GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Who would you vote for today?  (Read 26044 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11733
  • Manna: 170
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #35 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 22:46:58 »
I guess I am a little slow I don't understand the question.  The threat was the reason for the war.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #35 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 22:46:58 »

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #36 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 22:54:37 »
I guess I am a little slow I don't understand the question.  The threat was the reason for the war.

I'm not talking about the Afghanistan conflict. That's pretty legit. Iraq was so and so but that's history now so let's move on.

I'm talking fundamentals. What is the purpose of a nations arms forces? Why do we fight wars in the first place?

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #36 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 22:54:37 »

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11733
  • Manna: 170
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #37 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 23:05:03 »
Survival of our nation and national interest.  The question should always be ask is this conflict worth my life or my child's life?  I don't know if we should have been in either country but it should have been over in weeks not years.  There is no sense in having the might if we are not willing to use it when needed.  It IMO is inexcusable from either party.  OK so I guess I did not get off my soap box.   I hate war as much as I love my country.

Kaleel

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #38 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 23:21:40 »
I don't care about their power, but I do think Ron Paul is completely wrong on Iran. I don't like war any better than anyone else. I remember the first time In the debates that Ron Paul spoke about his view about Iran, my wife and I turned to each other and simultaneously mouthed the words, "he's a freakin'nut!"

It takes awhile to undue neo-con brainwashing, but you'll get there!

 ::eatingpopcorn:

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #38 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 23:21:40 »

Kaleel

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #39 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 23:23:34 »
I will vote for Ron Paul in the primary.

My least favorites are Romney/Gingrich/Perry.

Huntsman should just drop out.

After Paul, I would look at Santorum or Bachhman.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #39 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 23:23:34 »



Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #40 on: Sun Jan 01, 2012 - 23:27:44 »
Survival of our nation and national interest.  The question should always be ask is this conflict worth my life or my child's life?  I don't know if we should have been in either country but it should have been over in weeks not years.  There is no sense in having the might if we are not willing to use it when needed.  It IMO is inexcusable from either party.  OK so I guess I did not get off my soap box.   I hate war as much as I love my country.

Is "national interest" a just cause for war? I would argue that the only just cause for war is the protection of our nation.

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11733
  • Manna: 170
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #41 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 06:52:22 »
Light
Like some have warped the constitution some have perverted the term national interest.  Say a nation we have an alliance with like Canada was attacked it would be in our national interest to help defend her.  However, that would be up to congress because congress is the body the constitution gives the power of declaring war.  I see nothing in the constitution that states congress can only declare war when our survival is at risk.
I also see nothing in the constitution that authorizes the president with the "war powers act".

Any way we really should let folks get back to the OP.  If we get into our beliefs of reasons not to have war we both will hack a lot of folks off and even though my view of war is different than RP I would come off to some as being as wacky and uncaring as he does. ::smile:: 

p.rehbein

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #42 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 06:57:47 »
Duncan Hunter..............oh SNAP!..........he wasn't on the list was he? ............sigh...........

oh well, there ain't a "none of the above" either...............

 ::pondering:: ::pondering::

Duncan Hunter!


Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31409
  • Manna: 659
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #43 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 07:30:39 »
Duncan Hunter was my choice in 2008.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31409
  • Manna: 659
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #44 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 07:46:57 »
By the way lighthammer, the "global" war on terror IS a threat to this nation. I too care not to get involved to right every evil agaist every country. It is not necessarily a war per se against nations but against renegade individuals and groups that plot and plan to hurt us as they did with covert acts of violence not military attacks. The use of our military assets is, for lack of a better description a high tech posse seaching and destroying the bad guys. Also, I don't believe our constitution or it's writers ever contemplated such a threat as we face. We are not and have not gone to war against a nation in Iraq or Afghanistan in the senses we did in WWII. There was no reason for widespread destruction as there was against Germany and Japan. Some might argue that a well placed nuke in the cesspool that is Afghanistan would solve a lot of woes.

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31409
  • Manna: 659
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #45 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 08:03:01 »
We may well get to decide if the closing of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran is in our natioal interest. Of course it is, but if we had had a responsible  energy policy over the past 30 + years, it wouldn't have to be.  Part of the Pandora's box I talk about. It's difficult or impossible to go back and correct mistakes made decades before. We have to deal with the world as we find it, not as we wish it was without the mistakes. Also, if the world's economies were not so interdependent that kind of event would not have such dire consequences. I would much prefer to tell the rest of the world to eat cake.
« Last Edit: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 09:46:56 by Jaime »

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #46 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 11:57:23 »
Light
Like some have warped the constitution some have perverted the term national interest.  Say a nation we have an alliance with like Canada was attacked it would be in our national interest to help defend her.  However, that would be up to congress because congress is the body the constitution gives the power of declaring war.  I see nothing in the constitution that states congress can only declare war when our survival is at risk.
I also see nothing in the constitution that authorizes the president with the "war powers act".

Any way we really should let folks get back to the OP.  If we get into our beliefs of reasons not to have war we both will hack a lot of folks off and even though my view of war is different than RP I would come off to some as being as wacky and uncaring as he does. ::smile:: 

The President is authorized in the Constitution to lead the armed forces as Commander-in-Chief. Once Congress declares war thats about all they can do legally without the President's consent.

In regards to "national interest" could you cite that in the Constitution?

Offline OldDad

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6505
  • Manna: 253
  • Gender: Male
  • Ol' Skool
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #47 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 12:07:16 »
The poll results shows the continuing delusion of the Paulinistas...

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11733
  • Manna: 170
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #48 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 13:03:16 »
Light ask
In regards to "national interest" could you cite that in the Constitution?

The following is all the constitution has to say on this matter.  Congress has the authority to declare war.  It is not limited to survival or when attacked.  That is the decision of congress and it can included "national interest".

Now when it talks of congress calling the militia to suppress insurrections and repeal invasion that is talking about the state militia commonly known as the National Guard.  These troops are different than the US Army and fall under the control of the sate governor until called forth by congress.  There is nothing in the constitution that limits the reasons for congress to declare war.




To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #49 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 14:45:55 »
Light ask
In regards to "national interest" could you cite that in the Constitution?

The following is all the constitution has to say on this matter.  Congress has the authority to declare war.  It is not limited to survival or when attacked.  That is the decision of congress and it can included "national interest".

Now when it talks of congress calling the militia to suppress insurrections and repeal invasion that is talking about the state militia commonly known as the National Guard.  These troops are different than the US Army and fall under the control of the sate governor until called forth by congress.  There is nothing in the constitution that limits the reasons for congress to declare war.




To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;



Well that's awfully vague.lol

Would it be legal to limit the powers of Congress to declare war by occasion? Are there such restraints or can anyone just win enough votes and war be declared for any reason at all?

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11733
  • Manna: 170
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #50 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 16:08:25 »
By the constitution yes.  That power was given to congress.  However, they still have to raise an army and answer to the people.  

If we are to follow the constitution we should follow it all we can not pick and choose.  It was left vague to give congress broad power on this point.

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11733
  • Manna: 170
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #51 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 16:51:19 »
Light ask
Would it be legal to limit the powers of Congress to declare war by occasion?

No that would violate the specific powers given to congress in the constitution and should be declared unconstitutional.

The "war powers act" is not constitutional and should be declared as such.  There is nothing in the constitution that gives the president the power to wage war for X number of days while waiting on congress to declare war.

Offline tennman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1246
  • Manna: 94
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #52 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 18:45:17 »
The poll results shows the continuing delusion of the Paulinistas...


Delusion that we could return to a constitutional  government, liberty and freedom. I guess we're just like kids who just won't let it go.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7wK5qaNOtY&list=FL30hdHPseSlrx0LlMe2AwSA&index=10&feature=plpp_video[/youtube]

I especially like what he says at about the 2:28 mark. Don't back down Ron Paul!

Offline tennman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1246
  • Manna: 94
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #53 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 18:49:41 »
And one more I like:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0nUDUYl8sA&list=FL30hdHPseSlrx0LlMe2AwSA&index=5&feature=plpp_video[/youtube]

Don't be manipulated by the media!

And here's Ron Paul predicting 9-11 all the way back in 1997.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6hxE3mPgtM&feature=autoplay&list=FL30hdHPseSlrx0LlMe2AwSA&lf=plpp_video&playnext=2[/youtube]

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #54 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 19:05:56 »
Light ask
Would it be legal to limit the powers of Congress to declare war by occasion?

No that would violate the specific powers given to congress in the constitution and should be declared unconstitutional.

The "war powers act" is not constitutional and should be declared as such.  There is nothing in the constitution that gives the president the power to wage war for X number of days while waiting on congress to declare war.

If Congress declare war why do we have to fight abroad to fight that war?

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11733
  • Manna: 170
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #55 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 19:23:58 »
How about the little thing called WW2?  We fought abroad because that is where the enemy was and to not fight on US soil. So you would prefer that WW2 was fought on our soil and many more Americans killed?  You can keep asking questions or accept that the power to declare war is with congress.  The wisdom of the founders was to give that power to 535 folks and not just the president.  We live in a representative democracy so that is the only logical way for it to happen.   

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #56 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 19:36:19 »
How about the little thing called WW2?  We fought abroad because that is where the enemy was and to not fight on US soil. So you would prefer that WW2 was fought on our soil and many more Americans killed?  You can keep asking questions or accept that the power to declare war is with congress.  The wisdom of the founders was to give that power to 535 folks and not just the president.  We live in a representative democracy so that is the only logical way for it to happen.   

1. I don't think you're trackin on what exactly I'm saying. The power to declare war has zero to do with how we fight the war.


2. In WWII we would have had no need to fight if the enemy could not get to us.

For example some guy declares war on the U.S. and then what? He tries to attack us how exactly? From the west he never makes it to Hawaii because our fleet and aircraft blast him out of the sky. Our submarines sink  his vessels. On the East the same thing happens. He's not attacking from the north because Canada is an ally (unless of course Canada declares war on us and then of course we have no choice but to do things the traditional way). The same with a Mexican assault.

So basically what you end up having is a guy who has declared war of the U.S. but cant get to us. So why do we need to deploy billions of dollars and thousands of troops to fight an enemy we can swat out of the sky like a bug?

Again this has nothing to do with declaring war only how we fight it.

Offline OldDad

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6505
  • Manna: 253
  • Gender: Male
  • Ol' Skool
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #57 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 20:23:48 »
Yep delusional, especially the "9-11 Truthers" who are also Paulinistas...

The delusion is that their candidate has a snowballs chance of gaining the nomination.

And they're further delusional to think that if Paul somehow managed to win that he could deliver on ANY of his campaign promises with having to shred the Constitution he claims to love so much.

He's been in Congress since - what? - the late 70's sometime - and has shown ZERO ability to gather a coalition or persuade other MOC's to his point of view. He has sponsored no significant legislation. He's simply been an "anti" gadfly.

But the continued support of his deluded followers means they have a future displacing the Lyndon LaRouche people outside the Post Office.

Offline fcadcock

  • Loving
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 788
  • Manna: 26
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #58 on: Mon Jan 02, 2012 - 20:55:55 »
Since "None of the Above" isn't an option, I'm probably going to vote for Ron Paul.  Not that I think he's the best choice we could have, but because he's the best choice we have. 

This is a three way race between him, Gingrich, and Romney.  The others don't really have much of a chance I don't think.  Romney is just as liberal as Obama, and won't do any better.  Gingrich may be a good conservative, but he's not a good man; I can't vote for him.  And Paul's just a scary option...  First choice would still be "none of the above"

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31409
  • Manna: 659
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #59 on: Tue Jan 03, 2012 - 05:55:03 »
I like Gingrich better since his daughter has repudiated the supposed death bed divorce announcement to his previous wife. In the General Election, there is no choice but the GOP nominee, unless we want Obama. If conservatives stay home, they might as well just go on to the polls and vote for Obama.

I am in favor of multiple choice in the primaries, but in the the general election, our thrust needs to be beating Obama. Even if the country nominates the very worst possible GOP candidate. He will be no where as bad as Obama, and he (Obama) will come awfully close to being re-elected no matter what happens in his 4th year. The tingle up the leg has not disappeared with close to half of the American voters, and won't for died in the wool Democrats.
« Last Edit: Tue Jan 03, 2012 - 15:43:28 by Jaime »

Offline Johnb

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11733
  • Manna: 170
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #60 on: Tue Jan 03, 2012 - 06:30:10 »
Light
Yes I am understanding what you are saying.  No I don't think it is always in our best interest to wait til we are attacked and fight here instead of abroad.  I would much rather have a war fought some where else.  There simply is no way to tie congress down to only declaring war when we are attacked.  If someone say Iran is building a nuke boom and has already said we will use it on the US why should we wait until a few  hundred thousand Americans are dead before taking out that bomb making facility?   
You ask about how we fight a war?  To win.  That means we blowup stuff and kill enough of the enemy until they no longer have the will or means to fight.  It is not a police action nor a nation building nor to settle some other countries civil war.  It is to protect the sovereignty of the United States. 

Alfred Combes

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #61 on: Tue Jan 03, 2012 - 09:07:22 »
I will be voting in my state's primary for Mitt Romney for the following reasons:

1.  He is the most liberal of the GOP candidates.
2.  Obama will beat him soundly in the general election.

Although, I am a registered Republican, I will be voting for Obama in the general election.  He will continue sound foreign policy and will look out for the middle class.

p.rehbein

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #62 on: Tue Jan 03, 2012 - 09:13:30 »
I will be voting in my state's primary for Mitt Romney for the following reasons:

1.  He is the most liberal of the GOP candidates.
2.  Obama will beat him soundly in the general election.

Although, I am a registered Republican, I will be voting for Obama in the general election.  He will continue sound foreign policy and will look out for the middle class.


 ::pondering:: .........uh.........I'm just wondering here, but perchance, do you consider youself to be a masterherbalist?   ::shrug::

Alfred Combes

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #63 on: Tue Jan 03, 2012 - 09:17:51 »
I will be voting in my state's primary for Mitt Romney for the following reasons:

1.  He is the most liberal of the GOP candidates.
2.  Obama will beat him soundly in the general election.

Although, I am a registered Republican, I will be voting for Obama in the general election.  He will continue sound foreign policy and will look out for the middle class.


 ::pondering:: .........uh.........I'm just wondering here, but perchance, do you consider youself to be a masterherbalist?   ::shrug::

Are you implying I smoke marijuana because I do not agree with you on political matters?  Simply put, I believe Obama has handled the situation left to him by George W. Bush the best anyone could have.  I believe he deserves another term.

Mitt Romney is the most liberal of the GOP candidates, and if he happens to win, it is better than the rest of the candidates winning.  I am hedging my bets.

p.rehbein

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #64 on: Thu Jan 05, 2012 - 06:01:29 »
I will be voting in my state's primary for Mitt Romney for the following reasons:

1.  He is the most liberal of the GOP candidates.
2.  Obama will beat him soundly in the general election.

Although, I am a registered Republican, I will be voting for Obama in the general election.  He will continue sound foreign policy and will look out for the middle class.


 ::pondering:: .........uh.........I'm just wondering here, but perchance, do you consider youself to be a masterherbalist?   ::shrug::

Are you implying I smoke marijuana because I do not agree with you on political matters?  Simply put, I believe Obama has handled the situation left to him by George W. Bush the best anyone could have.  I believe he deserves another term.

Mitt Romney is the most liberal of the GOP candidates, and if he happens to win, it is better than the rest of the candidates winning.  I am hedging my bets.

 ::smile::, please explain this "sound foreign policy" and this "look out for the middle class" that you believe Obama has accomplished?  The situation left him by Bush 43?  I'm sorry, shoot, I thought the dems had full control of both the House and the Senate...............my bad..........as well, did they not maintain this control for the first two years of Obama's Presidency?  How does one believe that he/they have looked out for the middle class when they as yet have not managed to pass a budget?  If you believe that the policies they have enacted were for the benifit of the middle class, then you really, really need to consider changing your registration.  Why on earth did you register as a repub in the first place?  Personally, I don't believe the dems or the repubs have the best interest of anyone other than themselves in mind with the actions they take on a daily basis, but to believe that Obama has been anything other than a failure is simply unbelieveable. 


Offline Mere Nick

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12646
  • Manna: 307
  • Gender: Male
  • Reckon you could make me some biscuits?
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #65 on: Thu Jan 05, 2012 - 11:01:32 »
but to believe that Obama has been anything other than a failure is simply unbelieveable. 


Really.  Everything Obama touches turns to crap.

Offline psalmgirl

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 490
  • Manna: 42
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #66 on: Thu Jan 05, 2012 - 12:57:57 »
  I think Obama has done a very good job... I think it was his intention to bring this country to it's knees and he has done that very well.  He has BIG money behind him from foreign countries to do this.  The easiest way to control the masses is thru poverty/dependancy and that is just what he has done.  They hoodwink folks who don't take the time to follow whats really going on here with their sob stories such as the Occupy people... if they would occupy a desk they wouldn't be so down and out... and if you notice, it is the occupy people who are protesting the republican conventions... why, because they will lose their handouts and actually have to work for a living if the republicans get into office.  I am not for the republicans either, they all are crooks with their own agendas nowadays and our forefathers are probably spinning in their graves over this... There are just as many sob stories on the other side also, we all know folks who have lost everything in this recession and have nothing to show for all their hard work, their homes, retirement funds etc... yet the powers that be, the politicians and Wall st people, not a single one has been put in jail for any of this... it is disgusting and disgraceful and what is worse, they are set for life because of their political status... I have to pay all their doctor bills, salon appointments, vacations etc... when I can't afford to buy my own groceries.  There is something very wrong with this picture.  The real question is have we passed the point of no return?  I think the collapse of America is what will allow the antichrist to be ushered in... and how we become a one world political system... very very sad that the American people are sitting back and allowing this to happen...

Offline tennman

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1246
  • Manna: 94
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #67 on: Thu Jan 05, 2012 - 16:50:37 »
I will be voting in my state's primary for Mitt Romney for the following reasons:

1.  He is the most liberal of the GOP candidates.
2.  Obama will beat him soundly in the general election.

Although, I am a registered Republican, I will be voting for Obama in the general election.  He will continue sound foreign policy and will look out for the middle class.


 ::pondering:: .........uh.........I'm just wondering here, but perchance, do you consider youself to be a masterherbalist?   ::shrug::

Are you implying I smoke marijuana because I do not agree with you on political matters?  Simply put, I believe Obama has handled the situation left to him by George W. Bush the best anyone could have.  I believe he deserves another term.

Mitt Romney is the most liberal of the GOP candidates, and if he happens to win, it is better than the rest of the candidates winning.  I am hedging my bets.

Ah yes...liberal. So you want more government, more government spending, socialism, more taxes, more regulations, etc? Cause it's worked so dang well for the UK right? Oh wait...they're imploding even worse than we are.

We're already the highest taxing country on businesses in the world and Obama has proposed a higher rate even than we have. No wonder our businesses can't afford to hire. Liberals truly just don't get it and don't understand cause and effect, liberty or the Constitution. George W. Bush was a big-government liberal with a couple of exceptions. Obama has spent more than Bush did in his entire 8 years. He's destroying our future and you think he deserves another 4 years? I was of the impression that we elect a president to another 4 years when they've done something good. Not when they criticized the run-away spending of their predecessor only to OUTSPEND him. Geez.

Alfred Combes

  • Guest
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #68 on: Thu Jan 05, 2012 - 17:04:13 »
I will be voting in my state's primary for Mitt Romney for the following reasons:

1.  He is the most liberal of the GOP candidates.
2.  Obama will beat him soundly in the general election.

Although, I am a registered Republican, I will be voting for Obama in the general election.  He will continue sound foreign policy and will look out for the middle class.


 ::pondering:: .........uh.........I'm just wondering here, but perchance, do you consider youself to be a masterherbalist?   ::shrug::

Are you implying I smoke marijuana because I do not agree with you on political matters?  Simply put, I believe Obama has handled the situation left to him by George W. Bush the best anyone could have.  I believe he deserves another term.

Mitt Romney is the most liberal of the GOP candidates, and if he happens to win, it is better than the rest of the candidates winning.  I am hedging my bets.

Ah yes...liberal. So you want more government, more government spending, socialism, more taxes, more regulations, etc? Cause it's worked so dang well for the UK right? Oh wait...they're imploding even worse than we are.

We're already the highest taxing country on businesses in the world and Obama has proposed a higher rate even than we have. No wonder our businesses can't afford to hire. Liberals truly just don't get it and don't understand cause and effect, liberty or the Constitution. George W. Bush was a big-government liberal with a couple of exceptions. Obama has spent more than Bush did in his entire 8 years. He's destroying our future and you think he deserves another 4 years? I was of the impression that we elect a president to another 4 years when they've done something good. Not when they criticized the run-away spending of their predecessor only to OUTSPEND him. Geez.

He HAD to spend more to get out of the problems he inherited from George W. Bush.

Offline Cally

  • I am Christian. The rest is details.
  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4455
  • Manna: 151
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Who would you vote for today?
« Reply #69 on: Thu Jan 05, 2012 - 17:09:25 »
I will be voting in my state's primary for Mitt Romney for the following reasons:

1.  He is the most liberal of the GOP candidates.
2.  Obama will beat him soundly in the general election.

Although, I am a registered Republican, I will be voting for Obama in the general election.  He will continue sound foreign policy and will look out for the middle class.


 ::pondering:: .........uh.........I'm just wondering here, but perchance, do you consider youself to be a masterherbalist?   ::shrug::

Are you implying I smoke marijuana because I do not agree with you on political matters?  Simply put, I believe Obama has handled the situation left to him by George W. Bush the best anyone could have.  I believe he deserves another term.

Mitt Romney is the most liberal of the GOP candidates, and if he happens to win, it is better than the rest of the candidates winning.  I am hedging my bets.

Ah yes...liberal. So you want more government, more government spending, socialism, more taxes, more regulations, etc? Cause it's worked so dang well for the UK right? Oh wait...they're imploding even worse than we are.

We're already the highest taxing country on businesses in the world and Obama has proposed a higher rate even than we have. No wonder our businesses can't afford to hire. Liberals truly just don't get it and don't understand cause and effect, liberty or the Constitution. George W. Bush was a big-government liberal with a couple of exceptions. Obama has spent more than Bush did in his entire 8 years. He's destroying our future and you think he deserves another 4 years? I was of the impression that we elect a president to another 4 years when they've done something good. Not when they criticized the run-away spending of their predecessor only to OUTSPEND him. Geez.

He HAD to spend more to get out of the problems he inherited from George W. Bush.

He got out of the problems of Bush? I didn't realize that.  ::shrug::