And Along Came Nader......

[Lewis the Pike]

I am now in a quandry about who to vote for now.

I was teetering between Obama and whoever the Libertarians put up. Now I may look at Nader.

http://www.votenader.org/issues/

1-Adopt single payer national health insurance

2-Cut the huge, bloated, wasteful military budget

3-No to nuclear power, solar energy first

4-Aggressive crackdown on corporate crime and corporate welfare

5-Open up the Presidential debates

6-Adopt a carbon pollution tax

7-Reverse U.S. policy in the Middle East

8-Impeach Bush/Cheney

9-Repeal the Taft-Hartley anti-union law

10-Adopt a Wall Street securities speculation tax

11-Put an end to ballot access obstructionism

12-Work to end corporate personhood

I agree with most of his platform.
especially #8:mad::mad::mad::mad:!!!! Also, #4, #7, #9, #11, and #12

[BigBadBen]

What happened to the "never say die" Paulite mantra??

Giving up already?:rolleyes:

[Lewis the Pike]

I have lost faith in the republican party. They are either too stupid or too easily influenced from voting for a true conservative, like huckabee or paul.

I repect mccain and his service to our country, but I don't think foreign intervention will ever make our country safe, espicially with an open border.

[Lewis the Pike]

I have lost faith in the republican party. They are either too stupid or too easily influenced from voting for a true conservative, like huckabee or paul.

I repect mccain and his service to our country, but I don't think foreign intervention will ever make our country safe, espicially with an open border.

In addition, Dr. Paul has said he will not run as a 3rd party candidate.

[BigBadBen]

McCain is not my choice for Repubilcan Party Nominee either.

[okstatepike]

I am now in a quandry about who to vote for now.

I was teetering between Obama and whoever the Libertarians put up. Now I may look at Nader.

OK Lewis, I want to make sure I have this right. You were teetering between a true Libertarian candidate and the most liberal/quasi-socialist candidate since Eugene McCarthy?

Do you have a coherent political point of view these days or are you just reading the current winds of opinion? Those two options could not be more diametrically opposed on 80+% of the issues... One philosophy is based on the primacy of the individual and their rights, the other is based on the individual's primary duty to the collective. How in the world can you reconcile the two with any intellectual honesty?

[legelegel]

This post immediately made me think of ... then came Bronson.

http://www.thencamebronson.com/frames01.htm

http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/493/bronsoniz1.png (http://imageshack.us/)

[legelegel]

Route 66 on a motorcycle instead of a corvette.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=L6j8YXr9A6A

Guy: "Taking a trip?"

Bronson, not hearing the man clearly, asks, "What's that?", and the guy repeats the question, to which Bronson replies, "Yeah."

Guy: "Where to?"

Bronson: "Oh, I don't know. Wherever I end up, I guess."

Guy: "Pal, I wish I was you."

Bronson, "Really?"

Guy, sadly: "Yeah."

Bronson: "Well, hang in there."

[Poke John I]

Lewis, liking Nader's platform is one thing but you need a reality check. You hate Bush/Cheney but the fact that Nader ran in 2004 is the only reason Bush/Cheney ever got elected. Ninety+ % of Nader's votes would have gone against Bush/Cheney in 2004 and kept them out of office.

If 2008 is a close election, McCain can win because Nader is sucking votes away from the Democrats again. Nader talks a good game but he has no chance. I would not be surprised if some very rich Republicans are behind his running.

[Lewis the Pike]

OK Lewis, I want to make sure I have this right. You were teetering between a true Libertarian candidate and the most liberal/quasi-socialist candidate since Eugene McCarthy?

Do you have a coherent political point of view these days or are you just reading the current winds of opinion? Those two options could not be more diametrically opposed on 80+% of the issues... One philosophy is based on the primacy of the individual and their rights, the other is based on the individual's primary duty to the collective. How in the world can you reconcile the two with any intellectual honesty?

I disagree with Obama's philosophy, but i believe he will do what he says. To me honesty and transperency in the oval office is key to getting my vote.

After 16 years of Dubya and Bubba. I want someone I can trust. I was too young for Bush 41.

Dubya ran as a Christian conservative, no nation building, small government Republican. I nearly voted for him.

He has proven to be anything but what he ran as.

I trust Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Ralph Nader and Barrack Obama to do what they say.

I in no way trust Hillary Clinton. And I am not completely comfortable with John McCain.


There.... reconciled. :D

[Lewis the Pike]

Lewis, liking Nader's platform is one thing but you need a reality check. You hate Bush/Cheney but the fact that Nader ran in 2004 is the only reason Bush/Cheney ever got elected. Ninety+ % of Nader's votes would have gone against Bush/Cheney in 2004 and kept them out of office.

If 2008 is a close election, McCain can win because Nader is sucking votes away from the Democrats again. Nader talks a good game but he has no chance. I would not be surprised if some very rich Republicans are behind his running.

Incorrect, Dubya won, because Al Gore was a great guy, but a horrible public speaker....same with John Kerrey.

There need to be more choices for president, not less.

[okstatepike]

I guess it's reconciled - but I still don't understand how you can vote for someone whom with you clearly disagree on fundamental philosophical points. In fact, if he "does what he says he will" he will take this country farther away from the philospohy you feel is correct.

So is a fair summation of your POV that you would rather have a transparent President who does waht you clearly oppose to one who is less transparent but may be more inline with your beliefs?

To each his own, and vote your conscience - but I must admit that does not sound like a rational stance to me.

[Lewis the Pike]

I guess it's reconciled - but I still don't understand how you can vote for someone whom with you clearly disagree on fundamental philosophical points. In fact, if he "does what he says he will" he will take this country farther away from the philospohy you feel is correct.

So is a fair summation of your POV that you would rather have a transparent President who does waht you clearly oppose to one who is less transparent but may be more inline with your beliefs?

To each his own, and vote your conscience - but I must admit that does not sound like a rational stance to me.


Well there is logic, and then there is MateoLogic* (trademark pending):D:D

[FloridaPoke]

I disagree with Obama's philosophy, but i believe he will do what he says. To me honesty and transperency in the oval office is key to getting my vote.

After 16 years of Dubya and Bubba. I want someone I can trust. I was too young for Bush 41.

Dubya ran as a Christian conservative, no nation building, small government Republican. I nearly voted for him.

He has proven to be anything but what he ran as.

I trust Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Ralph Nader and Barrack Obama to do what they say.

I in no way trust Hillary Clinton. And I am not completely comfortable with John McCain.


There.... reconciled. :D

Well, if all you require is transparency, then we should bring Jimmy Carter back so we can have 18% interest rates, 16% inflation and 17% unemployment again all at the same time. He was a very, very honest and transparent man who was comletely inept. Is it ok to be horrible at guiding our country as long as there is transparency?

[Lewis the Pike]

Well, if all you require is transparency, then we should bring Jimmy Carter back so we can have 18% interest rates, 16% inflation and 17% unemployment again all at the same time. He was a very, very honest and transparent man who was comletely inept. Is it ok to be horrible at guiding our country as long as there is transparency?

No my first choice is Ron Paul, second Mike Huckabee,

third Barrack Obama or Ralph Nader

fourth John McCain

fifth Bob Stoops :eek:

sixth Kelvin Sampson :eek::eek:

seventh Joe Castiglione :eek::eek::eek:

eighth Hilary Clinton :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: :eek: