Welcome Former Bachmann Supporters!

[papitosabe]

but one day you'll wake up and it just might click.

 

[Xenophage]

I'd consider myself a pretty extreme conservative, not really an indie or regular street person, but it is good he does draw that crowd I guess. I mean I agree completely with Libertarian economic thought (i.e. Austrian School) but the social liberalism and foreign policy doesn't necessarily fall in line with me, although the foreign is starting to grow. I'd say if anything I could associate with Paleo-Conservatives like Chuck Baldwin.

Totally respect you for your beliefs, but as a staunch libertarian/objectivist I'm just curious about the social issues: What specific libertarian positions do you take issue with? Ending the war on drugs, getting the government out of the business of marriage, prioritizing personal liberties over national security?

 

[Dianne]

Welcome!

It is imperative, that despite our differences, we stop Newt Romney from gaining the nomination. We cannot have a nominee that supports gun control, abortion rights, healthcare mandates, fairness doctrines, medicare part d, no child left behind, the department of education, the epa and global warming regulations, TARP, amnesty, NAFTA, etc.

Not to mention, he is owned by the same banks and military complex that own Obama. We will see no difference between Obama and Romney.

 

[PauliticsPolitics]

Let's see...

 

[Chainspell]

welcome!

I know you're still waiting for your registration approval. so we'll wait

 

[TakeThePowerBack]

Hello, Bachmann supporters. I really wonder how many will make it to these forums. I would like to meet a Bachmann supporter. I have never seen one in real life.

 

[Endthefednow]

But, Bachmann was surging in Iowa last I heard on CNN, Foux and other lamestream

 

[Highstreet]

Bump...welcome!

 

[tremendoustie]

Yes it certainly does, and I love liberty just as much (if not more so) than many on here (One of my all time heroes and person I'm using for my senior quote is Patrick Henry, the guy who thought the Constitution was too progressive). There's just some things I don't like to consider liberating that some of the RP guys do. Idk, call me inconsistent but whatever.

Patrick Henry is great, absolutely. Have you read much of the anti-federalist papers? Their concerns were legit, that's for sure -- most of them have come to pass.

 

[BritishOnlooker]

So....is there any chance that she turns round and endorses someone in particular?

 

[sailingaway]

So....is there any chance that she turns round and endorses someone in particular?

No. Not for some time I wouldn't think.

 

[PauliticsPolitics]

So....is there any chance that she turns round and endorses someone in particular?

Yea, I would wager she will hedge her bets for a while.
She is friendly enough with Romney, but an endorsement in that direction (at this point) would ruin her tea-cred.
She'll probably lay low and see how it plays out for a while.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I am a former Bachmann supporter. You all have convinced me to support Ron Paul!

I am for a strong National Defense, and I find I am in agreement with Ron Paul on that, once I fully understood Ron's position.

War is not to be taken lightly, and war powers are not to be vested solely in the Executive. And when the argument for war occurs, the hidden agendas must be uncovered. That is the purpose of debate. One can be told about the Military/Industrial Complex, and somewhat understand the concept, but it takes time and information before a person truly understands the full scope, ramifications and functioning of it. When one fully understands that "War is a Racket", then they can completely understand Ron Paul's position on foreign policy and war. War is for Defense of the Nation, not to serve economic interests.

 

[pen_thief]

Welcome to the forums, we're glad to have you fighting the good fight with us

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

I am a former Bachmann supporter. You all have convinced me to support Ron Paul!

I am for a strong National Defense, and I find I am in agreement with Ron Paul on that, once I fully understood Ron's position.

War is not to be taken lightly, and war powers are not to be vested solely in the Executive. And when the argument for war occurs, the hidden agendas must be uncovered. That is the purpose of debate. One can be told about the Military/Industrial Complex, and somewhat understand the concept, but it takes time and information before a person truly understands the full scope, ramifications and functioning of it. When one fully understands that "War is a Racket", then they can completely understand Ron Paul's position on foreign policy and war. War is for Defense of the Nation, not to serve economic interests.

When someone is hawking for war I ask myself, "Who is going to profit from this?" Because surely Iran isn't a threat. The government said Iraq was a threat, then we found out they had no nuclear weapons, just some expired chemical weapons we probably gave them.

 

[kusok]

Is it inappropriate of me to say that I think Bachmann is a good looking lady?