Looking forward to it. Maybe we can do a nice two or three beer conversation on Skype soon.
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>wrote: > Hey Mark, > > Yep, unfortunately, I agree with you. I still believe that Reagan has > been the best President in our lifetime, and even though he fought the > battle daily to limit government, he didn't go far enough.....I am not > sure he could. I will write more to explain what I am talking about, but > in general, our federal government is such a behemoth, and there are > generations of Americans now who have come to expect and depend upon > government for their very existence. This was by design, by communists > and corrupt politicians. Again, more on this later. > > Keith > > On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 4:11 PM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The problem is that under Reagan the government grew greatly as well.... >> Only a true conservative with a "fuck you" attitude that takes and >> publicizes names and holds truly open meetings will have a chance on >> shrinking the behemoth. It is not something that will ever be accomplished >> behind closed doors or in a "meeting" behind closed doors. >> >> Both Newt and Mitt like the "game" too well. >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Keith In Tampa >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> I don't agree with Newt on a number of issues, and I would like for him >>> to adopt a more "Limited Government" attitude; by his actions and not >>> just words....(Newt talks a good game of limited government now) >>> >>> I do think that Gingrich looks for solutions to a number of problems >>> that this Nation faces, from a conservative viewpoint, and that he could >>> be an inspiration to this Nation, just as Reagan was after Carter. I >>> cannot think of any major issue where Gingrich does not have a conservative >>> point of view or policy. Example? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> "*Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow conservatives*". >>>> >>>> I think of Romney as a liberal and Newt as a fence sitter or moderate >>>> at best. Newt is too fast to compromise. It is truly time for a true >>>> conservative hard liner based on the bill of rights.....especially the >>>> tenth amendment. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Keith In Tampa < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Good Morning Perp and Mark! >>>>> >>>>> I agree with both of you......Sorta....... >>>>> >>>>> I am one that believes the Republican candidates should adhere to the >>>>> Republican 11th Commandment: "*Thou shalt not speak ill of fellow >>>>> conservatives*". Ron Paul broke this rule in Iowa, as he blasted >>>>> both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in Iowa with false, misleading and >>>>> prevaricate commercials. We've seen Paul's legions here in PF inundate >>>>> the board with many of these false assertions. (*See* MJ and >>>>> PlainOl). >>>>> >>>>> Just as important, for months, the Paul supporters all had their >>>>> panties in a wad, claiming that the media was ignoring Paul; that Paul >>>>> wasn't getting his fair share of press coverage. Well, once Paul's >>>>> numbers went up in Iowa, the press did in fact start covering Paul, and >>>>> the light got a little brighter on Paul's past record. Just as it did on >>>>> Gingrich and other candidates who have been raked over the coals by >>>>> pundits; (*See* John Sununu, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, and a number >>>>> of pseudo RINO assholes who are in Romney's camp and who have attacked >>>>> Gingrich unmercifully and unfairly). You don't see Gingrich supporters >>>>> crying like women, the way that Paul supporters are crying! I was >>>>> listening to Rush Limbaugh and several other talk show hosts yesterday, >>>>> and >>>>> the barrage of Paul supporters crying foul was unbelievable! >>>>> >>>>> The truth is Paul has a number of skeletons in his closet and his >>>>> legions of crackpot supporters are now pissed that the truth is coming out >>>>> about Crazy Uncle Ron. >>>>> >>>>> Paul is not electable on a national scale, but as both of you pointed >>>>> out, *IF* Paul chooses to break away and run as a third party >>>>> candidate, it will no doubt cost the Republicans the election, and we >>>>> will >>>>> see another four years of socialist/communist presidential directives and >>>>> executive orders, of which our Nation may not be able to recover. >>>>> >>>>> I trust that Paul has enough sense and wisdom to know that his running >>>>> as a third party candidate will do serious damage to our Nation and that >>>>> his candidacy would be an open ticket to a second Obama Administration. >>>>> >>>>> I'm all for throwing Paul a bone.....Give him a prominent night for a >>>>> speech at the Convention here in Tampa in August, and I would whole >>>>> heartedly support "Secretary Of The Treasury Paul". >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 9:39 AM, THE ANNOINTED ONE < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Perplexed has it right... if he cuts and runs as an independent Obama >>>>>> will win... he has 15% of the vote in his pocket. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Dec 31, 7:35 am, Perplexed <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> > Keith, I agree with you that a lot of his views are those of a >>>>>> > crackpot. But I noticed yesterday watching some discussion on one >>>>>> of >>>>>> > the Fox News shows that the pundits are being downright stupid in >>>>>> how >>>>>> > they are stepping up the talking points of "he's not electable". To >>>>>> > say he couldn't win in a general election is likely very true, but >>>>>> > that's not what they were doing. The person actually referred to >>>>>> his >>>>>> > candidacy as a "joke". >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Personally I think that kind of nonsense will backfire and encourage >>>>>> > Paul to run as an independent and republicans can kiss any chance of >>>>>> > defeating Obama good-bye. These ignorant assholes who make up the >>>>>> > "GOP establishment" and their mouthpieces in the media are >>>>>> apparently >>>>>> > too stupid to realize they should be respectful and leave room to >>>>>> > encourage Paul to join whoever the eventual nominee is - because >>>>>> > without him AND his supporters voting for whoever that is, >>>>>> republicans >>>>>> > stand no chance of winning, and that's just a fact. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Dec 31, 12:49 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00 PM, MJ <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > Posted on Thu, Dec. 29, 2011 >>>>>> > > > *GOP Establishment wrong to ‘disenfranchise’ Ron Paul supporters >>>>>> > > > *BY COLIN MCINTOSH >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > Don’t tread on me. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > Recently, something’s been amiss in the mainstream media when >>>>>> discussing >>>>>> > > > Ron Paul’s candidacy. As the Texas congressman’s support has >>>>>> surged to 15 >>>>>> > > > percent nationally in the latest Washington Post poll, the >>>>>> “Very Serious >>>>>> > > > Republicans” who write columns and give their opinions on TV >>>>>> and radio >>>>>> > > > shows have changed their tune. They aren’t as confident, as >>>>>> cocky or as >>>>>> > > > arrogant as they used to be when predicting the 2012 >>>>>> presidential election. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > Now, they sound scared; they sound nervous; they sound shaken. >>>>>> But most >>>>>> > > > important, they sound resolute that they, and not their >>>>>> audience, represent >>>>>> > > > the opinions of mainstream America. They are wrong, and their >>>>>> gamble will >>>>>> > > > be costly. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > In the absence of facts to support the Establishment >>>>>> candidates, the media >>>>>> > > > have turned to personal insults, childish mockery, and >>>>>> deliberate >>>>>> > > > misinterpretation of Dr. Paul’s lessons. Their goal, quite >>>>>> shamefully, is >>>>>> > > > to convince Ron Paul supporters that the candidate that they >>>>>> believe in has >>>>>> > > > no chance of winning the nomination, let alone the general >>>>>> election. Here >>>>>> > > > are some recent headlines from around the web: “Huckabee slams >>>>>> Ron Paul, >>>>>> > > > says he has ‘no chance’ to win Republican nomination” The Hill >>>>>> “Ron Paul >>>>>> > > > can’t be allowed to win Iowa” Daily Caller “Why Ron Paul >>>>>> Can’t Win” >>>>>> > > > Wall Street Journal “If Ron Paul wins Iowa, does that make the >>>>>> state >>>>>> > > > irrelevant?” Christian Science Monitor >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > This type of overt pressure from our media to change your vote >>>>>> because >>>>>> > > > “your candidate can’t win” constitutes a form of >>>>>> disenfranchisement. >>>>>> > > > Despite Paul’s rise to the front of the pack in Iowa, the media >>>>>> still >>>>>> > > > ignore that his national support from Republicans has risen >>>>>> from 9 percent >>>>>> > > > to 15 percent in a month (Washington Post/ABC poll, Dec. 18). >>>>>> They refuse >>>>>> > > > to report the fact that he would lose only by 49-44 in a >>>>>> hypothetical race >>>>>> > > > against Obama, down from 52-42 just one month ago. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > They will never tell us that 21 percent of Americans polled >>>>>> chose to vote >>>>>> > > > for Ron Paul as a third party candidate over the hypothetical >>>>>> choices of >>>>>> > > > President Obama or Romney/Gingrich. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > This last statistic leads me to my main point: if the GOP >>>>>> nominates anyone >>>>>> > > > besides Ron Paul, Barack Obama will win the 2012 election. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > Why? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > Currently, Establishment Republicans are issuing an obvious >>>>>> warning to >>>>>> > > > Paul’s base: vote for Romney, or the Democrats will win in >>>>>> November. >>>>>> > > > Clearly, they hope this ominous bit of advice also reaches the >>>>>> millions of >>>>>> > > > Americans who are still learning about Ron Paul’s views. Well, >>>>>> Dr. Paul’s >>>>>> > > > supporters have a retort: we don’t give a damn. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > There are worse things than having a Democrat in the White >>>>>> House, and >>>>>> > > > disenfranchisement is among them. We will not vote for whom we >>>>>> are told. We >>>>>> > > > will not vote for a candidate who espouses a policy of >>>>>> preemptive war. We >>>>>> > > > will not vote for the continuation of a flawed, costly, >>>>>> discriminatory drug >>>>>> > > > war. We will not vote for the circumnavigation of the U.S. >>>>>> Constitution. We >>>>>> > > > will not vote for a candidate (Romney) who has received just 10 >>>>>> percent of >>>>>> > > > his campaign donations from actual people (from opensecrets.org). >>>>>> And we >>>>>> > > > will not feel remorse for a Republican Party that has abandoned >>>>>> us. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > I am a registered Republican, but when I listen to my so-called >>>>>> party >>>>>> > > > leaders, I become infuriated and despondent. When did >>>>>> preemptive war become >>>>>> > > > our national defense? When did the desire to police the world >>>>>> become so >>>>>> > > > mainstream that we forgot that our nation was birthed from a >>>>>> repugnance to >>>>>> > > > imperialism? When did we concede that the federal government >>>>>> has the right >>>>>> > > > to regulate our lives to the point of quiet despotism? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > And most important, when did we become convinced that our votes >>>>>> and voices >>>>>> > > > only matter if we support the perceived frontrunner? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > As an advocate of liberty, I will vote on principle over party, >>>>>> every >>>>>> > > > time. If the Republican Party took the time to educate its >>>>>> members on the >>>>>> > > > issues, rather than simply bullying them into submission, their >>>>>> party >>>>>> > > > wouldn’t be so splintered right now, and perhaps Dr. Paul would >>>>>> have a >>>>>> > > > unified force behind him heading into November. Instead, GOP >>>>>> leaders seem >>>>>> > > > committed to promoting the status quo, to increasing their own >>>>>> power and >>>>>> > > > influence, and to keeping the support of moneyed interests. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > If the GOP Establishment is successful in convincing >>>>>> Republicans to >>>>>> > > > nominate Romney instead of Paul, and Paul does indeed run as an >>>>>> > > > independent, Obama will win with 45 percent of the vote, and >>>>>> the GOP will >>>>>> > > > have no one to blame but themselves. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > Colin McIntosh, a resident of Fort Lauderdale and graduate of >>>>>> St. Thomas >>>>>> > > > Aquinas High School, is a senior at Emory University in Atlanta >>>>>> and will >>>>>> > > > graduate this spring with bachelor degrees in economics and >>>>>> business >>>>>> > > > administration. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/12/29/2566016/gop-establishment-wrong. >>>>>> .. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > -- >>>>>> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>>>> > > > For options & help seehttp:// >>>>>> groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>>>> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>>>> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > > crackpot.jpg >>>>>> > > 9KViewDownload >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>>>> >>>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>>> >>>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *Mark M. Kahle H.* >>>> * >>>> * >>>> * >>>> * >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>>> >>>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >>> >>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> *Mark M. Kahle H.* >> * >> * >> * >> * >> >> -- >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. >> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum >> >> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. >> > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- *Mark M. Kahle H.* * * * * -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
