Ah, Newt

[gunderwood]

Fine. Let Obama be elected because independants, conservatives and libertarians refuse to vote for an "inept" republican, and he'll stick another Kagan on the SCOTUS; then you'll have failed to retain your rights 3/3rds of the time. You think that's better? Now THAT'S funny.

Wrong. I think that the best way to beat Obama is to nominate a real Constitutional, limited government candidate. Nominating another McCain, which both Newt and Romney are IMHO, ensures Obama wins. We've tried the watered down candidate and lost last time around...thus, I'm batting 100% at the moment.

[Kreutz]

Wrong. I think that the best way to beat Obama is to nominate a real Constitutional, limited government candidate. Nominating another McCain, which both Newt and Romney are IMHO, ensures Obama wins. We've tried the watered down candidate and lost last time around...thus, I'm batting 100% at the moment.

People are funny....they hate taxes, but they love them the services.

A truly limited gov't candidate would get creamed in a general election. Almost every American receives some form of government assistance....social security, medicare, medicaid, pell grants, the EIC, food stamps, GI bill, welfare, child tax credits, unemployment, civil servant pensions, mortgage tax deductions, section 8, heating assistance...the list goes on.

And alot of the people getting these arent some mythical "ghetto queens" but retired seniors...who do vote.

In droves.

Obama will be a two termer. The funny thing is people say, "oh, the economy will kill him", nope, it will guarantee his reelection. No one wants to see their own gravy train end. Especially when things are so bad for alot of people its all they have.

Oh people will talk about the need to end it, but when theyre alone in that booth....

[mk4]

There are 4 virulently anti-2nd Amendment Justices on the SCOTUS. If Obama gets one more appointment, you can get ready to turn your guns in to the government. we don't dare NOT vote for whoever the republicans decide to run. I don't like it, either; but that's just the way it is.

this is what scares me the most.
everyone *except* the justices can be voted out if 'we the people' get fed up with them. the decisions the scotus renders always span legislative 'generations'. the power they wield is enormous. separate, but co-equal branches of government?!? yeah, right.

[gunderwood]

Wrong. I think that the best way to beat Obama is to nominate a real Constitutional, limited government candidate. Nominating another McCain, which both Newt and Romney are IMHO, ensures Obama wins. We've tried the watered down candidate and lost last time around...thus, I'm batting 100% at the moment.

People are funny....they hate taxes, but they love them the services.

A truly limited gov't candidate would get creamed in a general election. Almost every American receives some form of government assistance....social security, medicare, medicaid, pell grants, the EIC, food stamps, GI bill, welfare, child tax credits, unemployment, civil servant pensions, mortgage tax deductions, section 8, heating assistance...the list goes on.

And alot of the people getting these arent some mythical "ghetto queens" but retired seniors...who do vote.

In droves.

Obama will be a two termer. The funny thing is people say, "oh, the economy will kill him", nope, it will guarantee his reelection. No one wants to see their own gravy train end. Especially when things are so bad for alot of people its all they have.

Oh people will talk about the need to end it, but when theyre alone in that booth....

I hope you are wrong, but the large number of people saying things like we have to vote for Newt/Romney at all costs probably proves you right...

It will be interesting to see the hypocrisy if a candidate who actually wants and supports limited government gets the nomination...wanna bet the "I'll hold my nose and vote for McCain/Newt/Romney/anyone but Obama" types stay home? I wonder what happens if someone like Paul (or the others who are polling lower ATM) gets the nomination despite the talking heads statements about supporting whomever is the Republican nominee. Listening to them spin lies and half truths is hilarious...sounds exactly like those "liberals" they hate so much and using the same dishonest tactics. There's a very good reason people, like myself, are making the case that there really isn't much difference between a Newt/Romney administration and Obama. It's all just arguing over the details of what BIG government is going to do, none of the above are limited government candidates...at least until they saw the mid-cycle results.

I believe in voting for the best guy on the ballot, third party or otherwise. I recommend it to others as well as it's the only way to affect real change, but it's the long term strategy for sure.

[gunderwood]

There are 4 virulently anti-2nd Amendment Justices on the SCOTUS. If Obama gets one more appointment, you can get ready to turn your guns in to the government. we don't dare NOT vote for whoever the republicans decide to run. I don't like it, either; but that's just the way it is.

this is what scares me the most.
everyone *except* the justices can be voted out if 'we the people' get fed up with them. the decisions the scotus renders always span legislative 'generations'. the power they wield is enormous. separate, but co-equal branches of government?!? yeah, right.

Then definitely don't vote for Newt...he supported the Brady Bill and the Lautenberg rifle ban...as well as the individual mandate and TARP. Like I said, Newt is practically everything that started the Tea Party, but in all the wrong ways.

[totes6]

I will say this right now and stand by it election day 2012. If it comes down to a 2 party race between Obama and Gingrich/Romney/Perry, I will vote for Obama. I won't even blink. If there is a third choice, than chances are I will vote for that candidate. Why you ask? Well I see Gingrich/Romney/Perry as just another version of Obama with masks on. If any of those three somehow do get elected, then the country continues to go down the tubes, the government only gets larger and OUR rights continue to vanish. Now the blame falls on the shoulders of the Republican Party. Remember the masses tend to have a short memory/attention span. They see the country going down the tubes and they blame the president that is currently in office. (Although Obama has done a wonderful job of blaming everything on Bush somehow). Now look at Obama getting a second term in office. The only difference is how fast the country goes down the tubes, I admit it would probably go faster. But remember who is in the office gets the blame and the blame tends to follow the party. Even Obama will have a hard time blaming Bush 5 years later. For those who claim that the country will end if Obama gets a second term. Then perhaps it should. Perhaps if it does end, the masses will finally wake up and take back the power from the Federal Monster. As I see it this country is already on its deathbed and we need a major change in direction that Gingrich/Romney/Perry just will NOT give us.

[SHMIV]

I will say this right now and stand by it election day 2012. If it comes down to a 2 party race between Obama and Gingrich/Romney/Perry, I will vote for Obama. I won't even blink. If there is a third choice, than chances are I will vote for that candidate. Why you ask? Well I see Gingrich/Romney/Perry as just another version of Obama with masks on. If any of those three somehow do get elected, then the country continues to go down the tubes, the government only gets larger and OUR rights continue to vanish. Now the blame falls on the shoulders of the Republican Party. Remember the masses tend to have a short memory/attention span. They see the country going down the tubes and they blame the president that is currently in office. (Although Obama has done a wonderful job of blaming everything on Bush somehow). Now look at Obama getting a second term in office. The only difference is how fast the country goes down the tubes, I admit it would probably go faster. But remember who is in the office gets the blame and the blame tends to follow the party. Even Obama will have a hard time blaming Bush 5 years later. For those who claim that the country will end if Obama gets a second term. Then perhaps it should. Perhaps if it does end, the masses will finally wake up and take back the power from the Federal Monster. As I see it this country is already on its deathbed and we need a major change in direction that Gingrich/Romney/Perry just will NOT give us.

Interesting stance. Valid points. I'm not sure that I'm in complete agreement, but interesting to think about, nonetheless.

[Kreutz]

I will say this right now and stand by it election day 2012. If it comes down to a 2 party race between Obama and Gingrich/Romney/Perry, I will vote for Obama. I won't even blink. If there is a third choice, than chances are I will vote for that candidate. Why you ask? Well I see Gingrich/Romney/Perry as just another version of Obama with masks on. If any of those three somehow do get elected, then the country continues to go down the tubes, the government only gets larger and OUR rights continue to vanish. Now the blame falls on the shoulders of the Republican Party. Remember the masses tend to have a short memory/attention span. They see the country going down the tubes and they blame the president that is currently in office. (Although Obama has done a wonderful job of blaming everything on Bush somehow). Now look at Obama getting a second term in office. The only difference is how fast the country goes down the tubes, I admit it would probably go faster. But remember who is in the office gets the blame and the blame tends to follow the party. Even Obama will have a hard time blaming Bush 5 years later. For those who claim that the country will end if Obama gets a second term. Then perhaps it should. Perhaps if it does end, the masses will finally wake up and take back the power from the Federal Monster. As I see it this country is already on its deathbed and we need a major change in direction that Gingrich/Romney/Perry just will NOT give us.

You understand. Few seem to.

And Gunderwood, mark my words Obama will be a two termer.

[SHMIV]

... mark my words Obama will be a two termer.

I've been fearing the same thing, as of late.

A few months into the Reign of the Great Pretender, I wrote an essay. It can be read here:

http://www.infobarrel.com/You_Want_Change%3F

I probably should have taken my own advice.

[Diomed]

There's no point in voting for Romney over Obama: Romney is Obama, just whiter.

Gingrich is nuts.

this is what scares me the most.
everyone *except* the justices can be voted out if 'we the people' get fed up with them. the decisions the scotus renders always span legislative 'generations'. the power they wield is enormous. separate, but co-equal branches of government?!? yeah, right.

Ah, but the court is actually less powerful than the other two branches - it has power only when the others allow it to have it. Any decision the court makes can be overturned by writing and passing a new law, and redefining the jurisdiction of the court so that they have no authority to rule on it. That doesn't even get into the Jacksonian tradition of simply ignoring the court. It's simply a matter of the legislature and executive having the will to marginalize the judiciary.

[Kreutz]

... mark my words Obama will be a two termer.

I've been fearing the same thing, as of late.

A few months into the Reign of the Great Pretender, I wrote an essay. It can be read here:

http://www.infobarrel.com/You_Want_Change%3F

I probably should have taken my own advice.

Interesting read, especially the part about infiltrating the Republican party. Note that didn't work.

Like a body invaded with foreign cells, it simply rejected the invader. The TP served its purpose (which was always to get more R's than D's into Congress and nothing else), but thats it. Nary a peep now. I expect a few of the dimmer members will show up in 2012 but they will be kneecapped by the GOP since they cant allow anything to eclipse their established order. OWS will suffer the same treatment on the other side.

A system this large and calcified won't change because it can't. Literally, it cannot change.

This is why i am so puzzled when conservatives ramble on about "taking back America"...do they know what they're asking for? Do they really want it?

Because you're getting it as it is, not as you wish it should be.

[gunderwood]

I will say this right now and stand by it election day 2012. If it comes down to a 2 party race between Obama and Gingrich/Romney/Perry, I will vote for Obama. I won't even blink. If there is a third choice, than chances are I will vote for that candidate. Why you ask? Well I see Gingrich/Romney/Perry as just another version of Obama with masks on. If any of those three somehow do get elected, then the country continues to go down the tubes, the government only gets larger and OUR rights continue to vanish. Now the blame falls on the shoulders of the Republican Party. Remember the masses tend to have a short memory/attention span. They see the country going down the tubes and they blame the president that is currently in office. (Although Obama has done a wonderful job of blaming everything on Bush somehow). Now look at Obama getting a second term in office. The only difference is how fast the country goes down the tubes, I admit it would probably go faster. But remember who is in the office gets the blame and the blame tends to follow the party. Even Obama will have a hard time blaming Bush 5 years later. For those who claim that the country will end if Obama gets a second term. Then perhaps it should. Perhaps if it does end, the masses will finally wake up and take back the power from the Federal Monster. As I see it this country is already on its deathbed and we need a major change in direction that Gingrich/Romney/Perry just will NOT give us.

You understand. Few seem to.

And Gunderwood, mark my words Obama will be a two termer.

That's exactly why I support only Constitutional, limited government candidates. No sense in expanding political capital on the details of big government. Also, that's a bet I will not take.

[gunderwood]

A system this large and calcified won't change because it can't. Literally, it cannot change.

This is why i am so puzzled when conservatives ramble on about "taking back America"...do they know what they're asking for? Do they really want it?

Because you're getting it as it is, not as you wish it should be.

Yes, it's not an overnight restoration of liberty and limited government. Yes, would take a great deal of fortitude and sacrifice to accomplish. However, it's all better than the alternatives, which are really just details on how a once great social experiment into limited government and liberty will atrophy and perish.

[Kreutz]

Yes, it's not an overnight restoration of liberty and limited government. Yes, would take a great deal of fortitude and sacrifice to accomplish. However, it's all better than the alternatives, which are really just details on how a once great social experiment into limited government and liberty will atrophy and perish.

What just dawned on me is a quasi paradox....in order to show the fortitude and sacrifice, in a representative democracy where the voting populace will dig its heels in to keep its benefits (ergo no politician will dare tamper with the status quo)...you'd have to have an authoritarian system of government to make the changes...thus negating the limited government and liberty part.

Quite a conundrum there.

[Riposite]

Yes, it's not an overnight restoration of liberty and limited government. Yes, would take a great deal of fortitude and sacrifice to accomplish. However, it's all better than the alternatives, which are really just details on how a once great social experiment into limited government and liberty will atrophy and perish.

What just dawned on me is a quasi paradox....in order to show the fortitude and sacrifice, in a representative democracy where the voting populace will dig its heels in to keep its benefits (ergo no politician will dare tamper with the status quo)...you'd have to have an authoritarian system of government to make the changes...thus negating the limited government and liberty part.

Quite a conundrum there.

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville



and I think we are learning the same lesson Athens learned oh so long ago.

And after the misguided social policies which are a way of bribing votes bring us down, people will be clamoring for someone who can get the trains to run on time and the garbage picked up and that is when we will have our strong man authoritarian leader emerge.

[VBshooter]

Well we can still hold out and hope that cooler heads prevail in the near future and neither of the great white dopes gets it,,, The nomination ain;t in the bag yet..

[SHMIV]

...especially the part about infiltrating the Republican party. Note that didn't work.


A system this large and calcified won't change because it can't. Literally, it cannot change.

At this point, I can't say whether it's working or not. Too early to tell. I suspect, though I'd have a difficult time proving, that the Socialist takeover of the Democrat party started in the late 40's. It was the mid to late 60's before the change really became apparent. (If my last two sentences cause you to believe that I own foiled head gear, so be it.)

A system this large, in fact, can change. It's always changing. Currently, the change we see is that it continues to grow.

As to "Taking back America", you mean to say that you don't want to? You are content with the current state of affairs?

One of two things is bound to happen, in the long run. The Government will continue to grow until the masses are fed up and they revolt, or the government continues to grow and we all become enslaved. Sometimes I wonder if it won't be the latter.

[gunderwood]

Yes, it's not an overnight restoration of liberty and limited government. Yes, would take a great deal of fortitude and sacrifice to accomplish. However, it's all better than the alternatives, which are really just details on how a once great social experiment into limited government and liberty will atrophy and perish.

What just dawned on me is a quasi paradox....in order to show the fortitude and sacrifice, in a representative democracy where the voting populace will dig its heels in to keep its benefits (ergo no politician will dare tamper with the status quo)...you'd have to have an authoritarian system of government to make the changes...thus negating the limited government and liberty part.

Quite a conundrum there.

Not really. Ultimately no free society could flourish if it had to be imposed by the government. The people must decide they want liberty and then work to achieve it, not the other way around.

[Kreutz]

At this point, I can't say whether it's working or not. Too early to tell. I suspect, though I'd have a difficult time proving, that the Socialist takeover of the Democrat party started in the late 40's. It was the mid to late 60's before the change really became apparent. (If my last two sentences cause you to believe that I own foiled head gear, so be it.)

Not at all, no.

A system this large, in fact, can change. It's always changing. Currently, the change we see is that it continues to grow.

By growth you mean a constantly increasing debt? I would take that as evidence of inflexibility, not change.

As to "Taking back America", you mean to say that you don't want to?

Take it back from...who? And who gets it once its "back"? Does it come with a few trillion in debt?

You are content with the current state of affairs?

Ehhhh....it could be better, could be worse. Plus theres jack I can do about it anyway, too poor to buy a senator. So, why care about that which cannot be changed? I'm busy managing my own affairs.

You may notice the most politically active people are also those with the most free time. The TP was loaded with retirees, the OWS the unemployed.

One of two things is bound to happen, in the long run. The Government will continue to grow until the masses are fed up and they revolt,

This....is my point. You seem unable or unwilling to consider that maybe, just maybe, people like perks that come with big gov? So why would they revolt? Why hasn't this happened yet? Have you considered people may actually consider you the threat and defend the system? Something to think about.

I know most people think everyone thinks like them...but, people don't. If everyone thought like you then you'd be in your utopia right now, right? Just like I'd be in mine if everyone thought like me.

or the government continues to grow and we all become enslaved. Sometimes I wonder if it won't be the latter.

Thaaaaaaaats probably the correct one.

[formula73]

Jesus. Does this make anybody else feel small and powerless? I'm starting to feel like I've been obsoleted by people who feel the need to have the government regulate their stupidity at the expense of personal freedoms. There's no such thing as personal responsibility, anymore. I'm part of the problem, I guess: I don't even see any sense in voting.