Bluegrassrivals

This board has become a perfect example of what is wrong with politics in America today. People who support someone or an agenda because of what party they are affiliated with is a complete joke and the majority of our ignorant populace goes along with this.

No one party or candidate is ever going to 100% fall in line with an individuals personal politics. And those that choose a side of an agenda based on what their party believes have no business being allowed to vote. (Im not advocating taking away anyone's voting rights, figure of speech)

I won't vote for Romney because he is Republican, I believe he is a horrible politician and is not what this country needs.

I won't not vote for Obama because he is Democrat, I also believe he is a horrible politician and is not what this country needs.

I'm a Ron Paul supporter. I do not agree with all of his policies. Some I adamantly oppose. However, overall I think he would get this country heading in the right direction. I think he is the type of strong willed leader we need at this time. Obama and Romney are cowards.

Now as we often see in this forum and other places, someone will pick out some small nuance about Paul that most may think is a bad policy, even myself. They will focus strictly on that one subject or subjects, and ignore the overall picture because it does not coincide with their party agenda.

This is the trick the 2 parties have pulled on us. We allow ourselves to be divided by small subjects. However, there is a reason we have the form of government that we do, and I will give some following examples of why that is important and why I still support Ron Paul

Now to list some reasons why a person may not vote for Paul, and some things I extremely disagree on him with.

-Paul has tried to do away with the federal minimum wage. I disagree with this.

-Paul has introduced legislation to do away with OSHA. I wholeheartedly disagree with this.

-Ron Paul will go full steam into oil drilling and mining. I oppose the expanded oil drilling of American reserves. Unless we change they way the system is set up first, there is no advantage to drilling more American reserves. Currently oil is a global product, if we increase our production, someone else will cut theirs to keep the prices high. That's just how it works. Independence from the global oil market is the only way drilling our own oil would benefit us at the pump. However how long can those last us? Obviously through a couple more generations, but what about after that?

-Ron Paul's stance on the education system is not something I agree with. I think our education system is in big trouble now, but I don't see it being any better under Paul.


So as you can see there are many important subjects I disagree with Ron Paul about. So you ask why would I still vote for him? Well that is easy, because we have a form of government with 3 branches, and checks and balances. No one person will decide all those things. I know many of those things will never stand a chance of being enforced.

However, he will have a great effect on many of our economic and budget policies. That is what I am currently concerned about, and that is why I support him.

Paul is still in this thing. Don't believe the media. The fact that most of these politicians and media members are afraid of Paul is the #1 reason you should vote for him


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BpL6eQyXDs#!

As i have said all along, there is no "true" republican or "true" democrat.
Everyones ideas and opinions will vary.

Thats why im strongly oppsosed to the two party system.

Beetle, I agree with all of Ron Paul's positions that you say you disagree with but Ron Paul is a Republican who is not electable for many reasons, most importantly because he will not be on the ballot this fall. You might as well write in your own name if you want to vote against both candidates who have a chance of winning the presidency.

^A study of the birth pangs and controversy out of which our country was forged shows a decided lack of agreement among the colonists. Some folks loyal to the King of England, were actually calling for the founding fathers to be hung. Yet, out of the name calling and differences of opinion emerged our great nation. The founding fathers were all too aware, that the throes of contoversy over how we should govern ourselves can produce the life or, the death, of our republic. Hence, the system of governance we employ uses the model set forth in our founding documents in the form of the US Constitution and other supporting documents, writings and letters of the day.

The founding fathers in their wisdom, IMO, knew and could envision the the struggle successive generations would have to endure, due to the surety of the coming of divisive and errosive forces by those calling for change, and redefinintion of American values from within, as well as fifth column style attacks from foreign origins.

The number of parties have nothing to do with our continued struggle to realize our national indentity and heritage as we try to govern ourselves in the "We the People" tradition. I will say, I believe the more parties we would have, the more factioned and divided we would become. No, to me our problem is character. Will those in power at the state and federal level return to the concept of governing for the "common good"? Country must be put above party and special interests and the groups that represent special interests. When politicians are able to put love of country ahead of things like entitlements and trying to wall paper the globe with greenbacks and engaging in a 24/7 argument over who among them is the most benevolent to that end, then, our ship will be righted.

We have become slaves to a concept which is humanistic in origin. The concept of TOLERANCE, and it rules us all. Not ethnic tolerance, tolerance of behavior and gratification of self. We must tolerate any and all behavior according to the dictates of Secular Humanism. God's law isn't recognized as the authority of moral understanding anymore. His precepts have been put aside, in their stead man has decided he will be his own authority on defining moral concepts in a new form, Social Justice. The ravenges of which, are the stuff of the 24 hour news loop. Tell me please, what happened to the idea of sacrifice according to the vision of JFK when he said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country". Jack Kennedy knew all too well what sacrifice for one's country was all about, and guess what? He was one of those insipid 1 percenters! A true American hero and patriot, flawed though he was, a democrat of honor and worthy of the votes cast for him. His idea of America meant folks providing for themselves.

This quote is attributed to Benjamin Franklin---at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation—in the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention. “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

Keeping our republic requires responsiblity at the personal level. Ever heard the quip "snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory"? To me, as a nation we stand ready to do just that. We lack the will power to live responsibly at the personal level. Is it unreasonable to expect Americans to govern themselves with integrity if they cannot live a life which has some amount of honor when it comes to family and friends? I believe it is. Society at large, cannot sew wild oats until death do us part with the reckless abandon that characterizes America these days. It takes responsiblity and integrity to be free. Dad's have to be willing to establish families (only ONE apeice please) and then go out to work and provide for them. And, big government has to allow the ramifications of bad decisions such as starting families out of wedlock to play out, with out expecting folks who are trying to live with integrity to be forced to pay for them through the entitlement programs. Which in such cases to me, is just governmentally sanctioned and funded depravity.

I'm not seeing the problem with Romney. People change as they go through life. That's why the wisest among us are usually well travelled, so to speak. Romney has learned through experience. I don't care how he became aware of the right path as long as he has become aware. The person who has chosen the truth at the personal level is far better to govern than a candidate who parrots a party line. Romney is smart and smart enough to choose what's right and prudent. He'll make a very good president, very likely the best since Clinton.

TheRealThing Wrote:^A study of the birth pangs and controversy out of which our country was forged shows a decided lack of agreement among the colonists. Some folks loyal to the King of England, were actually calling for the founding fathers to be hung. Yet, out of the name calling and differences of opinion emerged our great nation. The founding fathers were all too aware, that the throes of contoversy over how we should govern ourselves can produce the life or, the death, of our republic. Hence, the system of governance we employ uses the model set forth in our founding documents in the form of the US Constitution and other supporting documents, writings and letters of the day.

The founding fathers in their wisdom, IMO, knew and could envision the the struggle successive generations would have to endure, due to the surety of the coming of divisive and errosive forces by those calling for change, and redefinintion of American values from within, as well as fifth column style attacks from foreign origins.

The number of parties have nothing to do with our continued struggle to realize our national indentity and heritage as we try to govern ourselves in the "We the People" tradition. I will say, I believe the more parties we would have, the more factioned and divided we would become. No, to me our problem is character. Will those in power at the state and federal level return to the concept of governing for the "common good"? Country must be put above party and special interests and the groups that represent special interests. When politicians are able to put love of country ahead of things like entitlements and trying to wall paper the globe with greenbacks and engaging in a 24/7 argument over who among them is the most benevolent to that end, then, our ship will be righted.

We have become slaves to a concept which is humanistic in origin. The concept of TOLERANCE, and it rules us all. Not ethnic tolerance, tolerance of behavior and gratification of self. We must tolerate any and all behavior according to the dictates of Secular Humanism. God's law isn't recognized as the authority of moral understanding anymore. His precepts have been put aside, in their stead man has decided he will be his own authority on defining moral concepts in a new form, Social Justice. The ravenges of which, are the stuff of the 24 hour news loop. Tell me please, what happened to the idea of sacrifice according to the vision of JFK when he said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country". Jack Kennedy knew all too well what sacrifice for one's country was all about, and guess what? He was one of those insipid 1 percenters! A true American hero and patriot, flawed though he was, a democrat of honor and worthy of the votes cast for him. His idea of America meant folks providing for themselves.

This quote is attributed to Benjamin Franklin---at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation—in the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention. “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

“A Republic, if you can keep it.”

Keeping our republic requires responsiblity at the personal level. Ever heard the quip "snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory"? To me, as a nation we stand ready to do just that. We lack the will power to live responsibly at the personal level. Is it unreasonable to expect Americans to govern themselves with integrity if they cannot live a life which has some amount of honor when it comes to family and friends? I believe it is. Society at large, cannot sew wild oats until death do us part with the reckless abandon that characterizes America these days. It takes responsiblity and integrity to be free. Dad's have to be willing to establish families (only ONE apeice please) and then go out to work and provide for them. And, big government has to allow the ramifications of bad decisions such as starting families out of wedlock to play out, with out expecting folks who are trying to live with integrity to be forced to pay for them through the entitlement programs. Which in such cases to me, is just governmentally sanctioned and funded depravity.

I'm not seeing the problem with Romney. People change as they go through life. That's why the wisest among us are usually well travelled, so to speak. Romney has learned through experience. I don't care how he became aware of the right path as long as he has become aware. The person who has chosen the truth at the personal level is far better to govern than a candidate who parrots a party line. Romney is smart and smart enough to choose what's right and prudent. He'll make a very good president, very likely the best since Clinton.

Very well stated: I of course disagree because the republic is a representation of the people and if enough people feel one or another, their view point should be represented. I don't think that a two party system can do this. Take for an example of the differences between you and I. We both would claim to be conservative, yet your view points and my view points are different. Which by the way is good and healthy.

As for Romney, a man is known by his actions... you can repent of course... does not change the facts.

tvtimeout Wrote:Very well stated: I of course disagree because the republic is a representation of the people and if enough people feel one or another, their view point should be represented. I don't think that a two party system can do this. Take for an example of the differences between you and I. We both would claim to be conservative, yet your view points and my view points are different. Which by the way is good and healthy.

As for Romney, a man is known by his actions... you can repent of course... does not change the facts.

A republic is a protected, safe environment, governed by laws and is defended by a formed militia, against all threats foreign and domestic, in which the citizens of said republic, have the same opportunity to go out and earn a living, be it farming, manufacturing, or whatever. We are a nation of laws that, for the most part, guarantee us peace of mind, as to the safety of our family and our substance, as we live freely in our republic. The way people 'feel' has little or nothing to do with it all IMO, and has gotten us into the touble we fnd ourselves in currently, as a majority of folks think the government is here to give them at least part, of life's neccessities and in some cases their wants.

I appreciate your praise of my post however, to say we disagree is an understatement in the extreme. You remind me of the guy who, being stranded on the roof of his house by rising flood waters, declined to be rescued by a man in a row boat. Saying politely, "I have faith that the Lord will save me". A little later he again refused help from a couple in a cabin cruiser, and still later that day, and citing the same reason, again declined an offer of rescue by the fire department, via helicopter. The rising flood waters eventually over took him and he drowned. In heaven, he asked the Lord why he didn't help him and how could He allow him to drown like that? To which the Lord responded, "I sent you two boats and a helicopter!"

Romney is the only candidate (row boat) running for office against Obama (flood waters). You can insist on a different or better mode of deliverance all you want, the fact is, unless you want to sit there and drown, you're going to have to get aboard and live to fight another day for the values you think you hold so dear. Or you can effectively cast a vote for Obama by insisting on voting for Ron Paul, who has no chance whatever in winning the nomination, much less the presidency. To criticize Romney for the rather cosmetic and superficial reasons you have stated and refuse the ride offered while the flood waters are rising is anti-logic. Further, it shows you do not have the patience, or the vision, to effect the change you want.

TheRealThing Wrote:A republic is a protected, safe environment, governed by laws and is defended by a formed militia, against all threats foreign and domestic, in which the citizens of said republic, have the same opportunity to go out and earn a living, be it farming, manufacturing, or whatever. We are a nation of laws that, for the most part, guarantee us peace of mind, as to the safety of our family and our substance, as we live freely in our republic. The way people 'feel' has little or nothing to do with it all IMO, and has gotten us into the touble we fnd ourselves in currently, as a majority of folks think the government is here to give them at least part, of life's neccessities and in some cases their wants.

I appreciate your praise of my post however, to say we disagree is an understatement in the extreme. You remind me of the guy who, being stranded on the roof of his house by rising flood waters, declined to be rescued by a man in a row boat. Saying politely, "I have faith that the Lord will save me". A little later he again refused help from a couple in a cabin cruiser, and still later that day, and citing the same reason, again declined an offer of rescue by the fire department, via helicopter. The rising flood waters eventually over took him and he drowned. In heaven he asked the Lord why he didn't help him and how could He allow him to drown like that? To which the Lord responded, "I sent you two boats and a helicopter!"

Romney is the only candidate (row boat) running for office against Obama (flood waters). You can insist on a different or better mode of deliverance all you want, the fact is, unless you want to sit there and drown, you're going to have to get aboard and live to fight another day for the values you think you hold so dear. Or you can effectively cast a vote for Obama by insisting on voting for Ron Paul, who has no chance whatever in winning the nomination, much less the presidency. To criticize Romney for the rather cosmetic and superficial reasons you have stated and refuse the ride offered while the flood waters are rising is anti-logic. Further, it shows you do not have the patience, or the vision, to effect the change you want.

I do not considered to be forced to pay for health insurance a light item. Nor do I agree with the tax code on which he implemented to pay for it. Further more, I do not consider him a Christian. This I take very seriously again that is me and just my opinion.

Also, do you not demand the best out of your employees or out of yourself? I know you do. I can tell that about you. You also would demand the best out of your party. Is Romney the best for your party?

I would say we would agree that both of us would want to balance the budget and both of us hate debt, we would both say that it bailouts are against the very capitalistic nature of our country. I just call out whatever party does this. You would probably agree that republicans in 2000s did not represent your values that much...AIG, Patriot Act, no cuts in spending, Medicare prescription benefit... and this is when they had both houses and the white house.

I joined the libertarian party once these items took place. I would not support a party that did all of that. It does not go along with my values. They in my mind compremised themselves and I ask for what?

Now, I have never agreed with 600+ military bases around the world. I know you and I are miles apart on that issue. You believe you need this to be free and I believe that the cost of 600+ bases is eating at your freedom. Plus, why do we have so many bases?

Our country's time as the world leader is over in nearly every category besides the military...it's going down the shitter, and people need to realize this. It's too far gone to save.

vundy33 Wrote:Our country's time as the world leader is over in nearly every category besides the military...it's going down the shitter, and people need to realize this. It's too far gone to save.

I disagree...

I see the promise of our people. Once the safety nets are removed people will either sink or swim.

I look at people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark (facebook guy). Then companies like Apple, Google, GE. Amazing things are happening, despite all that is being said.

You have start-up companies all the time, granted 80% of them fail, but think about the courage it takes to start up with odds against you.

What we get caught up in especially in our area are the folks that need to be taken off all assistance programs that are capable of working. We (including myself in this) do not appreciate a good days labor any longer, or we think that I am "worth" more than what the market wants to pay.

No, I say there is hope, but we must not be afraid to fail. Get a tax system that is fair from the top to the bottom (i.e. flat sales tax and get rid of income tax), get our house financially in order, and we will be just fine.

tvtimeout Wrote:I do not considered to be forced to pay for health insurance a light item. Nor do I agree with the tax code on which he implemented to pay for it. Further more, I do not consider him a Christian. This I take very seriously again that is me and just my opinion.

Also, do you not demand the best out of your employees or out of yourself? I know you do. I can tell that about you. You also would demand the best out of your party. Is Romney the best for your party?

I would say we would agree that both of us would want to balance the budget and both of us hate debt, we would both say that it bailouts are against the very capitalistic nature of our country. I just call out whatever party does this. You would probably agree that republicans in 2000s did not represent your values that much...AIG, Patriot Act, no cuts in spending, Medicare prescription benefit... and this is when they had both houses and the white house.

I joined the libertarian party once these items took place. I would not support a party that did all of that. It does not go along with my values. They in my mind compremised themselves and I ask for what?

Now, I have never agreed with 600+ military bases around the world. I know you and I are miles apart on that issue. You believe you need this to be free and I believe that the cost of 600+ bases is eating at your freedom. Plus, why do we have so many bases?

I see your evil twin Babbletimeout has returned and is again controlling your keypad. Therefore, I must decline further comment.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/...loan-plan/

Why does the government intervien on issues that does not concern them...this time it is the republicrats... artifically keeping the rates low or high is what causes bubbles, did we not learn a lesson in the housing market?

TheRealThing Wrote:I see your evil twin Babbletimeout has returned and is again controlling your keypad. Therefore, I must decline further comment.

What, I point out where we agree and then disagree. I point out why I can not vote for Romney. I point out how absurdly large our military is and that it does cost to have such a large military.

You respond by this...really?

tvtimeout Wrote:I disagree...

I see the promise of our people. Once the safety nets are removed people will either sink or swim.

I look at people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Mark (facebook guy). Then companies like Apple, Google, GE. Amazing things are happening, despite all that is being said.

You have start-up companies all the time, granted 80% of them fail, but think about the courage it takes to start up with odds against you.

What we get caught up in especially in our area are the folks that need to be taken off all assistance programs that are capable of working. We (including myself in this) do not appreciate a good days labor any longer, or we think that I am "worth" more than what the market wants to pay.

No, I say there is hope, but we must not be afraid to fail. Get a tax system that is fair from the top to the bottom (i.e. flat sales tax and get rid of income tax), get our house financially in order, and we will be just fine.

I believe in our people too...but from what I've seen, it's not how it used to be. The sorry-asses far outnumber good, working people these days. And we can't get a good leader to save our lives.

That, and our foreign policy, together will take us down I think.

tvtimeout Wrote:What, I point out where we agree and then disagree. I point out why I can not vote for Romney. I point out how absurdly large our military is and that it does cost to have such a large military.

You respond by this...really?

Just wanna add that our military is so big because we've been in 2 wars for 10+ years...we're in the process of cutting down BIGTIME, back down to peacetime levels.

vundy33 Wrote:I believe in our people too...but from what I've seen, it's not how it used to be. The sorry-asses far outnumber good, working people these days. And we can't get a good leader to save our lives.

That, and our foreign policy, together will take us down I think.

Amen!

What's wrong with our government today? THEY HAVE GAINED TOO MUCH POWER OVER THE PEOPLE! The list of entitlements continue to grow and grow. With every new entitlement members of government gets to dole out, they get a dose of power. They are hooked on the power. They are also hooked on spending, spending to gain power. Instead of Statesman, we now have addicts running our governments. Addicts hooked on power and spending, no different than a heroine addict.

IMO ignorance and complacency of voters are the main reasons we elect these self serving, power hungry snakes into office. Some pay more attention to campaign adds and celebrities than to what a candidate says.

47% of people that earn a check from working do not pay any federal income tax. I firmly believe a part of government wants that to be higher. Why? It will be easier to gain power they so desire. Those that are part of the 47% have no desire to pay anything and sadly agree that someone else should pay more.

Vote for the candidates you think will lower taxes by completely changing the tax system in this country. Vote for candidates that will pull back regulations that will encourage manufacturing. Vote for candidates that will not only encourage small business, but will get out of the way of big business and allow it to get bigger. Vote for candidates that understand free markets and capitalism are what made this country the greatest country.

The biggest part of our politicians are puke. We The People elected the puke, and until we wise up and get rid of them, the puke will be on us.

The biggest chunk in the puke right now is Barack Obama. Let's start with him this fall and start cleaning the vomit out of Washington and our local governments.