Gary Johnson, the Liberal

Forum rules
Here, you can discuss your Politics. Post political memes and quotations, and discuss your Political beliefs. If you don't want to see Politics being discussed, please respect the rights of the people here to do so in peace. We respect that right, that's why this forum was created. Discussion should always be respectful of the people here and thier beliefs. Discussions will be respectful. We recognize that political discussions can sometimes become incendiary and we will step in from time to time if it does in order to cool things down. Posts that use terms and descriptions of others such as "Wing Nuts", "Libtards", "Rethuglicans", DemocRATS", and others of a demeaning nature will be deleted. Keep discussions on point, centered on facts, and based on the principal that two individuals can come to different conclusions based on the same information and can disagree, but discuss those disagreements in an agreeable manner. Please contribute to the discussion, not try to tear down an individual because he disagrees with you. Make you comments be on the post, and not the person posting.
User avatar
GregD
Reactions:
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#46

Post by GregD » Thu Sep 01, 2016 2:49 pm

BillyBob66 wrote:
sarge wrote:
GregD wrote:
Says you. Where exactly is the corruption that is so exceptional?

This statement is quite ironic being leveled against Democrats given the current Republican candidate.

We can resolve our differences of opinion by the political process - my candidate vs. your candidate. You don't like either candidate. We could alternatively resolve our differences person-to-person. You apparently don't like talking to me. Maybe you would prefer rock/paper/scissors, best of 5.
I like talking to you Greg.
So do I, even if you do get my BP up some days, as I feel like I am debating a brick wall. Still, there is always the hope of getting you to see reason some day, so I am grateful for that opportunity! ;) ( I wonder if we might agree on a few things hammock or camping related? Then at least we would agree on something! ) BTW, I actually preferred Cruz.
I will not see reason. We aren't going to agree. Are we going to figure out how to coexist? Or will our disagreements consume us?

Of course you preferred Cruz. However, it seemed to me that Mike Huckabee is more likely deserving of your trust and support than Cruz.



User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#47

Post by BillyBob66 » Thu Sep 01, 2016 2:55 pm

GregD wrote:
BillyBob66 wrote:
sarge wrote:
I like talking to you Greg.
So do I, even if you do get my BP up some days, as I feel like I am debating a brick wall. Still, there is always the hope of getting you to see reason some day, so I am grateful for that opportunity! ;) ( I wonder if we might agree on a few things hammock or camping related? Then at least we would agree on something! ) BTW, I actually preferred Cruz.
I will not see reason. We aren't going to agree. Are we going to figure out how to coexist? Or will our disagreements consume us?

Of course you preferred Cruz. However, it seemed to me that Mike Huckabee is more likely deserving of your trust and support than Cruz.
Yes, I know you won't, I was just kidding. ( I included a wink ) Are we not coexisting so far? I have not sent hit men to try and find you. (yet)
Last edited by BillyBob66 on Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
sarge
Reactions:
Posts: 2066
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:14 am
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:
Contact:

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#48

Post by sarge » Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:57 pm

GregD wrote:
sarge wrote:
GregD wrote:
Says you. Where exactly is the corruption that is so exceptional?

This statement is quite ironic being leveled against Democrats given the current Republican candidate.

We can resolve our differences of opinion by the political process - my candidate vs. your candidate. You don't like either candidate. We could alternatively resolve our differences person-to-person. You apparently don't like talking to me. Maybe you would prefer rock/paper/scissors, best of 5.
I like talking to you Greg.
Well if we could come to mutually agreeable compromises on social issues among ourselves then maybe our national elections could be more about what's best for the country and less about what is least worst.

I have nothing good to say about Donald Trump as a person or as a candidate. But during the primary, when he was standing next to Ted Cruz, I liked Trump better. Cruz seemed genuinely committed to positions on social issues that completely alienated me, whereas Trump was obviously insincere about pretty much everything except stroking his own ego.

During the primary I gave money to and voted for Bernie, the socialist, not because I agreed with so many of policy positions but simply because he was the only candidate that stated, plainly, that our system needs to work for everybody.
You may want to keep in mind that the people who tell you about the positions the guys on the other side hold are the same ones that rigged your primary, told you you could keep your doctor, that you'd be saving $2500 a year on your health insurance, and tht Hillary is the most honest, vetted candidate that ever was, the FBI said she told the truth, and all of her problems are the result of a Vast Right Wing conspiracy.
You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me. ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
My You Tube Channel

User avatar
GregD
Reactions:
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#49

Post by GregD » Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:16 pm

BillyBob66 wrote:Are we not coexisting so far? I have not sent hit me to try and find you. (yet)
We could do much better, I think. Both individually - you and I - and generally - people like you and people like me. If I'm voting for someone that you consider so bad that you will - or at least consider - voting for the likes of Donald Trump I think things are not good at all. If marriage equality had to be settled at the Supreme Court I think things are not good at all. If both Christian and Atheist individuals feel forced to do things inconsistent with their belief system I think things are not good at all.

We have more-or-less achieved a clear consensus on what side of the road to drive and to stop at red lights; rules that allow one to use their motor vehicles while (in principle, at least) avoiding conflicts with other individuals using THEIR motor vehicles. What we don't have is a consensus on rules that allow one to exercise personal liberties such as religion, sex, abortion, marriage, drugs, while avoiding conflicts with others exercising THEIR personal liberties. Currently, we are relying upon our political institutions to develop these rules, and that process is generating a lot of animosity. I propose a grass-roots effort to work out these rules. Starting with you and me.

User avatar
GregD
Reactions:
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#50

Post by GregD » Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:24 pm

sarge wrote: You may want to keep in mind that the people who tell you about the positions the guys on the other side hold are the same ones that rigged your primary, told you you could keep your doctor, that you'd be saving $2500 a year on your health insurance, and tht Hillary is the most honest, vetted candidate that ever was, the FBI said she told the truth, and all of her problems are the result of a Vast Right Wing conspiracy.
My fear of Ted Cruz is based on the description of his policies as described by Ted Cruz. My first ever vote in a primary was against Cruz when he was running for the Senate; and THAT was motivated by hearing Cruz when he debated Duhurst.

User avatar
sarge
Reactions:
Posts: 2066
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2015 10:14 am
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:
Contact:

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#51

Post by sarge » Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:46 pm

Well then;

I guess you're just stuck with voting for the amoral narcissistic 1%er beholden to the Wall Street Banksters.

I'm not voting for either of them.
You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me. ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
My You Tube Channel

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#52

Post by BillyBob66 » Thu Sep 01, 2016 8:02 pm

Though I pray that white males and even maybe white women will come out of the woodwork for Trump - or the constitutional candidat if he could win, any one who can win besides Clinton- I'm speaking of people who maybe don't normally bother to vote, or the several million who stayed home during Obama's 2nd campaign rather than vote for Romney apparently- I have no confidence that any one but Clinton will win. Just like Obama won fairly easily even after 4 years of his horrible polices and racism. ( sorry to sound so racist, but the problem is how the white people vote, or if they don't vote at all, that is what determines the winner. It was mostly white Republicans who stayed home rather than vote for Romney that gave us another 4 of Obama, IMO)

The reason is that the demographics of the country have changed so much in my lifetime that I can only see it getting worse every election. According to several sources, including Marketwatch.com, An estimated 45.3% of American households — roughly 77.5 million — will pay no federal individual income tax, according to data for the 2015 tax year from the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington-based research group. Also consider the ( way back in 2012! ), 109,631,000 Americans lived in households that received benefits from one or more federally funded "means-tested programs" — also known as welfare — as of the fourth quarter of 2012, according to data released Tuesday by the Census Bureau.
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/teren ... 00-welfare

This does not count benefits that people paid into for a lifetime- and which should have earned interest- such as Medicare and SS. If I could have kept that in an invested account, even at very low interest over 50 years the ~ $240,000 Ipaid into SS and ~ 70,000 I paid into MCare woud have been many hundreds of thousands, maybe millions. That figure I am talking about- the 109,631,000 is just the straight out welfare and is 35.4% of the population in 2012. (and greater than the population of Russia and England combined) Many immigrants- including illegal- go straight to welfare. All of these Muslims Obama and Clinton want to import, straight to welfare, just like the Boston Bombers were. They have no way to support themselves here so the tax payer will support them. So I'm sure the % is much higher than 35.4% now.

So, considering that, how many of these people are going to vote for anyone who might reduce their freebes? I suspect about zero. These are the ones Romney caught so much shit over in the press when he dared mention all of these people who would never vote for him. But he was of course correct about that, they would not, ever. These people are never going to vote for smaller government or anything but higher taxes, since they do not pay federal income tax. We are either now, or very soon to be, effectively slaves, where the almost 1/2 who pay no taxes but many of whom do receive federal benefits are simply voting on how much to charge us. Combine them with the white liberals who will support them, and I don't see how any one but the more or less socialist is going to win in the future. The partakers of federal benefits and non-tax payers now, or very soon will, out number the tax payers, and they vote on how much tax we should pay. And I don't see them voting for lower taxes, do Y'all?
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
GregD
Reactions:
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#53

Post by GregD » Thu Sep 01, 2016 8:52 pm

BillyBob66 wrote:Though I pray that white males and even maybe white women will come out of the woodwork for Trump - or the constitutional candidat if he could win, any one who can win besides Clinton- I'm speaking of people who maybe don't normally bother to vote, or the several million who stayed home during Obama's 2nd campaign rather than vote for Romney apparently- I have no confidence that any one but Clinton will win. Just like Obama won fairly easily even after 4 years of his horrible polices and racism. ( sorry to sound so racist, but the problem is how the white people vote, or if they don't vote at all, that is what determines the winner. It was mostly white Republicans who stayed home rather than vote for Romney that gave us another 4 of Obama, IMO)

The reason is that the demographics of the country have changed so much in my lifetime that I can only see it getting worse every election. According to several sources, including Marketwatch.com, An estimated 45.3% of American households — roughly 77.5 million — will pay no federal individual income tax, according to data for the 2015 tax year from the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington-based research group. Also consider the ( way back in 2012! ), 109,631,000 Americans lived in households that received benefits from one or more federally funded "means-tested programs" — also known as welfare — as of the fourth quarter of 2012, according to data released Tuesday by the Census Bureau.
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/teren ... 00-welfare

This does not count benefits that people paid into for a lifetime- and which should have earned interest- such as Medicare and SS. If I could have kept that in an invested account, even at very low interest over 50 years the ~ $240,000 Ipaid into SS and ~ 70,000 I paid into MCare woud have been many hundreds of thousands, maybe millions. That figure I am talking about- the 109,631,000 is just the straight out welfare and is 35.4% of the population in 2012. (and greater than the population of Russia and England combined) Many immigrants- including illegal- go straight to welfare. All of these Muslims Obama and Clinton want to import, straight to welfare, just like the Boston Bombers were. They have no way to support themselves here so the tax payer will support them. So I'm sure the % is much higher than 35.4% now.

So, considering that, how many of these people are going to vote for anyone who might reduce their freebes? I suspect about zero. These are the ones Romney caught so much shit over in the press when he dared mention all of these people who would never vote for him. But he was of course correct about that, they would not, ever. These people are never going to vote for smaller government or anything but higher taxes, since they do not pay federal income tax. We are either now, or very soon to be, effectively slaves, where the almost 1/2 who pay no taxes but many of whom do receive federal benefits are simply voting on how much to charge us. Combine them with the white liberals who will support them, and I don't see how any one but the more or less socialist is going to win in the future. The partakers of federal benefits and non-tax payers now, or very soon will, out number the tax payers, and they vote on how much tax we should pay. And I don't see them voting for lower taxes, do Y'all?
Wonderful half-truth. The other half of the truth are the lives of the recipients, the reasons they get benefits, and the impact of the benefits.

Meanwhile the rich get richer.

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#54

Post by BillyBob66 » Thu Sep 01, 2016 9:44 pm

GregD wrote:
BillyBob66 wrote:Though I pray that white males and even maybe white women will come out of the woodwork for Trump - or the constitutional candidat if he could win, any one who can win besides Clinton- I'm speaking of people who maybe don't normally bother to vote, or the several million who stayed home during Obama's 2nd campaign rather than vote for Romney apparently- I have no confidence that any one but Clinton will win. Just like Obama won fairly easily even after 4 years of his horrible polices and racism. ( sorry to sound so racist, but the problem is how the white people vote, or if they don't vote at all, that is what determines the winner. It was mostly white Republicans who stayed home rather than vote for Romney that gave us another 4 of Obama, IMO)

The reason is that the demographics of the country have changed so much in my lifetime that I can only see it getting worse every election. According to several sources, including Marketwatch.com, An estimated 45.3% of American households — roughly 77.5 million — will pay no federal individual income tax, according to data for the 2015 tax year from the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington-based research group. Also consider the ( way back in 2012! ), 109,631,000 Americans lived in households that received benefits from one or more federally funded "means-tested programs" — also known as welfare — as of the fourth quarter of 2012, according to data released Tuesday by the Census Bureau.
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/teren ... 00-welfare

This does not count benefits that people paid into for a lifetime- and which should have earned interest- such as Medicare and SS. If I could have kept that in an invested account, even at very low interest over 50 years the ~ $240,000 Ipaid into SS and ~ 70,000 I paid into MCare woud have been many hundreds of thousands, maybe millions. That figure I am talking about- the 109,631,000 is just the straight out welfare and is 35.4% of the population in 2012. (and greater than the population of Russia and England combined) Many immigrants- including illegal- go straight to welfare. All of these Muslims Obama and Clinton want to import, straight to welfare, just like the Boston Bombers were. They have no way to support themselves here so the tax payer will support them. So I'm sure the % is much higher than 35.4% now.

So, considering that, how many of these people are going to vote for anyone who might reduce their freebes? I suspect about zero. These are the ones Romney caught so much shit over in the press when he dared mention all of these people who would never vote for him. But he was of course correct about that, they would not, ever. These people are never going to vote for smaller government or anything but higher taxes, since they do not pay federal income tax. We are either now, or very soon to be, effectively slaves, where the almost 1/2 who pay no taxes but many of whom do receive federal benefits are simply voting on how much to charge us. Combine them with the white liberals who will support them, and I don't see how any one but the more or less socialist is going to win in the future. The partakers of federal benefits and non-tax payers now, or very soon will, out number the tax payers, and they vote on how much tax we should pay. And I don't see them voting for lower taxes, do Y'all?
Wonderful half-truth. The other half of the truth are the lives of the recipients, the reasons they get benefits, and the impact of the benefits.

Meanwhile the rich get richer.
Maybe you, but I'm not getting any richer. Neither are the Disney employees and many more like them who are replaced by forign workers our government imports, having to train their replacements.

What are the reasons Muslim immigrants, and illegal immigrants, and even legal immigrants, deserve to receive money from the tax payers? Maybe it makes you feel good to have your taxes taken from you and given to them, but it is pure thievery. If they can not support themselves, or their families take care of them, they should not be allowed to enter or actively imported by the Obama's of the world. To force some roofer slaving in the hot sun to pay a higher tax bracket when he gets OT, so that the government can give it to those it thinks deserve it, including all manner of immigrants, is thievery.

Them needing it does not make it a 1/2 truth. Maybe they should have stayed where they were if they needed American workers to take care of them? It is a complete truth that almost 1/2 of the population now votes on how much a working person, the other 1/2, is going to be forced to pay them.

Many people donate a whole lot of their incomes to support poor people, in the name of Jesus. But when the government forcefully takes it from one(or borrows it in his name) to give it to someone who often does not even work, or came here from another country to get it( maybe among other reasons), that is simple theft. Or slavery. Do you want to steal from or enslave people?

You always hear how immigrants built this country. But it is for dang sure none of those immigrants came here and went on welfare. It is insanity to not only say to people from other countries "hey, come on in", but also say "come on in, we will take care of you". But liberals are known to be generous with other working folk's money. They are always all for it. They feel good about saying to some poor working slob, who maybe has to work 2 jobs if they can find 2, "hey, congrats on that extra money! Now give me an even higher % , due to your higher tax bracket! We have some other folks who need it more than you do. We better know how to spend it than youdo, but thx for doing the work! And even if we didn't have some one we think deserves it more than you, we will bring in some from other countries who will definitely need it!". That concept some how makes liberals feel like they are the ones that care. But they have no money to invest until they first take it from some working soul, who earned it. Then they can give it to someone who didn't earn it.

EDIT: I forgot to mention: the vast sums of money spent to support the massive bureaucracy that is needed to give the money taken from the workers in order to give it to the more deserving.
Last edited by BillyBob66 on Thu Sep 01, 2016 10:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
Scott
Reactions:
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 11:08 am
Location: Texas Lost Pines (just outside Wierd)
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#55

Post by Scott » Thu Sep 01, 2016 9:52 pm

GregD wrote:
sarge wrote:
GregD wrote:
Says you. Where exactly is the corruption that is so exceptional?

This statement is quite ironic being leveled against Democrats given the current Republican candidate.
I like talking to you Greg.

I have nothing good to say about Donald Trump as a person or as a candidate. ... Trump was obviously insincere about pretty much everything except stroking his own ego.

During the primary I gave money to and voted for Bernie, the socialist, not because I agreed with so many of policy positions but simply because he was the only candidate that stated, plainly, that our system needs to work for everybody.
I give you that Bernie was the most genuine candidate we had.

The way you feel about Trump, I feel about Hillary. She first and foremost protects herself and political allies, not even her platform. if Democrats would vote for her is she was pro gun and pro life, I believe she would switch her stance on both.

glaring hypocrisy: her 1% status while blasting the rich, selling access to our government, having her assistant coordinate donations to the foundation and visits by the state department (confirmed via emails, no assumptions any longer), voting for the iraq war then blaming it on Bush. Her obvious involvement in the corruption of the DNC. And without her SuperDelegate friends she would not have gotten the nod. Why are Rich Democrats given bigger votes than regular democrats? Goes back to the 1%ers. The list goes on. Her whole life has been spent in the pursuit of power, not the promotion of ideals. At least Obama seems to have a social agenda he is married to - as much as I am against almost all of it - he seems bent on changing what America is. Hillary just seems like a really sleezy salesman.

Greg - Lets see if we can come to some middle ground of agreement on policy.
I am for helping people who are willing to participate in their own help. I am not for free handouts. I am not a cold person who says everyone has to earn their own way or starve. I am just VERY much against free handouts and the government stealing (taxing) to force us to conform to social acceptance.
The government should protect our borders.
Give us police and fire.
Build roads and schools.
I don't think it is the governments job to tell us what to think, how to live, limit my freedom for something I MIGHT do, or control how to spend MY money. Taxes for the basics I have no problem with. Some compromise to get along in society I have no problem with. What I do on MY land, should be none of the governments concern.

Any common ground here?
Texas sucede? Y'all are lucky we don't invade!

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#56

Post by BillyBob66 » Thu Sep 01, 2016 11:07 pm

Scott wrote:
GregD wrote:
sarge wrote:
I like talking to you Greg.

I have nothing good to say about Donald Trump as a person or as a candidate. ... Trump was obviously insincere about pretty much everything except stroking his own ego.

During the primary I gave money to and voted for Bernie, the socialist, not because I agreed with so many of policy positions but simply because he was the only candidate that stated, plainly, that our system needs to work for everybody.
I give you that Bernie was the most genuine candidate we had.

The way you feel about Trump, I feel about Hillary. She first and foremost protects herself and political allies, not even her platform. if Democrats would vote for her is she was pro gun and pro life, I believe she would switch her stance on both.

glaring hypocrisy: her 1% status while blasting the rich, selling access to our government, having her assistant coordinate donations to the foundation and visits by the state department (confirmed via emails, no assumptions any longer), voting for the iraq war then blaming it on Bush. Her obvious involvement in the corruption of the DNC. And without her SuperDelegate friends she would not have gotten the nod. Why are Rich Democrats given bigger votes than regular democrats? Goes back to the 1%ers. The list goes on. Her whole life has been spent in the pursuit of power, not the promotion of ideals. At least Obama seems to have a social agenda he is married to - as much as I am against almost all of it - he seems bent on changing what America is. Hillary just seems like a really sleezy salesman.

Greg - Lets see if we can come to some middle ground of agreement on policy.
I am for helping people who are willing to participate in their own help. I am not for free handouts. I am not a cold person who says everyone has to earn their own way or starve. I am just VERY much against free handouts and the government stealing (taxing) to force us to conform to social acceptance.
The government should protect our borders.
Give us police and fire.
Build roads and schools.
I don't think it is the governments job to tell us what to think, how to live, limit my freedom for something I MIGHT do, or control how to spend MY money. Taxes for the basics I have no problem with. Some compromise to get along in society I have no problem with. What I do on MY land, should be none of the governments concern.

Any common ground here?
Well obviously I would have some common ground with you, but I doubt most Dems would. I some how missed that part about how Greg was for Bernie Sanders, "because he was the only candidate that stated, plainly, that our system needs to work for everybody". Let me rephrase that. As a good socialist, he wants to make sure that I work for who he tells me to work for. IOW, He wants to take as much as possible of what I earn so he can give to whoever he deems as more deserving, making me their servant, and his. That is what he means by the system working for every one, every one being him and those he favors. Apparently that is what Greg is also for. AKA slavery. Is that what you are for, Greg?

As for Trump: a very rich man indeed. As for the Clintons: also very rich people indeed ( and Bernie is not exactly poor, buying expensive vacation houses in the mountains. I can't do that! I hope Bernie will be sharing that house with the poor, as Michael Moore no doubt does)

Trump: A definite 1%er. Has a father who earned money taking chances in the business world, and inherited a tidy sum from him. Earned way more money expanding his inheritance in the rough and tumble business world, no doubt - just like his competitors- paying off government officials when needed, legally taking advantage of tax and bankruptcy laws when needed. But investing, building, and always at risk of loosing his money if he made too many wrong decisions.

Clintons(both): also incredibly rich 1%ers, but did not earn any of it in the free market sector. ( unless you count some of Hillary's futures markets adventures early on, while Bill was governor and probably getting favors as the gov's wife from those in the know, quickly turning 1k into 100K) But became mega rich after a life time in government. Pretty good salaries and benefits to be sure, but the kind of wealth they have, where did it come from? Lots of donations to the Clinton Foundation by foreign counties while she is secretary of state. No doubt many other behind the scenes deals by people needing favors to help steadily run the net worth right on up there. I don' think they were all that rich when Bill was gov of Arkansas. But now, after roughly 26 years in the federal government? Net worth between 50 and 100 million. Now they did not invest money, build and rent or sell those buildings for profit, always with the risk of going bust. Some how they generated this money in ways related to their influence in the government. Even the staggering amount they get paid for speeches to wall street can only be justified if someone thinks they are buying influence by paying that much for her wisdom. And all these people who care about poor people are going to vote for this woman who has some how generated a 50 +million net worth, starting as a governor's wife, then a president's wife, the a senator, then Pres. Obama's Sec. Def. Now I realize all those jobs are really good work if you can get them, good tax payer funded salaries and fantastic benefits. But a net worth of 50 million, never having to take a risk in the markets. Not bad. That makes it even more so REALLY good work if you can get it. Plus, she cares so much for the poor that she would be happy to raise taxes on some guy making $50K a year for 60 hours a week. The more I think about it, no wonder so many folks want to vote for her! She is really quite impressive! And Bill is too!
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
TXyakr
Reactions:
Posts: 177
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:42 pm
Location: DFW north
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#57

Post by TXyakr » Fri Sep 02, 2016 6:24 am

As usual I am horrified at every person running for every office "up ballot" and "down ballot". A few things that each of them say and have actually done makes sense to me and seems productive but on the balance I just hope this country survives their nonsense. More people should reject the truly insane and nonsensical, idiotic ideas that they try to pass into law and enact at the executive branches of government, local, state and national. Either D. Trump or H. Clinton will become a handful of incompetent crazy for the next 4 years... Gary Johnson is the most sensible and competent Libertarian candidate I have ever heard speak (not boring to me, I like rational)... but that is still not enough, some of what he proposes is still irresponsible nonsense, their platform lacks critical thinking even more than R or D as hard to admit as that is. Green party, bless their hearts, seem to be a prime example of how pot smoking can damage the brain's development. Perhaps all these yahoos are just a reflection of the decline of the nation but I personally have the privilege of knowing some great Americans young, middle aged and old so choose to believe that the political process only allows the worst to rise to the "top" or float to the top as the case may be... My hope is not in humans who govern but in a greater power above and also in the decisions of wise citizens in their daily lives.

User avatar
GregD
Reactions:
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#58

Post by GregD » Fri Sep 02, 2016 8:37 am

Scott wrote:
GregD wrote:
sarge wrote:
I like talking to you Greg.

I have nothing good to say about Donald Trump as a person or as a candidate. ... Trump was obviously insincere about pretty much everything except stroking his own ego.

During the primary I gave money to and voted for Bernie, the socialist, not because I agreed with so many of policy positions but simply because he was the only candidate that stated, plainly, that our system needs to work for everybody.
I give you that Bernie was the most genuine candidate we had.

The way you feel about Trump, I feel about Hillary. She first and foremost protects herself and political allies, not even her platform. if Democrats would vote for her is she was pro gun and pro life, I believe she would switch her stance on both.

glaring hypocrisy: her 1% status while blasting the rich, selling access to our government, having her assistant coordinate donations to the foundation and visits by the state department (confirmed via emails, no assumptions any longer), voting for the iraq war then blaming it on Bush. Her obvious involvement in the corruption of the DNC. And without her SuperDelegate friends she would not have gotten the nod. Why are Rich Democrats given bigger votes than regular democrats? Goes back to the 1%ers. The list goes on. Her whole life has been spent in the pursuit of power, not the promotion of ideals. At least Obama seems to have a social agenda he is married to - as much as I am against almost all of it - he seems bent on changing what America is. Hillary just seems like a really sleezy salesman.

Greg - Lets see if we can come to some middle ground of agreement on policy.
I am for helping people who are willing to participate in their own help. I am not for free handouts. I am not a cold person who says everyone has to earn their own way or starve. I am just VERY much against free handouts and the government stealing (taxing) to force us to conform to social acceptance.
The government should protect our borders.
Give us police and fire.
Build roads and schools.
I don't think it is the governments job to tell us what to think, how to live, limit my freedom for something I MIGHT do, or control how to spend MY money. Taxes for the basics I have no problem with. Some compromise to get along in society I have no problem with. What I do on MY land, should be none of the governments concern.

Any common ground here?
Probably some, but not without careful discussion I would think.

For me, the idea that its not the government''s job to tell us how to live leads to support of marriage equality and other LGBTQ rights and question prohibitions on polygamy, prostitution, pornography, recreational drug use and abortion. It is also an important consideration with respect to firearms, independent of the 2nd Amendment. But the devil is in the details. And the critical detail is the point at which engagement of an activity significantly affects people that did not agree to be involved with that activity.

User avatar
Scuba
Site Admin
Reactions:
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 10:02 pm
Location: San Antonio
Hammock: DreamHammock
Tarp: UGQ WD or Hanger
Suspension: Varies
Insulation: UGQ40 HG20

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#59

Post by Scuba » Fri Sep 02, 2016 8:58 am

I think the FEDERAL gov't should remember that the 10th Amendment of the Constitution SPECIFICALLY says that all rights NOT set forth in the Constitution are left to the individual states. I believe in a WEAK central gov't, and that we should be a Union of states, not a centralized gov't behemoth. Abraham Lincoln did more damage to this country than any other President in our history with the possible exception of FDR.
"I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I'll kill you all." - Gen James Mattis, USMC RET.
Owner/Administrator HammockHangers.net

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: Gary Johnson, the Liberal

#60

Post by BillyBob66 » Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:17 am

GregD wrote:
Scott wrote:
GregD wrote:

.............................................................

Any common ground here?
Probably some, but not without careful discussion I would think.

For me, the idea that its not the government''s job to tell us how to live leads to support of marriage equality and other LGBTQ rights and question prohibitions on polygamy, prostitution, pornography, recreational drug use and abortion. It is also an important consideration with respect to firearms, independent of the 2nd Amendment. But the devil is in the details. And the critical detail is the point at which engagement of an activity significantly affects people that did not agree to be involved with that activity.
Notice the vast difference in approach between the pro government, socialist, liberal mind set and the conservative mind set, and I will also say the mind set of the founders mainly concerned with freedoms. Concerned with making as sure as possible that these God given rights of the people and the states could not be removed by a large, powerful centralized government. Hence the Bill of Rights ( not a bill of federal government rights, but a bill of rights to protect the people and states from that very government).

Notice that for Greg, "the idea that its not the government''s job to tell us how to live leads to support of marriage equality and other LGBTQ rights and question prohibitions on polygamy, prostitution, pornography, recreational drug use and abortion.". So his ( and of course most liberals and dems) idea of the government not telling me how to live is for the government to come into my private business- into which I have put my money and labor at risk, not the governments- and tell me that I must bake a cake for or take pictures of some one that the government favors. I am told that if I am not willing to serve every one on the government approved and favored list, I should either get out of business or face fines or jail. Look out, the government is going to get you if you don't bake that cake.

Or maybe you have founded your business and dedicated it to Christianity. You do not hide that Christianity ad your business are closely related or that the business will be based on those principles. People who know all of that seek out your business and apply for jobs. Now under Obama, here comes the feds saying you must pay for abortions by way of your insurance. Just forget the whole concept that the idea that you must even supply insurance to some one who has asked you to employee them is foreign to the idea of freedom and the countries founding. Now not only must you supply the insurance, it must also pay for abortions which you consider infanticide. And maybe for sex change surgery to boot. And then they are going to demand you open up your women's bathrooms to men who say they are women(but can you even ask if they are women?). On and on and on.

For the socialist, these oppressions are their idea of keeping government out of our lives. For me it is the definition of government tyranny, and the blatant breaking of the 1st, 10th and no doubt other amendments that are there to protect us from the federal government. Now that is going to be hard to find common ground on, common ground between freedom and tyranny. And this ever escalating enslavement is the essence of the Obamas, Clintons, Holders and Lynchs of the world, along with many of our SC justices.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

Post Reply

Return to “Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest