I have a new poll question up (lower right side of home page):
The Family Research Council just completed a presidential straw poll at its Value Voters Summit. For whom would you have voted?
Here are the results of my previous poll. You overwhelmingly agreed...
Here were your votes. Click to enlarge to find your own brightly colored flag...
As always, make comments to either this or last week's poll here, not on the Vizu website.
Wow. Family Research Council is either very gullible, or sexist.Posted by: xalisae at September 20, 2009 11:18 AM
Bobby Jindal and my 2nd choice would be Rick Santorum.
Sarah Palin's good, but I think she should run for Senator first to help in Washington.Posted by: LizFromNebraska at September 20, 2009 12:14 PM
I'd like to see Michele Bachmann, congresswoman from MN run. I'd like to see Joel Rosenberg be her VP.Posted by: Marie at September 20, 2009 12:43 PM
Sarah Palin? Are you guys kidding me? Do you WANT President Obama to be re-elected?
Bobby Jindal is a much more intelligent, well spoken, respectable candidate.Posted by: Jenny Z at September 20, 2009 1:14 PM
Governor Huckabee is definitely the right choice. He has always been a champion of family values and has never let politics get in the way.Posted by: Michael at September 20, 2009 1:26 PM
I support Sarah Palin because she's not only a defender of life, she is an ambassador like no other due to personal life experience. I've worked hard for many years in the pro-life movement and I see an opportunity like never before in a Palin presidency to roll back the Culture of Death in a big way. She's got my support 100%.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 20, 2009 1:44 PM
PALIN IN 2012!Posted by: Ak Krystal at September 20, 2009 1:52 PM
Jenny Z, are you dumb enough to believe everything the media tells you about Palin? If you believe the hype of the hit job the media put out on her last time around, you deserve Obama.Posted by: xalisae at September 20, 2009 2:17 PM
Gov. Hukabee is a wonderful, kind man. He has great morals and is a superb people-person.
HOWEVER, he is SO wrong on taxes it's scary.
As much as I like Sarah Palin, I have to agree with JennyZ here. (except for her support of Jindal). Sarah Palin, through absolutely no fault of her own, brings WAY too much media-biased decietful baggage with her to ever run for the presidency... at least in the near future.Posted by: Marie at September 20, 2009 2:40 PM
It's because the media hates her so much that we know she's the best candidate, but if you want to go with who the media picks for you, go for it. It's a free country....or not.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 20, 2009 2:44 PM
I would vote oppposite of what the left-leaning media supports in a heartbeat.
However, look at how many people voted for someone with hardly any experience, morals and friends that had/have ties to some of the most radical organizations this country has ever seen.
Unfortunately, most people in this country (as evidenced by the last election) are decieved by what they do hear in the media.
I wouldn't call that a convincing argument, Marie. I don't understand. My vote belongs to me, not anyone else, and certainly not the media.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 20, 2009 3:10 PM
Besides, have you all ever noticed that the only time Huckabee and Romney poll well is when the vote is rather stacked? Romney polls well with people who identify themselves as Republicans....which happens to be very few people these days. Lots of Huckabee people were at the Values Voter Summit, which explains his win there. The only two candidates polling well with a cross-section of America are Sarah Palin and Ron Paul. I could not support Ron Paul, but that is just a fact. Palin and Paul are the two strongest candidates right now. The others are just lucky to get some good polls that are stacked in their favor.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 20, 2009 3:14 PM
If you don't believe me, look at their online presence. Look at her Facebook supporters and look at all the websites that support Ron Paul and Sarah Palin. These polls aren't indicators of support. The online presence is what I'm looking at........and all the Palin signs at the 912 march, etc.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 20, 2009 3:16 PM
I wouldn't call that a convincing argument, Marie. I don't understand. My vote belongs to me, not anyone else, and certainly not the media.
Then please tell me: How did Obama win?Posted by: Marie at September 20, 2009 3:20 PM
I might vote for a Pailin/Paul ticket...Posted by: xalisae at September 20, 2009 3:31 PM
I don't think we should run people based on electability and personal charisma. I'd rather vote for someone who is honest and just and have them lose than to choke down what I believe in to vote for someone who is more likely to win. But I guess that's just me.Posted by: xalisae at September 20, 2009 3:33 PM
I don't think that I could vote for Sarah Palin, personally. She strikes me as a nice person who knows how to talk to the everyman. But the truth is that despite her pros, she has cons, too: she has a poor environmental record, doesn't support gay rights (which, generally, has nothing to do with the president so much as the state, but I think that the president should give some sway towards gay people to give them some rights), has little experience outside of governor, and I don't know much about her economic beliefs.
I mean, she probably knows a lot about economics since she's worked in them before. And I adore how much she's willing to do for the disabled. That's great. :)
But all in all, I would have to support Richardson, so I put "Other" in the poll.Posted by: Vannah at September 20, 2009 4:38 PM
Apparently someone posted as me on a previous thread and the post was removed.
Can you give me some more info.Posted by: Phil Schembri is HisMan at September 20, 2009 4:48 PM
xalisae - I don't need to listen to the media to have that opinion. All I have to do is listen to what comes out of her mouth. Sorry, not presidential material, IMO.
Not to say I don't feel bad about some of the stuff said about her. But she doesn't have enough appeal to independents. And you need them to win an election (See every election in the last, oh I dunno, 20 years).Posted by: Jenny Z at September 20, 2009 4:53 PM
Where is Gov. Huckabee wrong on taxes? He is a supporter of the Fair Tax, which would get rid of the income tax system. We would no longer be penalized for productivity, and we wouldn't have a tax code that is 10,000 pages.
Gov. Huckabee is a champion of social conservative causes, and it is not surprising he won the poll. He is the best candidate because he never backs down from his convictions, and he has the most government executive experience out of all the contenders. The aftermath of the result of this last election should show us the importance of experience.Posted by: Michael at September 20, 2009 5:48 PM
Gov. Sarah Palin is a nice person, strong, and good in a lot of ways but, policy-wise, she still has yet to take a public stand in favor of a Human Life Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We need a leader who will push for that amendment, just as Lincoln pushed for the 14th. Mike Huckabee has been doing so, regardless of where that takes him, politically. For that and for MANY other reasons, he has my vote and support. I also have thoroughly enjoyed following the career of Rep. Mike Pence (IN) for about 12 years now. He's sharp and deeply cares about the issues that really matter - could be a good VP for Huckabee. Romney's just a power-hungry, 2-faced fake.Posted by: Pat at September 20, 2009 6:04 PM
Slight correction to JennyZ above. The tax code is not "10,000" pages. It's actually 6.75 x 10,000 pages. That's right! 67,500 pages inserted over the decades of highly paid lobbyist who have had their corporation's best interest in mind, rather than the people who elected our Representatives. Since those lobbyist out-number elected Representatives by a ratio of 70 to 1 (35,000+ to 535) nothing is going to change the corruption that festers in Washington, D.C. until we get the FairTax implemented and a President Huckabee would get that done.Posted by: Pat at September 20, 2009 6:13 PM
This is why we have campaigns and primaries.
When that process has identified the nominees, then we have to decide which one more closely reflects our world view.
I can tolerate higher taxes.
What I will not tolerate in a candidate seeking my support is an indifference to more dead babies!
That requirement really narrows the field.
Oddly enough the candidate who is 'pro-life' almost always is right on the other less important issues that matter to me.
yor bro kenPosted by: kbhvac at September 20, 2009 6:21 PM
I plan on voting for Mike Huckabee. He's the most balanced candidate, he's conservative and I think his exposure on Fox TV will now give him the audience he needs to go forward and win it this time. My least favorite candidate is Mitt Romney.Posted by: Bobrockyw at September 20, 2009 6:24 PM
I love Mike Huckabee, he is the most gracious talk show host and a joy to watch as he puts a positive spin (but true) on every subject and guest....hence I would see him as a tremendous VP for a team like with Romney or Pawlenty...on the other hand, I am not the expert, so I voted for Mike as I want him on the ticket some way, and I was NOT his supporter in the primary (he has grown on me greatly....love you Mike, God loves you even more!!)Posted by: Debby at September 20, 2009 6:30 PM
"nothing is going to change the corruption that festers in Washington, D.C. until we get the FairTax implemented and a President Huckabee would get that done."
Posted by: Pat at September 20, 2009 6:13 PM
Pat (and Michael),
Who would set the national sales tax rate?
Would it stay the same forever and if not, how much can it be raised?
I agree, I think Sarah Palin is a smart women true to her beliefs. However, I think that that majority of Americans just don't take her serious because she is so bubbly and down to earth. I think Mike Huckabee has much more overall applicable experience.Posted by: Patricia G. McCaffrey at September 20, 2009 7:10 PM
Would you rather have someone like Obama tell you what you want to hear, i.e., lie to you or someone that tells you the truth?
Do you want to hear lies?
I think Sarah Palin tells the truth because she has a healthy fear of God, something Obama has no clue about but will soon bear the cconsequences for, i.e., the wrath of the American voter.Posted by: Phil Schembri is HisMan at September 20, 2009 7:13 PM
Thank you for this opportunity. We need to get out the vote for Huck in 2012!Posted by: Deborah at September 20, 2009 7:22 PM
I guess I'm the only Jindal supporter. :(Posted by: LizFromNebraska at September 20, 2009 7:48 PM
Huckabee is our best chance in 2012. He's solid on conservative issues but also draws support from democrats and independents. If we're going to take back the White House, we need a candidate who can draw support from across the board. Huck can do that.Posted by: Ted Malone at September 20, 2009 7:49 PM
Having researched his time in AR for myself rather than accepting the word of people who have an agenda, it is clear that Huckabee is a man with an impeccable executive resume.
He cleared out a lot of the bureaucratic bloat & improved efficiency in AR - no mean feat. Despite the smears, the only things he spent money on were exactly the things people WANT the govt. to attend to - things like improving children's health, education & necessary road improvements.
He served with a totally partisan Democrat legislature (who literally nailed his office door shut) & yet managed to turn a painful deficit around into a very impressive surplus during his time in office.
He is a principled man who genuinely cares & loves his country more than his resume -- & is exactly what our country needs to turn things around & move us into a positive direction.Posted by: QuoVadisAnima at September 20, 2009 7:52 PM
Punishing consumers for buying in a consumer-driven economy is just plain stupid. People judge Sarah harshly for saying things which are later taken out of context (example: "I can see Russia from my house!" = She was being facetious in that she has a close relationship with Russia due to proximity and has literally had to negotiate treaties with them in past business dealings...how's THAT for experience, by the way?!) but I would rather have someone who doesn't seem to sound intelligent to some people than someone with just plain ignorant policies, like Huckabee. I live in Arkansas. He really didn't help us that much.Posted by: xalisae at September 20, 2009 8:38 PM
You might want to revise your profile of exactly who is a Huckabee supporter and widen the margin somewhat. I have been an ardent Huckabee supporter since June 2007. I am an Atheist, Independent, Economic Conservative. I also track Nat Hentoff. Both Huckabee and Hentoff are concerned with ethics and the First Amendment.
Nice counts. It really, really does as far as I am concerned. I took an informal poll of the ten neighbors on my block and every single one of them was a Huckabee supporter. Not so surprising since we are in Florence, SC. Incredibly surprising when you consider every single house of my block except mine has been purchased within the last three years. I have been here since 1991. This is a real sea change. Every single neighbor is a social conservative. That makes me the odd man out. One of my neighbors said because I was an Atheist, I could not possibly be a Republican, much less a conservative. I asked him just how many economics courses he took in college, and whether he was aware of the many studies done by well respected universities which showed a fetus could feel pain.
We need to seriously revise our definition of "social conservative" and lift it off of the religious perspective and on to the philosophical perspective. Mike Huckabee got there several years ago. It is now time for the rest of his supporters to catch up.Posted by: LynnRobb at September 20, 2009 8:49 PM
I'll take any of them..Posted by: Jasper at September 20, 2009 9:11 PM
I belive in Governor Huckabee 1000% and know he has the kind of strong leadership qualities that this country desparately needs. His book "Do The Right Thing" is a very insightful look into his vision for the country. Over a decade of executive experience where he got things done even with a democratic majority in his state proves he has what it takes to work with ALL politicians in Washington for the betterment of this country.Posted by: Linda at September 20, 2009 9:22 PM
I voted for Mike Huckabee in the primaries. I voted my conscience. I only voted for Mcain because he was 'the lesser of the two evils' as the saying goes. If Mike Huckabee runs again(for president), I'll vote for him- AGAIN. :)Posted by: Pamela at September 20, 2009 9:31 PM
Lol, I voted for Jindal. Yay to the 4.9%!! But honestly I'd take most anyone but Palin.Posted by: Abel at September 20, 2009 9:47 PM
Huckabee likes taxes too much for my taste. And, I don't like his (imo) overly-forceful mandates about what kinds of foods can and cannot be allowed on school campuses.
Other than those two things though, I think Huckabee is great. Nice is fine, but at this point I think I'd rather vote for someone who's ready to be mean, because that's exactly how these people who are literally trying to destroy America need to be countered.Posted by: xalisae at September 20, 2009 9:53 PM
Obviously HuckPAC is busy today trying to make Sarah Palin look like she doesn't have the support she actually has. Good luck with that. Again, it's just a fact that Sarah Palin and Ron Paul are the only two viable at this point. If the primary were held this very second, it would be a close one between Paul and Palin and the rest would be left in the dust. That's just reality. I'm not going to undermine your candidate. I don't work that way. And I don't get strongly behind someone who's not a viable candidate. Huckabee and Romney are not even viable at this point. The only way they could be would be if both Paul and Palin dropped out.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 20, 2009 10:11 PM
Why don't you like Palin, Abel?Posted by: xalisae at September 20, 2009 10:15 PM
Huckabee, as much as I respect him, lost in '08, is riding on past supporters, isn't overly compelling (he was liked in '08 because he was the best of the bunch, not necessarily the best overall), and is, sorry to say, old news.
The old news issue goes for most of the people on that list, btw, including Romney. You could argue it goes for Palin too, but her problem was that she was paired with McCain, not that she wasn't liked by the conservatives.
I think we either need someone who has fired up the entire base, like Palin, or, preferably, a new face and style along with excellent conservative values, like Pence.Posted by: kj.matovich at September 20, 2009 10:33 PM
As I write, only 222 people have voted in this poll. I hope it's online for the whole week.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 20, 2009 10:34 PM
Mike Huckabee has almost 11 yrs. experience as a Governor of Arkansas. He inherited a $200 M deficit with terrible schools and infrastructure. He left the state with schools rated 6th in the country and some of the best roads in the country according to the truck drivers. Yes, he raised some taxes (the people in Arkansas voted they wanted the taxes raised to get better schools). He vetoed bills to increase taxes, but the legislature in Arkansas was almost all Democrats, so they went over what he wanted. You cannot compare one state to another to say this person was not a fiscal conservative because it depends on the money they have and what condition the state is in during their tenure. This is a very Democratic state (except voting for the Pres. election), so Mike Huckabee had to work hard to get anything done. He received over 48% of the black vote (Democrats) when he ran for his second term. He is the most popular candidate of the Black minority that the Republicans have, and we need somebody who can pull even a little bit of that vote to our side in the 2012 election. He is the most charismatic, excellent speaker and we need somebody like that to compete with the skills of Obama. When Mike Huckabee governed in Arkansas, he did not force his religion on the people of Arkansas. When he ran in 2008, he did not want all the Chiristian questions during the debates, but the Republican establishment wanted to only present him as a Christian pastor so the people wouldn't vote for him, He fooled them, because he came in second and got between 10-13% of the votes in the states that came AFTER he dropped out of the race. In polls, he gets the highest scores from Independents and Blue Dog Democrats when polled against other leading Republican candidates, so he can win votes across the board, not just the Republican voters. He would make a great President to all the people in the U.S.Posted by: VFT at September 20, 2009 10:54 PM
As a former crisis pregnancy counselor, I am absolutely convinced that if Sarah Palin were president, thousands and thousands of babies would be saved from abortion just because of her example. I have absolutely zero doubt about that. None whatsover.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 21, 2009 12:42 AM
Re: the Human Life Amendment. That battle is NOW. The 2010 Congressional races must be won by supporters of the Human Life Amendment. Although Palin hasn't mentioned her position on it specifically, you'd be hard pressed to convince anyone, left or right, that she'd come out against a Human Life Amendment passed by Congress. Her job during the campaign was to push the McCain agenda, not her own. We must win support in the 2010 elections for candidates who support the Human Life Amendment. I'm supporting Bill Johnson for U.S. Senate in Kentucky because of his staunch pro-life position. He's committed to life. He faces a very tough race against Rand Paul and Trey Grayson.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 21, 2009 12:54 AM
Sarah, of course.Posted by: Andy at September 21, 2009 3:09 AM
In answer to Marie's question about how Obama won......one of the ways he won was by having his supporters constantly post ugly, critical comments about Sarah Palin on blog comment threads. What we prefer to do is build, not tear down, by giving the reasons we support Sarah Palin and defending her against the ugliness rather than slinging mud at the other guy. If this is a losing strategy, so be it.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 21, 2009 6:18 AM
Huck is the man. Not only do I agree with most everything he shands for, he is the only one who can win in 2012. We need the FairTax and he is the only one who has a chance of getting it passed. Go Huck in 2012Posted by: Steve K at September 21, 2009 6:23 AM
I think Newt is the only one who would actually call Obama on what he says. Obama would have to face the music even if he was the media darling, Newt would show him no mercy.Posted by: Kristen at September 21, 2009 7:59 AM
The media will attack any social conservative who gets the nomination. Notice you never heard A WORD about Palin until she was chosen? They would have attacked Huckleberry just as much, if he wasn't a useful idiot for the media to leave hanging around, allowing McCain to win the nomination. Remember, the New York Times ENDORSED McCain as the Republican nominee--because he was the most liberal. Then, when he won, they viciously attacked him with the bogus "he's having an affair claim", while simultaneously hiding from the true Sen. Edwards affair story.
Social conservatives must not base their choice on who the MSM will hate the least.Posted by: John Doe at September 21, 2009 8:41 AM
Hey all, I was just browsing Star Wars bumper stickers and found one I thought would be appropriate for those who aren't fans of Obama or his policies, and would look good alongside an anti-Obama sticker:
bumperstickers.cafepress.com/item/with-thunderous-applause-sticker-bumper/325968193 (add http:// )
It reads: So this is how democracy dies, with thunderous applause.
Kristen, while Newt was traveling around the country promoting the president's education policy (with Al Sharpton) Palin was calling Obama out on rationing with her 'death panel' comment.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 21, 2009 10:41 AM
John Doe, the reason they didn't complain is because they loved her!!! They loved her for cleaning out the old boys network in the Republican party up there in Alaska! She was able to work with the Democrats in the legislature there while the Republicans couldn't stand her for what she'd done. When she went out on the campaign trail against their 'dear leader' suddenly she had both Democrats and Republicans in Alaska after her. On my desktop I have a picture of the people who headed up the Troopergate investigation.....Alaska senator Hollis French, et al, standing in front of Obama campaign posters.
The media and Alaska Democrats thought she was the best thing since Alaska statehood.........until she campaigned as VP against Obama.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 21, 2009 10:47 AM
Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 21, 2009 10:41 AM
Posted by: Kristen
at September 21, 2009 10:49 AM
Whoa! Did not know that. The only time I have ever seen Newt is when he is pounding Obamas policies. Yikes!!!
Palin is the only one registering on the liberal radar screen. The other names barely get a response from them.
Obviously they fear her the most.
Heeding their advice to bring up a more McCain-like candidate, so that conservatives can be defeated again, is not a bright idea.
By 2012, the liberals will need to dredge up bogus interviews from a no-longer-watched media in order to create a campaign against Palin.
Don't be afraid to support a truly pro-life candidate.Posted by: Pharmer1 at September 21, 2009 2:19 PM
Palin is the only one registering on the liberal radar screen. The other names barely get a response from them.
Obviously they fear her the most.
Posted by: Pharmer1 at September 21, 2009 2:19 PM
Well, just speaking as one individual liberal, I would be overjoyed to see Palin on the Republican ticket again. I smiled every day starting the day McCain picked her. It was the beginning of the end. Bring her on, I'm not afraid...Posted by: Hal at September 21, 2009 3:54 PM
There are many reasons to vote for any mumber of these people, however, only one addresses the one thing that will cure so many of this country's problems. That my friends is the FairTax.
1. Fix and save S.S., medicare and medicaid
2. Create millioms of jobs
3. Bring down and elimate the debt
And much much more !
www.fairtax.orgPosted by: Tkrop at September 22, 2009 9:19 AM
I could probably get behind the fair tax.
For all of you interested in HuckPAC's "fair tax" and Romney's perfect hair and glowing smile or whatever it is that you like about him, I have dedicated 17 years of my life to ending abortion. Seventeen long, hard years. I've never seen anything close to the opportunity we have in Sarah Palin and I'm not about to let the fiscally-minded people mess it up, do you hear me? Not on my watch.
Sarah Palin or bust, I say.Posted by: Lisa Graas at September 22, 2009 5:00 PM
There ya go. If Hal likes it, there has to be something wrong with it.
Personally, as I've stated before, punishing people for buying things in a consumer-driven economic system is just idiotic. That's what the "fairtax" would do. The fair tax is fairly stupid.Posted by: xalisae at September 22, 2009 5:13 PM
xalisae must be an illegal alien, or an IRS agent. They are the only ones who will not benefit from the FairTax. Punishing people for productivity is idiotic. Government taking a portion of your income before you have a chance to save or spend it is idiotic. Having a 60,000 page tax code is idiotic.
Let me ask you a question. What if the FairTax was our current tax system and there was a bill that would replace the FairTax with a complicated system incorporating an income tax, a payroll tax, a corporate tax, a capital gains tax, a gift tax and an estate tax? Do you believe there would be a grassroots effort to push for this change?
Would you be in favor of this bill if:
(1) On April 15th of each year, you will be required to file a complicated income tax return. A watch dog organization known as the IRS will be formed to audit these returns. If you fail to file a return or fail to include all income or include fraudulent deduction, you may be subject to fines, interest or even imprisonment. To support your figures, you will now be required to keep records of all your financial transactions.
(2) There will be many deductions that only certain people will be able to take advantage of and there will be loopholes which will protect mainly wealthy Americans. Taxpayers who aren't able to take advantage of these loopholes will be required to make up the difference in lost revenue.
(3) The new tax code will consist of thousands of pages of rules. Most people will need to hire an advisor who probably will not completely understand this new code.
(4)You will no longer receive 100% of your paycheck. The government will keep their share before you have a chance to spend it. The government will be in control of your earnings not you!!!!!!!!!!!!
(5) You will now be penalized for productivity; if you need to take on a second job to fill your family needs, the government will keep a larger up-front percentage.
(6) You will no longer receive your monthly prebate check, and your take-home income will be reduced by at least 7.65%. The 7.65% will support Medicare and Social Security.
This means if you are a family of four with a poverty level household income, your take home income will be reduced from $35,842 per year to at least $26,911 per year.
(7) Under the new bill there will be corporate taxes, capital gains taxes, and a 15.3% payroll tax. You will have 7.65% ducted from your paycheck and the company you work for must match this amount. For corporations to maintain there current profit margins, these taxes need to be added to the cost of goods and services. Compliance cost involved in maintaining records and hiring expert advisers will also be added to the cost of goods and services. Retail prices could increase as much as 22% as the result of these taxes and compliance costs
(8) No longer will the earnings from your savings and investments be free from tax.
(9) No longer will the money you spend on education be tax free. You will be using after tax dollars to pay for tuition.
(10) Since there will now be corporate taxes, capital gains taxes and payroll taxes, trillions of dollars will leave the American economy to work in foreign markets. There will be fewer jobs but you will be able to save money by purchasing Chinese products.
(11) The new tax bill would give more power back to government where it belongs. Congressmen will now be able to receive favors from lobbyists when they support tax reform that will benefit these lobbyists special interest.
(12) Taxes are too transparent under the FairTax. The new bill will allow the Federal Government to raise taxes by manipulate the code without you realizing it. This is good; you shouldn’t have the privilege of knowing how much of your total income is being spent by the government.
(13) And here is the best part of the new tax proposal; illegal aliens, drug dealers and tourists will no longer be paying taxes. You will be required to make up this lost revenue.
Now I call this an idiotic bill.Posted by: steve k at September 22, 2009 10:21 PM
You act as though our current system just POOF'ed into existence the way it is now-. This is the evolution of a system that has become bloated over years and years of abuse. You can't compare a system like this to a theoretical one that hasn't had the opportunity to be exploited yet.
Plus, I never said I like things the way they are, I just think Huckabee's plan is stupid.
Personally, I like Ron Paul's economics.Posted by: xalisae at September 23, 2009 12:46 PM
Other than Ron Paul, who doesn't want to incinerate a billion arabs, muslims, who cares - they are all less than "fetuses" anyway in a nuclear holocaust?
Who besides RP doesn't accept bribes? Or has integrity.
I will give Palin some benefit of the doubt because I think such things like her refusal to meet with Phylis Schlaffley but meet with the NeoCons was McCain's fault.
If you like Santorum, remember all you good little Catholics should have gone out and voted for now Democrat, Arlen Specter like he told you to. Brownback is conspicuous by his absence, but maybe it was the encomiums to Sibelius were just too recent.
You ask who is electable. Who says the nicest words. Who has some semi-acceptable track record. Who will preserve every bit of the current corruption, lies, and evil except for abortion. Oh, and fighting terrorists by letting Bin Laden escape and nation building is actually more important than winning on abortion.
Not who has the most integrity. Who votes ONLY on principle. Who keeps his or her promises.
Go ahead and support one of these corrupt hypocrites who will say anything to get elected, but instead of doing anything to stop the murder (including when Terri was dying of slow torture in an act of domestic terrorism) only will do the minimum to create an alibi.
But don't then ask God to bless your choice. Choose evil and expect evil. Choose liars and expect lies. And expect God to be a just judge.
Instead do the most righteous thing on the highest principles and let God bless you as you've obeyed every law to its final jot, tittle, and even the spirit of those same laws. Then go before his altar and say "I've done my part - I've voted for integrity, righteousness, and honesty, and didn't compromise for a compromise candidate - please bless my work".
Postscript - some are bothered when Ron Paul says "he doesn't have the authority" to do some specific thing. He is right. But he also proposed a law saying life begins at conception and that courts cannot review the definition similar to some of the military commissions legislation - but a republican house wouldn't let it to the floor - I suspect he would send it back to the house and senate his first day so he would have the authority. And I have absolutely no doubt he would ignore any judge by claiming to be a co-equal branch. And if he has over 30 years been the 1 in 454-1 votes, I expect him to continue doing exactly what he says he will do. Can you say that of anyone else on or off the list?
And while you are asking the candidates also ask the torture, assassination, and rendition administration why they didn't either rescue Terri like Clinton did with Elian Gonzales or why Felos, Greer, and Michael Schiavo weren't sent to Gitmo and waterboarded until they admitted the murder plot. Or why is Tiller dead instead of having been in Bagrham for the past few years? You want the rule of law broken? Then start with the holocaust and euthanasia by torture.
xalisae, You are correct; our current tax system has evolved from years of abuse into the gargage it is. It’s time to clean house. The problem is; a tax system based on income is too easy to abuse.
If you go to IRS.gov and click on forms, you will find there to be 1139 different forms. This is absolutely ridiculous. With a consumption tax there will be two forms. One for every US citizen to complete to qualify for the prebate, and one form for merchants to complete when submitting the tax collected. I can’t imagine this simple tax system would ever evolve into the pile of garbage we now have.
tz do you have the hiccups?Posted by: steve k at September 23, 2009 8:28 PM