another candidate quiz

September 18, 2007

  Here is another one of those quizzes designed to tell you which candidate most agrees with your values.  My Top Republican was Mitt Romney, and my top Democrat was Chris Dodd.  The Romney thing had me choking the hell out of myself.  It really is true.  You can’t choke yourself to death.  I did achieve unconsciousness though.

The most gratifying part of the quiz was that Barack Obama came in dead last…right behind Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.  Apparently I can still spot a whackjob a mile away.


How Ron Paul Votes

August 14, 2007

  I found a pretty good page while I was looking for financial disclosure information.  It’s available at the same place as his voting history.  What I like about the page is it is a major news source, so likely accurate, and it gives you a day by day accounting of Ron Paul’s, or any other congressional members, votes on whatever votes were held in the House that day.  It also has a lot of historic voting data, and is a great place for you to go learn about Ron Paul.  Due to the increased interest I have to assume some of you don’t know much about him

    I was a little surprised to see that he has missed 20% of the votes this year.  I’m going to assume that’s a result of the campaign schedule.

   The more I talk about him in everyday life, the more I hear the words “I’ve never heard of him.”  This is particularly interesting in that most of the people I talk to like what he has to say once enlightened.  I’m not so much a fan as a crap stirrer.  I like to start balls rolling and see what happens when they run into things.


Ron Pauls base revisitied

August 9, 2007

    I keep reading these articles that tell me how many groups with how many members Ron Paul’s Grassroots campaign has.  They are fairly formidable when you think about it.  Trying to get from 20,000 to 30,000 people to voluntarily get together to do anything usually requires a major sporting event or an attack on a third world country.  The problem is, that no matter how you slice it, they are running out of time.

    6 months.  In 6 months who vs. who will be decided.  By the middle of February it will all be over but the crying for the rest of the candidates, and I fear, Dr. Paul.  He has a rabid online fan base, but they aren’t reaching beyonf their own inner circle.  Bottom line, if you don’t want to read about Ron you don’t have to because his base isn’t making any concerted effort to change the hearts and minds so to speak.  They talk to each other a lot, and they go slam ant-paulers, but they aren’t doing anything to reach that 98% of the voters that just are not interested in the Ron Paul movement.

   Whether this is a part of the natural individualist nature of people who would support a small government libertarian, or simply because the internet isn’t a great way to create political change isn’t apparent to me. What is apparent is that Ron is simply going to run out of time.  His ideals are to big for most people to wrap their minds around.  Small government sounds good until you see a bridge collapse in Minnesota, or until you have to decide that being a loser in a war we should win isn’t so bad.  American’s do not like to lose, and while their is a vocal minority screaming to get out of Iraq, far more people would like to see us win and get out of Iraq.

    Without a concerted effort by his base to change their approach to the issue of spreading the word about Ron Paul he has no chance.  You can spam every internet poll from now until doomsday, and he will still be a minor congressman from Texas.   Use your voice.  I’m not a supporter, but just by talking to people I see how easy it is to get them to at least contemplate the idea of small government.  To ponder the idea of an America that doesn’t spread its message through gunboat diplomacy.  Change is not unwelcome, but with the media steadfastly sticking to it’s “he’s not a legitimate candidate” rhetoric, his followers need to make the adjustment.  They aren’t, and by the time they do, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, or Rudy will be challenging Hillary for the presidency of the United States.  Wake up Pauliacs.  You are running out of time.  Quit waiting for that big win to change things, when what is needed is hard work and communication.


religion…the fox in the hen house

July 16, 2007

    I’m a little concerned.  Is it Romney, or is it just me?  Has religion suddenly leapt to the fore of the presidrntial race?  I guess anything is possible in a society as mixed up as ours, but can it be reasonable to elect someone based on their religious beliefs?  Pardon me while I hop up on my pulpit.

let’s start with a laymans definition of faith.  Most religions are faith based, so this is a good starting point.

Faith:  Believing in something that can’t be proven.   Pretty simple.  Not real complicated.  Would anyone like an example?

