Home > words > steven rants: my ideal candidate

steven rants: my ideal candidate

September 5th, 2008

i find this whole election very interesting. i don’t really like either of the candidates. i’ll admit i probably lean towards obama, even though i don’t believe that we’ll be seeing the change he talks about anytime soon. i think i like him more for joe biden than anything else. it would also be nice to have an articulate candidate in the white house. then again palin is pretty cute. but i can’t, in good conscience, vote for either of the two candidates. i was talking politics with a friend recently and mentioned that i really liked ron paul and will probably vote for him. she didn’t know anything about ron paul so i told her that i’d put together some youtube clips about ron paul. i’ve decided to post them here, as i think most people don’t know much about ron paul. the media did a great job at marginalizing him and both parties made him out to be crazy.

this further illustrates to me how the two parties have done a great job at meeting in the middle and though they maintain that they have real differences, i believe that they’re both self serving and want nothing more than to take our money and grow the government. the republican party, which has always claimed to be the party of limited taxes and government has done nothing but increase the scope and size of the government and increase taxes. the democrats have done pretty much the same thing, though at least it seems to be part of their outward agenda. not quite as hypocritical.

please watch these clips. i’ve made sure to pick out some short ones so as not to take too much of your time and tried to pick the ones that will give you a good idea as to what he’s all about. if you watch these and decide that he’s not the man for you, then i totally understand. vote your conscience. but at least listen and educate yourself. and i’ve heard all the comments of, “but don’t you think you’re throwing away your vote?” maybe. but at least i’m not throwing away my integrity by not voting my beliefs. i’m not trying to imply that voting for mccain or obama is “throwing away your integrity” if you truly believe that they’re the best person for the job. but if you think that there’s someone else out there better suited to run our country, then i believe that it’s our duty as citizens to put that person in office. if every american did that, then we wouldn’t be stuck with “the lesser of two evils”. for me that person is ron paul. i hope i haven’t offended anyone. i’m just really passionate about this. and if you’re passionate about obama or maccain, then good for you. vote your conscience. anyway, check these out:

ron paul on nbc evening news (this one’s good)

ron paul, on drugs, prostitution, and states rights (from 20/20)

ron paul, actual republican. this one is a great example of the media trying to marginalize ron paul.

ron paul on the war

please sound off in the comments. i would LOVE to hear how you feel, good or bad. keep it cool, but feel free to speak your peace. i won’t get offended as i hope you haven’t.

words

  1. September 5th, 2008 at 10:19 | #1

    I love Ron Paul and have been completely confused on why the Republican base hasn’t embraced him. Heck, I honestly can’t figure out why Republicans didn’t make him the nominee. An Obama-Paul race would have been brilliant. The rhetoric would be focused on issues, not personal attacks. The debates would have been substantive. And we would be focused on the things that actually matter to every single American.

    Instead, he’s ridiculed by his own party because he opposes a war that 70% of Americans now oppose. It’s a little bit insane. My absolute favorite moment from the Republican debates (and I watched them all) was when the field was asked if hey would go to war without Congressional approval. After they all went off about lawyers and executive privilege, Ron Paul said, “Are you KIDDING me?!?” And explained that we are literally Constitutionally disallowed from going to war without Congressional approval. It was fantastic and pitch perfect. Paul has steered clear of the so-called “hot button issues” in favor of a grander vision. I am amazed by any politician… heck, any human being with an innate ability to focus their followers’ anger into an articulate call for change and genuine love for the work required get it. I’m not alone in thinking that Ron Paul will be remembered as one of our great leaders, despite his party’s instance on marginalizing him.

    Alas, I simply can’t subscribe to Libertarian ideals. While I like the idea of trimming programs and streamlining government, I fundamentally disagree on a basic level: I believe it is a government’s responsibility to take care of its citizens. While I agree that the current state of welfare is abysmal, ending it entirely would put far too much pressure on the local church (the most widely used charity organizations) to provide for the basic needs of its members. If parents were entirely responsible for the costs of schooling, wealthy families would get the best educations, poor families would get none. If a truly “free market” drove the economy, monopolistic companies would deliberately drown out locally owned businesses.

    There is nothing inherently wrong with any of these ideals, I just don’t subscribe to them. I like the way it’s worded in the Declaration of Independence, that governments are instituted among men to secure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

    It’s no secret that I am an Obama fan, so I won’t bore you with details (I have my own site for that), but I have to say, I fully support any and all write-in candidates. It’s so much better to vote for the candidate you want, not against the candidate you don’t.

    Honestly, I’m hoping the Libertarian Party sees a huge surge after this election. I would love to have debates with some substance again. And I would love Ron Paul to be recognized as the clear-minded leader he is.

  2. sisterfriend
    September 5th, 2008 at 10:58 | #2

    I think this guy pretty much seems complacent about all of the things that our prophet has warned us about. He’s a throw back to the 60’s free love, do whatever feels good to you, kind of attitude. I’m not ready to live next door to the drug dealing hooker who is told by our President “it’s your right!” Thanks for the info though. Your sister loves you anyway!

  3. September 5th, 2008 at 11:05 | #3

    this is the kind of discussion i’m talking about. yeah, ron paul was completely dismissed by the republican party. this just proves that the republican party has totally lost it’s way. if any of the old school republican presidents were around, they would cry. i can appreciate a candidate that sticks to their ideals, whether or not i disagree with them, just for the fact that i know what i’m getting. i’m still not sure that obama can (or will) deliver on these promises. and i just feel like with mccain, if we don’t get more of the same stuff we’ve had for the last 8 years, i have NO IDEA what we’ll be getting.

    i like the way you worded it. to vote for the candidate you want, not against the candidate you don’t. that’s the whole principle of “throwing away your vote”. by that logic, as long as the candidate you voted for didn’t win, haven’t you also thrown away your vote? if they didn’t win it may as well have been a vote not cast. unless you’re voting for some insurance. for the chance to be able to say, “i didn’t vote for him”, when the president screws up. and in that case, i’ll feel much better if i cast my vote for the person that is going to do the best job.

  4. September 5th, 2008 at 11:09 | #4

    @sisterfriend: i appreciate the thought, but completely disagree. if you listen to ron paul, he says frequently that using drugs is tragic, but he doesn’t believe that it’s the governments role to step in and tell us what to do. and it was joseph smith that said, “we teach the people correct principles and let them govern themselves”. wasn’t it Heavenly Father’s plan for us to come to earth and be tested? it was Satan that wanted us to be forced to do the right things.

    wow. that was pretty good.

    and i love you too!!!

  5. September 5th, 2008 at 11:32 | #5

    Oh man, you hit it on the head. The entire Republican convention has been about attacking the opposition (Obama, liberals, Democrats, San Fransisco, community organizers, etc.) instead of outlining their actual plan. Do they even have an actual plan? They’ve turned this election into a vote for either “Obama” or “Not Obama.” McCain has given us nothing, no specifics of any kind, on what he’ll do to help the country. In fact, he is deliberately catering to the single-issue-driven, hard right, evangelical vote (which, I’ll be honest, as a Mormon, I find a little frightening). He picked a VP who is currently under investigation for ethics violations, for heaven’s sake.

    Others are specifically outlining what they will do. Ron Paul, Barack Obama, even Bob Barr are talking about a direction, a goal, and a plan. I’d like to think that the framers of the Constitution had that in mind when they wrote it: a government that moved away from the nonsensical and oligarchical, toward a government focused on the people and their problems. To me, there’s no such thing as “throwing away” a vote. If American citizens weren’t so scared of voting their principles, we wouldn’t be stuck with a two party system.

    (And, as an aside, I literally fell asleep during McCain’s speech. I mean, jeez, can we please have a President who knows how to talk? Please?)

  6. September 5th, 2008 at 11:42 | #6

    And, wow. That was pretty good. I will probably be quoting you.

  7. voteforobamaman
    September 5th, 2008 at 12:35 | #7

    A vote for Ron Paul is a vote wasted. Like it or not, the major parties hold all the cards AND they run the game! Obama offers the only chance for real change for the future. McCain will continue Bush’s flawed domestic and foreign policies and he certainly won’t have the support of a Democrat controlled Congress. Thus, with McCain we’ll have at least 4 more years of nothing getting done in Washington.

    Regardless of whether you like Obama personally, what’s really at stake is: 1. ending the immoral Iraq war sooner rather than later 2. saving Social Security vs. reducing it 3. appointing Supreme Court justices than favor individual rights over those of the government 4. continuing to allow a woman rather than others to choose whether or not to end her pregnancy 5. allowing gays and lesbians to have equal rights under the law 6. giving tax savings to the middle class vs. the wealthy 7. providing access to universal health care to all Americans 8. granting citizenship to worthy immigrants and setting up reasonable immigration reforms 9. shifting policies to support the environment and energy savings, and 10. enhancing our stature in the world via diplomacy vs. military actions. Ten very important differences that set Obama far apart from McCain and will make him a far better President.

    The choice in Nov. is quite simple: A vote for Obama will improve America and uphold the American way of life.

    Voteforobamaman

  8. September 5th, 2008 at 13:36 | #8

    @voteforobamaman: while it may be idealistic, let me quote the definition of the word vote.

    a. A formal expression of preference for a candidate for office or for a proposed resolution of an issue.

    i firmly believe that the purpose of voting is not to vote against the candidate you don’t want to win, but to vote for the candidate that you believe will do the best job. that’s where our country has fallen short. i’m curious as to whether your main goal is to put obama in office, or keep mccain out. regarding the issues that you’ve raised:

    1. i agree that this is important. but obama’s foreign policy isn’t much different than bush’s or mccain’s. he just wants to move the troops somewhere else. if we really want a change in foreign policy, i don’t believe that obama has demonstrated that he’s going to do that.

    2. social security needs a complete overhaul. i’m unfamiliar with mccain’s or obama’s thoughts on the matter.

    4. if i were a democrat. i wouldn’t worry too much about this one. do you really believe that if mccain were put in office, he would somehow get roe v. wade overturned? that’s not even in the scope of the presidential office. that genie is out of the bottle, and like it or not, it’s not getting put back.

    6. the real issue at hand is closing the tax loopholes that are offered to big businesses. while i like the things that obama is saying, i have doubts as to whether or not he’ll be able to deliver on that, plus…

    7. there’s no way that taxes are going down with the introduction of universal health care. i know that he says he has a plan, and NPR will tell you how it will work, but i have several examples that prove otherwise. namely, every foreign country that offers a form of socialized health care. in every situation the people pay absurd taxes. and having spoken to some of the citizens of these countries, many will tell you that health care is a joke. try going to canada and wait in line for hours to see a doctor. or having to maintain your own private policy just so you can see a doctor for the important things.

    10. (see #1) while obama may talk about diplomacy, he supports military action about as much as mccain. just because he voted against the war in iraq, doesn’t mean that he’s against military action.

    i’m not saying that obama isn’t better than mccain. he very well may be. but is he the best candidate for the job? in my opinion? not by a long shot. i prescribe to the philosophy that if we really to make a change in this country then we have to be willing to vote for a candidate that preaches the change that we want. for me, that man is ron paul. i’m not comfortable with a lot of obama’s ideologies, and would feel guilty if i helped put him in office just because he “wasn’t as bad as the other guy”. i stand behind ron paul and the things that he represents. no matter what my vote, i want my conscience clean.

  9. September 5th, 2008 at 14:29 | #9

    I’m the biggest Obama fan I know (volunteered, donated, called, attended rallies, etc.), and I also disagree with voteforobamaman (no offense, man).

    The good news; I actually do believe that Obama will fundamentally change our foreign and domestic policy. Obama is perfectly suited for the job because he will focus (and has focused) on people rather than procedures. Internationally, he is a diplomat. Domestically, he is a forceful and articulate leader. From his time as a Constitutional professor to passing ethics laws in the Senate, he has always sought information and concusses to make important decisions. Only as an example (not as a comparison), it’s what made Abraham Lincoln a great President. When elected, he led by making tough decisions based on solid information.

    But the points listed by voteforobamaman are basically anti-McCain talking points. Obama doesn’t support and hasn’t written a “universal” health care plan. A single-payer system simply will not be approved by Congress. Obama is smart enough to know this, so his plan is much more intelligent. Obama also believes that gay marriage should be left to the states, not the federal government. While I agree that the things listed are important, much of it is moved forward by citizens, not politicians.

    I’m voting for Obama because I genuinely believe he’s the best man for the job, not because I think we need to kick some Republican butt. No vote for any candidate is “wasted” in our democratic-republic. How else can we, as citizens, voice our opinion? The First Amendment guarantees us the right to “petition the Government,” and while this protects groups who lobby for specific issues, it also highlights our ability to make the most personal petition of all: our vote.

    While I desperately want Steve to vote for Obama (I want everyone to vote for Obama), it is his ability to vote for anyone he likes that makes this country great.

    And Ron Paul is a great vote, exactly because of the personal petition it reflects.

    Another aside, it’s another reason I like Obama. He is funding and organizing voter registration drives in states (like Utah and West Virginia) who will absolutely vote against him. Elections are not only about electoral votes or the Supreme Court, they about making sure that every single American has a voice.

    Dang, I love America today.

  10. steve
    September 6th, 2008 at 14:13 | #10

    There’s been a lot of great comments on this. But…

    It’s hard for me to understand why everyone is not an independent. Luckily, I figured out a long time ago that there’s not much of a difference between the 2 most powerful parties. I know they like to pretend there is (and there was a long time ago). They’ll argue the point till they’re blue in the face, but they won’t accept it because then they’d have to admit that most of their beliefs are wrong; and that would take humility. Deep down they all want the security net of a big government to take care of them. Because of all the things that have happened to my immediate family, if there’s one thing I’ve learned, is that as soon as you expect a company or the government to take care of you…you are screwed!

    sadly, lack of responsibility is now ok in society. It’s easy to say that people should have the right to make all their own decisions. What’s harder is to accept any negative consequences for them. I’m just tired of paying for people’s personal mistakes. I work very hard to support my family, and I don’t need people telling me I need to pay more to help those who don’t. I’m sorry if someone picked the wrong major, or they decided to screw around until they were kicked out of the house, but don’t ask me to support you. I tried my damnedest to make money at music, but also didn’t expect the govt to take care of me while i was doing it. If you have bad times thrust upon you, then you deserve some help. But if it’s your fault, sorry.

    Obama or McCain will NOT get my vote. The sheep will secretly say that it’s a throw away (yes you will). but real change has to start somewhere. Power back to the states, give me back my S.S. so that I can invest it properly, limit legal immigration to only “X” amount per year (you’re fooling yourself if you think we have the resources to support the world and remain economically strong), no more welfare to any company with more than 50 employees, any whatever any other crazy idea and can come up with.

    I’m sorry if i offended anyone. I really do like most people. i just don’t have very much respect for people who only vote party lines. pull your head out of the sand

  11. September 6th, 2008 at 14:24 | #11

    here, here my good man. i couldn’t agree more. for me, that’s what ron paul represents. a staunch constitutionalist, he also believes the republican party has fallen so far of the mark, that that’s why the party views him as “crazy”. go back 100 years (or even 50 for that matter) and he would be seen as a normal republican. the republican party used to be the party of limited government, limited taxes and states rights. now they’ve become the party of expanded government, higher taxes and federal dictatorship (“read my lips: NO NEW TAXES!” yeah, that worked out pretty well).

    so, if you don’t mind me asking, who are you going to vote for (if at all)?

  12. Brady
    September 7th, 2008 at 22:47 | #12

    I was going to leave a comment on here; but, between Voteforobamaman and Ethan’s comments I’m frankly too frustrated to know where to even start.

    Between the comment that the government being responsible for the citizens social welfare and Ethan’s suggestion that Obama and Paul run together (could you have more polar opposite ideologies on one ticket?) I think people have lost their minds.

    Even Steven is spitting out dem-lib lines and doesn’t even know what they mean!

    We’re screwed people.

    (and know that I love Ethan but I would punch him in his face if I could right now:)

  13. September 7th, 2008 at 22:59 | #13

    all right brady, it looks like i’m going to have to set you straight on a couple of things.

    first of all, you might want to re-read ethan’s post. in no way did he suggest that paul and obama run on the same ticket. i believe his was saying that he would like to see an election in which paul and obama were the two main candidates.

    2nd: if i’m spouting some “dem-lib lines”, please let me know what exactly which ones you’re referring to. and it’s pretty lame to say that i’m saying something and don’t know what i mean. maybe you don’t agree with what i’m saying, but to assert that someone that says something that you don’t agree with must not know what they’re talking about is pretty stupid.

    so let’s hear it, brother. you don’t get to make comments like that and then run.

  14. steve
    September 8th, 2008 at 00:17 | #14

    Steven,

    If Paul is running, he’ll get my vote. Excuse my ignorance, but I’m not sure if was running. between the boy starting school, 2 bands going on in the studio at the same time, and everything else, my lack of knowledge of current events has been at a peak.

    Someone told me i’m a libertarian. from what i’ve read, i can get behind some of their ideals, but not all of them. I guess the cheese still stands alone.

  15. Brady
    September 9th, 2008 at 12:36 | #15

    Alright, here are my thoughts. I apologize for the other day as I just got off digg.com and am so sick of the politics on that site.

    Point on Ethan, I get that he was saying that an Obama vs. Paul race would’ve been rad. Thanks for the correction Steven. My fundamental disagreement with Ethan is his statement that “I believe it is a government’s responsibility to take care of its citizens.” I guess he would need to clarify what taking care of its citizens entails. Militarily? Sure. Minimal regulation which intervenes only when neutral third parties are involved, and the free market can’t correct, absolutely.

    But, forced distribution of wealth for social welfare programs. Absolutely not. This country (and the gospel) is founded upon mercy and assistance through self guided efforts. The BOM repeatedly tells us that it’s our duty and responsibility to help the needy and the poor, not to turn our backs on those that hunger, bear anothers burdens, etc. But, the most important element to social welfare and the gospel is that it is through ones own efforts using self agency as the vehicle. Only through self agency can we grow or digress as an individual. If you look at any humanitarian/social help offered by the church it is largely funded through fast offerings, I.e., voluntary contributions.

    Now to the government, I absolutely believe that there are individuals which need help and assistance time to time. The fundamental question is to what extent is the government obligated to provide for its citizens. We obviously have exploited those that work hard and advance themselves fiscally. It’s a fact that the top 5% of wage earners pay close to 40% of total revenue through federal taxation.

    If we as a people decide that the government should be in the social welfare game then major reform is needed. Such as; programs designed to help the individual temporarily all with the goal of self reliance. A mandatory repayment of assistance provided, etc.

    But at the core, I believe helping another should be voluntary and not mandated through distribution of wealth.

    Lastly to Steven, your comments I make reference to are the ones where you offer no explanation as to why. It seems you’re simply regurgitating the same lines from the DNC with no substance or examples.

    Some of them are;

    “With McCain we would have 8 more years of what we’ve had with Bush.”
    “Republicans have increased taxes for middle class America.”

    Ahh, I hate politics.

  16. Brady
    September 9th, 2008 at 12:46 | #16

    By the way, most peoples opinion on taxing and political party is limited to:

    Republicans want to cut taxes and Democrats increase taxes. The theory is that Republicans want independence from Government and to create liberty through individual powers and wealth. Democrats see a strong governmental state with high regulation key to prosperity individually and collectively.

    This is an excellent article on tax theory of both parties and what history has shown.

    http://hubpages.com/hub/Democrat_vs_Republican_Tax_Cuts_

  17. September 9th, 2008 at 13:04 | #17

    “With McCain we would have 8 more years of what we’ve had with Bush.”
    “Republicans have increased taxes for middle class America.”

    but i don’t recall saying those things. what i did say…

    “the republican party, which has always claimed to be the party of limited taxes and government has done nothing but increase the scope and size of the government and increase taxes.”

    you’re right that i didn’t give any specific examples, as i didn’t feel that they were needed. would you argue with this?

  18. Brady
    September 9th, 2008 at 17:19 | #18

    “and i just feel like with mccain, if we don’t get more of the same stuff we’ve had for the last 8 years”

    you said it Heller. in response to your sister’s post. suck on that.

    And not that I agree or disagree, but; in what way do you feel the Republicans have expanded government and increased taxes?

    You need to be careful in comparing administrations or decades as they are not equals. The Iraq and Afghanistan war, the housing crisis, 9-11, etc. all play important parts in your comparisons.

    So with that adjusted, in what way has government and taxes increased under Republicans?

  19. September 9th, 2008 at 21:50 | #19

    “and i just feel like with mccain, if we don’t get more of the same stuff we’ve had for the last 8 years”

    i think it bears noting that this was an incomplete quote. what i actually said was:

    “i just feel like with mccain, if we don’t get more of the same stuff we’ve had for the last 8 years, i have NO IDEA what we’ll be getting.”

    while similar, i think it’s important to make the distinction in the statements. i do feel like we’ll be getting a lot of the same stuff that we’ve had for the past 8 years. if i’m wrong, than i don’t know what the difference will be. i don’t feel like mccain’s done a good job at distinguishing himself from george w. his foreign policy is not much different. he wants to have military occupation in so many different countries (as does obama, so the dems shouldn’t get too excited) and i just fundamentally disagree with that. i prefer a little more of an isolationist stance. as it is now, the government looks out for our financial interests with the military. they aren’t trying to be the “world police” as some would like to say. if that were the case, why aren’t we in countries like darfour? because we have no fiscal incentive to do so. i principally believe that this is wrong.

    as far as expanding the scope of government, let’s take bush’s “no child left behind” act (while he didn’t write it, he signed it). federal funding for the department of education rose from $42.2 billion annually in 2001 to $54.4 billion annually in 2007. the department of education is a joke. we’re pumping BILLIONS of dollars each year into a system that is failing us. under bush’s watch, this is increased tremendously. and many argue that the NCLB act is worthless and ineffective at best. so, when i talk about increasing taxes and the scope of government, this is the kind of stuff that i’m talking about.

    i want to see these things get scaled back tremendously (if not abolished). i’d like to see the IRS get scaled back. could you imagine how much money we could save by just simplifying the tax code? a great argument could be made that we don’t need the IRS at all. but i don’t think this will happen as long as we have traditional republicans or democrats in power because most candidates are created by the political machine. and they’ll do everything they can to grow that machine and keep it in motion. if the republican party stood for the things that they should, do you really think we would have federally approved warrantless wiretaps?

    “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” – Benjamin Franklin

  20. October 15th, 2008 at 01:44 | #20

    Steven,

    I have been lost and alone this past year. I feel as if the Republican Party no longer represents my beliefs; I feel it is no longer conservative. I was hell bent on renouncing my membership in the party until I started researching Ron Paul, who in my opinion is the only REAL Republican in the political mix.

    The US NEEDS a peaceful revolution, and Ron Paul should be our leader. Take for example the bail-out plan, which no American I know wanted to happen. What did the folks on Capitol Hill do? They pushed it through; expanding the government even further past its post-Constitution size. Karl Marx has been smiling in his grave even wider recently, as the US has become even more socialist with all of this bailout madness.

    The Federal Reserve is unconstitutional; and it possess too much power with no checks and balances. We can thank Alan Greenspan for toying with the price of money, completely jacking house prices through the roof. As Ron Paul says, “someday we’ll let the market determin [interest rates].” We can thanks Paulson for sinking this country deeper into the trench of socialism. And we can thanks these snakes in Congress in being more interested in voting along Party lines than attempting to represent their states.

    But, this is the real problem: the 2 party system has failed us for the aforementioned reason. How can it be that the Republicans turned their backs on Dr. Paul? He is the defender of the Constitution. He is the only fiscal conservative with a voice. But, he hasn’t voted along party lines, so I am sure, that has something to do with his being utterly rejected by the party. Party lines? Party lines?? Who cares. Whatever happened to Congressional members doing the right thing, instead of voting based on winning points to be used latter when attempting to pass one’s own bill? Whatever happened to limiting the size of government and being fiscally conservative?

    Ron Paul is the only politician who is honest and stands for real change. McCain and Obama are incredibly similar as far as I am concerned.

    I will be writing-in Dr. Paul in Nov, as I cannot be held responsible for the damage the 2 popular candidates are about to unload on the United States, and the world. I am voting for what I feel is right, not for any other reason. I suspect many others are out there. Many who feel alone, but you’re not. Please write-in Ron Paul with me. He may not win this go around, but look to the future.

    -Dex

  21. October 15th, 2008 at 01:51 | #21

    dex, i can’t tell you how stoked i am to hear you say that stuff. we’re totally on the same page. i’ll be writing in ron paul as well. i don’t care if he “doesn’t stand a chance”. my conscience will be clean for the bext 4 years. our current political system is corrupt and not getting any better. ron paul is the first voice that i’ve heard in a long time that represents me and the America that i want to live in. i’m not giving up by choosing one of the 2 candidates that the system has chosen for me.

  22. kim
    October 18th, 2008 at 19:37 | #22

    Is it too late to comment on this? I looked at the videos…mostly…I’ve heard some interesting things. I have a couple of things to say.
    1. I don’t get the love for obama. His morals and his politics have nothing for me. I hear “spread the wealth around” and “I don’t mind paying more taxes”=more people thinking “why try” when the big guys will pay for me. I hear how he feels about late term abortion and it makes me ill.
    2. Your point about how the church works is not meant for ruling society. Are you telling me if someone sold Lily pot/meth/whatever you’d just want him/her to get consequences on judgement day-I must of misunderstood that point I know you don’t think that way.
    3. I believe in as little government as necessary (always spell that wrong) I believe government needs to fix priorities and put money where we need it and quit being soooo incapable of being smart and efficient. I believe in a leader that comes close to representing my morals. I know Bush spent a whole lot of money-I hate no child left behind but Mc Cain is not Bush’s clone. Do I love him and feel like hes even close to perfect…no. Is he closer than anyone else with a chance, yes.
    4. I really don’t have any conclusions about Ron Paul. I did hear an interview of him the other day and I know he is not a fan of obama. It kind of seems like if you are for Paul you are taking a big jump to Obama who is as big gov’t as you can get.
    Lastly-I don’t know who above stated = rights for those who are gay and lesbian, but both candidates are the same on that one. Biden himself says he does not support gay marriage.
    I love politics. It gets my blood boiling and upsets me when people don’t care. Up until 2 seconds ago I’d laugh and say you’re stupid for throwing your vote away. I’ve changed my mind. I do think you should do what feels right. For me, its voting for McCain.
    Too be honest, I can’t wait for this to be over and see how it plays out. I feel like Obama’s going to win (horror) and am anxious to see if anyone president has the power to make as many changes as they claim. I hope I’m wrong, but we’ll see.
    Geez did I really write all that-sorry boys.

  23. October 18th, 2008 at 20:53 | #23

    hey-o kim dee. it’s never too late for you to weigh in and it’s good to hear your voice here. i’ll comment on your comments.

    1. yeah, i’m not a big obama supporter. any of the reasons that are like him are pretty much minor. i think he’s well spoken and carries himself well. i disagree with most of his politics as well, but am not too concerned if he gets into office, because i really don’t believe it’s possible for him to do the things that he talks about. he won’t be changing abortion legislation anytime soon (nobody will) and i HIGHLY doubt we’ll be seeing any sort of socialized medicine anytime soon. there are just way too many lobbyists in washington for that to happen.

    2. i’m assuming that you’re referring to my “we teach the people correct principles and let them govern themselves” comment. i’m not saying that if somebody tried to sell lily marijuana, that i wouldn’t want some sort of justice, but i don’t think that’s really an accurate argument. first of all, lily is a child and you’re implying that somebody went out of their way to sell her pot. if drugs were legalized (and i don’t think we’re talking a cart blanche license to sell ANY drugs) it would be like alcohol is now. you can’t just stand on the street and sell alcohol (which, in my opinion, is a far more dangerous drug than marijuana). you would get arrested for that. it would be licensed and controlled and there be an age requirement to buy it. and i should be a little more specific in saying that i’m not necessarily saying that we need to legalize drugs, i’m saying that the federal government shouldn’t be the one making those decisions. if a state wants to legalize marijuana, i believe they should have the right to do that.

    3. “McCain is not Bush’s clone”. i agree. “Is he closer than anyone else with a chance, yes.”. i also agree. what i can’t bring myself to do is vote for a candidate that i don’t really like, just because he stands a decent chance of beating out a candidate that i like even less. i think the church said it perfect in their statement of political neutrality: “vote for and actively support those you believe will most nearly carry out your ideas of good government.” for me, mccain doesn’t carry out my idea of good government. in my studying of the issues and candidates (i’m no political scholar, but i try) ron paul is the only candidate that i can honestly say carries out my ideas of good government.

    4. “It kind of seems like if you are for Paul you are taking a big jump to Obama who is as big gov’t as you can get.” if i were to actually vote for obama, i would agree with you, but there’s no way that’s going to happen. no surprise, i’ll be voting for ron paul. i don’t see much of a difference between mccain and obama. i feel like the republican party has left it’s roots and swayed so much closer to the democratic party.

    i like discussing politics as well. it was pointed out to me that james e. faust was a lifelong democrat and served in the house of representatives as as a democrat. i don’t bring this up to validate the democratic party by any means, it just goes to show that we can all get along. maybe i’ll become a whig. can we still do that?

  24. Kim
    October 21st, 2008 at 19:24 | #24

    The whole someone selling Lily pot wasn’t taken quite as I meant it. I’m going to be honest my mind isn’t made up about legalizing drugs. I just meant it sounded like you were almost saying we don’t need laws. I did follow that up with saying I must not get what you are saying…understand? Many people out there (my dear old dad) hates what the democratic party has become but refuses to say he’s a republican even though they’ve had his “vote” for the last 20 years or so. The democratic party used to have more to offer. Not saying this was the case for President Faust…something to think about though. I’m just glad I have friends who give our country some thought. Its hard being busy with day to day life and interested in crazy politcs. I think I’m starting to calm down a little though and realize what is realistic and what isn’t. I just can’t seem to stop writing…sorry. Now you know why Jana and I are on the phone forever.

  25. October 21st, 2008 at 23:43 | #25

    it’s all good. not that it was part of my argument, but i’m pro legalization of marijuana. i don’t think ALL drugs should be legalized, but i would be totally okay with marijuana being legal.

    yeah, my issues lie with both of the parties. i feel like they’re completely self-serving. i really feel like the modern two party system has let us all down.

    it can get kind of depressing if you let it.

  1. No trackbacks yet.