Page 1 of 1
Posted on February 21 at 1:08 p.m.
I tried to verify this this list of insults and came across several references representing it as the view of Harper's Weekly.
However, Harper's was actually criticizing Lincoln's opponents for using this kind of language. After displaying the list, it asked, "Is the party whose orators and papers incessantly speak of the President of the United States in such terms, a party to which the Government of this country should be intrusted?"
See the image of page 610 of the issue of September 24, 1964, right-hand column, ' "Conservative" Ribaldry.'
Tracy Hall Jrhthalljr'gmail'com
On The Impossiblity of Reasoned Debate Without Newspapers
Posted on August 13 at 12:23 a.m.
" . . . the Mormon and Catholic churches engaged in a $43-million conspiracy . . ."
It is so easy to "support" a big lie with an exact number pulled out of thin air – in the very same way that the "constitutional right" of homosexuals to redefine the age-old definition of marriage was pulled out of thin air!
Poor Mr. Welsh is so blinded by his brilliant rhetoric that he fails to understand that the number that he almost got right ($44.1 million is close enough to $43) happens to be the amount raised by SUPPORTERS of same-sex marriage! It makes me wonder if the erudite Mr. Welsh also pulled the wrong lever in voting booth.
Both sides worked tirelessly to make this perfectly clear: "No on 8" meant "Yes for same-sex marriage," and "Yes on 8" meant "No for same-sex marriage."
So "No on 8" (In favor of homosexual marriage) outspent "Yes on 8" by $5.3 million (14% more) and also raised $2 million (18% more) from out-of-state!http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-...
Yes, money talks, and money says, loud and clear, that the homosexual marriage forces mounted, by far, the most lucrative "conspiracy."
Although we raised less money and enjoyed far less "out of state interference," I am nevertheless proud of my fellow Mormons and the good people of all religions and races who joined forces against the same-sex marriage juggernaut!
I look forward to the day when this oxymoronic scheme finally wends its way to the Supreme Court of the United States of America, when at least five of nine justices will have the common sense to ask themselves, "who, in their right mind, could possibly read any original intent in the Constitution for same-sex marriage?"
On Are You As Smart As Your Dog?