'This is Not a Bluff'

[fuzzis]

Will Conservative Christians form a Third Party? (http://www.newsweek.com/id/57631)

...NEWSWEEK: So we wanted to ask you, first of all, about the third-party idea and whether it's serious. A number of people are suggesting it's just a threat.
Richard Land: My intuition [is that] this is not a bluff. If Giuliani is the nominee there will be a third party. There are things that Giuliani could do to help mitigate the damage. But I have been in too many discussions over the last 15 years where evangelical leaders have said, "The one thing we will never allow to happen is for the Republican Party to take us for granted the way the Democratic Party too often takes the African-American community for granted."
This is not a bluff....

[Conveyor Belt]

America is overdue for some serious 3rd and 4th parties. people are just so afraid that if they aren't voting for a repub or dem, then their guy/gal isn't going to get elected. But if everyone would just vote for the person they most liked instead of who the major party puts up, then we'd have a better country, I think.

[58ford]

It'll just split up the vote & we'll have people getting elected with something like 27% of the vote.
What is needed is to unelect a bunch of incumbents to let the grand ole party know we want them to quit screwin' around & do what we sent em there for.

[Honey]

Again, I say, I will vote for the one who I think will do the best job for this country.

[dollfus46]

It'll just split up the vote & we'll have people getting elected with something like 27% of the vote.
What is needed is to unelect a bunch of incumbents to let the grand ole party know we want them to quit screwin' around & do what we sent em there for.

I'm real serious about voting against every incumbent in the next election. It's the only way I have to express my disgust.:(

[Conveyor Belt]

I'm seriously, SERIOUSLY considering voting 3rd, 4th or 5th party this next election. MS will go Repub, just as it always does, so it won't really matter in the end. But at least I'll feel good about my vote.

Last time, I was just voting against Kerry... and the timber thing in the debates... I loved that... GWB in one of the funniest moments of the campaign. God love SNL for doing a great job spoofing that one... "need some wood?"

[TheKing]

welcome to the polarization of america...moderates have no place

funny how it works in the economic landscape too...either youre rich as hell or broke...

[Conveyor Belt]

welcome to the polarization of america...moderates have no place

funny how it works in the economic landscape too...either youre rich as hell or broke...

That's just not true. When I was working a full time job, my wife working a full time job, we were very comfortable finacially. together making about $70K a year. We have a nice home, and two functioning cars, a padding of money in the bank, and some going to savings. Everything we wanted, and that's not rich by any stretch of the imagination.

People need to learn to live within their means and they'd be better off. Easy credit is what's making people feel broke. That and the ease of keeping up with the jones's nowdays.

[CircusRide]

The guy's name is Dick Land........I have a "hard" time taking him seriously.

[RGDoherty]

I know, without a doubt, from the center of my reasoning mind.......If a third party is formed to combat the Republican, we will be seeing president elect Hillary Clinton. Just remember old H.Ross did it to get Bill in. Those who don't learn from history are damned to repeat it.

[aaron]

I'd almost support any third party that had a chance of making it, just to break the mold. I think once politicians and voters see that a third party can make it in, it will open things up.

[dollfus46]

welcome to the polarization of america...moderates have no place

funny how it works in the economic landscape too...either youre rich as hell or broke...

Sounds like most third world countries, doesn't it King? Mexico is like that. Heck Pinehurst NC "the gold capital of the world" is like that. You are very wealthy, or you work for the very wealthy.

[dollfus46]

Will Conservative Christians form a Third Party? (http://www.newsweek.com/id/57631)

What I'm having problem with is the hypocritical attitude of the Republicans. If Clinton wasn't fit to be President (Remember "Character Counts)? Now it doesn't matter so much when Giuliani has a shot at beating Shrillery.. Chaps my cheeks and makes 'um snap shut! I can't vote for Giuliani if I wanted Clinton castrated for cheating on his wife.:confused:

[TheKing]

That's just not true. When I was working a full time job, my wife working a full time job, we were very comfortable finacially. together making about $70K a year. We have a nice home, and two functioning cars, a padding of money in the bank, and some going to savings. Everything we wanted, and that's not rich by any stretch of the imagination.

People need to learn to live within their means and they'd be better off. Easy credit is what's making people feel broke. That and the ease of keeping up with the jones's nowdays.

youre a fool if you think for one minute that americas middle class isn't shrinking in number, struggling more financially and the income gap isnt widening

congratulations on making a decent amount of money and living comfortably....but remember these two things

a) theres fewer of you now than there was 10 years ago...

b) your 70k and subsequent cost of living adjustments over the course of time(yes yes...i know youll get promoted and jump up in income brackets....possibly...but someone else will fill your shoes) will become less and less finaicially effective...your cost of living relative to your income will go up...while your disposable income will go down...all the while executive compensation and profits are through the roof...eventually your 70k(or 100k 10 years from now...adjusted for inflation) will be like 50k today

[TheCapitalist]

youre a fool if you think for one minute that americas middle class isn't shrinking in number, struggling more financially and the income gap isnt widening

congratulations on making a decent amount of money and living comfortably....but remember these two things

a) theres fewer of you now than there was 10 years ago...

b) your 70k and subsequent cost of living adjustments over the course of time(yes yes...i know youll get promoted and jump up in income brackets....possibly...but someone else will fill your shoes) will become less and less finaicially effective...your cost of living relative to your income will go up...while your disposable income will go down...all the while executive compensation and profits are through the roof...eventually your 70k(or 100k 10 years from now...adjusted for inflation) will be like 50k today
Answer A is the same argument made about the poor. Regardless of the number, it disregards the number of people that are no longer poor. In other words, this is not a static situation. Todays poor are tomorrows middle class. I think nine out of ten millionares are 1st generation millionares. They didn't inherit it. They made it. As to point B, quit whining and start your own business. Walk the mine field of risk: lawsuits, employee problems, taxes, taxes, audits. All stacked against you. But no one will tell you what you can make. This is America. If you can't make it here, you can't make it anywhere. TheCapitalist Speaks his mind. Who is John Galt?

[dollfus46]

I'd almost support any third party that had a chance of making it, just to break the mold. I think once politicians and voters see that a third party can make it in, it will open things up.

I'm going to vote for the person I want to be President. Damn the party, damn whether he/she "can win". That's gambling. Otherwise I'd vote for the democrat candidate in 08 at this point. Shudder.

[selmore]

We decided long ago to live with only one income. If I recall, the child care for the 2 rugrats was greater than any extra income (or it was a push).

I don't believe people when they say they gotta have two incomes. I know from experience.

I figure the people making over 40 up to about 95 are in the same neighborhood anyway. The 95k people are gonna pay 30 in taxes. I've heard from people with a lot of money..they have worries....,,,,about losing their money...lol.

Another thing. If anyone wanted to just make a lot of money, Mississippi prolly isn't the place. Look for cities that are always open on Sunday and don't have front porches. Thats the place to make bank.

That "keep up with the Joneses" has been around forever. Problem is, once you "out-do" your neighbor, here comes another. Thats a hollow existence. Its like George Jetson on the treadmill. "Help, Jane!! Stop this crazy thing."

BTW, isn't keeping up with the Joneses kinda coveting? I think thats covered somewhere as being a bad thing.

[dollfus46]

youre a fool if you think for one minute that americas middle class isn't shrinking in number, struggling more financially and the income gap isnt widening

congratulations on making a decent amount of money and living comfortably....but remember these two things

a) theres fewer of you now than there was 10 years ago...

b) your 70k and subsequent cost of living adjustments over the course of time(yes yes...i know youll get promoted and jump up in income brackets....possibly...but someone else will fill your shoes) will become less and less finaicially effective...your cost of living relative to your income will go up...while your disposable income will go down...all the while executive compensation and profits are through the roof...eventually your 70k(or 100k 10 years from now...adjusted for inflation) will be like 50k today

Mistaken, may not have the full information, but calling someone a fool is offensive to me. No neg reps. Just a GROAN.

[selmore]

Answer A is the same argument made about the poor. Regardless of the number, it disregards the number of people that are no longer poor. In other words, this is not a static situation. Todays poor are tomorrows middle class. I think nine out of ten millionares are 1st generation millionares. They didn't inherit it. They made it. As to point B, quit whining and start your own business. Walk the mine field of risk: lawsuits, employee problems, taxes, taxes, audits. All stacked against you. But no one will tell you what you can make. This is America. If you can't make it here, you can't make it anywhere. TheCapitalist Speaks his mind. Who is John Galt?

I call BS!

9 of 10..no way.

Now I do know that a person is 7 times more likely to become a millionaire if born OUTSIDE the US.

[Conveyor Belt]

I know, without a doubt, from the center of my reasoning mind.......If a third party is formed to combat the Republican, we will be seeing president elect Hillary Clinton. Just remember old H.Ross did it to get Bill in. Those who don't learn from history are damned to repeat it.

And lest we forget without Ralph Nader, we would be looking at President Gore.

The fact that Perot pulled in 18% and Nader pulled in almost 10% means that there are a fair amount of Americans out there fed up with the system. Now, imagine if 1/2 the people who wanted to vote for these two, but were afraid the Repub/Dem would win if they didn't toe the party line, would have voted for them. May be a totally different outcome all together. And don't forget that Perot got to debate. Nader didn't get to debate.

I have a WHOLE national election plan. The whole system needs an overhaul, and i've got the plans in my head.

1) Presidential election day would be a required national holiday. Nothing, save for vital services, can be open until 7pm.

2) Nationalization of ballot guidelines and balloting procedures. This means that a candidate who wants to run for office gets on EVERY ballot in the US. They're not running for president of 39 of the 50 states. Every state.

3) Nationalization of debates. Debates are open to all qualified candidates. Debates will be required to be run on the 4 major networks, also covered by C-Span and all Public Radio/TV airwaves. A Debate each week for the 6 weeks leading up to the Presidential election.

I'm tired of going into the voting booth and getting the ballot and there are 6 people running for president, and I've only heard of 3 of them. Everyone who's on the ballot needs a fair hearing of ideas. That's what this country is about. There are more than 2 sides and 2 solutions to every problem. We need to get back to the roots of which we came.

[Conveyor Belt]

I call BS!

9 of 10..no way.

Now I do know that a person is 7 times more likely to become a millionaire if born OUTSIDE the US.

A million rupees does not equal a million US dollars.

[dollfus46]

And lest we forget without Ralph Nader, we would be looking at President Gore.

The fact that Perot pulled in 18% and Nader pulled in almost 10% means that there are a fair amount of Americans out there fed up with the system. Now, imagine if 1/2 the people who wanted to vote for these two, but were afraid the Repub/Dem would win if they didn't toe the party line, would have voted for them. May be a totally different outcome all together. And don't forget that Perot got to debate. Nader didn't get to debate.

I have a WHOLE national election plan. The whole system needs an overhaul, and i've got the plans in my head.

1) Presidential election day would be a required national holiday. Nothing, save for vital services, can be open until 7pm.

2) Nationalization of ballot guidelines and balloting procedures. This means that a candidate who wants to run for office gets on EVERY ballot in the US. They're not running for president of 39 of the 50 states. Every state.

3) Nationalization of debates. Debates are open to all qualified candidates. Debates will be required to be run on the 4 major networks, also covered by C-Span and all Public Radio/TV airwaves. A Debate each week for the 6 weeks leading up to the Presidential election.

I'm tired of going into the voting booth and getting the ballot and there are 6 people running for president, and I've only heard of 3 of them. Everyone who's on the ballot needs a fair hearing of ideas. That's what this country is about. There are more than 2 sides and 2 solutions to every problem. We need to get back to the roots of which we came.

I like your No. 1. It might get more people to the polls.
No networks should be allowed to take exit polls and reveal nor predict the winners. Just post the actual tallied votes.
I'd like to see a spending cap on campaign funds so that advertising (brainwashing) is equal for all and doesn't buy the election.

[TheCapitalist]

Selmore, here it is, from The Millionaire Mind, Thomas J. Stanley, Phd. p. 7.

Only 2 percent inherited all or any part of homes and property.

Nearly 8 percent inherited 50 percent or more of their net worth.

61% never received any inheritance, financial gifts, or income from an estate or trust.

By line one, i'm at 98%.
By line two, i'm at 92%.
By line three, well, it is a sliding graph.

The reason the 7 of 10 come from outside the us is because they have not yet assimilated into the gimme culture. Studies have shown that 1st generation americans have the dream. Their kids become assimilated to the gov take care of me lost generation bs that by this generation the work ethic and capitalist ethos is lost on inner city punk bs. Whatever. Show me where else in this world, as bad as the gov bs is, where one can come from nothing to millionaire. For God's sake, where else are people dying and building rafts and hiding under cars to get HERE. Answer that.

[TheCapitalist]

On taxes, the top 1% pay 39% of the bill.
The top 5% pay 59.5% of all taxes.
The bottom 50% pay 3% of total taxes.

[RGDoherty]

And lest we forget without Ralph Nader, we would be looking at President Gore.

The fact that Perot pulled in 18% and Nader pulled in almost 10% means that there are a fair amount of Americans out there fed up with the system. Now, imagine if 1/2 the people who wanted to vote for these two, but were afraid the Repub/Dem would win if they didn't toe the party line, would have voted for them. May be a totally different outcome all together. And don't forget that Perot got to debate. Nader didn't get to debate.

I have a WHOLE national election plan. The whole system needs an overhaul, and i've got the plans in my head.

1) Presidential election day would be a required national holiday. Nothing, save for vital services, can be open until 7pm.

2) Nationalization of ballot guidelines and balloting procedures. This means that a candidate who wants to run for office gets on EVERY ballot in the US. They're not running for president of 39 of the 50 states. Every state.

3) Nationalization of debates. Debates are open to all qualified candidates. Debates will be required to be run on the 4 major networks, also covered by C-Span and all Public Radio/TV airwaves. A Debate each week for the 6 weeks leading up to the Presidential election.

I'm tired of going into the voting booth and getting the ballot and there are 6 people running for president, and I've only heard of 3 of them. Everyone who's on the ballot needs a fair hearing of ideas. That's what this country is about. There are more than 2 sides and 2 solutions to every problem. We need to get back to the roots of which we came.


CB, you are correct.....I'd love to see a Liberatarian with the coverage that the Dems and Reps get.....I'd love to see them with a candidate in every debate.

[Remington]

I'd love to see a liberal third party out there. That would split the democrat ticket and be an easy win for the republicans. But Clinton got in because of that squeaky voice Ross Perot splitting the conservative ticket.

[Guru]

What would be so wrong in having NO political parties. Everyone just went to represent us with their own thoughts in mind (or more specifically ours) and didn't have to bow down to the party boss of their affiliation.
What if we still had the three deciding elections we have now but when you went to vote you got ONE ballot thereby allowing you to vote for each office instead of having to do as we do now which is to have to skip some elections because you can only get a Democrat or a Republican voting sheet?
What would be so wrong if we had only one election if need be IF that certain office had a candidate, among all candidates running, and that person received over 50% of the vote or at least a demanding lion's share which indicated they were the favorite of the people?

These political parties are not owned by this government. There is nothing in the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation or any of the resulting amendments over the years that says that the Democratic or Republican parties are solely owned, operated or copyrighted by the United States of America?
I feel like a hostage.
Nobody is getting their full plate of rights in this.
Many of the best candidates for the jobs miss out in all this posturing which we are forced to bow to.
Abolish them all, fill out a sheet with everyone that qualifies and let the best man or woman for the job be elected. I feel very strongly that we wouldn't be any worse off than we are now.

[MC69TA]

Warm your Lexus up on dis one. Who is dis sick sumbitch dat ain't far off base, in retrospect?

"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a facist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."

Hint: No, this aint the guy from Ruby Ridge. ;)


Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

[onlyme]

2) Nationalization of ballot guidelines and balloting procedures. This means that a candidate who wants to run for office gets on EVERY ballot in the US. They're not running for president of 39 of the 50 states. Every state.
.

Can someone please explain to me why this isn't the case already? I find the US election process rather confusing and misleading. This whole concept of the electoral college is so outdated and ought to be changed as well.

[dollfus46]

The guy's name is Dick Land........I have a "hard" time taking him seriously.
Well, I went to the Annual Meeting of Greenville Literacy Council, Monday night, and learned the President's name is Hardy Peters. I thought about his life growing up and missed the meeting entirely.

[bpitt]

The people are like sheep, or, sheeple.

[Conveyor Belt]

Can someone please explain to me why this isn't the case already? I find the US election process rather confusing and misleading. This whole concept of the electoral college is so outdated and ought to be changed as well.

I don't know. I think the electoral college is needed, but I wish they'd split the votes. How many candidates spend time stumping in ND and SD? Damn, how many times do we get visited? Once, maybe... if we're lucky. We have to go over a few states to see a candidate.

And look at what Clinton said about MS yesterday. She knows our electoral votes are going republican, so she's just going to trash us. And don't tell me it was a slip of the tounge. That lady calculates everything, even her laughs.

I really want a debate system reform. It's BS. The debates are run by the parties, not by a national, non party affiliated entity. I want everyone who's on a ballot to be part of the debates. if their ideas are kooky, we'll know, but they may appeal to someone. I just want the opprotunity to see my candidate in a debate, instead of on a morning news show with everyone snickering behind the cameras.

[bpitt]

Is there a website were one can see all the 'parties' out there, and see there platform?

[dollfus46]

On taxes, the top 1% pay 39% of the bill.
The top 5% pay 59.5% of all taxes.
The bottom 50% pay 3% of total taxes.

I think that's as it should be. I've always wanted to be a kept man. And if Hillary is elected, the top 5% will bend over again.:smt086
I'm for a flat tax. Call it 15% of gross, no deduction, or a fed sales tax. I prefer the flat 15% (% pulled from a dark place. Can be 12 %, 18%, I don't care) But take it from gross earnings every payday. No income taxes to file. No cheating on taxes. Now I'm not including Businesses. I haven't thought about that enough yet to have an opinion. There is a heavy cost of doing business so that would have to be structured differently of course. Not sure how yet. Included Insurance companies and churches. No such thing as a tax free organization, Including the United Way, which I never give a dime to.

[dollfus46]

The people are like sheep, or, sheeple.
I love the designation: Sheeple. It's not very nice though. There are a lot of people who don't have the brains to make decisions like that. Making fun of them isn't nice.:laugh: