TriGirl 319 #26 October 12, 2016 Good point about how they got in, but once the nose was under the tent, the rest of the camel came in over the course of four more decades. I was trying to be a bit more concise in the beginning, as the rest of my post was quite long!See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus Shut Up & Jump! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #27 October 12, 2016 Another conservative woman cuts away: ================ To the Iowa Federation of Republican Women Executive Committee, Board of Directors, and members, It is with a heavy heart that I submit my resignation as your state president today. Since I cannot support Donald J. Trump for President, nor can I advocate for his election, I feel that I cannot adequately fulfill the duties of my position. While I am still a Republican and plan to work hard for our down ballot GOP candidates, I cannot fulfill our mission ‘To elect Republicans at all levels of government’ with Trump as our party’s nominee. Additionally, I cannot support the National Federation of Republican Women President Carrie Almond’s statement that was released yesterday on behalf of Republican women nationally, as I do not support Donald J. Trump. I will do all I can to ensure a smooth transition in leadership, and this is truly a last resort for me. I cannot in good conscience lead this organization or look at myself in the mirror each morning if I do not take a stand against the racism, sexism, and hate that Donald J. Trump continues to promote. Melissa Gesing President, Iowa Federation of Republican Women 10/12/2017 =============== Some excerpts from her post about her decision: ========= I have finally had enough with falling in line with my party and trying to support Donald Trump for President. Perhaps it’s because things finally hit close enough to home and my world experience to resonate. Or perhaps supporting Donald Trump has been a bit like being in a bad and unhealthy relationship. Part of the problem with getting out of the relationship is that you keep convincing yourself that things are going to get better. While they often briefly get better, they continue to get worse until the downs are lower than one ever thought possible. In the meantime, you lose yourself and you lose who you are just to try to keep the peace and not rock the boat. . . . - What do I tell my six-year-old nephew who saw Trump on TV a few months ago, turned to his mom (my sister) and said, “Mom, he is a bad man. He says bad words and wants to blow things up.”? What do I say to my sister, who was at a loss for words (and is a strong Republican)? – How do I reassure my mom – and moms of all of our men and women serving our country – that Donald Trump will speak wisely and not get us into more conflicts with his off-the-cuff remarks? – What do we say to women across the country who are mortified at Trump’s comments on the Howard Stern show discussing women’s breast sizes? How about so many of the other things he has said that objectify women? What message does this send to young girls? – How do we respond when our presidential nominee has stereotyped an entire religion? – Trump has openly insulted John McCain’s service to our country and has blamed George W. Bush for the 9/11 attacks. Are we OK with that? . . . I ask you this: Who are we if we defend ourselves by saying, “Wow this is horrible, but not as horrible as that over there?” Regardless of your party or your opinions on issues, we need to have candidates who can stand on their own merit and be honorable. This is also not an isolated incident from a decade ago. This is one of way too many times where Trump has used unacceptable words and actions. That is what makes me so sad for my party. I should have spoken up long ago. I do not like attention. I did not want to rock the boat. I wanted to honor my commitment in my role for Republican women. . . When I look back on this election years from now, I want to be proud of taking a stand for what I thought was right, even if I cut it a little close on the deadline. Decency transcends party loyalty. I still believe in an America where we can elect decent and honorable people to lead us. ============= Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #28 October 12, 2016 TriGirl I propose all elected officials from any party, agree that in all their messaging (e.g., on their campaign websites, etc), they will include this in their position points: I suggest that primaries be restricted to registered party members only.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #29 October 13, 2016 TriGirlGood point about how they got in, but once the nose was under the tent, the rest of the camel came in over the course of four more decades. I was trying to be a bit more concise in the beginning, as the rest of my post was quite long! I think you nailed it on the first shot but I'd just as soon the Reps go away completely and just join their soul mates in the DNC - the reps claim (claimed?) those values, but it's always been a false front - at least the dems are honest about their goals even if their methods are nasty. The Libertarians would fill the void already as defined. Fiscal thriftiness and True Social liberalism. the discussion would be much clearer - about the correct balance between more spending and authoritarianism and social contracts vs more freedom and choice and individualism and that really is a balance, it's not all or none, but the pendulum to more authoritarianism is way out of whack, neither Reps nor Dems have any inclination to bring it back, whatever they are 'claiming' - when the choice has always been "headlong rush to Big Brother" vs "quick jog to Big Brother" it's not really a choice. We need one or both parties to totally melt down for something better to come in ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #30 October 13, 2016 IagoI like those explanations very much. I'm not bothering anyone, so leave me alone to live my life. Provide a strong defense, an appropriate judicial system, and necessary public services. Other than that stay out. entire parties are defined over what "strong" and "necessary" actually mean - until both are just completely out of whack - that's why we are in the mess we are in ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #31 October 13, 2016 QuoteI like those explanations very much. I'm not bothering anyone, so leave me alone to live my life. Provide a strong defense, an appropriate judicial system, and necessary public services. Other than that stay out. I would be quite inclined to vote for a Liberation candidate if that was the platform but far too many of them are in the mindset of eliminating all of government and letting the local agencies take over. I was stuck in a hotel on the road the other week with CSPAN on and listened to the MO Governors debate. The Libertarian candidate's plan to eliminate the deficit that the state was facing was to shut down the department of education, transportation, commerce and a few other agencies and turn those functions over to the local counties and cities instead. Her proposal was basically to privatize all roads, bridges and other infrastructure and let the counties/cities fund everything at the local level. She wanted to implement a toll at the border of the state to charge all non-resident vehicles an entry and exit fee and use that money to fund the few highways that the state was mandated to maintain and then leave the rest of the functions to the local government. The plan for education was to allow every school district to fund itself and to be able to set individual standards. She was really big on home schooling and was proposing allowing parents to set their own standards for their home schooled child's education. It was not called out specifically but it seemed that she was wanting to pull all funding for higher education and privatize the state universities also. Her plan basically called for the elimination of the state level of government and was going to force the locality to figure out everything locally. This might sound great but when faced with the realities of needing to have a statewide standard for education so that graduates are all expected to be able to be at the same basic level this plan does not work out. Low performing Schools and home schooled students especially could adopt very low standards and reduce the education level dramatically of large portions of the state. This type of deficit can take 15-20 years to correct itself with an entire generation of students and graduates suffering. Funding of schools generally relies on a much larger tax base than a single district could cover due to the variance in income and property values in a single district. Allowing a rich suburb or office location to set a tax rate could raise large amounts of money but trying to tax farms or intercity locations will not result in near the same income which will automatically reduce money available to spend on students. You are essentially creating a two tier education system in these cases and that is not even considering Private schools in this equation. She did not seem to have an issue with this and the reply was basically "move" to counter this argument from someone on the stage. The examples go on and on in this case but as long as the party puts forth candidates that want to basically destroy the government and all the value it provides it makes it hard for large portions of the voting population to get behind them.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #32 October 13, 2016 I just looked up the candidates site: http://electspragins.com/ From her platform: Eliminate the state income tax, with the first priority being the tax on business income to accelerate job creation Opt out of federal regulations to the extent possible and do not use state government to enforce federal regulations. Help protect Missourians from the Fed’s inflationary policies by making gold, silver and other forms of physical or digital currency that the market adopts, legal tender in the state. Opt out of federal interference in education and federally-imposed standards Eliminate the state department of education and return children’s education to full local and parental control Eliminate state requirements and restrictions on the provision of education Transition state universities to a self-funding model and ultimately privatize them Eliminate plea bargaining that coerces defendants into accepting a guilty plea without a trial. The court system will be dramatically less congested without victimless crimes. As long as the party puts forward these types of plans/canidates they are looked at as a joke by most educated voters. Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #33 October 13, 2016 PhreeZone As long as the party puts forward these types of plans/canidates they are looked at as a joke by most educated voters. so you're telling me that the two entrenched parties haven't had a few fringe elements to their philosophies get out there too? the worst thing about politics, IMO, is how people take the worst or even made up examples of the 'other' side and then try to compare them to the best intentions (failed or not) of 'their' side.... Gary Johnson acknowledges frequently that the Presidential election is about a subtle shift because it's for "president" not "absolute emperor". And that give and take has to happen. It's not just flicking a switch and "boom". (except for maybe Trump - then it's "BOOM!!!" vs the legislature joining forces to mitigate the damage.) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #34 October 13, 2016 IagoBut you are correct- if the nutjobs keep taking center stage nothing will move forward. Unless it's a 2 party system for president - then we get months of 99% media circus/public personal destruction politics 24/7 and 1% sad meanlingless contentless soundbites. Then 4 more years of corruption and twirling down the drain (all to avoid pure crap, but still). So, at least that bit is moving forward - comedians and commentators get to have productive jobs for years. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)