so you want to vote for this witch?....great for you...

[Soonerjeepman]

Corporations and businesses don't create jobs...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nbFYP3xB6k


if you like your plan you can keep it...THIS IS NOT GOV RUN HEALTH care...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D74ZO082G8Q

[dwarthog]

She's a peach isn't she?

The lemmings are lined up, practically salivating to be her fools.

[olevetonahill]

Sure Ima vote for her, we need another Failed ****ing social experiment!

[FaninAma]

Words are cheap. She and her husband are both bought and paid for by big banks and corporations. Go back and review under which administration the big banks were really unleashed to reap windfall profits.

[badger]

so you want to vote for this witch?

I just assume you're referring to our current state superintendent. No worries, we already ousted her in the primary. Alas, she gets to stick around till the next one's elected in. I know it can be confusing, but her time's nearly up. Stop trying to dump water on her; Wizard of Oz is a fairy tale

[TAFBSooner]

Words are cheap. She and her husband are both bought and paid for by big banks and corporations. Go back and review under which administration the big banks were really unleashed to reap windfall profits.

You'd be mad if I called you a liberal for this post. So I will stick with "astute observer."

[TAFBSooner]

Corporations and businesses don't create jobs...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nbFYP3xB6k


if you like your plan you can keep it...THIS IS NOT GOV RUN HEALTH care...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D74ZO082G8Q

I really really don't want to vote for Hillary, and I hope I have a better choice (Warren, Sanders, mayyyybe Rand Paul).

I didn't watch the clip, but if she said corporations and businesses don't create jobs, customers do, then she's correct about that much.

[okie52]

I really really don't want to vote for Hillary, and I hope I have a better choice (Warren, Sanders, mayyyybe Rand Paul).

I didn't watch the clip, but if she said corporations and businesses don't create jobs, customers do, then she's correct about that much.

Paul, Sanders and Warren...are they in the same universe?

[TAFBSooner]

Paul, Sanders and Warren...are they in the same universe?

Not only the same universe, they are in the same dirty line of work.

Rand has at least some of the time claimed to be against our foreign adventurism. That is all. I'd really like not to have to choose between Hillary and Rand Paul.

So with my luck that will be the 2016 race.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

She's a peach isn't she?

The lemmings are lined up, practically salivating to be her fools.

they want der schlickmeister back onto the throne. simple as that.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Paul, Sanders and Warren...are they in the same universe?

Sanders and Warren are.

[okie52]

Not only the same universe, they are in the same dirty line of work.

Rand has at least some of the time claimed to be against our foreign adventurism. That is all. I'd really like not to have to choose between Hillary and Rand Paul.

So with my luck that will be the 2016 race.

So your primary focus is foreign policy? Because beyond "interventionism" I can't put Sanders and Warren in the same universe with Paul.

[TAFBSooner]

they want der schlickmeister back onto the throne. simple as that.

It's not who is on the throne that matters, but who's on the Small Council (Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz; or Samantha Power and Susan Rice). So you would be right to believe that BillC will be back in the thick of things again.

[TAFBSooner]

So your primary focus is foreign policy? Because beyond "interventionism" I can't put Sanders and Warren in the same universe with Paul.

I think foreign policy is pretty d@#m important, though certainly not the only thing. Our founding fathers were wise beyond our pale ken in warning us against foreign intervention. Foreign wars and standing armies had always led and would always lead to tyranny, they warned us.

And so they have.

[okie52]

I think foreign policy is pretty d@#m important, though certainly not the only thing. Our founding fathers were wise beyond our pale ken in warning us against foreign intervention. Foreign wars and standing armies had always led and would always lead to tyranny, they warned us.

And so they have.

I couldn't say I was absolutely non interventionist but I would like it greatly reduced and for us to be a whole lot smarter about those rare occasions where intervention might be necessary.

Beyond that issue you have a self declared socialist, a far lefty and a libertarian (mostly)...

[TAFBSooner]

I couldn't say I was absolutely non interventionist but I would like it greatly reduced and for us to be a whole lot smarter about those rare occasions where intervention might be necessary.

Beyond that issue you have a self declared socialist, a far lefty and a libertarian (mostly)...

Sander's "socialist" self-label doesn't scare me. If I thought he had any inkling of nationalizing the means of production I would change my mind, but I don't think he really intenda anything like that. I will cop to not researching him a lot on that.

I am (mostly) a "lefty."

I agree with libertarians on issues of personal freedom.

I disagree when they scale that concept up to giving corporations free reign over the rest of us. They use phrases like "by force of arms" when talking about government coercion of behavior. The fault in their logic is that mass economic power also enables coercion, in this case by the monopoly or oligopoly.

So, a libertarian (mostly) is worth considering if the other choice was Hillary, who voted for Iraq 2.0, AND who, as astute observer Fan pointed out, is in bed with the Wall Street giant banks and investment companies.

PS - I am not absolutely non-interventionist either. I can justify three of our wars: the Revolution, the Civil War, and WWII (although it wouldn't have been a thing without WWI which was NOT justified). BTW, "my side" won all three of those without the need for large standing armies.

[okie52]

Sander's "socialist" self-label doesn't scare me. If I thought he had any inkling of nationalizing the means of production I would change my mind, but I don't think he really intenda anything like that. I will cop to not researching him a lot on that.

I am (mostly) a "lefty."

I agree with libertarians on issues of personal freedom.

I disagree when they scale that concept up to giving corporations free reign over the rest of us. They use phrases like "by force of arms" when talking about government coercion of behavior. The fault in their logic is that mass economic power also enables coercion, in this case by the monopoly or oligopoly.

So, a libertarian (mostly) is worth considering if the other choice was Hillary, who voted for Iraq 2.0, AND who, as astute observer Fan pointed out, is in bed with the Wall Street giant banks and investment companies.

PS - I am not absolutely non-interventionist either. I can justify three of our wars: the Revolution, the Civil War, and WWII (although it wouldn't have been a thing without WWI which was NOT justified). BTW, "my side" won all three of those without the need for large standing armies.

I don't want to have to vote for someone in the hopes that he/she will be "shackled" by a more conservative congress (even if that means lefty congressmen that are to the right of sanders or even warren) to keep him/her from pursuing socialist economic policies. It may be the reality but certainly not a choice I would want to have to make.

I hate to label myself as a fiscal conservative, social liberal because that just depends on whose political spectrum you use. But I'm probably closer to that description than other generalizations.

I don't think corps should have free reign but I generally favor pro business positions. However, I don't think Wall Street should get a pass on fiscal improprieties nor do I think that corporations/businesses should dictate our border security or citizenry...particularly at tax payer expense. I am not a fan of the US Chamber of Commerce.

I can agree with 2 of your wars but strongly disagree about WWI as to our intervention...but maybe we have already had that discussion. Nonetheless, there is truth that the heavy handed armistice agreement was a partial cause to WWII. The Civil War? The "War of Northern Aggression"...heh heh...I just had to throw that in there. From a preservation of the Union perspective that war would be justified.

We've had other "interventions" that were correct...like Tripoli and the Barbary Wars for one. But, like many Americans, I feel the title and unwanted responsibility of being the world's police force illustrates a dated and costly foreign policy.

[TAFBSooner]

I don't want to have to vote for someone in the hopes that he/she will be "shackled" by a more conservative congress (even if that means lefty congressmen that are to the right of sanders or even warren) to keep him/her from pursuing socialist economic policies. It may be the reality but certainly not a choice I would want to have to make.

That's funny, because if I were to vote for Rand Paul, I would have to use similar logic: he can't change the whole economic system by himself, but as president he would be in the most powerful position to keep us out of war.

That is, if any president really has freedom of action if the powers that be want a war.

[Soonerjeepman]

I really really don't want to vote for Hillary, and I hope I have a better choice (Warren, Sanders, mayyyybe Rand Paul).

I didn't watch the clip, but if she said corporations and businesses don't create jobs, customers do, then she's correct about that much.

nope...she said her hubby bill raised minimum wages and so did she...so it didn't kill jobs like everyone said it would....I will say it cut off after she said that corporations and business don't create jobs...she was blasting "trickle down economics"...

[BetterSoonerThanLater]

I really really don't want to vote for Hillary, and I hope I have a better choice (Warren, Sanders, mayyyybe Rand Paul).

I didn't watch the clip, but if she said corporations and businesses don't create jobs, customers do, then she's correct about that much.

nope. she never mentioned Customers. she mentioned how govt raising minimum wage would create jobs/ govt creates jobs.