Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by edweaver 5 years, 4 months ago
    I wish I thought he was the solution to our problem but I don't. I like him but feel he has been in office too long and has learned to play the political game. Personally would have rather had his father in office. I think he was way better for the average person than the media gave him credit for. Too late for that now. I would much rather see Ted Cruz, Scott Walker or Alan West.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Susanne 5 years, 4 months ago
      This is true, except in that position, you have to know how the game is played or get walked over. Sad statement of the times. At least we know Rand's position, and that he's not a RINO or a sellout to the moochers...

      BEWARE of those who try to split us up over hairlines of crap. The Libs LOVE it when we tear ourselves apart, and nitpick our own over petty stuff - because it makes Queen Hillary a shoe-in, just like it did with King Obama the last.

      What we really need, however, is a congress who is not afraid to impeach an officeholder if they show an utter contempt for this country, its common (meaning all of us) values, and it's constitution. And deny anyone who has such contempt from gaining the support to even think of running for more than Local Dog-Catcher.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by edweaver 5 years, 4 months ago
        I won't disagree with anything you said but will stand on my position of not playing games. I would rather have someone tell me the truth so I know that I am voting for my beliefs. If Rand make the ticket he will get my vote which is not something I can say about everyone that will be running. :)
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 5 years, 4 months ago
      "I would have rather had his father in office."
      Yes. I wonder if his father could have won if he had gotten the nomination. I have this dream that someone like him will appear who can sell the idea of less gov't, not just less gov't in areas their supporters don't like anyone but all around gov't spending/doing less.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 5 years, 4 months ago
        yet you voted for a President that promoted MORE government and forced individuals to buy insurance they did not want.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • -1
          Posted by CircuitGuy 5 years, 4 months ago
          I say we already had forced insurance, but it wasn't the insured paying for it.

          Regarding the MORE gov't thing, I don't support the recent proposed increases in spending and taxes. People do not realize we are poised to have a mini-crisis, and it would be much easier to balance the budget now before it becomes a crisis.

          You keep saying "you voted" as if I created the world I was born into or as if the only righteous thing to do is not work with the major parties. If Obama hadn't been elected president and no third party longshot won, we'd have a Republican president. We could feel righteous about supporting a third-party or boycotting the process, but we'd have less liberty.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 4 months ago
            If we had a Republican President he or she would still be left wing, socialist probably corporatist, a believer in government control of citizens and would suit the establishment folks just fine as would any from the other half.

            No real difference in outcome.

            It's not a two party system it's a one party system with two faces. Republicans are the right wing OF the left. the only righteous thing to do is not support either of the halves of the Government Party.

            Of course you can fool enough of the people all of the time using one trick or another....then you to could be a GINO in a Republic In Name Only.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 5 years, 4 months ago
              "No real difference in outcome."
              Yes. That's my point exactly. I would call them both center-right, but whatever you want to call them, they do not debate whether the fed gov't should take a quarter of GDP and whether the fed gov't should be involved in all areas of life.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 4 months ago
                I define it close to the heart of the matter. Constitution in the Center and then think about the reasons for it's existence. Citizens over government one side - the right. Government over citizens on the other - the left. It would be nice if the Republicans were Center and a bit to the left along with some of the Blue Dogs and so forth as long as they were rooted in the center. They are not. The Libertarians are rooted that way in the center, the sacred ground and a bit to the right. It's a start.

                On GDP. It's an ill defined or non defined catch phrase. Like anything the meanings used change hourly in support of the party, The important information if it could be believed is NDP. What percentage is used for debt service. What are the devaluation percentages? $2.85 a gallon sounds way kewl but this is 2015. 16 years ago I was paying $.95 - ninety five cents.

                Figures can Lie, Liars can figure and if their mouths are moving... etc.

                Federal Government Involvement. Are the states small 's' just departments of the federal government? Not when the Senators and Representatives cannot be the subject of recall or can be chosen by out of the area money.

                Think it through. All of it.

                A Republic In Name Only seems a fair description.

                N

                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by CircuitGuy 5 years, 4 months ago
                  "Citizens over government one side - the right. Government over citizens on the other - the left."
                  I think I see it the same way but just reversed definitions. Since by my thinking "right wing" means rights flowing from the gov't to the citizens, instead of the other way around, I see us as having two rightwing parties. This is one reason the left/right thing is meaningless. We should just use the gov't thing.

                  I don't see the value of the USD as being related to this since it's very easy to raise prices. The old notion of "menu costs" to update all your paperwork is hardly an issue anymore. You can raise prices electronically to maintain a constant value.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 4 months ago
                    Left Right started with the French Revolution about the same time as our Constitution. When the Left which was the party of the people originally added the powers of the right in the form of an elitest ruling group it left the playing field of the right open. But the definition was rule by divine right so the only change is citizens replaced Kings as the supreme power.

                    Previously it was strictly and up and down definition King on top cannon fodder and baby factories on the bottom. In modern terms the Government Party whose center is the center of the Left refers to the rest of us as fly overs as they look down. Those of us in fly over country look up as they pass and think " Look at all the a--holes."

                    Trick is to define the true center.l For us it's the Constitution. For them it's their center - not ours. Ergo sum Democrats are the left wing of the left and Republicans the right wing of the left as they both hold that Government controls citizens. We take the opposite viewpoint as a divine right constitutional right.

                    100 years of being told he opposite and worse having so many agree. As the philosopher said
                    Dictators don't take power it's given to them. Or in the words of P.T. Barnum You only need to fool most of the people most of the time. With the education system, most of the the media spouting the current party line we end up where we are. As many of the left have said from Lenin to our own home grown version Anything said that supports or promotes the party is the truth."

                    Add it all up and looking up I truly like the observation "What as bunch of amazing A--holes.) Then I go back to reality as part of the 30 or 40% of disenfranchised looking for a home and trying not to support evil.

                    Ditto on electronic money. It's whatever they say it is. Hate to say it but even after a bankruptcy they just printed more and have the ability to do so. Which makes T Bills paid off in full but in devalued buying power a lot safer than FDIC if your in that bracket.


                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 5 years, 4 months ago
    Until we're willing to face up to and admit that those elected don't actually run our government and can have almost no impact on those that do, we're just headed down the same rabbit hole. Keep on getting sucked into the reality show of elections and political parties and we'll continue on to slavery and rule of the looters and moochers.

    I like Paul, but I have no hope that he'll make any significant difference.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DeanStriker 5 years, 4 months ago
    Sorry, Rand Paul. You showed your stuff at the RNC when you ditched your dad to support Romney and thus showed your ABO crap wanting "more of the same". You had the great opportunity to ditch the status quo and you blew it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by peterchunt 5 years, 4 months ago
    Too many people won’t vote for the Republican because they just don’t fit exactly into their ideal mold. That only guarantees we get another socialist in the Whitehouse. Voting for a third party candidate (i.e Libertarian) is a vote for the left. If you ever want to get rid of this progressive government, suck it up and vote Republican. No third party candidate in my life time has ever won the Whitehouse. I voted for Romney despite my concerns. I’ll vote for anyone who is representing the Republicans because there is just no Democrat candidate, for an Objectivist, to vote any other way.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 4 months ago
      Willhave to agree to disagree. Only difference between what the Republicans are and could be is a lot. Similarities with their comrades in the Government Party a lot! One half is socialist statist the other half is socialist corporatist. The differences between the two half other than amount of military personnel killed off is not much.

      If the got rid of the RINO's and publicly declared the center is the Constitution it would be one thing. What they do as the yippy yappy lap dogs of the left is .....revolting. Too many lies too much giving in until Republican In Name Only maybe more true than we would hope but it also means Republic In Name Only. Methinks thou must try harder to support what are straight up left wing socialists with a fascist mindset. Fascist for the uneducated is government control of citizens by any and all means.

      So? I have agreed to disagree but if you truly want to flush your vote wing! Republican or Democrat. See? They even give you a choice like Henry Ford's cars and their paint job.

      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 4 months ago
    The problem with two party presidential elections is that they are paid for by supporters who generally want some return on the investment they make in campaign contributions. That generally means they want to dip into cronyism, at least in the elections I have seen. Thats what behind their contributions. Then they pick a candidate who can bamboozle enough voters to actually win the election. So you get the black southern preacher types like Obama, who entices enough people interested in "historic" elections to actually put him in office. THEN, he panders to his supporters (note that nearly nothing he promised in the campaign is what he actually did !). So how is a freedom loving conservative, actually going to get enough campaign contributions by preaching conservatism to the populace which has been steeped in socialism and freebie giveaways. He would have to basically lie until he got elected, and then DO the conservative freedom-loving stuff after he got elected.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 4 months ago
      It follows then the cure for soft money buying elections being banned except to those who can vote and then only collected in and spent in their own precincts (districts, states, nation depending on which level is involved) campaigning for or against an issue or candidate would solve the problem. Simplistic starter idea. Would mean TV/radio couldn't carry political ads but that's a good thing and the internet system is another issue.

      Still citizens especially registered voters are the only one's with a valid geo-political interest and some schmoozer fronting for a group from the other end of the country has no valid reason to try and influence the vote in my precinct. Bingo... Soft money is banned from the vote buyers. Doesn't mean a ban on freedom of assembly. For that you have to depend on how the Government Party interprets or ignores the Constitution. Add None of The Above as an automatic candidate or choice and make sure every state has the Recall - it's a start - and a return to multi-party system of government.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 5 years, 4 months ago
        The real cure is to make it so that no matter who gets elected, cronyism cant happen. Hard to do, though. Its been around since the beginning of the country unfortunately, but its gotten out of hand now. Why on earth invest $200m to elect a president if he cant get that money back for the supporters somehow. We need an administrator to do the few things federal governemnt does, NOT an arrogant king like Obama. Ha, if I was king I would cancel out a LOT of federal agencies my first day, and probably get assassinated the next.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 5 years, 4 months ago
    Way too early.
    One can decide when it finally comes down to the very last few. If a person is rational, they may change their premises for very good reasons upon discovering they were wrong -- or right about certain issues.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 4 months ago
    Millions of Dollars worth of reasons to keep looking elsewhere. PACs SuperPACs? Elections for sale to the highest bidder is more like it. In the end it will go to one of the two Government Party selectees. Devil Get your secular self behind me.

    The quadrennial charade begins and another good reason to get rid of television.

    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Susanne 5 years, 4 months ago
      You'll never get rid of the National Addiction of Infotainment Media - too many people are hooked harder on it that a doper on meth or heroin. Or both.

      I still like the idea of one, and one only, 6 year term, the winner (if not impeached out of office, whence they get to spend their days in a lovely garden spot like Leavenworth - after all, they ARE [or were] the CiC...) is then banished to an island like Vanuatu to spend out their days incommunicado in peace, luxury and isolation. Pay them well, but they then go bye bye. And the single 6 keeps people from being an electioneer for most of their first term. Heck, as long as we're rewriting the terms of office, they are prohibited (under threat of immediate impeachment from office, see above) from electioneering for their "favorite Party-ites"...

      The Presidency and Cabinet - it's not a graft grabfest - it's service to your country.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo