Least fit to rule?

Posted by freedomforall 3 years, 6 months ago to Politics
204 comments | Share | Flag


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 14
    Posted by  $  jbrenner 3 years, 6 months ago
    Not only is she not fit to rule, but the premise to that is that we are to be ruled. I reject that premise, as do all Gulchers, most especially you. ;)

    Glenn Beck was referring to an author this morning who did a study that concluded that Trump's supporters were conservatives who liked authoritarians. That is an interesting contradiction.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
      Thanks for the compliment, jb.
      Being ruled is anathema.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
        A lot of people want to follow some "leader", be it a religious one or a secular one.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
          Too bad no-one qualified to lead with honesty, ethics, and integrity wants the job.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Donald-Brian-Lehoux 3 years, 6 months ago
            Anyone that WANTS the job should NOT have it. I expect to be killed any time but I am a veteran and a patriot and it is my DUTY to defend America against enemies both foreign and domestic.
            Conservative, Liberal, left, right these are terms that are used to divide us. The only term we need to use is Constitutionalist or veteran. The Constitution is the exact guide of what the government can, can’t, should and shouldn’t do, simple.
            Vote VETERAN someone that puts America before ANY party we come from ALL back grounds.
            No double standards put DC politicians on Obamacare and SS.Thanks for your support and vote.Pass the word. mrpresident2016.com
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 3 years, 6 months ago
      Correct, we were not to be ruled, originally we were empowered to rule ourselves but progressives have seen to that by making many over the years, just as incompetent as they are.

      Post Script: I saw the show and listen to the psyc-on trump. Have to say, I saw the same things...he's not fit to rule either.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jimjamesjames 3 years, 6 months ago
      Disagree with the "authoritarians" concept. I think Trump supporters like competence and demonstrated managerial ability. Consider, the Hildebeast and Obama's competence is climbing slimy political ladders.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
        imo, Trump's "managerial" ability is 99% con-man ability. He is a playground bully with a desire to spread his rule across all of the "lower classes."
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
          He has run very successful businesses, which is more than any of the other candidates can say.
          It would be refreshing to have someone in there who understands business and negotiating with foreign countries
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
            Unfortunately Trump isn't competent or trustworthy to do so. If, as president, he screws the Chinese/Russians/Indians in a deal like he has his partners in business it could lead to war, not just to a minor lawsuit where he can use the legal system to his personal advantage regardless of ethics. The competition has a billion people, 3 million square miles of resources, their own currency, and the US owes them hundreds of billions of USD. Trump as a businessman has only selected partners he could take advantage of. The POTUS doesn't have that luxury when dealing with China and Russia. They are the competitors Trump has to face. Trump is completely unprepared for real competition. Trump is an empty suit.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jimjamesjames 3 years, 6 months ago
          A lot of "business" is using what could be called "con man" skills (also called "salesmanship"). Nevertheless, he's demonstrated positive achievements that have improved the quality of life for thousands, if not (in aggregate), millions. What have the other candidates achieved? Climbing slimy political ladders, is all.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  blarman 3 years, 6 months ago
            That's not business, it's looting. In business, both parties gain value from a deal.

            What have Trumps investors lost in his four bankruptcies? Billions. And he laughed at them the whole time.

            Trump is out for Trump, but he doesn't represent what I want in a leader.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by jimjamesjames 3 years, 6 months ago
              "That's not business, it's looting. In business, both parties gain value from a deal." LOOTING is employing force. I doubt any of the people that have signed contracts with him were forced to do so. They may have made bad decisions but THEY made the decisions.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  blarman 3 years, 6 months ago
                No one enters business negotiations with an expectation of getting ripped off. Trump used the bankruptcy rules to avoid the repercussions of his own poor judgement and his investors paid the price while he laughed. That most certainly is looting: he used the force of the bankruptcy courts to avoid his payment obligations.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by jimjamesjames 3 years, 6 months ago
                  No disagreement, there. However, bankruptcy rules exist as a tool of business (bad business decisions, if you will) and, nevertheless, have been and will be used as long as they exist. I suggest that those who benefited by them and those who did not benefit by them all made choices that led to the consequences. Again, caveat emptor.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  blarman 3 years, 6 months ago
                    caveat emptor is exactly why I will not be voting for Trump. I've already seen what he's selling and am not interested in the risks he presents.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                      I take it you are more interested in what Hillary or Sanders is selling? Because that is who we will get if not for Trump I think.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by  $  blarman 3 years, 6 months ago
                        Not at all. For right now I am concerned with the primaries. Until Donald is the Republican Nominee, he's not my guy.

                        But let us consider the true differences between Hillary/Sanders and "The Donald".

                        Same:
                        They both support abortion.
                        They both support gay marriage.
                        They both support Kelo v New London (eminent domain).
                        They both don't have any problem sticking investors with the bill - Trump through his bankruptcies and Hillary/Bernie through government spending.
                        Both pretend a false connection to religion.
                        Tax policies: both favor high taxes
                        Obamacare: Trump was for it before it passed. He's only changed his mind since becoming a candidate.

                        Different:
                        Second Amendment. Trump would let you keep your guns.
                        Immigration. Trump wants to build a wall on the Southern Border. He also wants to stop un-vetted immigration.
                        The Iran Deal: Trump is against it.
                        Foreign Policy: Trump says he knows how to turn down a bad deal. All Hillary can make is bad deals.
                        Religious liberty: Trump says he'll preserve religious liberty. Hillary/Sanders have no such interests.

                        Unknowns/Questions:
                        Policy on Middle East: Trump has alluded to the notion of seizing the oil from ISIS.
                        Putin: Trump says he'll stand up to Putin. Hillary/Obama certainly haven't.

                        I'm looking, and really not seeing all that much difference between Hillary/Sanders and Trump on some major issues. Trump talks big and he's an outsider, but his policy statements are pretty tough to swallow given his actions.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                          The only question that matters:
                          Will you act only using the specific powers written in the constitution and the Bill of Rights especially this:
                          "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
                          The federal government has no implied powers whatsoever. If it isn't written clearly as a power to the US then it isn't a federal power and is not allowed unless the states and the people overtly change the constitution with an amendment.
                          Virtually every government agency created in the past 103 years is unconstitutional (except those created by amendment.).

                          All those policies that the idiot candidates use to confuse voters are not relevant because all those policies are unconstitutional.
                          None of the GOP or Dem candidates will keep the oath of constitutionality. None.

                          Not one is worthy to be president.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                          As far as abortion is concerned, I really dont care what a woman does with her body until the kid is essentially born. Gay marriage is a personal decision and isnt a government matter. Eminent domain isnt really a big issue. Its there and its fought in the courts, but its not high on my list of priorities. As to sticking investors with the bill, Trump wouldnt have much effect nationally on that. Bankruptcy is a long standing thing and wont change one way or another. Just as an aside it seems more reasonable than debtors prison. Belief in some god that doesnt exist seems to be a bit stupid, so the fact its ignored by some candidates, at least relative to government policy is a POSITIVE for me. Obamacare looks worse every day now that its implemented, so I am not surprised many people would change position on it. As to taxes, I dont like them at all, but all I think would happen for the better would be to keep them from increasing.

                          2nd amendment was to keep us able to defeat our own government if it came to it.
                          A southern wall is like closing the door after the cows have left. Issue guest worker permits and cancel welfare for illegals and the problem goes away. The Iran deal is stupid, as is all of Obama's foreign policy actions. He is an idiot. Trump will be much better and will stick up for OUR interests for a change. As long as religion is kept OUT of government, I am in favor of letting people believe what they want.

                          There are some major issues, mostly relating to the financial running of the country. I think Trumps business background will help there. Also, he tells us when the emperor has no clothes, which is sorely needed. Hillary will just hide what she does. Trump already tells you what he thinks and I say its already sparked a lot of thinking.

                          Consider that he needs to get elected so he puts out statements designed to get him free publicity. If you think about what he says about immigration and terrorism and foreign relations, its not so bad. When it comes right down to it I trust he will be a lot more reasonable in actual negotiations in order to get things through our government. After all, he is a candidate now, and not privy to all the information that the "insiders" get.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                    The purpose of BK rules is to speed up the process of "moving on". It was mostly designed for individuals so they can resume their lives again and be productive. Otherwise , one big screwup and you are done for the rest of your life.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by jimjamesjames 3 years, 6 months ago
                      Agree. There have been zillions of bankruptcies that resulted from "bad luck," "acts of God," and various and sundry events, not within the scope of normal business expectations. And, for the most part, the process of bankruptcy enabled a reasonable recovery period that did not result in total disaster.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
            You define salesmanship in a negative light to make excuses for Trump. He is conducting his biggest con yet as a candidate for president. If he was a good manager and had solutions to the "problems" of Americans, then present those problems and solutions in a businesslike, rational way. He hasn't. He won't. Because he is just another looter politician who seeks power.
            Most sales people sell a product that is more than a negative sum game. Trump has "produced" casinos that overtly steal from its customers, and Trump has overtly taken assistance from other looters. Another "lesser evil" is still evil.
            I'd rather have an honest small business merchant instead of Trump. He represents the worst view of business. I wouldn't trust Trump as dog catcher.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
              Its way too early to present "solutions". One would need a lot of information not yet available to him. He has no advisers at this point either. We are nearly a year away from an election. We want someone who can take the data and make decisions based on the date- in real time, not a year in advance. Things change in a years time.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                Trump claims repeatedly that he will fix it all.
                In fact he is clueless.
                HRM Donnie, prove it or shut up you arrogant windbag.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                  They all claim that. Trump. Has more experience in fixing it and negotiating it than the others
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                    Not in the areas required for the POTUS. Trump is a babe in the woods, and he will sell all of us out for his own purposes.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                      If we look at Obama, a real babe in the woods,. The real evil he perpetrated was when he had both houses of Congress on his side. Since that time he really hasn't been able to do much. That would be true for whoever wins in 2016. Even if trump wanted to reign in spending and do other good things, Congress would have to go along
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 6 months ago
                        Unfortunately he has done immeasurable damage that we will be living with for years! He has not been thwarted at all because there has been precious few in Washington who truly represent us! Obama and the cabal from both parties represent an all out oligarchy! Don't underestimate the damage that has been done....
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                          But most of it happened when he had the two houses of congress on his side (Obamacare, the various wars)
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 5 months ago
                            What about the landslide sweep of both 2010 and 2012 when the R's ended up with significant control. The more R's that we get the less Congress seems willing to do to fix the damage!

                            I don't buy the line that they are going to "fix" things when we have the House, the Senate and the WH. It is already shaping up to be just a little more of the same old same old! I am beginning to believe that the Republican party is just Democrat lite!
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by term2 3 years, 5 months ago
                              Each party pushes the government to benefit "their" supporters. Repubs have one set of supporters and dems have another. It's cronyism either way
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                        Donnie isn't running to reduce his power; it's to increase it. He will do just as the GOP did on Obamacare- only propose reductions that he has been assured cannot pass.
                        You are right about con-gress.. Republicans would never agree to reduce the trillions used for WMDs. Democrats would not agree to reduce their vote buying schemes for IQ's under 100.
                        Trillions for monuments to the glory of the state, not one penny in defense of liberty. That's what you get from the statist party and their charlatan candidates.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                          I have thought for a long time that the best we can have is a divided government. That way nothing gets done !! I do think, however, that Trump's take on political correctness (he ignores it and speaks his mind) is a good thing. We should all speak our minds and be true to ourselves. If elected, I hope he invites Snowden to come back without fear of prosecution. We need to know what goes on in the back rooms of our government.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                            While I agree with the sentiment on Snowden, there is no evidence to reasonably expect any such action from Trump. More likely he would make a deal with Russia fly him out and "accidentally" lose the plane after three airliners piloted by Saudis (trained to fly in Florida) crashed into it despite the Air Force escort.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                              Trump isnt swayed by political correctness, which is a good thing in my opinion. If anyone would exonerate Snowden, it would be Trump. None of the other candidates would do it. Shit, if Ford could let Nixon off the hook, we can certainly let Snowden and Manning (for that matter) off the hook.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                                I agree none of the statist candidates would pardon Snowden, nor would Trump. A third party candidate with principles is the only chance that will happen. That's the only chance for peaceful return to liberty and free markets, too.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                                • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                                  Snowden was smart to go to Russia. The one place he would be safe from Obama. Obama wouldnt dare have him killed on Russian soil, whereas I think Snowden would have met an untimely death in any other country.
                                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by jimjamesjames 3 years, 6 months ago
              "then present those problems and solutions in a businesslike, rational way" SEE: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions

              " casinos that overtly steal from its customers" Casinos offer something and people of free will make the choice. That they are, for the most part, not statistically astute, does not change the fact that they make the choice. Caveat emptor.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                Trump's "positions" are band-aid bullshit that do nothing to solve the problems. They are more of the same socialist, statist rubbish.

                Just because people choose of their free will to buy a product that is harmful does not forgive the seller for his unethical choice of "product."
                If someone wants to gamble that is their choice, but it does not make the casino operator a valid choice for president of the US.
                I think Trump's past behavior must be used to predict his future behavior, just as I think the GOP's past behavior should be used to predict their future behavior.
                Trump and the GOP deserve each other, but neither deserve anyone's vote or support.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Abaco 3 years, 6 months ago
            I still think Hillary will be the next president anyway. I've been saying that for about three years now. Let's see if I'm right...
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by jimjamesjames 3 years, 6 months ago
              "It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything." Joseph Stalin

              I suspect that the computers in the key states are already being rigged.
              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 3 years, 6 months ago
      Why? Conservatices are by non pc meaning real definition those in power whose goal is protecting their turf by any means necessary. Liberal are those outside of power those out of power willinig to do anything to get it back..I see nothing contradictory when proper definitions are applied instead of leftist PC (Political Crap) Ditto on the rejection.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  jbrenner 3 years, 6 months ago
        Perhaps so, with those definitions. The definition of conservative for most US residents would involve conservation of the ideals of the US founders, which were not authoritarian. In fact, Jefferson was referred to as a Jeffersonian liberal, and by his times, he was.
        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 3 years, 6 months ago
          Much closer I found most of the therms are over defined to the point of being useless so we 20 years or more when most dictionaries agreed meaning before PC and chucked all the rest of it. It was like a miracle with proper definitions the most complex questions became immediately clear. Starting with why to Republicans always cave to Democrats? Because they are both members of the same party. etc.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by KevinSchwinkendorf 3 years, 6 months ago
      I think Ted Cruz has the best record for conservative principles, but there are two things I really like about Trump: 1) As a big-business man, he understands "The Art of the Deal," and its a known fact that the USA has gotten the raw end of the deal in trade for decades now, and 2) illegal immigration. I wouldn't mind spending twice as much for broccoli at the supermarket if the pickers were US citizens getting minimum wage. Americans spend around 5% of their monthly income on food (yes, it depends on your income, but I read once that is a good national average), and that is a small fraction of what we spend on mortgage (or rent) payments, car payments, etc. Making the welfare class work for their money, even if agricultural, or other "jobs Americans won't do" - or so I hear), would not affect most people's bottom line all that much. As far as being an authoritarian, I LIKE the idea of having a POTUS who is a lot more authoritarian with foreign nations and terrorist threats like ISIS (but yes, leave us American citizens alone)!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by samrigel 3 years, 6 months ago
    We should not be looking for a "leader" or a "ruler". I don't want either. What I want is a representative which will take on the mundane tasks of the Gov't. Stuff like keeping foreign troops from invading and bombs from falling out of the sky on my home. Its not much but I paid for it. We need representatives who will "promote the general welfare" by staying out of the way of productive people.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 3 years, 6 months ago
      A true Leader, leads through example allowing us to lead ourselves and our nation in a successful manner and not do harm to ourselves or others unless harm has been done to us.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by samrigel 3 years, 6 months ago
        Being an Electrical Engineer and Project Manager on projects you are correct. The leader of the team should act in accordance in the manner you suggest. However, in America a Republic with a Constitution that clearly states it is We the People that are in charge. Therefore those elected are representative and not leaders or rulers.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 3 years, 6 months ago
    So once again we are being forced to choose between the lesser of evils or not voting or voting for someone who cannot possibly win. It's not pleasant living during the decline and fall of America.
    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 3 years, 6 months ago
      I maintain you are not being forced unless you let your self be forced. You absolutely will vote for evil if you are a supporter of evil. Evil is by your own definition. You will or you won't but I submit by calling something evil you have, independently, made the definition.

      As for voting for someone who cannot possibly win that means you knowingly and willingly voted for the other side under the winner take all rules. Still your choice.

      The next option is joining the 44 - 46% and try to help raise that figures of those who chose not to support evil or show any support whatsoever to the side of what I personally call preordained rigged elections by a one party system . My definition. A percentage I might add that is steadily growing.as people adhere to the adage the only way to win is not play their game.

      One thing I will not do is absolve you. That is your decision and your choice and no it is not easy. It takes strict adherence to the third rule of Objectivity. It allows no excuses and then application of moral values. Your choice even if it's choosing to adopt the ethics or lack of set forth or dictated by others. If you knowingly adopt there rules and then define them as evil you have defined yourself. No one else did that you did it/

      I use 'you' in general terms not directed at ir1776wg specifically. just to make that plain.

      However after the election you can proclaim I voted for evil, I chose to enable evil, I chose to compromise with evil. I chose not to support evil. No where in that range of choices is the word We.

      And remember the individual choice you made and take responsibility for it.

      The side bet this time is someone I thoroughly despise Donald Trump. He is, to me, a different form of evil but evil none the less. I shall not make that choice. Others see it as a way to judo evil or exchange it for another form. My individual choice is not to play that game.

      It's a secular way of saying 'get behind me.' For you religious folks its a repudiation of the devil in which ever religion you profess.

      Your choice, your responsibility you absolve yourself. No one else can do it for you.

      Consciouos conscience the results are to your credit or your shame but it's your verdict. One man or woman jury.

      That's Ayn Rands third law
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 6 months ago
        The simple way of looking at this is to just vote your conscience......It is not complicated at all.

        If you don't vote your conscience then you will get what you deserve. If you do vote your conscience and still get evil, at least you can live with yourself in peace.
        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 3 years, 6 months ago
          Your conscience is far far more liberal than mine. A common factor in those who support evil. (your public confession not my opinion. )
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 6 months ago
            From your post, you and I have an entirely different definition of "conscience"! I can't and won't attempt to speak for you! If I vote my conscience, it won't be knowingly for any evil! I will vote however for whomever does not represent evil or I won't vote at all! So! If your definitions of "evil" or "conscience" are not classical and for some reason you think that your definition is not as "liberal" as mine, then by all means vote it but don't try to judge where on the scale mine resides! You assume too much!! BTW what an who's standards do you feel you can judge my beliefs against?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by GaryL 3 years, 6 months ago
        I am happy to disagree with you Michael. Not so much that you are wrong but more because if you refuse to play the game then you, by your definition, will not be affected by the outcome. We all know that is not the case.
        I would much prefer to always cast my vote for the one I believe is the "Lesser Evil" because a refusal to vote at all or as you call it "Play the Game" is a vote for the "More Evil" as I see it. In American politics we will have a choice between 2 possible candidates on election day who could possibly win. The outcome will in fact affect us all.
        I cast my vote not for the one I wish to win but against the one I refuse to accept as a political leader. I am "Ruled" by no man or woman but I must live by the rules these jerks put in place. If my choice on election day comes down to Clinton against Mickey Mouse then you can be sure I will vote against Hillary but I will vote so it goes to the next viable candidate that has a chance to win and not to any third party guaranteed looser. That's my plan and I am sticking to it!
        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 3 years, 6 months ago
          That's your choice as a self confessed supporter of evil. Don't believe for a second I'm not in the game I'm not however playing your sides game by your rules. Since you just made a public confession of being an active member I can say that without rancor but as a valid observation. It's your responsibility and your ethics to support evil..Sorry to hear you joined the secular devil's congregation. That's my view of the picture you presented. Again with out rancor....we each make our own decisions.

          I'm neck deep in the game. but the veersion I play is for larger stakes is not rigged, and does not offer an easy out. However that's not your playing field any more so enough of that. .
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
            How much goodness in a candidate is required to NOT call them EVIL? Even Ayn Rand herself wasnt 100% good when it came down to her being mad at Nathaniel Branded that he didnt consider HER #1 romantic partner.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by GaryL 3 years, 6 months ago
            These are NOT my rules Michael! It is just the way we have our system designed and we all must live with the end results. Staying home only does you good!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
              You have voted to support those rules every time you cast a vote for "lesser evil." You have sacrificed your principles; they are the rules promulgated by those you voted for; they are your rules. Take responsibility for your actions.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by GaryL 3 years, 6 months ago
                I am taking responsibility for my actions but I don't usually agree with the results. So why not tell me what exactly your actions of refusing to not bother to vote gains us? I am all in for a solution but what you both are saying solves nothing other than allowing you to say I voted for neither evil.
                Please don't bother to tell me you would have voted for Ron or Rand Paul. Nice guys, both but also had about a snow balls chance in hell of ever coming close to winning. Just for fun say Trump is the R nominee and Clinton the D so you write in Mickey Mouse or Rand Paul. What good did your vote do other than end up in the circular file and appease your own self centered dislike of the system we have in place. Forget the name calling and evil label bullshit, make me and others here understand what your attitudes are attempting to prove. I am happy to argue where I stand without the name calling crap but you two are not. BTW, I have never yet seen where Not voting or where voting for some third party candidate who had zero chance of coming even remotely close to winning has ever done us any good. Yes, we are in the Gulch but this is fiction. We happen to live in the real world and I want to know how your plan is going to change this BS system we have.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                  Haven't posted here for anyone not to vote.
                  No name calling on my part that I see either.
                  So-called conservatives have wasted votes on the GOP for decades.
                  The state gets bigger under every GOP administration, and you whine about third parties having no chance and you continue to support the evil statist party.
                  The founders of America had no guarantees; you don't get any either.
                  Realistically the British should have crushed the American revolution, but men of integrity didn't sacrifice their principles.
                  Voting for evil against your principles is the problem. You are responsible for the massive government, but you want to shift blame to others for your decision to support the statists.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by GaryL 3 years, 6 months ago
                    Once again I have to agree with you! Too bad out of all the votes that are cast 95% go to one or the other of the evil entities. I think a viable third party would be a very good thing in our politics but I fear I won't see it in what life time I have left. I understand that you think I am just as wrong as I think you are but face the facts. We are just now getting to the end of 8 years of democratic rule by the very worst president and administration in my entire life. I will gladly waste my vote on the GOP just to get them out and at least see a glimmer of hope.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                      "We are just now getting to the end of 8 years "
                      that's what most people thought at the end of GWB's disasterous rule, too. It doesn't get better by repeating the same errors. The GOP offers no glimmer of hope, just another mirage of hype.

                      Again, if people like you don't desert the GOP's false hope and vote your principles the state will continue to grow, liberty will continue to disappear, just as it has in every regime since 1913.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by GaryL 3 years, 6 months ago
                        OK, so quit voting for the D and the Rs and we might get a few thousand converts per election. Instead of the third party getting 3% they might get 5% and it will take a hundred years to get anywhere just like it took a hundred years to get where we are.
                        It is a highly flawed system which is the exact reason I go for who I think is the lesser evil. Some cake is better than no cake. But again, I do agree. I just don't see the tides changing unless we can get all the Non voters off their asses.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                          We have nothing more to discuss.
                          I'd rather starve as a free man than eat cake as a slave. You'd rather eat cake than defend your liberty or your principles.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by GaryL 3 years, 6 months ago
                            I'd rather let you have your opinions and I already defended OUR liberty in Vietnam and would be very happy to do it today, actually more happy today!
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by Zenphamy 3 years, 6 months ago
                              I was there. I'll be damned if I can think of anything that I saw or did while there that had anything to do with 'OUR' liberty or anyone else's.

                              Even after a Civil War with more than 600,000 killed to supposedly end Slavery, there we were back being enslaved again, except it was to be shot, killed, and screwed up for life instead of just working in the field.

                              You want to go back and do all that nonsense again, go ahead; just don't try to drag the rest of us along with you and if we don't want to go with you, throw us in Fed prison for 10 yrs.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
          You and others like you are responsible for the evil that has controlled and expanded the fedgov. Like Janet Reno you claim to take responsibility for your actions and then you keep voting for statist evil ignoring the continual betrayal by every politician you voted for.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
            If not voting added to the total vote and therefore subtracted from the impact of the votes cast for the candidates, I would agree with you. BUT, thats not how it works. Not voting for Trump will guarantee either Hillary or Sanders gets to be president for the next 4 years.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
              We have seen how voting for evil works for the past 30+ years. You want to keep doing it, go ahead. How it works: vote for evil, you get evil.
              If you alone vote for the GOP they don't win either. Obviously it takes a lot of GOP supporters to vote for principle instead of voting for evil. Using that as an excuse to continue voting for evil and sacrificing your principles is reprehensible.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by jdg 3 years, 6 months ago
        Voting for the least of evils does not make you responsible for that evil. Read Spooner.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
          Someone repeatedly makes the same mistake, continues to ignore the results of that action (which imposes force on and injures millions of people), and wants to do it again without taking any responsibility for the action. You call that rational? No, it isn't. And you aren't voting for the least of evils. you are voting for,one of two evils when you have other choices that are not evil.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by H2ungar123 3 years, 6 months ago
      Yeah, not pleasant living during the decline
      and fall of America: i.e. the Obama years!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Zenphamy 3 years, 6 months ago
        Haven't you figured out yet that Obama was just the one chosen for you to pay attention to and hate instead of paying attention to what's been really going on by those that tell the Obamas, Romneys, McCains, Bushes, Cruzes, Trumps, etc what to do?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by j_IR1776wg 3 years, 6 months ago
        I'm afraid that the decline has been going on for a lot longer. Obama is just the latest in a long line of Constitution killers.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
          Obama increased the speed of the decliine by a lot. Sanders would sink us quickly into a pit from which we would never recover.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
            If Bush hadn't been such a lying sack of slime, embarrassing America at every opportunity, pretending he was the decider, then Obama would never have had a chance to continue Bush's horrid policies (and admittedly add some horrid ones of his own;^)
            Every president has been worse than the one before him since Eisenhower (with the arguable exception of Reagan and anyone who followed Carter had it easy;^)
            (Note-this is a repost of an earlier comment with several spelling corrections.)
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
              Bush got us into two wars for which we not benefit at all. Its true that Obama just kept them going and expanded them. I have had it with these external wars to "expand democracy", at least thats what they say
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  prof611 3 years, 6 months ago
      I would like to present my case for always voting for the "lesser of two evils".

      Here's a scenario: Suppose that, not counting my vote, the Democratic candidate and the Republican candidate received an equal number of votes. Suppose also, that I really don't want a Democratic president. Now which of my four choices would result in NOT electing a Democrat? Answer: only one of them - my voting for a Republican. ( My other three choices - voting for a Democrat, voting for a 3d party candidate, or not voting at all - will result in a Democratic win or a tie. )

      This is why voting for "the lesser of two evils" is the proper choice. Granted, my scenario will most likely never occur. But if enough people vote like me, it certainly will make it a lot less likely for a Democrat to win.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by j_IR1776wg 3 years, 6 months ago
        Democrat win? What did W Bush do for for individual rights, limited government, and laissez-faire capitalism? Answer: worse than nothing - he diminished all of the three.

        Voting for the lesser of two evils just sinks you further into slavery.
        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 3 years, 6 months ago
        First off there both left wing and to split hairs between a RIno and Dino shows a marked lack of understanding. The parties you mention exist in name only ...so let's stop that left wing shuck and jive flush your vote spin. Spin is just another name for deceit. You want to spank one of your hands for what the other hand is doing? Nonsense. The answer is none of them . Same party, same Government over Citizens goals - zero difference. Not justify your choice and acceptance of having four socialist socialist choice perhaps one of them is National Socialist the rest International socialist.

        Your take on the last two are also incorrect. They are part of a group that now holds 44% to 46% of the electorate while Rino left 26% and Dino 29% --- so far 55 percent. All of your choices will result in kissing what's left of the constitution goodbye...and won't affect life as we know it today one little bit. Your three choices are give up, cave, and quit. That's as nice as care to be today. No it won't occur...but even if it did. Are morals, values and ethics any the less valid? When the going gets tough you need more than Charmin.

        Hows that for being nice! It's a real world view;
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
        In rebuttal: history 1985-2015.
        If enough people like you stuck to ethical principles and voted for the third party the statist party would lose, and individual liberty and free markets would be resurrected.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  prof611 3 years, 6 months ago
          Let's be realistic here. No election in my memory ever had a third part candidate come close to winning. If that were a REAL possiblitity ( and not just an "if" ), I would certainly join you. In the meantime, I hope more people will join me than you.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
            So-called conservatives have wasted votes on the GOP for decades.
            The state gets bigger under every GOP administration, and all you do is whine about third parties having no chance and continue to support the evil statist party.
            The founders of America had no guarantees; you don't get any either.
            Realistically the British should have crushed the American revolution.
            Your votes for evil are the problem. You are responsible for the massive government, but all you do is whine and make irrational excuses for the statists you support.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  prof611 3 years, 6 months ago
              Wow! You be rude! I not whinin mson. Simply bein realistic.

              Much better to have the lesser of two evils than the greater. And you can hardly hold hold me responsible for what the majority voted in. I guess you are becoming like the retards you detest - you aren't willing to use logic, hold on to your irrational beliefs in spite of the evidence, and refuse to recognize it when you're wrong!

              And BTW, I'm not supporting statists. I'm simply trying to prevent the greater statist from winning. And also, BTW, I haven't voted for president in over 45 years, since we are not permitted to do so in the US Virgin Islands. But I definitely have an interest in the election, since the result influences our lives here in the islands.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                Every president whether Dem or GOP has increased the power of the state and reduced individual liberty.
                Voting for the "lesser of two evils" is an excellent example of Einsiein's definition of insanity: Repeating the same actions and expecting a different result.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
      If you feel they "can't possibly win" it's because you believe the statist "lesser evil" propaganda and waste your vote on evil. Conservative voters can change this but they choose sacrifice principles and to vote for evil
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 years, 6 months ago
        Here is my personal point of view on that.
        The current Obamanation is not my fault. Why?
        I did not voting day twice sit on my hands.
        A caustic continuation of White House socialism, albeit Bolshevik BS Bernie or a Bungling Bloody Billary, will not be my fault either.
        This "old dino" will vote AGAINST such wanton wreckage of what used to look like the America I thought I was growing up in..
        One may view my voting as an exercise in futility since my Birmingham area is a blue speck in a red state.
        Nevertheless, I have always viewed voting as my patriotic duty even if the choice sucks.
        I have myself to live with. So for me there it is. Call me old-fashioned if you will.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
          Dino, just vote for the person who best represents your principles and is most likely to uphold them. That should exclude anyone that the statists put forward as their candidate.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by j_IR1776wg 3 years, 6 months ago
        The evil I perceive ffa is that no candidate is defending the first ten amendments to the Constitution, limited government, and laissez-faire capitalism. I'll be voting in my 13th presidential election in 2016 and, maybe, Goldwater and Reagan came closest. But even they weren't anywhere near being radicals for individual rights and capitalism. And, of course, Goldwater never got the chance to prove me wrong.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
        No matter what you say, there are going to be two choices for president in 2016. This is mob rule, and there arent enough freedom loving people left to make up a majority here in the USA>
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
        No matter what you say, there are going to be two choices for president in 2016. This is mob rule, and there arent enough freedom loving people left to make up a majority here in the USA>
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 3 years, 6 months ago
    She is the worst in the running now. I think Trump is next, because he will make the US a laughing stock. Then Sanders, then take your pick (Bush, Rubio, Carson). Cruz is the best unless you count the distant Paul.
    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 3 years, 6 months ago
      Cruz is the best of a bad lot but ....there is that little problem with the constitutional requirement for becoming President. Wishful thinking and conjecture etc. are not the same as a legal amendment and dreams, schemes and fairy tales are not on the list of valid ways to make changes. Of course that's assuming we still have a rule of law government. If not then I'll go back to a greater claim than Cruz manufactured and couch it in these terms. Has Obama agreed to abdicate yet?

      The way things are going possession is nine points of ten and Cruz doesn't have one.

      Besides he's a Pelosi tax supporter and that's a deal killer if ever was.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 3 years, 6 months ago
        What Cruz recommends re VAT 1) is not the same as Europe's, and 2) needs to be considered in context with all the other fantastic tax reform he recommends for corporate and individual taxes.

        The citizen thing is just noise. Dem's can't do anything with it because of Obummer.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
          Fantastic to me would be repeal of the 16th amendment and passage of an amendment making it clear that income taxation is, was, and always will be in violation of the basic rights of men described as follows:
          "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 3 years, 6 months ago
            Equally fantastic would be Kathy Ireland throwing herself at my feet, and equally likely. However, if first the success of lower taxes and smaller government were demonstrated, the fantastic could become a possibility.

            Some lead angle is very helpful.
            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 3 years, 6 months ago
          True but it's no less devious nor out of line with Pelosi's version and is just as dishonest. Public pays increased freight no matter which truck hauls the load.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 3 years, 6 months ago
            Just about any government action, except eliminating rules/government, is bad. This "bad" comes with a lot of other "good" in government reduction. Sort of like repeating "the lesser of the evils".
            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 3 years, 5 months ago
            The 16% per level I'm assuming, is enough to make u for a lot and puts the onus on business when it fact it's just all government. That's assuming those other changes are made. Far far to much like a Pelosi Tax or a Hillary Enhancement. But what do you expect from a nothing to lose illegal candidate? Think not. Quote me the LAW that allows him to run. Wishful thinking; is not law and doing something not specificlly allowed under the 9th and 10 th amendment 'rights not granted provisions means if it isn't allowed it's illegal. Cruz will only get in the way Obama did. By a public that has turned left wing fascist and agreed to crap on the Constitution....His campaign is a three dollar bill worth about .32 cents. That's point three two. About point 69 less than the closet leftist Rand who co sponsored the the tax increase.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
      Trump will get respect for the USA from other countries, just as he does in business. Cruz is a religious zealot as is Rubio and Carson. Bush and Hillary are old time politicians who are bought from powerful people. Sanders might just be the last president of the USA, as he would wipe out the last of the ideals in the constitution.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 3 years, 6 months ago
        Who respects Trump in business? Not me. Maybe Sarah Palin? A guy handed a bunch of money by his dad, that couldn't advance it better than a child investing in the S&P, is NOT a businessman. What contribution has he made that was not a paid contribution to politicians supporting him in eminent domain. Saying ridiculous, non-implementable policies like no muslim immigrants. Trump is a spoiled child.

        The problem with republicans is they are all religious zealots. However, Cruz is the only one also seeking small government...the only one. Wait, let me think, yep... the only one.

        Trump, the respecter of Putin, lover of eminent domain, patron of politicians, builder of giant walls isn't one of them. If he were really a businessman and not an actor, he'd have gotten someone to explain some basics of what we can actually do to solve problems, versus railing like a child and appealing to fools at Walmart.

        I am no supporter of religion, as many here will attest. However, Cruz's zealotry contributes to exactly what that would be in his power? If he votes with Congress, with bills starting in the Ryan House, we might actually, for the first time in...forever...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
          If I didn't know better, I would say you dislike trump so much you would rather have Hillary. Cause I think that's the alternative
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 3 years, 6 months ago
            No. Check my list again. I think Trump has less chance against Hillary than others, unless he starts to take some guidance and recants some silliness.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
              Cruz is a religious zealot who wants to take gays back out of the military, Rubio is another religious zealot who wants raped women to carry the rapists baby to term, Carson is too busy with his painting of him standing next to Jesus (well, some sort of picture anyway), Fiorina couldnt make it at HP let alone in an election, and the others just arent electable at all.

              Trump tosses out his views in a bombastic way in my opinion to get free notoriety, but when you think about what he actually says a few weeks later, its not so bad. Who wants muslims around if you cant tell the difference between the violent ones and the sane ones? Figure that out before you let in thousands of syrian muslims that WE have to pay for.

              Getting respect from foreign countries requires strength. He already got respect from Putin, which is more than Obama can claim.

              None of the presidential candidates who are actually electable are perfect by any means. A perfect one would never get elected in this day and age.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                Respect. One gangster to another. Yeah, that's a reason to trust him to be king. FDR's record of 3700+ executive orders will be a footnote in comparison to HRM Donald..
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
                  I think that when other countries dont respect us, thats when they just act without thinking (given that we will have no response to them). When they respect us, they will think more about what actions they are proposing to take. Strength is better than weakness, as we have found out with Obama.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
                    Bush showed that kind of "strength." That's how Obama got elected. Facist dictatorship is not the answer.
                    I do agree, America needs better than Obama
                    and better than Bush
                    and better than Clinton
                    and better than Bush
                    and better than Reagan
                    and better than Carter
                    and better than Ford
                    and better than Nixon
                    and better than Johnson
                    and better than Kennedy
                    and better than Eisenhower
                    and better than Truman
                    and better than Roosevelt
                    and better than Hoover
                    and better than Coolidge
                    and better than Harding
                    and better than Wilson

                    We desperately need a Thomas Jefferson.
                    Neither party today would let a Jefferson join, much less run.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by MetaCynic 3 years, 6 months ago
    Since in a free society people for the most part rule themselves, very little is required of a President to be fit to rule. His job would be largely to get the government out of our way. Here are some suggestions for a new President of no governing experience to cut huge swathes thru government during just his first day in office.

    First he could immediately pardon all inmates in federal prisons convicted on victimless crimes charges. He could then order his Attorney General to not enforce any victimless crimes laws. There goes the cruel war on individuals who put things in their bodies which others disapprove of. Violent crime would be cut probably in half as would the "criminal justice" budget. Hundreds of billions of dollars wasted on now vastly overpriced prohibited substances would be available for more urgent uses.

    Being the Commander in Chief, the new President could dismantle the economy-killing overseas Empire with a single command to bring all the overseas troops home and to shut down the 1,000 or so military bases in foreign countries. Say hello to peace and prosperity.

    The new President could next pardon everyone imprisoned on violation of legal tender laws. Since legal tender laws are unconstitutional, he could order his Attorney General to no longer enforce these laws. Commodity based free market competing currencies would quickly emerge. There goes the Federal Reserve and the unbacked fiat dollar. Say goodbye to inflation.

    Next the new President could pardon everyone imprisoned for using non FDA approved medical therapies and order his Attorney General to no longer prosecute such witch hunts. The foot-dragging FDA would wither away as life extension research exploded and competing private companies emerged to certify the safety and efficacy of new therapies.

    Finally the new President could announce that he will refuse to spend any money allocated by Congress to federal agencies not specifically authorized in the Constitution. Say goodbye to a long list of unconstitutional alphabet agencies bossing us around.

    Should Congress threaten to impeach the new President for showing more interest in the freedom and prosperity of Americans than in the interests of crony capitalists, he could exercise some of those powers which Congress foolishly gave the President and legally have Congress arrested and detained without due process. Congress is largely superfluous since all it does is pass laws, and there are already far too many laws and regulations crippling commerce and robbing productive people of their wealth.

    All these freedom promoting actions could be taken care of in the new President's first morning in office. He would then be entitled to a very long vacation while leaving Americans to get busy rebuilding their lives and the national economy in an environment of individual liberty.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 3 years, 6 months ago
    as a former classification officer at a manhattan project
    site, I can assert that Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton has --
    according to reporting today -- done far worse than anything
    General Petraeus did, and does not qualify to be president. -- j
    .
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Flootus5 3 years, 6 months ago
    Nevada has the best third party option. On the ballots is actually the choice of "None of the above".

    But I'm not sure about the presidential ballot.
    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 3 years, 6 months ago
      puts Nevada ahead of the rest of the nation.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Flootus5 3 years, 6 months ago
        I should clarify. The choice says "None of these Candidates".
        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 3 years, 6 months ago
          I'm in a polling group and they are doing primary polls I'm listed in Florida and they are using that exact same phrase of their county level poll. Somebody is doing our work for us!!!!!!!!

          If the primary is set up properly it will require a majority of 50% plus one or reverted in None of these candidates gets 50% plus one.

          What the poll is measuring is the real percentage of hell no votes. They had another question that asked about why certain candidates were not chosen. Two answers were too far left and too far right. Another was...Candidate doesn't support the Constitution. So? Not all but some of the right questions are being answered to some extent.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 3 years, 6 months ago
    this is an interesting article, with details which I have
    wanted to know for awhile. . Thank You, FFA!

    please note, however, that Saddam Hussein did send
    many of his WMDs to Syria, and among those which remained
    was the one which killed my brother-in-law by ruining
    his lungs. . the "lie-based" statement is itself based
    on media hype. -- j
    .
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 3 years, 6 months ago
    And who rules the ruler?
    Ever since there have been rulers, there have either been power brokers pulling the ruler's strings or wannabes vying to take the ruler's place. Add to that the discontented citizens who realize that they are being ruled and don't like it and you are suddenly illuminated as to why the king, dictator, socialist-in-charge, keeps a loyal army that eliminates dissenters by whatever means they can get away with. Is Hillary fit to "rule?" Yes, as a ruler. Is she fit to be the president? Absolutely not, and for the above reason for starters. One of the things liberals remind me of can be found in "The Walrus and the Carpenter" a poem from "Alice In Wonderland." The Walrus cried for the demise of the poor oysters as he ate them all up.
    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 3 years, 6 months ago
      It should have been the oysters but they all jumped on the plate. What we need are silent oysters. I really despise the whining AFTER the election when the people they supported are screwing them. Especially when it's repetitive.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 3 years, 6 months ago
        The oysters enjoyed themselves, until it came time for lunch. Lewis Carroll was an astute satirist if one could look beyond the nonsense plots and poems. The Walrus who cried for the oysters held a hanky to his eyes which allowed him to cheat the Carpenter by eating more than his share while behind the handkerchief. Sounds like a number of Washingtonians to me.
        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 3 years, 6 months ago
    Methaphor

    Road Runners live in a smaller range than snakes.
    Rattlesnakes only show up where there are rats.
    Rats only show up for edible garbage.
    Edible Garbage is caused by humans.

    Unknown for Road Runner
    Trump and Hillary representing looters/moochers
    Politicians for Rats
    Voters.for Enablers

    This is a fill in the blank metaphor.

    If you don't have a Road Runner why are you settling for Snakes and Rats?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 3 years, 6 months ago
    I agree totally that she will make a terrible president. I suspect Sanders would be worse in that he is a true socialist (although he is at least honest about it. I am goint to vote for Trump, in that at least he speaks his mind and you know where he is at- and he runs successful businesses and is a good negotiator.)
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 3 years, 6 months ago
      You know what he wants you to know. He runs looter businesses and when he fails he screws his "partners" to enrich himself.
      (But we have already had this discussion, term2, just had to put in my opinion, too;^)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo