The Liquor Talking

I don’t get it. How is the ability to beat Obama NOT important? If the polls show that Candidate D can not possibly beat Obama, I’d be an idiot to support that candidate. I have to agree with Lambert. We republicans need to quickly get behind our best shot at beating Obama.

Ray

Come on, really?

Dude, you’re killin’ me here.

I didn’t say it wasn’t important. It’s just not very important.

Not when considering the fact that ANY of the present candidates CAN beat Obama.

As far as polls go, they never enter into my thought process. They’re probably important to politicians to determine if their message is working or not, but a voter who bases their opinion on what a majority of randomly selected strangers think is nuts.

Finally, as far as quickly getting behind a candidate, that kinda defeats the purpose of the whole primary system. Basing your decision on who the voters of one or two states likes is equally insane. “As cold a night as ’tis,” it’s a process we have to endure in order to give each contender a good sniff.

For me, the fascinating part is seeing how the candidates tweak their message, based on what state their in. Its the inconsistencies that I look for.

But, vote with the majority if it makes you feel like you’re participating.

Elim

I don’t have a problem with the republican candidates beating each other up. It’s good practice for when the Obama cult fires up its slime machine. Right now, I think the democrats want Romney to get the nomination. He’s the only one they’re really going after with ads and surrogates on the talk shows. I think they’re trying to make the republicans think that Romney is who they most fear.

Russell

Kinda like an intramural slime-a-thon eh?

I guess it wouldn’t bother me if I didn’t feel like some of the candidates are talking out their wazoo. I mean you got Perry and Gingrich yapping about how Romney was mostly responsible for people losing their jobs while he was at Bain Capital.

I can relate. I lost my last job because the owners thought the company would be more profitable in Kentucky than in Montana. While I have some umbrage about the way it was played, I don’t begrudge them this. I’d rather put on a job application “Company moved out of state” than “Company went out of business.”

The point here is that even IF we pin the WHOLE thing on Romney, the take away for me is that he was good at it. He made tons of dough for his employer. I guess the likes of Perry and Gingrich would prefer it if Romney had been an abject failure at business? I’m not advocating Romney by any means, but I think I prefer someone who’s at least been successful in the private sector than yet another career politician.

Unless it’s politicians that are gonna throw hands when they get mad:

Hard to say who’d prevail in a brawl amongst the republican candidates, but I’d watch that Ron Paul guy. He looks like he has a knife.

Elim

Tyler

Okay, so we won’t say “independent.”

We’ll instead say “waffle head.”

Just kidding.

It would be nice if we didn’t have a party system, especially for the presidential elections. There are times when the Republican party and I have sharp disagreements.

Such as gay marriage. The Republican party is out-and-out hypocritical in its position. Yes, I believe homosexuality is a sin. I believe that lots of things are sins. However, what I don’t understand is why a gay couple should be denied the same rights a heterosexual couple, based solely on the sinfulness of it. For a party that claims to guard the rights of the individual, their position here is incompatible with this claim.

I also have major differences with their position on abortion. While I also believe that deliberately aborting a fetus is a sin, The US Constitution requires that a person be born or naturalized in the United States in order to be subject to the jurisdiction and a citizen thereof. While I’m not a Constitutional scholar, to me, the constitutional requirement to be a person is that they are born.

This being the case, granting person-hood to a fetus requires a rewording of the 14th Amendment. As written, the decision to continue or abort a pregnancy is not withing the purview of the government.

Thirdly, I believe that the Patriot Act (and its enhancements) was and is a huge mistake. Protecting us from terrorists is a fine and noble cause, but doing so at the price of suspending, diluting or ignoring personal liberty is an unacceptable trade off. Yes, it’s true that the Patriot Act has thwarted terrorist attacks. I suspect the majority of which will remain unknown to us for ever. However, allowing the government to invade the privacy of law abiding citizens, regardless of how well-intentioned, is an unacceptable trade off.

These are, in my opinion, major flaws in Republican party doctrine.

That being said, it is unlikely that I could ever again vote for a democrat. I have in the past, but never again. At the core of the question (to me at least) is the question of whose rights are paramount. Republicans (with the exceptions above) hold that the rights of the individual are paramount. Democrats hold that the needs of society outweigh individual liberty.

This core value permeates every facet of party doctrine, democrats and republicans alike.

This does not necessarily mean that I will vote a straight party ticket. If I find the republican candidate offensive, I will leave it blank. I’m done with voting for the lesser of two evils.

Dunno if you’ll find this test of value. I felt some of the questions to be awkwardly worded, but it was interesting nonetheless.

Oh, and we happen to agree on education. We need to spend way, way more on education. The problem of course is finding the most effective way of doing so.

But that’s for another rant.

Elim

If you’re not dumbing down your resume because of “principles” … well you can’t eat principles my friend. Not that I advocate you completely abandon them all but you might want to re-examine and see if it’s not more ego than principle
and on a side note and NOT to be picky … but it’s LYNN not Lynne, but hey – any press is good press LOL Good luck with the rest of your interviews – they truly are fools if they don’t snap you up.

Lynn

Sorry about the name. I do that to Lynette all the time.

There must be lots of fools out there.

You’re right that I can’t eat principles, I am however not quite to the point where I’m ready to again hide my lamp under a bushel. That nearly killed me once and I won’t do it again any time soon.

That being the case, this temp gig isn’t anything that’s likely to tax my skill set, but it is just that, temporary and I can do just about anything temporarily.

Which means I’m suspending work on my CD:

Elim

Yay on the successful job find!

Christine

Thanks!

It might be a yay. We’ll find out starting Monday. I know the wife is pretty tickled about it. It seems I’m not a particularly great house husband.

Elim