Topic: It's Official: Glenn Beck Jet Skis Over Shark Tank

[charlesoakwood]

Rubio is ineligible.

?

[Predator Don]

Rubio is ineligible.

How? I bet his BC is as ligitament as our current resident at 1600 Pennsylvania.

[Damn_Lucky]

 I am hearing it will be my fault if Stymie gets reelected because I refuse to cast a vote for Romney or gNewt.  

Your fault? You, personally?

No. But I will fault a center right candidate who does run third party. I fault Perot for giving us Clinton. Twice. The stakes are just higher this time.

This is where I get frustrated...I disagree that Perot in and of himself gave us Clinton, if G.H.W. Bush had not betrayed Reaganism and told the Dem's to stick tax hikes up their butts, I think he would have won easily over both Perot & Clinton.  So the problem was a flawed, establishment candidate.  Establishment candidate ought to be the key phrase people direct their full attention on!

"We all should do as our conscience dictates."

"Choose wisely."

I fully agree!  And my conscience will not allow me to accept the status quo or a Ruling Class/establishment candidate, period.  Ownership of any results after the fact are the sole responsibility of how people voted in the primaries.  I will go to my caucus, I will try to influence other voters as best I can, I will use the electoral process as long as the electoral process is functional...but I cannot guarantee people act as I do, think as I do, or vote as I do...I will do what I can, but I am planning for the worst, not because I wish for it, but because it is prudent to do so and the odds appear tilted that direction to me.

In this system people have the right to make totally stupid decisions, it has been demonstrated on more than one occasion and no doubt will be demonstrated again...

I think I'm in love with Liberatas.  Seriously.. would anyone reach down to the middle of my soul and express what I believe better than what he just did?

I'm with you.

[Damn_Lucky]

Rubio is ineligible.

Not in four years.

[Magnum]

I don't know how on the one hand we think we have 90 years to undo what the Left has done...when did FDR leave office, April 1945 feet first, right?  It's been 66 fricken years!  Have we gotten rid of any of the social crap he heaped on us?  No!  Wilson, his League of Nations (predecessor to the UN), the Fed, the FTC...has ANY of that crap gotten smaller or eliminated?  No!  That clown left office 90 fricken years ago!  

Now people can do what people want to do, but that road goes both ways you know?!  You can think we have 90 years to fix things, I don't don't, if we have a decade (even under a RINO POTUS) I'd be shocked.  You can think "holding the line" is a sound strategy, that a little more progressive creeping towards the end zone is better than giving up a touchdown, but I don't.  Surrendering to a little evil isn't better than surrendering to all evil.  I am hearing it will be my fault if Stymie gets re-elected because I refuse to cast a vote for Romney or gNewt.  OK, let's assume that dogma is 100% accurate.  You know what?  How does that advance your position to get me to support your fatally flawed candidate?  I'm not asking for Mr or Mrs Perfect, that is clearly not an option.  And I can flip the blame game around, and I think on a more solid foundation, by saying if you foist a fatally flawed candidate on people, it will be YOUR fault Stymie got re-elected.

I am sick and tired of being taken for a chump by the RNC, the state GOP party, every RINO candidate, the Machivellian operators like Karl "The Butthead" Rove, the media, pundits and the leftist pol's!!!  I can't do a damn thing about the last three, but the first four I will fight to my dying breath!

No more compromises!

That is my line in the sand.

Oh, and to drive my point home even more, the Rubicon could be here already...

http://itsaboutliberty.com/index.php/topic,4209.0.html

...this, courtesy of our enlightened leaders on the Hill!

Time, it is not on our side, and it appears it may have never been...

 

Libertas you have expressed a well written and well reasoned argument.

But;

I cannot in words convey my dislike for obama as a president.  I believe he is a man of poor character and quality. He and I hold irreconcilable differences with respect to vision and values as how our country should be governed.   obama has made statements against the Bible, his sympathies seem to lie with islam, is antagonistic toward Israel and there is not enough time to expound on how he is damaging our wonderful country through his and the lefties domestic and economic policies. His values and morals are polar opposite of what I believe…………. as I derive mine from Gods Holy word the Bible and he it seems from the book “Rules for Radicals” by Saul Alinsky.

I freely admit, I probably have ods (obama derangement system) and it may give me poor judgement in this matter. But because I love this country and hate the way it is being governed by obama and the lefties, I am at the point were I would probably vote for any candidate the republicans put up………… even Newt or Romney if it means obama is defeated and I do not ever again have to hear his vile lefty ideological sewage spilling from his teleprompter.

[Pandora]

Rubio is ineligible.

Not in four years.

No.  I believe his parents were not citizens when he was born and I don't care that Duh Wun MAY have set a precedent by skirting the g-damned law.  He's an unConstitutional president and so would Rubio be.

If it was up to me, the parents of a presidential candidate would have to be born here, as well as the candidate himself; the opportunity for a dual loyalty concerned the Founders and I share the concern.

[trapeze]

Rubio is ineligible.

I believe that the precedent has now been set to allow him to serve.

[trapeze]

I just got done watching the Ted Baxter Factor wherein Ted Baxter interviewed Glenn Beck. I agreed with everything that Beck said about Gingrich. Beck did not repeat his statement about going third party. I would like to think that he has backed off of it but I doubt it.

[Libertas]

I don't know how on the one hand we think we have 90 years to undo what the Left has done...when did FDR leave office, April 1945 feet first, right?  It's been 66 fricken years!  Have we gotten rid of any of the social crap he heaped on us?  No!  Wilson, his League of Nations (predecessor to the UN), the Fed, the FTC...has ANY of that crap gotten smaller or eliminated?  No!  That clown left office 90 fricken years ago!  

Now people can do what people want to do, but that road goes both ways you know?!  You can think we have 90 years to fix things, I don't don't, if we have a decade (even under a RINO POTUS) I'd be shocked.  You can think "holding the line" is a sound strategy, that a little more progressive creeping towards the end zone is better than giving up a touchdown, but I don't.  Surrendering to a little evil isn't better than surrendering to all evil.  I am hearing it will be my fault if Stymie gets re-elected because I refuse to cast a vote for Romney or gNewt.  OK, let's assume that dogma is 100% accurate.  You know what?  How does that advance your position to get me to support your fatally flawed candidate?  I'm not asking for Mr or Mrs Perfect, that is clearly not an option.  And I can flip the blame game around, and I think on a more solid foundation, by saying if you foist a fatally flawed candidate on people, it will be YOUR fault Stymie got re-elected.

I am sick and tired of being taken for a chump by the RNC, the state GOP party, every RINO candidate, the Machivellian operators like Karl "The Butthead" Rove, the media, pundits and the leftist pol's!!!  I can't do a damn thing about the last three, but the first four I will fight to my dying breath!

No more compromises!

That is my line in the sand.

Oh, and to drive my point home even more, the Rubicon could be here already...

http://itsaboutliberty.com/index.php/topic,4209.0.html

...this, courtesy of our enlightened leaders on the Hill!

Time, it is not on our side, and it appears it may have never been...

 

Libertas you have expressed a well written and well reasoned argument.

But;

I cannot in words convey my dislike for obama as a president.  I believe he is a man of poor character and quality. He and I hold irreconcilable differences with respect to vision and values as how our country should be governed.   obama has made statements against the Bible, his sympathies seem to lie with islam, is antagonistic toward Israel and there is not enough time to expound on how he is damaging our wonderful country through his and the lefties domestic and economic policies. His values and morals are polar opposite of what I believe. as I derive mine from Gods Holy word the Bible and he it seems from the book “Rules for Radicals” by Saul Alinsky.

I freely admit, I probably have ods (obama derangement system) and it may give me poor judgement in this matter. But because I love this country and hate the way it is being governed by obama and the lefties, I am at the point were I would probably vote for any candidate the republicans put up………… even Newt or Romney if it means obama is defeated and I do not ever again have to hear his vile lefty ideological sewage spilling from his teleprompter.

I share your extreme distaste in the current occupant of the White House, I cannot add or detract from anything expressed on that point.  I merely plead with people to make the best choice we can in the selection process so we can all have someone we can vote for.  The advocates ABO at this stage is putting the cart before the horse IMO.  I am not saying people cannot hold to the ABO point of view, I merely propose that expressing such sentiments not be the Holy Grail of our selection process, as it appears to me (and I sure know it appeals to promoters of establishment candidates) to give certain candidates more leverage with voters than it should at this point in the game.  IMO it smells of settling and compromising ones beliefs for an expedient goal we all share except with respect to the means in how we get there.  I would like to see more emphasis on who offers the most likely advance of our cause, not who the elite tell us are the only people capable of gathering the mushy middle or who currently polls better (11 months out) from the general election.

[Pandora]

Rubio is ineligible.

I believe that the precedent has now been set to allow him to serve.

No.  An illegal action does not precedent make.  It's an illegal and unConstitutional violation.

eta:  And another point is that Congress took pains to validate McCain's eligibility and gave the current sonofabitching occupant of the WH a total pass in a demonstratin of unequal treatment under the law.

NO.

[trapeze]

We may or may not see. Time will tell.