GOLDWATER AND THE CONSERVATIVE BELIEFS.

[Lock Piatt]

Barry Goldwater believed that the Constitution meant what it said and did not need to be revised reviewed or changed. He supported low taxes and a strong defence. He also railed about the thought police in our bedrooms and schools where to quote him "They have no damn right to interfere in our free right to do as we damn well please."

He fought wasteful spending because it was our money not the governments. Progressive taxes were wrong and not allowed in the Constitution. All taxes and levies must be as to population or equally divided equally amongst the citizens based on a head count. There are many ways the Forefathers tried to protect the citizens from wealth removal from citizens for government purposes.

These unfair actions started the Goldwater conservative movement that carried the country through the Reagan Presidency. Goldwater was the father of the party not Reagan.

[Larry Puckette]

Beck had the author of the letter on today. He suggested to her she may be the Thomas Payne of this revolution...even though he's (beck - and Payne) the one who has just released a book entitled 'Common Sense'.

She is very confident that 'We are coming.' Signs are indicating something special is brewing in AZ too.

[Lock Piatt]

MUST BE THE GHOST OF GOLDWATER AND PAYNE MEETING??? IN PHOENIX!

NOTE: THE PHONEIX IS THE BIRD THAT AROSE FROM THE FIRE TO LIVE AGAIN.

[Merlin26-K45]

I completely disagree with you. Since Reagan did right by this country.

[gabe]

Reagan did fine as president. He was a true conservative. He did some things I disliked but for the most part he was a true and strong conservative and libertarian. I doubt we will ever see another Goldwater, the closest thing is RP and he honestly scares the hell out of me.

[Marlene H. Klim]

Nobody scares the hell out of me quite like the usurper. Anybody with a group of 'friends' like his is scary. BUT the really scary part is that a person who supposedly taught the constititution AND DISAVOWS THE CONSTITUTION, and does NOT QUALIFY FOR THE OFFICE UNDER THE CONSTITUTION WOULD RUN FOR ELECTION AND ASSUME THE POSITION. Then that person goes to great lengths to destroy this country. The same person goes on a worldwide vendetta against this country. NOW THAT IS SCARY.

SCARIER YET IS THE NUMBER OF NUMBSKULLS STILL SUPPORTING HIM. AND, that large media outlets violate the trust of the American citizenry in supporting him in hopes of monetary gain. WHAT HAS BECOME OF THE MORALITY OF THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY.

[Larry Puckette]

Who said; When Americal ceases to be good, she will cease to be great?

It was one of those old white men from the early 1800s, a french dignitary of some sort I think.

[Larry Puckette]

Gabe - My initial reaction was to agree with you about rp. We need someone better. I can't support this man and his district is about 10 miles from me. But in considering Marlene's response I'm wondering if your reservations on him are about the extremity of his views. If so, I'll make this argument on the topic. The libs have sent thier tanks on a blitz to finalize thier goals and it's no longer a fist fight. We have to exceed thier extremity to win. Our fists are no longer adequite.

[gabe]

Yes they are on the extremity of his views. But only on certain views. His extreme views on govt and fiscal discipline do not bother me. His belief of let states decide on abortion and gay marriage appeals to me as libetarian. I like his close the border policy. But when the extremity of his views come out on FP it is frigghtening. He advocates closing all military bases across the world and leaving Iraq and Afghanistan. That kind of FP worked in 1776 not today.

[Larry Puckette]

I'll have to pass on debating what is the correct foreign policy.. I do enough internal debate and don't know what is right and do-able. But even if we were to become less involved, it couldn't be at the flip of a switch that's for sure. -- My issues w/rp are not as easy to define, but I'm very sure if he's the best constitutionalist we can come up with it's not going to happen.

I really don't think we have to have a face/name for the mission at hand.

[Jim Rock]

we dont need a face or name right now, I do know from hearing the left rP is encouraged and sarah feared---tells ya something, because they know the rP sheeple are tunnel vision and even if Jefferson ran again they would help elect them dem

[Larry Puckette]

:~} I gotta agree with you Jim on the RPers tunnel vision and even Jefferson probably couldn't get thier vote. Idol worship big time.

[Marlene H. Klim]

My background with the military puts me somewhere in the middle on the FP. Inappropriate to discuss reasoning here. I lean toward the 1776 viewpoint. We should mind our business a LOT MORE THAN WE CURRENTLY DO. Our reasons for doing so are not just because we are the good guys. Remember the military bulletin board says COUNTRIES DO NOT HAVE FRIENDS, THEY HAVE INTERESTS.

Suffice it to say that we could do with A LOT LESS FOREIGN BASES.

Agree with Larry that we do not have to have a face/name at this time for the mission at hand. In fact, the mission demands that everyone be willing to fall on their sword regardless of the name/face. This is a do or the country dies situation.

My instinct says that the situation in Iran may be a lot like the situation will be in this country when the usurper gets voted out of office. With Acorn and similar factions contributing massively to the negative.