TexasCHLforum.com

Wow, you guys REALLY like getting TROLLED by someone, don't you? Did anyone read, for starters, which website hosted the article (HUFFINGTON POST, just about as LEFTIST as you can get) and secondly, that its a Wisconsin STATE bill? If you people think that is what conservatism is really about, well the leftist media and press have truly done their propaganda work well...Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin and Saul Alinsky are all standing around somewhere extra warm high-fiving each other over this one...I guess I should go build a bunker somewhere because if this one little article convinces you that the Glorious Leader currently occupying the White House deserves re-election, our nation is FINISHED and its now only a matter of time...ridiculous.

cbunt1 wrote: Why oh WHY would anyone support something like this.

Good question...The OP claims to, but has also made this statement in another thread:

Toorop wrote:I remember the Alamo everyday. That is why I will be supporting anyone but Santorum, Romney, or Gingrich. But I don't plan on voting for Obama either.

A bit of a dichotomy - not every statement made by the OP could be reasonably believed...

Heartland Patriot, I wasnt going to bring up the troll aspect, but if the shoe fits...

Slowplay wrote:

cbunt1 wrote: Why oh WHY would anyone support something like this.

Good question...The OP claims to, but has also made this statement in another thread:

Toorop wrote:I remember the Alamo everyday. That is why I will be supporting anyone but Santorum, Romney, or Gingrich. But I don't plan on voting for Obama either.

A bit of a dichotomy - not every statement made by the OP could be reasonably believed...

Heartland Patriot, I wasnt going to bring up the troll aspect, but if the shoe fits...

We have had some undoubtedly heated discussions with many viewpoints expressed on this forum...everyone has an opinion, of course. But, in my personal opinion, the way this was presented was simply too much. If our fine moderators don't like what I had to say, I'm certain they will let me know. But I will stand up for my beliefs, and I stand by my statement that the article posted by the OP is NOT conservatism.

Heartland Patriot wrote:Wow, you guys REALLY like getting TROLLED by someone, don't you? Did anyone read, for starters, which website hosted the article (HUFFINGTON POST, just about as LEFTIST as you can get) and secondly, that its a Wisconsin STATE bill? If you people think that is what conservatism is really about, well the leftist media and press have truly done their propaganda work well...Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin and Saul Alinsky are all standing around somewhere extra warm high-fiving each other over this one...I guess I should go build a bunker somewhere because if this one little article convinces you that the Glorious Leader currently occupying the White House deserves re-election, our nation is FINISHED and its now only a matter of time...ridiculous.

Well, for one, don't discount any news outlet. An informed voter looks at both sides of the issues and then makes an informed decision based off of the information gathered. Blowing off HuffPo only because its HuffPo is *exactly* what the left does when they see something from Fox News. You are only doing yourself a disservice. It's only effective propaganda if you believe it.

Secondly, I believe we all read the article and know it's a Wisconsin bill. That being said, it's ammo for the left. Conservatives are shooting themselves in the foot this election cycle, and this just falls under the "look at those crazy Conservatives" much like we tout the "look at those gun grabbing Liberals". It's a generalization, yes, but it's election season fodder.

By the way, who was convinced that Obama deserves re-election? I don't see anyone mention that...was it a deleted post?

We have had some undoubtedly heated discussions with many viewpoints expressed on this forum...everyone has an opinion, of course. But, in my personal opinion, the way this was presented was simply too much. If our fine moderators don't like what I had to say, I'm certain they will let me know. But I will stand up for my beliefs, and I stand by my statement that the article posted by the OP is NOT conservatism.[/quote]

Your posts are vociferous and dogmatic but they are consistent and seem to express your beliefs. It is obvious you are not a troll and Bless your Heart, you go right on espousing your views of what is the way to run the country. Not everyone will agree with you but some will read your thoughts. In attempt to gain a balanced perspective some will also read other sources. Doesn't make either side wrong, just different. It would be a pretty boring place if they throttled all differences.

A more accurate title would be "A Conservative ..." rather than "Conservatives".

This is not a Republican or Democratic issue and should not be law.

Since it is an issue of humanity, it should be funded by those who should fund and deal with such issues, the Church. That way, The Church may vote their conscience on the issue with their dollars, not someone else's.

pbwalker wrote:the introduction of this bill, as well as all this other morality legislation, is why the GOP will loose 2012.

Plain and simple...we're going to get Obama for another 4 more years.

Toorop wrote: I think this might bring back family values. It would be nice to see the government finally stepping in and protecting the children. These are old fashioned values that our nation seems to have lost. I think it is child abuse to be a single parent or to divorce and punishing people for this might not be such a bad thing.

So...I was abused by my Mother because she separated from my alcoholic, drug abusing father? She had no values? The government needed to step in and "protect" me? Boy...you are sounding like quite the Liberal.

And there it is...in red...

gigag04 wrote:This bill is idiotic.

Exactly! It's all about the economy, stupid. It's not about abortion, religion or our bedrooms.

Good Grief! Are these guys trying to throw the election before we even have it. The current POTUS and his minions must be having a laugh-a-minute at the idiotic musings of the Repubs.

rwg3 wrote:Your posts are vociferous and dogmatic but they are consistent and seem to express your beliefs. It is obvious you are not a troll and Bless your Heart, you go right on espousing your views of what is the way to run the country. Not everyone will agree with you but some will read your thoughts. In attempt to gain a balanced perspective some will also read other sources. Doesn't make either side wrong, just different. It would be a pretty boring place if they throttled all differences.

rwg3, well, Bless your Heart but Heartland Patriot never suggested Huffington Post should be "throttled," only made note of the OP's cited article.

This thread seems to be an extremely weak attempt at setting a trap. The OP suggests that 'conservatives wanting to punish single & divorced parents' might "bring back family values." How anyone could believe the OP is legit is beyond me...

Heartland Patriot wrote:

pbwalker wrote:the introduction of this bill, as well as all this other morality legislation, is why the GOP will loose 2012.

Plain and simple...we're going to get Obama for another 4 more years.

Toorop wrote: I think this might bring back family values. It would be nice to see the government finally stepping in and protecting the children. These are old fashioned values that our nation seems to have lost. I think it is child abuse to be a single parent or to divorce and punishing people for this might not be such a bad thing.

So...I was abused by my Mother because she separated from my alcoholic, drug abusing father? She had no values? The government needed to step in and "protect" me? Boy...you are sounding like quite the Liberal.

And there it is...in red...

And you read that as me saying Obama deserves re-election?

Wow

Oldgringo wrote:Good Grief! Are these guys trying to throw the election before we even have it. The current POTUS and his minions must be having a laugh-a-minute at the idiotic musings of the Repubs.

This X 1000!

I say get rid of subsdies. Income tax should be based on you income, not whether you're a single mom.

If people can't afford kids without subsidies (welfare by another name) then they shouldn't have more.

Slowplay wrote:

rwg3 wrote:Your posts are vociferous and dogmatic but they are consistent and seem to express your beliefs. It is obvious you are not a troll and Bless your Heart, you go right on espousing your views of what is the way to run the country. Not everyone will agree with you but some will read your thoughts. In attempt to gain a balanced perspective some will also read other sources. Doesn't make either side wrong, just different. It would be a pretty boring place if they throttled all differences.

rwg3, well, Bless your Heart but Heartland Patriot never suggested Huffington Post should be "throttled," only made note of the OP's cited article.

This thread seems to be an extremely weak attempt at setting a trap. The OP suggests that 'conservatives wanting to punish single & divorced parents' might "bring back family values." How anyone could believe the OP is legit is beyond me...

Perhaps I wasn't clear or you misunderstood my response. I was commenting on the earlier reply in which the troll issue was attached to a response of HP's and his reply invoking the mod's role in setting boundaries. I dont believe in this thread that HP suggested that Huffington should be throttled. In fact he acknowledge that differences in opinion exist as a matter of course. I happen to agree with that. I dont agree with all of HP's views but I would be the poorer for not being exposed to them. I didnt comment on the legitimacy of the OP. Thanks for the blessing I can always use them.

Kudos to the single mothers out there who have raised successful kids. You have probably done one of the most difficult thing possible.

However you are the exceptions to the rule, not the rule. Studies have demonstrated that the fastest way to poverty is either to be a single mother or to be born to single a single mother. Studies have also demonstrated that children of single mothers tend to have more problems than children in two parent families. Those really aren't opinions, they are fairly well proven.

Having said that, government, and certainly not the kind of law cited above, is not the answer. Nor do I know what the answer is anymore. Community and shame used to limit the numbers of single parents. Neither works any more. Perhaps preaching is all we have left.