Will a Jeff Flake Victory help the Liberty Movement?

[Brian4Liberty]

Changing thread titles to fit your own agenda is pretty damn disingenuous.

You point this out as a person on one side of this debate, but a totally disinterested party might also notice that something doesn't feel right there. Censorship is a slippery slope. Changing the words of someone else without adequate notation could possibly fall under the category of deceptive, though unintended to be that way.

In the past, moving threads to Off or Hot Topics was the standard course of action, if the forum owner or designated stand-ins felt that a thread was no longer fit for wide-open public display. Deletion of threads or posts has also occurred for the most outrageous violations of the Guidelines.

 

[tbone717]

there were a couple of congressional district races in CA (not mine) where Ron Paul folks didn't like the RLC candidate as much as another. I would have looked into them more had I lived in those districts, but I don't.

The RLC only has McClintock (incumbent) and Dennis on their list for US House. McClintock didn't have a challenger. Dennis is the one running against Pelosi - the only question in that race IMHO is will Pelosi win by 80% or 75% of the vote.

Perhaps you mean the state house races?

Edit: my mistake, they have added some endorsements since I last checked.

 

[libertskee]

How about we change the thread title to "Will a Jeff Flake victory help the Liberty Movement?" since this whole thread is a discussion of that question.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Speaking of rating Jeff Flake, here's what our very rough rating is for him in our list. At this point, he has two stars deducted for some his votes that have been mentioned in this thread:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?365683-List-of-Liberty-minded-Candidates-for-US-Congress

Arizona
Primary: Aug 28, 2012

Jeff Flake (R) - (purity: ★★★☆☆)

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

We actually have a nice little success story here. Our school board in made up of 9 folks. Every year like clockwork they raise the school tax. Not a huge amount, but still they raise it. And up to last year no one voted no. But this past year we got two strong fiscal conservatives on the board and for the first time the tax increase was a 7-2 vote. There are a few more seats up next year I think. Hoping that eventually, we can get it to 5-4 "no" vote.

A better solution isn't to crush, but to squeeze. Think of a putting something in a vice. One doesn't have to crush whatever is within the vice to make an impact. Right?

The immediate impact is to squeeze. One does this by threatening to take away half of what is normally given to the teachers in the public sector, in order to give it to the teachers (managers) working in the private sector in order to teach the already graduated children what they should already know in how to pull up their pants, how to show up everyday and on time, and how not talk on their cell phones while on duty.

 

[tbone717]

A better solution isn't to crush, but to squeeze. Think of a putting something in a vice. One doesn't have to crush whatever is within the vice to make an impact. Right?

The immediate impact is to squeeze. One does this by threatening to take away half of what is normally given to the teachers in the public sector, in order to give it to the teachers (managers) working in the private sector in order to teach the already graduated children what they should already know in how to pull up their pants, how to show up everyday and on time, and how not talk on their cell phones while on duty.

Actually in our district the salaries aren't the issue, it is the buildings that are in need of major repair and upgrades. The problem as I see it, from a budgetary stance, is that they try and do too much in one year, and assume that a small increase in taxes will cover the spending. The two new folks we have are proposing spreading out the repairs and upgrades over a longer period of time so that the taxes do not need to be raised.

 

[cajuncocoa]

I really resent the implication that I'm not pulling my weight around here because I won't support Jeff Flake, or recruit people to run for the local school board. I don't feel good about letting those accusations go unanswered.

I don't vote for a party, I vote for people. I used to think the GOP was better than the Dems, until I finally figured out that nothing really gets better when GOP candidates are in office. They promised this and that, but it never happens.

I don't just vote for just anyone anymore. I vote for people who have a good voting record on issues that are important to me. If it's their first time running, I will find out where they stand on those issues, either by phone, or email, or in person. If their answer is satisfactory to me, I will vote for them and maybe send a small donation. But before I send the kind of donations I sent to Ron Paul, I would need to know more...a good voting record, and an unwavering regard for the issues of Liberty.

Many of us didn't see eye-to-eye on Rand's endorsement of Mitt. Some of you want to stand by Rand and support him in 2016 (if Obama wins in 2012). I won't go so far as to say he won't have my vote, but I don't trust him anymore as much as I did before that endorsement. I don't know why that's so hard for some to understand.

And I don't understand how anyone on this board can support someone who voted for the PATRIOT Act, NDAA, TSA and the Iraq War. You would think most people here would consider those votes to be a deal-breaker for said candidate. I really don't get it.

 

[cajuncocoa]

How about we change the thread title to "Will a Jeff Flake victory help the Liberty Movement?" since this whole thread is a discussion of that question.

That seems fair.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Speaking of rating Jeff Flake, here's what our very rough rating is for him in our list. At this point, he has two stars deducted for some his votes that have been mentioned in this thread:

He's not on this list at all:
http://libertycandidates.com/

 

[pcosmar]

Actually in our district the salaries aren't the issue, it is the buildings that are in need of major repair and upgrades. The problem as I see it, from a budgetary stance, is that they try and do too much in one year, and assume that a small increase in taxes will cover the spending. The two new folks we have are proposing spreading out the repairs and upgrades over a longer period of time so that the taxes do not need to be raised.

Why not sell the properties and cut the loss. cut the government jobs as well and then cut taxes.

Less government and less tax until the remaining government can operate from a tip jar.

Perhaps your ideas of Fiscal conservative and mine are different.

 

[tbone717]

I really resent the implication that I'm not pulling my weight around here because I won't support Jeff Flake, or recruit people to run for the local school board. I don't feel good about letting those accusations go unanswered.

I don't vote for a party, I vote for people. I used to think the GOP was better than the Dems, until I finally figured out that nothing really gets better when GOP candidates are in office. They promised this and that, but it never happens.

I don't just vote for just anyone anymore. I vote for people who have a good voting record on issues that are important to me. If it's their first time running, I will find out where they stand on those issues, either by phone, or email, or in person. If their answer is satisfactory to me, I will vote for them and maybe send a small donation. But before I send the kind of donations I sent to Ron Paul, I would need to know more...a good voting record, and an unwavering regard for the issues of Liberty.

Many of us didn't see eye-to-eye on Rand's endorsement of Mitt. Some of you want to stand by Rand and support him in 2016 (if Obama wins in 2012). I won't go so far as to say he won't have my vote, but I don't trust him anymore as much as I did before that endorsement. I don't know why that's so hard for some to understand.

And I don't understand how anyone on this board can support someone who voted for the PATRIOT Act, NDAA, TSA and the Iraq War. You would think most people here would consider those votes to be a deal-breaker for said candidate. I really don't get it.

I don't do "dealbreakers" but instead look at the entire picture. So if someone is with us on the fed, the budget, taxes, regulations, abortion, immigration and the second amendment - but votes with the majority on defense issues, I am not prepared to write them off, because I see them as being an asset and not an enemy. And when it comes to elections, the alternative to that 90% guy could very well be a 50% establishment Republican or a 10% liberal Dem.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

How about we change the thread title to "Will a Jeff Flake victory help the Liberty Movement?" since this whole thread is a discussion of that question.

Absolutely. Especially since it is your words in the first place.

 

[tbone717]

Why not sell the properties and cut the loss. cut the government jobs as well and then cut taxes.

Less government and less tax until the remaining government can operate from a tip jar.

Perhaps your ideas of Fiscal conservative and mine are different.

We have a growing school age population in the area. We had somewhat of a gap here in the age demographics. Seems like we have retirees and younger folks with kids, and not as many in the middle. They just had to build a new elementary to accommodate the growth. If we were to sell the old schools, we'd have to build a new one to replace it. I haven't sat in on too many of those meetings where they go over the numbers, but from my understanding it is cheaper to repair and upgrade than to replace.

 

[cajuncocoa]

I don't do "dealbreakers" but instead look at the entire picture. So if someone is with us on the fed, the budget, taxes, regulations, abortion, immigration and the second amendment - but votes with the majority on defense issues, I am not prepared to write them off, because I see them as being an asset and not an enemy. And when it comes to elections, the alternative to that 90% guy could very well be a 50% establishment Republican or a 10% liberal Dem.

That's good....I'll thank him for lowering my taxes when I'm indefinitely detained because the PATRIOT Act gave the government the authority to spy on my cellphone conversations.

 

[tbone717]

That's good....I'll thank him for lowering my taxes when I'm indefinitely detained because the PATRIOT Act gave the government the authority to spy on my cellphone conversations.

But you aren't getting it - the alternative is someone who will vote for NDAA and not support a lot of Rand's bills in the Senate.

We don't operate in a vacuum. We can't say "oh he's not like Ron Paul" therefore we ignore the good stuff about a candidate. Rand and Ron don't do that, so why should we. Many of the guys that Ron has endorsed this time don't meet that purity test that some here have. Mosey on over to see how people have been talking down Cruz.

 

[cajuncocoa]

But you aren't getting it - the alternative is someone who will vote for NDAA and not support a lot of Rand's bills in the Senate.

We don't operate in a vacuum.

No, it's YOU who's not getting it.

As sailingaway said earlier, as long as you pat them on the head for only selling HALF of our liberties down the river, there is no incentive to stay strong on ALL of them.

 

[NoOneButPaul]

No, it's YOU who's not getting it.

As sailingaway said earlier, as long as you pat them on the head for only selling HALF of our liberties down the river, there is no incentive to stay strong on ALL of them.

Again... a standard that should be held when we don't have 5 people in the Congress...

 

[Brian4Liberty]

He's not on this list at all:
http://libertycandidates.com/

He would be rejected.

 

[tbone717]

No, it's YOU who's not getting it.

As sailingaway said earlier, as long as you pat them on the head for only selling HALF of our liberties down the river, there is no incentive to stay strong on ALL of them.

Who said half? I said time and time again, I am a 90% guy. I look at the entire picture - all of the issues and see where they come down on those. By the same token I won't support a guy who is good on civil liberties, but horrible on economic issues, 2nd amendment, regulation, taxes, the fed, abortion, etc. I look at all the issues and make my decision based on that.

 

[gerryb]

No, it's YOU who's not getting it.

As sailingaway said earlier, as long as you pat them on the head for only selling HALF of our liberties down the river, there is no incentive to stay strong on ALL of them.

And as we've said -- What is the incentive for a "pure" liberty candidate to get involved? There is no support structure to encourage them to run and win. We need to build that structure.