November Elections in Maryland, Wise UP Maryland (Baltimore: appointed, lawyer)

[InvaderBryce]

Originally Posted by Jobworkinger

Sounds like it wouldn't be a bad thing then if Ron, Rand, and Gary took the reigns over the Republican Party.

The last thing the GOP needs is Libertarians controlling it.

[wisedisguise]

A few constitutionalists would be nice. The main problem I see in national politics is a willful lack to stand by the constitution. There are too many progressives who claim it to be an old piece of paper that makes no sense anymore but as of the middle of the last century it was the frame work for the most successful form of government yet. This is from Article VI of the constitution -
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Pretty simple, right?

One problem spot with our government, be it REP or DEM, is the need to go to war for no real reason at all. Read the constitution for a remedy to that. We are not the world police though it has been part of our nation's mindset to go to the aid of our allies. Again, revert to the constitution. We have no allies.
Most of the real hot topics on the table - abortion, gay rights, immigration, gun control, health insurance and the war on drugs should not be on the federal level. The 10th amendment lays all of that out in a quick sentence.
Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Our economic problems can be traced back to the Federal Reserve act signed into law by Woodrow Wilson in 1913. Nixon closed the gold window which prevented the USA from paying foreign debts in gold. We use fiat currency in these times which means it is only worth what we are told to believe. It is based upon nothing but the credit of the USA and that has been degraded somewhat within the past year.
The main stumbling block we face is agenda and power. The XXII amendment limits the POTUS/VP to two 4 year terms in office. This was done purposefully to prevent what equals a king, which the constitution adamantly puts a stop to. Do you think congress would ever limit themselves to the same? No, and that is where the agenda/power struggle comes in. Our own state senators have been in office for too long. If a senator is in office for more than 3 six year terms they are either accomplishing a lot or doing little. You make the choice at the ballot box. Most citizens keep voting for the same guy anyway so it never changes.
If we were students of the constitution, the law of the land, we would know social issues are not what presidential candidates are to be haggling about. We, the people, have lost our way and handed the reins to criminals with no regard to the effects until IT hits the fan. Then we want the government to sort it all out for us. "They should do something about it".
Again, read the constitution - please. I can't/won't give detailed history lessons here but everyone can access this info on the interweb. Your congressman will send you a copy if you request one.

[molukai]

Barring the polar ends, I don't think there are any people on the left or right side of the spectrum that do not believe in the authority of the Constitution. Conservatives have traditionally adhered to a more literal form of the Constitution whereas Liberals have traditionally viewed it as open for interpretation due to its intentional vagueness in certain areas.

[InvaderBryce]

Originally Posted by wisedisguise

A few constitutionalists would be nice. The main problem I see in national politics is a willful lack to stand by the constitution. There are too many progressives who claim it to be an old piece of paper that makes no sense anymore but as of the middle of the last century it was the frame work for the most successful form of government yet. This is from Article VI of the constitution -
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Pretty simple, right?

One problem spot with our government, be it REP or DEM, is the need to go to war for no real reason at all. Read the constitution for a remedy to that. We are not the world police though it has been part of our nation's mindset to go to the aid of our allies. Again, revert to the constitution. We have no allies.
Most of the real hot topics on the table - abortion, gay rights, immigration, gun control, health insurance and the war on drugs should not be on the federal level. The 10th amendment lays all of that out in a quick sentence.
Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Our economic problems can be traced back to the Federal Reserve act signed into law by Woodrow Wilson in 1913. Nixon closed the gold window which prevented the USA from paying foreign debts in gold. We use fiat currency in these times which means it is only worth what we are told to believe. It is based upon nothing but the credit of the USA and that has been degraded somewhat within the past year.
The main stumbling block we face is agenda and power. The XXII amendment limits the POTUS/VP to two 4 year terms in office. This was done purposefully to prevent what equals a king, which the constitution adamantly puts a stop to. Do you think congress would ever limit themselves to the same? No, and that is where the agenda/power struggle comes in. Our own state senators have been in office for too long. If a senator is in office for more than 3 six year terms they are either accomplishing a lot or doing little. You make the choice at the ballot box. Most citizens keep voting for the same guy anyway so it never changes.
If we were students of the constitution, the law of the land, we would know social issues are not what presidential candidates are to be haggling about. We, the people, have lost our way and handed the reins to criminals with no regard to the effects until IT hits the fan. Then we want the government to sort it all out for us. "They should do something about it".
Again, read the constitution - please. I can't/won't give detailed history lessons here but everyone can access this info on the interweb. Your congressman will send you a copy if you request one.

Please keep your Uncle Ron talking points to yourself.

[wisedisguise]

Originally Posted by molukai

Progressivism does not equate to taxation, Jobworkinger.

How do you fund the actions progressives want to implement? The only means is through taxation, especially in an economic climate as we face now.

[wisedisguise]

Originally Posted by InvaderBryce

Please keep your Uncle Ron talking points to yourself.

You don't like the constitution? Are you one who think it to be a useless piece of paper?

[InvaderBryce]

Originally Posted by wisedisguise

You don't like the constitution? Are you one who think it to be a useless piece of paper?

Now, I find it funny that because I don't agree with your little statement, I'm somehow against the Constitution? All I'm just telling you is to just keep your Uncle Ron talking points to your self, because that's what they are; talking points from a Ron Paul website.

Your move.

[wisedisguise]

Originally Posted by InvaderBryce

Now, I find it funny that because I don't agree with your little statement, I'm somehow against the Constitution? All I'm just telling you is to just keep your Uncle Ron talking points to your self, because that's what they are; talking points from a Ron Paul website.

Your move.

You see them as Ron Paul talking points. I see it as sticking to the rulebook (constitution). I don't visit Ron Paul's website, I speak from what I learned in school, as a citizen of this country and in business dealings. I can piece it all together and it makes sense if any tries to comprehend. Do your own research and see what you find.
Critical reading is almost nonexistent today so fact gathering would be a real strain for most. Therefore, they let the media form their thoughts/talking points and they will go to the polls armed with that knowledge.

[InvaderBryce]

Originally Posted by wisedisguise

You see them as Ron Paul talking points. I see it as sticking to the rulebook (constitution). I don't visit Ron Paul's website, I speak from what I learned in school, as a citizen of this country and in business dealings. I can piece it all together and it makes sense if any tries to comprehend. Do your own research and see what you find.
Critical reading is almost nonexistent today so fact gathering would be a real strain for most. Therefore, they let the media form their thoughts/talking points and they will go to the polls armed with that knowledge.

Well buddy, I've done my research and I know where I stand. I support the Constitution and I believe in adhering to, but I also believe in interpreting it in places where it needs interpretation. And the last thing I need is some wannabe-enlightened hack come on here and tell me I'm wrong because of my convictions.

[justtitans]

Originally Posted by molukai

(2) The Republican Party is adding to government bureaucracy to attempt to eliminate a problem that is nearly non-existent. Specifically? Staunch voter ID requirements to prevent voter fraud. Oh wait, is it truly voter fraud that's the issue? No, considering voter fraud was less than 0.1% What it really is is voter suppression as an overwhelming number of the Democratic base would become instantly unable to vote after these 'protective' measures.

Just looking at your position on things, maybe you weren't really as conservative as you thought you were. It sounds like you are more moderate than anything.

As far as voter fraud, you can't prove voter fraud until you start checking it. It's like have a free for all at a store and giving away free items for every customer that enters the store. Unless you check the customer, their ID and keep record of them there is no way to know if that person has come a second time. One thing that people don't consider is, there is more than one way to commit voter fraud. If someone voluntarily gives you their voter card, it's still voter fraud. People being able to do things like that compromises the integrity of the elections.

I do believe that the Republican Party has ill intent to stop certain voters, but I believe it's ridiculous that we have able bodied adults in this nation who have not gotten ID. What kind of jobs do they have that they don't need ID?

Originally Posted by molukai

(3) The Republican Party openly (hypocritically) stating as late as the Republican National Convention that they believe in liberty EXCEPT it has to do with cases of the woman's reproductive system. Not only are they against abortion (which I am as well), they are willing to supercede personal liberties (which I am against) to make it illegal for women to have an abortion in any case or situation.

That makes no sense. You can't have it both ways. You say you are against abortions but then you don't want it to become illegal. I guess the question should be why are you against abortions? Abortions should definitely be illegal, in my opinion, because the way they are used is flawed. Organizations like Planned Parenthood get to inform and perform abortions without any oversight. It's the equivalent of allowing car dealers to tell you what the price of a car is and for you not to have access to Kelley Blue Book. Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics have a bias view on whether these women should have abortions and they aren't going to give you all the facts, because quite honestly it's not in their best interest. It's completely flawed. Also abortion is not illegal, then murder shouldn't be either. There are no differences. If you kill a pregnant woman in this nation it's double murder, but at the same time that child doesn't have rights to be a considered a human being?

Originally Posted by molukai

(5) The continued revisionism of our American history as being based on Christian religion. It was not. If you ask for quotes I will be happy to oblige, but it will solidify the fact that you watching Fox News isn't making you any smarter on our proud country's heritage.

Please give quotes. This nation was based on Christian values. How did we derive the fact that murder and stealing is wrong? What was the purpose of the pilgrims? Why do we have God or Our Creator written in so many documents?