Which side of the aisle are you supporting? - Page 3 - Jeep Wrangler Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > General Discussion Forums > Off-Topic

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on WranglerForum.com
Old 06-03-2013, 09:04 PM   #61
Jeeper
 
KC_Hawker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Too far from any coast.
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senior Chief View Post
2. I'm totally OK with my gay neighbors bing married.
There are a lot of people that feel this way also that are against many of the gay marriage laws. I am one of them.

The devil is in the details, just like on the 2nd amendment arguments. Under most proposals, its not tolerance that is desired, but full embracement of that lifestyle. For instance, what happens if 2 gay men want to be sealed in a LDS ceremony? If the church has a stance against homosexuality, will you take away their right for freedom of religion and force them to marry a gay couple or be shut down as a discriminatory institution?

I have heard many arguments that this will never happen, its a one off, etc but this has happened. The Catholic church was forced to abandon adoptions in Boston because they refused to allow gay couples to adopt. It has happened and will again by some fringe elements with an agenda to force others to embrace their lifestyle.

Before you call me a bigot, I have no issues with homosexuality. My stepson trusted me enough that he came out to me before anyone else in his family. I kept the secret from his mom and her family for over a year while both he and his partner lived with me and my then school aged kids. He asked his mom to let his friend live with us because he needed a place to stay.

I just don't want my govt telling me what my religion can believe.

KC_Hawker is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 09:17 PM   #62
Jeeper
 
BlueRidgeYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC_Hawker View Post
...The devil is in the details

...

I just don't want my govt telling me what my religion can believe.
Very true.

There is a very simple solution. Stop the legal connection to a religous service, which is an endorsement of religion. Everybody can go to a JoP for a civil union, then your religious institution of choice can hold whatever antiquated or ritualistic ceremony, exclusive of whomever you want, however you want.

I don't mean to sound insulting, I was raised a Southern Baptist and don't think 2 men CAN marry. Regardless of what, who, where, govt benefits, priests, rabbis, monks, etc. But they should be able to select whatever person in this life they want to as their best friend, confidant, heir, emplied power of atty, assumer of debt, and tax beneficiary. I can't find that prohibited anywhere in my KJV, NIV, or US Constitution copies. This is the most mutually satisfying solution I can surmise, though ot may not solve all those issues. Of course, studies show having two parents is better than one, even if they are both mommy. Who are we trying to benefit most, society or the child?

__________________
“Coming of age in a fascist police state will not be a barrel of fun for anybody, much less for people like me, who are not inclined to suffer Nazis gladly and feel only contempt for the cowardly flag-suckers who would gladly give up their outdated freedom to live for the mess of pottage they have been conned into believing will be freedom from fear.”
BlueRidgeYJ is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 09:23 PM   #63
Jeeper
 
frieed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Utah
Posts: 110
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
I do like these socialist red trucks with ladders and hoses, though, and educated neighbors.
Started by a group of like minded free men who chose to pool their resources for the common good. No one was forced at gunpoint as is the norm today.
__________________
2012 JKUR, LOD Mid Width Front Bumper
Warn M8000 winch, Modified stock Rubicon sliders
Teraflex 2.5" coil lift, Pull Pal
FJ Cruiser roof mod (painted white)
frieed is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 09:38 PM   #64
Jeeper
 
KC_Hawker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Too far from any coast.
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
There is a very simple solution. Stop the legal connection to a religous service, which is an endorsement of religion. Everybody can go to a JoP for a civil union, then your religious institution of choice can hold whatever antiquated or ritualistic ceremony, exclusive of whomever you want, however you want.
I agree with this solution 100%. The problem is it doesn't cater to the extremists on either side the political parties cater too. Solving problems without pushing an agenda is beyond our current govt....
KC_Hawker is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 09:39 PM   #65
Jeeper
 
Senior Chief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: A Secure, Undisclosed Area
Posts: 2,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC_Hawker View Post
There are a lot of people that feel this way also that are against many of the gay marriage laws. I am one of them.

