Chelene Nightingale of Save Our State Is Running for Governor (Sacramento: crimes, home)

[Rhenzanite]

Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat

Where are you getting your information. I don't remember reading anything about making Jesus our ruler in their platform.

From The Official Constitution Party website:
The preambles of their platforms:

The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Providence as we work to restore and preserve these United States.
This great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been and are afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.
The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries.

Those are their opening paragraphs describing where their party stands.

Yeah.... it'll do real well in California.

[City Boy]

Originally Posted by JetJockey

From The Official Constitution Party website:
The preambles of their platforms:



Those are their opening paragraphs describing where their party stands.

Yeah.... it'll do real well in California.

LOL wack jobs.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Pushing traditional Californians to the margins has given this candidate a small but important market segment. The GOP (and even to an extent the Democrats) have failed to appeal to salt of the earth, non elite Californians in favor of over credentialed transplants and foreigners with money, while cynically pandering to poorly educated illegal and legalized illegal immigrants. Yet another tragedy, slowly unfolding almost imperceptibly, for the formerly-Golden State.

[big daryle]

Originally Posted by majoun

I think it's her looks that got your vote.

As if CA doesn't have enough bimbos already. Our politics are screwed up enough already without having our own Sarah Palin.

Might as well run Britney Spears for governor...

She is reasonably attractive, i would'nt call her pretty. She does have a nice rack, though.

[Exitus Acta Probat]

Originally Posted by JetJockey

From The Official Constitution Party website:
The preambles of their platforms:



Those are their opening paragraphs describing where their party stands.

Yeah.... it'll do real well in California.

Oh...well..in all fairness to me, that stuff wasn't there back when I voted for Michael A. Peroutka in 2004.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by BayAreaHillbilly

Pushing traditional Californians to the margins has given this candidate a small but important market segment. The GOP (and even to an extent the Democrats) have failed to appeal to salt of the earth, non elite Californians in favor of over credentialed transplants and foreigners with money, while cynically pandering to poorly educated illegal and legalized illegal immigrants. Yet another tragedy, slowly unfolding almost imperceptibly, for the formerly-Golden State.

The difference is that traditional California as a whole was a live and let live, rugged individualist "don't bother me and I don't bother you" type of place, a legacy of the Old West, not a theocracy, although there were pockets of the state where that sort of thing was big. Slightly to the right of center, but very tolerant and moderate (and yes, obviously the racial/ethnic issues of the past were an exception to this, but I'm just generalizing here). And, unsurprisingly, the major parties in the old days generally avoided extremes ; they both worked for the good of the state ; there were always wackos, but generally they didn't get far. The then-part-time Legislature was as far as they got for the most part.

A good example of the old traditional California attitude was Pat Brown's statement "if you want to get elected in California, don't mess with a man's car or his gun". That sort of attitude now only exists in the far north of the state (one could say the real authentic California begins not at the San Ysidro/TJ border but at the Sonoma County/Marin County border) and would be unthinkable for a major politician to say nowadays (other than perhaps Tom Campbell).

The Constitution Party on the political spectrum is way on the fringes, out there with the Socialist Workers Party and the Socialist Party USA (which despite its name is a Trotskyist group with no connection to the old Socialist Party of America). The Libertarians and Greens look positively mainstream in comparison.

In any case, CA has suffered enough from divas, crybabies, attention whores and would-be celebrity politicians, and needs a grown up in charge. The only two candidates of the major parties who are truly grown ups are Jerry Brown on the Dem side and Tom Campbell on the Republican side. While their ideologies are quite different, either one would be a massive improvement over what we have now. For all that can be said about Brown's past, he was fiscally responsible as governor, and he's certainly competent. Campbell's libertarian Republicanism would be a clear break from some of the worst excesses of both sides in the state, and he is also clearly competent and would help get rid of the excessive regulation and insane fiscal structure that handicap the state. A race between the two would be the first time in years that California would be privileged to have two decent and good men of good character and ability running against each other on both sides, something that rarely happens in the state or the nation anymore (there hasn't been a Presidential race with two major party candidates of equally fine character and ability since Eisenhower vs. Stevenson over half a century ago).

[majoun]

Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat

Oh...well..in all fairness to me, that stuff wasn't there back when I voted for Michael A. Peroutka in 2004.

Did you read Peroutka's website?

What is the Mission of The American View & God, Family, Republic?

If you don't like either illegal immigration or theocracy and didn't like Bush or Kerry, you should've voted for Ralph Nader (who is tougher on immigration issues than Bush, Gore, Kerry, Obama, or McCain) instead of Peroutka.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by big daryle

She is reasonably attractive, i would'nt call her pretty. She does have a nice rack, though.

And therein lies her appeal, what appeal she has anyways.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by majoun

The difference is that traditional California as a whole was a live and let live, rugged individualist "don't bother me and I don't bother you" type of place, a legacy of the Old West, not a theocracy, although there were pockets of the state where that sort of thing was big. Slightly to the right of center, but very tolerant and moderate (and yes, obviously the racial/ethnic issues of the past were an exception to this, but I'm just generalizing here). And, unsurprisingly, the major parties in the old days generally avoided extremes ; they both worked for the good of the state ; there were always wackos, but generally they didn't get far. The then-part-time Legislature was as far as they got for the most part.

A good example of the old traditional California attitude was Pat Brown's statement "if you want to get elected in California, don't mess with a man's car or his gun". That sort of attitude now only exists in the far north of the state (one could say the real authentic California begins not at the San Ysidro/TJ border but at the Sonoma County/Marin County border) and would be unthinkable for a major politician to say nowadays (other than perhaps Tom Campbell).

The Constitution Party on the political spectrum is way on the fringes, out there with the Socialist Workers Party and the Socialist Party USA (which despite its name is a Trotskyist group with no connection to the old Socialist Party of America). The Libertarians and Greens look positively mainstream in comparison.

In any case, CA has suffered enough from divas, crybabies, attention whores and would-be celebrity politicians, and needs a grown up in charge. The only two candidates of the major parties who are truly grown ups are Jerry Brown on the Dem side and Tom Campbell on the Republican side. While their ideologies are quite different, either one would be a massive improvement over what we have now. For all that can be said about Brown's past, he was fiscally responsible as governor, and he's certainly competent. Campbell's libertarian Republicanism would be a clear break from some of the worst excesses of both sides in the state, and he is also clearly competent and would help get rid of the excessive regulation and insane fiscal structure that handicap the state. A race between the two would be the first time in years that California would be privileged to have two decent and good men of good character and ability running against each other on both sides, something that rarely happens in the state or the nation anymore (there hasn't been a Presidential race with two major party candidates of equally fine character and ability since Eisenhower vs. Stevenson over half a century ago).

I'd say all three of the apparent GOPers have some sort of libertarian streak. And I agree we could do worse than Brown. This is the silver lining if any.

My worry is that the libertarians and Goldwater conservatives will incur infighting. In which case, I hope Brown is it on the Dem side and not Newsom.

[Quatermass]

Originally Posted by majoun

The difference is that traditional California as a whole was a live and let live, rugged individualist "don't bother me and I don't bother you" type of place, a legacy of the Old West, not a theocracy, although there were pockets of the state where that sort of thing was big. Slightly to the right of center, but very tolerant and moderate (and yes, obviously the racial/ethnic issues of the past were an exception to this, but I'm just generalizing here). And, unsurprisingly, the major parties in the old days generally avoided extremes ; they both worked for the good of the state ; there were always wackos, but generally they didn't get far. The then-part-time Legislature was as far as they got for the most part.

A good example of the old traditional California attitude was Pat Brown's statement "if you want to get elected in California, don't mess with a man's car or his gun". That sort of attitude now only exists in the far north of the state (one could say the real authentic California begins not at the San Ysidro/TJ border but at the Sonoma County/Marin County border) and would be unthinkable for a major politician to say nowadays (other than perhaps Tom Campbell).

The Constitution Party on the political spectrum is way on the fringes, out there with the Socialist Workers Party and the Socialist Party USA (which despite its name is a Trotskyist group with no connection to the old Socialist Party of America). The Libertarians and Greens look positively mainstream in comparison.

In any case, CA has suffered enough from divas, crybabies, attention whores and would-be celebrity politicians, and needs a grown up in charge. The only two candidates of the major parties who are truly grown ups are Jerry Brown on the Dem side and Tom Campbell on the Republican side. While their ideologies are quite different, either one would be a massive improvement over what we have now. For all that can be said about Brown's past, he was fiscally responsible as governor, and he's certainly competent. Campbell's libertarian Republicanism would be a clear break from some of the worst excesses of both sides in the state, and he is also clearly competent and would help get rid of the excessive regulation and insane fiscal structure that handicap the state. A race between the two would be the first time in years that California would be privileged to have two decent and good men of good character and ability running against each other on both sides, something that rarely happens in the state or the nation anymore (there hasn't been a Presidential race with two major party candidates of equally fine character and ability since Eisenhower vs. Stevenson over half a century ago).

Now there's the majoun I've come to respect. Totally agree on all points.