States' Rights Redux

October 8, 2014 at 11:00 am
Norm Kelly says:

I doubt the viewership of the debate was sufficient for it to be decisive.

I expect informed voters will be the deciding factors.

Why do I say this? Simple. Those who are informed on the issues, educated about where the candidates stand based on their own history, then the decision once in the voting place will be easy. Unless, of course, the demon party and it's supporters find a way to vote fraudulently again. You know, more demon voters than actual voters in the precinct. But it won't be called 'voter fraud' or investigated. Like most other cases of actual voter fraud.

K has proven her socialist 'tendencies'. She has proven that she believes socialized medicine is the long-term goal. She has proven that she believes it is the RESPONSIBILITY of the central planners to insure that some people don't 'make too much' at the same time that she believes that some people should be compensated, by the central planners if necessary, if their income is insufficient to please the central planners. Of course, educated voters already know that socialized medicine has failed every time, every where, it has been tried. Even if you CAREFULLY watch the drivel created by Mike Moore concerning Cuba's implementation of socialized medicine, you will clearly see the failure of the system. That is, if you can survive thru his garbage. I'd rather waste my time watching 'Napolean Dynamite' than watch either Moore or algore! And to clarify, it's not that K has ever said that some people shouldn't be allowed to 'make too much'. What she says instead is the same garbage that most other lib pols say 'the rich must pay their fair share'. But has ANY lib ever defined 'their fair share'? And why is it the central planners responsibility to insure that someone doesn't make 'too much'? And who decides what 'too much' is? And why is it that tax policy (theft, in this case) should be used to insure that no one 'makes too much'? The central planners are using tax policy to influence personal/individual behavior when it comes to cigs, alcohol, gasoline, etc. etc. etc. So they also want to control incomes by using the tax code. Why? Using what US CONSTITUTIONAL authority?

There are a multitude of reasons to vote AGAINST K, regardless of whether Tom is the best choice. We know, without doubt, that K is the worst choice. Which candidate supports the XL Pipeline? Which candidate supports states rights, as defined in the US CONSTITUTION? Yup, there I go again. I refer to the US CONSTITUTION a lot, because it's the controlling document for our nation. It's true that some socialist members of SCOTUS have used foreign law in recent years to come to a decision, but the US CONSTITUTION says that ONLY the US CONSTITUTION can be used to reach a decision, so why do we let SCOTUS get away with violating our LAWS? Probably for the same reason that we let the current occupier violate the law! Something that only low-information voters agree with. But since they are low-information voters (libs!) we can expect them to have no idea what they are agreeing with. Like most times.

October 8, 2014 at 1:51 pm
Richard Bunce says:

Let's get the government out of the relationship approval business and then we will not have these distractions from the minimum essential business of government. Just one example of Republican big government to go with the Democratic big government that requires a business to do business with everyone... with the likely exception of catering a Klan convention.