Ho Ho Ho

seriously, if any one of us in here could even stomach the whole political process...so I admire those who I see are trying hard and still having to pay attention to not falling off the fence or treading the traintrack (slug)...lol

Hello khalling,
The earlier support for universal healthcare and raising taxes are the most troubling to me. I have not heard any acceptable explanation or convincing arguments from him about a change of position on these matters. As for the other points you mentioned I heard a comment from him the other day that may shed some light... He claimed that he had to play the game to get things done and that was one of the reasons he wanted to get into the race...(paraphrase). He apparently greased the wheels with whoever had the power at the time. The implication I gleaned was that he recognized the cronyism and knew it for the problem it was, apparently felt compelled to play along at the time, but thought he would be different... I want more elaboration from him on this issue. If he thinks he would be above such things because of his wealth... I don't know what to make of his rhetoric... if it is what he truly believes now... what is in his mind??? Still his forcing of some of the issues is refreshing and illuminating in regard to the responses of his competitors. We shall see... I still think he will crash and burn ultimately, but I will enjoy the show.
Respectfully,
O.A.

ok. let's hear your gripes against Paul.

Very interesting and informative. He is clearly a political animal and does not hold any consistent pattern or "Platform" (I really dislike that word these days) of principles. He is really all over the place, just seems almost at random he will hit the mark very accurately and then on another day or year, be way out there.

Based on the coverage of his statements on healthcare, I would be terrified of healthcare fascism taking hold. Definitely the statist in there. Not that we have anything different at this point, but he is clearly not the one to help solve this mess. It appears Mr business man has not a clue to what free market means.

And so, everyone at one point or another is a "great guy". Why? Cause they can laugh while beveraging? Apparently it has nothing to do with ones values or qualifications.

Very interesting. Thanks for posting.

It will still be a depressing toilet swirl after the Donald bails.

He 's a complete statist. He was for universal healthcare, raising taxes. Highly praised Hilary, Kerry, called Obana "a great guy"

http://www.buzzfeed.com/christopherma...

.....? More please.

I disagree.

Good point on the attacks. He is getting their goat, so to speak.

And now I see he is threatening a third party is not out of the question. High, high stakes there. The Bull Moose/Perot thing.

I need to learn more about his track record. You say he is a statist and a crony and will trample others in some fashion. If anyone can recognize a statist, it would be you. I must learn more.

Except when this hockey game music stops, there won't be a real game to watch afterwards... instead there will only be a toilet's swirling drain to witness.... Did you bring your foam finger?

I'll say this. He did not start it and he was bullied. McCain calling people crazy and Graham calling him a jackass. You know what-I did not appreciate their tone. and you take no prisoners with bullies. as to his presidential qualifications-well he's more qualified than those two bozos. BUt I do think he is the music they play at hockey games you thrill to until the players get on the ice. I do not think he comes froma strong moral foundation so -wild card. He is ultimately a statist and in the past has had no qualms over trampling others property to get more for himself. He has consistently been a crony who used that lever to great advantage.All he's done for me is let a little steam off. It's a short term solution but not great policy making

And the left hates it.... trying every trick they have to put him in a bad, ridiculous, hateful light... Heck so are the republican candidates for that matter...which I don't think is going to bode well for them.

Confident, strong, brutal, honest, and intelligent - I like it.

I don't know either, but I wish people would just hear the point and quite with splitting hairs over his choice of words or the tone or his style. I'm so sick of those who appease or use kitty cat purring p.c. say it like you mean it. Confident and strong.! Brutal honesty.

Me too. Trump has the edge though, the politicians and the media envy his cash so much they'll kiss his ass as he insults them.

I'm not sure about your emphasis on tone. If your saying quit the sugar coated standard political rhetoric - indeed. What I am saying is by cutting to the chase with strong, but well thought positions, rather than the bombastic, off the handle, headline grabbing antics, he would represent a serious candidate for the job. While I enjoy the candor and the upsetting of apple carts, I think it could be easily done in a manner that also supports a candidates credibility. I am not sure this style is going to get him all the way to the White House.

I don't know, maybe he knows that and his main goal is to just stir the pot and help the vetting of the big list of candidates. Especially towards weeding out the lily livered elites. Like AJ says he is not stupid and maybe that is the game plan.

It is not a stretch in the definition of property rights. Property rights are the result that you own yourself and therefore you own the things you create. The founders and Locke understood this.

I only have a small pile of money and I take the same approach. Haha...

They're hypocrites. Whenever somebody tells me they are a Christian I hide my wife and kids and move my wallet from my back pocket to a front pocket...

I remember those images of Clinton coming down the church steps one Sunday morning right after getting his knob slobbed by an intern about the age of his daughter.

Yes. Emotion is "trumping" reason.
No pun intended.

The problem here is that they have a right to hold to any belief and follow the rules of that belief system IF their actions (or inaction) don't violate another PERSON or their property.
The word "NO" isn't violating anyone.
Christians who don't value money above their principles are simply chosing the latter over the former.
The problem with our legal system and especially with laws that are non-objective is that "hurt feelings" are now looked upon as some sort of assault.
Laws should be in place to prevent actual loss to a person or their property by an act of aggression. That ISN'T where that type of non-objective nonsense leads to.
Non-objective laws (laws based upon emotions instead of reason) lead to protecting the guilty and rewarding emotional immaturity by punishing the innocent when no crime has been committed.

That is a bit of a stretch in the definition of property rights, but I'll grant it. I recommend you also see my response to ewv below where he writes that the basic moral issue is rational egoism.

Precisely. Anyone who thinks Trump is stupid hasn't been following him very much. He is behaving exactly as he always has.

"I have a ton of money. You can't buy me. I'll say whatever the hell I want and you can kiss my ass if you don't like it."

Aide from being crass this reminds me of the T. Roosevelt and short lived the Bull Moose Party. The Republicans bent over backwards to ride the teddy-train into power.