Elections 2006

[PerryChase]

I’m starting this off-topic thread because the mid-term elections are coming up soon.

What issues do you think are important? What are the politics that will affect the economy, real estate or your own life?

Have you decided how you’ll vote?

[technovelist]

Since I don’t believe the government can do anything about the coming economic disaster, I’m voting solely based on one thing: war vs. peace. An anti-war candidate will get my vote; no pro-war candidate will.

[PerryChase]

One issue that is politics but somewhat real estate related is the transfer of the Mont Soledad cross to the Federal Government.

What is the Congress thinking barging into a local issue? This is a states rights situation. The Federal government has no business interfering.

Republicans, it appears, are religious fanatics hell-bent on imposing their values on everyone else.

[Mark Holmes]

Well, to be completely honest, my mind is made up. I will simply vote against any Republicans and initiatives. Notice I said against. I’m not terribly enthusiastic about voting for too many Democrats, but given the nuttiness of the current right-wing Republicans running the GOP, I could not in good conscience participate in any way to keep them in power. Remember when conservatives were fiscally conservative, pro-states rights and small governement? Now they’re spending like drunken sailors, consolidating all power at the federal level and intruding in the most private of our citizens (not consumers) decisions. As far as initiatives go, I’ve lost any faith in a process started as a way to empower little people that has been co-opted by monied interests. No worries though: with the economic precipice of the bursting of the credit bubble quickly approaching, I have a feeling that Republican will soon be considered a four-letter-word. RPLN?

[picpoule]

I’ll vote straight Republican ticket. I’m a conservative and not ashamed to say so.

[Anonymous]

I’m with picpoule, a conservative Republican.

Perry, I was happily signed up to chain myself to the cross to keep it on Mount Soledad. I’m glad that it’s staying, and so are many of my Jewish friends (I’m Catholic).

The big question for me is whether to hold my nose and vote for ‘The Governator’ or not. I’m tempted to abstain on that one, let the DemoRats and Mexican illegals run CA into the ground (low home prices, though!), then help bring sanity, and the GOP, back.

[L_Thek_onomics]

The 9/11 attack caused about 1 Trillion Dollars damage. If the Islamo-Fascists get their way, we can have the worst economy ever. Sorry, I can’t trust Howard Dean, Barbara Boxter and Michael Moore with our security.
L Thek

[OwnerOfCalifornia]

Vote Libertarian.

I stopped voting for Republocrats years ago.

[Anonymous]

The Republicans have lost any credibility at all with their unwavering support of that fiasco in Iraq. Additionally, they are turning into a part of religious fanatics (aka bible thumpers) and that is scary to most of us intellectual minded people.

My main beef with the Democrats is their soft approach to the illegal immigration issue, particularly in supporting amnesty which is just ridiculous in my view.

So, independent party or libertarian candidates are the only choice on principle but they have no chance to win so as usual it will be the lesser of two evils.

[JES]

Libertarian = wasted vote, as is a Rebublican presidential vote in California. Thankfully, evangelicals are having many more children than their liberal counterparts. And since close to 80% of children vote along family lines, we may see CA swing right yet again.

[OwnerOfCalifornia]

Voting for a third party is the only way to NOT waste your vote. You throw away your vote by voting for either of the two lame-on commercialized candidates.

Just because you didn’t pick the “winner” means that you wasted your vote. Watch how the Republocrats react in the event that a Libertarian or a Green captures 5% of the popular vote for a high-profile race. Historically, third parties have been catalyst for change in either of the two major parties (one, really).

I’m far more interested in using my vote to send a message for change, rather than having it get lost in the abyss of the status quo.

[L_Thek_onomics]

“Sending the message” is the most ineffective way to make changes. Join one of the major parties you want to change and work hard to influence its policies. Third parties will never win majority status in the US.
L Thek

[Anonymous]

I’m with L_Thek and JES!

[PD]

To say that all republicans are religious fanatics is out of line. I a firm republican but I am agnostic. I much prefer moderate republicans but there are some democrats that I could live with.
I can’t stand people like Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton. I cannot believe some of the garbage that comes out of her mouth!

[picpoule]

PD – I’m not a Christian, either.

[ybc]

If both parties are actually saying/doing things that make some sense, then I’d be an independent. Perhaps leaning towards the Democrates, but I think that I’d vote on candidate’s individual merits.

At this point, I have no choice but to vote against the Republican. To tell the truth, coming from a communist country, I felt that many of the tactics used by the current administration is strikingly similar to what was preached by a communist party leader. Not as obvious, of course, and always use “democracy”, etc., as a shield. The secrecy, the pursuit of absolute power, the deaf ear to opposite views and the blind eye to reality… these are traits of dictators. I read that George Soros made similar comments, and here I’d agree with him. Because the GOP is the party that got this administration elected, and because the politics is already so embedded, a vote against them is the best way. If they stay in power, they’d think that party discipline and pampering to the “base” are the only things that matter.

I wish that I’d have better alternatives. Don’t know much about Babara Boxer, but I’d vote for Hillary Clinton.

[L_Thek_onomics]

Strange. You came from a communist country, so I. The only
similarity I see is the american left’s fairly successful drive to
intrude into private business and personal decisions, curiculum
of public schools, restricting parental rights, substituting morality
with legality and the story goes on… I didn’t hear any concrete
example (except bumper sticker whining) of violations of civil
rights during this administartion, maybe a few terrorists feel
that way, so be it…
L Thek

[PerryChase]

I’ve noticed that intellectually minded people are quite rational and are willing to consider the issues carefully. Ideologues just have faith that their leaders have the right answers to everything. Their lives must be very simple black and white.

I don’t understand anymore how anyone can be Republican and conservative at the same time.

Conservatives support:
– Small government
– Low spending and saving for the rainy days
– Free markets
– No government intrusion into private matters
– No nation building
– Privacy protection
– State Rights
– Freedoms guaranteed by the constitution
– Separation of Church and State

Republicans support:
– Nation building in Iraq
– Unlimited debt spending
– Power of government to review private records
– Warrantless wiretapping of American citizens
– Prayer in school
– Federal intervention into private family matters
– Bailing out of powerful businesses interests
– Funneling public money to religious organizations

The Republican Party today is not the party I used to know.

[bgates]

When you say ‘very simple black or white’ is that a bad thing?
Since you just described half the voting public as “religious fanatics hell-bent on imposing their values on everyone else” it’s hard to tell whether you’re in favor of overgeneralizations or not. Or it could be that you don’t think things through very carefully before you post on politics. That’s certainly the impression I got the last time you tried your hand at the subject.

[PerryChase]

I was referring to the cross on Mt. Soledad. The Republican Congress acted for no other reason but to preserve the cross undoing almost two decades of due process. If that’s not imposing values, then I don’t know what is.

[L_Thek_onomics]

Another strange comment. Conservative was never equal republacan, nor the opposite. The republicans are tolerant enough to welcome even liberals. “No nation building” was never a conservative principle. As I learned history, conservatives helped to build Germany and Japan. Nationalists and isolationists are against free markets, not republicans. The Clinton administration helped to bail out the savings and loan industry. The Enron cocroaches were jailed under a republican administration. I’m tired…
Stop the emotional, irrational bumper sticker crap, please.
L Thek

[CardiffBaseball]

Probably plug my nose and vote GOP. I’d like to see the border closed, but I don’t see anyone in this pack willing to take that on.

Wiretapping helped catch the enemy recently and avert a new attack. There are people who want us dead, and have wanted this long before we took out Sadaam. Iran is surrounded, Isreal has about 400 nukes, so hopefully we can encourage a rising up in that nation, as the Ayatollahs get kicked to the curb.

I am just glad that the evangelicals wishing to impose their ways on us, havent’s issued Fatwa’s, or declared Jihad’s against us. Surely we must all be in fear of our lives from these bible thumpers, after all it says right there in the new testament to slaughter the infidels, right? I guess I didn’t realize just how much the christians are like the muslims.

All Praise be to Allah.

[Anonymous]

My family and I are off to church, so I’ll be brief.

Perry, Federal review and involvement is allowed under our system, and has done some fine things in the past (forced integration). San Diegans voted twice to keep the cross, and an unhappy minority who thinks that they have a right to not be offended attempted to use nutty judges for their cause. They lost; too bad.

Yep, the Republicans have lost their moorings on smaller government, lower spending, and closing the borders. But, they’ll see the light and return to form during the upcoming recession/depression.

[sdrebear]

“jg”, when you refer to “nutty judges”, are you talking about all 44 federal judges who have, over the years, ruled unanimously that the cross should be removed? I wouldn’t really call that “losing”. Just because the forum of discussion is moving doesn’t change the fact that in court, on this issue, there has been a perfect record of defending the freedom of religion in our courts.

Oops, did we all read that last sentence correctly? That’s right! That Constitutional Amendment everyone is trying so hard to overcome was put in place to protect YOU (and me) and all of our religious beliefs from the influence of government. Asking the government to actively “help” in the “protection” of your religion is like asking a wolf to protect your steak from attacking squirrels. Who should we really be more worried about here?

That’s another argument I fail to understand. How are Christians being “attacked” in this situation? Nobody is going after your churches (are they?) Has anyone asked you to remove, or replace your church’s cross on their private land? Told you to change your church leaders, or what they are teaching you? Exactly who would ever have the power, or inclination to do such a thing? Hmmmm, let’s all think about it a little while. If you were thinking the government, YOU WIN! Now, what is keeping the government from having ANY say in what we do with our religion? Right again… the Constitution and its funny little “separation of church and state” rule that is supposedly suppressing your religious rights in some way!!! Who defends the constitution? Come on now. I know you know this… YES, the “nutty judges”!!! I know that was a painful road, but we’ve made it.

Look, I completely understand the emotional connection to the cross. It doesn’t really seem to be hurting anyone and the Mt. Soledad cross is beautiful up there on the hill. It’s not inherently offensive visually, but that was never REALLY the point. The point is that as a religious person, it is YOU (not some atheist) that should be marching up that hill, removing that cross and taking it safely to private church owned land (or any private land for that matter). It is YOU who should be protecting your religion from some government sponsored project who ultimately can only serve to bastardize your beliefs.

Here is a question. If there was a group called “Christians for the rescue of the Mt. Soledad Cross from Government Clutches” headed up by several local religious leaders, would the feelings of understanding start to creep in? If it was these leaders telling you that we need to save our cross from being used as a political pawn, would you then listen to them and see what is truly happening?

Unfortunately, I doubt you’ll ever see that group formed as our religious leaders are just as uninformed on this subject as most others are. They are out there fighting for the one and only thing that could possibly destroy our precious freedom of religion. I realize that it’s a long slippery slope to get to that point, but really… what is the point of taking that first step?

I will be the first in line to defend ANYONE’s religious symbol on their private land or person. It is our right in this country to practice our religion without ANY government involvement for or against our chosen path. That is a huge idea and took enormous forethought (and self control) by our founders to understand this and act accordingly. They knew that government always had and always would destroy true religious freedom if not protected. Perhaps even their own religion could be harmed when the next administration moved in with their own beliefs and forced change.

The allowance of one symbol on government land effectively endorses that religion (in this particular case, Christians) and more importantly, excludes all others. Unless you purpose that we also put up a Crucifix (yes, Catholics are often separated by other Christians, so I wouldn’t feel so “included” by this particular cross), Star of David, a Crescent Moon, a Buddha statue, an empty pedestal (for the atheist I guess), or whatever other symbols are out there that represent ALL of the people in this country (that our government is supposed to be representing), then the only real option is to remove the one symbol that is there, let our government display the one thing they can stand for (namely the flag) and return the cross to where it should have been built in the first place… safely and constitutionally protected at one of the many deserving churches who would love to give it a home.

I tried to choose my words carefully as I certainly didn’t want to demean anyone based on religion. Quite the contrary actually. I’m simply tired of people misunderstanding the purpose of this particular article of the Constitution and basically fighting to ruin the protections we all currently enjoy to worship as we please. I urge you to be careful what you ask of your government with respect to their involvement in our religion. You just might get it. Once that box is open, you may not like what future leaders choose to do with it. If you have any questions about the possibilities of this happening, please feel free to read the history of nearly any other country in the world (most have been around much longer than ours) to see how well government and religion have mixed.

[PerryChase]

sdrebear, i agree with you because I believe in the Constitution.

This issue is very similar to people supporting the Patriot Act or warrantless wiretaping because they beleive it’ll help catch terrorists. They don’t understand that by giving the government so much power to “interfere” we’re erroding our freedoms away.

[carlislematthew]

Wiretapping helped catch the enemy recently and avert a new attack.

There’s a HUGE difference between wiretapping and WARRANTLESS wiretapping. There are very very few people that disagree with all wiretapping, and I haven’t heard a single democrat say that wiretapping is bad.

What they *are* saying is that the executive branch of government wiretapped Americans without a warrant which, they believe, he is required to obtain by law. There is debate over this issue of course…

Unfortunately, the argument is not simple, or black and white. Therefore it has been easy for Republicans, and the oblivious masses, to suggest that Democrats are against wiretapping. They’re not, they just want the president to obey the law. If the law isn’t good enough (too slow, too boring, too orange, whatever) then the Republican president can go to the Republican congress and get the law changed. Then he can follow it.

Unfortunately, the Democrats just come across as being whiney and pedantic, when they’re actually making very important points. When I get all annoyed about people using “insure” when they mean “ensure” I feel like a Democrat. When I look at my pay check and see my tax bill, I *don’t* feel like a Democrat.

[ybc]

The one democrat that I really like is Senator Obama. I read his speech from time to time — he’s a great writer!
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/

I think that he has intellect, judgement, compassion, and humility that’s lacking in our leaders. I’m waiting to see if he’s as skilled a politician and leader. I hope so.

[Stu949]

I agree with a couple of people on here. I’m going independent or libertarian. I feel there is no hope for the two major parties at this point!

Some may feel that my vote will be wasted; however, I march to my own drum. When I listen to others, I become as miserable as them.

[Chris Johnston]

Chris Johnston
iamafuturestrader.com

When are we going to get to religion so we can get a jihad going against RE insiders?

[carlislematthew]

I didn’t hear any concrete
example (except bumper sticker whining) of violations of civil
rights during this administartion, maybe a few terrorists feel
that way, so be it…

Are you suggesting that American citizens that feel their civil rights have been reduced are terrorists? Or sympathize with terrorists?

[L_Thek_onomics]

“Are you suggesting that American citizens that feel their civil rights have been reduced are terrorists? Or sympathize with terrorists?”

I’m not suggesting anything like that. But the way you phrased your response proves the shaky ground of the argument. You don’t know your rights are violated, you “feel” it. On the other side I know, my civil rights are not violated by any means.

L Thek

[carlislematthew]

I’m not suggesting anything like that. But the way you phrased your response proves the shaky ground of the argument. You don’t know your rights are violated, you “feel” it. On the other side I know, my civil rights are not violated by any means.

The single reason I asked is that your post was not clear. I was asking for clarification… You have to ask these days, as sometimes a deliberate vagueness (which yours wasn’t) can imply things without having to specifically state them.

[no_such_reality]

Join one of the major parties you want to change and work hard to influence its policies.

That’s wasting your time. Both parties are beholding to their donors and radical voters. In the republican’s case, that’s big money people and the fundamentalist religious groups because of the demonstrated single issue impact in swing states.

Similarly the democrats are subject to the Union’s and their money. They also have their radical left members with similar impact.

You will not be changing either party.

[CardiffBaseball]

Don’t worry the GOP will eventually face the fact that Big Business and Evangelicals, cannot co-exist forever.

Big Business and their Orwellian-like adherence to globalization, will eventually cause a deep split in the GOP someday. The current administration promotes corporate welfare in the form of cheap off-the books labor.

Note that I am not saying that globalization can or will stop, I just see a day when the christians see that big business practices are nothing to stand up and fight for.

[ybc]

Interesting perspective. Sometimes the seed of destruction was planted within.

[PerryChase]

Or could it be that capitalists will feel that the Christians with their opposition to scientific research and popular culture are inhibiting business opportunities?

I see a big chasm coming in the GOP.

[Author]

Posts