The devil is in the details, just like on the 2nd amendment arguments. Under most proposals, its not tolerance that is desired, but full embracement of that lifestyle. For instance, what happens if 2 gay men want to be sealed in a LDS ceremony? If the church has a stance against homosexuality, will you take away their right for freedom of religion and force them to marry a gay couple or be shut down as a discriminatory institution?

I have heard many arguments that this will never happen, its a one off, etc but this has happened. The Catholic church was forced to abandon adoptions in Boston because they refused to allow gay couples to adopt. It has happened and will again by some fringe elements with an agenda to force others to embrace their lifestyle.

Before you call me a bigot, I have no issues with homosexuality. My stepson trusted me enough that he came out to me before anyone else in his family. I kept the secret from his mom and her family for over a year while both he and his partner lived with me and my then school aged kids. He asked his mom to let his friend live with us because he needed a place to stay.

I just don't want my govt telling me what my religion can believe.
Of course not. Government does marriage. Churches do weddings. If your, or anyone's church doesn't want to allow a gay wedding, or for that matter, allow gays to worship, or hold church positions...that's up to you and your higher power.
Senior Chief is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 09:51 PM   #66
Jeeper
 
BlueRidgeYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by frieed View Post

Started by a group of like minded free men who chose to pool their resources for the common good. No one was forced at gunpoint as is the norm today.
http://www.ushistory.org/franklin/philadelphia/fire.htm the 1st volunteer fire company, Philadelphia, Dec 7 1736. I certainly do not feel the federal govt should fight fires, but states (wilderness), counties, and cities should, as well as volunteer companies filling the gaps. The feds should only do what they are chartered to. We can argue about State socialism later, after we get the feds in line, lol.

...

It's amazing how close everyone you talk to is after you discuss issues, yet nothing ever gets accomplished over in D.C. Makes ya wonder if they want to try, or if the status quo is too beneficial to disrupt. That's why we need an isle, NRA to Brady Campaign, Spiderman to Green Goblin, G.I. Joe to Cobra. Your side to theirs. Eternal arguing and contributions to campaigns/causes.

If you read the federalist papers, letters of our founders, books written then, etc it all has the same issues we talk about now. Nothing has happened in 250 years because of the arguing (except the bankers and corporations have been busy growing power the whole time).
__________________
“Coming of age in a fascist police state will not be a barrel of fun for anybody, much less for people like me, who are not inclined to suffer Nazis gladly and feel only contempt for the cowardly flag-suckers who would gladly give up their outdated freedom to live for the mess of pottage they have been conned into believing will be freedom from fear.”
BlueRidgeYJ is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 09:59 PM   #67
Jeeper
 
mckey73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Scappoose
Posts: 10,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
Fire Department the 1st volunteer fire company, Philadelphia, Dec 7 1736. I certainly do not feel the federal govt should fight fires, but states (wilderness), counties, and cities should, as well as volunteer companies filling the gaps. The feds should only do what they are chartered to. We can argue about State socialism later, after we get the feds in line, lol.

...

It's amazing how close everyone you talk to is after you discuss issues, yet nothing ever gets accomplished over in D.C. Makes ya wonder if they want to try, or if the status quo is too beneficial to disrupt. That's why we need an isle, NRA to Brady Campaign, Spiderman to Green Goblin, G.I. Joe to Cobra. Your side to theirs. Eternal arguing and contributions to campaigns/causes.

If you read the federalist papers, letters of our founders, books written then, etc it all has the same issues we talk about now. Nothing has happened in 250 years because of the arguing (except the bankers and corporations have been busy growing power the whole time).
__________________
“Animals don't hate, and we're supposed to be better than them.”

-Elvis Presley
mckey73 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 09:59 PM   #68
Jeeper
 
KC_Hawker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Too far from any coast.
Posts: 742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senior Chief View Post

Of course not. Government does marriage. Churches do weddings. If your, or anyone's church doesn't want to allow a gay wedding, or for that matter, allow gays to worship, or hold church positions...that's up to you and your higher power.
SC, just want to add I was not implying any of the additional things you stated, nor does my religion. That's why this topic is so hard, there are so many hard feelings on both sides, civil disagreements are rare. Please remember it is possible to be religious, and take an opposing stance without it being malicious or hateful.

We are not all bible thumpers condemning you to hell
KC_Hawker is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 11:25 PM   #69
Jeeper
 
fan of fanboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by jp2611 View Post

I agree with what you are saying historically...but we have never been able to have votes counted in as short a time as we can now. Also you would have to be a legal resident to vote....and the people voting would really "care" IMO and yeah I know it is a dream idea and would never pass look at how many people would be suddenly unemployed. ......and a lot of them are the ones who make the "rules"......(laws)..but I also don't think it would be the same as a "regular" democracy....most people are too lazy or don't care enough to vote and know what is going on in the political arena now Imagine if they had to wade through a new law or bill to be able to vote!!!
Okay someone please get this thread back on track.....Still conservative....but think where we are is everyone's fault,,and now how do we fix it?
Problem with democracy, at least 1 problem, is top few cities in this country (for example NYC, Chicago, LA) are all very liberal. And very populated. So the highly concentrated areas would have as much impact as some states (for example the bottom 13 states combined roughly equal those three cities)
That's a huge flaw bc culturally N Dakota wouldn't operate well with same laws as NYC, and vice versa.
And while a properly functioning Republic does work better there is one thing that's even better: more state rights and less federal laws. Let states run themselves more and restrict/minimize federal laws.
Result: successful state ideas grow into an attractive and successful environment. Others fail and eventually follow suit. Cool thing is can be different and still successful bc of cultural differences
__________________
not
/nät/
adverb
1. used with an auxiliary verb or “be” to form the negative
2. used as a short substitute for a negative clause
"Not actually a backer of this thought"
fan of fanboys is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 11:26 PM   #70
Jeeper
 
fan of fanboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by n00g7 View Post

This. Either force them to do "all those jobs that nobody wants to do" to earn their keep or pay them nothing.

Additionally, there should be NO incentives to have children (I'd prefer incentives to have no children), thus emphasizing proper family & financial planning.

If you want to have 5 kids, fine, but you pay for them to eat and go to school instead of absolve you from financial responsibility.
Very much agree with point 5 you quoted
__________________
not
/nät/
adverb
1. used with an auxiliary verb or “be” to form the negative
2. used as a short substitute for a negative clause
"Not actually a backer of this thought"
fan of fanboys is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 11:33 PM   #71
Jeeper
 
fan of fanboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC_Hawker View Post

There are a lot of people that feel this way also that are against many of the gay marriage laws. I am one of them.

The devil is in the details, just like on the 2nd amendment arguments. Under most proposals, its not tolerance that is desired, but full embracement of that lifestyle. For instance, what happens if 2 gay men want to be sealed in a LDS ceremony? If the church has a stance against homosexuality, will you take away their right for freedom of religion and force them to marry a gay couple or be shut down as a discriminatory institution?

I have heard many arguments that this will never happen, its a one off, etc but this has happened. The Catholic church was forced to abandon adoptions in Boston because they refused to allow gay couples to adopt. It has happened and will again by some fringe elements with an agenda to force others to embrace their lifestyle.

Before you call me a bigot, I have no issues with homosexuality. My stepson trusted me enough that he came out to me before anyone else in his family. I kept the secret from his mom and her family for over a year while both he and his partner lived with me and my then school aged kids. He asked his mom to let his friend live with us because he needed a place to stay.

