Could you?

SouthernN'Proud

Southern Discomfort
From a presidential candidate's website. Doesn't matter which one...yet.


He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

OK, it says "he", so we can rest assured it ain't Shrillary.

Could you support this candidate based on this information?




(Part One of a series...more later)
 

2minkey

bootlicker
too bad he'll never get the nomination.

but yeah, i'd vote for him. (i know who yer talking about...)

and yeah i'd vote for him knowing just what you've posted, assuming no freakish surprises (i.e. turns out he's some sort of kiddie molester). why? he's obviously got strong libertarian leanings.
 

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
He sounds okay on the surface, but the question is...what will he do? We already have a good idea of what he won't do from the first post...
 

SouthernN'Proud

Southern Discomfort
He sounds okay on the surface, but the question is...what will he do? We already have a good idea of what he won't do from the first post...

If I may, allow me to answer that with a question of my own.

Consider the following names:

George W. Bush
Hillary Clinton
Barack Obama
John Edwards
Al Gore
Rudy Gulianni (sp?)




In comparison, how much worse could he possibly be?

What we been doing ain't working. Logic tells me that if something is repeatedly tried and repeatedly found wanting, it is the very definition of insanity to keep trying it, expecting a different outcome. Contrary to popular opinion, I am not insane. My efforts and the efforts of others to form a viable Confederate party have not produced palpable results yet. Until such time as they do, I must therefore opt for the best remaining alternative.

(R) and (D) after someone's name means nothing anymore. It used to, but it doesn't now. They just lie out of different sides of their respective mouths. Since I cannot in good faith entrust the leadership of this country to such scalawags, I choose to find a different scalawag. I'll either vote for Paul, write in Jefferson Davis, or vote for one candidate solely on one issue, a hint of which I have discussed privately with catocom already. (And as an aside cat, that idea is gaining momentum believe it or not...)

Unless and until someone of character, credibility, inspiration, and testicular fortitude emerges, we are merely picking our poison in 2008.
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
I keep saying it and saying it and finally someone notices I was right. ;)

You say R & D. Most of us agree.

I say conservative vs liberal. There is a difference.

George W. Bush
Hillary Clinton
Barack Obama
John Edwards
Al Gore
Rudy Gulianni (sp?)
*askeered*
 

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
If I may, allow me to answer that with a question of my own.

Consider the following names:

George W. Bush
Hillary Clinton
Barack Obama
John Edwards
Al Gore
Rudy Gulianni (sp?)




In comparison, how much worse could he possibly be?

Better the enemy that you know than the enemy that you don't. The parts you initially posted sound fantastic, but what a person won't do is not a gauge for what a person will do. :shrug: As for the list of people you just posted, not a one is a person who I would vote for out-of-hand. Out of the above-crowd, even Nader seems a good choice.

SnP said:
What we been doing ain't working. Logic tells me that if something is repeatedly tried and repeatedly found wanting, it is the very definition of insanity to keep trying it, expecting a different outcome. Contrary to popular opinion, I am not insane. My efforts and the efforts of others to form a viable Confederate party have not produced palpable results yet. Until such time as they do, I must therefore opt for the best remaining alternative.

(R) and (D) after someone's name means nothing anymore. It used to, but it doesn't now. They just lie out of different sides of their respective mouths. Since I cannot in good faith entrust the leadership of this country to such scalawags, I choose to find a different scalawag. I'll either vote for Paul, write in Jefferson Davis, or vote for one candidate solely on one issue, a hint of which I have discussed privately with catocom already. (And as an aside cat, that idea is gaining momentum believe it or not...)

Unless and until someone of character, credibility, inspiration, and testicular fortitude emerges, we are merely picking our poison in 2008.

Good luck with that one. As long as there is a "popular" vote, the only people who are electable are the shysters, con-men, thieves, and idiots.
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
SnP and Spike voting for the same guy .... wasn't there something in the Bible about this sort of thing? Cats sleeping with dogs and the like ...



Or maybe that was jsut Ghostbusters...
 

chcr

Too cute for words
:D

Interesting that Nostradamus wrote a new book too. Anyone else having a problem figuring out how that really works?
 

SouthernN'Proud

Southern Discomfort
SnP and Spike voting for the same guy .... wasn't there something in the Bible about this sort of thing? Cats sleeping with dogs and the like ...



Or maybe that was jsut Ghostbusters...

My mind is far from made up just yet. I'm just doing a little creative fact finding is all. Something to the tune of, "If you give the people what they say they want, will they take it?" kinda reasoning.
 

chcr

Too cute for words
You say R & D. Most of us agree.

I say conservative vs liberal. There is a difference.


*askeered*

And I say those definitions change from moment to moment and therefore are really meaningless. It makes no difference to the average citizen's well-being whether one or the other is in power and therefore there is functionally no difference.
 

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
From a presidential candidate's website. Doesn't matter which one...yet.




OK, it says "he", so we can rest assured it ain't Shrillary.

Could you support this candidate based on this information?




(Part One of a series...more later)

Ron Paul doesn't stand a Chinaman's chance in hell of getting the nomination, let alone the presidency.
 
Top