So tell me again why I should vote Republican? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : So tell me again why I should vote Republican?


certifiedfunds
06-28-2012, 19:34
Folks here have said over and over that they SCOTUS was the real issue and that for this reason, above all else, Romney must be supported because he will give us better court appointments.

Today, a W appointee was the swing vote in upholding Obamacare and now the Republicans are using this as a rally cry for the election, so that it can be repealed. :rofl:Sorry but if anyone actually believes this will be repealed :rofl:really is the only response I can come up with.

So, tell me again why I should vote for Romney?

LASTRESORT20
06-28-2012, 19:40
Forget about it Lefty....just vote for berry and enjoy your` self....as long as you can. :)

The Machinist
06-28-2012, 19:54
Forget about it Lefty....just vote for berry and enjoy your` self....as long as you can. :)
Seriously, what is the thrust of the argument you're making here? Your loyalty to the GOP got you nothing but a major assault on your liberty today.

jlavallee
06-28-2012, 19:55
Don't mind LASTRESORT20, the ones who still haven't woken up (especially after today) like to go bahhhh.

certifiedfunds
06-28-2012, 19:58
Forget about it Lefty....just vote for berry and enjoy your` self....as long as you can. :)

Lefty? :rofl::rofl::rofl:

And you're planning to vote for a MA gun control liberal who wrote the template for Obamacare?

Yeah, I'm the Lefty :rofl:

lancesorbenson
06-28-2012, 19:58
Forget about it Lefty....just vote for berry and enjoy your` self....as long as you can. :)

Certified a lefty? Good stuff. Next you'll tell us Romney's a conservative. Methinks your political compass may be off.

BTW--the conclave is listening.

jakebrake
06-28-2012, 19:59
is ron enjoying is unconstitutional social security check? just curious. don't worry. do all the ron paul write ins you can. when that genius in the white house gets re-elected by one point, give yourselves a mental high five, knowing....you won

certifiedfunds
06-28-2012, 20:00
is ron enjoying is unconstitutional social security check? just curious. don't worry. do all the ron paul write ins you can. when that genius in the white house gets re-elected by one point, give yourselves a mental high five, knowing....you won

Maybe, just maybe you could answer my original question? :wavey:

GAFinch
06-28-2012, 20:02
Though the decision wasn't ideal, limits were permanently placed on the Commerce Clause. Coercion to limit state sovereignty was curtailed. Democrats were just publicly handed the largest tax increase in history.

certifiedfunds
06-28-2012, 20:05
Though the decision wasn't ideal,


That's an interesting way to describe it. Creative, I'll give you that.

jlavallee
06-28-2012, 20:05
is ron enjoying is unconstitutional social security check? just curious. don't worry. do all the ron paul write ins you can. when that genius in the white house gets re-elected by one point, give yourselves a mental high five, knowing....you won

He paid for it. Spending your own money as you see fit is part of logic. He does however not participate in the special benefits like the congress plan.

You follow the GOP off the cliff, they're almost as much to blame as the Democrats but hey, say baaaaahhhhh all the way.

certifiedfunds
06-28-2012, 20:05
is ron enjoying is unconstitutional social security check? just curious. don't worry. do all the ron paul write ins you can. when that genius in the white house gets re-elected by one point, give yourselves a mental high five, knowing....you won

Do you think Ron Paul would appoint a Justice who would vote to uphold Obamacare?

Ruble Noon
06-28-2012, 20:09
Lefty? :rofl::rofl::rofl:

And you're planning to vote for a MA gun control liberal who wrote the template for Obamacare?

Yeah, I'm the Lefty :rofl:

You've gotta' be a lefty if you don't like the gun banning liberal. It's like a rule or somethin', maybe even state law.

jakebrake
06-28-2012, 20:09
Do you think Ron Paul would appoint a Justice who would vote to uphold Obamacare?

i don't know. neither do you, neither does he. welcome to the real world. you and the maybe 3% want to do a write in, that's fine. but when he doesn't win no one wants to hear the vast right wing conspiracy bullcrap. he ran, i voted for him in the primary. he lost. i live in reality.

certifiedfunds
06-28-2012, 20:11
i don't know. neither do you, neither does he. welcome to the real world. you and the maybe 3% want to do a write in, that's fine. but when he doesn't win no one wants to hear the vast right wing conspiracy bullcrap. he ran, i voted for him in the primary. he lost. i live in reality.

Oh, I think we both know:whistling:

jakebrake
06-28-2012, 20:16
Oh, I think we both know:whistling:

no, we don't. he has shown just how hypocritical he is by collecting social security.

he has less than a snowballs chance, and, if whether you choose to accept it or not, deep down, you know it.

GLOCK17DB9
06-28-2012, 20:18
Because its your Republican duty er I mean your American responsibility. :supergrin:

certifiedfunds
06-28-2012, 20:19
no, we don't. he has shown just how hypocritical he is by collecting social security.

he has less than a snowballs chance, and, if whether you choose to accept it or not, deep down, you know it.

How is Paul hypocritical?

I agree he has no chance. My question at the front end of this thread is why should I vote for Romney.

Ideas?

G29Reload
06-28-2012, 20:21
Folks here have said over and over that they SCOTUS was the real issue and that for this reason, above all else, Romney must be supported because he will give us better court appointments.

Today, a W appointee was the swing vote in upholding Obamacare and now the Republicans are using this as a rally cry for the election, so that it can be repealed. :rofl:Sorry but if anyone actually believes this will be repealed :rofl:really is the only response I can come up with.

So, tell me again why I should vote for Romney?

This argument is a chimera. Both Left and Right throughout history (yes, even FDR and Truman) made appointments with Justices who became turncoats. For whatever reason, whether stealth agenda, or the influence of other justices, or change of heart, it happens.

Bush I gave us Clarence Thomas.

He also gave us Souter.

Many justices have lied over time.

So, your description is not apt at all.

There are two guys running.

Obama created this garbage and is thrilled.
Mittens specifically said he dismantle it starting day one.

So, its not even close. It's not about electing Mittens, its about firing BHO. Mitt has committed strongly, including again today in specifics.

There is no question of who to vote for. Unless you want to double down.

As for Mitt and the Judiciary, you know Hatch will have his ear. Odds heavily in favor of a conservative judge.

But no, no one is immune from trickery. The Roberts thing is also bizarre and completely unexpected.

greentriple
06-28-2012, 20:29
What I find fascinating is when a SCJ does what the constitution mandates, that is be non-partisan and vote as he believes the Constitution requires, wrong or right, he's lambasted by those who only want a "neutral" Court when it decides in their political ideological favor.

Justices should be non-partisan, that is how the Constitution defined them!


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

jakebrake
06-28-2012, 20:30
How is Paul hypocritical?

I agree he has no chance. My question at the front end of this thread is why should I vote for Romney.

Ideas?

because he is our only shot at getting this crap dealt with. no one can afford for this to happen. the economy will not be able to handle this hit. period. obama has told everyone point blank, he will not repeal this. romney? you got a 50/50 shot. will romney's scotus picks be conservative? compared to the 2 obama picks we've seen, they can't be much worse. romney understands how to make money, obama knows how to spend ours

as far as being a hypocrite, you cannot talk about a flawed unconstitutional system, such as social security, while they are sending you a check once a month for benefits. it pretty much reeks of bravo sierra when you do

Ruble Noon
06-28-2012, 20:32
This argument is a chimera. Both Left and Right throughout history (yes, even FDR and Truman) made appointments with Justices who became turncoats. For whatever reason, whether stealth agenda, or the influence of other justices, or change of heart, it happens.

Bush I gave us Clarence Thomas.

He also gave us Souter.

Many justices have lied over time.

So, your description is not apt at all.

There are two guys running.

Obama created this garbage and is thrilled.
Mittens specifically said he dismantle it starting day one.

So, its not even close. It's not about electing Mittens, its about firing BHO. Mitt has committed strongly, including again today in specifics.

There is no question of who to vote for. Unless you want to double down.

As for Mitt and the Judiciary, you know Hatch will have his ear. Odds heavily in favor of a conservative judge.

But no, no one is immune from trickery. The Roberts thing is also bizarre and completely unexpected.

Not really

I'm not shocked at all that a government that gives one person the power of life and death over its citizens, a power that most of you cheered for BTW, would decide that they can force you to buy anything they want you to buy.

Hopefully this illegitimate ruling by our overlords will wake the people from their Bush/ Obama derangement syndrome and to the fact that the left/ right paradigm is false. Instead, it is a matter of the government vs. the people.

jlavallee
06-28-2012, 20:33
There is no question of who to vote for. Unless you want to double down.


Yes, voting for the left/right BS will be doubling down on flawed logic at best and more aptly, lack of logic.

Unfortunately, the sheep keep going baahhhh.

jakebrake
06-28-2012, 20:37
man, the tin foil is flying, huh?

QNman
06-28-2012, 21:34
One word: Heller.

We lost today. But tomorrow is another day. I'll still take four more Robert's over another Kagan or "wise Latina".

HarlDane
06-28-2012, 21:50
At the end of the day, I'll take Roberts and Alito over Kagen and Sotomayor every time. I'ts not ideal, but it's better than the alternative.

evlbruce
06-28-2012, 22:07
I agree that in no uncertain terms this decision has guaranteed that we will have Obamacare and any new powers Congress can think up for itself.

This is "winning" in a Charlie Sheen sense.

podwich
06-28-2012, 22:15
Democrats were just publicly handed the largest tax increase in history.

So I don't have to pay it if I'm not a Democrat?

I care much less about who looks good or bad on the political scene than I care about government's intrusion into my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

427
06-28-2012, 22:17
How is Paul hypocritical?

I agree he has no chance. My question at the front end of this thread is why should I vote for Romney.

Ideas?

Why aren't you chastising Paul for doing the very thing you're always beating the drum about, Social Security?

To answer your question, to get obama out of office.

Blast
06-28-2012, 22:35
https://i.chzbgr.com/completestore/12/6/28/HZ1jgSRhuk2L-1XYx2hl0A2.jpg

G29Reload
06-28-2012, 23:48
Yes, voting for the left/right BS will be doubling down on flawed logic at best and more aptly, lack of logic.


Actually, it would be akin to mental illness to suggest that there's anything but 2 guys in the picture. There IS no other choice. You go with the guy who brought the pain, or the one that says he's gonna dismantle it.

YOu fire the guy who;s in, or you keep him.

That's the game we've got. You vote for one, the other, stay home or write in someone from, say, Mars or gary johnson, who both have about the same chance.

There are no other options.

certifiedfunds
06-28-2012, 23:54
Why aren't you chastising Paul for doing the very thing you're always beating the drum about, Social Security?



Because he isn't here.

To answer your question, to get obama out of office.

Now that you've seen the SCOTUS ruling, what do you think that will accomplish, exactly?

certifiedfunds
06-28-2012, 23:55
https://i.chzbgr.com/completestore/12/6/28/HZ1jgSRhuk2L-1XYx2hl0A2.jpg

Big government shall be yours. Thanks Republicans.

427
06-29-2012, 00:10
Because he isn't here. So you're not upset that you're paying for his Social Security benefits despite all of your numerous threads ranting and raving?



Now that you've seen the SCOTUS ruling, what do you think that will accomplish, exactly?

Getting Obama out of office or are you another Paul supporter who hasn't come out of the closet?

certifiedfunds
06-29-2012, 00:10
One word: Heller.



Q - It's bedtime. Try not to think about how the unlimited power to tax just handed to the Congress might be used to compromise your RTKBA in the future.

You might not sleep.

certifiedfunds
06-29-2012, 00:13
So you're not upset that you're paying for his Social Security benefits despite all of your numerous threads ranting and raving?


Sure I am. Where did I say I wasn't?

Is it that you're one of those pseudo-conservatives who defends Social Security? Or are you just trying to find Paul in a compromising position?

Getting Obama out of office or are you another Paul supporter who hasn't come out of the closet? What do you now think you'll accomplish, exactly? (asking you for a second time)

If you've read any of my posts and think I support Obama in any way, you've got comprehension problems.

427
06-29-2012, 00:44
Sure I am. Where did I say I wasn't? You rant and rave almost every time social security is brought up. You've been strangely silent on the issue of Paul collecting Social Security.


Is it that you're one of those pseudo-conservatives who defends Social Security? Or are you just trying to find Paul in a compromising position?The compromising position of him or at least his followers claiming that he's all about small gov't, campaigned on small gov't, yet he participates/collects in a big gov't entitlement that's bankrupting the country?

What do you now think you'll accomplish, exactly?

If you've read any of my posts and think I support Obama in any way, you've got comprehension problems.

Either you're going to help fire him or you'll help to keep him in. It's that simple. If you can't/won't comprehend that truism, then I don't know what to say.

So your choices are:

-Voting for Mittens who actually has a chance of beating Obama. If mittens gets in, the Senate will probably go, too. There's a chance of undoing a lot of things. No chance if Obama stays in office.

-Voting for Johnson, which has about as better chance of being pres than your dude Paul, and that's not saying much. What would that vote do? What?

-Voting for Obama. You've seen what he's done. I already know the type of people who support Obama, Communist Party USA for one, and the kind of people he's already appointed. If you're cool with that, vote for him.

-Staying home. What right do people have to complain when they refuse to vote? eff them!

Make your choice, vote however you want or don't.

certifiedfunds
06-29-2012, 00:51
I asked you a question. Which are you?


Originally Posted by certifiedfunds http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=19143015#post19143015)
Is it that you're one of those pseudo-conservatives who defends Social Security? Or are you just trying to find Paul in a compromising position?


You rant and rave almost every time social security is brought up. You've been strangely silent on the issue of Paul collecting Social Security.




No, I haven't. Search my posts. Paul is wrong on this one.

However, he is the only candidate who would like to and has presented a plan to end it. On the other hand, Romney stood on a stage and debated Rick Perry over which one of them loved Social Security more.


The compromising position of him or at least his followers claiming that he's all about small gov't, campaigned on small gov't, yet he participates/collects in a big gov't entitlement that's bankrupting the country?
He does and he did and he's wrong for it. Which of the candidates presented a plan to end it?

Either you're going to help fire him or you'll help to keep him in. It's that simple. If you can't/won't comprehend that truism, then I don't know what to say.

So your choices are:

-Voting for Mittens who actually has a chance of beating Obama. If mittens gets in, the Senate will probably go, too. There's a chance of undoing a lot of things. No chance if Obama stays in office.

-Voting for Johnson, which has about as better chance of being pres than your dude Paul, and that's not saying much. What would that vote do? What?

-Voting for Obama. You've seen what he's done. I already know the type of people who support Obama, Communist Party USA for one, and the kind of people he's already appointed. If you're cool with that, vote for him.

-Staying home. What right do people have to complain when they refuse to vote? eff them!

Make your choice, vote however you want or don't.
I've made my choice. I won't vote for a gun-grabbing liberal from the northeast. Congratulations on your choice to vote for a gun-grabbing liberal from the northeast.

BTW, I asked you another question. Here it is again for the third time:


Originally Posted by certifiedfunds http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=19143015#post19143015)
What do you now think you'll accomplish, exactly?
Do you answer questions in a conversation or just avoid them and ASK questions?

427
06-29-2012, 01:01
I asked you a question. Which are you? I'm not for any program. Feel free to label me however you want, I don't care. I'm sure others don't care either.

No, I haven't. Search my posts. Paul is wrong on this one. Yes he is.

On the other hand, Romney stood on a stage and debated Rick Perry over which one of them loved Social Security more. I agree with you.

However, he is the only candidate who would like to and has presented a plan to end it.

He does and he did and he's wrong for it. Which of the candidates presented a plan to end it?You seriously think Paul is going to end a program he's drawing benefits from?! Yeah, right! He's a hypocrite for saying he's against it yet drawing benefits from it.

I've made my choice. I won't vote for a gun-grabbing liberal from the northeast. If you've already made the choice of not voting for Mittens, then everything said in support is a moot point.

Congratulations on your choice to vote for a gun-grabbing liberal from the northeast.Whatever.

BTW, I asked you another question. Here it is again for the third time:I answered your question in the previous post.

Do you answer questions in a conversation or just avoid them and ASK questions? I'm playing your game.

panzer1
06-29-2012, 01:01
Folks here have said over and over that they SCOTUS was the real issue and that for this reason, above all else, Romney must be supported because he will give us better court appointments.

Today, a W appointee was the swing vote in upholding Obamacare and now the Republicans are using this as a rally cry for the election, so that it can be repealed. :rofl:Sorry but if anyone actually believes this will be repealed :rofl:really is the only response I can come up with.

So, tell me again why I should vote for Romney?I guess if you like the USA becoming a commie state then go vote for that A-Hole Obama! I don't like Romney that much myself but I would NEVER vote for that POS Obama if you put a gun to my head!! If you think its bad now just wait & see what that commie will do with 4 more years!!! GOD help us all!! Wake up!

panzer1
06-29-2012, 01:04
Lefty? :rofl::rofl::rofl:

And you're planning to vote for a MA gun control liberal who wrote the template for Obamacare?

Yeah, I'm the Lefty :rofl:Anyone but Obama!

panzer1
06-29-2012, 01:15
At the end of the day, I'll take Roberts and Alito over Kagen and Sotomayor every time. I'ts not ideal, but it's better than the alternative.Kagen? Is that not Fred Flintstone? Sure looks like him. LOL

panzer1
06-29-2012, 01:17
I agree that in no uncertain terms this decision has guaranteed that we will have Obamacare and any new powers Congress can think up for itself.

This is "winning" in a Charlie Sheen sense.You bet! No 16zo drinks for you.

panzer1
06-29-2012, 01:21
Where is Patrick J Buchanan when you need him? I would vote for him in a heart beat.He would stop all this commie crap in a NY min!

TangoFoxtrot
06-29-2012, 02:07
Folks here have said over and over that they SCOTUS was the real issue and that for this reason, above all else, Romney must be supported because he will give us better court appointments.

Today, a W appointee was the swing vote in upholding Obamacare and now the Republicans are using this as a rally cry for the election, so that it can be repealed. :rofl:Sorry but if anyone actually believes this will be repealed :rofl:really is the only response I can come up with.

So, tell me again why I should vote for Romney?

Romney and the republican party is done. ..actually committed suicide by trying to axe Obama in the back every chance they could.

Narkcop
06-29-2012, 04:29
This argument is a chimera. Both Left and Right throughout history (yes, even FDR and Truman) made appointments with Justices who became turncoats. For whatever reason, whether stealth agenda, or the influence of other justices, or change of heart, it happens.

Bush I gave us Clarence Thomas.

He also gave us Souter.

Many justices have lied over time.

So, your description is not apt at all.

There are two guys running.

Obama created this garbage and is thrilled.
Mittens specifically said he dismantle it starting day one.

So, its not even close. It's not about electing Mittens, its about firing BHO. Mitt has committed strongly, including again today in specifics.

There is no question of who to vote for. Unless you want to double down.

As for Mitt and the Judiciary, you know Hatch will have his ear. Odds heavily in favor of a conservative judge.

But no, no one is immune from trickery. The Roberts thing is also bizarre and completely unexpected.

:goodpost:

Bren
06-29-2012, 04:35
Seriously, what is the thrust of the argument you're making here? Your loyalty to the GOP got you nothing but a major assault on your liberty today.

So instead of the swing vote justice, you'll be voting for the party that authored, voted for and signed into law the very law you are objecting to.

That can't seem like a smart choice to you.

No, don't bother explaining how you are standing on principle by casting a vote for Obama.

Bren
06-29-2012, 04:37
Big government shall be yours. Thanks Republicans.

So you at least recognize you have only 2 choices. Since you surely get the big(ger) government with the democrats as well, Romney once again become the only choice.

Cavalry Doc
06-29-2012, 04:43
Folks here have said over and over that they SCOTUS was the real issue and that for this reason, above all else, Romney must be supported because he will give us better court appointments.

Today, a W appointee was the swing vote in upholding Obamacare and now the Republicans are using this as a rally cry for the election, so that it can be repealed. :rofl:Sorry but if anyone actually believes this will be repealed :rofl:really is the only response I can come up with.

So, tell me again why I should vote for Romney?

The SCOTUS has been my number one issue. And Roberts has turned out to be a major disappointment.

Got any conservative senators you can vote for? Maybe that's a better place to focus this time around.

I still think Barry is going to appoint worse judges. And I would rather have the cabinet shuffled and several current cabinet members gone. Barry in a second term sounds like a bad idea to me. Oh well, I'm preparing for that possibility.

Glock30Eric
06-29-2012, 05:17
Folks here have said over and over that they SCOTUS was the real issue and that for this reason, above all else, Romney must be supported because he will give us better court appointments.

Today, a W appointee was the swing vote in upholding Obamacare and now the Republicans are using this as a rally cry for the election, so that it can be repealed. :rofl:Sorry but if anyone actually believes this will be repealed :rofl:really is the only response I can come up with.

So, tell me again why I should vote for Romney?

There is not one good reason to vote Romney, really none. It is a set up for us to vote either Obama or Romney, but both faces are same. Therefore, you have a choice to change the political system by voting other than D and R. Yes I know we don't have much of chance to win President through third party, however, you could stand up and be proud to say this, "I did my part to vote someone that truly represents my position. I refuse to play a game of lesser of two evils. Please take a look at what you have done to us; thank a lot to you."

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

The Machinist
06-29-2012, 05:31
So instead of the swing vote justice, you'll be voting for the party that authored, voted for and signed into law the very law you are objecting to.

That can't seem like a smart choice to you.

No, don't bother explaining how you are standing on principle by casting a vote for Obama.
First off, Romney was the principle author of Obamacare, whether you admit that to yourself or not. Pelosi and Obama have mentioned it several times, as did other Republicans in the primary debates.

Secondly, after this latest ruling, the singular reason you built your party loyalty on was just thrown out the window.

Lastly, I'm not voting for Obama, because I don't vote for liberals. That's the difference between you and me.

tcruse
06-29-2012, 05:57
Certainly the decision is a little different than what I had expected or wanted. However, there is one thing that can not be denied, the real fix is a change in the people that are elected. Like, many of you it is hard to find a perfect candidate, however, I hope that the vast majority of the voters agree that the current leadership must go. Just because ObamaCare is legal under the constitution, does not mean that it is a good or helpful law. The upcoming elections will set the direction of our country and possibility the world. So, make sure that you vote when the time comes.

Cavalry Doc
06-29-2012, 06:08
First off, Romney was the principle author of Obamacare, whether you admit that to yourself or not. Pelosi and Obama have mentioned it several times, as did other Republicans in the primary debates.

Secondly, after this latest ruling, the singular reason you built your party loyalty on was just thrown out the window.

Lastly, I'm not voting for Obama, because I don't vote for liberals. That's the difference between you and me.

Bottom line, it's not just Romney. He's a POS too. It's all the people that are radical socialists and fascists that are in the positions of power that Barry brought to Washington with him. I'd really not want to see Barry in a second term. He will go for a lot more than he's gone for.

Either way, what I want doesn't mean much evidently. So I will get ready for either to be president this time next year, and I'm preparing for a bumpy ride.

Just a couple tips, get EVERYONE IN YOUR FAMILY a carry license. Take a few more family outings to the range for some steel matches and plinking. Times will get bad, I expect crime to get worse. Keep a low profile, as in don't flash wealth. Trade in the luxury cars for modestly priced vehicles, don't wear fancy clothes, don't wear expensive watches. Look like you are barely scraping by too. Reinforce your home's physical security, and talk to your family about how to handle situation. Masaad Ayoob is required reading in my home. Buy stuff, and lots of it.

Be safe out there.

PocketProtector
06-29-2012, 06:26
So instead of the swing vote justice, you'll be voting for the party that authored, voted for and signed into law the very law you are objecting to.

That can't seem like a smart choice to you.

No, don't bother explaining how you are standing on principle by casting a vote for Obama.

^^^^^ this!!!

How quickly we forget !! Who and how this bill got shoved up our keister. Sure, Roberts hammered the final nail but the coffin only was there because OMao, Pelosi and Reid passed this bill with clearly underhanded tactics and bribery because they had huge majorities in both houses.
The D's erected the whole structure and have no idea WTF Roberts is thinking. Went left if the lefties. That's akin to Ginsburg voting Constitutionally.
Something smells.

aircarver
06-29-2012, 06:48
First, we throw out the commies.

Then we throw out the Rinos.....

.

eracer
06-29-2012, 06:50
Actually, it would be akin to mental illness to suggest that there's anything but 2 guys in the picture. There IS no other choice. You go with the guy who brought the pain, or the one that says he's gonna dismantle it.

YOu fire the guy who;s in, or you keep him.

That's the game we've got. You vote for one, the other, stay home or write in someone from, say, Mars or gary johnson, who both have about the same chance.

There are no other options.You and all the other Demopublicans admit to not doing all you could to see to it that Ron Paul was the Republican nominee in this election, and I'll admit that I'm going to stick my hand in the garbage disposal and push the Romney button come November.

Cavalry Doc
06-29-2012, 06:55
You and all the other Demopublicans admit to not doing all you could to see to it that Ron Paul was the Republican nominee in this election, and I'll admit that I'm going to stick my hand in the garbage disposal and push the Romney button come November.

Fair enough. I did not help or support Ron Paul to be the nominee. I didn't support or help Romney either.

I'd have taken any if the others, including Paul as the nominee with less heartburn than Romney.

maxsnafu
06-29-2012, 07:46
First, we throw out the commies.

Then we throw out the Rinos.....

.

...and when exactly will this happen?

aircarver
06-29-2012, 07:56
Starts with the next election.

We crippled the commies in 2010.

In 2012, we toss 'em out.

.

certifiedfunds
06-29-2012, 08:07
Got any conservative senators you can vote for? Maybe that's a better place to focus this time around.



I have Mary "Louisiana Purchase" Landrieu and David Vitter. Not up for re-election. We mobilized the last 2 elections to get ride of Mary but she has the New Orleans voter fraud machine working for her and its pretty much impossible, even if she gets fewer votes than her opponent.

The Machinist
06-29-2012, 08:35
I have Mary "Louisiana Purchase" Landrieu and David Vitter. Not up for re-election. We mobilized the last 2 elections to get ride of Mary but she has the New Orleans voter fraud machine working for her and its pretty much impossible, even if she gets fewer votes than her opponent.
If you don't like it, just change the system, and vote them out. That's how our republic works, right? :whistling:

That's what all the GOP faithful tell me when I complain about not having representation, and having my money taken from me.

Bren
06-29-2012, 08:38
First off, Romney was the principle author of Obamacare, whether you admit that to yourself or not. Pelosi and Obama have mentioned it several times, as did other Republicans in the primary debates.

Secondly, after this latest ruling, the singular reason you built your party loyalty on was just thrown out the window.

Lastly, I'm not voting for Obama, because I don't vote for liberals. That's the difference between you and me.

I have no party loyalty and have never claimed to, but you ARE voting for Obama, even if you do it by staying home on election day.

I don't like Romeny, but I dislike him less tthan I dislike Obama and every action an eligible voter takes on election day, no matter how they vote or whether they vote at all, supports either Obama or Romney. You can write in Fred Flintstone if you want, but that only amounts to a vote for either Romney or Obama, whichever one you like the LEAST.

The Machinist
06-29-2012, 08:38
Just a couple tips, get EVERYONE IN YOUR FAMILY a carry license. Take a few more family outings to the range for some steel matches and plinking. Times will get bad, I expect crime to get worse. Keep a low profile, as in don't flash wealth. Trade in the luxury cars for modestly priced vehicles, don't wear fancy clothes, don't wear expensive watches. Look like you are barely scraping by too. Reinforce your home's physical security, and talk to your family about how to handle situation. Masaad Ayoob is required reading in my home. Buy stuff, and lots of it.

Be safe out there.
Words to live by, good doctor. I'm doing my best to keep on keeping on, and to make sure my family doesn't end up beaten and broken by the machinations of this government.

The Machinist
06-29-2012, 08:39
I have no party loyalty and have never claimed to, but you ARE voting for Obama, even if you do it by staying home on election day.

I don't like Romeny, but I dislike him less tthan I dislike Obama and every action an eligible voter takes on election day, no matter how they vote or whether they vote at all, supports either Obama or Romney. You can write in Fred Flintstone if you want, but that only amounts to a vote for either Romney or Obama, whichever one you like the LEAST.
Did anyone ever teach you about the electoral college? Presidents aren't voted in by a direct democracy.

Bren
06-29-2012, 08:39
If you don't like it, just change the system, and vote them out. That's how our republic works, right? :whistling:

Because, given the time and numbers of supporters necesssary to do that, the only possible outcomes will be that I (a) fail or (b) succeed in the long run, after I am dead. Neither of those outcomes helps me.

certifiedfunds
06-29-2012, 08:41
If you don't like it, just change the system, and vote them out. That's how our republic works, right? :whistling:

That's what all the GOP faithful tell me when I complain about not having representation, and having my money taken from me.

In Mary's first election the black churches in Orleans Parish bussed dead people to the polls and gave them lunch.

lancesorbenson
06-29-2012, 08:54
In Mary's first election the black churches in Orleans Parish bussed dead people to the polls and gave them lunch.

If you're ever in New Orleans on a Sunday morning, drive up Earhart Blvd. through Hollygrove. The black "mega churches" are packed and you can always tell which car belongs to the preacher. Think imported German sedan.

My wife did some pro bono work for a very small black church in that area and we went For a Sunday service. Talk about surreal. They had about a dozen people there in a small, run-down building and the preacher was incredible. His message was really good, preaching self-reliance and a color blind attitude. When we left I told my wife that he better start blaming whitey or that church will be gone in a year.

Bren
06-29-2012, 09:00
Did anyone ever teach you about the electoral college? Presidents aren't voted in by a direct democracy.

Apparently nobody taught you, or else you've created some fantasy world where this election doesn't work like the ones before it.

Fred Hansen
06-29-2012, 09:10
A funny thing happened on the way to the Forum... Citizens were arguing whether it was better to vote for Janus, or was it better to vote for Janus?

http://www.pakalertpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Janus-dimon21.jpg

:upeyes:

GRIMLET
06-29-2012, 09:17
In Mary's first election the black churches in Orleans Parish bussed dead people to the polls and gave them lunch.

Didn't the voter fraud become public after the election?
I seem to remember she was able to keep the win without another vote.

certifiedfunds
06-29-2012, 09:50
Didn't the voter fraud become public after the election?
I seem to remember she was able to keep the win without another vote.

Yup. Vs Woody Jenkins. You can google it.

There is no more solid corrupt democratic machine than in NOLA.

certifiedfunds
06-29-2012, 09:51
If you're ever in New Orleans on a Sunday morning, drive up Earhart Blvd. through Hollygrove. The black "mega churches" are packed and you can always tell which car belongs to the preacher. Think imported German sedan.

My wife did some pro bono work for a very small black church in that area and we went For a Sunday service. Talk about surreal. They had about a dozen people there in a small, run-down building and the preacher was incredible. His message was really good, preaching self-reliance and a color blind attitude. When we left I told my wife that he better start blaming whitey or that church will be gone in a year.

As you know, the black preachers in NOLA are a major seat of political power. Those church vans rack up a lot of miles on election day and smell like hotdogs.

kirgi08
06-29-2012, 10:06
Yup. Vs Woody Jenkins. You can google it.

There is no more solid corrupt democratic machine than in NOLA.

Detroit Michigan.'08.

beforeobamabans
06-29-2012, 10:30
First, we throw out the commies.

Then we throw out the Rinos.....

.

This has proven to be the 'impossible dream' of 40 years of GOP votes....

lancesorbenson
06-29-2012, 10:33
As you know, the black preachers in NOLA are a major seat of political power. Those church vans rack up a lot of miles on election day and smell like hotdogs.

Unfortunately the huge influx of Yankee hipsters does nothing to change the landscape politically. Middle-class white, college-educated 20-somethings and the largely black lower-class government dependents vote the same way, strangely. At least the latter group is voting in their own perceived self-interests rather than out of do-gooder ignorance.

maxsnafu
06-29-2012, 10:47
Though the decision wasn't ideal,

This reminds me of that old gag "Other than the death of your husband, what did you think of the play Mrs. Lincoln?"

G29Reload
06-29-2012, 11:23
Not really


As usual you bring the nothing.

Looks like I'm upheld. :rofl:

G29Reload
06-29-2012, 11:27
First off, Romney was the principle author of Obamacare, whether you admit that to yourself or not.

ITs that its NOT relevant that counts.

That was a state thing, Fed VERY different.


Lastly, I'm not voting for Obama, because I don't vote for liberals. That's the difference between you and me.

You are voting for him by staying home or voting for anyone other than romney.

This election is about firing zero and nothing else. and its like rubbing a dogs nose in his own poop, here romney, see this? happens to you if you don't put it back on the rails. now govern..correctly! or else.

We roll up a newspaper in the next election if you don't and it aint gonna be pretty.

Ruble Noon
06-29-2012, 13:53
As usual you bring the nothing.

Looks like I'm upheld. :rofl:
You were the fool that thought it would be struck down.

G29Reload
06-29-2012, 15:40
You were the fool that thought it would be struck down.

One justice going off the reservation does not a fool make.

New facts on the ground: We have a traitor on the bench.


But that's also what I was elaborating on that you disagreed with on no grounds whatsoever...because you don't have any.

So, OVERRULED.

So have a seat before i sentence you to contempt of Mayhem.

NEver mind, I'm doing it anyway. 3 days of baloney sandwiches for you!

I'm your judge. :)

Woofie
06-29-2012, 17:29
Do we have enough Louisiana residents on the board to start a secession movement yet?

certifiedfunds
06-29-2012, 17:35
Do we have enough Louisiana residents on the board to start a secession movement yet?

We met last night. Where were you?

Had boiled crabs and cold beer. We voted on something around midnight but no one can remember what it was.

Apparently it passed because Boudreaux had a new tattoo this morning and his catahoula is expecting puppies.

Woofie
06-29-2012, 17:41
How's Boudreaux expect to take care of all those puppies?

certifiedfunds
06-29-2012, 17:45
How's Boudreaux expect to take care of all those puppies?

He's worried. Says Clotile gonna make him sleep outside with the catahoula

Woofie
06-29-2012, 17:56
Maybe Earl and Pearl will take them. They can't have no puppies of their own.

fortyofforty
06-29-2012, 18:20
Will all those new amnestied aliens that Obama is allowing to stay in this country have to pay these fines? I doubt it. They'll just get a free ride. I'd like to see Odumbo try to collect Obamacare fine money from his beloved amnestied aliens.

kirgi08
06-29-2012, 18:20
We met last night. Where were you?

Had boiled crabs and cold beer. We voted on something around midnight but no one can remember what it was.

Apparently it passed because Boudreaux had a new tattoo this morning and his catahoula is expecting puppies.

:impatient:

Ya seen that Jindal thread?.'08. :dunno:

G17Jake
06-29-2012, 19:05
Because one of two people will be sworn in this January. One is a communist, the other is a liberal capitalist.

I had a Ron Paul sign in my yard during the 2008 primary. I am quite sure he would nominate good candidates for the SCOTUS. Problem is.... it is the President that nominates people for the SCOTUS.....

Ruble Noon
06-29-2012, 20:33
Will all those new amnestied aliens that Obama is allowing to stay in this country have to pay these fines? I doubt it. They'll just get a free ride. I'd like to see Odumbo try to collect Obamacare fine money from his beloved amnestied aliens.

Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS). Bill: PPACA; Page: 317-337

Read more: http://www.atr.org/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes-a6996#ixzz1zEwjaSYi

QNman
06-29-2012, 21:23
Q - It's bedtime. Try not to think about how the unlimited power to tax just handed to the Congress might be used to compromise your RTKBA in the future.

You might not sleep.

Oh, I've thought about it, my friend. And I don't disagree with you. In fact I share your concerns. One more reason for another Alito, eh?

QNman
06-29-2012, 21:26
Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS). Bill: PPACA; Page: 317-337

Read more: http://www.atr.org/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes-a6996#ixzz1zEwjaSYi


As stated... Yet one more tool to steal from the productive to offer more government candy to the non-productive. I fear we have crossed the apex. The fight back to the other side may be impossible, but it is a noble fight which requires good men with strong shoulders to shove harder still.

fortyofforty
06-30-2012, 06:24
I am still reeling from Thursday. Is 50% the best we can get when we make Supreme Court appointments? I mean, we got Clarence Thomas and David Souter. We got Antonin Scalia, William Rehnquist, Sandra Day O'Connor, and Anthony Kennedy. We got Samuel Alito and John Roberts. Come on! It's better than zero, as we get with the Natsos and their appointees, but could be better. There was never any question on which side Sotomayor (Obama), Kagan (Obama), Ginzburg (Clinton) and Breyer (Clinton) would fall, was there?

Ruble Noon
06-30-2012, 07:00
I am still reeling from Thursday. Is 50% the best we can get when we make Supreme Court appointments? I mean, we got Clarence Thomas and David Souter. We got Antonin Scalia, William Rehnquist, Sandra Day O'Connor, and Anthony Kennedy. We got Samuel Alito and John Roberts. Come on! It's better than zero, as we get with the Natsos and their appointees, but could be better. There was never any question on which side Sotomayor (Obama), Kagan (Obama), Ginzburg (Clinton) and Breyer (Clinton) would fall, was there?

The SCROTUS is just another political wing of the monster.

The so-called system of checks and balances is a farce and a fraud; the reality is that all three branches of the federal government work together to conspire against the taxpayers for the benefit of the state and all of its appendages. As Judge Andrew Napalitano wrote in his book, The Constitution in Exile (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1595550704?ie=UTF8&tag=lewrockwell&linkCode=xm2&camp=1789&creativeASIN=1595550704), the Supreme Court failed to rule a single federal law unconstitutional from 1937 to 1995. The Court is essentially a political rubber stamp operation with all of its black-robed ceremony being nothing more than part of the circus that is employed to dupe the public into acquiescing in its dictates.

http://lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo228.html

fortyofforty
06-30-2012, 10:32
The SCROTUS is just another political wing of the monster.

If you look at it a certain way, Justice Robertsís decision makes Constitutional sense. If you believe that the People have the final say over what is and is not Constitutional (over and above even unelected judges), and if you believe that the courts should not always step in between the People and the Constitution, then you can see that, by stepping back, Roberts is saying the People have spoken. The Congress, first the House of Representatives, next the Senate, are the closest to representing the direct will of the People in our government. The Judicial and Executive branches are divorced from the People, far more so than the Legislative branch. Roberts said the People, through their elected representatives, wanted this law. They got what they wanted. Tough. Deal with it.

I personally disagree with the decision because it was not crafted as a tax, was not voted on as a tax, was never sold to the people as a tax, but I can see some logic here. Of course, the four Natso clowns will always side with the ever-growing government and its endless power grabs.

Ruble Noon
06-30-2012, 11:03
If you look at it a certain way, Justice Robertsís decision makes Constitutional sense. If you believe that the People have the final say over what is and is not Constitutional (over and above even unelected judges), and if you believe that the courts should not always step in between the People and the Constitution, then you can see that, by stepping back, Roberts is saying the People have spoken. The Congress, first the House of Representatives, next the Senate, are the closest to representing the direct will of the People in our government. The Judicial and Executive branches are divorced from the People, far more so than the Legislative branch. Roberts said the People, through their elected representatives, wanted this law. They got what they wanted. Tough. Deal with it.

I personally disagree with the decision because it was not crafted as a tax, was not voted on as a tax, was never sold to the people as a tax, but I can see some logic here. Of course, the four Natso clowns will always side with the ever-growing government and its endless power grabs.

Is it the will of the people when one party shuts the other out, bribes, buys votes, breaks laws and rules to pass their agenda?

hogship
06-30-2012, 11:20
So, tell me again why I should vote for Romney?

......because he isn't Obama, and a vote for anyone else, is a vote for Obama.

It's sad, but if you want to hang on to anything "we, the people" can hang on to, and recover what is good about America, Romney is the only choice.

What you're saying about Romney is true........and, he was my very last choice of anyone who sought the GOP nomination.........but, the alternative has clearly shown to have no interest in America, except through his totally revised vision of what he wants America to be.........

I keep holding my nose and voting against the other candidate..........I'll do it once more.

ooc

Cavalry Doc
06-30-2012, 11:48
Words to live by, good doctor. I'm doing my best to keep on keeping on, and to make sure my family doesn't end up beaten and broken by the machinations of this government.

The truly scary part, if you are keeping a low profile, you are 1000 times (guess) more likely to be harmed by a citizen than the government. Things are more likely to get interesting in a bad way when the illusion of government control disappears, and the Police, Firefighters and EMS can't respond to calls. I'm more worried about people that think they are entitled to eat and sleep indoors without paying for it themselves. When the gravy train stops, they'll have to get food somewhere. Things could go tribal rather quickly. And I don't necessarily mean race, but neighborhoods will either band together or be routed. Be prepared to bug in and bug out.

jlavallee
06-30-2012, 11:50
If you look at it a certain way, Justice Robertsís decision makes Constitutional sense. If you believe that the People have the final say over what is and is not Constitutional (over and above even unelected judges), and if you believe that the courts should not always step in between the People and the Constitution, then you can see that, by stepping back, Roberts is saying the People have spoken. The Congress, first the House of Representatives, next the Senate, are the closest to representing the direct will of the People in our government. The Judicial and Executive branches are divorced from the People, far more so than the Legislative branch. Roberts said the People, through their elected representatives, wanted this law. They got what they wanted. Tough. Deal with it.

I personally disagree with the decision because it was not crafted as a tax, was not voted on as a tax, was never sold to the people as a tax, but I can see some logic here. Of course, the four Natso clowns will always side with the ever-growing government and its endless power grabs.

All of what you have said is true of a democracy. We're a republic and that is supposed to mean the minority is protected from the majority. If you want to amend the Constitution, there is a process for that. Ignoring thr process because at one point the president and both houses were democrats is total BS. Again, nothing more than the usual left/right stuff that steals freedom.

jakebrake
06-30-2012, 12:09
......because he isn't Obama, and a vote for anyone else, is a vote for Obama.

It's sad, but if you want to hang on to anything "we, the people" can hang on to, and recover what is good about America, Romney is the only choice.

What you're saying about Romney is true........and, he was my very last choice of anyone who sought the GOP nomination.........but, the alternative has clearly shown to have no interest in America, except through his totally revised vision of what he wants America to be.........

I keep holding my nose and voting against the other candidate..........I'll do it once more.

ooc

pretty much this. he wasn't my last choice in the primaries. he was close, but not last. and i'm at the hold my nose point...again.
sitting this out, or doing a write in are, i think, just what obama is hoping for. he's gonna have the dead and non-otherwise exisatant vote locked up. just needs enough pissed off people to sit at home and pout.

after that, i shudder at the thought of what follows.

jlavallee
06-30-2012, 12:52
pretty much this. he wasn't my last choice in the primaries. he was close, but not last. and i'm at the hold my nose point...again.
sitting this out, or doing a write in are, i think, just what obama is hoping for. he's gonna have the dead and non-otherwise exisatant vote locked up. just needs enough pissed off people to sit at home and pout.

after that, i shudder at the thought of what follows.

Thinking like that is what gets us candidates you have to hold your nose for. That mentality IS the root cause of our problems today so don't ***** amd whine because you're obviously not willing to take a stand.

The GOP establishment wouldn't run a POS like Romney unless it knew there were enough spineless folks to give them some chance. They're willing to risk loosing to Obama because even if mittens doesn't win, they do.

jakebrake
06-30-2012, 13:00
Thinking like that is what gets us candidates you have to hold your nose for. That mentality IS the root cause of our problems today so don't ***** amd whine because you're obviously not willing to take a stand.

The GOP establishment wouldn't run a POS like Romney unless it knew there were enough spineless folks to give them some chance. They're willing to risk loosing to Obama because even if mittens doesn't win, they do.

ok. then stay home or write in ron paul. your choice. but when obama wins again, you lose any and all rights to ***** and whine...is that fair?

i have to hold my nose, because reagan is dead, and DeMint didn't run.

fortyofforty
06-30-2012, 13:12
Is it the will of the people when one party shuts the other out, bribes, buys votes, breaks laws and rules to pass their agenda?

Bribery is illegal (see "Duke" Cunningham (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_%22Duke%22_Cunningham)). Other forms of vote buying, such as earmarks (see Ron Paul (http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/07/ron-pauls-personal-pork-projects.html)), have been used quite extensively on all types of legislation.

I don't like one party shutting out the other party, and the Republicans rarely unify enough to shut out the Democrats, so it's always one direction. But if one party has enough votes in both chambers (60 or more in the Senate, for example), they can do as they please, and with a complicit White House, they control the government. It sucks but that's our system. Checks and balances only carry you so far. That bar is 60 votes in the Senate, and the Natsos had them.

As for breaking laws or breaking rules, those arguments can be made, and any law breaking could and should be prosecuted. If you have evidence of law breaking, Iíd suggest you present it to the proper authorities. Rule breaking should be dealt with by the appropriate Congressional body.

fortyofforty
06-30-2012, 13:22
Thinking like that is what gets us candidates you have to hold your nose for. That mentality IS the root cause of our problems today so don't ***** amd whine because you're obviously not willing to take a stand.

The GOP establishment wouldn't run a POS like Romney unless it knew there were enough spineless folks to give them some chance. They're willing to risk loosing to Obama because even if mittens doesn't win, they do.

So, uh, we should nominate somebody who, um, can't even garner enough votes to win the Republican primary. Or, uh, even one state primary. Yep, that's a winning strategy. :whistling: In election after election, Ron Paul struck out. He was inept. He barely if ever broke the 10% mark. He had just as much chance as everybody else, and he was rejected--soundly--in election after election. Deal with it.

Romney is the nominee. Back Romney. Write in Paul. Vote for Obama (which I suspect is where many so-called Paul supporters really reside anyway). Vote for a third party. Do whatever makes you happy. But if you don't vote for the candidate with the best chance of unseating Obama in November, you are partly to blame if Obama wins another four years of destructive power with no self-control imposed, like the thought of having to win reelection. Remember, as Obama said, ďThis is my last election. After my election, I'll have more flexibility.Ē

jakebrake
06-30-2012, 13:25
^^^^^ pretty much.

i voted for paul in the primary. i'll run through walls of fire to pull the lever for romney, if it'll get rid of obama.

QNman
06-30-2012, 13:30
Thinking like that is what gets us candidates you have to hold your nose for. That mentality IS the root cause of our problems today so don't ***** amd whine because you're obviously not willing to take a stand.

The GOP establishment wouldn't run a POS like Romney unless it knew there were enough spineless folks to give them some chance. They're willing to risk loosing to Obama because even if mittens doesn't win, they do.

For the last time... THERE IS NO GOP "ESTABLISHMENT"! Romney was picked by those who showed up on primary day and asked for the "red" card. The "establishment" gave us Reagan. We selected W - and Romney - ourselves.

NO ONE WILL RECEIVE YOUR MESSAGE! We have met the enemy and he is us.

Gunnut 45/454
06-30-2012, 13:59
certifiedfunds
Do you support freedom or Socialism? Do you believe in the COTUS or that the Government should run every aspect of your life? Do you believe in Obamamoa's future America or do you want the America we should have, free , less Fed Government, free markets, adherence to the COTUS.etc. The choice is clear, vote for Socialism, no freedom, no guns , or vote for freedom , and the rights you have enumerated by the COTUS!:supergrin:

fortyofforty
06-30-2012, 14:20
Hell, I'll even accept a vote AGAINST Eric Holder as a valid reason to vote for Romney. These fine fellas are hoping you don't show up at the polls, or throw away your vote in protest.

http://texasfred.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/King-Samir-Shabazz.jpg
"Go ahead. Write in your vote. Sucka."

jlavallee
06-30-2012, 15:45
Stop holding your nose. If you honestly believe Romney is your best choice then vote for him and continue supporting someone who pushes their views on others. I feel no pity for you when someone like Obama takes liberties you care about.

Or, believe in what America started as... A Republic where it wasn't supposed to matter what your personal decisions were as long as you didn't infringe on someone else.

Just because mittens is a little better on some issues that mean more to you, you're not doing anything but putting off the time were we have total state control. If you believe that you have the right to force your beliefs on others as many on this forum do then you're a lost cause and YOU are the problem so I don't expect you to do anything but support the GOP. If you believe as I do that everyone is entitled to live their life as a free person as long as they don't infringe on anyone else, then have some conviction and stand up for what you believe in regardless of outcome. America lost it's way by following the democratic model and the mob mentality.

If I can't live in America, I can damn well vote for it.

PS. Only one candidate frightened me more than Obama and that was Santorum. I don't see any real difference between mittens and Obama. Two steaming piles isn't choice anyway.

jakebrake
06-30-2012, 15:49
Hell, I'll even accept a vote AGAINST Eric Holder as a valid reason to vote for Romney. These fine fellas are hoping you don't show up at the polls, or throw away your vote in protest.

http://texasfred.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/King-Samir-Shabazz.jpg
"Go ahead. Write in your vote. Sucka."

sounds like that's his plan.

fortyofforty
06-30-2012, 19:52
PS. Only one candidate frightened me more than Obama and that was Santorum.

Funny, that's how I feel about Paulie Earmarks.

certifiedfunds
06-30-2012, 20:00
certifiedfunds
Do you support freedom or Socialism? Do you believe in the COTUS or that the Government should run every aspect of your life? Do you believe in Obamamoa's future America or do you want the America we should have, free , less Fed Government, free markets, adherence to the COTUS.etc. The choice is clear, vote for Socialism, no freedom, no guns , or vote for freedom , and the rights you have enumerated by the COTUS!:supergrin:

Romney is a gun-grabbing yankee who implemented the model for Obamacare.

I'm confused.

beforeobamabans
06-30-2012, 20:18
I don't see any real difference between mittens and Obama. Two steaming piles isn't choice anyway.
I voted for Paul in my primary, but that hasn't caused me to become deaf, dumb and blind. There is simply no way for any honest observer of the political landscape to make this statement you've made. Just start with the topic du jour. Romney will repeal Obamacare, Obama obviously will not. Isnt that a difference? Have you read Romney's website? Try going through his issues statements. I predict you'll like most of what you read. It's not really about what he has done but what he will do. Running the country is different than running a small New England state. Romney was the last Republican I would have supported in the primary, but the primaries are over. You need to get over it, honestly evaluate the choice that is left and do what's best for you and the country. That thought process will lead you to an obvious conclusion.

beforeobamabans
06-30-2012, 20:25
Romney is a gun-grabbing yankee who implemented the model for Obamacare.

I'm confused.

Read this. You'll be less confused.

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/gun-rights

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care

jlavallee
06-30-2012, 20:29
You need to get over it, honestly evaluate the choice that is left and do what's best for you and the country. That thought process will lead you to an obvious conclusion.

I have. I will never play the lesser game again. The obvious conclusion is that I vote for the Republic that is America and not support the parties that destroy it.

If you want to vote mittens in hopes that he slows the pace of destruction, go ahead and hope. If a candidate doesn't respect and promote liberty I can't support them. Don't ***** at me when mittens looses, you can't expect me to support someone who is un-American in values.

jlavallee
06-30-2012, 20:30
Funny, that's how I feel about Paulie Earmarks.

That tells me everything I need to know.:upeyes:

fortyofforty
06-30-2012, 20:32
Romney is a gun-grabbing yankee who implemented the model for Obamacare.

I'm confused.

Or you can keep Obama who implemented THE Obamacare, and who used thousands of weapons shipped to Mexican drug cartels to foment border violence in order to bolster calls for more gun control. Your choice. :faint: You Paulistas are always amusing. You're sort of like Hiroo Onoda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroo_Onoda). Keep up the fight, while America burns. :wavey:

fortyofforty
06-30-2012, 20:44
I have. I will never play the lesser game again. The obvious conclusion is that I vote for the Republic that is America and not support the parties that destroy it.

If you want to vote mittens in hopes that he slows the pace of destruction, go ahead and hope. If a candidate doesn't respect and promote liberty I can't support them. Don't ***** at me when mittens looses, you can't expect me to support someone who is un-American in values.

Are you serious? You must be very young, and not have participated in many elections to have an attitude like that. Do you think Ron Paul is perfect? Do you agree with him on every issue, big and small, or do you forgive him for some issues on which you differ? Some Paulistas here are at least honest enough to admit Paul is a politician, and makes many decisions based on political considerations. Are you? Do you choose Paul because he is the least, in your mind, of the evils?

As an exercise, why don't you run down the list of Republican presidential candidates and see which ones you would have supported.

Eisenhower
Nixon
Ford
Reagan
Bush
Dole
Bush
McCain

That's off the top of my head. Would any of those candidates received your vote? Not any of them was perfect. Not one. Yet most were far better than the alternatives. We often lived with the consequences of the alternatives.

jlavallee
06-30-2012, 21:45
Eisenhower
Nixon
Ford
Reagan
Bush
Dole
Bush
McCain



Eisenhower was before my time. I still in my gut like Reagan but he spoke a much better game than he played. Every president in my lifetime has been a disaster for the individual liberties which are the core of America. I support Paul not because he is perfect but because he has a nearly perfect record on respect for and voting to protect individual liberty.

My support isn't Paul based, it is Constitution based. I can suck it up and vote Johnson if I must even though I disagree with some points because he at least has general reapect for our Constitution. I can't accept mittens since I doubt he's ever read it and certianly based on any of his positions, he doesn't respect founding principals.

The only reason people hate libertarians is because they feel their brand of BS is OK to push on others. If they were intelligent to understand that they ought to mind their own business, they'd support folks who act that way. Complaining about liberals forcing their views on you and then voting to do the same to them is complete stupidity.

jlavallee
06-30-2012, 21:54
Read this. You'll be less confused.

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/gun-rights

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care

He has been on every side of every issue and has no record to back up his BS. His record actually refutes it.

I wouldn't piss on mittens if he was on fire, much less vote for the POS.

beforeobamabans
07-01-2012, 06:19
He has been on every side of every issue and has no record to back up his BS. His record actually refutes it.

I wouldn't piss on mittens if he was on fire, much less vote for the POS.

All you have is a man's word, no different than Ron Paul. If Romney has evolved into these policy positions instead of owning them as personal principles for 40 years, so what? He got there. I don't agree with as many of his positions as I did with Paul, but the choice of Paul is no longer available. Again, I say, your statement that there is no difference with Obama is factually in error and you need to admit this-to yourself if not this board-and move on. Am I disappointed in the GOP again giving us a flawed candidate? Sure, but I've mourned that and gotten over it. Now we have a choice before us, a real choice. Stick with the status quo which we both believe is disastrous or vote for the flawed candidate who will move some of the policies at least part way in the direction we desire. The latter puts you, me and the rest of the country in a much better position to move the candidates for the next election cycle closer to our ultimate desires than four more years of Obama. Politics is never about the absolutes. It's all about getting as much as you can. Unfortunately, the electorate did not agree to move as far and as fast as you and I would have preferred. So, we swallow our pride and make the best decision possible from the choices the voters have allowed.

Have you bothered to read the issues positions on Romney's website?

Cavalry Doc
07-01-2012, 06:50
Hell, I'll even accept a vote AGAINST Eric Holder as a valid reason to vote for Romney. These fine fellas are hoping you don't show up at the polls, or throw away your vote in protest.

http://texasfred.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/King-Samir-Shabazz.jpg
"Go ahead. Write in your vote. Sucka."

That is a very good point. We tend to get wrapped up in ourselves. But WWOD? He'd love for people to NOT vote for Romney.

I don't like either, but I have an ability to see the differences, and all you have to do is read the sig line.

Don't blame me, I haven't ever voted for Romney.

fortyofforty
07-01-2012, 06:51
I still in my gut like Reagan but he spoke a much better game than he played...I support Paul not because he is perfect but because he has a nearly perfect record on respect for and voting to protect individual liberty.

A modicum of research would reveal much the same about Paulie Earmarks and his supposed "respect" for the Constitution. Oh, well. I don't expect you to question your candidate's two-faced, hypocritical positions, so never mind. Just blindly accept what he says. :wavey:

Vic777
07-01-2012, 07:07
So, tell me again why I should vote for Romney?It's real simple, there is no other choice.

If you want to destroy America, which would also kill your future of course, there is also only one choice vote Dumocrat.

If the Dumocrats win, I'll be shutting down and resurfacing in Ordos.

RC-RAMIE
07-01-2012, 08:57
A modicum of research would reveal much the same about Paulie Earmarks and his supposed "respect" for the Constitution. Oh, well. I don't expect you to question your candidate's two-faced, hypocritical positions, so never mind. Just blindly accept what he says. :wavey:

I'm sure it has been explained numerous times out of the 100 or so you have posted this. You have been offered RP statements explaining his actions and numerous supporters have told you how they feel about it. You are not gonna get a new answer to this question.


....

jlavallee
07-01-2012, 09:17
I'm sure it has been explained numerous times out of the 100 or so you have posted this. You have been offered RP statements explaining his actions and numerous supporters have told you how they feel about it. You are not gonna get a new answer to this question.


....

This. I love the fact that he will push to get back money that had no business being transferred in the first place. Because they have nothing of merit, unlike their guys they have to try and chew on a non issue.

It's going to be interesting when the Romney loss happens. I'm far more interested in getting both houses of congress filled with more liberty minded candidates. Maybe in 2016 we'll have a chance for a president that respects America.

fortyofforty
07-01-2012, 10:39
I'm sure it has been explained numerous times out of the 100 or so you have posted this. You have been offered RP statements explaining his actions and numerous supporters have told you how they feel about it. You are not gonna get a new answer to this question.


....

Yep, however he excuses it, it's still abject hypocrisy. Whatever you want to call it, and however many times you want to look the other way, hypocrisy is hypocrisy. Own it. Deal with it. Every Congressman can now justify every porkbarrel project as bringing taxpayer money back to taxpayers in his district. That's why it's so funny, and why you Paulistas can't wrap your heads around it. Nice try, though. :yawn:

fortyofforty
07-01-2012, 10:43
This. I love the fact that he will push to get back money that had no business being transferred in the first place. Because they have nothing of merit, unlike their guys they have to try and chew on a non issue.

It's going to be interesting when the Romney loss happens. I'm far more interested in getting both houses of congress filled with more liberty minded candidates. Maybe in 2016 we'll have a chance for a president that respects America.

It's going to be interesting when Ron Paul can't even win one primary and his supporters turn that into a mandate.

I love the fact that every Congressman represents taxpayers who deserve some of their tax money back, just as much as those people in Paulie Earmarks's district in Texas. Don't you think the people of Nevada or California or New Jersey deserve their money back, too, or is it just for little Ronnie's voters?

You Paulistas are simultaneously funny and sad, how you have to excuse whatever he does.

Doesn't really matter, though. He couldn't buy enough votes with earmarks to win the Republican nomination so he's a non-factor. Enjoy living on both sides of the Constitution. :wavey:

jlavallee
07-01-2012, 10:53
I'm dumber now for having read that comment. Thank you for that insight on how a brain functions without logic.

fortyofforty
07-01-2012, 10:56
I'm dumber now for having read that comment. Thank you for that insight on how a brain functions without logic.

Wow. That retort brings a lot. Typical Paulista. Can't respond with a good answer, so belittle the poster. You must be so proud of yourself.

Love those earmarks, don't you? Keep justifying them, ALL OF THEM. They are all of equal value. Yep, live on both sides of the Constitution. Paul is a genius. :rofl:

Cavalry Doc
07-01-2012, 11:11
I'm dumber now for having read that comment. Thank you for that insight on how a brain functions without logic.

:therapy: Has this been happening to you a lot lately?

RC-RAMIE
07-01-2012, 11:48
Yep, however he excuses it, it's still abject hypocrisy. Whatever you want to call it, and however many times you want to look the other way, hypocrisy is hypocrisy. Own it. Deal with it. Every Congressman can now justify every porkbarrel project as bringing taxpayer money back to taxpayers in his district. That's why it's so funny, and why you Paulistas can't wrap your heads around it. Nice try, though. :yawn:

I dont agree with you on that I explained it before.


....

jlavallee
07-01-2012, 11:53
:therapy: Has this been happening to you a lot lately?

Yes, it has. I hear a lot of whine about "anybody but Obama" from people with no argument on position beyond the fact that he isn't as bad or that he is more conservative now.:rofl:

Fortunately, some on here get it and have arguments based on logic and reason. Those folks and the increase in critical thought over party BS that I see makes it much easier to offset the ignorance.

RC-RAMIE
07-01-2012, 11:54
It's going to be interesting when Ron Paul can't even win one primary and his supporters turn that into a mandate.

I love the fact that every Congressman represents taxpayers who deserve some of their tax money back, just as much as those people in Paulie Earmarks's district in Texas. Don't you think the people of Nevada or California or New Jersey deserve their money back, too, or is it just for little Ronnie's voters?

You Paulistas are simultaneously funny and sad, how you have to excuse whatever he does.

Doesn't really matter, though. He couldn't buy enough votes with earmarks to win the Republican nomination so he's a non-factor. Enjoy living on both sides of the Constitution. :wavey:

Yes I think voters in all states deserve their money back. Citizen also should know where congress is spending their money at since it is congress job to earmark spending. Then voters in local districts can see what their congressman voted to spend money on and hold them accountable for at election time. It was also be nice to have a federal government that ran at its proper size and would not have to take the money from the states in the first place. Of course that would take the federal government power over the states by making them beg for their own money back.


....

fortyofforty
07-01-2012, 12:12
I dont agree with you on that I explained it before.


....

And once again you're wrong. I explained it before.

fortyofforty
07-01-2012, 12:15
Yes I think voters in all states deserve their money back. Citizen also should know where congress is spending their money at since it is congress job to earmark spending. Then voters in local districts can see what their congressman voted to spend money on and hold them accountable for at election time. It was also be nice to have a federal government that ran at its proper size and would not have to take the money from the states in the first place. Of course that would take the federal government power over the states by making them beg for their own money back.


....

Well, OK then. It's a Congressman's job to grab as much cash for his or her district as possible. That isn't part of the problem, now is it? That's how the system works now. Nothing wrong with that. It's a Congressional cash grab.

You have a sorry understanding of the role of Congress and federal spending. Unfortunately, in order to support Paul, you've got to hold this contradictory view, so it's not really your fault. Except that you choose not to open your eyes. That is your fault.

Cavalry Doc
07-01-2012, 12:45
Yes, it has. I hear a lot of whine about "anybody but Obama" from people with no argument on position beyond the fact that he isn't as bad or that he is more conservative now.:rofl:

Fortunately, some on here get it and have arguments based on logic and reason. Those folks and the increase in critical thought over party BS that I see makes it much easier to offset the ignorance.

Irritating huh? Want to know a secret. Neither of us are going to be happy with who is president this time next year, regardless of who it is. Sucks, but it will be interesting to watch.

You seem to know a lot after your 6 month absence. In fact, it's almost like you never left.....:whistling:

Maybe you should catch up a bit before making such sweeping declarations of ignorance, out of apparent ignorance.

I noticed over at the Paul Forum that the Lawyers for Ron Paul have disintegrated, possibly giving the names of all of the Trojan Horse Delegates to the RNC.

I also noticed that Dr. Paul is not going to attend the RON PAUL FESTIVAL everyone has been planning, and will actually be at another rally for himself, planned by the campaign that was supposed to be taken over by the Lawyers for Ron Paul.

Saw that they posted how many people, by state population voted for Ron Paul in the Primaries.


http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chf=bg,s,EAF7FE&chs=440x220&cht=t&chco=FFFFFF,FF0000,FFFF00,00FF00&chld=AKALARAZCACOCTDEFLGAHIIAIDILINKSKYLAMAMDMEMIMNMOMSMTNCNDNENHNJNMNVNYOHOKORPARISCSDTNTXUTVAVTWAW IWVWY&chd=t:100,70,70,70,100,100,100,100,70,70,100,70,70,70,45,100,70,100,70,100,100,45,100,70,100,25,45,1 00,45,1,100,70,100,100,45,70,70,70,100,45,70,70,70,100,45,25,100,45,70,100&chtm=usa
Percentage of total state population voting for Ron Paul in the Republican Primary or Republican Caucus, ranked highest to lowest by color:
Red 5% to 3% (NH)
Orange 2.9% to 2% (VT MT)
Yellow 1.9% to 1% (SC WI IN VA MI NC OH NE)
Light Green 0.9% to 0.5% (OR IA PA SC TN OK AR TX IL WV AL FL GA AZ MA KY ID MO NM)
Green less than 0.5% (ND AK MS CA MD UT DE RI NJ MN LA NV CT WA CO ME HI NY KS WY)


Pretty dismal over there. Glad you decided to come and hang out with us.

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/CavDoc-3.gif

jlavallee
07-01-2012, 13:13
Pretty dismal over there. Glad you decided to come and hang out with us.

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p158/CavalryDoc/CavDoc-3.gif

Yep, that is your mentality. You don't need logic, just numbers.:rofl:

Cavalry Doc
07-01-2012, 13:22
Yep, that is your mentality. You don't need logic, just numbers.:rofl:

Speaking of numbers...... remember this???


http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=17866526#post17866526


That is a threat plain and simple. Glad you were able to figure that out. :rofl:

Ron Paul's only hard part is the primary so you've been warned that if a typical bible thumping, Neocon idiot Republican is voted in the primary, you go without independent support in the general so when you lose, don't go *****ing about how people wouldn't stand up against Obama. If you really want Obama gone then put someone up we can all get behind.

I can 100% guarantee that I've seen enough of Santorum, Cain, Bachmann, Romney and especially Perry that they will NEVER get my vote. I loathe Perry enough that I will vote Obama before I see that POS in the White House.



Looks like we found another Barry supporter claiming to be a champion of liberty. Sooooo conservative, that you are forced to vote for the most liberal guy in the race.


sure :rofl:

fortyofforty
07-01-2012, 13:24
Speaking of numbers...... remember this???


http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=17866526#post17866526






Looks like we found another Barry supporter claiming to be a champion of liberty. Sooooo conservative, that you are forced to vote for the most liberal guy in the race.


sure :rofl:

:shocked: Good find Doc! You've been exposed, Natso. Now go away.

jlavallee
07-01-2012, 13:37
So, when did I ever claim to be a GOP conservative?

The neo-cons steal liberty and the liberals steal liberty. If it came down to no other choice and I have to, I can do that.

If I had the possibility of a GOP house and senate and a nutbar bible thumper like Santorum then I could vote Obama knowing the president alone wouldn't get much done. That is far better than having the "conservatives" go to sleep and we get what happened when Bush or Obama had the House and Senate.

Keeping them fighting over which liberties they rape us of is better than allowing certian ones to be stolen.

Cavalry Doc
07-01-2012, 13:42
So, when did I ever claim to be a GOP conservative?
...........

I have no doubt that you are neither of those things.

jlavallee
07-01-2012, 13:51
I have no doubt that you are neither of those things.

Thank you. We agree on something.