Not to worry TG. It really isn't really "unpopular", it just doesn't hold against all of the dimmirats who never fail to stand and LIE and enter the circle of deceit every day, and every hour, protecting their own.

----------

DISCLAIMER: As a citizen of the United States, I hereby withdraw any de facto permission for president biden to speak or act on my behalf in any matter, domestic or foreign. He is not to be regarded a

Degenerates elect degenerates. And will often reelect them.

There was a time when a divorced person would have trouble getting elected as the reasoning went "if you can't keep your own **** together how are you going to run an office?" To be sure......affairs have always abounded in politics, but kept under wraps. Ironically with the acquiescence of the media. They knew but did not spill the beans.

But nowadays, in our modern, enlightened society anything goes. Porn star? No prob. ****ing porn stars? Apparently no prob either.

As for BOOBERT, I am surprised she did claim to be bipolar, as that seems to be the go-to response when a woman gets herself into a compromising position. Side note: young men take heed....this is your (statistically speaking) future when you wife up a modern, college-educated whammen. But you'll do it anyways.

In FL...we came THIS CLOSE to electing a methhead gay pedo who preyed on young men. I wonder if he ran again....would he win at least a nomination?

Predators. Karens. Degenerates. Communists. Sociopaths. *****mongers. That is who rules us. With our consent.

You supposedly can't legislate morality. But when you elect (over and over again) degenerates, don't be surprised when you get ****ed yourself.

You should be used to it by now.

Degenerates elect degenerates.

@Edward.fish "We have fiscal responsibility? government accountability? the law applied justly?"

I'm not even American and I know there's a difference between actual Republicans and GOP RINOs, so you have no excuse.

----------

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

@Moconserv:I don't care if the elected position is dog catcher. We've slid so far down the ****-hole we deserve what's coming.

You aren't wrong.
2 Peter 1: 5-7; ]For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, virtue with knowledge, knowledge with self-control, self-control with endurance, endurance with devotion, devotion with mutual affection, mutual affection with love.

I still remember the banner spread across the top of counseling offices in High School my freshman year (1965 - 1966).It said KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. The verses above strongly counsel to build virtue, good character, before building knowledge in a person. We really haven't done that since at least my generation or even earlier.

Is it any wonder that our culture has become degenerate especially in political leadership. We hear all the time that we aren't hiring a priest/pastor for office so their lack of virtue (moral uprightness) doesn't matter. Well we are finding out it does matter. We have "men without chests" making the decisions and we've ended up with the ugliness of the past 3 years as a result

Elected office at all levels seems to be a magnet for attracting liars, bullies, blowhards, exhibitionists, perverts, and the entitled. I suppose that politics is just a mirror of our amoral and corrupt society.

I can't see any of the *******s advancing any of the principles that once made America great. They don't even manage a rearguard action against the onslaught of marxism from the evil branch of the uniparty. Their actions are more like fleeing in terror.

Agree 100% Karl.

What's the real difference between lewd conduct by a drag queen in a public library and a member of congress in a public theater? None.

Evidently she also thinks she is above the law threatening people with words as "Do you know who I am?" Obviously not someone that should be representing the public! People as this are dangerous to freedom.

Too bad she wasn't making out with Clinton. I am sure he would have found another orifice to store that vaping device. I'd then like to see it explode.

Smoking and vaping in a public theater and breaking public law.

The tagline Lauren "Superfreak" Boebert has a definitive ring to it and not in a good way -with apologies to Rick James.

----------

"Mass intelligence does not mean intelligent masses."

I'm still processing what happened and have watched the uncut video several times.

Regardless of whether it was a good decision to do that in public or not - and most including me think it wasn't appropriate for someone in her position, I am at least glad that I finally know the answer to a question that has been on my mind regarding Boebert. They are indeed real. You can tell they move totally naturally as her companion in palpating them. No implants in there. Question answered.

The good news is she'll have a future on Pornhub or Onlyfans if her political career goes to ****.

@Radiosity: "...It's like leaving a cancer unchecked. It eats away at you from within those 'closed doors', and eventually spills out into the areas beyond the doors. On a societal level, the cancer of degeneracy is destroying Western civilisation, and it's because we permitted people to be degenerate behind closed doors because 'we don't care what they do in private'...."

Well now I'm curious. Permitted? How so?

And how do you un-permit?

Not surprised by Boobert's actions.

The political class and the TPTB are filled with child molesting perverts of all persuasions. That high-def picture of Lauren in the theater is just the Deep State getting the goods on another politician to control/guide future voting.

Absolutely she should be disqualified from Congress. Same with all 535 Congress Critters who have preyed on the young and/or illegally made Millions at the taxpayers' expense.

@Edward.fish

You must not be familiar with Colorado's Western Slope.

See ski areas of Texas for an education
https://www.redriverdreams.com/republic-....

----------

The problem is most people want to point a finger rather than their thumb when dealing with challenges.

She barely won re-election in 2022 in an R+7 district.

The non-presidential party typically outperforms in mid-term elections, so 2024 will likely shift to the Democrats. Strike one.

The Democrat who nearly defeated her last time is running again. Strike two.

Colorado, as a state, is getting more blue. Strike three.

Now this. Strike four.

She needs to announce she is not running for re-election, to increase the odds of keeping this a Republican seat.

But she probably won't put ego aside and do what is best for the country. Gee, where have we heard that before?

----------

The seat is done; she grilled it to beyond charcoal with that stunt.

----------

Barnhardt Axiom #2
"The culture has degraded such that seeking and/or holding office, especially national-level office, is, in and of itself, proof that a given person is psychologically and morally unfit to hold public office."

@Bluto - A good Republican (if there is one) needs to primary her.

----------

'Power, like the reproductive muscle, longs to be exercised, often without judgement or right' - Gerry Spence

"Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers

Radiosity wrote..

@Edward.fish "We have fiscal responsibility? government accountability? the law applied justly?"

I'm not even American and I know there's a difference between actual Republicans and GOP RINOs, so you have no excuse.

@Radiosity -- Republican elected officials can be fairly accurately described with this: "Never passing up an opportunity to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory"... just look at Trump, he praised himself for not signing on to the TPP, only to sign onto the USMCA, whose own author described it as NAFTA plus TPP plus a few other goodies.

In that regard, the "normal base" may be considered Republicans In Name Only (RINO), because by the party's actions in the past twenty years, the stated party-planks have all been discarded when "the rubber met the road" and the actual political leaders had a chance to force the issue, they instead roll over and capitulate, because they "had to".

Boredfree wrote..

@Edward.fish
You must not be familiar with Colorado's Western Slope.

@Boredfree -- It was more a comment on Texas being "The Republican Party" of the States, branding itself as conservative, patriotic, etc... when they're in reality all talk: (e.g.) instead of the governor declaring the state of invasion and ordering the State's military forces to secure the border, they whine and cry, wringing their hands uselessly for the TV cameras, possibly calling up the national guard for a "Display Purposes Only" PR deployment.

What's the difference between California and Texas?
California at least admits it has a problem.

Churches made a deal with the devil when they decided to participate in or accept a state license for anything church related. They should have said something along the lines of, "We don't care where you got the license, we don't consider you married unless you got married in our faith, that includes marriage in churches with beliefs that differ from ours." As soon as you give the state the right to determine what marriage is, you have to live with it if the state decides to change the rules years down the road.

----------

Village Idiot

@tickerguy wrote:

Quote:

High office is not for those who are incapable -- or unwilling -- to display and use logic and analysis in their actions.

Our government is almost entirely populated with people who can't or won't use logic and analysis. Our society is based upon skims, scams, lies, fraud and deceit and now you can add illogic and non-analysis to the list.

----------

''Whenever law ends, tyranny begins'' -- John Locke, English Philosopher
The United States is a banana republic
Survivors use critical thinking, common sense and intuition

Agreed on the Clinton debauchery. I still can't get over the fact that he wasn't run out of town on a rail for defiling the Oval Office. Proof we haven't lived in a serious country in a long time. F**k 'em all

Had to look up who she is, either never knew or escaped me. See the links below:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023....

https://coloradosun.com/2023/05/16/laure....

So..., she and her former husband are white trash just like Clinton's roots. This is the new Republican/Trump base, thus will be forgiven probably even a benefit. Go ahead, let's see how many women of her base are just cool with what she did and feel validated.

One knows how she plays it when even "The Guardian" shows her as eye candy in the headline photo. Not becoming of a professional woman or State political leader. Ok, decent legs but below average attractiveness. Got to play her assets i guess.

@Radiosity -- you knocked it out of the park in today's thread, compliments.

Karl -- regarding the marriage thing, something comes to mind. DS and i were very much in protest of the governmental involvement in family life, especially marriage and the whole "license" thing, and definitely against the dissolution messes which they create. Our biggest issue was that it preempted the imposition of community and personal values with a sameness. It placed the sanctioned average situation above the various faiths, cultures and personal aspirations. It makes everyone the same not equal standing under the law but required roles and participation such as the court ****-show regarding said.

We had our own hack where we expended the effort to construct agreements and documents to achieve what we committed to according to our vows. The agreements and documents were necessary as we did not have the "shorthand" of common (not common law, rather low regard intended) marriage to achieve certain legal necessities. However, it worked while we did something else. We shunned.

Since very early adulthood we refused to attend or honor those as "married" by state license. Actually for two reasons. One was that their actions validated the injustice by "getting that piece of paper" to use the vernacular and that most of these weddings outside of being grotesque displays were not to last making a mockery of our time and support. We had an open rule. We would attend only 25 years wedding anniversary celebrations, and it made a seriously taken point especially when explained why.

Want to fix things? Stop supporting that which one does not approve with daily, mundane actions and by participation.

The message will become quite clear.

----------

Mission Complete

The truth is just too powerful to know. Those who hold the truth suffer more than those who believe the lie. -The Hall of Tears

Indeed.

But the thing that galls the most @Raven is that NONE of the alleged "religions" -- even those with the MOST SERIOUS views of this -- will take it on.

None.

There is nothing preventing them from doing so: Refusing to sign government documents, performing their sacrament, and expecting the couple to create legally-sufficient documents which, to the best of capacity within the law, comport with their rules -- and then enforce them, including kicking anyone out who breaks them.

They can't be sanctioned for that, but none of them do it.

None.

----------

Huh...there must be additional footage I have not seen then. Yeah...how serious can she be if she's dating a Dem supporter of trannies. She's done...

For Christians who are apoplectic right now I have some questions:
Would you as a Christian recognize the validity of a marriage that is performed in church by a church official with a state license?
Would you as a Christian recognize the validity of a marriage that is performed in church by a church official without a state license?
Would you as a Christian recognize the validity of a marriage that is performed at city hall with a state license but not sanctified in a church by a church official?
Would you as a Christian recognize the validity of a marriage that is performed by a lay person who is licensed by the state to perform marriage but who has no church affiliation? Universal Life Church as an example.
Would you as a Christian recognize the validity of a marriage where one or both parties are divorced?
Would you as a Christian recognize the validity of a marriage that is performed in a non Christian church (Unitarian as an example) or environment with a state issued license?
Would you as a Christian support legislation that strengthens the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) by nullifying any government benefits for people who divorce?
Would you as a Christian recognize the legitimacy of a marriage between a male and female conducted by a civil authority not in a church? What if that civil authority is atheist?
Should the state / society recognize the legitimacy of a man and woman conducted in a church but unlicensed?
Should Christians recognize the legitimacy of a marriage conducted by someone licensed through Universal Life Church or some other internet ordination entity?

You'll find that most Christians answer these truthfully that they find the state supreme when it comes to defining marriage. It exposes their hypocrisy.

All the Catholics (or any other major denomination -- Jewish, Islamic, Baptist, etc.) would have to do is say this:

We do not care if you have a marriage license that has a default set of terms and conditions, including the right of the state to retroactively modify it. However, we will not perform a ceremony under those terms, and the 1st Amendment prohibits you from compelling us to do so, which has been litigated and decided.

Therefore, if you want us to perform marriages you recognize, we require that the couples be able to submit a contractual replacement for your terms along with their executed document that we sign onto. You may rule on the legitimacy or reject same prior to its filing (and we will provide a pro-forma unexecuted copy to do this in advance, which you must either accept or reject in whole, and if you reject it we'll work with you to see if common ground can be found) BUT, post-execution it is a contract and cannot be abrogated EXCEPT with the written consent of BOTH parties."

There is nothing prohibiting them from doing this and basically forcing the State to enact that legislation, lest ALL faiths simply refuse to perform the ceremonies. The state has no power to compel them to drop such a challenge. None. Further, NOTHING prohibits a Church from specifically disavowing the Christianity of lawmakers BY NAME. They cannot campaign for or against by law but they CAN call out unrepentant sin as that is a religious and not political act. A few have done so in the context of Communion with various political figures - and been attacked for it too - but ZERO have extended it to the sacrament of marriage.

I know of exactly ZERO Christians, other than myself, who have put this sort of marker on the table. Therefore I argue there are ZERO Christians who actually believe in what the Christian faiths, such as they are, and particular Catholicism, claims. Zero.

Statistically speaking, zero, yet quite-clearly if you defile a sacrament at the time you take it you did not really take it at all and worse, you are spitting in your deity's face to the exact same degree as if you said "Hail Satan!" as you swallowed the Eucharist.

The Church in this regard is not just mere performative art; it is openly defiant to what it claims are the essential elements of that sacramental act.

----------

Karl -- i like your new term "ZERO Christians". I'll start calling them Zee Cees for short.

There are a few things to remember, and it is a huge subject too long for this venue.

The major religions from their time in Europe and then when they set down roots here were always extensions of the govt. Much like when a local store in a small town sets up a Post Office location at the counter. These religions could help with the officiation of matters as the local "authority" as a community govt agent.

In many cases they setup institutions which in centuries and decades later would take on government roles such as hospitals and charities for the poor.

Many such as the Roman Catholic Church saw that the best way to the power structure here was to setup their own institutions for their members to have standing in the community and force the access to the power base. This is the reason for the RC Universities and other Institutions granting degrees and privileges accepted and valued in the secular world. Their people had to be accepted once the institutions were large enough. Then influence would follow. The path was not always this direct and the founding of these went a number of ways, however the main purpose and dynamic were a constant.

Thusly, there is always an aspiration in these faiths to be a part, integral to governmental and legal functions. They want the validity of their Sacraments in the eyes of the Power Structure and Law to which they have always aspired or else they, their community and value systems would have to stand on their own in too many things for them to have overall societal influence and achieve wealth and power. Through this they can parcel out some of these things acquired to their membership, thus cementing their role.

It is why for all intensive purposes their schools became a parallel public school system in huge way becoming so integrated that the actual public system does not have a significant capacity to school that percentage. Thusly, they follow the state edicts to remain a part of this role and expand it.

They recreated Europe here which is the root of so many of our problems.

This is not to target just the RC Church. They are merely the largest and most effective player at this game recognizable as such by most people. In a place such as Utah, one would ascribe the same purposeful plan to the Church of Latter Day Saints.

----------

Mission Complete

The truth is just too powerful to know. Those who hold the truth suffer more than those who believe the lie. -The Hall of Tears