SLL: U-Turn Or Detour?


Or something different?

Time will tell.

7 responses to “SLL: U-Turn Or Detour?

  1. Bonaventure (fka Randall Flagg)

    U-turn all the way. Extremely happy with mine.

    Oh wait… we talking ’bout something else?

    • Bonaventure (fka Randall Flagg)
      The Roman Catholics of every country on the earth are backing his campaign. Already they are spending money in the South buying up newspapers, seeking to control the vehicles that carry the news to the people. They are sending writers down there from New York and other places to misrepresent and slander our State, all this to build a foundation on which to work for Al Smith for President. The Roman Catholic edict has gone forth in secret articles, “Al Smith is to be made President.” Doctor McDaniel said: “Of all countries the Pope wants to control this country.” “The Knights of Columbus slogan,“ said Doctor Chapman, . . . ”is make America Catholic.” Here they tell you in their book that they will force the propaganda of Protestants to cease, they will lay the heavy hand of a Catholic state upon you and crush the life out of Protestantism in America.
      On your campaighn against the protestants:
      We should also consider ‘ Those who write the history. How much history did the roman church write and record, and how tainted is it?
      Just look at how the Catholic Church treated the Templars, when they no longer served their purpose.
      i believe the problems existing in many the ‘organised’ churches stem from their roots to the Roman church. They never truly broke away from the traditions and false notions, graven images etc…. And it is no coincidence that while Yahuah is calling for us to change our ways and return to Him, a similar call is resonating from this false church for the protestors to return to it.
      Also this( Never Truly breaking away) is why Freemasons and all related ‘clubs are poison, the roots are poison.
      Who wrote the history and is it tainted?
      Luther may have went back to the flesh. i do not personaly know. i find some of the things said of him quite ridiculous and very, very hard to believe. Yet nothing said of him takes away from the Truths he nailed upon the door that day. Also he was not the only one who rebelled from this “universal church.” He was not the only one who was pursued, hunted,etc. Huss, Jerome, John Wycliffe etc…
      The Master that i strive to follow does not force, nor lie, nor condone it.
      Nor does He have a list with $$$ amounts on how to regain ones status within His church.

      Stephen Kings faults aside: The Stand was a great book in many ways. Did you also read all of the Dark Tower by any chance?

      • Bonaventure (fka Randall Flagg)

        a follower (of Satan): Is it hard for you type while wearing that white hood?

        Two citations from the webpage you link above:

        –“Heflin’s January 18, 1928, speech before his Senate colleagues blamed the defeat of 1924 Democratic presidential candidate John W. Davis on Roman Catholics (“Al Smith’s crowd”) who demanded—to Heflin’s outrage—that the party denounce the Klan.”

        –“I said, ‘Gentlemen, that question has got no business in this convention; you may not like the Klan, but you have got no business trying to get a National Democratic Convention to denounce it. It is a Protestant order and Protestants generally think that you want it denounced because you are Catholics.’ …”

        Thank you for proving my point. I need say nothing further.

  2. White Blue Collar Redneck

    Make it personal.
    “Fuck the right to organize, these cocksuckers shot at me!”

  3. There will be NO swamp draining.

    Throwing out some of the less cherished sacrificial babies…maybe..

    Drumpfy LIKES the all equipped houseboat that he’s piloting on the swamp.

    Why drain it?

    Yours in Daily Armed Liberty via anarchy!
    Northgunner III

  4. U-Turn? Detour? Most likely just a Speed Bump.

  5. Robert gets it half right.
    The money quote:
    As long as Washington is a $4 trillion honey pot, as long as it sticks its nose in every important activity and business, as long as intervenes anywhere it wants around the globe, for whatever reason, it will be a swamp. Money and power feed the swamp.
    The horseshit-and-chicken soup quote:
    The word “conservative” implies conserving something. What conservatives conserve, as well as nourish and profit from, is the ever-expanding federal government. Conservatives think small: a little less or a little more. A little less taxes, regulation, and welfare, a little more defense spending and foreign intervention. Fewer liberals in power, more conservatives. Republican presidents and Republican-controlled congresses have come and gone as the swamp has relentlessly grown. The current Republican president and congress have even managed to conserved Obamacare.

    Looking at the mess Washington has made of America and the rest of the world, what would any rational, honest person want to conserve? Wouldn’t it be better just to blow the whole thing up and start all over? Isn’t that what’s necessary if you want not just to drain the swamp, but keep it drained?

    Swallow that swill, if you, like the author, think there’s any amount of horseshit in your chicken soup that’s palatable.

    When you start with faulty premises, you get ridiculous conclusions.
    Like that one right there.

    If anyone cannot tell the difference between conservatism, and the Republican party, they aren’t tall enough for this ride, and the conclusions drawn from such half-assed premises are risible.

    If the GOP=conservatism, neither Goldwater nor Reagan would have had to fight tooth and nail for the party’s nominations going back 50 years. The Venn circle diagrams of the two overlap somewhat, but it’s never been and is nowhere near a 1:1 correspondence. Anyone older than 17 should know that without having to be told. This is Poli Sci 101 stuff.
    (Bonus question: name five nationally-known conservatives in the GOP, and tell the class how you know this is so. If you cannot, you flunk as well.)

    That leaves utter ignorance or deliberately deceit as the only excuse for the conflation, and I can’t begin to parse which is the likelier motivation.

    At a minimum, he needs to stop thinking that R=conservative, with only a few thousand obvious counter-examples in recent history.

    The Republicans nominally hold the presidency, the Senate, and the House, with a supposed majority in SCOTUS as well.

    Conservatives have not held a majority in any branch since Reagan was president, and before 1981, not since Coolidge.

    If you disagree, show your work.