Stephen King & Hillary Clinton

[dude58677]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/7200220

[Ronin Truth]

Well that's pretty scary. :eek:

[dude58677]

Well that's pretty scary. :eek:


Heh, It just proves the Democrats and Neocons are one and the same.

[r3volution 3.0]

Phew, that's a relief.

I wouldn't want Rand to get his endorsement.

Think of all the bad joke opportunities, photoshopped images of Rand as [insert hideous monster], etc.

[Sola_Fide]

I'm confused. The article is about Steve King.

[libertyplz]

Am I in the minority of people who actually reads the article? Just a general observation, not just politics but all areas of interest to me seems most people comment on the headline and not what's in the article itself. The author is trying to say that with King's anti-immigration stance he may as well be campaigning for Clinton, because he is chasing the Hispanics away from the GOP. He not actually campaigning Clinton.

Edit: hmm after reading my own reply it kinda makes me come off as an ass, not trying to haha:p

[dude58677]

Am I in the minority of people who actually reads the article? Just a general observation, not just politics but all areas of interest to me seems most people comment on the headline and not what's in the article itself. The author is trying to say that with King's anti-immigration stance he may as well be campaigning for Clinton, because he is chasing the Hispanics away from the GOP. He didn't actually endorse Clinton.

Edit: hmm after reading my own reply it kinda makes me come off as an ass, not trying to haha:p

No you are being honest. I should have paid better attention. That is my fault.

[r3volution 3.0]

Am I in the minority of people who actually reads the article?

Yea, I didn't read it - Steven King (fiction writer) is supporting Hillary; what more do I need to know?

Perhaps Congressman King could change his name to avoid these incidents...

In the meantime, though, the OP should change it to "Steve."

[dude58677]

Yea, I didn't read it - Steven King (fiction writer) is supporting Hillary; what more do I need to know?

Perhaps Congress King could change his name to avoid these incidents...

In the meantime, though, the OP should change it to "Steve."

LOL Another mistake on my part.

[euphemia]

Maybe he'll write her out of the next book.

[r3volution 3.0]

Well, I started this when I saw the thread title, and now I guess it's going to waste...

https://i.imgflip.com/l0hlj.jpg

[Anti Federalist]

WTF...is it so damn hard to post a relevant paragraph instead of just a link?

Is this a finger fucking phone gadet "thing"?

Now then, WTF are we talking about:

Stephen King the author?

Or Steve King the congressman?

[Anti Federalist]

WTF...is it so damn hard to post a relevant paragraph instead of just a link?

Is this a finger fucking phone gadet "thing"?

Now then, WTF are we talking about:

Stephen King the author?

Or Steve King the congressman?

[devil21]

Stephen King is the author. Steven King is a congresscritter.

THE ARTICLE IS ABOUT THE CONGRESSCRITTER!

[Henry Rogue]

Lol, I wish it was Stephen King. Hillary could play Kathy Bates' character in a Misery reboot.

[dude58677]

WTF...is it so damn hard to post a relevant paragraph instead of just a link?

Is this a finger fucking phone gadet "thing"?

Now then, WTF are we talking about:

Stephen King the author?

Or Steve King the congressman?

Hey man, I don't know what you want me to say. Are you perfect?

[r3volution 3.0]

Stephen King is the author. Steven King is a congresscritter.

Oh yea, forgot that's how he spells it.

[Anti Federalist]

Hey man, I don't know what you want me to say. Are you perfect?

No, far from it.

Don't take it personally, it's a frantic pet peeve of mine, posts with nothing but a link, as I am working off a slow connection that is next to impossible to link through on.

[specsaregood]

I haven't clicked the link and thus still have no real idea wtf it is talking about.

[idiom]

Is this a finger fucking phone gadet "thing"?

Best time to double post ever.

Article calling out Rand for not coming back at Steve King for his No birth-right citizenship position as unconstitutional.

Nice piece of bait actually.


We are faced with the reality that in today's Republican Party, a proposal to mangle the U.S. Constitution for partisan -- not to mention darker -- purposes is not only acceptable, but welcomed.

I did a Google search for reactions from other Republicans to this idea. I could not find another member of Congress who stood up for the Constitution and America's traditions by criticizing King's outlandish proposal. Instead, there are the shrill voices of support for King and the mind-numbing silence of the rest of the GOP caucus.

[Anti Federalist]

I haven't clicked the link and thus still have no real idea wtf it is talking about.

Thank Christ, I thought I was having a stroke or something, not being able to understand.

[YesI'mALiberal]

Best time to double post ever.

Article calling out Rand for not coming back at Steve King for his No birth-right citizenship position as unconstitutional.

Nice piece of bait actually.

Rand Paul has proposed an amendment along with David Vitter to end birthright citizenship, and he reiterated that's his position to WND just a couple weeks ago. The most he could do is disagree with King on approach - which, by the way, why doesn't he, being a Constitutionalist and all?

[hells_unicorn]

Article calling out Rand for not coming back at Steve King for his No birth-right citizenship position as unconstitutional.

The position would only be unconstitutional if he was trying to subvert the constitutional process in order to change the law, you know, the kind of stuff that Barack Obama and George W. Bush are into, though I wouldn't be surprised if King would be willing to use dubious means for his ends given his general shrillness. You are correct, it is a good piece of bait, which is PRECISELY why I hope he doesn't acknowledge it. That, and the fact that The Huffingston Post's staff and readership are in dire need of cliff diving incident Wiley Coyote style.


Rand Paul has proposed an amendment along with David Vitter to end birthright citizenship, and he reiterated that's his position to WND just a couple weeks ago.

Good for him, if Rand is truly consistent in his view that legal immigration is the way to go, it makes sense that a legal solution to a flaw in the Constitution as it pertains to an "anchor baby" loophole is in keeping with it. Granted, liberal politicians who are dependent upon poorly educated people from Trotsky's second home in order to replace the aborted progeny of their indigenous voting blocks may disagree, for such is the position of the self-interested. :p