He doesn't need a teleprompter! - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: He doesn't need a teleprompter!

  1. #11
    The other problem is, as I see it, anyway, that the Demonrats fight like, well, rats. Bite, kick, punch, lie, cheat, steal...whatever it takes. (BTW, those are good tactics for winning a fight.) OTOH, the Repugnants fight like wussies. It is long past time to take the gloves off and get down to dancing. But, the GOP doesn't seem to have what it takes. And on it goes...
    Prov. 27:3 - "Stone is heavy and sand a burden, but provocation by a fool is heavier than both"

  2.   
  3. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Battle Creek Michigan
    Posts
    1,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Keykutter View Post
    It's a shame Newt never made good on the 'Contract with America'. He lost a lot of support during that time.

    As much as I respect and like Newt, it's hard to fall behind a candidate just on principle, as much as I do stand on principle on a lot of other issues.

    Wasting a vote on a dark horse, especially for this office is just plain stupid.

    I know the argument, if everybody felt like I did, nobody but the pretty guy would get elected. I just don't want to feel that I have wasted my vote.

    I would vote for Newt in a skinny minute if I thought he had a chance, but I'm afraid his one chance has been squandered, his fault or not.

    KK

    PS...Killer speech though!
    Your reply made me think of something. For as long as I've followed presidential politics, I've listened to the talking heads pontificate and preach about how someone is just plain "unelectable." I never COULD figure out what qualifies a newsreader to render such an opinion, but I learned to do my own research. If I recall correctly, FDR, Harry Truman, JFK, Jimmy Carter, to name a few were all considered by many to be "unelectable."

    Also, the media always preaches that a third party just cannot win, BUT, I seem to recall that we haven’t ALWAYS had a Democratic and Republican party! But that’s not to say that a popular enough PERSON could not win the nomination, third party or otherwise!

    I feel it's the "I don't think this (my) guy can win attitude" that causes many to cast a vote that does NOT reflect what is in their heart, which is how we end up having to vote for the lesser of the evils.

    If, for example, voters REALLY, REALLY like Herman Cain they should VOTE THEIR HEART in their primary, and to hell with conventional “wisdom,” the (mostly) liberal media, and all of the other "experts." I use Cain as an example because of how well he's done in the polls. As pissed off as Americans are right now with politicians in general, Herman Cain could well end up as our next president simply because he is NOT a politician.

    Having said that, I'm assuming you're talking about not voting for YOUR guy (Newt) in the primary. Please make sure that you vote in your primary, because THAT is where the candidate is selected. Most people don't feel the primary is important when, in fact, it is THE place to vote if you want YOUR candidate to win! Skipping the primaries is EXACTLY how we end up having to "vote for the lesser of the evils," such as John McCain in the last election.

    Whether it's Newt or Herman Cain, both of whom are considered "unelectable," it's important that you vote your heart, but more importantly that you vote in the PRIMARY. Then you CAN vote for the person YOU think should run. Besides, if your guy doesn't get nominated, you can vote for the "lesser of the evils" with a clear conscience!
    Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia...Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

  4. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    St. Louis County, MO
    Posts
    3,445
    Quote Originally Posted by dcselby1 View Post
    Your reply made me think of something. ... Having said that, I'm assuming you're talking about not voting for YOUR guy (Newt) in the primary. Please make sure that you vote in your primary, because THAT is where the candidate is selected. Most people don't feel the primary is important when, in fact, it is THE place to vote if you want YOUR candidate to win! Skipping the primaries is EXACTLY how we end up having to "vote for the lesser of the evils," such as John McCain in the last election.

    Whether it's Newt or Herman Cain, both of whom are considered "unelectable," it's important that you vote your heart, but more importantly that you vote in the PRIMARY. Then you CAN vote for the person YOU think should run. Besides, if your guy doesn't get nominated, you can vote for the "lesser of the evils" with a clear conscience!
    Now you have just managed to confuse me. <g> If I vote with my heart, and my candidate did not win, the purpose of my voting will come to nil. Times has changed. This time around I wanted to vote in someone who will get the current one out of office. The person I want to vote may not be that one. It will be a dream come true but not all people vote with the heart, not in this crucial time when our country is being dragged down slowly to the pit. Many more months will go by before the next election. And there will be a revolution apart from the polling booth before that, you can be sure I will be in it and with it. I'd say from now till the next election, we should all be watchful. I've lived in countries where people accept the order of the day from the guv -- no more.
    "Don't let the door hit ya where the dawg shudda bit ya!"
    G'day and Glock
    GATEWAY SWIFT WING ST. LOUIS

  5. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by JJFlash View Post
    The other problem is, as I see it, anyway, that the Demonrats fight like, well, rats. Bite, kick, punch, lie, cheat, steal...whatever it takes. (BTW, those are good tactics for winning a fight.) OTOH, the Repugnants fight like wussies. It is long past time to take the gloves off and get down to dancing. But, the GOP doesn't seem to have what it takes. And on it goes...
    Probably because the Reps, on the main, try to stay within the bounds of civilized behavior.

    Witness the difference in "Tea Party" demonstrations and "Occupier" demonstrations. There IS a difference between working within a system to remedy observable faults.... Quite another to try to destroy or disrupt a system to bring about "change".

    The Nation is fundamentally bankrupt and trying to forestall a complete meltdown through borrowed money.

    Yet the "Occupiers'" demands boil down to "we want more money" and we want someone else to pay for it. Simple as that. THIS is the "attitude" we have carefully cultivated in this Nation for half a century in ernest and probably started working toward it thirty years earlier than that.

    Prosperity, or the promise of same, as a Nation, does NOT come from the Government! It comes from the hard work and productivity of ALL the people. When a large number of "people" DEMAND that money be thrown at them rather than try to earn their own way through life....... we have a problem.

    I don't mind charity for the purpose of giving a leg up. I become heated when it becomes a lifestyle. Yet we have untold millions sucking the proserity and productivity out of this Nation.... to the point where some people (well, to be truthful.... a LOT of people) expend no end of energy trying to find a way to qualify themselves for Government Largesse.

    Question: What is the fastest way to get on the Government dole? Simple, become a mother with no means to support the child. Corelation: Is it any wonder why illigitimacy amongst the lower social classes is over 50%? (I still call them illigitimates. I remember a time when it was a social stigma to have children out of wedlock. Now we reward the practice.) (Be advised that "in wedlock" used to be considered a stable financial base for child rearing. If the care and feeding of the children is primary concern... one would think the priority of the Government would be to encourage "family values", ties and SUPPORT BASE.)

    Anyone figure out why the Government is going broke? We have promised too much to too many for too long. All in the name of "humanity" but all we have accomplished (Despite promises of "eradicating poverty".) is to create a societal "tail" that now has enough members to begin to wag the dog.

    We have a problem here. If a Nation's prosperity is based on productivity.... what is the result of a lack of productivity? Making it even more difficult to "feed" the dependents as the tax base shrinks.

    ... and the still unanswered question remains: Who, then, will feed the millions of dependents when the Government goes completely under?

    Perhaps you may believe that the dependents will suddenly become productive on and for their own survival? Given that many of them have NEVER had to fend for themselves or actually produce.... is this going to be a "gift" from the Gods once the evil Capitalistic US is destroyed?

    I'm not holding my breath on THAT one.

    GG
    Fanatics of any sort are dangerous! -GG-
    Which part of "... shall NOT be infringed..." confuses you?
    Well now, aren't WE a pair, Raggedy Man? (Thunderdome)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast