The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: PegLeg45 on March 16, 2013, 06:12:09 PM
-
This is the guy that made BHO squirm at the annual prayer breakfast this year.
Dr. Carson hints a White House run, exciting conservatives
Dr. Ben Carson -- who during his speech at this year’s National Prayer Breakfast criticized some of President Obama’s economic policies -- hinted Saturday that he might be interested in a 2016 presidential run.
Speaking at the 2013 Conservative Political Action Conference, Carson resumed his sharp critique of Washington and the rest of the United States, including his vision on how to fix the country’s problems.
“Let's say you magically put me in the White House,” Carson, a Johns Hopkins pediatric neurosurgeon, said to a loud applause.
The remark was a bit unexpected, considering Carson has said his prayer breakfast speech -- critical of higher taxes and Obama’s new health-care law -- was to “serve God” and was not political.
However, Carson has since become so popular among conservatives that his name is on the ballot for CPAC’s straw poll for a 2016 presidential candidate.
The 62-year-old Carson, whose prayer breakfast remarks were within earshot of Obama, said Saturday he is retiring from surgery within roughly the next three to four months. He said his immediate focus will be on “educating the next generation," then “once we get that taken care of who knows.”
Carson, raised in poverty, returned to his concerns including the decline of education in America, Washington overspending and the importance of God in American life.
“We continue to spend ourselves into oblivion,” said Carson, adding the country’s younger generations have become “uniformed” and “ignorant.”
Carson also seemed to imply Obama’s agenda is destroying the country.
He said if somebody was in the White House and “wanted to destroy this nation,” then “that person might create division among the people … undermine the financial stability of the country … weaken the military ... .Coincidentally, those are the very things that are happening right now.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/16/dr-carson-hints-white-house-run-exciting-conservatives/
-
I don't think he would work as a candidate, but he could be a very effective organizer.
-
I genuinely like Dr. Carson but a couple of great moments don't really add up to "Our next candidate!" Conservatives are looking so hard to find someone to be interested in, it's become a flavor of the month club.
I think it would be wiser to select someone who:
A - Has been elected to something.
B - Has been thoroughly vetted...think Herman Cain.
If they wouldn't have strayed from the conservative values that real thinking, taxpaying people adhere to we wouldn't be in this situation. Of course now that the libtard media is on their knees swallowing for the Dems, the only exposure Republicans get is to finish a punchline.
Dr. Carson could be a shoo-in for HHS secretary though!
-
I am running in 2016 ( yes really, yes as mostly a joke, but what the f..k atleast I could not f..k things up worse)
-
So another eloquent guy with no experience, an inflated sense of himself, and a penchant for Bible banging? Paging BO and Mike Huckabee anyone? I think I've seen this movie before. I'm leaning Rand Paul, at least this early in the game.
-
Cruz got some quality face time for throwing water on the
cesspool funking bitch hag hasbeen esteemed senator wicked witch from CA.
-
maybe he was hoping she would melt... No such luck.
-
Lots to agree with on this thread.
I really like the good doctor--he has made the current resident squirm a few times by pointing out several of Odama's true faults.
However, I think Kmitch has it right when he counsels caution. And yes, I do remember the Hermanator fiasco. Cain looked good early on, but became little more than a joke when the layers were peeled back.
I have to agree with the Quaker, too. I like Rand Paul at this point. Like his dad, he seems to have an awful lot going for him, but he's not as much of a nutcase as his old man.
We have some time, yet. But it is important to get some reliable conservatives out there and talking up the cause. 2016 will be here before you know it--if we don't finish digging our own grave before then.
Crusader Rabbit
-
Lots to agree with on this thread.
---------------------
We have some time, yet. But it is important to get some reliable conservatives out there and talking up the cause. 2016 will be here before you know it--if we don't finish digging our own grave before then.
Crusader Rabbit
Amen.
Only time will tell.
Carson has no political experience (and looking at the current state of affairs with a PotUS with limited political experience, but surrounded by "career politicians") I don't know if that is a blessing or a curse as far as a potential leader.
The most efficient department manager I ever had knew absolutely nothing about our department.....but he was excellent at motivation, organization, and most importantly selecting the right folks for the right tasks.
That being said, I didn't post this in support of Carson.... just relaying info.
I agree with the consensus here..... especially what kmitch said....... if Carson doesn't really dig in over the next three years and show himself, he'd still be a good candidate for a Cabinet position or to that effect.
Right now, I really like Cruz...... if he stays the course, barring any real skeletons, he might be a front-runner.
-
Cruz won a whole bunch of Bunny Points when he stood up to the biatch from California and schooled her on the Constitution. We'll need to see if he really is a clean and bright as he appears to be.
The good news is that the field seems to be sprouting some good stock. There may still be some hope.
Crusader Rabbit
-
Or.... we could go with David Plouffe's view: :-X :-X
http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/03/18/obama-clinton-david-plouffe-2016-election/1996135/?csp=fbfanpage
Plouffe: Clinton looks 'strongest' for 2016
-
Actually, I'm more concerned with 2014. The resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. is campaigning very hard to win back the House and Senate, so said resident can then truly dictate. I've got a good, solid, unbending supporter of the Second Amendment in the House. In the Senate, I've got Sherrod (I've never met a gun confiscation plan I didn't like) Brown, and Rob (which way is the wind blowing) Portman. House and Senate, House and Senate, House and Senate.
-
Clinton got her dibs in early for the gay and lesbian vote, a smart move for the 2016 election and for her pick of the litter (so to speak). Carson sounds good, but needs substance or he will turn into a Hermanator. Paul will be painted as an extremist by the lame stream media and every Democrat in the land. Cruz will be scrutinized and skeletonized unless he is proven spotless, and then he will be crucified in the apostolic manner. You guys know the drill.
-
Of those at CPAC,
1. Cruz,
1. West
1. Carson
I like em all equally..
Rand Paul is gonna run.. His move on Immigration tells me he sees an opening..
I still DO NOT want Rubio. He's too young and I just don't trust him to not turn into a Bush du jour..
Sounds like Jeb is sizing it up too.. No more Bush's..
I just don't think that the GOP is gonna allow a small got't conservative on the ticket.. I just don't..
They like the big gov't thing way too much to relinquish that much power over the electorate, or the reigns of the Party..
As such, I believe the Dem will take it.. The GOP is already trying to be Democrat light again..
2014 is much more important, at this point in the game.. If we can take the Party back, it has to be from the bottom-up..
-
What has Carson ever done besides give 2 speeches ?
-
Tom raises an interesting question.
Other than crawling from abject poverty, finding a massive education, and rising to the top of a "cream of the crop" medical profession to end up a highly skilled and world reknowned pediatric neurosurgeon, he's got nothing. Pit him against a guy who has never held a job in his life until now, has never run anything, but somehow is pretty wealthy, and has really done nothing but write a few books about himself and his ego, and is now screwing the pooch at the only job he has ever held, how could Carson possibly be considered a legitimate candidate.
He has actually accomplished a LIFE, so that would disqualify him from taking an elected position as a worthless POS.
-
Tom raises an interesting question.
Other than crawling from abject poverty, finding a massive education, and rising to the top of a "cream of the crop" medical profession to end up a highly skilled and world reknowned pediatric neurosurgeon, he's got nothing. Pit him against a guy who has never held a job in his life until now, has never run anything, but somehow is pretty wealthy, and has really done nothing but write a few books about himself and his ego, and is now screwing the pooch at the only job he has ever held, how could Carson possibly be considered a legitimate candidate.
He has actually accomplished a LIFE, so that would disqualify him from taking an elected position as a worthless POS.
Are you still that gullible ?
None of that stuff helped Romney.
-
Are you still that gullible ?
None of that stuff helped Romney.
Changing his positions every five minutes (and straping his dog to the roof of his car) did in Rommney. Hillary would have kicked his ass. He's the GOP version of John Kerry.
-
Changing his positions every five minutes (and straping his dog to the roof of his car) did in Rommney. Hillary would have kicked his ass. He's the GOP version of John Kerry.
You should contact planet earth occasionally FQ.
-
You should contact planet earth occasionally FQ.
Really? What of the above would you disagree with? He was a weak ass candidate that no one trusted, not even the GOP base.
-
Are you still that gullible ?
None of that stuff helped Romney.
Gullible about what, Tom? I think I said he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell. Besides, he's just getting started. He's got a lot of time to F**k up.
-
Gullible enough to think that no political experience and limited funds leaves any conservative any sort of hope .
The fact that he is any sort of pastor guarantees his defeat with out even cranking up the rest of the Dem machine.
-
Gullible enough to think that no political experience and limited funds leaves any conservative any sort of hope .
The fact that he is any sort of pastor guarantees his defeat with out even cranking up the rest of the Dem machine.
It doesn't hurt his stock in my book..
It's that whole "Of, By, For the People" thing that messes everybody up.. I guess we expect/demand that our elected officials all be Twits of the Potomac, and will accept no less (more)..
-
It doesn't hurt his stock in my book..
It's that whole "Of, By, For the People" thing that messes everybody up.. I guess we expect/demand that our elected officials all be Twits of the Potomac, and will accept no less (more)..
