[jbock13]

But do we really want the 8 party parliamentary chaos that is in europe? Like it or not, our system works, we just chose to sit around and blame everyone else for our own problems.

Also regarding your friend, this is the problem. People are too eager to pick their candidate, and for all the wrong reasons. Hold the fire. Calm down and let the process work. Too many don't do this however. Its exactly how McCain won in 08. People jumped all over the place regarding candidates, and it created conservatives splitting votes, when McCain had a small but loyal moderate following.

[Purple Haize]

Newt is leading in the polls!!!! how can people who call themselves Christians support him? Why do we have no spines?

Yeah, because people who call themselves Christians are perfect and without sin. Heaven forbid we allow anyone to change from their sinful ways. name for me one person who had moral shortcomings and changed their life?

[From the class of 09]

Newt is leading in the polls!!!! how can people who call themselves Christians support him? Why do we have no spines?

Yeah, because people who call themselves Christians are perfect and without sin. Heaven forbid we allow anyone to change from their sinful ways. name for me one person who had moral shortcomings and changed their life?

So Newt's Christian now? I thought he became a Catholic so he could marry one of his mistresses And yes you could be Catholic and Christian but they don't tend to trend together IMO.

[LUconn]

wait, I thought we didn't care about morals and stuff. You guys need to make up your minds.

[jbock13]

Not to be annoying here, but just to point it out, only one poll in one state says that Gingrich is leading, in Mississippi. Don't trust the national polls. The states elect our nominee. Not the national country.

Also to note, Public Policy Polling is a democratic pollster group. They do tend to bias the Democrats by about 5 points, though I'm not sure about Republican primaries. The same group that gave Gingrich a 3 point lead in Mississippi, just came out with a poll stating Cain is ahead 14 points in Ohio.

What makes politics so thrilling to me is that it is like a patchwork, a puzzle to solve. All the pieces come together before your very eyes. It's exciting to watch.

When Ward Armstrong got beat in Virginia, Patrick County, a Republican county, voted for him. But Henry County, a traditionally Democratic county voted for the Republican, it was certainly a shock. And that's why politics is such an exciting sport. There's all sorts of surprises.

[From the class of 09]

wait, I thought we didn't care about morals and stuff. You guys need to make up your minds.

Not I. I've always said morals are the most important, I'm pretty sure no one agreed with me. But if someone is going to lie and cheat their spouse why would I expect any different to the country? One guy that did agree with me was George Washington who thought being moral/religious (Christian) was the most important thing for an elected official.

[R i]

Who will do the most to help our country remain successful. Are morals and character factored in? Yes. Are they near the top of the priority list? Yes. Are they the single most important thing when I am voting for a president? No.

Kind of like drafting a player out of college to play proffessional sports. Is character an issue? of course. But can the dude play? That is the more important factor.

[jbock13]

I think this goes back to the whole christian socialism argument. If there's a christian who's a socialist, and there's an atheist who believes in free minds and free markets, then I'm voting for the atheist.

Call me a heretic if you wish.

[From the class of 09]

I understand I'm in the minority on this one. But I wonder how many problems could be solved if our politicians actually did have moral integrity. I know we wouldn't have a problem with insider trading for congress.

Also I'm not saying being a moral person is the only thing needed to lead, but I do think it's the most important. If that makes sense.

I keep thinking of the different times where leaders have to make hard decisions and especially ones that aren't publicly appealing and I don't know how somebody without a solid moral backing makes that decision when it means they won't be re-elected.

I know I'm different on this thinking but I do enjoy this convo.

[jbock13]

I disagree with you 09, but I understand your argument, and there's nothing inherently wrong with it my friend

[Purple Haize]

I think this goes back to the whole christian socialism argument. If there's a christian who's a socialist, and there's an atheist who believes in free minds and free markets, then I'm voting for the atheist.

Call me a heretic if you wish.

Heretic! I hope you feel better now!

As for the moral issue I am a little more forgiving I guess. I am a fan of Dick Morris and how he was able to change his lifestyle and behavior by embracing his religious beliefs. I look at how GWB faced his alcoholism etc by embracing his faith. The world is full of stories of people turning their lives around. I have read the account of Newts first divorce ( and 2 ND) and it is a rather interesting narrative comparing the media version and the version of his kids. I have read how the Newt today is a much different person today then in 94 and who isn't. One person even cited the cruise he took with his wife early in the campaign cycle as proof he is changed. $500k credit line at Tiffany's? Good on him, how is that illegal or immoral.
His sofa conversation about global warming with Pelosi? Said it was a huge dumb mistake.
I am sure he can be arrogant, unfocused, and prickly. So what?

[jbock13]

ick, I can't stand Dick Morris. His politics I mean.

[skywalker5291]

Everyone on here keeps talking about how they cant stand that the candidate flip flop, that they may not uphold the same moral standard as them, or te persons stance on abortion is off. I can fix all three of these issues with one candidate and his name is Ron Paul. Dr. Paul has never flip flopped in his 30 years in politics, he is a devout christian that stands for his beliefs and he is also Pro-life. And yes I know all of you guys think Ron Paul supporters are crazy but we are crazy for a reason bc this man has been right for three decades now and is America's only hope.

Just my two cents bc I feel like everyone on here is looking in the wrong places.

[From the class of 09]

There are a number of Paul supporters on here. jbock is just louder then the rest of us

[jbock13]

But some people truly believe that Paul is the solution to all that ails the earth. He's not deity.

And yes, there are lots of Paul supporters on here.

Paul is good, but cmon, the gold and ft. Knox is real, and the the U.S border is not used for keeping american citizens from escaping.

Other than that I'm behind the guy.

[LUconn]

Dr. Paul has never flip flopped in his 30 years in politics

You must have done extensive research..... or not

[Purple Haize]

ick, I can't stand Dick Morris. His politics I mean.

He is very Machievellian I will grant you that but he does have a lot of great insight. I'm sure BYD would throw up in his throat a little bit but if Newt wins the primary, I would LOVE to see Newt hire him to run his campaign. He would destroy the Obama Chicago machine!
After Saturdays debate I am still stuck on 3 candidates, but I have 'flipped' on 2 and 3

I hate the term ' flip flop". It's like saying "I ve turned round 360 degrees the other way". If you are for position A then realize you were wrong and the ate for Position B that is a flip. Reagan did it with his own views on abortion. A flip flop is someone who is for Position A then goes with Position B then realizes he was really behoind Position A. George H W Bush did it on taxes.

As for Paul, his 'gospel' of personal responsibility is golden. I just disagree with his views on the gold standard and foreign policy. And if he wins the Republican nomination I'd still vote for him over Obama

[jbock13]

ick, I can't stand Dick Morris. His politics I mean.

He is very Machievellian I will grant you that but he does have a lot of great insight.

I could not disagree with you more, and we'll leave it at that.

As to your flip flop argument, you are right. Great minds never stay stagnate. They are always considering counter-evidence, and strengthening their arguments. I flip flopped on the War of Terror after common sense hit me. What is our aim? When will it be over? When every terrorist is killed? How will that even be possible to do so? We will somehow be able to change in one day, 5,000 years of cultures?

Okay you get the point

And BYD, I heard the Fort Knox and Border comment in real time. I know what he said. And I'm not sure why he didn't use more clear and concise language than to just aimlessly say what he did. But that's just my opinion.

[Purple Haize]

So you are saying our views are 360 degrees opposite of each other

[Innocent Bystander]

Sorry, I posted twice before reading the entire thread....don't want to beat a dead horse.

[Innocent Bystander]

Bystander, I'm interested in what you mean. Is it my fault that some contracts aids? Should I be forced to subsidize them for their poor choice?

I know church charity should help, and we should, I just reject the argument that we are responsible for "killing" them.

Also, right on skywalker.

jbock...I think I missed something between my post about abortion and your response about subsidizing poor choices...not trying to be sarcastic here, I'm just not following the progression.

[RubberMallet]

i'm certainly not saying that i'm not interested at all in the issue from a legislative standpoint. its just not on my list of major priorities. yeah yeah yeah, its murder we get that and i firmly believe that it is but its going to be there. abortion is not going to be reppealed. once again, abortion numbers are up. why? because everything sucks in this country. the number of impoverished grow, the jobless numbers rise, sounds alot like a breeding ground for abortions.

i guess i should expound on the legislation of morality. i should even rephrase it because its too vague of a statement without explanation and its used too often by chowderheads. We can not JUST legislate morality. it seems thats all we are interested in often times. i go back to a post i made a while back. many it seems just feel, lets make it illegal, i voted on that. i did my part. my wife and i help and fund pro life organizations. my wife's group helps regularly at crisis pregnancy centers. i furiously despise the genocide of the voiceless and i will continue to vote against it as often as i can. Luckily, my political leanings will for the foreseeable future will generally coincide with the right to life stance.

[Innocent Bystander]

i guess i should expound on the legislation of morality. i should even rephrase it because its too vague of a statement without explanation and its used too often by chowderheads. We can not JUST legislate morality. it seems thats all we are interested in often times.

I apologize for my chowderheadedness....I agree with the above wholeheartedly.

[jmdickens]

i guess i should expound on the legislation of morality. i should even rephrase it because its too vague of a statement without explanation and its used too often by chowderheads. We can not JUST legislate morality. it seems thats all we are interested in often times.

I apologize for my chowderheadedness....I agree with the above wholeheartedly.

On the money Mallet!!!

[01LUGrad]

Noticing a trend here. Every time a candidate moves close to Romney in the polls, he or she is the target of an incredible barrage from the media. This lasts until said candidate is down close to 10% in the polls. At that time, the next highest candidate in the polls becomes the target.

No one is messing with Romney at all. My guess is that they will leave him alone until he becomes the nominee and then they will fire everything they've got at him.