Election 2004
-
Anonymous
Well geez, when you're out in the woods deer huntin' with a bunch of redneck goobers with rifles & such, you need an assault weapon and a few 50 clips just to get out of the woods. I also don't like everything GWB has done since he took over. His main weakness seems to be he tries to take away clout from the Libs by caving into them on certain programs that they really want- beating them to the punch so to speak. The problem with this is it makes him look weak to the main body Conservatives for not sticking to his (guns)(principles)(whathaveyou). His prescription drug package implemented is the biggest expense item in the ENTIRE Federal budget. For those who need it, all well and good, but for those like Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, why the hell should they get their prescription drugs for next to nothing while us common folks are going to be under fixed incomes for most of us? Libertarians- that's the group that wants to legalize marijuana and the like, right? Yeah, that's the way I want this country to go. Not!
-
fleaflicker
- Official BleacherCoach
- Posts: 1947
- Joined: March 13th, 2004, 12:32 am
My own opinion, of course, is that the government is spending too much time worrying about illegal drugs, and not enough time worrying about crime. But then, why would the government worry about crime? Call me cynical, but think of this. If the government actually got crime under control in the major cities and stuff, then that would put a lot of police officers, drug agents, etc. out of a job. So this crime is actually helping our economy.
As far as guns, I only need one shot to do in a deer in the woods, and if I need more than one, that's a shot I shouldn't have taken in the first place. But to defend my liberty against those who would take it, whether it be robbers, burglars, or jack booted thugs, I may need more than ten rounds to a clip. Sides, I can quote Charles Krauthammer on this. "Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic, purely symbolic, move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the puglic to the regulation of weapons in prepartion for their ultimate confiscation." [April 5, 1996, The Washington Post]
Sides that, the defination of crazy is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Everybody's voted either democratic or republican for years and years, and all it has yielded is a larger and more intrusive government. Do you honestly believe that either George W. Bush or John Kerry is going to change that pattern? And I'm not voting Libertarian necessarily because they are going to win, as I have no illusions about that. I am voting that way to protest the system, and make a statement with my vote that we need at least a three party system. We have democratic republicans and republican democrats, heck the two parties in some cases may as well merge into one. America needs fewer laws, not more. Everything that is evil and criminal, such as stealing and murder, has already been outlawed since the founding of this country. All that the government is doing now by making more laws is making outlaws out of otherwise good people, who can't keep up with the thousands of tax laws, gun laws, cigarette laws, etc. While I don't necessarily believe that eating fatty foods is healthy for anybody, I sure as h*** believe that a fat person has the right to eat fatty foods if he or she wishes to. And I will also support a person's right to smoke a cigarette, if he or she is doing it in an area (smoking area, like a special room set aside) where it doesn't encroach upon a non smokers clean air. Personally, I don't think it is our government's place to step in and tell these people what they should be eating, and whether or not they should be smoking, whatever. It should be up to the individual person. But anymore, that's a thing of the past, so just call me old fashioned.
As far as guns, I only need one shot to do in a deer in the woods, and if I need more than one, that's a shot I shouldn't have taken in the first place. But to defend my liberty against those who would take it, whether it be robbers, burglars, or jack booted thugs, I may need more than ten rounds to a clip. Sides, I can quote Charles Krauthammer on this. "Passing a law like the assault weapons ban is a symbolic, purely symbolic, move in that direction. Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the puglic to the regulation of weapons in prepartion for their ultimate confiscation." [April 5, 1996, The Washington Post]
Sides that, the defination of crazy is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Everybody's voted either democratic or republican for years and years, and all it has yielded is a larger and more intrusive government. Do you honestly believe that either George W. Bush or John Kerry is going to change that pattern? And I'm not voting Libertarian necessarily because they are going to win, as I have no illusions about that. I am voting that way to protest the system, and make a statement with my vote that we need at least a three party system. We have democratic republicans and republican democrats, heck the two parties in some cases may as well merge into one. America needs fewer laws, not more. Everything that is evil and criminal, such as stealing and murder, has already been outlawed since the founding of this country. All that the government is doing now by making more laws is making outlaws out of otherwise good people, who can't keep up with the thousands of tax laws, gun laws, cigarette laws, etc. While I don't necessarily believe that eating fatty foods is healthy for anybody, I sure as h*** believe that a fat person has the right to eat fatty foods if he or she wishes to. And I will also support a person's right to smoke a cigarette, if he or she is doing it in an area (smoking area, like a special room set aside) where it doesn't encroach upon a non smokers clean air. Personally, I don't think it is our government's place to step in and tell these people what they should be eating, and whether or not they should be smoking, whatever. It should be up to the individual person. But anymore, that's a thing of the past, so just call me old fashioned.
"To give anything less than the best is to sacrifice the gift." -Steve Prefontaine
I wish John McCain was in the election mix. He inspires me. Neither Bush nor Kerry do. I really believe they're both honorable men, but they're victims of the system. Of course, that system, with all its flaws, is still the best that's ever come around. Anyway, JM is the real deal.
"Talk low, talk slow, and don't talk too much."
-- John Wayne
-- John Wayne
-
old school
- Official BleacherCoach
- Posts: 1236
- Joined: September 4th, 2003, 8:03 am
-
Cheerleader_Flirt
- Moderator Team
- Posts: 325
- Joined: February 11th, 2004, 11:00 pm
- Location: Fort Loudon
- Contact:
-
Anonymous
fleaflicker- I do agree with some, if not many of your points of view, but if all you want to do is vote Libertarian as a "protest" vote, if it makes you feel good to do so, do it, but you're just wasting your time. I agree that between the two parties, sometimes you have to look at all the issues at hand and determine which candidate is the lesser of 2 evils. For instance, between Specter and Toomey, Toomey doesn't stand a prayer, and I will vote for AS, at least at this time, but I heard today something about him that REALLY distresses me. Toomey campaign commercials refer to AS as being a LIBERAL Republican, and after hearing on the radio today that AS is receiving financial backing from GEORGE SOROS, I'm really ticked. SOROS for all you un-politically informed, is a multi-billionaire left-wing Liberal who has supported ANY Democratic candidate that has a chance against GWB and would like to see this country become Socialist in the future. Look him up, I'm sure all the left-wing MEDIA has nothing but glowing things to say about him. The truth though, can be heard from 12 to 3 on AM 560 down your way, or AM 670, Mondays thru Fridays.
WhiteShadow - I'm not so sure that Toomey doesn't have a chance. Granted, it is an uphill battle, and it will have to be close if he is to have a chance. But consider this before casting your vote for AS. AS also supports abortion rights. This is fundamentally anit-Republican, and AS is more of a liberal than a conservative in all his votes. I for one will vote for Toomey, and will pray that AS is voted out.
AS's ads correctly indicate that Santorum and Bush back him. However, that is a political necessity since he has been in office for so long. I don't profess to know that Toomey will do any better overall, but at least I know that he does not support the murder of innocent children. I vote for conversatives - period. And AS is a liberal with a Republican tag, because that is convienent for him.
And Bush will absolutely have my vote. His only downfall is that he is not near the public speaker that Clinton was, but he's twice the man. It has been a long time since we've had a president that sticks to his convictions, and doesn't just make decisions for politcal gain.
AS's ads correctly indicate that Santorum and Bush back him. However, that is a political necessity since he has been in office for so long. I don't profess to know that Toomey will do any better overall, but at least I know that he does not support the murder of innocent children. I vote for conversatives - period. And AS is a liberal with a Republican tag, because that is convienent for him.
And Bush will absolutely have my vote. His only downfall is that he is not near the public speaker that Clinton was, but he's twice the man. It has been a long time since we've had a president that sticks to his convictions, and doesn't just make decisions for politcal gain.