Example 1: While there is no proof that tarot cards can really tell your future, many people believe in them. 

Let’s do another

example 2: while there is no proof that their are humanoid life forms on other planets, many people believe in them.

Let’s call in the hounds and head it on home to bowlegs now.

example 3: Though there isn’t a shred of evidence that there is a supreme being, many people believe in one.

   Number one is no sillier than number two is no sillier than number three.  In fact, if you believe in any of them they aren’t silly at all. They also do not lend you a special insight into the running of a nation, any extra knowledge on how to deal with the leaders of other nations, nor do they improve your ability to make a tasty bologna, mustard, and chitlins sandwich.

Its not important.  In fact, were it up to me religion would almost always be a negative. Religious doctrine, all of them, are riddled with violence, intolerance,  and draconian strictures.  The strictures are so binding that a truly devout man would make a horrible leader.  would you like an example?  No? Tough

Example:  Jimmy Carter

Example: Adolph Hitler

Example: Golda Meir

Example: The Ayatollah Khomeini

I could go on like that until tomorrow, but we’d be no closer to the end of this post, and I’m striving for it.

  Mitt Romney is a mormon.  What did you think?  90% of the people that hear the word mormon think “polygamy.”  Those who have read up on it so they can slam him know much more.  What they don’t realize is that the same brush they use to spread the tar that holds the feathers on old Mitt, can be used on any of the others as well.

What makes a christian a good choice as a president?  If you said nothing you are correct. What happens if a true christian gets in the white house? A Ron Paul, or a Mike Huckabee? Hell, Mike is a preacher. Will they fight to end abortion?  Will they try to make adultery a felony?  Will coveting be a crime? Man I hope not because I confess I have been known to covet my ass off from time to time.  Will a catholic president out of bitterness go after the lutherans?  You laugh my friend, but it’s been done.  This nation was settled by people who were fleeing religious persecution.  If I’m not mistaken it was those two factions.

   What about Barack?  He is a christian, but his name is pure muslim. What if he’s elected, and then converts to islam?  does Shariaa law become something he wants enforced?  Shall we lop off hands for theft?  How about stoning for adultery. Maybe a little bif bam boom for not wearing your abaya when you walk out in public ladies?

What about hillary? Would opus dei try to whack her?  They seem to be all about a patriarchal society?  Or would she rewrite scripture ala Dale Brown, and raise up Mary Magdalene? 

  Back To Mitt.  Would he really make me have two wives?  I work damn hard not to have any, but I know i’m supposed to be fruitful and multiply under virtually every religion on earth.

   None of that is likely to happen.  We have what we call seperation of church and state.  It’s more of a euphemism for “incredibly rich churches don’t have to pay there fair share,” but we do have it. The point I make in my overly wordy way, is that religions are not inviting if you don’t belong to them.  They are not inclusive, are not tolerant of other ideals.  They are probably the number one cause of wars since time began.

Oh yeah.  they are based on faith.  Let’s elect the man in the moon.  There is no basis for him existing, but i have faith that he does.

Being religious is not a bad thing.  It tends to make one an instant hypocrite, but other than that it’s not so bad.  Religion is no barometer on how good a person is though, and shouldn’t be a primary concern when casting your vote.  I’d vote for the guy that worships Roscoe the wonder bunny if i think he’s the best man for the job.


Ron Paul and the NAFTA Super Highway (with corrected links)

July 11, 2007

I apologize for the links.  They’ve been fixed

  As many of you know, I’m neither for nor against any political candidate at this point.  That being said I have shown more interest in Ron Paul than in many of the other candidates.  The reason for this is I believe Ron Paul is more dangerous.

   One of his bloggers the other day (name withheld) challenged me to come up with something they haven’t already figured out how to spin.  So here you go.  Explain this for me.

On October 30, 2006 He said this: http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst103006.htm

what this article does not say is the NAFTA superhighway IS I-69. 

On march 12, 2007, Ron Paul made a request for funds.  It was for I-69, and was categorized as funding for roads. see this link.  (page 20)

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/allpolitics/0706/popup.congress.earmarks/pdfs/tx.14.paul.pdf 

Now, if he was against it in october, why is he trying to appropriate funds for it in march?  Don’t say “well he voted against it in the final bill.”  Just tell me why he tried to appropriate funds for the NAFTA superhighway.

  There you go ron paul bloggers.  Handle that… BTW, I am really curious about this, so if any of you have information let me know.  The NAFTA superhighway will go through my town, and I don’t like it.  China is funding deep water ports in mexico, which will make them the big winner in the whole deal.

thanks mike for bringing this to my attention


who is your candidate? (quiz link)

July 8, 2007

  so there is a quiz.  I didn’t bother to read how scientific it is.  i just wanted to see what happened.

http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html

if you go to that link you get a 25 question quiz asking you how you stand on issues and personal data for a candidate.

here are my centrist results.  Mdvp is gonna hang me.

1.  Theoretical Ideal Candidate   (100%)
2.  Dennis Kucinich   (61%)  Information link
3.  Hillary Clinton   (55%)  Information link
4.  Joseph Biden   (53%)  Information link
5.  Barack Obama   (53%)  Information link
6.  Christopher Dodd   (52%)  Information link
7.  Alan Augustson   (52%)  Information link
8.  John Edwards   (52%)  Information link
9.  Al Gore   (49%)  Information link
10.  Wesley Clark   (49%)  Information link
11.  Rudolph Giuliani   (47%)  Information link
12.  Michael Bloomberg   (47%)  Information link
13.  John McCain   (43%)  Information link
14.  Mitt Romney   (42%)  Information link
15.  Ron Paul   (42%)  Information link
16.  Mike Gravel   (39%)  Information link
17.  Tom Tancredo   (39%)  Information link
18.  Bill Richardson   (36%)  Information link
19.  Duncan Hunter   (34%)  Information link
20.  Kent McManigal   (34%)  Information link
21.  Elaine Brown   (30%)  Information link
22.  Jim Gilmore   (29%)  Information link
23.  Tommy Thompson   (29%)  Information link
24.  Mike Huckabee   (24%)  Information link
25.  Newt Gingrich   (23%)  Information link
26.  Chuck Hagel   (23%)  Information link
27.  Fred Thompson   (22%)  Information link
28.  Sam Brownback   (22%)  Information link

oh well, i called em as i seen em.    guess i’m a whacko liberal.  Probably because i said legalize dope.  I’m really not sure how this happened.  I think it may be flawed. maybe how i rated the importance or something.  I was gratified to know i really don’t like Ron Paul.  I’ll tag it for Tsoldrin.  Even more gratifying was that they agree…i don’t like any of them.


Ron Paul is not a god

June 20, 2007

   and all you heathens are not prophets.  You are however likely as not the same quack- pots that raised The Ross Perot banners lo those many years ago, ushering in the decade of the over serviced gland.  We the people thank you.  Ol Bill did ok by todays standards, and it was the Ross Perot mercenaries that made it possible.

   I think what I like most about the repeat of this scenario that a weaselly but slightly strong Ron Paul candidacy could create, is the thought of you self righteous sonuvabitches sittin there with your head in your hands, your lite beer lying between your fat feet having your first real thought in 2 years , WHAT HAPPENED?

     Lemme hook you up with some reality.  You happened you ignorant walking piles of mucous.  You happened.  You and your 1 million strong ilk of blog writing,  teeth gnashing, mildly retarded Ron Paul fanatics.  do the math….1 million don’t win…never has you annally retented hillbillies wishing for some good old days that never existed.  You mush mouffed scumsucking, tail wagging maladjusted purveyors of hopeful insanity.

Now for some more sanity for you refugees from the idiot bin.  who do you think is funding this awesome putsch on the internet?  Ron Paul is like “whatta fug is happening?  Its the lefties you wienie spanking troglodytes.  They love ron paul.  They love him because they remember Ross Perot.  

   I don’t mind.  I’m not for or against anyone right now.  what I do know is most my Ron Paul hits come from gun-toting conservatives to dumb to realize all ron does is splits the party.