Posted on 11/01/2004 9:16:28 AM PST by SeasideSparrow
No. If you care about immigration vote Peroutka. If you want the IRS disbanded vote Badnarik.
Wrong, George Bush's father cost George Bush's father, the election.
Wrong, George Bush's father cost George Bush's father, the election.
Our form of government is a representative republic. That means SOMEONE is going to represent you in governing at each level of government. Unless you are that representative, no matter who that representative is, they will not represent your views and opinions 100% of the time. However, if there are two different people running for that office, one of them will represent your views more often than the other.
If you fail to vote for that person, it has the same effect as it would if you voted for the other person, who will not represent your views as frequently.
You are not being asked to vote for your representative before God; it is only a vote for someone to represent your views in secular government. You are not going to lose your salvation (assuming you are a Christian believer) by this vote. At least I've never found a scripture that indicates that. Have you?
Q: What's the difference between an empty promise that a Republican or Democrat makes that you know they won't keep, and a genuine promise that a Libertarian or Constitution party member makes that will never be realized because they don't have a snowball's chance in hell of being elected?
A: Zero. An unimplemented idea is an unimplemented idea.
You've managed to be here for many years and in all that time,haven't learned anything at all about politics.
You haven't a clue.I bet you helped give us Clinton..fess up...you did,didn't you?
bttt
Voting pool = 10 people.
Five vote for Kerry. Four vote for W. One votes for Joe Schmuck, the Independent.
Doesn't Kerry win?
Yes, but that isn't what I asked. For Kerry's chance to *increase*, the Joe Schmuck voter must have originally been a W supporter who subsequently changes his mind. For all we know, the Schmuck supporter may have been planning on sitting it out.
I deny that the GOP candidate is always automatically entitled to the vote of every non-Communist in the country. Whatever happened to earning votes?
Got that right, BIG TIME agenda. Look into the FTAA, most people seem to have never heard of it. Unfortunately most of the anti-FTAA groups are nutty left wing loons who think the FTAA doesn't go far enough! The birchers are trying to get the word out and regardless what you think of them their info is valid.
http://www.stoptheftaa.org/
And get John Kerry.
Someone said: "You are not being asked to vote for your representative before God; it is only a vote for someone to represent your views in secular government. You are not going to lose your salvation (assuming you are a Christian believer) by this vote. At least I've never found a scripture that indicates that. Have you?"
Excellent point!
Mcg1969, I appreciate all your posts here today. Also, DaughterofanIwoJimaVet, you got it! ;o)
Let's just pray God gives us all guidance tomorrow.
I have stopped pounding my head against the wall with these people. They don't understand what's at stake, apparently, and they seem entirely incapable of understanding it.
Yeah, probably. LOL
Hog wash. I have no idea what you''re talking about. I don't know anyone, RINO or conservative, who stayed home in 2000, and as a daily reader of FReep, I haven't seen anything over the last four years which supports your ridiculous assertion. Contrary to your delusions, conservatives brought the White House back to the Pubbies in '80, '84, '88 and '00, and won the Congress for the Pubbies in '94. Conservatives were the GOP until you RINOs took over.
I remember the words of Larry Hopkins, the congressman from Lexington, KY, that I worked for in '88. At his victory celebration, he told us "I can serve my party best by serving my country first". When the GOP again lives by this principle, I will consider giving it my support again. But first y'all have to look up the definition of "principle".
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
You better call Karl Rove then; because he sure as hell thinks 4,000,000 of the religous right sat home in 2000.
and as a daily reader of FReep, I haven't seen anything over the last four years which supports your ridiculous assertion
Then you don't read it very closely.
"Assessments that Bush has given up on the gay vote seem confirmed by Bush's strategist, Karl Rove, who has repeatedly claimed that the key to re-election is mobilizing the estimated 4 million evangelical voters he believes stayed home in 2000. "
"Quoth Dugwayduke: ----- Please explain how a vote for Badnarik is a vote against illegal immigration? You have read the libertarian platform? The party official opposes any limitations on immigration. ----- Michael Badnarik is not the Libertarian Party. He's the Libertarian Party's candidate. Not all candidates agree with every jot and tittle of their party's platform. And while he does support making it very easy for peaceful people to enter the US, he also supports real security for the borders..."
Horsehockey. The man's position on immigration is indistinguishable from that of the libertarian party. From the position paper you referenced: "Coupled with open, easy immigration for the peaceful, I advocate a vigorous national defense against our enemies."
Now as for his 'support for real security for the borders.', the man is even a bigger fool who wants to defend the borders while withdrawing all troops for overseas. Yeah, that makes a ton of sense, let's fight the war on terrorism here on US soil.
Exactly... most people can't grasp this. Not only will the productive have to pay back bushes "tax cuts", we'll have to pay interest to the chinese for lending him the money to "give" us those cuts.
To the bushies, I say that the only reason I personally would want to see bush elected over skerry is my personal greed... let those 6-8 million mexican friends of his that have poured over the border during his first term pay for my "tax cut".
My personal greed however, is far outweighed by what bush'll do if he recieves a second term. War against Iran, North Korea, Syria, Columbia, continued military occupation of the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq, increased fascism and socialism at home, you name it! Nothing is so dangerous as a man with nearly unlimited power, so convinced he's right, when, on just about everything, he's so damn wrong.
My vote goes to Badnarik... I'm convinced that, of the Presidential candidates on the ballot in enough states to have a mathematical chance of winning, he's the best. I'm equally convinced that a weak, poll-driven idiot like skerry, opposed by a 'pubbie senate & house, is much preferrable to the group of madmen that hold the executive branch of gov't today (but hopefully not tonite!).
Bottom line... we'll be worse off 4 years from now than we are today, no matter if bush or skerry is elected. This trend will continue until we, as a nation, restore the Republic as conceived by the Founders, or until a weak, socialist, balkanized US disintegrates. Those are the only two long-term outcomes from travelling the road we're on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.