It is currently Thu Apr 24, 2014 1:19 am

All times are UTC - 10 hours [ DST ]




 Page 3 of 3 [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:51 pm 
Da Kine
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 1:32 pm
Posts: 619
Location: Kona
Todd wrote:
I've never voted 3rd party because I know they stand no chance of being elected. To me it's always been a choice of the lesser of 2 some what crappy options. While I agree it may be nice to send a message, if sending a message means another year of Obama it's just not worth it. I'll be voting for the person most likely to beat Obama. I'd like to see someone other than Mitt, but if I have a choice between him, a 3rd party that is expected to obtain less than 5% of the vote and Obama, I'll certainly take Mitt. I'd certainly like to see the Libertarians advance, but don't see much of a possibility of it happening until it is too late.


We feel exactly the same way !


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 5:39 pm 
Malihini
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 8:25 pm
Posts: 158
Joyce wrote:
Todd wrote:
I've never voted 3rd party because I know they stand no chance of being elected. To me it's always been a choice of the lesser of 2 some what crappy options. While I agree it may be nice to send a message, if sending a message means another year of Obama it's just not worth it. I'll be voting for the person most likely to beat Obama. I'd like to see someone other than Mitt, but if I have a choice between him, a 3rd party that is expected to obtain less than 5% of the vote and Obama, I'll certainly take Mitt. I'd certainly like to see the Libertarians advance, but don't see much of a possibility of it happening until it is too late.


We feel exactly the same way !


The fix for that is instant runoff voting. You rank the candidates in order of preference. If no candidate has a majority of votes, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated, and the second choice on those ballots is then counted. That continues until a candidate reaches the majority. This would allow us to vote for third party candidates without wasting the vote. But chances are that the current political parties in power will never let that through!

I guess I'll be the lone voice here that will vote for Obama again. Not because I'm thrilled with him, but I don't see the scary face of socialism that you all do. He's really a pretty middle of the road guy in my opinion, and has been faced with an obstructionist Congress.

I won't vote for any Republican, they're too beholden to the crazy right wing of the party.

But I'm not a believer in the Libertarian party either. It's a little too Darwinian for me. I actually believe in government. I believe in fiscal responsibility. I believe in a government that provides a strong regulatory framework to ensure safety (food supply, drug supply, air, water supply, energy, etc.) and fairness (fraud, monopolies, predatory practices, etc.), but by and large stays out of people's lives. I believe that providing basic infrastructure (transportation, education, defense, energy, etc.) and a baseline safety net against poverty helps business by ensuring businesses an educated work force, prosperous customer base, and the means to produce and transfer goods and services. I believe in Social Security and Medicare, that we should take care of older citizens. I believe that health care should be a right, not a privilege, and guaranteed to all. I believe in equality of opportunity. If that makes me a socialist, then I guess I'm a socialist. But we're all in this together, and we can do together what none of us can do alone. So I'm happy to have my socialist fire department, police department, libraries, schools - you get the idea of where I'm going.

I hope Ron Paul stays on the political scene, because I think he provides a good balance and opposing viewpoints that are worth considering. But some of his positions are too extreme for me, such as his stand on the Civil Rights Act. While he champions the freedom of private businesses and people to do what they want to do, he doesn't allow for the fact that that "freedom" may infringe on another's freedom to do business, work, live and play in a free society. A land owner who has the "freedom" to do what he wants with his land infringes on his neighbor's freedom if he clearcuts a slope and causes a landslide, or diverts a stream and floods his neighbor's land. A business owner who has the "freedom" to not hire an otherwise qualified racial minority prevents that person from earning a living and attaining the same economic freedom that others have.

I think the election will come down to Romney and Obama, and I'll vote for Obama, but I'm not all that worried about Romney. I think Romney is a pretty centrist guy too, just playing to the conservative crowd right now. If the Republicans were smart they'd take a good look at Jon Huntsman. He's their best candidate.

But until we get the big money out of politics, I don't think it makes much difference who we elect. I'm a lot more worried about the concentration of wealth and the use of that wealth to buy our politicians to the exclusion of the citizens. The Citizens United decision was a bad decision. Corporations are not people, and money is not speech. The Montana Supreme Court, of all places, just issued a ruling to challenge that, so it will be interesting to see what happens.



_________________
Before you criticize another person, walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:19 pm 
Menehune
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 1:08 pm
Posts: 74
LizH wrote:
Joyce wrote:
I won't vote for any Republican, they're too beholden to the crazy right wing of the party.

But I'm not a believer in the Libertarian party either. It's a little too Darwinian for me. I actually believe in government. I believe in fiscal responsibility. I believe in a government that provides a strong regulatory framework to ensure safety (food supply, drug supply, air, water supply, energy, etc.) and fairness (fraud, monopolies, predatory practices, etc.), but by and large stays out of people's lives. I believe that providing basic infrastructure (transportation, education, defense, energy, etc.) and a baseline safety net against poverty helps business by ensuring businesses an educated work force, prosperous customer base, and the means to produce and transfer goods and services. I believe in Social Security and Medicare, that we should take care of older citizens. I believe that health care should be a right, not a privilege, and guaranteed to all. I believe in equality of opportunity. If that makes me a socialist, then I guess I'm a socialist. But we're all in this together, and we can do together what none of us can do alone. So I'm happy to have my socialist fire department, police department, libraries, schools - you get the idea of where I'm going.

But until we get the big money out of politics, I don't think it makes much difference who we elect. I'm a lot more worried about the concentration of wealth and the use of that wealth to buy our politicians to the exclusion of the citizens.

Liz, that is how I feel.

All of you guys are better read about politics and current affairs than I am. I find these things very depressing. I admire you for keeping up on it all.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 5:32 pm 
Da Kine
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 785
Location: Puget Sound
LizH wrote:
Joyce wrote:
Todd wrote:
I've never voted 3rd party because I know they stand no chance of being elected. To me it's always been a choice of the lesser of 2 some what crappy options. While I agree it may be nice to send a message, if sending a message means another year of Obama it's just not worth it. I'll be voting for the person most likely to beat Obama. I'd like to see someone other than Mitt, but if I have a choice between him, a 3rd party that is expected to obtain less than 5% of the vote and Obama, I'll certainly take Mitt. I'd certainly like to see the Libertarians advance, but don't see much of a possibility of it happening until it is too late.


We feel exactly the same way !


The fix for that is instant runoff voting. You rank the candidates in order of preference. If no candidate has a majority of votes, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated, and the second choice on those ballots is then counted. That continues until a candidate reaches the majority. This would allow us to vote for third party candidates without wasting the vote. But chances are that the current political parties in power will never let that through!

I guess I'll be the lone voice here that will vote for Obama again. Not because I'm thrilled with him, but I don't see the scary face of socialism that you all do. He's really a pretty middle of the road guy in my opinion, and has been faced with an obstructionist Congress.

I won't vote for any Republican, they're too beholden to the crazy right wing of the party.

But I'm not a believer in the Libertarian party either. It's a little too Darwinian for me. I actually believe in government. I believe in fiscal responsibility. I believe in a government that provides a strong regulatory framework to ensure safety (food supply, drug supply, air, water supply, energy, etc.) and fairness (fraud, monopolies, predatory practices, etc.), but by and large stays out of people's lives. I believe that providing basic infrastructure (transportation, education, defense, energy, etc.) and a baseline safety net against poverty helps business by ensuring businesses an educated work force, prosperous customer base, and the means to produce and transfer goods and services. I believe in Social Security and Medicare, that we should take care of older citizens. I believe that health care should be a right, not a privilege, and guaranteed to all. I believe in equality of opportunity. If that makes me a socialist, then I guess I'm a socialist. But we're all in this together, and we can do together what none of us can do alone. So I'm happy to have my socialist fire department, police department, libraries, schools - you get the idea of where I'm going.

I hope Ron Paul stays on the political scene, because I think he provides a good balance and opposing viewpoints that are worth considering. But some of his positions are too extreme for me, such as his stand on the Civil Rights Act. While he champions the freedom of private businesses and people to do what they want to do, he doesn't allow for the fact that that "freedom" may infringe on another's freedom to do business, work, live and play in a free society. A land owner who has the "freedom" to do what he wants with his land infringes on his neighbor's freedom if he clearcuts a slope and causes a landslide, or diverts a stream and floods his neighbor's land. A business owner who has the "freedom" to not hire an otherwise qualified racial minority prevents that person from earning a living and attaining the same economic freedom that others have.

I think the election will come down to Romney and Obama, and I'll vote for Obama, but I'm not all that worried about Romney. I think Romney is a pretty centrist guy too, just playing to the conservative crowd right now. If the Republicans were smart they'd take a good look at Jon Huntsman. He's their best candidate.

But until we get the big money out of politics, I don't think it makes much difference who we elect. I'm a lot more worried about the concentration of wealth and the use of that wealth to buy our politicians to the exclusion of the citizens. The Citizens United decision was a bad decision. Corporations are not people, and money is not speech. The Montana Supreme Court, of all places, just issued a ruling to challenge that, so it will be interesting to see what happens.


While I don't necessarily agree with every thing you've said, the one thing this post proves is that we're really not that far apart on the issues. I remember watching the Kennedy-Nixon debates in college. They had four 1-hour debates - spent one entire debate on the Quemoy and Matsu (how many people under 70 even remember that as being important - except for history junkies like me). At one point, Kennedy says something to the effect of = VP Nixon and I aren't really that far apart. We both want both want good schools and jobs for the people and a strong defense.

Most the time people aren't that far apart. They just can't cut through the noise to talk like rational adults.



_________________
If Dave's bodyguard attacks me, I'm out of here!
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:23 am 
Da Kine
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 1:32 pm
Posts: 619
Location: Kona
More of what I see as RWCN's. Defend your actions on their merits, not while trying to jam your beliefs down everyone else's throat.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01 ... latestnews


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:27 am 
Da Kine
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 1:32 pm
Posts: 619
Location: Kona
And here's one for the LWLA's and their need to sanitize the world of anything that is not PC enough

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/entert ... latestnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Didn't Tom Hank's do this 25 years ago?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 8:10 pm 
Da Kine
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:56 am
Posts: 787
Location: Honokaa
Joyce wrote:
More of what I see as RWCN's. Defend your actions on their merits, not while trying to jam your beliefs down everyone else's throat.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01 ... latestnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Political payback, pure and simple. He should be condemed.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 8:20 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:30 pm
Posts: 3838
Location: Kapolei
Joyce wrote:
More of what I see as RWCN's. Defend your actions on their merits, not while trying to jam your beliefs down everyone else's throat.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01 ... latestnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jeeeez, I really hate ALL politicians!!!! It doesn't matter what side of the isle they are on.

I guess if you want to go there with the God is all forgiving then I guess it would be okay for him to cheat on his wife or have sex with a kid. God is going to forgive him no matter what. When are people going to wake up and quit voting for these vermin?



_________________
Kona Dave

Ka'u Web
Ka'u Blog
Ka'u Homes
Pohue Bay
Kona Forum
Dream Kona
Southpoint Hawaii
Da Kine Hosting
Da Kine Web Design
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 3:46 am 
Da Kine
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 4:18 am
Posts: 785
Location: Atlanta
GOP Should Heed Ron Paul
Republicans can’t afford to lose voters who agree with his small-government philosophy.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/ ... um=twitter

As Senator DeMint says:

I don’t agree with him on everything, but he is right about the out-of-control and unaccountable Federal Reserve. He’s right about the need for limited constitutional government and the importance of individual liberty. And I really think the Republican who is going to win this thing — if they capture some of what Ron Paul’s been talking about for years. And more and more we can see that what he’s been talking about is true. Again, you don’t have to agree with everything he’s saying, but if the other candidates miss the wisdom in what he’s been saying about our monetary policy and limited government, then I think we will see it’s to their detriment because the 20 percent or 25 percent or so that are supporting him are people that we need in the Republican party. A lot of them are libertarians, but they’re our natural base. We shouldn’t ignore them.

That would mean putting forward detailed plans to reduce the size, cost, and intrusiveness of government. It would mean the candidates explaining in detail how they would reform entitlement spending and dismantle Obamacare. It would mean talking about how they will reduce the authority of unelected bureaucracies, including the Fed. It would mean ending corporate welfare, farm supports, ethanol subsidies, and bailouts. It would mean recognizing that, as Sarah Palin noted, “Americans are war-weary,” before proposing the next intervention overseas. It would mean that protecting individual liberty is important, even in an age of terrorism.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why Ron Paul Matters
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 11:01 am 
Malihini

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:38 am
Posts: 118
Ron P is the only one with a plan...the rest of them all, even the Dem’s are carbon copies of each other...no change her for ever.

The lack


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 3 of 3 [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 10 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron