Republicans fear they do not have a candidate they believe has the best odds of beating Obama (conservative, president)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Despite America being founded as a Constitutional Republic, based on limited government, individual rights, and separation of powers.
The people would prefer:
A Communist (Marxist) who believes that the federal government should be intrusive, that rights can be limited, and that the federal government should be authoritarian in nature, with less powers reserved to the states.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,483,116 times
Reputation: 6671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
So, in your opinion:
Despite America being founded as a Constitutional Republic, based on limited government, individual rights, and separation of powers.
The people would prefer:
A Communist (Marxist) who believes that the federal government should be intrusive, that rights can be limited, and that the federal government should be authoritarian in nature, with less powers reserved to the states.
Ahh, I get it. You support a communist.
You mean unlike supporting the so-called "Dominionists" (Perry, Bachmann, Palin, et al), who seek a "christian" theocracy, and openly defy the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to said "Constitution"?!
Also you apparently haven't noticed that the majority of Americans "constitutionally" elected this particular "communist" (aka, "the Socialist", "Chimpy the Kenyan", "The Magic Negro", "Obummer", "Hitler", "Barry", "the Anti-Christ", yada-yada). So unless the GOP can come up with some better candidates than the current bunch of wacky-doodles designed just for folks like yourself, looks like y'all better prepare for another big loss again in 2012.... um, "Comrade"!
I don't believe any of those polls, other than the order of which candidate the people are more favorable of compared to Obama. In that case, Paul is second, yet the media acts like he's the seventh or eighth candidate.
RCP is the most accurate of polls as they take numerous sources and give an average. Paul in second as they have it I believe, but the media is out to get Paul and make him look irreverent. Fox especially hates Paul and props Perry up because that's who they want their viewers to support
You mean unlike supporting the so-called "Dominionists" (Perry, Bachmann, Palin, et al), who seek a "christian" theocracy, and openly defy the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to said "Constitution"?!
Also you apparently haven't noticed that the majority of Americans "constitutionally" elected this particular "communist" (aka, "the Socialist", "Chimpy the Kenyan", "The Magic Negro", "Obummer", "Hitler", "Barry", "the Anti-Christ", yada-yada). So unless the GOP can come up with some better candidates than the current bunch of wacky-doodles designed just for folks like yourself, looks like y'all better prepare for another big loss again in 2012.... um, "Comrade"!
I support Ron Paul.
By the way, I see nothing wrong with Bachmann's views. What specifically has she said that "defies the establishment clause of the first amendment"? Oh, I get it, it's because she says that people of faith have a right to practice their faith, regardless if they're public officials. Our founding fathers thought so too, considering that they wrote the Constitution. You don't know what you're talking about.
RCP is the most accurate of polls as they take numerous sources and give an average. Paul in second as they have it I believe, but the media is out to get Paul and make him look irreverent. Fox especially hates Paul and props Perry up because that's who they want their viewers to support
I agree that they're out to make Paul look irrelevant. It's quite obvious. They called Perry a "Front Runner" from the moment he stepped into the race. Paul has truly been popular in polls, and has run for president before. How does Perry, one who favors in-state tuition for illegals, forced immunization of HPV vaccines on teenaged girls, and having never run for president garner front runner status, when he's never been shown to be such in a poll or anything? Paul has done well in polls. He has run for president. He doesn't support in-state tuition for illegals, or forced immunizations. What is the appeal of Perry? Nothing.
I agree that they're out to make Paul look irrelevant. It's quite obvious. They called Perry a "Front Runner" from the moment he stepped into the race. Paul has truly been popular in polls, and has run for president before. How does Perry, one who favors in-state tuition for illegals, forced immunization of HPV vaccines on teenaged girls, and having never run for president garner front runner status, when he's never been shown to be such in a poll or anything? Paul has done well in polls. He has run for president. He doesn't support in-state tuition for illegals, or forced immunizations. What is the appeal of Perry? Nothing.
Because that's who Fox and the other right wing networks want people to support. Perry is the perfect empty suit to the corporations and will happily bob his head and do anything for big business and other puppet masters. He will gladly help them lead to their ultimate goal of turning america into a complete corporatist/fascist reign.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,483,116 times
Reputation: 6671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
I support Ron Paul.
By the way, I see nothing wrong with Bachmann's views. What specifically has she said that "defies the establishment clause of the first amendment"? Oh, I get it, it's because she says that people of faith have a right to practice their faith, regardless if they're public officials. Our founding fathers thought so too, considering that they wrote the Constitution. You don't know what you're talking about.
Have you ever actually read the Constitution? And the establishment clause has generally been interpreted by the Supreme Court to prohibit 1) the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or 2) the preference by the U.S. government of one religion over another.
Bachmann and Perry both explicitly support Dominionism, whose basic message is that "Christians should rule". Which is in direct conflict with said Constitution, and should be obvious even to any Tea Party "moran" (as they spell it)!
Of course it's now a moot point, since none of 'em are obviously going anywhere (especially Ron Paul)!
Have you ever actually read the Constitution? And the establishment clause has generally been interpreted by the Supreme Court to prohibit 1) the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or 2) the preference by the U.S. government of one religion over another.
Bachmann and Perry both explicitly support Dominionism, whose basic message is that "Christians should rule". Which is in direct conflict with said Constitution, and should be obvious even to any Tea Party "moran" (as they spell it)!
Of course it's now a moot point, since none of 'em are obviously going anywhere (especially Ron Paul)!
Do you have references where Bachmann or Perry have said they support Dominionism, because I am sure you don't? This is bordering on being slander.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
