Yeah, he's the Weed candidate.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Second debate. Who won?
- Thread starter righteousdude2
- Start date
Yeah, he's the Weed candidate.
poncho
Well-Known Member
It's not scapegoating when it's true.
Who controlled those governments? The lenders. Who financed the Nazis? Who financed the communists?
BTW, the bible says the rich rule over the poor and the borrower is servant to the lender. Our government borrows from a privately owned central bank. Is the bible right or not?
He's the individual liberty candidate. That's why he won't win. Republicans (neo conservatives) hate individual liberties.
Last edited by a moderator:
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
I've never smoked weed (unlike Jeb! apparently), but I think overall Rand is the most consistent on the constitution and states' rights while not being a gung-ho neocon in regards to foreign policy.
So how did that work out? Bill and Hillary. Funding for Planned Parenthood. The housing bubble.
Now we have big government borrowing trillions to spend on big government. We have the lowest workforce participation since I do not know when. Liberal run cities going bankrupt, literally looting the public investors.
That's a fair assessment, I guess. Although didn't Paul once introduce a bill in the Senate to ban abortions with no exceptions for rape or incest? Not sure, but if he did that is an inconsistent application of the 10th amendment.
poncho
Well-Known Member
More reasons he won't win. Republicans (neo conservatives) hate the fourth and tenth amendments like the democrats hate the first and second.
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
Perhaps this is an inconsistent application, except that abortion is a human rights issue (such as slavery was) so one could argue for a federal role in this instance particularly to counter the SCOTUS decision to strike down state abortion laws in Roe v Wade.
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
Wouldn't it be great if there was a CONSTITUTION party that could gain some traction. :smilewinkgrin:
poncho
Well-Known Member
Never happen. American's love the warfare/welfare state too much. Besides if ever a "constitution movement" took root the establishment neocons would co opt it same as they did the "limited government conservative movement" and the "Tea Party".
Get used to endless war, big intrusive government and debt my friend because under the republicrats and demopublicans that's all we're ever going to have.
Last edited by a moderator:
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
Unless the whole Empire implodes and we have to start over again.
poncho
Well-Known Member
The Empire is imploding. Hubris and arrogance among the elite class and ignorance and gullibility among the "woking" class is doing it in.
It's the fall of Rome all over again in the technotronic era.
I doubt this generation un-enlightened as is would know where to begin to start over without some "great" hero figure to tell us what to do. We're thoroughly trained sheople now.
Look at the threads here this week. The corporate run and funded national election has to be the biggest scam pulled on the American people since the federal Reserve act but people hang on every word and dissect every candidate as if it would actually make a difference who sits in the oval office.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, I still would like to know who you think won the thing last night. My thoughts:
Rubio - excellent performance, but a little too slick
Paul - libertarian first
Christie - surprisingly good
Huckabee - unsurprisingly good, he's great at debating
Cruz - great at times, but not in the spotlight and came off as desperate
Bush - too defensive, too entitled, stood firm on Roberts though
Fiorina - keep it up, she'll be VP nominee
Carson - faltered, much better in the first one
Trump - :laugh: entertaining as usual
Kaisich - double-talked and was vague but seemed strong enough
Walker - blended into the background too much
better moderation by far this time
Rubio - excellent performance, but a little too slick
Paul - libertarian first
Christie - surprisingly good
Huckabee - unsurprisingly good, he's great at debating
Cruz - great at times, but not in the spotlight and came off as desperate
Bush - too defensive, too entitled, stood firm on Roberts though
Fiorina - keep it up, she'll be VP nominee
Carson - faltered, much better in the first one
Trump - :laugh: entertaining as usual
Kaisich - double-talked and was vague but seemed strong enough
Walker - blended into the background too much
better moderation by far this time
Obviously your viewpoint on voting is 360 degrees divided by 2 different than mine.
I do not see voting for a 3rd party candidate per se is just a throw-away vote or a way to have "the other guy's worst opponent win.
Granted, that has (and probably will continue to) happened in the past, but I still believe in voting that way.
I was born and raised in the Keystone State, and while I lived there, I saw very little basic philosophical differences between the D's and the R's, especially in the major state-wide and in the federal elections. Usually the Jackass Party's candidate was very leftist, while their "loyal opponent was usually only a hair's length behind and gaining on him."
Bottom line to me was the observation that both parties really offered me the wonderful choice of being killed by falling over the cliff on the left at 130 mph as compared to doing the very same thing at 125 mph. The end result was still the same.
Historically my family was basically GOP. My father--who died in 1963 at age 57--never really gave me a reason for this so I can only speculate why that was.
I'm inclined to think it may have had something to do with his older brother who seemed to be the patriarch of my paternal grandfather's 4 sons--which were the only children he had. My father was the 2nd oldest & next to him was my uncle who married a woman who prided herself as being one of their home area's top GOP activists.
I was only 8 YO when "Pop-Pop" died so my main concerns with him was usually limited to how much candy he had for me when he showed up for his bi-monthly visits.
As for my 2 sisters and one brother's political views, the only one who seemed to be concerned that much with politics was my brother who just turned 73 last month. He tends to lean pretty much for the GOP.
Getting back to me, though, by the time I turned 18 in 1964, I was so tired of seeing the GOP hating any real conservatives for the last few years that I sought out a different venue wherein I could at least visibly make a stand for voicing my disgust with the PA GOP, thus I registered with an infant conservative party.
Naturally, they seldom made more of a dent in local and state races that even Wikipedia doesn't even have an article on them.
With me being in the USAF from September 1964 until April 1969 when I was released from the AD REGAF, I had no real opportunity to personally do any face-to-face political activity during that time, and local area contacts were basically somewhere between slim and none--with "none" usually winning.
Since I hadn't even set foot in PA from March 1967 until April 1969, I was pretty well unaware of what'd happened to the 3rd party of which on paper I was still a registered 24 YO single guy.
The couple people with whom I only had a brief encounter with in 1966-67 had all disappeared from my radar screen. What I suspect led to the beginning of the end of my 3rd party was that for some reason that's still a mystery to me was that in 1968 the PA American Independent Party refused to let any other PA political party endorse their POTUS/VPOTUS candidates.
What I think might have been one of the death knolls for my 3rd party was that the more independently-minded conservative voters jumped ranks in that year's race, thus practically gutting my 3rd party's already very small numbers to next to nothing.
Interestingly enough, the local IFB church that I wound up joining (and staying with until I moved to the Volunteer State in 1972) had among her membership a young bachelor fellow who served as her de factor college & career ministries' leader. Almost soon after he graduated from law school in Philadelphia, he ran for PA state representative in a district neighboring mine (I think that since he lived in one county [Bucks] while I lived in an adjacent county [Montgomery], that 10-12 miles difference in our two addresses was because they were in different counties.)
Anyway, he won that race and went on to win every other successive race since. Having served continuously since about 1970 through to today means that he's got about 44 years of seniority in the PA state House of Representatives, thus making him probably very close to the person with the most seniority not just within the PA GOP's state house caucus, but probably within the entire PA House of Representatives. Not bad for a single man who's probably in his 60's from a suburban area (as opposed to a big city's usually more powerful "king makers").
Here in TN the last state-wide race in 2014 put the GOP not only in the governor's office again, but for the first time in I don't know how many years in the majority in both the state house AND state senate.
Davidson County (where Nashville's located) still has a rather vapid GOP strength, but neighboring Williamson county (which usually always top's TN's list of the most economically successful counties) has a very notable US House representative, and so does Wilson County (our neighbor to the east of us)--both of whom are women.
Our current Gov. Haslam was for years the mayor of Knoxville which traditionally served as not only the home of UT's Volunteer's, but also the "capital" of NE TN's GOP base. Chattanooga, the "capital" of the southern eastern part of the GOP, had a long-time mayor who, as US Senator Bob Corker, is TN's junior US Senator, while GOP Senator LaMar Alexander, one time TN Governor (1978-1986) and former US Education Secretary for George H.W. Bush, holds TN's senior US Senator's seat.
So, you can easily see why TN is a fairly strong GOP state. In the 2000 POTUS race, hometown Al Gore (who still owns property in Carthage--some 50 miles east of Nashville) didn't even carry his home state, something that few major party POTUS contenders failed to do. Even Goldwater in 1964, who lost by one of the largest landslides in the first half of the 20th century carried AZ.
OTOH, simply because a state such as TN now is seems to be a rather strong GOP state, that by itself doesn't conclusively prove that she's swung far to the right on issues that many conservative evangelicals hold dear.
While we have some victories--the resounding vote for the pro-life Amendment 2 is a good example, the US Senate voting records, according to the New American magazine's (a fairly libertarian periodical) latest "Freedom Index" on the 113th Congress puts Sen. Alexander at only a 53% rating and Sen. Corker at only 60% rating.
TN's US House caucus (a total of 8 compared to only 2 in the Jackass Party) at only a 60% average--with only one of our state's GOP congressmen scoring a 100% rating while 1 of our GOP scored a whopping 40% rating.
So, just because one can put TN in the red state listing, doesn't necessarily mean that we ought to also list Music City USA as the new national capital of American conservatism any time soon.
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
It would have to begin from the ground up, starting at the local and state levels, and I'm not sure the union would end up looking the same.
All I can say is I wish Dr. Carson sounded more like James Earl Jones. With a deeper voice, he'd sound more authoritative.
poncho
Well-Known Member
That's how the "Tea Party" started out. Soon as it was apparent they were gaining traction the establishment (neocons) stepped in and co opted the movement. The "Tea Party" went from being anti military intervention to pro military intervention almost over night.
Last edited by a moderator:
Zaac
Well-Known Member
Some folks would then brand him as sounding too angry. :laugh: