Which is the greatest threat to the USA?

A paranoid-schizophrenic grammarian gunman?

A religion where its radicals threaten to kill anyone who calls their religion violent?

A post-racial orator who builds government expenditures.

Keli wrote:A paranoid-schizophrenic grammarian gunman?

A religion where its radicals threaten to kill anyone who calls their religion violent?

Niether!!! The greatest threat to this nation is the ignorance and politician worship of the voting public. The public looks at the political class as gods. For example when Byrd died, the same public that is upset about overspending all but made sacrifice at his funeral. We see it every time our local politicians show up to bless the peasants. We see it right here on this board with some posters.

As far as Ignorance goes, I get a kick out of people who complain about overspending and public debt, yet support people who are the root causes of these very things. That is just plain stupidity.

Yea, we face threats from outside, but the greatest threat to this nation is the people who allow their leaders to do the idiotic things they do and never hold them accountible.

So if one votes in every election but their candidate is not elected, are they still ignorant because their candidate lost?

Aaron wrote:So if one votes in every election but their candidate is not elected, are they still ignorant because their candidate lost?

If one is stupid enough to support a candidate who by their actions show themselves in opposition to the ideals one stands for, they are stupid or just plain ignorant.

For example, Stephanie states she supports fiscal restraint, constitutional spending, and constitutional government. She thus supports Ron Paul, who happens to talk a good talk. However, when one supports $300,000,000 million dollars in earmarks and yet speaks against them, one has to wonder what on earth they really stand for. Apparently Dr. Paul isn't as fiscally conservative as Stephanie believes.

I'm curious as there was only one candidate in the last Senatoral election who supported fiscal restraint, smaller government and less spending, values you've stated you favor in the past BC, which candidate did you vote for?

Aaron wrote:I'm curious as there was only one candidate in the last Senatoral election who supported fiscal restraint, smaller government and less spending, values you've stated you favor in the past BC, which candidate did you vote for?

I didn't support or campaign for either one. To me, they were both morons. However, I held my nose and voted for John Raese, which was not a vote for Raese, but a vote against Manchin.

Cato wrote:

Aaron wrote:I'm curious as there was only one candidate in the last Senatorial election who supported fiscal restraint, smaller government and less spending, values you've stated you favor in the past BC, which candidate did you vote for?

I didn't support or campaign for either one. To me, they were both morons. However, I held my nose and voted for John Raese, which was not a vote for Raese, but a vote against Manchin.

Really? Even though Raese has stated that he favors pork projects like Star Wars and during his campaign, gave no impression that he would real in deficit spending? Interesting. Perhaps I could understand that if Jeff Becker had not been on the ballot for the Constitutional Party but as he was, and as he campaigned on reducing spending to what is specifically enumerated in the United States Constitution (haven't you pined for the same thing?) that only leaves me with one question.

Cato wrote:As far as Ignorance goes, I get a kick out of people who complain about overspending and public debt, yet support people who are the root causes of these very things. That is just plain stupidity.

Are you ignorant or stupid?

I guess I'm ignorant or stupid, too. This is the first I've heard of Jeff Becker. Except for injudiciously having a picture taken with the Constitutional fraud Bob Byrd, Mr. Becker looks like a candidate I could support.

ohio county wrote:I guess I'm ignorant or stupid, too. This is the first I've heard of Jeff Becker. Except for injudiciously having a picture taken with the Constitutional fraud Bob Byrd, Mr. Becker looks like a candidate I could support.

I actually heard on the afternoon drive on 580 WCHS OC. I did a little research, liked what I saw and cast my vote for him. Yes, it may have been wasted but to me, I'd rather waste a vote then pinch my nose.

A vote that is principled is never wasted. A vote for the lesser of two evils is still evil.

"I'd rather waste a vote than pinch my nose."--Aaron

GREAT words!

SheikBen wrote:"I'd rather waste a vote than pinch my nose."--Aaron

GREAT words!

I'd rather pinch my vote than my nose.

Aaron wrote:

Cato wrote:As far as Ignorance goes, I get a kick out of people who complain about overspending and public debt, yet support people who are the root causes of these very things. That is just plain stupidity.

Are you ignorant or stupid?

I guess in your book I'm, ignorant and stupid. However, I really don't much care what you think. If you don't like the way I voted, lump it.

As far as who I voted for, I did all I could to keep an unethical freak of nature out of the Senate. The polls showed a tight race and I couldn't stand the thought of doing anything that would put Manchin in the senate. As far as Mr. Becker goes I knew very little about him and did very little research on him, especially since the race was supposed tight and I wanted nothing more than to keep Manchin ut of the senate. As far as Pork goes Star Wars is far more inline with the mandates of the US Constitution, than either Corridor H or Route 32 or what ever route it is you whine about, not that I support the expenditure of Federal Dollars any of the three.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110114/wl_nm/us_iraq_politics_sadr

Maybe not totally in line with the topic...

Cato wrote:

Aaron wrote:

Cato wrote:As far as Ignorance goes, I get a kick out of people who complain about overspending and public debt, yet support people who are the root causes of these very things. That is just plain stupidity.

Are you ignorant or stupid?

I guess in your book I'm, ignorant and stupid. However, I really don't much care what you think. If you don't like the way I voted, lump it.

No, it's not in my book Cato. I used your words. You were the one that said, and I quote...

Cato wrote:As far as Ignorance goes, I get a kick out of people who complain about overspending and public debt, yet support people who are the root causes of these very things. That is just plain stupidity.

...so based on what Cato said, it is Cato who is calling Cato ignorant or stupid, not Aaron. So according to Cato, which is it Cato, is Cato ignorant or is Cato stupid.

Cato wrote:As far as who I voted for, I did all I could to keep an unethical freak of nature out of the Senate. The polls showed a tight race and I couldn't stand the thought of doing anything that would put Manchin in the senate. As far as Mr. Becker goes I knew very little about him and did very little research on him, especially since the race was supposed tight and I wanted nothing more than to keep Manchin ut of the senate.

But wait. Didn't Cato just say that to do what you said you did above was stupid and ignorant? And in addition to that, didn't you say that those who did otherwise had no principals? And didn't you claim that was me, Stephanie and Sam and as we didn't stand on principals we had no convictions.

And now you're telling me that because the race was close, you couldn't stand on your convictions and vote for someone because to do so might put another person in office.

Bearing all that in mind, I have just one question.

How you doing Pot?

Cato wrote:As far as Pork goes Star Wars is far more inline with the mandates of the US Constitution, than either Corridor H or Route 32 or what ever route it is you whine about, not that I support the expenditure of Federal Dollars any of the three.

There's only one problem with that statement (is it ignorant or stupid) Cato.

Based on numerous comments from you, it's clear to anyone who's read the document that you don't understand the constitution so how can you say what is and isn't Constitutional?

Aaron wrote:

Cato wrote:

Aaron wrote:

Cato wrote:As far as Ignorance goes, I get a kick out of people who complain about overspending and public debt, yet support people who are the root causes of these very things. That is just plain stupidity.

Are you ignorant or stupid?

I guess in your book I'm, ignorant and stupid. However, I really don't much care what you think. If you don't like the way I voted, lump it.

No, it's not in my book Cato. I used your words. You were the one that said, and I quote...

Cato wrote:As far as Ignorance goes, I get a kick out of people who complain about overspending and public debt, yet support people who are the root causes of these very things. That is just plain stupidity.

...so based on what Cato, it is Cato who is calling Cato ignorant or stupid, not Aaron. So according to Cato, which is it Cato, is Cato ignorant or is Cato stupid.

Cato wrote:As far as who I voted for, I did all I could to keep an unethical freak of nature out of the Senate. The polls showed a tight race and I couldn't stand the thought of doing anything that would put Manchin in the senate. As far as Mr. Becker goes I knew very little about him and did very little research on him, especially since the race was supposed tight and I wanted nothing more than to keep Manchin ut of the senate.

But wait. Didn't Cato just say that to do what you said you did above was stupid and ignorant? And in addition to that, didn't you say that those who did otherwise had no principals? And didn't you claim that was me, Stephanie and Sam and as we didn't stand on principals we had no convictions.

And now you're telling me that because the race was close, you couldn't stand on your convictions and vote for someone because to do so might put another person in office.

Bearing all that in mind, I have just one question.

How you doing Pot?

Cato wrote:As far as Pork goes Star Wars is far more inline with the mandates of the US Constitution, than either Corridor H or Route 32 or what ever route it is you whine about, not that I support the expenditure of Federal Dollars any of the three.

There's only one problem with that statement (is it ignorant or stupid) Cato.

Based on numerous comments from you, it's clear to anyone who's read the document that you don't understand the constitution so how can you say what is and isn't Constitutional?

You caught me. I bow to your superior intellect. I guess defence isn't a responsibility of the federal government afterall, silly me. I'll humbly fade away and leave those matters requiring great intellegence and the power of thought up to you.

I don't blame you Cato. If my words made me look like an ass in the same manner your words have made you look like an ass, I'd run like a little girl as well.

Aaron wrote:I don't blame you Cato. If my words made me look like an ass in the same manner your words have made you look like an ass, I'd run like a little girl as well .

You run like a little girl??????

Cato wrote:

Aaron wrote:I don't blame you Cato. If my words made me look like an ass in the same manner your words have made you look like an ass, I'd run like a little girl as well .

You run like a little girl??????

Only when I mocking Cato.



And I'm not the least bit suprised that you have no answer to the fact that I used your words to make you look like a fool. You should probably just tuck tail and run though as your attempts at humor are fairly lame.

Cheers

Aaron wrote:
And I'm not the least bit suprised that you have no answer to the fact that I used your words to make you look like a fool. You should probably just tuck tail and run though as your attempts at humor are fairly lame.

Cheers

I don't you to make me look like a fool, I do pretty good on my own. At least I'm honest enough to stand for what I believe. You and most of those that post on this board are pathetic. I'm honest enough to admit, I don't have a great deal of use for the black race mainly because of the way they have presented themselves or allow themselves to be presented or represented. I'm honest enough to admit I don't trust muslims, and I want very little to do with homosexuals. You and along with many that post on this board think you are above all of this and yet it slips from time to time that each of you are just as bigoted as I am, you just ain't to admit it.

You an many of the others that post talk fiscal repsonibility. However, don't dare cut anything you you might benefit from. I remind you of route 35 or 32 and Stephanie's cut the military, but don't cut social welfare.

Tomorrow I'll still be a fool, but you and many of your buddies who post here will still be hypocrites defining yourself by your politics.

I don't know what's sadder, the fact that you don't realize you've spouted the same garbage countless times before or the fact that you actually believe the garbage you spout. You remind me of John Edwards.

Cheers

Aaron wrote:I don't know what's sadder, the fact that you don't realize you've spouted the same garbage countless times before or the fact that you actually believe the garbage you spout. You remind me of John Edwards.

Cheers

Yep, and tomorrow you'll wake up the same hypocrite you went to bed as.

Let's see, you're the one who stated you were a man of principal and the confirmed that by voting against what you state is your principal.

Cato wrote:If one is stupid enough to support a candidate who by their actions show themselves in opposition to the ideals one stands for, they are stupid or just plain ignorant.

Cato wrote:I didn't support or campaign for either one. To me, they were both morons. However, I held my nose and voted for John Raese, which was not a vote for Raese, but a vote against Manchin.

And I'm the hypocrite

Ignorance can be fixed so that's not it.

OK, well I know Jeff Becker. He's a good guy and I consider him a friend. I held my nose and voted for Raese just the same. In part I voted for Raese because I disagree with a substantial portion of the party's platform.

In any event, I'm posting now because the WVCP is holding it's quarterly meeting this weekend in Beckley. If anyone's interested in attending let me know and I'll dig out the details for you.

Also, if you're interested in the Constitution Party, the party of Jeff Becker, I can hook you up there too. I have a number of friends affiliated with the WVCP.