It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


ATS's Boondock-Saint for US President - Would you vote for me ???

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 11:51 AM

Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by boondock-saint

Sorry bro, no vote here.
If you did end up a good president, you would be knocked off as all good presidents are.
Or you would change and that would be no good either.
I heard someone say the other day, "You can't beat the house".
If we want a good president we will not get one from the current political system.
But if you run after the reformation you are on my list of top candidates.

well thank you for your discussion
none the less
Just remember,
a president is not a dictator. He can
do very little without congressional
approval according to our constitution.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 11:57 AM

Originally posted by DrCarter
I would vote for you based on most of your stances, you certainly are far better than any other candidate or president we have had in at least thirty years. However the entire system needs to be brought down and restructured to fit the original idea. Small government and state control over their own laws including military being controlled by individual states not the national government. Any centralized banking institution was originally and should still be illegal and unwelcome. Most certainly lobbyists should be outlawed outright as they have the power through bribery to make the policy.

Thank You

I am all for smaller government.
One of the biggest cuts I would make
in the Fed budget would be defense.
We spend 51% of GDP on military.
I would rather see that 51% spent
on education than wars. I would like to
see every person who wants to attend
college given an opportunity. I would also
like to see caps put in place so it doesn't
cost you for the rest of your life just to
pay back a student loan. An affordable option
to the masses is my goal.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:00 PM

Originally posted by Student X
IIRC you don't know much about parapsychology and mysticism. If humanity is going to make it, it will be through knowledge and wisdom of those. We must reach our psychic potential. So no I wouldn't vote for you as President but I would support you in a smaller role.

thank you at least for your response
even though I do not share it

I think the world revolves around
education and understanding
and personal enlightenment.
That personal enlightenment may
come in many different variations
for different people. To focus mainly
on psychic potential alone would
be a futility IMO.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:04 PM
I would vote for you if you could prioritize the maximum funding of a free-energy race. Once there is this "free energy" for all, while the big utility companies collapse like 'building 7', then a dominoe-effect of numerous other good things would follow.
Abolish Free Trade.

Do you know yourself well enough to know if you would not succumb to intimidation? Immediately after Obama entered the WhiteHouse, I heard scuttlebutt, that he was quickly swarmed by Spooky BlackWorld types who intimidated, if not frightened, him into a NeoHawk mindset for the blackbudget-recieving defense industry. During their intelligence briefings to him. Which took place fairly soon. Would you fall for that? Would you cower in the presence of The Illuminatti? Just remember that scene where Luke skywalker told Yoda "I'm not afraid!" (And the master's reply.....)

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:05 PM

Originally posted by boondock-saint
I think the Fed Gov should stay out of the bedroom.
I think this is a scenario that needs addressing
on a state level with each state determining it's own
course of action.

I'm not talking about the bedroom. I'm talking about the LEGAL institution of marriage. Many FEDERAL rights and benefits are provided to married people. These same FEDERAL rights and benefits aren't offered to gay people. This is a federal issue on some levels.

Originally posted by boondock-saint
A women's body belongs to her and her alone.
No Fed law would make that decision for her.

But states could outlaw abortion? Even though the Constitution guarantees her privacy rights? Is that your stance?

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:05 PM

Originally posted by nerbot
I would never vote for you because I know you are a liar.
Simple really.

We all are liars at some point in our life
even if it was when you were 10 yrs old
and your mom asked you if you stole a
cookie from the cookie jar and you said no.

It is relative, yes I have lied before so I guess that
does make me a liar. I also lied to my children
when I told them there was a Santa Claus and an
Easter Bunny. Let he who is without sin
cast the first stone

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:13 PM

Originally posted by kwakakev
As an Australian I am out of the race. Beyond this, I would have to put Ron Paul first due to his experience in the political scene. Overall I would agree with about 80% of what you have to say so I would put you above Obama and any other candidate that comes up.

Speaking of Dr. Paul,
there are some things I like about his platform.
others I do not. While I do agree with him that
the Fed Gov needs to be downsized and the Fed
Bank eliminated. he goes a lot farther than that.
he wants to eliminate a lot of organizations that
could harm the US. He wants to end the Dept.
of Education and Dept. of Energy. This will
cause more harm than good. We need some sort
of federal entity to help keep America running.
While downsizing each would be considered,
eliminating them all would not IMO.

Dr. Paul's platform of a free market system
would allow more corruption for national
and international corporations with no
judicial oversight. Without it, they can screw
over anybody they cared to and we couldn't
do a darn thing about it. Free market should
not be allowed to rule like the lawless wild west.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:17 PM

Originally posted by mesle123
You can run and I would vote for u just cause u aren't part of the illuminati (are u?). But you have no chance of winning because u are not the one the NWO will pick. Sorry.

No, I am NOT part of the Illuminati.
However, I will state for the record
that my past does include being a
32 Deg Scottish Rite Freemason.
But I am no longer active in the

And you maybe correct, I may have
no chance of winning. But that was also
told to the Colonist who threw Tea
into Boston Harbor.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:19 PM

Originally posted by Granite
I agree with much of the time, but you are a mason which is a huge no no!

as noted,
I have not been involved with Freemasonry
for over 10 yrs. Just to clarify. I can produce
documents from my Grand Lodge to support this.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:22 PM

Originally posted by Havick007
Perhaps we should work together across boarders i mean to make the world a better place

ATS Thread ( Havick007 ) - Sovereign Party of Australia

this is the first time I have seen that thread
or that organization. I will have to check it
out before I feel comfortable in answering
questions whether or not I support it.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:29 PM
Here's a question for you...

How would you deal with this situation?

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:29 PM

Originally posted by nerbot
Which is why I wouldn't vote for you and I'm surprised you are still a member here really and not banned for your blatant breaking of one of the biggest ATS rules some time ago. Friends in high places is the only reason you're still posting.
Of course, to be a politician one HAS to lie so I'm not surprised about this thread and your efforts to fool yourself and others into thinking you are trustworthy.
How about a "no comment" just for authenticity, or maybe you'd prefer a good dragging through the mud?
Better still, why not tell us all about it in your own words?

I was kinda expecting this thread to have a troll
or two or three or more, lol.

I have no relationship with any owner, admin,
mod or staff of this forum. They are not endorsing
me either that I am aware of. I have never met
anybody from this forum in person but have
chatted with some that i thought were interesting
enough to get to know.

If you would please ask questions about specific events,
I could better answer your inquiries. Just stating things
as a generalization gets us nowhere.

And please by all means, let's air it all out, drag it
through the mud if you wish. However, with that said,
I do not want to turn this thread into a 3 ring circus
for your amusement so please keep it civil, thanks

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:34 PM

Originally posted by DrCarter
What about a debate? Similar to any other nominee debate, with a one post answer to questions posted by a designated member. It would go a long way to not only get out all of the answers to Boondock's stance but also allegations presented against him? I doubt it would work but it would be interesting.

well I was trying to make this thread into a
debate forum under similar rules. But if you have
a better way of doing this, then I'm all ears

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:37 PM
reply to post by boondock-saint

Count me in, but you knew that...

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:37 PM
The answer is: No, I would not. We already have an incompetent and clueless person in the White House. I'm not sure it is possible to have omn that is not, but why put one in who avows it?Leaderdship and executive comptence is not just about having opinions; it's about getting things done. Politically you'd get torn up in a heartbeat.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:41 PM

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by boondock-saint

Sorry, not a chance in hell!
Your little "Constitutional Gestapo Squad" idea scares the hell out of me.
Giving a small group of people with no oversight power to execute elected officials is not my idea of a good leader.

I do remember the post you are referring to.
I don't recall what thread it was on or how long ago
it was, but I do remember it.

The topic was about Treason, if I'm not mistaken.
And if I'm not mistaken, doesn't treason come with
an execution sentence??? Or maybe I misread
that somewhere. No Gestapo Squad if it's in
our forefathers documents it's the law.

+4 more 
posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:41 PM
reply to post by boondock-saint

No. I would not vote for you. You seem like a nice enough guy, but you have reactionary tendencies and are not a deep analytical thinker. This is not to say you are stupid, only that I never, ever see you make a really considered response to someone that indicates you have actually seriously considered their point of view.

I know it is common practice to want to elect someone you would want to "have a beer with." But that is the source of our problem. Americans keep electing people they would like to hang out with instead of people who actually have the intelligence, analytical skills, self control, and principles required to handle power on behalf of others without succumbing to the temptation of skimming for personal gain.

Being a leader is about much more than being smart, or popular. Its much more about being incorruptible. Yes, you need intelligence, courage, self control, etc., but you need more than anything a profound sense of honor and justice, and a desire to do the right thing for its own sake, even if it isnt in your own best interests.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:45 PM

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
How do you plan to end this hidden dictatorship in America?

very good question !!!!

I think a lot of this dictatorship and enslavement
is through monetary means. If we ween ourselves
off of it's teet, then we take away the basic
structure of it's stranglehold.

a Great start would be to end the Fed.
And if it still persist on other levels, we
will have to adjust to counter.

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:48 PM
reply to post by boondock-saint

Even treason requires a trial, you know that third branch of our government, however your gestapo squad doesn't fit that requirement.

Creating a 4th branch of government with execution powers certainly isn't constitutional. I would worry about a president who would want to execute elected members of congress for proposing legislation. The Supreme Court handles questions of constitutionality, not a gestapo squad that is nowhere in the US Constitution. So, by your own mandate, you would be calling for your own execution by establishing this gestapo squad.
edit on 3/25/2011 by whatukno because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:50 PM

Originally posted by snapperski
The best president is the one who doesnt want the job,not the one who sells his soul for the job.
But i like your passion,as passion doesn't look beyond the moment of its existence or brilliance.

in all honesty, I do not want the job.
In general I do not like politics.
But I see no changes coming forth
without somebody coming forth
to help see those changes
which is the reason for this thread.

I am not even sure I will run yet.
This thread is an exploratory function
to serve that purpose.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in