Thoughts on this presidential campaign
I'm curious if others feel this way. To frame where I'm coming from...I have spent some time over the past few years dealing face-to-face with politicians in some of my work and in some of my personal time (fighting a law). I have confirmed the reports that they are shallow, narcissistic whack jobs for the most part.
So...I have come to the conclusion that political campaigns are just a form of entertainment. None of these candidates seem very special, very intelligent, for the most part. I do love Rand Paul's position on liberty and smaller government. But, he's not electable due to lack of connection with the average mouth-breather voter (my editorial, sorry). But...really...this is just entertainment. The President is just a puppet, for the most part. Seriously...do any of these candidates even remotely appear presidential to you? Rubio? Hillary? Christie? Trump? Bernie the socialist? It's surreal to me that they've all made it this far. This is the best we can do? LOL
I'll cut this self-indulgent rant off. But, I'd appreciate your thoughts. And, have a great Christmas, everybody. You are a great group of thinkers. Nice to visit with you all.
So...I have come to the conclusion that political campaigns are just a form of entertainment. None of these candidates seem very special, very intelligent, for the most part. I do love Rand Paul's position on liberty and smaller government. But, he's not electable due to lack of connection with the average mouth-breather voter (my editorial, sorry). But...really...this is just entertainment. The President is just a puppet, for the most part. Seriously...do any of these candidates even remotely appear presidential to you? Rubio? Hillary? Christie? Trump? Bernie the socialist? It's surreal to me that they've all made it this far. This is the best we can do? LOL
I'll cut this self-indulgent rant off. But, I'd appreciate your thoughts. And, have a great Christmas, everybody. You are a great group of thinkers. Nice to visit with you all.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
I think they thought it would give him more credence if he acted as if taking the job was a hardship.
I still vote because I was raised in an era when voting was a badge of honor and I feel compelled to do so. But I am aware, at least, that I'm participating in a charade. I do get the satisfaction of saying, "I told ya so" no matter who wins or loses. I used to think that when a candidate enters the beltway their I.Q. drops by 50%. But because of the present slate, I think their I.Q. is that low going in. By the way, self indulgent rants are found in The Gulch very often. I am one of the guiltiest posters.
Everything published about this is nothing but a smokescreen. The annointed "leader" just wanted it to appear that he was reluctant to take the position.
No, you can't vote until you understand what the issues are, and you can't vote unless you have EARNED the priviledge through hard work and a vested interest in a voluntary peaceful industrious society, free markets, and by defending all of rights in the Bill of Rights without any reservations or restrictions. If you take any benefit from government, you are compromised and cannot vote. This includes all employees (or companies) providing service under contracts to government, all consultants, all government employees, and those receiving government retirement payments. Voting priviledge should also be voluntary, by consent of the prospective voter.
It doesn’t matter if the man or woman is a stupid peacock in real life. The ship must sail anyway.
I try to see the humor in everything. Look at the bright side if Trump is elected:
At least we know he won’t be out fundraising while we are getting our heads chopped off.
With the recent and ongoing cuts guaranteed they will be the bulk of those retained. Not a good thing as they do not uphold their oath of office. Might's well count them as part of the protective echelon.
Where are they going to get all that pickled herring?
Hold it -- wrong century.
In this case the saying when you have the citizens by the balls their hearts and minds will follow is only half true. The only thing that follows is what government steals at the point of a gun. Ergo some income taxis the favorite caliber of the left.
Yes on the other with commissions restricted to combat veterans and high public offices restricted to combat veterans. They are the least likely group to start wars and the most likely to win wars started against us.
Government is a group of people. If they are independent and free the outlook is far different than those who are just part of an all powerful collective. That's invariably caused by the collective entity becoming the only entity with former citizens as atoms, molecules, cells or other, replaceable parts
But if government is controlled by individuals who recognize rights and responsibilities go hand in hand and put that knowledge to use by voluntarily opting to serve a certain period of time as part of whatever system is set up they have in doing so proved or disproved their capabilities to be allowed or selected for higher responsibilities by the individual citizens.
One of the times when acting as a group is necessary but also recognizing it is fraught with danger.
Long winded way of saying voluntary military AND other form so of service.
Heinlein's one phrase was not restricted to military service only.
The other phrase put an automatic penalty on bad voting habits.
The skin in the game when voting for war was the one the voter lives in...not the amount they could pay.
Load more comments...