I've left the party

[Latch]

1. It is not socialism word for word. I agree that it sucks as well.

 

2. The Republicans voted for the bailout, and it was passed under former President Bush, a Republican.

 

Did you miss earlier where I said Bush spent way too much?

 

The Republicans did not vote for the latest $700B+ stimulus bill that nobody had enough time to read.

[AirYardGo]

Could we start a fundamentalist movement and actually organize the Christian Conservative Party? I'll volunteer to run for President on the ticket.

 

Let's do it!:thumb:

[PepRock01]

So what? The only difference between Republicans and Democrats is assorted, vague, random tax cuts by the Republicans. They both spend our money like crazy, which in the end will screw us, no matter if it is spent on the war in Iraq or universal health care. (Also, it is worth noting here that universal health care is NOT a bad thing, something that conservatives tend to get strung up on. The bad thing is the enormous amount of money spent (and negative impacts of it on medicine). So the money will be mismanaged somehow.

 

 

Anyways, it took Jimmy Carter to bring us Reagan. If 20 years of what you think is socialism (which, I can safely assume, you don't know what socialism actually is) is what it takes to bring us true small government, then so be it.

 

I am failing to understand why you feel that way about the bolded.

[PepRock01]

Could we start a fundamentalist movement and actually organize the Christian Conservative Party? I'll volunteer to run for President on the ticket.

 

 

Yeah, that will go real far.

[PepRock01]

I have been unhappy with the Republican party for a while. In fact when I registered to vote I only registered Republican because they weren't so far from my beliefs as the Democrats AND I wanted to vote in primaries. That said I am thinking I may well change my registration as well.

[cch5432]

I am failing to understand why you feel that way about the bolded.

 

I wouldn't see anything wrong with everyone in the country having health care (not necessarily all government-mandated, but even if it were some) so long as it A) did not present an enormous burden to government and taxpayers and B) did not result in an equally enormous lowering of quality and R&D among healthcare providers and pharmaceutical companies.

 

If I thought universal healthcare truly made everyone better off in the long-run, I'd probably support it.

[PepRock01]

I wouldn't see anything wrong with everyone in the country having health care (not necessarily all government-mandated, but even if it were some) so long as it A) did not present an enormous burden to government and taxpayers and B) did not result in an equally enormous lowering of quality and R&D among healthcare providers and pharmaceutical companies.

 

If I thought universal healthcare truly made everyone better off in the long-run, I'd probably support it.

 

 

I suspect I can understand that thought process, even if I find it a tad idealistic.

[cch5432]

I suspect I can understand that thought process, even if I find it a tad idealistic.

 

Oh, believe me, I don't see it ever happening. I'm just trying to emphasize that people shouldn't be against universal health care because it is inherently evil; they should be against it because of the spending and unintended consequences.

 

Unrelated note- a few months ago, you expressed appreciation for me complimenting your ability to keep politics and separate from morality and be especially ruthless, so I assumed that your opposition to widespread health care was some kind of pseudo-Survival-of-the-Fittest argument that those who can't afford it should die. :lol:

[PepRock01]

Oh, believe me, I don't see it ever happening. I'm just trying to emphasize that people shouldn't be against universal health care because it is inherently evil; they should be against it because of the spending and unintended consequences.

 

Unrelated note- a few months ago, you expressed appreciation for me complimenting your ability to keep politics and separate from morality and be especially ruthless, so I assumed that your opposition to widespread health care was some kind of pseudo-Survival-of-the-Fittest argument that those who can't afford it should die. :lol:

 

 

I don't feel they should die per se, but if they cannot afford it then it is a possible outcome. In the event that it was cost effective, was free of graft and still managed to encourage entrepreneurship and development in medicine I would probably be willing to embrace it as a practical expense for the country. As it is, I see none of that and as such I see it as a waste.

 

I am not necessarily cruel, I just figure we should look at such things from an amoral perspective. Otherwise we could possibly find ourselves emotionally attached and make an irrational and illogical decision.

[SEMPERFIFALCON]

I agree it's time to start looking past the D's and R's, IMO both are doing a very poor job of representing the people their supposed to be representing.

[Covercorner]

A major problem with both parties is the number of people who think and vote like you.

 

Little unsure on how to take this:confused:

 

Assistance please.

[formerkywrestler]

I've left the Republican party. I think its high time we all take our names off of the Democrat and Republican registers and send them a message. I harped on Rmom because she's registered Independent and doesn't get to vote in the primaries. Well primaries suck anyway. They're a waste of time and money, especially when you end up with nominees like John Kerry and John McCain.

 

So now I'm registered Libertarian. I would encourage others to leave their mainstream party and tell these blood-sucking politicians that the free ride is over. Besides, you can still vote for whoever you want in the general election.

Awesome, it was the best political decision I've made in a long time. I also don't think I am voting for an incumbent anytime in the near future.

 

Though if Ron Paul runs as an elephant again, I may have to temporarily go back to do the right thing and vote for him in the primary.

[Hearsay]

I am strongly considering dropping party affiliation, and I can strongly influence at least 23 other persons I know (we've actually discussed this at church). However, Ron Paul ain't the answer.

[formerkywrestler]

I am strongly considering dropping party affiliation, and I can strongly influence at least 23 other persons I know (we've actually discussed this at church). However, Ron Paul ain't the answer.

He probably isn't. BUT, he is someone I can feel very comfortable casting a vote for. I mean Barr wasn't the answer either...but he was much better than either of the two big ones.

[75center]

Little unsure on how to take this:confused:

 

Assistance please.

 

"the correct Republican if there ever is one is elected"

 

Your quote "IMO, there is no such thing."

 

Appears that you are saying there is no such thing as a Republican who could be right to lead. That's how I took it and I believe there are too many people who simply vote the R or the D rather than listening to the candidates. I believe that is a major problem and seems to be growing.