The Conservative Thread: Back to Basics. Pass the Lasagna and Have a Flower!!

[#1hockeymom]

Saw the breed.. how about CARIBOU? A name he can grow into?! (in his mind, only!) or Moose?

 

[#1hockeymom]

*needs pictures*
I'll eat another jolly rancher if you post pics!?
*guilt.. .it might work!*

 

[*disgal*]

I'm not saying...



A Malatese/Toy Fox Terrier

I'm trying to picture this in my mind, but I can't.

What about Piper??

Thanks again to all the "well" wishes!! It feels good knowing I have cheerleaders behind me. DH, while being supportive, is not doing it in a helpful way. He keeps on asking me if I'm going to whig out on him yet. I'm telling you, he might not make it through tonight!

YOU CAN DO IT! YOU CAN DO IT! GO #1HOCKEYMOM!!

 

[*disgal*]

Will he look like this, but smaller?

http://www.maltesemaniac.com/maltese-fox-terrier-mix-scooter.html

 

[SorcererDonald16]

Okay, I didn't mean to start a game of Clue or Guess Who? here. Sorry, all.

Lest I drive you all crazy, I don't think it's Newt, I don't think it's Giuliani. I don't think it's Huckabee.

Based on past history from the primaries, the facts we do have, and my gut instinct, I think it's some of Huckabee's people. I don't think they started the rumors, I think they're the ones who pushed the idea that it was Romney behind it all. I know some will think I think this because I supported Mitt and didn't like Mike, but I'm basing this on the behavior of several people in the primaries. You cannot underestimate the out and out hatred many of the people working for Mike had for Romney. A lot of my friends work or volunteer in politics at the state level or in D.C., and it's no secret that quite a few of Huckabee's people weren't just looking to beat Romney, they wanted to destroy him. Why, I still have no clue. And I guarantee you some of them are having a cow at the thought of him getting the nomination in 2012.

I don't think Huckabee is involved in any way because I believe his career in politics is over for now, and he seemed to really like Sarah. But if some of his former people are still hoping he'll run in 2012, then they're going to want to get rid of Sarah and Mitt ASAP. Sarah, because she cuts directly into his base of evangelicals. Mitt, because, well, the hatred they showed for him is already very clear. Our primaries were very, very dirty at first, but it got little attention because of the Clinton/Obama saga. Again, this is just my own speculation based on their past behavior. I didn't want to out and out say what I think because I don't want anyone to run and say it's true when it might not be. I feel like that's what happened to Romney, and it was wrong. All of the specific campaign people I'm thinking of (and I am thinking of a specific few) could be completely innocent in all of this, but history is what makes me think otherwise.

 

[B9erSteve]

From today's paper:

"If Stevens resigns or is expelled from the Senate, there would be a special election to pick his replacement.

Would Palin run?

"Not planning on that, no, not planning on that. Just being very thankful to get to hustle back to my governor's office here and get to work as the governor," Palin said."

I could be wrong... But If Stevens is expelled, I believe that the Governor is able to appoint a replacement. If so, Palin could appoint herself and resign the Governorship. (correct me if I am wrong)

Okay, this is totally OT, but I need some advice. Conservatives are generally careful with spending, so I figured this was the place to ask. I am looking at my handy dandy charts that I made earlier tonight showing the rates of various WDW resorts with this new 7 for the price of 4 deal. Here's what I came up with for 3 adults, 8 nights in May, 8 day park hopper pass:

Caribbean Beach or Riverside (water view): $2,104.41
Animal Kingdom Lodge or Wilderness Lodge (standard view): $2,728.65
Wilderness Lodge (courtyard view): $3,000.60
Animal Kingdom Lodge (Savannah view): $3,122.49
Polynesian (Garden view): $3,422.28

We paid around $4,000 for our 7 day hopper tickets and 9 nights at WL (courtyard view) this May. So, I'm presented with a unique opportunity here. My parents and I go on two family vacations a year, and they pay (my parents are quite awesome, btw). WL in 2005 and 2008 was a graduation present to me, as they can't really afford that price for a resort. All of these prices above are well below what we paid last year. My dad asked the price of Riverside tonight, and I also tossed in the price for the Grand (which was $3,600) and the Poly, pointing out the difference between what he paid this year on the latter two. I would love to go back to WL. I'm iffy about the Poly. But my dad has wanted to stay there since it opened. It's, for whatever reason, his Disney dream. Mine is a Magic Kingdom tower view room at the Contemporary, but I'm waiting on my imaginary lottery winnings to come in the mail before I ever even think about that. My mom said he talked about the Poly all the time in the 70s when they got married. He talks about it hardly at all these days, dismissing it as too expensive.

So, question: Is the Poly worth is? Is garden view worth it? Has anyone stayed there? I'd be a happy clam staying in a Standard room at my beloved WL, but I'm wondering if I should do a wink, wink, nudge, nudge with my dad to get him to go with the Poly since he may never have another chance to stay there that cheaply.

If you had the above options, what would you do?

I was thinking much the same as you. I had ressies at POR but thought that with the savings I could upgrate to WL. But when I called, I was told that the only WL rooms that qualified for the 7 for 4 deal were studios. The resulting increase in my costs far outweighed my savings. I stuck with saving $700. Have the Disney Travel agent check out availiablity in all of the resorts you are interested in. As far as the Poly goes. I walked through it in 2006 and thought that it looked pretty 70's. A decade that I am not fond of! Good Luck!

IF [/SIZE]for a second I thought that my tax money in CA would be spent wisely, I would agree with you wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, Any tax increase will be spent before it is collected and the debt will NEVER be touched. I've been burned by this sort of foolishness before.

As much as I love her, I think you might be right. Like I said before, I think after the govenorship she should run for senate. We need her in Washington and in some ways, you have more power as a congressman than pres. And she has shown she is electable in Alaska. They love her. So it's an easy way to get her in.

One thing I will always love her for is putting the light to true conservatism again. The base was just, "eh", about McCain until she came on board. She might not have been perfect, but she let the Rep. leaders know that we love what she stands for. We let them know this in a big way. I just hope they keep remembering over the next four years.

SM -- I agree. Although I truly like and admire Sarah Palin, I think the MSM and creeps like Tina Fey and the like so tarnished her reputation that I don't think she is a viable candidate in 2012. People, especially PTS, do not listen to the truth -they listen to the smear that is being spread - and the smear is what they will remember. She needs to be part of a a R administration, but not part of the ticket.

Regarding Palin's electability... as long as we go on letting the media and the Democrats define our candidates, we will always fear them tearing our candidates apart. We need to stand proudly behind those who carry our banner and defend them whenever and wherever they are attacked.

Currently L.A. County (where I live) is 8.25%. Stupid measure R just passed which increased it by .50% and Arnie wants to up it another 1.5% on top of that. So it would end up at 10.25%. I do not want that at all. We already pay the second highest taxes in the nation and don't get me started on the gas tax. To say I am not happy about this is an understatement.

We're experiencing a similar thing in our county. We get duped each and every time. Last time was the Library tax. Who can refuse that? Except that once the county got their Library tax they slashed county expendatures on the library. Now the library is worse off than before the tax. This last election we voted to give ourselves a higher sales tax again! (to fix the roads this time) I anticipate a greater number of potholes in the not too distant future. But on top of all that The Governator wants to raise my sales taxes to pay for the fiscal irresponsibility of our Democraticly controlled government. Sheesh! And they wanted to recall my representitive (Jeff Denham) because he had the audacity to tell them that they were spending like madmen!

 

[#1hockeymom]

I have a jackrat
http://www.visualshare.com/trish_talk/harriet.jpg
Make this one smaller, mostly white on his under belly, and add giant brown spots on his back which we call "beautiful bovine markings" and you have my doggy. He's currently burrowed under the down blanket and comforter.

 

[#1hockeymom]

Okay, I didn't mean to start a game of Clue or Guess Who? here. Sorry, all.

Lest I drive you all crazy, I don't think it's Newt, I don't think it's Giuliani. I don't think it's Huckabee.

Based on past history from the primaries, the facts we do have, and my gut instinct, I think it's some of Huckabee's people. I don't think they started the rumors, I think they're the ones who pushed the idea that it was Romney behind it all. I know some will think I think this because I supported Mitt and didn't like Mike, but I'm basing this on the behavior of several people in the primaries. You cannot underestimate the out and out hatred many of the people working for Mike had for Romney. A lot of my friends work or volunteer in politics at the state level or in D.C., and it's no secret that quite a few of Huckabee's people weren't just looking to beat Romney, they wanted to destroy him. Why, I still have no clue. And I guarantee you some of them are having a cow at the thought of him getting the nomination in 2012.

I don't think Huckabee is involved in any way because I believe his career in politics is over for now, and he seemed to really like Sarah. But if some of his former people are still hoping he'll run in 2012, then they're going to want to get rid of Sarah and Mitt ASAP. Sarah, because she cuts directly into his base of evangelicals. Mitt, because, well, the hatred they showed for him is already very clear. Our primaries were very, very dirty at first, but it got little attention because of the Clinton/Obama saga. Again, this is just my own speculation based on their past behavior. I didn't want to out and out say what I think because I don't want anyone to run and say it's true when it might not be. I feel like that's what happened to Romney, and it was wrong. All of the specific campaign people I'm thinking of (and I am thinking of a specific few) could be completely innocent in all of this, but history is what makes me think otherwise.

hmm interesting. It does make sense with what you've added.

 

[blestmom]

I could be wrong... But If Stevens is expelled, I believe that the Governor is able to appoint a replacement. If so, Palin could appoint herself and resign the Governorship. (correct me if I am wrong)

No, she can't.

"If Stevens were to resign from his seat or be expelled, how would a replacement be chosen?

Nobody can say for sure.

That's because Alaska's law on senatorial succession was changed twice in 2004 -- once by the Legislature, and once by ballot initiative. Both laws call for a special election within 60 to 90 days of the vacancy. But they disagree on whether the governor appoints an interim senator in the meantime.

The Alaska Supreme Court would ultimately have to decide which law the state follows."

Regarding Palin's electability... as long as we go on letting the media and the Democrats define our candidates, we will always fear them tearing our candidates apart. We need to stand proudly behind those who carry our banner and defend them whenever and wherever they are attacked.

I agree.

 

[nannerbadnanner]

Name the puppy Ronnie or Reagan.

 

[TLSnell1981]

Okay, I didn't mean to start a game of Clue or Guess Who? here. Sorry, all.

Lest I drive you all crazy, I don't think it's Newt, I don't think it's Giuliani. I don't think it's Huckabee.

Based on past history from the primaries, the facts we do have, and my gut instinct, I think it's some of Huckabee's people. I don't think they started the rumors, I think they're the ones who pushed the idea that it was Romney behind it all. I know some will think I think this because I supported Mitt and didn't like Mike, but I'm basing this on the behavior of several people in the primaries. You cannot underestimate the out and out hatred many of the people working for Mike had for Romney. A lot of my friends work or volunteer in politics at the state level or in D.C., and it's no secret that quite a few of Huckabee's people weren't just looking to beat Romney, they wanted to destroy him. Why, I still have no clue. And I guarantee you some of them are having a cow at the thought of him getting the nomination in 2012.

I don't think Huckabee is involved in any way because I believe his career in politics is over for now, and he seemed to really like Sarah. But if some of his former people are still hoping he'll run in 2012, then they're going to want to get rid of Sarah and Mitt ASAP. Sarah, because she cuts directly into his base of evangelicals. Mitt, because, well, the hatred they showed for him is already very clear. Our primaries were very, very dirty at first, but it got little attention because of the Clinton/Obama saga. Again, this is just my own speculation based on their past behavior. I didn't want to out and out say what I think because I don't want anyone to run and say it's true when it might not be. I feel like that's what happened to Romney, and it was wrong. All of the specific campaign people I'm thinking of (and I am thinking of a specific few) could be completely innocent in all of this, but history is what makes me think otherwise.

I really don't think it's Huckabee. I don't think he has plans to run.

Changing the subject... Batgirls....I need some lasagna....

 

[blestmom]

Pictures of the puppy coming...

hang on!

 

[*disgal*]

Okay, I didn't mean to start a game of Clue or Guess Who? here. Sorry, all.

Lest I drive you all crazy, I don't think it's Newt, I don't think it's Giuliani. I don't think it's Huckabee.

Based on past history from the primaries, the facts we do have, and my gut instinct, I think it's some of Huckabee's people.

Our primaries were very, very dirty at first, but it got little attention because of the Clinton/Obama saga.

Hey, I thought it was kind of interesting.

You know, I didn't follow the primaries THAT closely that I remember a rift between Mitt and Huckabee. I just didn't want Mitt because he just looks like the typical white, rich guy. I know that sounds awful, but when they thought McCain might pick Mitt for VP I thought, oh, great.....two white rich guys........we're never going to get anywhere. Then the next morning they picked Palin and I was freakin' out of my mind with delight.

Mitt seems like a nice guy and I probably agree with most of his policy stances, but he, well, he's not very exciting. I know, I know, we shouldn't pick according to that. But it would be nice to have an exciting, well-spoken, get you revved up, true blue conservative for once. That's what I like about Palin.

Regarding Palin's electability... as long as we go on letting the media and the Democrats define our candidates, we will always fear them tearing our candidates apart. We need to stand proudly behind those who carry our banner and defend them whenever and wherever they are attacked.

Yes, I agree. But if you can't get in the door to have a discussion.......your hands are kind of tied.

 

[blestmom]

Here's the puppy!

Just look at that face...

Here's to show just how "big" he is...

 

[B9erSteve]

No, she can't.

"If Stevens were to resign from his seat or be expelled, how would a replacement be chosen?

Nobody can say for sure.

That's because Alaska's law on senatorial succession was changed twice in 2004 -- once by the Legislature, and once by ballot initiative. Both laws call for a special election within 60 to 90 days of the vacancy. But they disagree on whether the governor appoints an interim senator in the meantime.

The Alaska Supreme Court would ultimately have to decide which law the state follows."

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[#1hockeymom]

I really don't think it's Huckabee. I don't think he has plans to run.

Changing the subject... Batgirls....I need some lasagna....

bat girl checking in!

 

[blestmom]

Thanks for the clarification.

It "is" quite confusing...

Alaskans voted to change the law after our former governor appointed his daughter to the position.

 

[Tink & Goofy]

He's such a cutie, how about Trig?

 

[*disgal*]

Name the puppy Ronnie or Reagan.

I like that idea.

I really don't think it's Huckabee. I don't think he has plans to run.

Changing the subject... Batgirls....I need some lasagna....

I don't know how to post the actual picture.......here is the link though.

http://comps.fotosearch.com/comp/UNE/UNE150/indoor_~u12711282.jpg

Pictures of the puppy coming...

hang on!

can't wait.

 

[*disgal*]

Oh, blestmom, you must have posted it while I was typing.

Too cute!! Oh, I just love him.