Here's the one we were REALLY looking for...

[skarke]

My favorite quote from anybody is my postscript on my GBO signature.

See below.

[scootrd]

see .. now this is where I have issues with the whole system. It's the Labels ... Dem,  Rep, Prog , whatever.
The game is already rigged in a 2 party system before it even begins. For me it's not about the parties..  
If Washington is going to label why doesn't Washington use , Radical party , moderate party  conservative Party.
There are radical Dems and Rep and progs , there are moderate Dems , Rep and progs , and their are conservative Dems , Rep, progs. I never vote the party , I vote the person.

if the REP's want my vote throw up someone worth a spit. If the Dems want my vote do the same .

Personally ,
I just recently heard Paul Ryan (keep an eye on this Guy ) they may label him conservative (whatever that means nowadays) and he is a Republican , But no matter what his political affiliation, I don't care if he was  from the purple
iguana party , I think the guy has a lot of common sense. And he is not tainted from insider politics. (least not yet)
Lets hope it stays that way.  

I vote for more of these types of guys no matter what party they claim. Paul Ryan just may be your future Reagan
___________________________

Paul Ryan (-) Paul Ryan Wisconsin congressman

Paul Ryan has it all – including time on his side. He entered Congress at the tender age of 28 and doesn’t turn 40 until this year. A budget hawk, he is now the senior Republican on the House Budget Committee and is holding the Obama administration’s feet to the fire just as he challenged the Bush administration to return to fiscal conservatism. Undoubtedly a future presidential prospect, he hails from a swing state and won re-election in 2008 even though his district went for Obama – an illustration of his powerful crossover appeal. A Catholic and strong social conservative, Ryan is happily married with three children and is a keen bow hunter and fisherman. His website Americanroadmap.org outlines his plans to rewrite the entire federal tax, healthcare and Social Security system.

Increasingly a national figure, he recently endorsed Marco Rubio in the Florida Senate primary, saying that “Marco’s record of conservative leadership offers convincing evidence that he will hold Washington accountable, prevent government from wasting our tax dollars and lead a new generation of Republicans”. Showed he is not afraid to go against his party’s hierarchy. A former Senate aide, he wrote speeches for Jack Kemp, Republican vice-presidential candidate in 1996. He is the fifth generation of his family to live in Janesville, Wisconsin. Used to hold constituency hours in an old truck that he would drive to remote towns and villages. Has a populist touch, recently penning an essay for Forbes entitled Down With Big Business, railing against lobbyists, “crony capitalism” and the “record profits” of rescued banks.

[nomosendero]

I like the "keen bowhunter" & family man aspect of Mr. Ryan & he "sounds" good, we will see.

[teamnelson]

I'm thinking there are a few paul ryans hanging around GBO too. We need as many of them as we can get to refill all the seats in congress - he won't be able to do it alone.

[slim rem 7]

mabe palin an brown for president ..the liberal antigunner opposition.. bama an oprah..
 that is unless, they talk bama out of running altogather..that would be thier best chance..
 but 3 yrs is a long time,,so his popularity could change. slim
 ps..i do believe oprah is gonna make a play though..
 i use to kinda like her.. but shes made some very subtle changes over the years..
 now i think she s a closet socialist..

[Swampman]

Yes I do!

[ironglow]

  Swampy;
   I believe there is a great deal of "buyer's remorse" over their choice of B. Hussein Obama...that is by the brighter ones.
   Some, who are a bit more dense, still haven't caught on..

[nomosendero]

mabe palin an brown for president ..the liberal antigunner opposition.. bama an oprah..
 that is unless, they talk bama out of running altogather..that would be thier best chance..
 but 3 yrs is a long time,,so his popularity could change. slim
 ps..i do believe oprah is gonna make a play though..
 i use to kinda like her.. but shes made some very subtle changes over the years..
 now i think she s a closet socialist..

I would say she is in a clear glass closet.

I don't know why Brown/Palin would be a logical ticket, no way would I vote for a Lib like Brown, I am not sure about Palin yet, she has disapointed me a little lately, not beyond repair, but more in question for me now.

[steve y]

Nomo, I'm with you on Palin. I have wavered in my support for her because she won't distance herself from McCain. She had an opportunity to do it when interviewed by Glen Beck and wouldn't even touch it. Disapointed me greatly. Steve

[teamnelson]

I'm skeptical of any party affiliate ... if they're on camera, there is something wrong. I'd feel safer taking a random collection of folks from around the country, have them draw straws for the presidency. It couldn't be worse, and may just be better.

[bilmac]

Palin displayed loyalty, that's a trait that we should want in our leaders. Most of us here are strongly opposed to Mccain's politics but we should remember that he is one of the only people in the country today who when the chips were down proved what an honerable man he is. Who among us here if offered a chance to leave a Viet Nam prisoner of war camp and go home would have refused.

I've been watching Glen Beck lately, what he has been saying is awfully preachy, but I think the point he is making is that what we need to be looking for in leaders is character. That's something President Reagan had in spades.

[ironglow]

  While I would vote for Palin ahead of at least 98% of those in federal offices now, I am not saying Palin is the whole panacea. She does have many qualifications which are lacking in many other potential candidates. To wit;

  1) She was born to an America loving family, as opposed to those born & reared by America hating family and friends.

 2) Yes, Sarah is a religious person, and we all know just who and how she worships..no suspicions of being closet Muslim.

 3) In her church, ( at least 1000 to 1 odds)...the preacher doesn't shout... "GOD  D- - -  AMERICA !"

 4) Sarah and her husband have both worked hard physically...something few politicians, especially liberals have done.

 5) Sarah & Todd have run a successful business, meeting bills, managing a payroll and paying taxes. As a contrast, politicians and "community organizers" have things handed to them, and if they come up short, just tap Uncle Sam (that's us) for more money (that's taxes).

 6) When Sarah & Todd were faced with the prospect of a handicapped child, they chose to LOVE their child, rather than kill him.

 7) Sarah successfully functioned as mayor of a small city, I wonder just how many federal politicians could do that..successfully.

  Sarah was a remarkably  successful governor of the geographically largest state in the union..and left it in probably better financial condition than any other state.

 9) Sarah does not just "talk about" the war; she has a son serving in the war zone. Her son is not a rear-eschelon "fobbit"...but is assigned to a Stryker brigade.

 10) She has no recognizable Communist, Marxist,  Fabian Socialist or "Progressive" tendancies.

 11) When Sarah & Todd's daughter unwisely became pregnant, they welcomed the innocent baby..rather that insisting she kill it to preserve Sarah's "political standing".

 12)  Sarah, Todd, their parents and most of their kids are hunters..a sure bulwark against the "gun grabbers". That alone, makes her election very palatable..


  BTW: When Sarah was tapped as VP candidate...it wasn't the FIRST TIME she was proud to be an American...
 

[ironglow]

  Bilmac...RIGHT ON !
  That's what I have been "preaching" for decades. A president doesn't have to be a top expert in economics, military, social problems or a myriad of other subjects. He/she has economic advisers by the score, the Joint Chief of Staffs and many other advisers. The pres only has to be intelligent and use his/her head to choose the most sensible advice..plus, have the CHARACTER to do what is right..even if it hurts.
  No man is all knowing..the pres who thinks he is the "all wise potentate" (sound familiar), is soon in deep doo-doo..and he deserves it !

[scootrd]

I would never vote for Palin. She is as polarizing as Hilary Clinton on the Dem side.

[billy_56081]

I would never vote for Palin. She is as polarizing as Hilary Clinton on the Dem side.

Yeah but she is the pole of the compass that points in the direction I believe in. I could care less what the opposition or the center believes.

[steve y]

Very good synopsis ironglow. While she does give me pause about the McCain thing I can't say that about anything else she has said or done. Because the people at Pravda and the commies in DC have such a visceral reaction to her there must be something that scares them alot. I like that Which is something I don't understand about calling her too polarizing. I don't want someone who is wishy washy and only interested in doing the politically safe thing. It could be argued that Reagan was polarizing and he was one of our best presidents. Lincoln was the most polarizing and he is considered our best president by most. I want someone who stands for our country first above all others and shares my beliefs which I believe she does. But we're getting way ahead of ourselves here we need to win in November, try to veer off this course and harass the crap out of his excellency till 2012 and hopefully start the long road back to where we came from. Anybody want another glass of kool-aid??? Steve

[ironglow]

  Yup Libs, remember Palin's question; "How's that hopey, changey thing going?"

  Scootrd;
      Any leader worth anything was "polarizing"..Alexander, Patton, Lincoln, Reagan, Washington, Madison, Patrick Henry and almost every one of our founding fathers were highly "polarising". If some leader is not being "polarizing", he/she is asleep, doing nothing.
  Even God....our Lord Jesus Christ is polarizing...just who would you want for a president ? Perhaps a tree sloth would not be polarising..

  Methinks thou protesteth too much..is there something you're not telling us ?
 

[scootrd]

I don't understand about calling her too polarizing. I don't want someone who is wishy washy and only interested in doing the politically safe thing. It could be argued that Reagan was polarizing and he was one of our best presidents.

Reagan was far from polarizing , the whole country loved him irregardless what party they were affiliated with.
Even those who disagreed with him respected him and loved him and Nancy. Of course that was a different era
when folks respected each other even when they disagreed with a particular point of view.  He was a class act.

I also believe the Rep. have much better qualified candidates within their ranks than Palin who have a much stronger grasp on the issues. As I said earlier I think Paul Ryan will be a strong candidate within few years. He is also able to cross party lines and bring people from all walks of life together.  - JMHO

[teamnelson]

Can I just say it though? We lost the HC fight ... and we're gonna get'em in the next election?!? What're we smoking to imagine that that means anything anymore?

Do you need a recap of what all has happened in the last year? Can you imagine what will happen in the next? Do you have any tangible expectation that swapping one set of politicians for another is going to make things better? Seriously, if you purchased a firearm that had this many problems, would you still consider it safe to fire? Would you hopefully send it to a disinterested and unreliable manufacturer for repair and expect it to be better? Would you bet on it to save the life of your family? Why would you not use the same logic for government that you do in purchasing a firearm?

Don't get me wrong, I'm a strong proponent of the power of hope. But if the HC bill didn't make it clear to you, I sincerely don't know what will. I picture GBO in 5 years, most likely under different management, full of disgruntled old former gun owners reminiscing about America.

[ironglow]

  I must differ with you  SCOOTERD: Reagan was very polarizing. from taxes to faith to military to individual rights, 2nd amendments and many other items ..the Dems fought him every step.
  And you should have noticed, Reagan was not the only polarizing figure I mentioned..look at the list again !
  
Adams & Hancock: To king George III, " We will have no soveriegn but God and no king but Jesus"

 Patrick Henry "give me liberty or give me death".

 Do you have any idea how Abraham Lincoln was despised..called an ape..and is despised by some even today ? It was because of his polarizing nature that he was assassinated.

     Those who are not polarizing are called "middle of the roaders", "mug-whumps" or "fence straddlers"..and although they are often used by others, they are respected by very few.
  Just remember, if a "fence straddler" slips & falls, where does he get it ? Yup; right where he deserves it !

    The greatest individual who ever lived..God in the flesh..was probably the most polarizing figure in history:

" I  gave my back to the smiters and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair; I hid not my face from shame and spittle." (Isa 50:6)

"He is despised and rejected; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and we hid as it were our faces from  Him; He was despised and we esteemed him not"..(Isa 53:3)

"He that is not with me is against me, and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth" (Luke11:23)

"For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy;and because thou, being a man, makest thyselfGod" (John 10:33)

"If the world hate you,ye know that it hated me before it hated you" (John 15:18)

   So, it is very clear.. if Sarah Palin as a leader is polarizing , she may well be just asking herself.... WHAT WOULD JESUS DO ?

    One could hardly fault her for that !  

[scootrd]

 I must differ with you  SCOOTERD: Reagan was very polarizing. from taxes to faith to military to individual rights, 2nd amendments and many other items ..the Dems fought him every step.
  

We can agree to disagree ,

In 1980 Reagan Took every state except Minn, WV, GA, Maryland, and DC. He took 489 Electoral votes and 43,901,812 popular votes to Jimmy Carters 49 Electoral votes and  35,483,820 popular votes. a difference of 8,417, 992 votes

His second term was even more popular (which usually is considered a lame duck term)

In 1984 Reagan took every state except Minn. 525 Electoral votes 54,455,000 popular votes Walter F. Mondale 13 Electoral votes 37,577,000 Popular votes. Every state including staunch democratic states were a sea of red except one single blue mark on the  U.S. Map the state of Minn.  a difference of 16,878, 000 popular votes.

Reagan appealed to a vast a majority of Americans across all party lines. Now granted I understand he won 90% of the electoral votes but only 50.7 % of the popular vote against Jimmy Carter but he is in the Top 4 of all time popular and top 2 highest electoral votes in History.

Popular votes    
* Lyndon Johnson's 61.1% to Barry Goldwater's 38.5% in the 1964 presidential election
* Franklin D. Roosevelt's 60.8% to Alf Landon's 36.5% in the 1936 presidential election
* Richard Nixon's 60.7% to George McGovern's 37.5% in the 1972 presidential election
* Warren Harding's 60.3% to James M. Cox's 34.1% in the 1920 presidential election
* Ronald Reagan's 58.8% to Walter Mondale's 40.6% in the 1984 presidential election
* Theodore Roosevelt's 56.4% to Alton B. Parker's 37.6% in the 1904 presidential election

Electoral votes

* Franklin D. Roosevelt's 523 electoral votes to Alf Landon's 8 electoral votes in 1936. (97% margin)
* Ronald Reagan's 525 electoral votes to Walter Mondale's 13 electoral votes in 1984. (95.2% margin)
* Richard Nixon's 520 electoral votes to George McGovern's 17 electoral votes and John Hospers's 1 in 1972. (93.3% margin)
* James Monroe's 231 electoral votes to John Quincy Adams's 1 electoral vote in 1820. (85.6% margin)
Ronald Reagan was first president with over 50 million votes.
Nixon (1972) and Reagan (1984) are the only 2 presidents to win 49/50 states.

[~Ace~]

He signed the 1986 Amendment to the Gun Control Act ..... 100% Contrary to the Constitution... For all the Good a man may do, I can not over look the faults.

[ironglow]

  Scoot;
      Just because Reagan won big, doesn't mean he wasn't polarizing. If he has a 58% win, doesn't mean a thing, it still involves intensity.
  Reagan w3as an anti-Communist and was responsible for bringing down the Iron Curtain , stopping a Commie takeover of Grenada and pushing Marxism back in many way..that was enough to make most liberals & "progressives" hate him viciously.
     This current "messiah" president won by a very comfortable margin, would you say he is not polarizing. Were you of an age to be politically aware during Reagan's tenure ? If not, you had best check your assumptions.

 Ace;
  You're a hoot ! In this thread you thoroughly condemned the Republicans..SOME of which was surely deserved.  Then just now, you condemn Ronald Reagan.
   Seeing that, I decided to look at your past posts..just to check for "fair & balanced". Now that WAS an eye-opener !
   
  You soundly condemned Republicans and accuse Reagan of somehow helping the "assault weapons" ban ! ..But I checked your past posts and I saw nowhere that you gave it to the Democrats, the real gun grabbers.
   I read where you condemned the Jews but not the terrorists who are daily attacking them from lands given to the terrorists, in return for their solemn promise of "peace".
   You even went on in one thread about how horrible this United States has become; without a word of approbation to the terrorist producing nations.
   You sure are a logical, astute thinker !.

[Oldshooter]

SOUNDS LIKE A PROGRESSIVE TO ME!

I swear, i think some of these guys are on the acorn payroll!

[scootrd]

 Were you of an age to be politically aware during Reagan's tenure ? If not, you had best check your assumptions.

He was my commander and chief when I was in the military through both his terms and a darn good one.
The above are not assumptions , all points above are empirical facts. .  Under Reagan, I was stationed in Korea, Honduras, Germany and the states. I did not see him as polarizing and under his leadership , Reagan Democrats were born.

Polls indicated that Reagan's appeal transcended traditional boundaries of class, age, and even political party. "Reagan Democrats" consisted largely of blue-collar voters who had turned away from the party of Franklin Roosevelt and Big Government. Additionally, young voters, historically pro-Democrat, now populated Reagan rallies with cries of "Four more years!" In the 1980 election battle against Jimmy Carter, Reagan broadened his appeal by espousing moderate policies, gaining much of his support from disaffected Democrats and blue-collar workers.

Interesting we each have different perspectives on what was occurring back then.

[ironglow]

  In the military, especially when we were overseas, we didn't see any national politicians as polarizing..simply because we got our news through The Stars & Stripes, if we got any at all...and the S&S didn't deal with politics.
   Do you recall the first big difference Pres Reagan made ? As he was raising his hand to take the oath of office, the planes were taking off from Teheran, bringing the embassy hostages home from 444 days of captivity under Carter. Almost immediately, our leftist media and talking heads started a whispering and loudspeaker campaign about an "arms for hostages" clandestine deal. Remember how they ran their clackers when rumors said Nancy Reagan had consulted an astrologer ? Of course, they made no such clatter when Hillery Clinton claimed to be having seances or conference calls with Eleanor Roosevelt and Mahatma Ghandi.
   ..But no mind, we can agree to disagree...