Saturday, January 21, 2012

Thoughts on Republican Primary Candidates, 2012

As to the Election, I am now Leaning towards Newt Gingrich and in a Minute I'm going to be Explaining why.

For those who Find this Page at a Later Date, I'd just like to say that this was written on the day of the South Carolina Primaries, but we won't know the results of that until tonight.  We've just Recently been Told that Santorum is the One who Won Iowa, not Romney.  What was Once a Romney Win by Only 8 Votes, later became a Santorum Win by 34 Votes.  So here's the Story, so far...  Santorum Won Iowa, Romney Won New Hampshire and the Out Come of South Carolina Appears to be either Romney or Gingrich

In my Opinion, Romney has been coming Across as a little Arrogant Lately.  He's just a little too Confident that he is going to Win and he won't Release his Tax ReformsRon Paul may be a little Embarrassed because he makes less than the others, yet Romney is Embarrassed about something too and yet we do not Know what.

Both Santorum and Gingrich Appear to have more Heart than Romney.  What Romney Appears to have is Money.

In Actuality, Gingrich's willingness to be a little Softer on Illegals that have been here 25 Years or more and have Roots in the Community makes sense and Romney's Approach does come across as a little Heartless.

Ok.  So Newt has had some Marital Problems and has even had Affairs as a Result.  He has Married his "Mistress", so it wasn't just a Casual Thing done just for Thrills.  I Know it's hard for a lot of Hard Core Christians to Understand, but you know what?  Sometimes these Things just Happen.  I can Forgive him for that and I Believe him that his Ex-Wife's Accusation against him is False.

For some Reason, they Keep Referring to Newt as "the other Conservative Option" and to Romney as the One who is more Liberal.  I Guess that's because of his Tendency to Change his Mind about Things.

And what about Rick Santorum?  Well, though I Agree with his Strong Pro-life Stand, it may be too Strong for most of the Liberals, a lot of the Independents and perhaps even some of the Conservatives.  I'm Afraid that might make him Unelectable.

And Ron Paul, well he is Unelectable too, as well as a little on the Radical Side on some of his Positions.

Yeh.  I Think I'm going to go with Newt.  For now that's my Decision.

38 comments:

Silverfiddle said...

I hate all of them. The GOP field stinks. Not a conservative in the bunch.

Lista said...

Thanks for Commenting Silverfiddle and since I know you to be a Libertarian, I'm not at all Surprised by your Answer, yet if we do not Nominate someone who is Electable and Obama gets 4 more Years in Office, we can say good bye to our Country and the Damage will probably not be Reversible. Never before has it been so Urgent that we Think Reasonably.

soapster said...

Neither Newt or Santorum can win the nomination as the are not even on the ballot in a number of states with a total of 564 delegates. Newt is a progressive to the core. He is an ego maniac and not someone who should be trusted with political power. That he was ousted for ethics violations is a testament to this fact.

soapster said...

Rick Santorum voted to give money to Planned Parenthood. Not to mention he seems to have no qualms about waging war across the middle east and therefore killing innocent men, women, and children. I posted the link at Beth's blog about his votes regarding PP. Really Lista you just seem to swim with the current. Say what you will about Ron Paul but there is nothing extreme or radical about the golden rule, christian just war theory, a sound currency, the rule of law, ethical behavior, etc.

Satyavati devi dasi said...

Um.. I thought he got a divorce from his wife,married his mistress, got another mistress, divorced the first mistress and married the second mistress.

I thought that was what I heard.

soapster said...

It's more than a bit absurd to infer that if Obama gets another term we can "say goodbye to our country".

The Soviet Union faced virtually the same scenario as we are facing right now.

They merely underwent reform (and a necessary one at that).

BB-Idaho said...

"The Soviet Union faced virtually the same scenario as we are facing right now." Yep, they wasted their resources in the mountains of Afghanistan. Nuttin new under the sun...

Lista said...

I really do Hate to Post all of these Comments and then not have Time to Respond, yet between Z's Blog and my own, I am having Trouble Keeping Up.

I Truly do Invite the Input of a Fellow Moderate on this Post. My Audience is Made Up Mostly of Libertarians and Liberals and so Far, the Input of a Moderate Republican is what is Lacking.

I'll be back with more of a Response Later.

soapster said...

Got a little fairness doctrine thing cooking here huh.

Lista said...

To Soap's last Comment;

Perhaps, but I'm not going to Mandate it. I Only want to Encourage it and there is Absolutely nothing Wrong with that.

I Wonder if I'm Going to be able to Watch the Debates tonight. 9:00 PM ET, should have been 6:00 PM here, yet I scanned through all the Channels and Could not find it. I'm going to Try again at 9:00 PM, which will be Midnight for a lot of the Rest of you.

Lista said...

Here is what I started Writing to you guys earlier...

Soap,
If Newt and Santorum Continue to Grow in Popularity and do not Drop Out of the Race, they will no Doubt be Added to more and more of these Ballots.

I will do some more Study about Newt. California doesn't Vote Until June.

Both Romney and Newt have Explained how sometimes there are Things that they do not Like within Packages that they Find Necessary to Vote for. This is called Compromise and without it, nothing ever gets done in Washington. This Happens when Republicans are put in Situations in which they have to Work with Democrats, just as both Romney and Newt have been and I'm sure that Santorum has been in similar Situations as well, though in reality, he has Probably the Strongest Pro-Life Stand of any of the 4 Remaining Candidates.

Santorum has also been Criticized for Voting against the Right to Work. His Explanation was that he was Voting as a Representative of a Non-Right to Work State and it just so Happens that being Willing to Vote in Accordance with the Will of those that you Represent is a Positive, not a Negative, for it shows a Willingness to Listen to the Will of the People.

I will Make no Secret of the Fact that I am Pretty Much an Undecided Voter. I see no Reason to Apologize for that.

You Act as if Ron Paul is the Only One who Believes in the Golden Rule and that's Absurd.

As to the Last of your Comments, well, I Hope you're Right, yet the Further Left the Country goes, the more Painful the Reform. Gradual Change is much better. To Follow the Extreme of Obama with the Extreme of Ron Paul would be Painful. It's Like a Boat Rocking Violently from Side to Side so that no one can get any rest from the Constant Trauma of Violent Changes.

I'll Vote for Ron Paul if I'm Confused enough about the Others and can't Make Up my Mind, for I believe that his Ideas are Valid. I just don't Trust him not to Take Things further than he should and this is Why I will not Vote for him if I Think there is a Chance that he might Actually Win.

Satyavaiti,
Yes, I'm sure that's Correct and it shows that he Obviously has a Problem with Commitment, at least the Kind that Lasts a Life Time. There is a Worse Kind of Adulterous, though, and that is the One who Plays Around just for the Joy and Adventure of the Sex. At Least Newt appears to Actually Love those he Cheats with. That is not a Justification, yet I just don't see that as quite as bad.

soapster said...

"If Newt and Santorum Continue to Grow in Popularity and do not Drop Out of the Race, they will no Doubt be Added to more and more of these Ballots."

If you don't understand how the state GOP bylaws work and how the allocation of delegates is done then you should say as much. Don't simply make stuff up.

They will not be added to ballots Lista. The state party bylaws are explicitly clear on their filing dates.

What's more, many people do not understand how delegates are selected in caucus states. The presidential preference poll in Iowa(which apparently Rick Santorum has now won) and the similar preference polls which will be done in the remaining caucus states (MN is one) have absolutely NO bearing on the allocation of delegates. Just because a candidate wins the presidential preference straw vote in a caucus state doesn't mean they have delegates.

I live in a caucus state. I know how they operate. What happens is that caucus attendees are separated into their respective precincts. From there, caucus attendees are nominated and then voted upon to level up to the BPOU, County, Congressional District, and/or State convention.

It is at these later conventions where the delegates to go on to the RNC are selected. No National Delegates come immediately out of the caucuses.

That said, we have increased significantly the number of Ron Paul supporters in our state. We are very well organized in MN and in the other caucus states. We will do very very well in pushing up RP delegates.

It won't matter if you get a few Gingrich supporters here or a few Santorum or Romney supporters there. They will not have the numbers to win enough votes to push their delegates beyond the caucus. A few might make it through in some other precincts but by the time the state convention rolls around they will have dropped off as the delegate numbers get smaller and smaller at each convention.

Lastly, you continue to go on with this Ron Paul is extreeeeeme meme. But what you never seem to do is to define what it is that, in your eyes, makes him so extreeeeeeme.

I think that in many respects what you deem as extreeeeme is really nothing more than a lack of understanding on his positions. By your own admission you listen to alot of the Clear Channel talking heads who don't care for Ron Paul and who themselves continue to tout this "His foreign policy is dangerous." and "His views are extreme." Yet, they never really identify what it is that makes them extreme. If his foreign policy is so extreeeeeeme then why does he get more financial contributions from active military personel than all the other GOP candidates combined? Simple, he knows they're stressed. They know they're stressed. And further, they and he both know that their involvement in the ME and elsewhere has nothing to do with national security.

The word extreme is an adjective. In and of itself it is simply a word which imputes a characteristic to a noun or pronoun.

Alone is doesn't denote anything.

Everytime it is bandied around the obvious question one should ask is:

Extreme what?

soapster said...

"I just don't Trust him [Ron Paul] not to Take Things further than he should..."

He's a strict Constitutionalist. He understands the limitations of the Constitution better than any of those other 3.

If it's a runaway executive branch you're concerned with you're afraid of the wrong guy.

Lista said...

The Points that you have made in your 6:21 AM Comment, Soap, if True, just don't Make any sense.

As to what it is that Makes Ron Paul "Extreme" (as I have said before, by this I mean Far from Center) are his Ideas about Freedom. Freedom is Fine, but Libertarians, as a Rule, take their Removal of Regulations too Far and Absolute Freedom is Anarchy.

It is Right to Remove Excessive and Unnecessary Regulations, but to Remove ALL of them is Extreme. It is also Right to Make Cuts to the Budget, but to Cut too much all at Once is Extreme and will Traumatize those who Lose Needed Benefits. It is Right to be Reasonably Reluctant to go to War and to Make some Cuts to the Military, but to Cut too much is Extreme.

As I Hear myself say these things, I realize that another Word that could be Used is the Word "Excessive". Perhaps that is a Better Word. Hows this for a Definition of "Extreme"; those who do things in an Highly Excessive Way?

While I'm at it, perhaps what I should Point Out is that when you typed out the word "Extreeeeemememe", you have Used "Excessive" letters and Exaggerated what I have been Saying.

It is not Uncommon for People who do not Like the Way in which I disagree with them to Assume that it is because I am Uninformed, yet what I've been Finding to be True is that even when I become more Informed and yet do not Change my View, they are not Satisfied and Continue to Accuse me of not Having enough Information.

It's just Like how I was Joking with BB Once when I Told him that I don't care how much he has already Read, as long as he still Disagrees with me, he Needs to Read some more. Of Course, I Followed that with a Friendly and Hearty lol.

I just Checked my Dictionary to Make sure and Guess What? The Word "Extreme" is also a Noun. Oh Gee! What do you Know?

I Admit that sometimes the Word Extreme may be a Bit of an Exaggeration, when In Fact, all that I Actually Mean is "Excessive", or something that is Excessive.

"He's a strict Constitutionalist."

Personally, I Think that the Current Constitution may Need a Few more Amendments.

Another Thing that Newt has said is that he wants to Restore the "Balance of the Powers". He was saying this in Relation to Reigning in the Power of the Supreme Court by Dealing with Political Activists Judges. I couldn't Agree more with this One. Amen!! Amen!! Amen!!!!!!

And Yes, the Executive Branch Needs to be Reigned in as well.

Another Plus is that I am Finding that Gingrich Agrees will Ron Paul on some of the really Important Things, such as the Problem with the Federal Reserve and he wants to Reign in this as well. You may not Think that Reducing and Auditing is enough, yet when he says this, I do Believe him. As for Romney, I do not Believe that this is as much his Top Priority.

Even in the Debate Last Night, Ron Paul Acknowledged that Newt and him agreed on some things and he even said, "Now, if I could just get him to Agree with me on Foreign Policy, we would be all set."

soapster said...

Could you elaborate on what doesn't make sense in my 6:21 comment?

soapster said...

"Another Plus is that I am Finding that Gingrich Agrees will Ron Paul on some of the really Important Things, such as the Problem with the Federal Reserve and he wants to Reign in this as well. You may not Think that Reducing and Auditing is enough, yet when he says this, I do Believe him. As for Romney, I do not Believe that this is as much his Top Priority."

I don't know about you Lista but I am much less interested in what a candidate vying for the nomination says and much more interested in what their record shows.

As I've pointed out before, Newt made a ton of money off of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. At the same time he was making gobs and gobs of money from them (all made possible by the Federal Reserve bailing them out), Ron Paul was on the House floor authoring legislation to put an end to the artificial housing bubble.

Newt is something of a serial hypocrite. He says one thing when it is convenient to do so. When he got paid to go the other way he did just that. He has very little integrity and his numerous ethics violations are a testiment to this fact.

BB-Idaho said...

Well now, "He was saying this in Relation to Reigning in the Power of the Supreme Court by Dealing with Political Activists Judges"
..yes, he mentioned having Federal Marshalls arrest those judges he
didn't agree with (but not the ones I don't agree with). Hello,
US Constitution, can you hear me now? [a newt is an amphibian which exudes toxic slime..look it up]

Lista said...

You Know what, Soap? There are Times in which I am in Conflict Over this Freedom of Speech vs Censorship Idea and how it Relates to Blogs. And then there is also the Freedom of Association Idea.

This may Sound like a Change in Subject, but you are just going to have to Hear me Out as I Express something that I think Needs to be Said.

Now I Know that you Think that your "Ability" to Remain Continually Connected to the Internet by way of your Smart Phone, Soap, is an Asset, but to me, it is an Annoyance in which I am Actually Quite Often Tired of your Constant Company and it Brings a Certain Question to my Mind.

How does a Person say "I Need some Space from you. Please don't say another Word until 24 Hours has Passed." without being Accused of Unfair Censorship?

I don't Know what it is, Soap. Perhaps Questions are a little Annoying because they Take both Time and Thought to Answer. If the Question had come several Hours Later, rather then Only a Few Minutes Later, though, I'm quite Certain that my Initial Response to it would be Entirely Different.

Too Often, we can feel all Proud about our Wonderful Technology, such as Smart Phones, and not Realize that what we see is a Blessing is Actually in someone else's Eyes, an Annoyance.

Anyway, I'll be Back Later with more of a Response. Possibly not until Tomorrow. Meanwhile, I'm just Ignoring you cause I have Other Things to do.

You Know? A Blog is not really supposed to be a Chat Room. I have the Right to Choose to have Moderation on in Order to Prevent it from becoming one and also to Delay the Posting of Comments for the Same Reason.

I can be a Bit of a People Pleaser at Times and Posting Comments like this one is my Way of Giving myself Permission to do Things in my Own Way, even though I don't Need the Permission of anyone else to Moderate if I Choose to and also in the Way that I Choose to.

soapster said...

Censor at will. It's your blog. If you can't keep up with the comments then that really isn't my problem.

When you go out of the house to an event or to a movie or some such thing, does it bother you that the actors talk too fast or that actions in the movie happen too fast and you can't pause the movie to process it?

This is life Lista. It doesn't stop so you can keep up.

You have comment moderation turned on so that you can process it. That's as good as it's going to get.

That is all for now.

Lista said...

Hi BB,
Thanks for your Comment and Please Forgive my little Speech to Soap. There are Two other Comments from him that I have not Posted and, In Fact, have not even Taken the Time to Read. He has not Broken any of my Rules. I'm just Tired of him. I Hope that's Allowed. Even if it's not, that's just the way it is. lol.

No More People Pleasing for me. I'm going to do what I Want.

Anyway, as to the Judges. Perhaps Arresting a Judge is not the Right Way of Doing it and there is not enough Agreement with the Idea in Order to Allow Gingrich to Actually go that Far, yet shouldn't the Congress have the Right to Review and Evaluate any Decision by any Judge. Perhaps there should be Several Congressmen and/or Women in Agreement before a Judge can be Subpoenaed.

Here's the Thing, though, if Newt is Elected, I can Feel Confident that the Issue of Activists Judges and the Excessive Power of the Supreme Court would indeed be Addressed.

Lista said...

Also, just because Gingrich's Name is Newt doesn't Mean that he is one of these Amphibians that Bears the same Name.

BB-Idaho said...

:)..I know Newt isn't a newt..he just reminds me of one. :) As far as the judiciary, he is playing to
the frustrations of the electorate.
From my POV, the judges HE would keep are the ones I would remove.
But, the judiciary is one of three
pillars our government consitutionally agrees upon...and
the battle over which branch controls what goes way way back,
to click here ..as a
history professor, Gingrich knows
that very well. (and he will be
backtracking like he always has to
shortly)

Lista said...

BB,
"From my POV, the judges HE would keep are the ones I would remove."

Yes, and I would be in Agreement with Newt. This is the Reason, though, for the Judge in Question to be Brought before the Congress, which is Exactly what Newt had Suggested. He Never Claimed that he Personally was going to Impeach anyone.

Lista said...

Look, Soap, I'm Sorry that I Reacted the Way I did. I just get Tired of your Company Once in awhile and I don't Know how else to Explain it other then to say that that's just the way it is. Sometimes Things just don’t have Neat Little Explanations.

I'm Writing a Comment now after 10:00 PM, hoping that it is Midnight, or maybe even 1:00 AM in Minnesota and you are in Bed. Unfortunately, I Still had Lots of Thoughts even before you Asked the Question in your 10:45 AM Comment.

In Reading you Comments again, Soap, I realize that you have Said a Few Things that are Obvious Exaggerations.

"Neither Newt nor Santorum can win the nomination, as they are not even on the ballot in a number of states with a total of 564 delegates."

If this were Absolutely True that neither of these Guys can Win the Nomination, then there would be no Reason for them to Continue Running, nor for the Media to be Talking so much about them.

Actually, Romney is the One who comes Across to me as the One with the Ego Problem, more so than Newt.

Here's another Exaggeration...

"The presidential preference poll in Iowa.......and the similar preference polls which will be done in the remaining caucus states........have absolutely NO bearing on the allocation of delegates."

If that were "Absolutely" True, then there would be no Reason to Bother Taking the Time to do these "Polls".

I can Acknowledge that these Votes may not be Set in Concrete, Soap, but the way you have Explained it is an Obvious Exaggeration.

Oh, and I did not Hear the "His Foreign Policy is Dangerous" idea from "the Clear Channel Talking Heads". That is something that I Remember Michael Buckman Saying. It is her Words that I First Heard and the Repeating of such by Certain Talk Show Hosts is not what I Remember.

"Extreme What?" and "If it's a runaway executive branch you're concerned with, you're afraid of the wrong guy."

Extreme Ideas; That’s What.

I Fear Anarchy, Soap, (Excessive Freedom) just as much as I do Excessive Rule.

Lista said...

Ok, now for your Question…

For a Caucus Vote to be Nothing more than a "Presidential Preference Straw Vote" or "Preference Poll" doesn't Make sense to me, or Actually what doesn't Make sense is if the Final Delegates do not Vote in Accordance with the Votes of the People. This Makes it Seem that the People have no Say.

It's sort of like that "a Republic, not a Democracy" Idea. I sort of Understand the Concept, yet I'm not sure if I Agree with it or not. It's not an Important Issue, though, so I do not want to Waist a lot of Time on it right now.

My Initial Plan was to Also Respond to the Two Comments that will eventually be Posted when I get to them, yet I just can't seem to get Past this Tiredness. Politics Makes me Tired and I don't see any Reason to Apologize for the Fact that I do not Fit into the Typical News Junky Mold.

Perhaps I'll just Respond to One of the Two Comments and that would be the One that was Submitted at 11:58 AM.

I'm sure that I will have Plenty of Time Prior to June to Study Both Romney and Gingrich's Records and I'm sure that there will also be much Discussion about it before then, so that I Can Evaluate exactly how Serious the situation actually is and whether or not I Feel that the Issues are Still Relevant. Since I have found you to be Prone to Exaggeration, though, Soap, I'm Probably not going to Take your Word for it.

"Newt is something of a serial hypocrite. He says one thing when it is convenient to do so."

Yes, and they say the Same Thing about Romney. The Trick is to Figure Out what is Exaggeration and what is Truth and since you have a Tendency to Exaggerate, you are Probably not the One who is going to be able to be able to Help me. Sheer Repetition is not at all helpful. No, I'm Probably going to have to Figure this one Out on my Own.

Newt Keeps saying that he wants to Repeal not Only Obama Care, but also Dot Frank. Romney Agreed with him in relation to Dot Frank, but Newt is always the One who Actually Initially Brings this One Up. You see, here is the Thing about that. Dot Frank is about the Housing Market and is what Caused a lot of the Problems in the First Place. If Newt Gingrich is Truly all Messed Up in his "Lobbying"/"Influence Peddling", then why does he also come Across as more Passionate than the Others about the Repeal of Dot Frank? This is what Leads me to Believe that he is Actually on the Level in Relation to this Issue.

On the Other Hand, I just Listened to Obama's State of the Union Speech from off the Internet. Oh Gee! Another Crazy Subject.

When he was Talking about Legislation that would Prevent Congressmen and Woman from making Conflict of Interest sort of Investments and Lobbying and well, it sort of Sounded Like he might be Thinking about Newt Gingrich when he said that and I got a Feel for how Obama's Campaign against him might go.

Oh my! What a Mess! That Man Speaks with a Very Fancy Tongue and then Breaks his Promises, yet his Speech was rather good, making me Wonder if he might Actually Win another Term in Office.

Keeping on Subject, though, I wonder if Newt has too much Baggage to Win against him. Still Undecided. Perhaps it's a good thing that I have until June to Figure this Out.

soapster said...

You are ignorant and uninformed with respect to the caucus system. It is that simple. If people want to have a voice then they themselves either step up and become delegates or they vote for an individual delegate who shares their political/ideological persuasion. If it is the former then they will need to get other caucus goers to vote for them to prevail as a delegate out of the caucus. Thus, the people who are well organized will prevail because they will turn out greater numbers and essentially run the table with slates (just as was done in 2008).

Simply because you haven't taken the time to learn how it works is a poor excuse to call my statements about it, considering I live in a caucus state, exagerations. And, if you are expecting the media to inform you of these facts then I dare say you have way too much faith in the magic picture box.

soapster said...

Simple question to prove my point.

It was recently reported that Rick Santorum was the winner of Iowa. How many national delegates did he get for that win?

If you haven't the interest or the intestinal fortitude to research that and answer it then, when you tell me i'm exagerating, then expect me to be direct in telling you that you are uninformed and ignorant of the process.

soapster said...

"Dot Frank is about the Housing Market.

If you expect to be taken seriously when speaking about a piece of legislation, you might want to take the time to actually identify it properly.

It's not Dot/Frank. It's Dodd (named after Christopher Dodd).

Secondly, Dodd/Frank is not about the housing market. It is a piece of legislation whose primary purpose was intended as regulatory reform of banks and other financial insitutions (Wall Street) that would prevent future bailouts and the like.

Lista said...

Ok. I Still have One more Comment to Respond to that was Written Yesterday and that is the One that Soap Submitted at 12:56 PM.

As to the Censoring, I Never said that the Fact that I can't Keep Up is your Problem, nor did I ever say that I was Trying to Slow Down everything Around me, so that I can Keep Up, regardless of where I am and what the Circumstances are. You are Putting Words in my Mouth that I Never Said and Assuming Motives that I do not Possess. Actually, though, it may Appear that my Decisions about Censoring are not your Problem, yet that is Only True if you do not Mind being Censored.

There is Never any Reason, however, to Apologize for Making a Request from People when they are Talking Directly to me, whether then to someone else, on any of the Blogs, and this is Especially True when it is on my Own Blog. In Fact, Perhaps a Direct Request is what I should be doing with you and that Request is if you are continually On Line, by way of your Cell Phone, which you really do Appear to be, then could you Please, at least Occasionally, Give me a Minute, or Actually an Hour or Two before Responding to me.

This Request Probably Sounds Silly to you, yet you come Across as Pushy when you are Always Present. I Need to Learn to Occasionally Ignore you and not Apologize for doing so, yet it is also a good thing for you to be Aware that your Continuous Connection to the Internet, by way of your Cell Phone, is not something that causes me to Admire, Appreciate, Look Up to or Respect you in any way, but Instead comes Across as a rather Pushy Annoyance and when your common Exaggerations are Added to the Mix, my level of Respect for what you have to say goes Way Down, so if your Goal is to Annoy and earn Lack of Respect, whether then to be Heard, then you are doing the Right Thing in Order to Accomplish this Goal.

That's just my Little Tid Bit Relating to Generosity and the Earning of Appreciation and Respect, which you are Free to Ignore if you have no Desire to be Respected or Listened to. Remember, though, along with Freedom comes Responsibility for the Natural Outcome of one's Actions and yes, these Natural Outcomes, such as your Earned Lack of Respect, as well as Ignoring Behaviors from Others, are YOUR Problems, not Mine.

Lista said...

Ok. Now before I say another Word, Soap, Perhaps I should Tell you that you have Reached your quota for the day of the Number of Comments that you are Allowed. See Rule #5, as Listed to the Right.

Lista said...

In Response to Soap, January 25, 3:13 AM;
I Never Claimed to be an Expert about the Caucus System and Insulting me about it is a Rather Ignorant and Childish way of Communicating.

No Body has the Time to become an Expert on everything, Soap, nor are they Required to Study everything that You Personally Think they should. I don't Need an Excuse to Make the Priority Decisions that I Choose to, nor to Make a Statement that is Based on Sound Reason and my Explanation about your Exaggeration is Based on Sound Reason...

"If this were Absolutely True that neither of these Guys can Win the Nomination, then there would be no Reason for them to Continue Running, nor for the Media to be Talking so much about them."

And

"If that were 'Absolutely' True, then there would be no Reason to Bother Taking the Time to do these 'Polls'."

A Person does not have to have a Complete Understanding of a Subject in Order to see that there is something not Logical about what is being said.

I also Never Claimed that I was going to Rely Solely on the "Magic Picture Box" to Inform me about the Candidates.

Soap, January 25, 3:22 AM,
Apparently, Santorum got 8 Delegates, which is Actually less then Paul's 10. I'm not sure which States Paul's Delegates came from. I'm not Claiming to be an Expert and in this Free Country, have every Right to Decide if Researching that Right now is a Priority for me. Insulting me for the Priority Decisions that I've Made about my Own Time is no more then the Behavior of a Child.

And Again, a Person does not have to have a Complete Understanding of a Subject in Order to see that there is something not Logical about what is being said.

Soap, January 25, 6:21 AM,
Sorry, my Mistake. Dot Frank was Listed in the Search Engine. He is, In Fact, I real Person and I did, In Fact, Check the Spelling of this before I Posted, yet Apparently did not Look Close enough. Excuse me for being a Human Being.

The Subject being Discussed in the Debates when this was Brought up was the Housing Markets. Honest Mistake.

In Closing:
Once Again, you come Across as Pushy when you are Always Present and your Continuous Connection to the Internet, by way of your Cell Phone, is not something that causes me to Admire, Appreciate, Look Up to or Respect you in any way, but Instead comes Across as a rather Pushy Annoyance.

You are Behaving Like a Very Immature and Childish Troll, Soap, and I am being Extremely Generous to you by Posting any of your Comments at all.

Ok, that's Three Comments and I'm not Even Going to Publish the Last Two that are Still in Moderation. I've given you the Quota that I've Allowed, now Please go away.

BB-Idaho said...

I must admit the GOP primary is one of the most interesting and unusual in memory. Wonder what
bizarre thing will happen next?
will Palin return? A brokered
convention to Chris Christie?
...Fred Thompson after all? :)

dmarks said...

Ron Paul is a joke candidate. As I predicted, his "campaign" is failing and he is settling back to the 3% of the country whose interest he represents.

As for Paul and "just war", he has no idea what one is. He does not want us to fight against the terrorists.

His proposal to strip American citizens of citizenship due to the crimes of their parents is also rather nutty. He us one of those who only wants us to follow those parts of the Constitution that he likes.

Lista said...

BB,
I Like Palin, but there are such a Large Number of People who don't that I Doubt her Electability.

Dmarks,
Thanks for Finally Giving us the Long Awaited Anti-Paul Perspective. If you don't Mind me Asking, Who are you Supporting?

An Apology to All for my Unfriendly Words with Soap. I think he's a bit of a Troll at Times and in Need of a bit of a Spanking.

dmarks said...

I don't know yet. I think Newt is a sneaky opportunist, and I find it hard to forgive Romney for harassing me by telephone and ignoring my request (via the Don't Call List) to not be harassed in such a fashion.

Lista said...

Every Time that I hear an Interview of Newt, I am always Impressed with it and I'm Finding myself less and less Impressed with Romney. I Get the Feeling that some of his Wins are due to his Money and that Frustrates me, because that is not what should Decide these Things.

I Think that most of the Adds are Exaggerations and According to Both of the Candidates, some of the Information in them is not even Correct. I guess this is Why we Need to Do our Own Research and Try to Ignore all the Adds. We Need to Evaluate Both Sides in relation to all of the Accusations and also, well you Know, shouldn't we also Study the Issues?

Michigan doesn't Vote until the End of Next Month. Is Romney Harassing you already?

I Missed the Speeches Tonight Relating to the Florida Election. Oh well.

radar said...

I fear that, unless Santorum gets an influx of money or Newt drops out, that Romney has the edge on Newt and a Romney-Gingrich punching match will result in a Romney win. Santorum is the most authentic real conservative I think, but he has not money.

If Ron Paul does not break his word (and kneecap Rand's shot at a Presidential run in the future) by running third party, Romney can beat Obama. Even Romney is a great improvement on Obama. So we must pray for the best outcome but not be discouraged and still vote even if it is the guy with the great suit and uncertain values.

Radar

Lista said...

Hey Radar,
Thanks for Dropping by. I Like Santorum. I Wonder how Electable he is. There are such a Large Number of Liberals, though, as well as Pro-choice Independents and these are the Sort of People who will Vote Against Santorum in the General Election because he Believes in Pro-Life so Strongly that he will not even Make an Exception for the Situation of Rape.

If you will Read my Abortion and Rape Post that I have a Link to on the Right, you will Realize that I Actually do agree with him on this, yet I also Find it to be a rather risky Position Politically, that could result in the Loss of the General Election. It's too Bad, though, that more People do not Understand the Truth about this Issue.

I do Think that I would Prefer Newt Gingrich to Romney, yet I will Vote for whoever wins the Nomination. Sometimes I Consider, though, Voting for either Ron Paul or Santorum, just to give Extra Support to their Message.

I don't Know. I'm Really going to have to Pray about this One, because I am Finding this Election to be quite Confusing.

Hey, BTW, since you are here, I Wonder if you would Mind Dropping by some of my Earlier Creation vs. Evolution Posts. I've Been Talking to BB-Idaho on a Couple of them...

Intelligent Design Theory & the Scientific Method
Evolution/Intelligent Design/Faulty Arguments