We staged a hostile take over of the Republican party

Originally posted by Terminal1
reply to post by Hopechest

 

I think the higher ups have learned their lessons from those days and have implemented strategies that blunt efforts. It makes me wonder if those issues of those times came to a head in these times the results would be different.

Recently we have seen huge events happen and some even protested but protests generally have their teeth pulled unless the movements follow the course those same powers want or need. Movements are quickly diffused and ridiculed that do not follow.

I mean, look at the following Ron Paul had and yet he rarely seen the light of day and the media treated him as if he were anathema.

You cannot stop a movement that has a strong will behind it. Look at the protests in Tiananmen square in China. Certainly if they can't stop a movement with their communist power than how will America stop one. We simply haven't had a movement recently that a majority of people can get behind.

Ron Paul did not have that large of a following if you look at it in context. A few million supporters, most of whom did nothing more than acknowledge they like the guy is not a movement. The media did not have to do anything to prevent him from winning. Even if all the media supported him he still would have lost.

reply to post by Kali74


Well I cannot argue there except maybe there may be more reasons to get involved (minor point) and I do agree that the game board needs to be flipped over at this point.

I just (sadly) think that there just isn't too many altruistic people in government anymore mainly because politics are not altruistic in nature.

Once you have money to live comfortable, what else does a non altruistic person desire outside of more power to influence things in their favor?

reply to post by Hopechest


A thought occurred to me (well actually re-occurred because I've thought this before) that it is really hard to rally around our flag when there are just too many different ideas on what the flag represents anymore.

Maybe I should leave the thread for now because I feel my trains of thought will derail the thread.

Ron Paul was mainly a person I thought of because he is the head of a movement. Maybe the reason he does not get more of a following is because he is marginalized and demonized by certain segments of our society.

People are locked in binary thinking. Either you are for or against us. If you are not a capitalist you are communist. If you are poor you don't like the rich and vice versa. If you didn't go through higher education you are ignorant yet if you are well educated you are elitist. On and on. No matter what idea is brought up there will be a segment of society that will take offense and that is a guarantee. It is like scientific studies. One may pronounce a discovery and there will be one that refutes it. No wonder people are confused and diffused.

So I have to ask... what pray tell could happen that hasn't already happened to us already to mobilize the people under a similar idea?

reply to post by downtown436


It's good to see that grass roots politics is still an option in New Mexico. The "good ole boy" machine is powerful in both parties and perhaps this will send a message that the old methods of nepotism and corruption in NM is coming to a close. I hope so...

Now if we can do the same thing in Santa Fe; we might have a movement.

Originally posted by Terminal1
reply to post by Hopechest

 

A thought occurred to me (well actually re-occurred because I've thought this before) that it is really hard to rally around our flag when there are just too many different ideas on what the flag represents anymore.

Maybe I should leave the thread for now because I feel my trains of thought will derail the thread.

Ron Paul was mainly a person I thought of because he is the head of a movement. Maybe the reason he does not get more of a following is because he is marginalized and demonized by certain segments of our society.

People are locked in binary thinking. Either you are for or against us. If you are not a capitalist you are communist. If you are poor you don't like the rich and vice versa. If you didn't go through higher education you are ignorant yet if you are well educated you are elitist. On and on. No matter what idea is brought up there will be a segment of society that will take offense and that is a guarantee. It is like scientific studies. One may pronounce a discovery and there will be one that refutes it. No wonder people are confused and diffused.

So I have to ask... what pray tell could happen that hasn't already happened to us already to mobilize the people under a similar idea?

Well for Ron Paul, he had 30 years to increase his following and it reached a point and stayed there. This is indicitive of the amount of support he would ever get. His message resonated with a certain segment but was not flexible enough to go any further.

His strength was also his limitation. Its good to have unchanging principles but to appeal to enough voters to win an election you need to be willing to compromise.

Originally posted by HauntWok
Not sure if that counts as a hostile takeover. Sounds to me like you just worked within the framework and practiced participating in our representative government.

So now that you have a position of authority, what are you going to do with your new found political power? What is the platform you are going to push?

Typical Republican ideology? Xenophobia? Closeted racism? Bigotry? Tax cuts for the wealthy? Starving the poor? Eliminating the 1st Amendment and forcing a national religion and language? Ohh, how about a nice WAR with a country that's really no threat to us whatsoever.

Or are we going with real conservative beliefs of sensible taxation/spending (ala Reagan)?

We are basically of the ilk of Gary Johnson, we want huge tax cuts for everyone, like 95% less taxes, and about a 95% smaller gov't. No more having the gov't with their greedy paws in your pocket, and no more gov't telling you what to put in your body, or what you do in your bedroom.

reply to post by watcher3339


Yeah, we are trying to get back to conservatism of the style of Thomas Jefferson, not Sean Hannity fake conservatism.

reply to post by downtown436


Gary Johnson wants total open borders, especially with Mexico.

You support that?

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by downtown436

 

Gary Johnson wants total open borders, especially with Mexico.

You support that?

Here is Johnson's platform. I didn't see anything about open borders. What is your source?

www.politicaljack.com...

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by downtown436

 

I'm all for knocking the status quo on it's ass... so congrats there. I wonder though if the new boss is the same as the old boss, so I would like to ask some questions...

Do you feel all your peers are above corruption?

Liberty and free-thinking mean different things to different people, where do you guys stand on social issues such as:
abortion
gay rights
immigration reform

What about environmental issues?
Global warming... man-made or natural?
If man-made, how should we handle it?

Economy?
Do big corporations have too much power?
If so, how can that power be curbed?

Well, I personally don't think abortion, gay rights are things that the gov't should be dealing with. I don't think that straight marriage should be gov't sanctioned with any benefit, or penalty, so same with gay marriage.

Environmental, I think that big petrol has bought up all the clean/free energy ideas to retain a monoply of the oil business. I think it is a crime against humanity. The fact that hemp is illegal is wiping out forests, when we could be growing hemp for a lot of things including many things that are made from petro products. I think we are largely at the whim of mother nature, but polluting the environment is bad considering that we have the technology to have vehicles that would pollute dramatically less. For example in Europe they sell diesel vw's that get 75mpg, they are built in America but not allowed to be sold here!

Big corporations.
I am in favor of capitalism, but not corporate fascism. For example monsanto. They lobbied the gov't to pass laws so they can literally monopolize the world food supply! That and countless other things that are insanely bad are going on right now.

Originally posted by Terminal1
Congrats for exercising what needs to be done.

But I do have reservations (I believe it is too late currently) because I know there is a hierarchy amongst the corridors of power and if the "seniors" do not like what the juniors bring to the table, the juniors will never be heard.

Though internal hierarchies can be useful, what I believe we have now are pretty much gatekeepers that make sure the status quo will remain in charge and running things.

If only more people would go but it is a pipe dream I believe. Too many people are just turned off by the process to even be involved.

Yeah I am one of the ones that was real turned off by the process! I had given up!

I joined a militia, and have been active with that, and still am.

It may be too little too late to change the political process, but we marched in there, and we voted out all the people that were running for officer positions, and put our people in! We are going to have a voice at the state level and there is nothing they can do about it! The people that were there, were caught totally off guard and some of them were seriously freaking out!

Originally posted by olaru12

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by downtown436

 

Gary Johnson wants total open borders, especially with Mexico.

You support that?

Here is Johnson's platform. I didn't see anything about open borders. What is your source?

www.politicaljack.com...

edit on 7-4-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

Here you go,

My vision of the border with Mexico is that a truck from the United States going into Mexico and a truck coming from Mexico into the United States will pass each other at the border going 60 miles an hour. Yes, we should have open borders.

www.ontheissues.org...

Um, sensible fiscal policies and Reagan? RR who tripled the debt? The Dem House did what he wanted for sympathy when he was shot, and he had a GOP Senate until his last two years. He signed the bills, no vetoes, that tripled the debt.

Originally posted by TheBoomersRBusted
Um, sensible fiscal policies and Reagan? RR who tripled the debt? The Dem House did what he wanted for sympathy when he was shot, and he had a GOP Senate until his last two years. He signed the bills, no vetoes, that tripled the debt.

That tripling of the debt also led to the collapse of the Soviet Union, all the proxy wars, and the end of the Cold War.

Reagan basically bankrupted the Russians. Was it worth it?

I think so.

Originally posted by olaru12
reply to post by downtown436

 

It's good to see that grass roots politics is still an option in New Mexico. The "good ole boy" machine is powerful in both parties and perhaps this will send a message that the old methods of nepotism and corruption in NM is coming to a close. I hope so...

Now if we can do the same thing in Santa Fe; we might have a movement.

edit on 7-4-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

Yeah there are people working hard in Abq to do the same thing. If we can get them to succeed we can make some progress in the state!

reply to post by Hopechest


Thanks!

I'll still favor the Libertarians over the GOP corpratracracy any day.
I'm still skeptical that any meaningful change will take place nationally but my allegiance lies with the malcontents and not the stuffed shirt status quo.

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by downtown436

 

Gary Johnson wants total open borders, especially with Mexico.

You support that?

Well, Gary Johnson wants to legalize drugs. That would completely change things in Mexico, and it might end up being a whole lot cleaner friendlier place.

If that were the case I would support open borders.

Originally posted by downtown436

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by downtown436

 

Gary Johnson wants total open borders, especially with Mexico.

You support that?

Well, Gary Johnson wants to legalize drugs. That would completely change things in Mexico, and it might end up being a whole lot cleaner friendlier place.

If that were the case I would support open borders.

Not a single country, anywhere in the world pursues a policy of open borders.

Why do you think that is? Yet your willing to support it because drugs are legalized?

Ooofta....there are many many other issues that go far beyond contraband you know.

[quote/]

Well for Ron Paul, he had 30 years to increase his following and it reached a point and stayed there. This is indicitive of the amount of support he would ever get. His message resonated with a certain segment but was not flexible enough to go any further.

His strength was also his limitation. Its good to have unchanging principles but to appeal to enough voters to win an election you need to be willing to compromise.

I don't agree, I think people want someone to stand for them, and not compromise! I agree with Ron Paul's politics, but I wonder if he is some kind of gatekeeper.

Originally posted by Hopechest

Originally posted by downtown436

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by downtown436

 

Gary Johnson wants total open borders, especially with Mexico.

You support that?

Well, Gary Johnson wants to legalize drugs. That would completely change things in Mexico, and it might end up being a whole lot cleaner friendlier place.

If that were the case I would support open borders.

Not a single country, anywhere in the world pursues a policy of open borders.

Why do you think that is? Yet your willing to support it because drugs are legalized?

Ooofta....there are many many other issues that go far beyond contraband you know.

Right now, the way things are, open borders are a very bad idea!

However, if things changed dramatically, we might have a different world, and Mexico might actually be a nice place to visit, like it was in years past.