RNC 2012

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

I know damn Liberals piss me off too, More proof people believe anything

[/quote]

So the orginal peice ended up incorrect?

Good thing I didn’t go running around like a loon using it to further my agenda, and only commented on how something like that looks, in the thread on the subject.

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
His speech was good. Clint seemed a bit deranged though…wtf.[/quote]

Dude is in his 80s… I hope to be half that well together when I’m that age.

I’m not one for celebrity worship, and am pretty much anti-celebrity opinion when it comes to politics, world issues and moral values. His whole deal was just entertainment really.

[/quote]

I love Clint, just for the record. But I think he detracted from the message more than he helped, esp where he was in the program. Maybe a bit earlier in the night would’ve worked better. Kinda broke the flow in my view…
[/quote]

I am huge Clint Fan and Clint is entitled to his opinion but he is showing his age and I agree he was some what disheveled . But he is an old guy

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

I love Clint, just for the record. But I think he detracted from the message more than he helped, esp where he was in the program. Maybe a bit earlier in the night would’ve worked better. Kinda broke the flow in my view…
[/quote]

I see what you are saying, and am happy Rubio introduced Mitt.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?

[/quote]

Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?

[/quote]

Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]

So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?

[/quote]

Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]

So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.

[/quote]

Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

I know damn Liberals piss me off too, More proof people believe anything

[/quote]

So the orginal peice ended up incorrect?

Good thing I didn’t go running around like a loon using it to further my agenda, and only commented on how something like that looks, in the thread on the subject.

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
His speech was good. Clint seemed a bit deranged though…wtf.[/quote]

Dude is in his 80s… I hope to be half that well together when I’m that age.

I’m not one for celebrity worship, and am pretty much anti-celebrity opinion when it comes to politics, world issues and moral values. His whole deal was just entertainment really.

[/quote]

I love Clint, just for the record. But I think he detracted from the message more than he helped, esp where he was in the program. Maybe a bit earlier in the night would’ve worked better. Kinda broke the flow in my view…
[/quote]

I am huge Clint Fan and Clint is entitled to his opinion but he is showing his age and I agree he was some what disheveled . But he is an old guy
[/quote]

Let’s see how sharp you are when you hit 82.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?

[/quote]

Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]

So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.

[/quote]

Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]
No I agree with his positions. He can’t be nominated by the current Republican party he doesn’t court the evangelicals. I don’t mean he should be nominated now that he is the Libertarian nominee. I think the Republicans should adopt a more Libertarian like platform if you like.

I am realistic he would have a hard row to hoe with cutting medicare and social security and defense spending and ya know being actually for limited government and wanting to stay out of all issues of personal choice, but dare to dream.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?

[/quote]

Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]

So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.

[/quote]

Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]

I would vote for him too. Serious question… What kind of people are voting for Romney but would rather vote for Obama over Johnson? (If Johnson was the rep nominee)

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?

[/quote]

Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]

So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.

[/quote]

Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]
No I agree with his positions. He can’t be nominated by the current Republican party he doesn’t court the evangelicals. I don’t mean he should be nominated now that he is the Libertarian nominee. I think the Republicans should adopt a more Libertarian like platform if you like.

I am realistic he would have a hard row to hoe with cutting medicare and social security and defense spending and ya know being actually for limited government and wanting to stay out of all issues of personal choice, but dare to dream.[/quote]

So let me get this right, you wanted Johnson because he would have stayed out of your personal affairs. But you are going to vote for Obama? Someone who has nosed government in between you and your doctor, taking over 1/6th of the economy in the process. Someone who wants to grow government so that it can be even more intrusive than it already is.

You are going to have to explain that to me.

Thanks.

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?

[/quote]

Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]

So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.

[/quote]

Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]

I would vote for him too. Serious question… What kind of people are voting for Romney but would rather vote for Obama over Johnson? (If Johnson was the rep nominee)
[/quote]

One reason I laugh at Pitts political positions (there’s many more than one). He was on board with Ron Paul, but would rather vote for Obama than Romney.

Paul who didn’t want to collect any income tax and Obama who feels that income taxes should be raised to world record levels.

Certainly there are many more similarities between Paul and Romney than Paul and Obama. There are other forces at work like what I call the “rebel factor.”

HEY! I just realized blowhard Trump didn’t have a roll in the RNC!
LOL Good call!

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?

[/quote]

Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]

So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.

[/quote]

Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]
No I agree with his positions. He can’t be nominated by the current Republican party he doesn’t court the evangelicals. I don’t mean he should be nominated now that he is the Libertarian nominee. I think the Republicans should adopt a more Libertarian like platform if you like.

I am realistic he would have a hard row to hoe with cutting medicare and social security and defense spending and ya know being actually for limited government and wanting to stay out of all issues of personal choice, but dare to dream.[/quote]

So let me get this right, you wanted Johnson because he would have stayed out of your personal affairs. But you are going to vote for Obama? Someone who has nosed government in between you and your doctor, taking over 1/6th of the economy in the process. Someone who wants to grow government so that it can be even more intrusive than it already is.

You are going to have to explain that to me.

Thanks.[/quote]
I was living with Johnson repealing national healthcare as one of the issues I am not a fan of in order gain some of the other things. I am completely ok with requiring people to buy their own goddamn insurance. I like that while hes going to cut medicare and social security he’s also pledging to cut the military by 40 percent. He’s also going to restore habeus corpus and end gitmo as it is now. Repeal the patriot act. End the war on drugs. Allow gay marriage. Keep abortion legal.

The better question would be is your commitment to small government enough to overcome your distaste of his views on personal morality. I find that unlikely.

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
What kind of people are voting for Romney but would rather vote for Obama over Johnson? (If Johnson was the rep nominee)
[/quote]

People scared of “too much too soon” radical change in government.

Obama’s change is in the opposite direction, and also very radical, but much more subtle. It is fucking brilliant to be honest. Obama is a very smart man, and very good at doing what he wants to do.

Johnson isn’t “forward”, he is in fact backward, lol. Even though what he wants to do is much more in line with what we need, what the government was supposed to be and would be a better option than Mitt or Obama in the long term.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
What kind of people are voting for Romney but would rather vote for Obama over Johnson? (If Johnson was the rep nominee)
[/quote]

People scared of “too much too soon” radical change in government.

Obama’s change is in the opposite direction, and also very radical, but much more subtle. It is fucking brilliant to be honest. Obama is a very smart man, and very good at doing what he wants to do.

Johnson isn’t “forward”, he is in fact backward, lol. Even though what he wants to do is much more in line with what we need, what the government was supposed to be and would be a better option than Mitt or Obama in the long term. [/quote]

I agree with the “too much too soon”. But because of how slowly things move it would never be “too much” or even “too soon” because of congress. Legitimate concern but not a legitimate reality.

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:
What kind of people are voting for Romney but would rather vote for Obama over Johnson? (If Johnson was the rep nominee)
[/quote]

People scared of “too much too soon” radical change in government.

Obama’s change is in the opposite direction, and also very radical, but much more subtle. It is fucking brilliant to be honest. Obama is a very smart man, and very good at doing what he wants to do.

Johnson isn’t “forward”, he is in fact backward, lol. Even though what he wants to do is much more in line with what we need, what the government was supposed to be and would be a better option than Mitt or Obama in the long term. [/quote]

I agree with the “too much too soon”. But because of how slowly things move it would never be “too much” or even “too soon” because of congress. Legitimate concern but not a legitimate reality.[/quote]

Right, and that is why the government was set up the way it was. The slow pace and forced compromise was intended to make it hard to take away liberty and at least slow down the slide into tyrany to a pace where the people could load their muskets.

The only way Johnson and people like him ever get a real shot is the electorate has to change first off, but besides that is to start local. Mayor and selectman turn into state reps and governors, and they in turn become congress and the president.

Once 32 states have Johnson’s leading them, the national scene will adapt.

At least that is my theory. The only way the people can take back our country is to pay attention, be aware and start at home. Start with the individual, spread to the family, spread to the community, spread to the state, and then sit in the White House.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

I know damn Liberals piss me off too, More proof people believe anything

[/quote]

So the orginal peice ended up incorrect?

Good thing I didn’t go running around like a loon using it to further my agenda, and only commented on how something like that looks, in the thread on the subject.

[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
His speech was good. Clint seemed a bit deranged though…wtf.[/quote]

Dude is in his 80s… I hope to be half that well together when I’m that age.

I’m not one for celebrity worship, and am pretty much anti-celebrity opinion when it comes to politics, world issues and moral values. His whole deal was just entertainment really.

[/quote]

I love Clint, just for the record. But I think he detracted from the message more than he helped, esp where he was in the program. Maybe a bit earlier in the night would’ve worked better. Kinda broke the flow in my view…
[/quote]

I am huge Clint Fan and Clint is entitled to his opinion but he is showing his age and I agree he was some what disheveled . But he is an old guy
[/quote]

Let’s see how sharp you are when you hit 82. [/quote]

Let’s not rush things :slight_smile:

Filmmaker Michael Moore predicts Romney wins.

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
A bit cocky don’t you think ?

[/quote]

Eh… If I didn’t dislike his agenda so much that wouldn’t bother me, other than the fact it is our chair, that we gave him, and it would go along way if he kept in mind the constitution he wants to change so bad, is the only reason he has the chair to sit in.[/quote]

So there is not a chance in hell I’d ever vote for Romney for many reasons. Why couldn’t the Repubs pick someone like Johnson? While some of his policies I am lukewarm on I’d be down for voting for him in a second.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

I know he doesn’t fit the mold of the party any longer, but I can’t find fault with many of his issue positions.

[/quote]

Obama would have absolutely crushed Johnson. Oh wait…that’s why you wanted him to be the nominee. Ha…got it.[/quote]
No I agree with his positions. He can’t be nominated by the current Republican party he doesn’t court the evangelicals. I don’t mean he should be nominated now that he is the Libertarian nominee. I think the Republicans should adopt a more Libertarian like platform if you like.

I am realistic he would have a hard row to hoe with cutting medicare and social security and defense spending and ya know being actually for limited government and wanting to stay out of all issues of personal choice, but dare to dream.[/quote]

So let me get this right, you wanted Johnson because he would have stayed out of your personal affairs. But you are going to vote for Obama? Someone who has nosed government in between you and your doctor, taking over 1/6th of the economy in the process. Someone who wants to grow government so that it can be even more intrusive than it already is.

You are going to have to explain that to me.

Thanks.[/quote]
I was living with Johnson repealing national healthcare as one of the issues I am not a fan of in order gain some of the other things. I am completely ok with requiring people to buy their own goddamn insurance. I like that while hes going to cut medicare and social security he’s also pledging to cut the military by 40 percent. He’s also going to restore habeus corpus and end gitmo as it is now. Repeal the patriot act. End the war on drugs. Allow gay marriage. Keep abortion legal.

The better question would be is your commitment to small government enough to overcome your distaste of his views on personal morality. I find that unlikely.

[/quote]

Eh…I’m not a libertarian and I think that when the rubber hits the road that most of the libertarian points just don’t measure up.

With perhaps a rare exception or two I agree with Romney just about right on down the line.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Filmmaker Michael Moore predicts Romney wins.

Who cares what that admitted communist thinks?

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Eh…I’m not a libertarian and I think that when the rubber hits the road that most of the libertarian points just don’t measure up.

[/quote]

It’s because you are so old. :wink:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Filmmaker Michael Moore predicts Romney wins.

Who cares what that admitted communist thinks?

[quote]ZEB wrote:

Eh…I’m not a libertarian and I think that when the rubber hits the road that most of the libertarian points just don’t measure up.

[/quote]

It’s because you are so old. :wink:

[/quote]

I don’t know cutting the military budget in half and legalizing (all) drugs just doesn’t make sense to me.

But I agree with you if I was young and naive I would feel that these are good things :wink: