I am disgusted with our party. I pray to god we get fresh blood in 16

[kaz]

I have associates and even personal friends who are Christian. I am not a Christian. Same with people who have associates who are Marxists. You need to learn to make these logical distinctions if you want to be taken seriously.

The planks are a Manifesto are a pretty good definition of a Marxist. Here is the argument that could be made and since none of you liberals are aware and introspective enough to make it, I'll make it for you.

Liberal Kaz: OK, I admit reading the planks, the similarity of the things I advocate made me uneasy. However, if you go through the planks, Democrats do not advocate the full extent of what the Manifesto advocates. So we're not Marxists.

Kaz: Yet through history you've moved always to the left of where we are in the direction of the plank. You may not be a full fledged Marxist at the moment, but you are never endingly moving towards it, you will get there.

Liberal Kaz: No, we would stop first.

Kaz: Democrats of the past would be shocked at what you advocate today. You would be shocked at what Democrats of the future will advocate. You have never stopped before, based on what can you claim you will stop in the future? What tax rate is high enough for the rich you would say it's too high? What Social Security payout would you say is too much? How much healthcare would the government pay that you would say we can't pay that? We have a $1.5 trillion...annual...deficit and yet you take the gas off the spending peddle not even a sliver. When exactly would you stop?

Well?

 

[oreo]

Paul is not an option Matthew. He is just as fucked up as our other candidates. He will retire soon after this election and drift into history with his eyebrows. Thank god.

We need new blood. Screw these old lifers.

I doubt you have spent an honest 10 minutes looking into Ron Paul.

Next I'd like to point out that I called it, it took about 1 month or you to catch up to what I was telling you about Newt... Of course you will just react saying something near incoherent and how Paul sucks, but in the end I also doubt you spent an honest 10 minutes looking into any candidate you have supported so far.

Gramps, YOU are the problem. The Political infants that invest no amount meaningful effort despite all the answers being at your finger tips. It’s posers like you in the Republican party that help Neocons Big Government Progressives like Newt, or mindless drones, vapid of the basics on the most simple issues that this country faces like Cain rise to the top… Only to start sob story threads wallowing in your own self induced regurgitated cycle of dumping all your hopes in a candidate you knew nothing about.

I have supported Paul for 4+ years, when I hear you talk about him it’s clear you lack the ability to even comprehend what he talks about because you honestly don’t want to understand it. You make the choice to be irrelevant and uneducated on the issues.

I honestly think you are a good person… but when it comes to politics you care more about the “he said she said bullshit” than giving real answers to real problems more than a glance. There is no doubt in my mind I know more about Cain and more about Newt several times over than yourself…

I hope you learn from your mistakes rather than repeat them. I hope you can swallow your pride and disarm you defensive attitude to anyone that has more to say than “Fuck Obama!!!”

In our primaries today--the person with the most money wins. Gingrich was up in the polls by 20 points just a couple of weeks ago--until he got hit with millions in negative ad campaigns coming from the Romney and Ron Paul campaigns. Who's ahead in Iowa on election eve?--Mitt Romney and Ron Paul---

Most everyone watched those debates--and it was clear who was the winner--and the statesman out of the bunch--loaded with the most knowledge. Not one single question he couldn't answer--and that person was & is Newt Gingrich.

What Romney did not count on was Ron Paul. Paul could very well end up with a win in Iowa--and if he does he will surge in areas across this country. I doubt he will win the nomination--but he is the ONLY candidate that has not pledged to form a 3rd party in this election cycle-should he not win the nomination. He may just do that--and in the process insure that Barack Obama wins a second term.

At that point I think the Romney camp will regret the attack ads they have launched against other viable candidates-(who have pledged they would not form a 3rd party)-

The Romney campaign (pounding them down)--while Ron Paul ends up returning the football to the end zone--and very may well go for a 3 party run--when he gets cut out of the nomination.

And the Romney camp will only have themselves to blame for it. If not for the millions in negative campaign ads launched at Newt Gingrich by the Romney camp--Ron Paul would still be in 4th or 5th place there. Romney didn't help himself--he helped Ron Paul.

 

[Charles_Main]

Bill Bennett knows Newt personally and says he has problems. This gives me pause because I've considered Bennett a respectable man and usually trust his judgment.

I remember Newt as speaker and thought he did a good job. Problem is Bennett says he knows Newt personally and listed a few characteristics that bother me. I got a sense of some of them but just wrote it off as personality glitches when put on the spot. Bill however says they are part of Newts core. Ie self agrandizing and grandiose ideas beyond the ones we have heard about. He thinks as many here have said that if Newt wins the nomination the election will become about his past.

How did our party get relegated to such shitty choices? Obama should be so fucking easy to beat yet at every turn its all about the negativity of our party.

Perry can't debate to save his life. And yes I know were not electing a debater n chief but if he can't sell himself on the stage against Obama the public won't vote for him.

Pauls foreign policy is nuts.

Santorum is too extreme for this election cycle. The country doesn't want to go from far left to far right.

Newt can't outrun his past long enough to talk about current events.

Bachmann just turns me off personally.

Huntsman sounds centered but I honestly don't know anything about the man. And if I don't the public at large won't have a clue.

That leaves Romney, the KING FLIP FLOPPER.


WTF


I like Santorum and Bachmanns ideas but it won't fly in this election so WTF is a person to do? Sitting out or writing in a name is a sheer waste because it could lead to another Obama term. He has to go so I guess I just have to bite my tongue and vote for whoever gets the nomination. This is beginning to feel just like 08 and it straight pisses me off.

I know I'll probably get flamed for this post but I don't care. I don't have a job secure from this shitty economy and I desperately need change.

I am always weary of someone who claims to know someone "personally" and then Says negative things about them.

 

[Charles_Main]

There is no evidence that Obama has EVER advocated a Marxist position.

He says flat out in his Book that he was Influenced and at one point infatuated with the Ideas of Marx.

Why is it people on the left are always trying to tell us they didn't say, what they said.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And you complain I call you a Democrat when every post I've ever seen from you defends Democrats and attacks Republicans. Which means I'm black and white. Got it.

You'd be wrong.

Besides, when I say that "Democrats are not communists," I'm not defending Democrats per se. I'm correcting stupidity.

Actually again taking you back to my wording, I said every post I've seen you write. You, rw and Jake claim to be Republicans, but I never see any of you ever criticize Democrats or support Republicans. I did not say you never did, I said I never saw it. Granted I don't post as much as you, but I've seen a pretty good body of your posts at this point.

You can argue as a message board you tend to get more activists on the "right" and they are more extreme, but I'd counter with ditto on the lefties on the board and yet I see you backing them up.

Speaking for myself, I have criticized Democrats and I have supported Republicans. If you have not seen it, you are blind then.

I can't change the Dems, but I sure can oppose wack philosophy such as yours from infecting the GOP.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no evidence that Obama has EVER advocated a Marxist position.

He says flat out in his Book that he was Influenced and at one point infatuated with the Ideas of Marx.

Why is it people on the left are always trying to tell us they didn't say, what they said.

Proof, page #, you know, evidence.

 

[candycorn]

Bill Bennett knows Newt personally and says he has problems. This gives me pause because I've considered Bennett a respectable man and usually trust his judgment.

I remember Newt as speaker and thought he did a good job. Problem is Bennett says he knows Newt personally and listed a few characteristics that bother me. I got a sense of some of them but just wrote it off as personality glitches when put on the spot. Bill however says they are part of Newts core. Ie self agrandizing and grandiose ideas beyond the ones we have heard about. He thinks as many here have said that if Newt wins the nomination the election will become about his past.

How did our party get relegated to such shitty choices? Obama should be so fucking easy to beat yet at every turn its all about the negativity of our party.

Perry can't debate to save his life. And yes I know were not electing a debater n chief but if he can't sell himself on the stage against Obama the public won't vote for him.

Pauls foreign policy is nuts.

Santorum is too extreme for this election cycle. The country doesn't want to go from far left to far right.

Newt can't outrun his past long enough to talk about current events.

Bachmann just turns me off personally.

Huntsman sounds centered but I honestly don't know anything about the man. And if I don't the public at large won't have a clue.

That leaves Romney, the KING FLIP FLOPPER.


WTF


I like Santorum and Bachmanns ideas but it won't fly in this election so WTF is a person to do? Sitting out or writing in a name is a sheer waste because it could lead to another Obama term. He has to go so I guess I just have to bite my tongue and vote for whoever gets the nomination. This is beginning to feel just like 08 and it straight pisses me off.

I know I'll probably get flamed for this post but I don't care. I don't have a job secure from this shitty economy and I desperately need change.

Still love this post.....NOW he's disgusted....

 

[kaz]

There is no evidence that Obama has EVER advocated a Marxist position.

He says flat out in his Book that he was Influenced and at one point infatuated with the Ideas of Marx.

Why is it people on the left are always trying to tell us they didn't say, what they said.

I didn't say that, it was in response to my quote. I'm arguing he IS a Marxist. I know it was an honest mistake, but be more careful please.

 

[kaz]

I can't change the Dems, but I sure can oppose wack philosophy such as yours from infecting the GOP.

I see. So telling the GOP you're a Republican and then repeating every mindless drivel talking point from the DNC is going to make them think twice about their views. Got it.

 

[Dragon]

The planks are a Manifesto are a pretty good definition of a Marxist. Here is the argument that could be made and since none of you liberals are aware and introspective enough to make it, I'll make it for you.

It's not that we're not "aware and introspective enough" to make this argument, it's that we're not paranoid and stupid enough. Viz:

Liberal Kaz: OK, I admit reading the planks, the similarity of the things I advocate made me uneasy.

Here's your problem. Why should it make us uneasy? Marx was concerned about some of the same things that liberals are concerned about: oppression of the working class, gross inequality of wealth. It would be amazing, then, if there weren't some similarity between the two. Marx, however, went to extremes in addressing these problems, advocating unworkable solutions and showing himself willing to abandon democracy in service to the pursuit of equality.

You're essentially arguing a slippery-slope fallacy: that moving AT ALL towards addressing the problems of exploitation of the working class and gross inequality of wealth means an inexorable slide towards a full Marxist-Leninist outcome. There is no reason to believe this except for paranoia, and much reason to resist any argument that says we should simply accept exploitation of the working class and gross inequality of wealth without even trying to do something about it, on fear of becoming Commies.

This is actually much more of a reasoned response than your argument deserves, frankly.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I can't change the Dems, but I sure can oppose wack philosophy such as yours from infecting the GOP.

I see. So telling the GOP you're a Republican and then repeating every mindless drivel talking point from the DNC is going to make them think twice about their views. Got it.

Kaz, you are driveling now. You are not a mainstream Republican, are you? I support Romney, my politics are generally that of a Gerald Ford and always have been. Unlike the far, far distant right of the party, folks like me are not afraid of the world and are not afraid of being Republicans in the 21st century.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no evidence that Obama has EVER advocated a Marxist position.

He says flat out in his Book that he was Influenced and at one point infatuated with the Ideas of Marx.

Why is it people on the left are always trying to tell us they didn't say, what they said.

I didn't say that, it was in response to my quote. I'm arguing he IS a Marxist. I know it was an honest mistake, but be more careful please.

You have no evidence BHO is a Marxist.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why are you disgusted now the republican party has been like this for some time now, It is akin to the democratic party if there is a two party system anymore.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Romney will select Christie as his veep candidate, says the insiders.

 

[Toro]

Romney will select Christie as his veep candidate, says the insiders.

I like Christie so I would be up for that but I think he's more likely to pick someone like Huckabee, though not the Huckster himself.

 

[Rinata]

 

[JoeB131]

Romney will select Christie as his veep candidate, says the insiders.

I like Christie so I would be up for that but I think he's more likely to pick someone like Huckabee, though not the Huckster himself.

NO evangelical will be caught dead with this guy.

My guess is he takes Pawlenty, who is probably kicking himself tonight for panicking back in August. It would actually be a good choice, it puts Minnesota and Wisconsin in play for him.

Or it would if Obama wasn't ready to hit him with a 1 billion dollar buzzsaw...

 

[JoeB131]

Romney will select Christie as his veep candidate, says the insiders.

Again, don't see what that gets him.

Christie is too moderate on social issues, and is from a state the Democrats have no real chance of carrying in November. He doesn't add anything to the ticket.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Christie has far more cred with the GOP righties than Pawlenty, and will hold the heartland every bit as well as Pawlenty.

 

[kaz]

Here's your problem. Why should it make us uneasy? Marx was concerned about some of the same things that liberals are concerned about

It won't make you uneasy because you believe when ubiquitous government is created by liberal politicians who tell you what you want to hear that government can be controlled to provide the objectives used in it's creation. It "should" make you uneasy because you are wrong. The ability to elect your warden doesn't mean you're not a prisoner and you are building the prison walls of government around yourself. I object because you're building them around me as well.