend to vote for the best candidate.

 

[TE999]

According to the latest Gallup/USA Today poll, Independent voters favor Republican candidates 59% to 31% Democrats.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/144125/Republicans-Appear-Poised-Win-Big-Tuesday.aspx#2

This margin could very well be the deciding factor in many, if not all, races...local, state and national (Reps & Senators).

It's gonna be an interesting week.

 

[Boxlicker101]

According to the latest Gallup/USA Today poll, Independent voters favor Republican candidates 59% to 31% Democrats.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/144125/Republicans-Appear-Poised-Win-Big-Tuesday.aspx#2

This margin could very well be the deciding factor in many, if not all, races...local, state and national (Reps & Senators).

It's gonna be an interesting week.

That it will. I expect that on Nov. 3 there will be news stories and a thread on this forum using words such as "massacre" and "bloodbath" and "slaughter." I don't expect to read about many landslides, though. My prediction is that the Reps will control the House and gain in the Senate, but not enough to take control. However, I believe this will be a matter of many voters being turned off by what the Dems have done in the last two years and voting in large enough numbers to "throw the bums out."

In other words, many voters will do what I plan on doing: Vote against the Dem Candidate.

 

[TE999]

That it will. I expect that on Nov. 3 there will be news stories and a thread on this forum using words such as "massacre" and "bloodbath" and "slaughter." I don't expect to read about many landslides, though. My prediction is that the Reps will control the House and gain in the Senate, but not enough to take control. However, I believe this will be a matter of many voters being turned off by what the Dems have done in the last two years and voting in large enough numbers to "throw the bums out."

In other words, many voters will do what I plan on doing: Vote against the Dem Candidate.

Word! What I find amusing is the number of incumbent Democrats equivocating and waffling on their votes for health care, the stimulus package and the bank & auto company bailouts. I heard one say something to the effect that "If I'd only known what was in the Health Care Bill I wouldn't have voted for it."

 

[amicus]

Tea Party ?
With Jelly & Cake ?

Seriously, will some kind soul explain this in slow motion for me?.
It's even getting into the UK papers.[/QUOTE]

~~~

Being the kind soul that I am, and I still owe you, I will attempt the impossible as few in the world, with the possible exception of the 'down under' curs in Ozzieland.

T.E.A. Party....Taxed Enough Already, is the acronym and the metaphor of the Boston Tea Party, where Colonists, disguised as Indians, dumped British Tea into the Bay as a tax protest.

The schism in American politics goes back to almost the beginning, following Washington as General and then President, governing a still loosely connected and divergent group of British citizens who still wanted an Monarchy and back country, self sufficient farmers and merchants and a smattering of the inconoclastic, 'rugged individualist', the frontiersmen and women that continued expanding the envelope of protection for homesteaders and vagabonds.

Even most Americans with their scant knowledge of History, will say the names of Jefferson and Adams as if these two compatriots were lifelong friends...they were not...if anything, lifelong enemies who used the infant press as surrogates to argue their different approaches to government.

After a brief summer in Europe in 1970, my previous years of formal education came into focus as I realized, walking the cobblestones of Paris, that Europe, in general, with different varieties for each Nation I visited, was still in the Feudal age of dependence on local and national power sources.

The Irish are still the Irish, the Dutch, the Dutch, the French, Italians and Spanish, without their Colonies and world influence have become introspective and sullen.

I digress momentarily, to confess my immersion, as a college student, into the popular writers and authors in the first forty years of the 20th century. Many of those writers, some knowing, some not, Oscar Wilde among the knowing, shared their Cafe' Utopian Socialism throughout all their works, and essentially swept and controlled the world of literature and thus sophisticated political thought, well into the 20th century, reaching an apex in the 1960's.

Of course, it all began to change and focus, with German Natiional Socialism and Italian Fascism and the Proud British, who, through their Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, stated that defeating Socialism and Fascism would be Britain's 'finest hour' in the vein that, 'there will always be an England...'

The US was an awkward partner on the world stage of politics during and following the Versailles Treaty that emasculated Germany and set the stage for another world war. American's preferred to view Europe's wars as European only and something Americans had no interest in.

It has been said that an honest man is at a disadvantage when dealing with a thief; trust in a handshake between honest men is a tradition with all peoples, I suspect, but there is always a worm in the apple. Most Americans are professed 'conservatives', in both their lifestyles and their politics. By conservative, I mean small government, low taxes, almost Victorian moralities of privacy and prudishness; in other words, they want to be left alone to live their lives as they choose and with only the affiliations they are comfortable with, a sameness and a likeness of lifestyles and traditions.

While right wing and left wing politics is academic and grows only among the educated young, day to day political necessities in every election at every level, reflect the fundamental conservative nature of Americans.

Another consideration worthy of mentioning is that Conservatives, being 50% percent of the voting public as opposed to 20% that identify themselves as Liberals, conservatives are not usually politically active. They become politically active when their basic lifestyles are threatened as in the 49 State sweep of Ronald Reagan in the 80's, and what may be an equal sweep in the 2012 election if a suitable conservative Presidential candidate rises to prominence.

Intellectually, this is more difficult to condense down to the bare bones of understanding. Conservatives, normal working people who find pride and satisfaction in self sufficiency and who focus their intellectual abilities upon building and creating wealth and technical progress within the laws, hold to traditional and conventional morals and ethics, provided by formal religion, to guide their lives.

At the recent Comedians Ball at the National Mall, one person said it all: "I am representing a Gay, Mexican, Union worker....all the things the conservatives hate" (I paraphrase)

The upper echelon of the Liberal Progressives are the elite intellectuals who visualize how much better human society could be if only they were in charge of everything. They truly and sincerely believe that if only they had the political power, they could provide every human being with a comfortable life, with adequate housing, food, medical care, employment and retirement; complete and compassionate care from cradle to grave.

They, the compassional Liberals, would do away with war and poverty, pestilence (by organic means) provide a life time of educational opportunities to people of all ages, purge the environment, the air, the rivers and oceans of pollutants, and legislate away murder, rape and robbery by replacing corporate functions with government entities.

The voting public knows nothing of just how this sausage is made; that is the province of you and I and those who ponder and discuss such things in perpetuity.

Sarah Palin, Sharon Angle, the McDonald woman, Nickie Haily, none of these are of the intellectual elite; they represent the grass roots rebellion against higher taxes, more government rules and regulations, a continuing price inflaton of the basic foods and necessities they buy. They don't understand a bit of why this is all happening, but they came out of their homes and into the meetings in small communities across the country and chose those who would represent them on the political stage.

There was a Goldwater revolution in 1964 that failed, but opened the way for the Reagan revolution of the 80's. It seems to be happening again but thus far lacks a substantial leader with Presidential qualities.

Not to diss Europeans excessively, but the conflict here is between small government and large, whereas in Europe, as I perceive it, it is between large government and even larger, edging ever closer to an outright socialist state where government directs all actions of all individuals.

I briefly touched upon Religion, but....the elite left are all evolution atheists, but dare not express it as they know the vast percentage of the electorate cling to their guns and religion.

Perhaps I should qualify that slightly; most evolution atheists proclaim agnosticism which fits nicely with secular humanism that essentially states the mind of man can know, no absolutes, and thus all things are subjective and relative.

The common man needs a firm moral foundation. It may surprise you that over 60 percent of all American's attend church on a weekly basis.

The liberal outrage at a Tea Party candidate questioning evolution, falls upon deaf ears to the voting public in general.

Like Obama and every other intellectual liberal progressive, they lack the ability to communicate with the common man, and face the facts dey is mo of dem den der are of us.



Amicus the heretic....

 

[ishtat]

Tea Party ?
With Jelly & Cake ?

Seriously, will some kind soul explain this in slow motion for me?.
It's even getting into the UK papers.[/QUOTE]

Being the kind soul that I am, and I still owe you, I will attempt the impossible as few in the world, with the possible exception of the 'down under' curs in Ozzieland.

T.E.A. Party....Taxed Enough Already, is the acronym and the metaphor of the Boston Tea Party, where Colonists, disguised as Indians, dumped British Tea into the Bay as a tax protest.

Even most Americans with their scant knowledge of History

Amicus the heretic....

Alright I'm quoting you very selectively but haven't time to reply to all your points.

1 On a recent trip to the USA it seemed to me that the Tea Parties resentment, was of all government especially Washington and affects Republicans as well as Democrats though obviously Democrats more because they are the ones in power. The Democrats seem to have a leadership disaster and are opposed by Republicans who have a leadership vacuum.

2 As you said so accurately Ami "Americans with their scant knowledge of
History"

When the tea was relocated into Boston Harbour the Tea duty had already been reduced from 18 pence to three pence per pound for a considerable time and the responsible minister (Greville?) was sacked. The people that did the dumping were largely local Boston smugglers whose illicit trade had been destroyed by the reduction in tea prices as legal tea was now cheaper than smuggled tea. Incidentally the work took them three hours so it was hardly the work of an impassioned mob.

The local newspapers in Boston the next day condemned the event and Benjamin Franklin thundered that the whole 90000 pound loss should be repaid.

Samuel Adams created the catchphrase "No taxation without representation" but not for many months after the dumping.

The event was hardly commented upon in early histories of the revolution and was initially called the Destruction of the Tea. It wasn't until 1834, 60 years later that some genius coined the phrase "Boston Tea Party". It was only then that The Boston Tea Party was adopted as the iconic moment of American independence.

It proves two things:-

1 Mythology is more important than History.

2 Spin started in American politics on Day one.

and it was a great story!

Yours

One down under cur.

Incidentally if anyone wants to argue please quote primary sources because almost all accounts tell the myth rather than the history because the former has such power in the American imagination.

 

[amicus]

Alright I'm quoting you very selectively but haven't time to reply to all your points.

1 On a recent trip to the USA it seemed to me that the Tea Parties resentment, was of all government especially Washington and affects Republicans as well as Democrats though obviously Democrats more because they are the ones in power. The Democrats seem to have a leadership disaster and are opposed by Republicans who have a leadership vacuum.

2 As you said so accurately Ami "Americans with their scant knowledge of
History"

When the tea was relocated into Boston Harbour the Tea duty had already been reduced from 18 pence to three pence per pound for a considerable time and the responsible minister (Greville?) was sacked. The people that did the dumping were largely local Boston smugglers whose illicit trade had been destroyed by the reduction in tea prices as legal tea was now cheaper than smuggled tea. Incidentally the work took them three hours so it was hardly the work of an impassioned mob.

The local newspapers in Boston the next day condemned the event and Benjamin Franklin thundered that the whole 90000 pound loss should be repaid.

Samuel Adams created the catchphrase "No taxation without representation" but not for many months after the dumping.

The event was hardly commented upon in early histories of the revolution and was initially called the Destruction of the Tea. It wasn't until 1834, 60 years later that some genius coined the phrase "Boston Tea Party". It was only then that The Boston Tea Party was adopted as the iconic moment of American independence.

It proves two things:-

1 Mythology is more important than History.

2 Spin started in American politics on Day one.

and it was a great story!

Yours

One down under cur.

Incidentally if anyone wants to argue please quote primary sources because almost all accounts tell the myth rather than the history because the former has such power in the American imagination.

~~~

Starting with your last paragraph...I am certain you know of Historiography, the study of Historians, and you damn well know there are NO original sources other than bills of lading, deeds, and Bank records. All else is essentially hyperbole, just like King Arthur and Camelot.

Your number 1: The 'Tea Party Movement', is not a single movement; many, or most, chapters are independent and do not agree on all things. While the essential bonding arguments are smaller government and lower taxes, there is much disagreement on social issues especially, and a true confusion over what the constitutional function of government really means.

"...1 Mythology is more important than History..."

Is that not true for all societies at all times? I alluded to King Arthur, I heard, but don't remember the Australian hero's that exist in mythology. I watched a film a while back, "The Rabbit Fence", the Abo's surely have a mythological foundation as do the prison colony from England.

By the theory and the Bell Curve results, half the citizens of every nation on earth do not have the intellectual capacity to do anything other than belief in myths, be they religious or historical.

As the average IQ, intelligence quotient, Stanford Version, places the average at 100 to 105, with those of intellectual qualities to become doctors and lawyers, at about 125, what is the role in society for those of over 150 on the scale?

There are online tests to determine personal IQ's, I have no idea as to the accuracy of those tests, but those in question might take a few of those tests, if you dare, and see where you place.

The point of all that was to imply that well over half of every population on earth requires, and will always require, faith and belief in a mythology that satisfies their level of understanding of reality.

I consider this forum an elite venue, minus the perverts, in which one can express opinions that resonate with those of high intellect.

Objective reality, sans faith and belief, is a difficult path to knowledge; but it is the only path. I am considering a book of Philosophy, titled, "On Being Human", written in plain language for the common man...each and every exchange on this forum adds to my repertoire....thanks...

Amicus

 

[wet_special]

I consider this forum an elite venue, minus the perverts, in which one can express opinions that resonate with those of high intellect.

I'm sorry if I came traipsing into this elite thread with nothing intelligent to add. You wrote a good post above breaking down the Tea Party, Amicus. When Ishtat said the spin started on day one I woulda just said that before the free press, the "news" was spin central with the monarchs and lords, and sometimes the church all working together to mollify the serfs. Day one in the USA wasn't the Roussouian man crossed with Benjamin Franklin, but it was a sight better than the Weekly King George Gazette or whatever they came out with at the time. With the optimistic and heartfelt belief that it could get better, but regardless was the best system they could devise at the time to improve the way information is circulated. It is otherwise simply known as the first amendment.

By the by Democrats (liberals, if you will) who if they had the power believe that they could cure the diseases and stop the theft and hunger, are monarchists. But unlike monarchs of old they actually believe that they can do all this, which makes them extreme, radical, and foolishly naive.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

TEA PARTY:
There's an excellent book in print that captures the flavor of America and Britain from CHARLES II time to the Civil War. I wanna say the title is Secession Reconsidered. But the book examines how British culture and American history brought about the American Civil War.

Ishtat is correct that the Boston Tea Party was retaliation for tea dumping by the East India Tea Company. The East India Tea Company had monopolies for most of the American economy (they printed money, coined silver, made loans, imported & exported all goods, owned the warehouses and wharves, and directly competed with their commercial customers for retail sales. Imagine WAL-MART controlling banking, transportation, wholesale trade, and retail trade, and you get the idea. All the tax acts were created to fund the military protection of the Tea Company. GEORGE 3rd borrowed all his money from the Tea Compnay, and gave them exclusive license to exploit America. And the war came.

Present day America is slowly doing what GEORGE 3rd did. IE, Congress is changing our trade laws to favor the Chinese over Americans. For example, a local golf cart manufacturer wants to build electric cars but cannot do it because Federal Law restricts the manufacture of electric cars to companies able to build 5000 or more. Young Henry Ford need not apply for a permit. GM may assemble its VOLTA but much of the car comes from Asia.

INTELLIGENCE:
IQs above 130 are likely bogus and 'vanity plates' for snobs. When the perfessers attribute IQ scores to Beethoven and Newton and the rest, theyre guessing, cuz IQ tests didnt exist until a century ago. High IQ scores may be nothing more significant than a gate pass to Harvard and Yale. And a gate pass from Harvard & Yale gets you admitted to Washington and Wall Street where you can fuck the world up with your superior noodle.

IQ scores may be good to a point, like Newtonian physics.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Well well, sounds like a fine stance to take -- you don't want to elect someone who doesn't believe in evolution. I believe in evolution too. I'm an atheist. I have to deal with many people on the right whose beliefs I disagree with. Ultimately if you take a close look at the person who will WIN if O'Donnell loses, one, it's not the third party candidate. Two, it's a democrat.

We've got a black robed taliban in the judicial system, SHREDDING the constitution, and O'Donnell's opponent would be a rubber stamp for the approval of even MORE of these judicial appointees throughout the federal benches to say nothing of the supreme court.

The Tea Party is trying to turn this mess around. I know you're suspicious of the social conservatives but don't you think that on fiscal issues, on judicial issues, on our debt, it's much more important to just send the democrat packing, and get the conservative? Get the Tea Party backed candidate? I do. There's no question.

For that reason alone, you gotta say.. Vote O'Donnell!

Well, in her last performance in the debate with Chris Coons, she did better than expected, and at least had the good sense to leave evolution vs. creation to the states, where it should be decided (hopefully in favor of evolution).

Coons, on the other hand, proved himself a Clinton-style sham centrist, refusing to answer directly questions about taxes and spending. The close ties to the Senate leadership are telling as well.

Yeah, she actually won my endorsement as of today, but only by a hair. I still have grave doubts, but I am now certain that is absolutely crucial to keep Coons (if possible, which I doubt) out of the Senate. He's part of the problem.

We probably still won't regain the majority, but every seat clearly counts this time.

One further note. Watch out for the Old Guard, the Hamiltonian Federalists who are more Hamiltonian than Hamilton (though they wouldn't admit it, of course). You know whom I mean. Mitch McConnell and Co. would love to co-opt the Tea Party and use it to their own purposes. The Tea Party Senators need to work with them when they're right, but oppose them when they are wrong, as they often are (TARP, anyone?). The Republican Establishment needs a rude awakening, jolting it into returning to Jeffersonian principles.

 

[wet_special]

Good deal Severus, glad at least you're on board with O'Donnell. It's all for the best, ultimately. And it's so refreshing to hear someone call the establishment GOP "More Hamiltonian than Hamilton"lol -- I get your drift perfectly.

Ya know that's just one more reason to support O'Donnell. She sees it clearly by the way guys like Rove and the luscious bitch Dana Perino reacted to her primary win. The old guard is not just an entrenched potential ally. They are political enemies that have even more to fear if the Tea Party continues to shake things up. God I wish we could get rid of Boehner's speakership and ol' Mitch is dead to me, period. Yep, can't wait for Nov 3rd.

 

[amicus]

"...and the luscious bitch Dana Perino..."

Heh!

ami

 

[Handley_Page]

Oh surely not; for Real ?.
You mean there are politicians (or wannabes) who really believe in creation as opposed to evolution ? Which planet are they from then ?
[unless, of course, they represent a whole bunch of {insert word here}]

 

[amicus]

Oh surely not; for Real ?.
You mean there are politicians (or wannabes) who really believe in creation as opposed to evolution ? Which planet are they from then ?
[unless, of course, they represent a whole bunch of {insert word here}]

~~~

Consider, Handley_Page, the accumulated final product of science is da big bang...what existed before that? One can easily insert, 'God', to replace the big bang; and neither answser the ultimate question of existence.

As you didn't address my concept of the role played by intelligence in the human equation, perhaps a little sexism will make you smile...women and children believe in ghosts and such and it is mainly women who become believers in the guff of any smooth talking Priest in impressive garb.

I would also offer that the descent of the liberal intellectual into depravity, a life of drugs and sex, underlines the impact of a loss of faith and a rejection of reason as a moral foundation.



ami

 

[Handley_Page]

I'll ponder that and reply with some thought.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I'll ponder that and reply with some thought.

Why?