You know who Republicans seem to really hate these days? Conservatives. At their CPAC meeting they did this cute little straw poll. Among Republicans the most likely individual to be nominated, and win, the 2012 Presidency was….
Ron Paul.
The crowd booed when this was announced.
So, uh…you voted for him but you still hate him? I mean I don’t like the guys politics because he is a hair shy of being an anarchist and he steps on the rights of women and homosexuals by refusing to protect their rights – but I would never vote for him!
It seems that most of the 2,400 people who voted “wished the Republicans had a better field of candidates to choose from.”
Don’t we all. I mean they have Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Ron Paul, Dick Cheney. I honestly think if I had to pick one I would go with Mitt. No. Scratch that. I would not vote.
At some point, kiddos, you are going to have to straighten up and fly right or we are going to only have one party in this country. And, let’s face it, Democrats cannot get anything done with you – imagine how little they would get done without you hounding them.
mac
5 months ago
Mitt is a little too fundie for my taste.
Ron Paul, though nutty, is the only one I’d actually vote for. But, he doesn’t play nice with the other repubs, so he won’t go too far on the national stage. At least, I believe that’s what happened last election.
the lion
5 months ago
Ron Paul does not support women’s rights. He does not support gay marriage. Like him, I believe in a tiny government. Unlike him, however, I believe that when it comes to defending our rights the government should be like dictatorship large. We are talking massive. Other than that? I am with him. But I can not support a man who refuses to protect my basic rights and the basic rights of everyone.
mac
5 months ago
I saw they booed Bob Barr for going against torture, too.
You’re right. If they don’t straighten that ship, they will loose revelance as a party. Well, they should anyway.
Michael Lockridge
5 months ago
I, too, am a hair shy of being an anarchist. I selected the Libertarian party as a tool to thumb my nose (through my vote) at the Democrats and Republicans. They are two flavors of vanilla, and not very good vanilla.
Even the Libertarians as currently evolved are a disappointment.
Gay marriage? Get the government out of the marriage business altogether. That would include marriage related tax regulations. If taxed at all people should be taxed as individuals. Their relationships should not be a factor. Marriage should be a matter for individuals to work out apart from government.
On the up side, the current system has lumbered along more or less adequately for centuries. I think the key is nobody having power for long enough to really screw things up. Moderated mediocrity. That’s America!
Of course, anarchy has it’s down side. As a friend said to me, “We are just too old for anarchy. I don’t have what it takes to defend myself all of the time, anymore.”
Mike
TheNate
5 months ago
I heard a quote from my father when I was young. I believe it effectively sums up current American politics. “One side seems crazy, the other side is crazy. And I can never tell which is which”
the lion
5 months ago
Michael, the govvies are heavily into marriage only because people are trying to take away the right of all Americans to marry (consenting adults) whomever they please. It is the government’s job to protect rights. That is why they must stay involved here. Once that right is protected, step out.
Rights must be actively protected or they will be taken away. You need only look to Asia to find many examples.
Uruk
5 months ago
I can’t recall an exact quote and source– but Thomas Jefferson basically said that our democratic experiment is doomed if the people don’t stay educated and remember that our government facilitates the people’s rule. Not, that the government rules over the people.
Each party needs to fall in line or get out of the way.
Except that the people don’t seem to know that in mass. We need to start a movement that helps our fellow citizens recognize that in my opinion.
Michael Lockridge
5 months ago
I don’t think people have ever had much in the way of rights in nations such as China.
What people want to take away the right to marry? By what authority? Marriage should occur within your own sub-culture according to whatever rules you have chosen to submit. Nobody else has any say.
This is the ideal world, of course. Then again, I know of no agency imposing any restrictions on my own marriage other than the government. That license thing. As to whether or not others recognize a particular form of marriage, why would it matter?
I am probably fortunate to live in a place where I experience little social compulsion to conform. Except that old guy from the home owner’s association who doesn’t like how I keep my yard.
the lion
5 months ago
Michael, the government needs to recognize all marriages equally whether it is between man and woman or man and man or woman and woman. Churches need not recognize all marriages but the government must.
I hope one day we look back and see this anti-gay marriage sentiment as we now see anti-interracial marriage sentiment: foolish and simply wrong.