You don't matter, what I have tried to tell you over and over is that you represent a minority who hurts more than helps candidates by your focus on religion that the majority of voters either out right oppose, or at best don't give a sh!t about.
Don't take my word for it, ask Mike Huckabee.
-
Hell, ask me. I'm a Christian, and you'll find me at mass at least twice a week. Thing is, I believe in the seperation of church and state. Its my priest's job to persuade me of something on Sunday, not legislate it on Monday. I would be hard put to elect a man of the cloth. Its not their job. And I don't care if I agree with them 100%. Its just a line I'm not comfortable crossing. Theology and politics are always a bad mix. History (heck the evening news) has a thousand examples.
-
Religion is about what people wish were possible.
Politics is about what is practical .
To many people confuse the 2.
-
Any "man of god." has zero chance of getting elected. they could very well be the best choice, but that won't matter. You will have at best a strongly divided party. you can also forget about a large chunk of the swing vote. in case you have not noticed. The swing is what wins elections, not the base.
-
Not for or against the guy...... just more info about his point of view:
Dr. Ben Carson Dismantles Touré's Race-Baiting Smear Campaign
On the last episode of ‘When Democrats Attack Black Republicans,’ MSNBC’s ankle-biting spokesman for all black people Touré was explaining how pediatric neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson was a tool of the GOP.
What do you know? It looks like Dr. Carson has his own outlet to get his opinion heard and doesn’t need Touré’s smear machine at MSNBC.
Dr. Ben Carson appeared on Fox News and rebutted Touré’s pathetic charges that he was an ‘Uncle Tom’ and a token who conservatives only act like they support so they can pretend not to be ‘racist.’
Right… I think it’s time Touré go back to dissecting the deeper meaning in hip-hop and grow out of his third grade playground antics.
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/03/43647-dr-ben-carson-dismantles-toures-race-baiting-smear-campaign/?fb_action_ids=10151384173265662&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%2210151384173265662%22%3A483244098403469%7D&action_type_map=%7B%2210151384173265662%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D
-
I like Dr. Carson but I will wait and see. I remember liking Ross Perot after reading his book "On the Flights of Angels". Then when he was running I saw the antennae pop out of his head and I realized he was a space alien.
-
I like Dr. Carson but I will wait and see. I remember liking Ross Perot after reading his book "On the Flights of Angels". Then when he was running I saw the antennae pop out of his head and I realized he was a space alien.
;D
-
You don't matter, what I have tried to tell you over and over is that you represent a minority who hurts more than helps candidates by your focus on religion that the majority of voters either out right oppose, or at best don't give a sh!t about.
Don't take my word for it, ask Mike Huckabee.
Huckabee is a snake in the grass. That's the extent that I'm interested in discussing him or his candadicies.
As for your appraisal of my value, I'll offer you this..
Your view is cheap. It can be found in any gutter where God is not welcome. It cost you nothing. You have never had to give up anything to acquire or maintain it. I can go to any boardwalk and dump a quarter into a machine and get three copies, preprinted on cheap paper with cheap ink. It fades and goes away in the sunshine. It's easily replaced. If you disappeared from the face of the Earth, someone else would speak the same words, unaware that you had ever existed, having paid just as much for his opinion as you did for yours.
I value your opinion of my relevance as much as you paid for it, or pay to maintain it. :D
**
Speaking of laughable, FQ, since I never got the piece for the SAIGA that you offered, did you at least find someone to give the (Sig, S&W, Ruger, I forget) grip that I offered in exchange for the consideration to?
It's not my intention to answer a fool in his folly here.
Like buying a cheap appliance or agreeing to go along with someone who you know doesn't mean it, it doesn't make value any more valuable, but it does give contrast to the difference between that which has value, and that which doesn't..
As far as any of this having anything to do with Carson, who knows. Three years is an eternity in politics. Personally, I don't think he has a snowballs chance in hell, not because of Carson, but because of the state of the electorate.. I suspect that Carson's position cost him more than Tom's position cost him.. Having never actually met either of them, the observation should be taken as speculative, at best.
Judge a tree by it's fruit.. Is it good or bitter? Judge for yourself.. Perhaps that which lifts up is better than that which puts down..
Just a thought..
Worth what you paid for it..
Happy (almost) weekend!!
-
My ole Daddy used to say: "Son you gotta learn when to keep your mouth shut!" ...usually just before he would deliver a lesson to the seat of my pants. Mom used to use a paddle ball paddle (with rubber band and ball removed) that Dad had drilled holes in. Her mother would hide the paddle to protect my a$$. Ah, none of that worked for me. santahog, Tom is expressing an opinion that is shared by many...that we focus too hard on religion in the political process. Admittedly Tom says it in a not so delicate way but does not appear to be meant as demeaning religion, just that we focus on it to the detriment of the point we need to make on a non-religious subject like gun control. santahog, your stance that the freedoms we have stem from a religious and political context our forefathers experienced is not wrong. santahog, if you feel better by calling my opinions "cheap" you'd be right. I offer them freely because I acquired them freely, well at the expense of reddened rear end as a youth! Let's all have a good weekend...perhaps the last good weekend in MD.
-
I'm expressing the opinion held by most of the people you need to convince if you actually want to win elections instead of just bitching about the guy who did win .
-
I think regardless of Dr. Carson's future. IF the Republicans can actually muster a win, they should make Carson HHS Secretary. Better position than the Socilaist Sebelius dumb ass.
-
My ole Daddy used to say: "Son you gotta learn when to keep your mouth shut!" ...usually just before he would deliver a lesson to the seat of my pants. Mom used to use a paddle ball paddle (with rubber band and ball removed) that Dad had drilled holes in. Her mother would hide the paddle to protect my a$$. Ah, none of that worked for me. santahog, Tom is expressing an opinion that is shared by many...that we focus too hard on religion in the political process. Admittedly Tom says it in a not so delicate way but does not appear to be meant as demeaning religion, just that we focus on it to the detriment of the point we need to make on a non-religious subject like gun control. santahog, your stance that the freedoms we have stem from a religious and political context our forefathers experienced is not wrong. santahog, if you feel better by calling my opinions "cheap" you'd be right. I offer them freely because I acquired them freely, well at the expense of reddened rear end as a youth! Let's all have a good weekend...perhaps the last good weekend in MD.
Hey..
I'm not attacking. Tom dishes it out liberally enough. Offering some in return won't injure him..
There's alot in your reply that I want to dig into.. (Alot of fond memories too..) I'm on a borrowed computer and I don't have time to do it justice. That's why I haven't offered anything up to now.. I'm not ignoring it. Please don't take it that way.
My machine "should" be back next week, (and I'll have the latitude to grace your presence in my usual, unfettered fashion).
7 or 8 months ago, Tom and I were on the same team, politically. Imagine that!!
Tom's happy to dish it out. I'm happy enough to return the favor..
I responded to "You don't matter". I believe that the "why" of the "what" that we gather here to "sit around here and bitch about" is as important as the "what", itself.
The 2A is critical to me because of the same "why" as the rest of it, (1A, 4A, 5A, 10A, et al).
I've got to get ready for church. Lobo, I would ask that you go through my last reply here in a more detailed fashion. There's more there tham perhaps you caught the first time around.. (Or not).
Gotta go..
Happy Easter! He is risen indeed!!!
-
Hey..
I'm not attacking. Tom dishes it out liberally enough. Offering some in return won't injure him..
There's alot in your reply that I want to dig into.. (Alot of fond memories too..) I'm on a borrowed computer and I don't have time to do it justice. That's why I haven't offered anything up to now.. I'm not ignoring it. Please don't take it that way.
My machine "should" be back next week, (and I'll have the latitude to grace your presence in my usual, unfettered fashion).
7 or 8 months ago, Tom and I were on the same team, politically. Imagine that!!
Tom's happy to dish it out. I'm happy enough to return the favor..
I responded to "You don't matter". I believe that the "why" of the "what" that we gather here to "sit around here and bitch about" is as important as the "what", itself.
The 2A is critical to me because of the same "why" as the rest of it, (1A, 4A, 5A, 10A, et al).
I've got to get ready for church. Lobo, I would ask that you go through my last reply here in a more detailed fashion. There's more there tham perhaps you caught the first time around.. (Or not).
Gotta go..
Happy Easter! He is risen indeed!!!
You STILL don't get it.
You and I would not vote for any one the Dems would put up for a candidate because their Party platform opposes everything we believe in . Period, end of sentance
Rosie O'Donut, Van Jones, and their ilk would never vote for a Republican for the same reason.
For campaign purposes neither group matters , they will not be swayed by anything.
The ones who matter, who decide elections, are the ones who don't fall into either group, and to them a strong religious connection such as having "Rev" before your name says "THEOCRACY", and is the kiss of death for a candidate.
-
You STILL don't get it.
Okay, I'm back..
You're still missing something that you demand be changed, that never will be.. A (honest to God) Christian will not support a pro-abortion candidate. I'm not talking about the guys who play church, but the converted..
>> Again, to be clear here. It doesn't matter how many times you show up at Gods house, it matters that Jesus makes the rules in yours. <<
I can't support an anti-2A candidate. I just cant, no matter what the justification. Even before that one, I can't support a pro-abort candidate. The former has to do with Liberty, and all the things we all (here) value. The latter is because I'd rather trust my fate to Gods blessing than your good graces. I'm sorry, but you're just not that good... ::)
I can't, as His child, be "for" something that He is "against".. It's really very simple, you know??
I admonition to the secular "conservative" is to keep that in mind when brushing aside the core beliefs of a necessary voting block of the coalition.
Each of us can determine who we consider relevant or not, at least in our own minds. I'm just trying (again) to tell you that you won't bring along the Christians by forcing/demanding them to support a pragmatist on moral issues..
Some things are negotiable. Some things aren't..
Sorry it took so long. That was the most costly cup of coffee I've had to date.. :-[
-
Okay, I'm back..
You're still missing something that you demand be changed, that never will be.. A (honest to God) Christian will not support a pro-abortion candidate. I'm not talking about the guys who play church, but the converted..
>> Again, to be clear here. It doesn't matter how many times you show up at Gods house, it matters that Jesus makes the rules in yours. <<
I can't support an anti-2A candidate. I just cant, no matter what the justification. Even before that one, I can't support a pro-abort candidate. The former has to do with Liberty, and all the things we all (here) value. The latter is because I'd rather trust my fate to Gods blessing than your good graces. I'm sorry, but you're just not that good... ::)
I can't, as His child, be "for" something that He is "against".. It's really very simple, you know??
I admonition to the secular "conservative" is to keep that in mind when brushing aside the core beliefs of a necessary voting block of the coalition.
Each of us can determine who we consider relevant or not, at least in our own minds. I'm just trying (again) to tell you that you won't bring along the Christians by forcing/demanding them to support a pragmatist on moral issues..
Some things are negotiable. Some things aren't..
Sorry it took so long. That was the most costly cup of coffee I've had to date.. :-[
I'm gonna jump in the middle here. If the 'Christian' bloc of the conservative movement cannot support, even begrudgingly, a candidate that does not match up with all of their 'core' issues, the conservative movement is finished. Your way or the highway means the collectivists win. Every time. There just aren't enough Conservatives to out vote the collectivists unless ALL sub-sects of the conservative movement vote together. We all hang together, or we hang separately.
The 'Christian' bloc has a better chance of getting some of what they want with a Conservative in charge, than with a collectivist. The choice made as outlined by you above means you will never, ever, not a snowballs chance in Satan's palm have a chance of having your issues even discussed. Your decision, your choice. Work incrementally, or give it all away.
-
What isn't getting through Santahog's pious skull is that morality has no place in good government.
Just as one example lets use Osama Bin Laden .
Bill Clinton had 4 separate chances to to make OBL dead before 9 - 11 and declined on all 4 occasions .
Bin Laden was a known threat, who had already struck at US embassies .
Would it have been better for the population of the US , and their freedoms to kill him then ?
People in NY think so.
But the Bible preaches "turning the other check", and "Thou shalt not kill".
Only a moron or a pompous liberal ass would think either of those ideas have any place in national foreign policy.
If you can not separate the proprieties of personal and national conduct then you probably don't deserve the voice you are throwing away anyway.
-
That's real special Tom, but I'll tell you what I've told my State Legislators in the push to change the State from May Issue to Shall issue..
Each freedom you deny to me, you have effectively denied yourself.. Keep shoveling. All that lost ground will show up somewhere..
If you support tax money for abortion, it's your vote. I have to explain mine. I can't do it.
The thing that gets me is that all you pragmatists that want to concede to the left on moral issues don't realize that you get nothing from them in return.. Have you not noticed that? It's not just the moral issues either. It's any of it..
You sit there and demand that I compromise what I hold as Holy to something you don't really care about one way or the other. Good for you! If I say the same to you, I'm ignorant.. I"m sure you don't see that, but it's there for all but the blinded to see..
I won't compromise my faith. Not for you, Obama or anybody else who demands it.
The fact that you see it as a one way street makes you look like a fool to me, for not seeing the hypocrisy of your demands..
What is it about 50 Million dead babies that you get off on so much, that you're willing to run your head back into that same brick wall in order to support public funding for it?? (Notice that I slipped in a "compromise" there. Tom only compromises with the left, not the right.. He won't get it..)
I'm not moving, Tom. Not me or a third of the country's conservatives that you don't think should count.. Die a hero to the cause, or compromise with "us" for a change..
I want to point something out while I'm at it.. I'm not sure if Mississippi still has a licensed abortion clinic. Alabama has five. You piss downhill at these folks who are the base of the movement, and wonder why you lose elections..
My State Rep, State Senator, US Rep, both US Senator and Governor are all at least anti "tax paid" abortion, along with the majority of the Dem Party at the State level. Throw them away and see what your conservative movement looks like..
Keep shoveling Tom.. Keep shoveling.. When you get done, you'll recognize that it was your own grave, and that of the nation..
Keep it up.. We'll keep on building, and you can keep on tearing down.. Because true conservatism is all about tearing down the foundations.. Well, I'll tell ya.. You wouldn't have the gun rights you have today without the Christians down here where the economy moved standing up and doing the work..
You think the whole country is a bunch of secularists.. The television told you so. Yo believe them because it eases your guilty conscience, kind of. You keep screeching about this because you can't find peace in your soul and you vomit at anybody who stands for what you can't even justify within yourself.
You think you're fighting me/us/Christians. You're not. You're fighting Jesus. I/we/Christians gave up fighting Him and started asking the important questions of why all this did or didn't make sense.. We finally asked the right questions of the right person. You're not there yet.. I was where you are.. I get it. But I'm not coming back. You can fight me or follow me, but I'm not coming back..
I made my decision. I'm happy for your help in politics, but if you don't want mine, don't ask.. If you want my help, don't ask for something you know I can't give you.
Get a clue, Tom..
-
By the way, Tom..
All that rage blowing out your nose at me is guilt from the conviction that comes under the hand of a Holy God. If he wanted to kill you, you'd be dead by now.. Why don't you just take a breath, look up and find out what in the hell he wants from you?? You won't be any worse off than you are right now! Ask Him!! If it ain't real, you're sitting there talking to yourself, like you are right now anyway..
Have you ever wondered why "this" is the one thing that blows your rivets out to the point that you can't control your emotions and go off on Search and Destroy missions against folks that believe the same thing you do??
What are you gonna lose by asking??
You don't really "get to me", you know?? The only thing that drives me nuts about you is that you, as an otherwise intelligent person, go off on this bit and you don't realize that you're not the guy swinging the cat by the tail.. YOU'RE THE CAT!! ::)
Every time you come after a (changed, actual) Christian, you're like you're swinging a sword at a tree in zero gravity.. We're not gonna move, and you're the one that gets spun off into space with blood running down your face!..
God ain't afraid of you, or your "superior mind"!! Speak up and ASK HIM WHAT THE HELL HE WANTS FROM YOU!!
Or, you can keep doing what you're doing, losing elections and wondering why..
-
The good suffer with the bad. God raises up leaders and gives the people what they really want...if they want someone who is secular and hates God He will let that befall them. The mass of people reject God and His precepts so we get to enjoy a leader who rejects God and His precepts. So you want someone tolerant of killing unborn children...voila', but don't expect that guy to have the other principles you are looking for. These precious God-given rights we have came because of the faith, mind and will of men who loved God...not ones who compromised with truth.
It's a pretty simple Biblical concept. Conservatives will never get the leader they think they want by rejecting God. You say these rights are common to man and not given by the government...you are right...but don't expect to enjoy them if you reject the One who gave them to you.
-
Santahog, you and the other 1/3 of the 'base', cannot get to where you want to be from where you are. Romney was nothing more than a Democrat masquerading as a Republican. Yet his positions were closer (even before the waffling) to where you want to be, than the imposter/destroyer/usurper/dictator lite, will ever be. Tom wants it all when it comes to the 2nd Amendment, so do I, so does Solus. That argument parallels this one, Tom isn't willing to work on incremental gains there, just as you aren't willing to work on incremental gains on your core issue(s).
.gov has no business funding abortion, contraception, section 8 housing, education beyond the local level, limiting or prohibiting any sort of firearm ownership, and hundreds if not thousands of other issues.
To paraphrase Neil Armstrong, one small step (at a time, will equal) one giant leap. To not work toward a goal, is to hand victory to the opponent.
-
<snip> Romney was nothing more than a Democrat masquerading as a Republican. <snip>
Exactly true.
The Republican party leaderships smells of the slow death stench of compromise. The Republican "leadership" has a plan...that is to "look like, feel like, taste like" the other guy so that people are not offended by "conservative" ideals so that people will love them and vote for them. The leadership is rotten and must be replaced if even a pseudo-conservative (someone better that Romney) is ever elected. You cannot stand for one thing and your reflection image another.
To win an election the Republican party needed to promote a leader with ideals and morals but they did not.
Compared to Reagan, the elder Bush was less a leader and when compared to Bill Clinton appeared less a leader when they ran against one another. The foundation of the evaluation is the double cross on, "Read my lips no new taxes." where H Bush broke his word and compromised. Obviously in this situation, agree with the ideology or not, the democrats provided the leadership that brought the new taxes and Bush went along for the ride...a follower not a leader on the one big thing that "brought the house down" and led to his election. After that many could not vote for Clinton but would not turn out for Bush. Bush failed the slightest redemption by playing nice with Clinton instead of treating him boldly like the cockroach Clinton turned out to be.
So...pick the battles and limit the scope. I am good with that but we cannot throw our own under the bus and expect a turnout.
Today we see on TV, hear from the radio, read from the newspapers and converse with our own families events and actions where truth is a lie and a lie is the truth. We are so morally bankrupt as a nation....so fundamentally lost in our collective ability to discern lying politician stuff-their-own-pockets with power and money charlatan speech vs. truth that we cannot regain nor can we retain our famous pursuit of life and liberty. We may be destined to continue the downward spiral as subjects owned by the state.
There is no hope for our nation without leadership and mercy from above. If we want compromise...compromise it will be and we won't get to pick what get's compromised in the end.
-
And because Romney did not receive the votes from 'the base', we ended up with a creature that wishes to destroy our country. That means 'the base' is saying, 'If we can't have it our way, we'll allow and cause the whole nation to be destroyed, along with our freedom to worship any way we choose, to keep and bear arms, to free speech, etc. ad nauseam.
Be people of faith, please. You also must think rationally.
Because there is no real conservative leadership on the right, I am becoming involved with the Party on the local level. It is easy to become a precinct committeeman. IIRC, about half of all those positions are empty. Conservative grass roots members who elect leadership in the party is how to get it done.
Until then, we must choose the lesser of two evils, lest the greater destroy us before we can effect change.
-
And because Romney did not receive the votes from 'the base', we ended up with a creature that wishes to destroy our country. That means 'the base' is saying, 'If we can't have it our way, we'll allow and cause the whole nation to be destroyed, along with our freedom to worship any way we choose, to keep and bear arms, to free speech, etc. ad nauseam.
Be people of faith, please. You also must think rationally.
Because there is no real conservative leadership on the right, I am becoming involved with the Party on the local level. It is easy to become a precinct committeeman. IIRC, about half of all those positions are empty. Conservative grass roots members who elect leadership in the party is how to get it done.
Until then, we must choose the lesser of two evils, lest the greater destroy us before we can effect change.
If they can't have their theocracy they would prefer Obama over the SECULAR Republic the Founders intended.
Santahog simply underlines this.
-
I take it, correct me if I am wrong, that you two guys are under the assumption that we "people of faith" did not get out and vote for the lesser of two evils. I would think nothing is further from the truth. Everyone I know across several states who is "of faith" got out and pulled the lever early in the morning for Romney.
I think my assumption that people "of faith" voted for Romney is true. So what is the beef here? You don't want some things we hold as bedrock moral principals so you want us to go away? My free speech is not as good as your free speech? A leader can set the tone of the conversation and handle the misconstructions, lies and over-the-top statements of the left and stay the path....Romney could not do that because he was not a leader yet we voted for his lesser of two evils.
Once again some overlook the faith of our founders who were sick of a state religion and who used Deuteronomy as a guide for fair and equitable government. The foundations are distinctly Christian and at the same time distinctly permissive to inalienable rights. We don't want, at least very very few want, some cobbled theocratic idea of government some think we want; we want the nation back as it was. Just because someone may be a God hater they don't have to throw rocks at us and berate us and ridicule us. Does anyone here recognize that the repertoire of ridiculing Christians into submission on this board is very Alinski and is what we hear from the progressive liberal socialists communists? If someone want to ridicule and berate Christians they should jump fully to the dark side, become a democrat, and shake their fist at God or they can tolerate us. If someone hates us when we say what our beliefs are and what we know is true all that hate is going to eat them up.
Until then, we must choose the lesser of two evils, lest the greater destroy us before we can effect change.
If they can't have their theocracy they would prefer Obama over the SECULAR Republic the Founders intended.
Santahog simply underlines this.
-
I take it, correct me if I am wrong, that you two guys are under the assumption that we "people of faith" did not get out and vote for the lesser of two evils. I would think nothing is further from the truth. Everyone I know across several states who is "of faith" got out and pulled the lever early in the morning for Romney.
I think my assumption that people "of faith" voted for Romney is true. So what is the beef here? You don't want some things we hold as bedrock moral principals so you want us to go away? My free speech is not as good as your free speech? A leader can set the tone of the conversation and handle the misconstructions, lies and over-the-top statements of the left and stay the path....Romney could not do that because he was not a leader yet we voted for his lesser of two evils.
Once again some overlook the faith of our founders who were sick of a state religion and who used Deuteronomy as a guide for fair and equitable government. The foundations are distinctly Christian and at the same time distinctly permissive to inalienable rights. We don't want, at least very very few want, some cobbled theocratic idea of government some think we want; we want the nation back as it was. Just because someone may be a God hater they don't have to throw rocks at us and berate us and ridicule us. Does anyone here recognize that the repertoire of ridiculing Christians into submission on this board is very Alinski and is what we hear from the progressive liberal socialists communists? If someone want to ridicule and berate Christians they should jump fully to the dark side, become a democrat, and shake their fist at God or they can tolerate us. If someone hates us when we say what our beliefs are and what we know is true all that hate is going to eat them up.
I do NOT want you (people of faith) to go away. I am NOT a God hater. I am NOT throwing rocks at anyone. I do NOT intend to ridicule anyone, and IF I have, my apologies. Since only offense can be taken, I will proffer no further opinions.
-
I'm saying that religion is aimed at governing personal conduct .
Religion is counter productive in the governance of a nation .
We have been "turning the other cheek with North Kora for 60 years, how's that worked out ?
Under the Constitution which you "people of Faith" CLAIM to support the Govt has no right to say that abortion is legal, it also has no right to say it isn't.
To demand that the country hold to "christian values" makes you no better than the Taliban, and to hide behind the personal faith of the founders is an insult to their goals.
-
You are just wrong. Quoting "turning the other cheek" out of context shows something, I'm not sure what.
Insult to their goals? There is no basis for that.
I'm saying that religion is aimed at governing personal conduct .
Religion is counter productive in the governance of a nation .
We have been "turning the other cheek with North Kora for 60 years, how's that worked out ?
Under the Constitution which you "people of Faith" CLAIM to support the Govt has no right to say that abortion is legal, it also has no right to say it isn't.
To demand that the country hold to "christian values" makes you no better than the Taliban, and to hide behind the personal faith of the founders is an insult to their goals.
-
These guys do not get the concept of seperation of church and state. The Bible is not a governing document. There is no Christian Sharia'. The fact that I point this out as a Christian pisses Rastus off. He hates someone inside the church telling him he's wrong. You don't have to be a heathen as you have basically been called to be uncomfortable with electing a priest to office. And for the love of God, when did we we revive the wars of religion here? We live in the real world. Democracy=compromise. You have to get to 51%. That means building alliances which means, GASP compromise with others. Libertarians and the God Squad living toghther oh my. That means that Rastus is going to have to compromise with me, and I with him if we're ever going to get a candidate elected. That's life in politics.
-
Then you better get used to living in a dictatorship, cuz these "Wahabi Christians" are more likely to strap on suicide vests than to support any one who fails their Inquisition.
I know I'm done trying to talk sense to bigots.
-
I'm saying that religion is aimed at governing personal conduct .
Religion is counter productive in the governance of a nation .
We have been "turning the other cheek with North Kora for 60 years, how's that worked out ?
Under the Constitution which you "people of Faith" CLAIM to support the Govt has no right to say that abortion is legal, it also has no right to say it isn't.
To demand that the country hold to "christian values" makes you no better than the Taliban, and to hide behind the personal faith of the founders is an insult to their goals.
Tom, you are so ass-backwards, wrong-side-out on what you rail against as "religion" that I can't help but wonder if you're doing it intentionally!.. Do you mean to be as wrong as you are??
I ask you, (please) to kick in the door of either a teetotaler Pentecostal or winebibber Catholic, and see how many more holes you get wheeled out with than when you entered therein..
These same two will welcome you into the Faith, and HELP YOU ALONG THE WAY, with nothing more than your statement of faith..
A truly Christian nation would not allow it's citizens to be killed, beit by drug lords or Korean dwarfs.. It's your whack-job compromised sort that doesn't know what the hell to do..
Are you trying to be as ignorant as you are??
How the hell am I supposed to take you seriously when you so stridently misrepresent me? I lived up there for several years, but as best as I can remember, we never met..
Lets do this. You volunteer to be among the dead bodies that I'm gonna crawl over to vote against the next fool they offer for your consideration, just like all the other times they opened the doors to the polls.. Yawnt to?
This tear you're on here really does drop you into the "Bless his heart" category.. What a moron you are..
(One would have expected Carter to demonstrate a little sense too, considering all that he "knew".. Alas, it was not to be.. ::))
Tom, I think you really are a moron.. And I am amazed..