"I'm sorry, I now understand that he is the antichrist"

soybean

HR King
Sep 30, 2001
52,960
17,357
113
It's just one woman, and it's just her opinion, but to me it's telling. This is a woman I used to be close to, a woman I respected, a staunch Republican, but an honest one back then. She was a straight shooter once. A name that many of you would know. She was a conservative who once made sense. She had many good ideas for both the nation and the state of Iowa. Many of her ideas helped to shape law in Iowa, especially as it related to children...and from the sidelines I supported her in that back then. She and Mrs. Bean had some good tangles over the years, but it was always in a reasonable and respectful way. Then 2016 came and we ruptured.

Last night at a small social gathering at a long time mutual friend's home she approached me, looked me in the eye and said "I'm sorry, I now understand he is the antichrist". We laughed. She nodded her head, and we laughed again. She later told my wife that although she could have never voted for or supported Joe Biden in any way, shape or form, she now deeply regrets her support and vote for Donald Trump.

It's only one woman, but it sure made the event that we had both been dreading a happy one instead for both me and Mrs. Bean. This morning I can't help but think that maybe, just maybe, the worm is beginning to turn.
 

soybean

HR King
Sep 30, 2001
52,960
17,357
113
Don’t worry, she will support the next republican, who will undoubtably also be a terrible person. They are so bad nowadays that people look back fondly on a dead war hawk and a guy that once said corporations are people my friends.
She is a Republican, and she will support the next Republican nominee...unless its Donald Trump.
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
41,844
71,857
113
Right. Her future will be something like “I don’t want to vote for DeSantis but I can’t support Klobuchar and salad combs.”
There’s nothing wrong with being conservative and voting Republican. I don’t agree with voting for most of them because of the whole being desecrations thingy, but there are a lot of terrible Democrats too. Not as bad as the desecrations, but pretty bad in their own right.
 

Hawki97

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Dec 16, 2001
8,537
11,943
113
Iowa City, IA
No.

But I do believe he’s the most obvious wolf to ever adorn sheep’s clothing.
685d63c091739c08df91fbc8375ae119.jpg
 

TC Nole OX

HR Legend
Mar 29, 2002
10,073
23,051
113
Don’t worry, she will support the next republican, who will undoubtably also be a terrible person. They are so bad nowadays that people look back fondly on a dead war hawk and a guy that once said corporations are people my friends.

Yep, the cultists will gladly vote for the same fascism in nicer packaging. Most of them will vote for Cheeto if he is the nominee despite saying they would never do so again. The members of the morality, law and order, party are severely lacking in character.
 

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
123,615
118,304
113
She is a Republican, and she will support the next Republican nominee...unless its Donald Trump.

You should probably inform her, that there are WAY too many Trumps in the GOP to vote for anyone in that party right now.

The ONLY reason Trump was there, and still has GOP support in Congress, is because the GOP is top-heavy with more just like him. If none of them enabled him, he would not exist or would have been impeached and removed the FIRST time. She should push her ideas with moderate Democrats.
 

Jerome Silberman

HR Legend
Oct 30, 2009
12,101
16,292
113
It's hard for me to believe anyone that waffles between supporting Donald Trump for POTUS and then calling him the Antichrist has ever really had the ability to be a straight shooter, barring a head injury of course.

That combines a high level of gullibility and mysticism.

Oh sh!t! Is OP communicating with Nancy Reagan?
 
Last edited:

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
123,615
118,304
113
It's just one woman, and it's just her opinion, but to me it's telling. This is a woman I used to be close to, a woman I respected, a staunch Republican, but an honest one back then. She was a straight shooter once. A name that many of you would know. She was a conservative who once made sense. She had many good ideas for both the nation and the state of Iowa. Many of her ideas helped to shape law in Iowa, especially as it related to children...and from the sidelines I supported her in that back then. She and Mrs. Bean had some good tangles over the years, but it was always in a reasonable and respectful way. Then 2016 came and we ruptured.

Last night at a small social gathering at a long time mutual friend's home she approached me, looked me in the eye and said "I'm sorry, I now understand he is the antichrist". We laughed. She nodded her head, and we laughed again. She later told my wife that although she could have never voted for or supported Joe Biden in any way, shape or form, she now deeply regrets her support and vote for Donald Trump.

It's only one woman, but it sure made the event that we had both been dreading a happy one instead for both me and Mrs. Bean. This morning I can't help but think that maybe, just maybe, the worm is beginning to turn.

She may not wanna hear this, but it's true


If the GOP stood up against fascism, then there is no such thing as a Trump presidency. A little self-reflection on what she stands for vs what the GOP stands for would be in order...
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
17,573
17,839
113
Don’t worry, she will support the next republican, who will undoubtably also be a terrible person. They are so bad nowadays that people look back fondly on a dead war hawk and a guy that once said corporations are people my friends.
Mitt should be forgiven for his imprecision.
What he was trying to say is that a corporation is a group of people.
If I pool my money with a group of people, should we lose our first amendment rights regarding how that money is spent?
If so, why?

The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time.


It's bizarre to me that the government should be able to restrict political speech around elections.
I read the 1st amendment as something forbidding the government from attempting to silence people, around elections or otherwise.
 
May 27, 2010
15,278
19,132
113
It's hard for me to believe anyone that waffles between supporting Donald Trump for POTUS and then calling him the anti-Christ has ever really had the ability to be a straight shooter, barring a head injury of course.

That combines a high level of gullibility and mysticism.

Oh sh!t! Is OP communicating with Nancy Reagan?
You mean like people believing in an actual Antichrist? I find that type of thinking equally unsettling and inexplicable.
 

Mike Zierath

Family, football and fishing.....
Staff
Jun 3, 2002
17,535
10,494
113
59
Flower Mound, TX
She is a Republican, and she will support the next Republican nominee...unless its Donald Trump.
I'm republican...........

I didn't support the orangeman.

I won't support the next one if he isn't worth a shit either.

You can have party affiliation and still not agree with what the party is putting out there.

Call me a RiNO I guess.
 

Moral

HR Legend
Sep 29, 2017
24,856
76,460
113
Mitt should be forgiven for his imprecision.
What he was trying to say is that a corporation is a group of people.
If I pool my money with a group of people, should we lose our first amendment rights regarding how that money is spent?
If so, why?

The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time.

It's bizarre to me that the government should be able to restrict political speech around elections.
I read the 1st amendment as something forbidding the government from attempting to silence people, around elections or otherwise.

Hey Ayn Rand, shuttie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jerome Silberman

Tom Paris

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 1, 2001
44,135
49,430
113
She is a Republican, and she will support the next Republican nominee...unless its Donald Trump.
Then she remains part of the problem because the next Republican is being supported by Christian-Fascists.
 

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
123,615
118,304
113
, should we lose our first amendment rights regarding how that money is spent?
First Amendment rights have nothing to do with how you spend your money.

In fact, you can criticize the government about anything on this message board and they cannot prevent you from saying stuff.

Absolutely nothing to do with campaign finance limits on spending
 
  • Like
Reactions: sob5 and RileyHawk

billanole

HR Legend
Mar 5, 2005
11,789
12,695
113
Mitt should be forgiven for his imprecision.
What he was trying to say is that a corporation is a group of people.
If I pool my money with a group of people, should we lose our first amendment rights regarding how that money is spent?
If so, why?

The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time.

It's bizarre to me that the government should be able to restrict political speech around elections.
I read the 1st amendment as something forbidding the government from attempting to silence people, around elections or otherwise.

political speech or corporate speech?
The corporation from Florida, Iowa, China, the Virgin Islands, Russia….
 

soybean

HR King
Sep 30, 2001
52,960
17,357
113
Yes agreed, but in all fairness that part of my post was more of a set-up for the Nancy Reagan crack.

I understand the OP's quote was probably not to be taken quite as literally.
Yes. And I'm also surprised at how many do not understand the literary term "worm".
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
17,573
17,839
113
Hey 97, you don’t have the ability or desire to speak for yourself?
Are you questioning the value of anonymity in speech?

The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the right to anonymous free speech is protected by the First Amendment. A frequently cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission reads:

Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.
The tradition of anonymous speech is older than the United States. Founders Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote the Federalist Papers under the pseudonym "Publius " and "the Federal Farmer" spoke up in rebuttal. The US Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized rights to speak anonymously derived from the First Amendment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: billanole

SA_Hawk

HR All-State
Jan 8, 2022
823
1,305
93
Lincoln, NE
iowa.rivals.com
It's just one woman, and it's just her opinion, but to me it's telling. This is a woman I used to be close to, a woman I respected, a staunch Republican, but an honest one back then. She was a straight shooter once. A name that many of you would know. She was a conservative who once made sense. She had many good ideas for both the nation and the state of Iowa. Many of her ideas helped to shape law in Iowa, especially as it related to children...and from the sidelines I supported her in that back then. She and Mrs. Bean had some good tangles over the years, but it was always in a reasonable and respectful way. Then 2016 came and we ruptured.

Last night at a small social gathering at a long time mutual friend's home she approached me, looked me in the eye and said "I'm sorry, I now understand he is the antichrist". We laughed. She nodded her head, and we laughed again. She later told my wife that although she could have never voted for or supported Joe Biden in any way, shape or form, she now deeply regrets her support and vote for Donald Trump.

It's only one woman, but it sure made the event that we had both been dreading a happy one instead for both me and Mrs. Bean. This morning I can't help but think that maybe, just maybe, the worm is beginning to turn.
She is like a corporation that goes woke just so the mob will leave them alone.
 

billanole

HR Legend
Mar 5, 2005
11,789
12,695
113
Are you questioning the value of anonymity in speech?

The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the right to anonymous free speech is protected by the First Amendment. A frequently cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission reads:


The tradition of anonymous speech is older than the United States. Founders Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote the Federalist Papers under the pseudonym "Publius " and "the Federal Farmer" spoke up in rebuttal. The US Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized rights to speak anonymously derived from the First Amendment.
Sure. Sport.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk

herk90

HR Heisman
Silver Member
Sep 4, 2004
5,693
3,262
113
Coralville, Iowa
Don’t let her fool you. We will all vote for trump over any Dem that runs. Would we rather have someone else run? Maybe. But if it’s him then I will vote for him over any Dem. Why? There won’t be a centrist Dem that gets the nomination.
 

INXS83

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jul 5, 2003
18,318
6,385
113
It's just one woman, and it's just her opinion, but to me it's telling. This is a woman I used to be close to, a woman I respected, a staunch Republican, but an honest one back then. She was a straight shooter once. A name that many of you would know. She was a conservative who once made sense. She had many good ideas for both the nation and the state of Iowa. Many of her ideas helped to shape law in Iowa, especially as it related to children...and from the sidelines I supported her in that back then. She and Mrs. Bean had some good tangles over the years, but it was always in a reasonable and respectful way. Then 2016 came and we ruptured.

Last night at a small social gathering at a long time mutual friend's home she approached me, looked me in the eye and said "I'm sorry, I now understand he is the antichrist". We laughed. She nodded her head, and we laughed again. She later told my wife that although she could have never voted for or supported Joe Biden in any way, shape or form, she now deeply regrets her support and vote for Donald Trump.

It's only one woman, but it sure made the event that we had both been dreading a happy one instead for both me and Mrs. Bean. This morning I can't help but think that maybe, just maybe, the worm is beginning to turn.
Birds with TDS flock together.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk

Latest posts