Tue 30 Jan 2007
It’s that time again. Sonoran Alliance is now accepting writers to this blog.
Here are the requirements:
1) You must be willing to write/contribute often.
2) You must be a conservative Republican who adores the party platform.
3) You are not allowed to post profane, vulgar or false posts.
4) Any posting must contain reliable and credible third-party source references (No ultra-liberal sources) if necessary.
5) You should be able to compose a coherent, grammatically-correct sentence/paragraph/essay.
If you are interested, please submit your contact info and a sample writing to the website for consideration.
Thank you!
DSW
January 30th, 2007 at 5:58 am
If I may add one more point just for clarification – You must be adamantly and firmly pro-life!
January 30th, 2007 at 6:01 am
Yes, indeed. That definitely falls under the “adores the party platform” provision.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:28 am
Can Honest Abe apply?
January 30th, 2007 at 6:31 am
I hope so, i’m in!!
January 30th, 2007 at 7:08 am
Uhh…what exactly is the pro-life test? But getting to trivial stuff, what does it mean to adore the R platform? There is much to admire in politics, but litte to adore. It’s part of the human condition. MInd you, this is not a jab at some off-the-cuff post, which unfortunately we all are capable of, but you are soliciting significant content in bringing on a new writer, and readers should know what they can expect. And writers before they apply.
I once demurred on an invitation to participate in Operation Rescue, and later criticized someone who put super-glue in the locks at an abortion mill. I was accused of being not pro-life enough.
And hey, if you require good grammar and spelling Patterson would be disqualified!
Cheers!
January 30th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
I’m a platform Republican, but geez, have you read our party platform lately? I is 96 pages long… http://www.gop.com/media/2004platform.pdf
It is interesting to hear all the Pullen supporters talking about “supporting the Party platform.” I guess that means that Pullen, Haney, Tuttle, Rutledge, Pearce, Gould and Harper are all champions of a temporary worker program and pathway to citizenship – hey, it’s in the platform! (pg. 79)
January 30th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
clarification – it is 92 pages long (of which 7 are a list of the people who worked on it…) Still too long, IMHO…
January 30th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Actually, when combined with a secure border, every conservative that I know IS in favor of a guest worker program. Its just doing one in the absence of a secure border that is insanity.
January 30th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
On page 16 the platform on says, “We must strengthen our Border Patrol to stop illegal crossings, and we will equip the Border Patrol with the tools, technologies, structure, and sufficient force necessary to secure the border (emphasis added.)”
Sounds good to me.
January 30th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
Looks like Grassroots Girl is a little peeved over the Chairman’s race results. Suggestion GG, maybe establishment hack girl would be a more appropriate handle for you.
January 30th, 2007 at 7:00 pm
“establishment hack girl”?? gimme a break… the “establishment wouldn’t know me if I slapped them in the face… course, Pullen is the establishment now, so I guess you’ll have to change your tired rhetoric.
STS, if you think that Russell Pearce and Rob Haney favor a guest worker program, you are horribly uninformed, or choose to ignore reality… I don’t even know what Pullen thinks on that particular issue, but it probably doesn’t matter, because he will be their puppet anyway… see how it works? Lisa James was going to be the evil delegation puppet, but Pullen isn’t Haney’s puppet? Ha! “Don’t look at the little man behind the curtin!”
January 30th, 2007 at 8:50 pm
The bitterness runs deep
January 30th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
Wow, ” Republican who adores the party platform” — all 96 pages…a small group of people indeed.
Who came up with “adores”? I think you’d be more interested in thoughtful conservatives than party hacks.
Do we have to adore the Republican’s most horrific federal spending, too?