It’s a Trap!

4 more years of Obama, and you won’t have the courts to turn to; they’ll be packed with racist socialists who allow, or even demand Obama’s socialist agenda. Even if Romney is a rerun of W, another W accompanied by another Alito or Roberts is better than an Obama along with another Kagen.

I agree that Romney is another go-​along, get-​along type, but Obama actually scares me. I have low expectations for Romney, but I don’t trust Obama to stay within the bounds of the Constitution, as he has repeatedly demonstrated he considers it an inconvenience to his agenda. And finally, the conservative Supremes are not spring chickens.

Reality:If Obama is re elected, we are destroyed as a country. The claim is made that Obama is not a Communist or a Muslim. He IS sympathertic to both.
The ONLY candidate picked by the majority of the American people is Romney. Not Johnson, not Santorum.
Romney may not be perfect but he beats the living tar out of Obama. P S: I was a Santorun Activist

The only thing that can force me to vote for Obomney is Obama. The liberal/​socialist media and the New York-​Washington corridor Republican establishment worked assiduously to purchase the Republican nomination for Romney — probably because he fits into the Northeastern liberal power structure. I’d have much preferred Cain or Bachmann, and even would have expected good leadership from Newt. I expect nothing from Romney except the hope that he won’t destroy the country as his opponent certainly would

Paul, I think your Libertarian Party would be better served to work with the growing number of Conservatives taking over at the grassroots of the Republican Party and reinvent that party as a major opponent to Dems rather than just being the right wing of the Democrat Party.

Europe, Australia, and NZ have already trodden the path that republicans are now contemplating. The two parties are both agreed on reducing ghg emissions. In Australia, this means that the carbon tax, which is taking effect in July, will force energy and business costs up — and billions of dollars worth of carbon offsets will be purchased from overseas as permissions slips for Australian’s to keep their lights on. 

Julia Gillard had promised that there would be no carbon tax, and then passed one by hook or crook. And, similar to the Romney position, she has temporarily offset it with pathetic cuts in other taxes to mask its destructive effects. Americans must look at other western countries and see the example they have set in losing party distinctions in the energy sector, and in the energy crisis that these countries are now experiencing.

You fools that actually believe that there is any substantive difference between Romney and Obama need to notice that voting (or supporting) the lesser of two evils is still evil. When will you ever learn that to compromise your principles is extremely self destructive. Our economy is so bad it will take heroic efforts to clean up the horrific mess created by the likes of Romney and Obama.

Not only did Romneycare force people to buy insurance through legislation, it is now running billions over projected costs. The emergency room visits have increased. Costs and waiting times have increased. And yet, Romney has said it was a good plan for his state. So, he is running on the success of Romneycare as his platform. Obamacare is hated and unpopular, and what should be a strength for republicans and all those who are opposed to gov’t expansion into healthcare, has become a disaster in the Romney nomination.

So Mr. Jacobs, you are now whining about no one taking your six points, one by one, in an attempt to refute them. Why would anyone waste time trying to change your mind? You think we are all happy about having Romney rather than one of the alternatives? But the difference, for some of us, is that arguing about Romney’s weaknesses versus candidates who are all out of the running is pointless. It is now about his weaknesses and strengths versus President Obama’s. No, Ron Paul is still never going to win the nomination in any world not influenced by some narcotic-​induced euphoria. 

The Congress and the Senate MAY become more conservative- enough to actually start reversing 100 years of liberal, incremental policies little by little- over the course of several election cycles. But no major legistlation, even if they could muster the votes for it, will become law so long as Obama remains in the White House for 4 more years. However, in that same 4 more years we could see a liberal domination of the Supreme Court, Appellate and District benches, and more bloated bureaucracy and regulation that will plague us for decades. No legislature or President will overturn that dynamic overnight. No mechanism exists for that.

But you all go ahead and refuse to vote for the “lesser of two evils” and, de facto, vote for the GREATER of two evils. It’s a strange reality that Obama may be re elected, not by liberals, but by people who call themselves “conservatives.” In truth these are really just immature children who don’t want to play if they can’t have their way 100% of the time. Adults will understand that we have to retake the country a little bit at a time, and that a true conservative in the Presidency is a prize we may wait another generation for. Meanwhile, we have to play BOTH offense and defense. By that I mean that we have to not just try to gain where we can, but insist on slowing the movement further towards socialism that cannot be undone again until our children’s time. That means a Mitt Romney rather than Barack Obama.

I know some of you think that Ron Paul is God’s gift to America. Well let me enlighten you. A man like Ron Paul will never be popular enough to score more than a Congressional seat until a new generation of American voters has a change in attitudes about what kind of public servant this country needs. It doesn’t matter what parts of Paul’s policy you and I agree or disagree on. He remains far out of the mainstream. I know you all think we should worship the ground he walks on, but it is time you are disillusioned and accept the fact that most of America doesn’t think like you, and that is why Ron Paul is ultimately just a side show in the Presidential circus. 

So quit blaming the Republican “Establishment” when it is the American voter that chose Mitt Romney over Paul, Santorum, Gingrich and all. The American voter is NOT with you on this. But you Ron Paul types are just big enough to make a difference, don’t doubt that. You are big enough to give us Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. So if we get Obama, it will be thanks to you. Your children and grandchildren will reap the rewards of your vote.

The destructive power on national economies of ghg regulations, subsidies, mandates and the efforts to shut down coal are vital issues. Obamacare is destructive to a huge segment of our economy and our individual freedoms. No one has to be so threatened by one bad leader that they in turn foolishly support another who is identical on issues that are so vital to our everyday lives. The right thing to do is to continue to campaign against ghg regulations, and against gov’t mandates in energy and health, and any candidate who supports them. 

No one has to be terrorized into thinking they have only two choices. Rigorously campaign against going the way of Europe and Australia. They have identical parties in many respects, and they carry out edicts given to them by unelected foreign bodies. Do not trust any global warming advocates, and for goodness sake, do not lie about their positions — past and present.

Sorry, the trap was set in 2008 and too many Americans walked into THAT one. They fell for the candidate who said there was no such thing as blue state America and red state America but that we lived in a UNITED STATES of America. So Romney isn’t perfect. I did what you suggested back in 2008. I went out and voted for someone else. What good did it do? To coin a phrase: NEVER AGAIN!

The term “conservative” at this stage of the game, is a joke. There’s nothing left to conserve. Are you going to conserve the practice of common law? Sorry. In 1850, the practice of voir dire was instated to allow Northern prosecutors to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law. That practice, of allowing the prosecutor to rig the jury, was never repealed. Essentially, our constitutional republic ended right then and there, because the government could then enforce any law, even ones that more than 1/​12 people disagreed with. Then came “Sparf and Hansen v. USA,” with the Supreme Court split on whether juries needed to be informed that they had a right to vote their consciences (even after the made it past the voir dire gauntlet). The Supremes decided they did not need to be so informed, and that “jury members are already supposed to know their rights as citizens when called.” Well, guess what? They don’t. …Because the government educated them to be obedient, servile taxpayers, not strong independent citizens.

So, now you have lapdogs of the police state like the moron above posting as “Jay,” who claim that it would be a tyranny for Ron Paul to remove unconstitutional tyrannies that the people support, because congress created them under the color of law. Let’s go through some of the ways that this distorted logic is wrong:
1) In a constitutional republic, if a law is unconstitutional, it is considered “null and void” from its inception. “Marbury v. Madison” established this logical principle. Sadly, “Marbury v. Madison” also established the contra-​republican principle that the Supreme Court will decide issues of constitutionality, and that the people generally will not (except in cases like “John Bad Elk v. USA (1900),” where a citizen takes action to defend his rights and is later acquitted by the courts.). So, even if a majority of the people want to build gas chambers and put all the Jews in them, the constitution doesn’t allow them to lawfully do this, even if congress makes a law allowing genocide. All systemic checks and limitations on “building gas chambers and putting the jews into them” are therefore lawful means of minimizing state tyranny. …Including the prerogatives of the president, whose “balance” in the system can act as a check. So, if Ron Paul wants to repeal or defund an unconstitutional government agency, he need only show that it violates the Bill of Rights, and is therefore unconstitutional. …A simple task. Remember: the Constitution was a document set up to LIMIT the power of the government, not allow tyrants to do whatever they want.
2) Congress was never given authority to create the DEA, FDA, EPA, etc. Moreover, those agencies cannot rightfully deny those they oppress a trial by jury. Yet, they do so, all the time. This makes those agencies criminal agencies, agencies not of the constitutional republic. …And it doesn’t matter whether congress, or my drunken neighbor bob claims to have “given them lawful authority.” You cannot give what is not yours to give.
3) Regulatory “authority” is false authority. Unelected bureaucrats in regulatory agencies now deny the necessity of habeas corpus, and deny that there needs to be a “corpus delecti” or “body of crime.” They thereby throw out over 400 years of jurisprudence and enlightenment values. A “corpus delecti” always has two elements: “injury” and “intent to injure.” When the EPA accuses me of destroying wetlands that are not actually wetlands but merely standing flood waters (as in the John Stossel episode, “Illegal Everything” on youtube), they act unilaterally and deny that they need to show injury or intent to injure. Moreover, I am never given a day in court, or any redress at all in their dealings with me. So, if Paul acts to restore the absent rule of law, he is not acting as a tyrant, because he takes power away from tyrants. He is restoring the concept that the initiation of force is wrong, and that those who instigate violence cannot claim to be victimized by their intended victims’ self defense.

The fact that jay, and rollins lapdog, and others on this board can’t comprehend the basic difference between right and wrong is indicative of America’s slide toward socialism. Really, I think they simply like the nice-​looking ken doll with a square jaw, and don’t like the skinny brown negro. If they had to evaluate Romney’s policies against Obama’s, I doubt they’d be able to tell the difference, especially since the true political control of the USSA is external to either of those two assclowns.