FOX Strategy Really Paid Off...........Idiots
POSTED BY: captaincdc
UPDATED: Saturday, March 13, 2004 00:47
VIEWED: 21389
PAGE 8 of 8
In my opinion the only reason Perot lost in 92 was his intentional self sabotage. He was way ahead of Clinton and Bush largely for his anti-NAFTA stance. He was more appealing to the right then the left on most issues, but what pushed him well beyond Clinton and Bush was his stand on Nafta wich both the hardcore right and left could agree on. And the media hated him the right loves to say the media is left but all true left folks I know say otherwise. The point being the media with all their hate drove both sides to him.
And then Perot dropped out something or another to due with his daughters wedding photos? Then he dropped back in but after that he was a joke. I don't know why he ran but it wasn't to win.
Yes if the Reform party had been run by a real canidate not Ross Perot I believe you could have had grounds for a third party. This is because what the Reform party offered would have drawn in the people who only vote democrat or republican because they feel the alternatives are worse.
Most of the definitions of left and right are artificial any way. Most true right-wingers hate Nafta so do left-wingers a whole new way of looking at things could have been formed by these two groups getting together.
My point is if Perot had wanted to win and did. A whole new paradigm could have formed. Now this was a long time ago and I hardly remember what this party was supposed to be about but I do believe they were pro-gun ownership, well gosh so am I and I'm by current standards supposed to be left. I can't recall anything said about environmental issues but with a huge bunch of left folk in there party I doubt they want to piss us off and I bet a bunch of former right would love to be pro-environment. Just as I a former left folk would like to be pro-second amendment.
Why because the current standards don't fit a lot of people. A new party what ever it is could create new standards.I mean who the hell decided gun ownership was right-wing who decided giving a damn about our forests and air and water is left-wing. I mean why not have pro-gun folk be left and environmentalism be a rabid right wing cause?
I like alot of people think these standards are competely arbitrary. For example my doctor he's a born-again Christian yet he gets an environmental magazine by Bible folk which I read in his office every time I go. It's all about doing what the book of Genesis talked about being a care-taker of the Earth and what not. Shows all the bad things being done to our planet. Don't know how he votes but I bet he votes Republican because more of his issues are Republican than not. He has to swallow those enviromental callings for a greater cause.
But perhaps not if there was a third party of power and maybe even a fourth party that was electable.
Now lets just say there was a third party out there. A real third party that could get votes both Democrats and Republicans would have to revitaize themselves just so they didn't become the Whigs. This would help democracy and restore peoples faith.
Look I read one of your posts up top in reaction to someone who said they wanted the two party system destroyed. And your reaction seemed to indicate you thought this was the worst idea you had ever seen. What I don't get is you seem to need duality. Everthing needs to be right-wing or a communist plot one or the other(I kid). The truth is most people hate the right-wing and left-wing paradigm it no longer fits most of us. The question becomes what do you think is so worth while about it because I don't know?
I want a radical pro-environmental,pro-second amendment,pro-school choice, anti-drug war, pro-death penality for murder,pro-prison-eradication for non-violent offenders home incarceration,type party.
Now of course I'm a realist but in what way does voting republican or democrat suit my needs my only hope and the hope, of a hell of a lot of folk is the begining of melding between the current duality in too many new forms.
Here's the new solgan America's diverse why aren't our parties.
And from now on America
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
...And it seems to be human nature to settle with only two choices.
I have to disagree with that one we have two choices for a reason the game is rigged. Remember when Pat Buchanan ran for president the first time he got 5% of the vote enough to allow him in the Presidential debates in the 2000 elections. Well those elections came around he had a spot in the Presidential debates as determined by law but then.
Here's what happened get this the Bi-Partisan Commission said no. It used to be 5% but now you we've changed the law retroactively so it's now 15%. And yes it's called the Bi-Partisan commission Bi,meaning two. Notice how it's not called the Tri-Partisan Commision which would mean three it's the Bi-Partisan Commission. If thats not rigged I don't know what is.
Pat Buchanan earned the right to speak at the Presidental debates by law. But when the real powers find the law not to their taste it can be changed at random.
Skull and Bones don't worry it will never be a issue. It will not be brought up at any time during the elections. It's not a secret it just all news media know it's not important enough to bring to any ones attention ever.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If anyone is interested in finding out more about Skull and Bones I have an interview with Alexandra Robbins Best Selling author of, Secrets Of The Tomb, Skull and Bones, The Ivy League, And The Hidden Paths To Power.
This is from the radio show Democracy Now and by the way if you have dial up connection you should have no problem listening.
http://stream.realimpact.net/rihurl.ram?file=webactive/demnow/dn200401
22.ra&start=9:54
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, I haven't read this entire thread, only about the first ten posts... but you wacko liberals make my head spin.
Conspiracy, corrupt 'Big Business', only the right-wing conservatives care about money, no liberal slant to the media, Skull and Bones... geez, do you leftists have a SINGLE original thought about anything? All I hear is the same crap you get from NPR. You are obviously not paying attention if you BELIEVE any of it.
As a conservative I'm not running around saying that 'Rush is right', or Bill O'Reiley is speaking the truth... why is it that you believe everything YOU hear from your liberal media? I can listen to Rush or Glenn Beck and make up MY OWN freekin' mind. Why can't YOU?
Now stop with all the BS. Please.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
the people at fox are being a bunch of gou tsao de huh choo-shang tza-jiao duh tzang-huos.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
For god sake, let this thread die...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Cuda:
For god sake, let this thread die...
Right, I agree. Oh, wait. What am I doing?!?!?!?!?
Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hi, Kobayashi nice Star Trek reference by the way. I have many original thoughts and I pay a lot of attention. So you think that my discussion on why Pat Buchanan was robbed of his right to speak in the presidential debates given by law at the 2000 elections is leftist huh? And pointing out both Kerry and Bush are Skull and Bones is working for the left huh? How does that work exactly?. I listen to both the "liberal media" and the A.M. radio crowd next time read the last ten posts please.
And you want me to let this thread die Rklnseth well how about this I like irony at least as much as you.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What idiots! (Stupidest reality TV ever...lilist groom...god...)
~~~~~~~~~~
Take me out to the black.....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME