Evidence for God from Science

I'm finished with the GOP. I'm never going back. It's independent all the way for me now. And I was a machine republican from 18 to 45 years of age. A HUGE waste of my time and vote. Republican politicians are the biggest hypocrites on the planet.

touchingcloth wrote:What's GOP? (sorry for my English ignorance!)

GOP = Grand Old Party.

Harry wrote:I thought you were a Republican.

May I ask why? I'm very much NOT a Republican. There are a few I actively support--Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, John Linder, etc.--but I'm most definitely not a Republican. I used to be. I left the party in '08 for social and fiscal reasons. Tired of being treated like an abused wife.

I didn't even vote for McCain in the election . . . granted, I'm anti-Obama. I think he is destroying the country very quickly--far more quickly than anything the Republicans are doing. But I think the only difference in Obama and the Reps is that Obama wants to destroy us today, whereas the Republicans want to drag it out. Why support a slow, painful death?

AoK wrote:It would be nice reverse all the red tape and the Constitution Party certainly would do that. This party is successfully tapping into a very real and growing populist movement in this country. I voted for their candidate Chuck Baldwin in the last election. However, they have some serious flaws in their platform. Their platform emphatically allow states to secede from the union; for example, even to foreign powers. If California decides to go with Mexico and Texas wants to as well that's all well and good from the Constition Party's perspective. Another problem is that all social services including Social Security, welfare, Medical, etc... would end very quickly leaving tens of millions of people starving, suffering, and dying. How do you think we would react to that? Do you think we would just lie down and die quietly without a whimper? Think again. Massive serious riots would occur with millions involved across the country. The backlash would be HUGE and domestic revolutionary communist groups would develop in a BIG way seeking to overthrow the government. It would be citizen against citizen. The have's warring against the have nots in every way.

There is a difference, as you know, in campaign platform ideology and governing. While your ideology--your principles--will certainly guide our governance, it is also obvious that governing has a far more practical side to it. You obviously can't go in and end social security on day one. It HAS to be done. But not on day one. You can't do that anymore than a heroine addict can quit cold turkey. That would be fatal. I think we are responsible enough, should we get in power, to bring these well intentioned economy killers to an end. It just has to be done slowly and deliberately.

That's one of the biggest reasons I support the FairTax. ULTIMATELY, I see it as a means to and end. If you get rid of the income tax and start taxing consumption, you are well on your way to getting back to a truly Constitutional view of taxation.

As far as the states and succession, that's one of the things I like about their platform. If TX or CA want to go, they should be able to. But if the federal government were MUCH smaller, there would be no reason for them to, now would there? Besides, in today's world, it would prove very difficult for them to go anyway. One of the things any country really has to have is a standing army. Could any state provide for adequate self-defense? I don't think so, so I don't think any state would be wise in leaving the union. BUT, again, I see it as their right. We choose to be a part of the federal government. States should have the power. Federalism FTW.

Jac3510 wrote:

Harry wrote:I thought you were a Republican.

May I ask why? I'm very much NOT a Republican. There are a few I actively support--Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, John Linder, etc.--but I'm most definitely not a Republican. I used to be. I left the party in '08 for social and fiscal reasons. Tired of being treated like an abused wife.

You mentioned you were a conservative in the other thread(s) so my non-American brain instantly thought 'Republican', since Democrats and Republicans are all we really hear about across the pond. I've just looked up what the Constitution Party is now, I never even knew it existed before.

ageofknowledge wrote:

touchingcloth wrote:

ageofknowledge wrote:

touchingcloth wrote:What's GOP? (sorry for my English ignorance!)

The GOP is another name for the Republican Party.

Ah, OK.

Not sure how things are in the US, but (regarding the hip-hop, ghetto, down with the kids bit) our UK politicians (not to mention those peers in the House of Lords) are generally, to say the least, a bit "out of touch".

I like many aspects of the BNP's platform to be honest but they do have an undesirable racist history.

History? They're still racist now!

Harry wrote:You mentioned you were a conservative in the other thread(s) so my non-American brain instantly thought 'Republican', since Democrats and Republicans are all we really hear about across the pond. I've just looked up what the Constitution Party is now, I never even knew it existed before.

Ah, I see. Well that is fair. It does, though, point to one of the sad realities about our political system. When "Republican" becomes synonymous with "Conservative," there is a huge problem in that Republicans very, very often to things that conservatives abhor. Bush's deficits are only one small example of that . . . the bailouts, TARP, the stimulus, etc.--all of these are as radical (read, Keynesian) as you can get on the economic side. So when people rebel against Republicanism, they think they are rebelling against conservatism. Conservatives, then, take the blame, and liberals get elected. The irony, of course, is that it is LIBERALISM that the Republicans so elequently practiced during the Bush years on many fronts--at least, the fronts that angered people--and yet people voted in someone even more liberal than that!

I can only hope that there will be a salvagable America after Obama is through with us. And then I can only hope that we elect a President and Congress who actually cares about the Constitution. Since I don't expect it, though, my wife and I are planning our escape strategy. I would not be surprised if in ten years we don't live in America anymore.

I'm going to stay and document it from a Southern California perspective.

Jac3510 wrote:

Harry wrote:You mentioned you were a conservative in the other thread(s) so my non-American brain instantly thought 'Republican', since Democrats and Republicans are all we really hear about across the pond. I've just looked up what the Constitution Party is now, I never even knew it existed before.

Ah, I see. Well that is fair. It does, though, point to one of the sad realities about our political system. When "Republican" becomes synonymous with "Conservative," there is a huge problem in that Republicans very, very often to things that conservatives abhor. Bush's deficits are only one small example of that . . . the bailouts, TARP, the stimulus, etc.--all of these are as radical (read, Keynesian) as you can get on the economic side. So when people rebel against Republicanism, they think they are rebelling against conservatism. Conservatives, then, take the blame, and liberals get elected. The irony, of course, is that it is LIBERALISM that the Republicans so elequently practiced during the Bush years on many fronts--at least, the fronts that angered people--and yet people voted in someone even more liberal than that!

I can only hope that there will be a salvagable America after Obama is through with us. And then I can only hope that we elect a President and Congress who actually cares about the Constitution. Since I don't expect it, though, my wife and I are planning our escape strategy. I would not be surprised if in ten years we don't live in America anymore.

I started wondering if we start seeing a bit of an exodus as well, depending how things go.

Shoot, All you have to look at is New York, where they have continued to increase taxes so much that people start leaving the state. Yeah, bright idea, tax people so much that they leave...

I wonder where people would choose to go.

Some place where they get to keep at least 50% of their income. Some place where they don't have to worry about being assaulted and robbed by a black or latino gangmember while walking to the corner store to get a pepsi and a sandwich. Some place where ice heads, tweakers, and drug addicts don't break into their homes. Some place where gangs don't sell drugs on their lawns, spray paint on their walls, steal their cars, corrupt their kids, etc... In other words: some place ELSE!

Hong Kong?

Harry12345 wrote:Hong Kong?

No. Hong Kong has mad gangs and triad crime groups. Try Mount Pleasant, Iowa.

You could try Glasgow, Scotland. Drug, murder and knife capital of Europe but I find it rather pleasant.

Stats aren't everything.

Proinsias wrote:You could try Glasgow, Scotland. Drug, murder and knife capital of Europe but I find it rather pleasant.

Stats aren't everything.

I'm liking you better already Proinsias. Born in Los Angeles and lived through the 70s, 80s, and 90s here. If it's not a mission, then it's a mission field .

Singapore?
Switzerland?
Ameri... wait, now we're back to the problem.

Singapore or Switzerland?