I just don't want my govt telling me what my religion can believe.
I would say it needs to be like this:
Remove marriage as we know it. Make it completely religious term. That's it. Being married ONLY means your church acknowledges it.
Everyone not married by a priest/minister/etc has a civil union. That's where government is involved. That's where tax and other benefits come to play.
Some religions will allow, some wont. But that's up to religion since the government and related benefits are separate.

I am for less government and for no government and religion mingling. And if churches stopped acting like a business then they would be less influenced by "sinners" complaints and desires (I use that term loosely. Hoping in context makes sense what I'm trying to convey)
__________________
not
/nät/
adverb
1. used with an auxiliary verb or “be” to form the negative
2. used as a short substitute for a negative clause
"Not actually a backer of this thought"
fan of fanboys is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 11:37 PM   #72
Jeeper
 
Oz82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 94
Government shouldn't be big enough to need to worry about who's sleeping/living with who.
Oz82 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 11:41 PM   #73
Jeeper
 
fan of fanboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,985
I think if being objective most people don't care about gays being together in a government recognized religion. They may personally/morally oppose. May not want to be apart of religion that supports. And that's fine.
Supporting a right/liberty doesn't mean you agree with, just means you don't want your rights/liberties suppressed bc someone doesn't agree.

Ideally we have a gun loving black homosexual who wants to lower taxes and ensure everyone has a job and no kids get hurt. Think it'll cover most bases?
__________________
not
/nät/
adverb
1. used with an auxiliary verb or “be” to form the negative
2. used as a short substitute for a negative clause
"Not actually a backer of this thought"
fan of fanboys is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 11:51 PM   #74
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys View Post
I think if being objective most people don't care about gays being together in a government recognized religion. They may personally/morally oppose. May not want to be apart of religion that supports. And that's fine.
Supporting a right/liberty doesn't mean you agree with, just means you don't want your rights/liberties suppressed bc someone doesn't agree.

Ideally we have a gun loving black homosexual who wants to lower taxes and ensure everyone has a job and no kids get hurt. Think it'll cover most bases?
Missed one -gun loving black lesbian
jimbot is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-03-2013, 11:54 PM   #75
Jeeper
 
fan of fanboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbot View Post

Missed one -gun loving black lesbian
Ha I said homosexual. Can be gay or lesbian, depends which way your fan tasty goes :-)
__________________
not
/nät/
adverb
1. used with an auxiliary verb or “be” to form the negative
2. used as a short substitute for a negative clause
"Not actually a backer of this thought"
fan of fanboys is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-04-2013, 12:03 AM   #76
Jeeper
 
fan of fanboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,985
I'm against a democracy. Only possible way I'd be for it is if we redefined what it is to be an American. I won't type a BlueRidge length post (love ya dude) but I'd say have meet mix of some sort of following (list subject to change as off top of my head)
Land owner
Military service w/ honorable discharge
Pay x% tax rate for y number of years
Own a business that's 70% USA based for manufacturing


I would say 2 of those would need to be met before can be full citizen with right to vote. I'm sure my numbers can be tweaked and that couple other stipulations can be added. But if not meeting the above, or something close, then you're not contributing. Which means your vote is only to take and not to give. Similar reason don't let 12 year olds vote.

Dunno how much sense making. Drinking about how before game 7 started. Not trying to offend anyone.
__________________
not
/nät/
adverb
1. used with an auxiliary verb or “be” to form the negative
2. used as a short substitute for a negative clause
"Not actually a backer of this thought"
fan of fanboys is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-04-2013, 12:41 AM   #77
Jeeper
 
MarkinOhio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 469
Took the quiz, it says I'm a Centrist, which would describe me pretty perfectly.

I am a moderate Democrat. Not a liberal, probably more conservative than many so-called conservatives. I'm probably also more liberal than many libertarians.

I just wish some people would read the Constitution, ALL OF IT, before making comments like this:

Quote:
The feds should only do what they are chartered to.
EVERYTHING the federal government does for US, you know, "THE PEOPLE" is pretty much covered right at the very beginning of the Constitution, whether cherry pickers like it or not:

Quote:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
That for me means the government can fight fires, build roads, have police and fire departments, have trash collectors, and any other thing some people deem unnecessary, because that stuff PROMOTES THE GENERAL WELFARE.

You can't just pick and choose the parts of the Constitution YOU like. You have to embrace the whole thing. That's my position.
__________________
“Dogs’ lives are too short. Their only fault, really.” – Agnes Sligh Turnbull
MarkinOhio is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-04-2013, 12:53 AM   #78
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys View Post
Ha I said homosexual. Can be gay or lesbian, depends which way your fan tasty goes :-)
Nope. You still missed it. The protected classes are minority, female, and homosexual. You left out the female originally.
jimbot is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-04-2013, 06:44 AM   #79
Jeeper
 
fan of fanboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbot View Post

Nope. You still missed it. The protected classes are minority, female, and homosexual. You left out the female originally.
Ah. Very true.
__________________
not
/nät/
adverb
1. used with an auxiliary verb or “be” to form the negative
2. used as a short substitute for a negative clause
"Not actually a backer of this thought"
fan of fanboys is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-04-2013, 07:59 AM   #80
Jeeper
 
BlueRidgeYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkinOhio View Post
Took the quiz, it says I'm a Centrist, which would describe me pretty perfectly.

I am a moderate Democrat. Not a liberal, probably more conservative than many so-called conservatives. I'm probably also more liberal than many libertarians.

I just wish some people would read the Constitution, ALL OF IT, before making comments like this:

EVERYTHING the federal government does for US, you know, "THE PEOPLE" is pretty much covered right at the very beginning of the Constitution, whether cherry pickers like it or not:

That for me means the government can fight fires, build roads, have police and fire departments, have trash collectors, and any other thing some people deem unnecessary, because that stuff PROMOTES THE GENERAL WELFARE.

You can't just pick and choose the parts of the Constitution YOU like. You have to embrace the whole thing. That's my position.
Lol.

General Welfare clause, huh? Bush thinks that trumps the 8th Amendment. I don't. Obama thinks he can mandate you purchase a product from a private company under that clause. I do not. The DoD thinks American soldiers can arrest and detain citizens because of that clause. I do not. Drones shooting untried citizens, under the guise of 'welfare'. Police states created, 'welfare'. Let's round up the undesireables of society and eliminate them. After all, our welfare will improve, despite the violation of their rights. It worked great under the enabling act, for about a dozen years anyway. Then Patton got there.

Let's not only look at the words, but let us also embrass the time of their creation to understand their intent. Only then can we understand what the 10th Amendment says.

'General Welfare' does not give carte blanche to the federal govt to do whatever they deem to be good for someone. You completely miss the purpose of the US Constitution.

Btw, I do read it - frequently - along with other supportive documents to understand its context. We were never intended to be an Adams nanny state, although the usurpation of the AoC took a big step in that direction. (Postal roads are their own entry in the Constitution, a power of Congress - not a general welfare item - police, fire, and trash are not, making it a 10th issue. What was article 2 of the AoC?)

Amazing how many people ignore the obvious words written to find some clause that can be manipulated to fit their flavor of the week, attempting to lead us towards the american union and its mob rule practices. These same folks have authorized congress to spend our grandchildrens wealth, under our general welfare.


Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys View Post
... I won't type a BlueRidge length post ...
__________________
“Coming of age in a fascist police state will not be a barrel of fun for anybody, much less for people like me, who are not inclined to suffer Nazis gladly and feel only contempt for the cowardly flag-suckers who would gladly give up their outdated freedom to live for the mess of pottage they have been conned into believing will be freedom from fear.”
BlueRidgeYJ is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-05-2013, 09:26 AM   #81
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 123
Images: 1
I am originally from Colombia/panama. Lived under a dictator. Regardless of the challenges of living under the US government , the pain of different liberties the US government controls---I thrive under the system. Conservatives and liberals control money and liberties equally . Just with a different focus . There is little difference. People in the us get caught up in republican vs democrat. I find our current administration much more conservative than I thought it would be. Much more conservative than the previous. Choosing to be a us citizen is a different experience for me than people accustomed to living a life of liberty. Sometimes uncomfortable . Unlike natural born Americans, I don't have that sense of comfort knowing that regardless of the party running the country, that things will remain basically the same. An overhaul of the way politics are or government system is scary. Really scary. Controlled by a police state is a nightmare. I pray we will never know that depth of control . Celebrate that blessing, criticize your government because you CAN without the fear of death or torture. Discussions like this are healthy and proof that it works.

Ps- I think that marriage shoukd not be recognized by the government. it is a religjous issue. all legal contracts of citizens should be considered civil unions---a legal contract. All citizens should be able to enter into any legal contract and That these legal contracts ought to be governed by the state. Marriage on the other hand is personal. And can be conducted in the church . Government needs to lay off religion and religion needs to lay off the government .
Titaness is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-06-2013, 01:01 AM   #82
Newb
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 5
raped by a hippo or a rhino...
Rofhnald is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-06-2013, 11:12 AM   #83
Jeeper
 
Walkingstick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,736
Don't be surprised if little camera's are going to be installed in urinals/squat seats as part of ObummerCare.
__________________
Make Sure Everyone is Dead within hearing and sight range. Only then, you can say any area is cleared.
Walkingstick is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-06-2013, 12:12 PM   #84
Jeeper
 
n00g7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Northern VT // Western Wisconsin
Posts: 1,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walkingstick View Post
Don't be surprised if little camera's are going to be installed in urinals/squat seats as part of ObummerCare.
Maybe we can get urinal cakes in the image of our savior?
__________________
That moment when you look at a really nice JK and think to yourself, "Well I SUPPOSE I could see myself trading in my TJ for one of those, but for those ugly ass door handles."
n00g7 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-06-2013, 12:34 PM   #85
Jeeper
 
erickpl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,330
Send a message via AIM to erickpl
Fiscally conservative.

Example: I want sound policy for a sound economy w/o breaking the bank or budget. If I have to balance my checkbook, so should the .gov.

Socially liberal.

I don't care about gay marriage one way or the other. I don't think it is the .gov's place to dictate who to love, but I DO think there should be rules as far as benefits and financial/legal issues (surviving partner type stuff). Abortion? I'm personally one that would want his wife to do it, but who is the .gov to tell women what they can or can't do?
__________________
-Paul

-97 TJ with a few mods. PM with questions.
erickpl is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-06-2013, 12:39 PM   #86
Ugly Supporting Member

WF Supporting Member
 
PecosRiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: San Jose, New Mexico
Posts: 1,546
I voted for Gary Johnson in the last Supreme Leader election. You can make whatever assumption you wish by my choice.

Gus, I have a brother and he hasn't spoken to me since he found out. He makes Rush looks like Hilary.
PecosRiver is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-06-2013, 12:44 PM   #87
Jeeper
 
fan of fanboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by PecosRiver View Post
I voted for Gary Johnson in the last Supreme Leader election. You can make whatever assumption you wish by my choice.

Gus, I have a brother and he hasn't spoken to me since he found out. He makes Rush looks like Hilary.
I also voted for him. And I'll vote for him or Rand next election
__________________
not
/nät/
adverb
1. used with an auxiliary verb or “be” to form the negative
2. used as a short substitute for a negative clause
"Not actually a backer of this thought"
fan of fanboys is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-06-2013, 03:12 PM   #88
Jeeper
 
Walkingstick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan of fanboys

i also voted for him. And i'll vote for him or rand next election
x2
__________________
Make Sure Everyone is Dead within hearing and sight range. Only then, you can say any area is cleared.
Walkingstick is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-06-2013, 03:22 PM   #89
Jeeper
 
Sand Jello's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California
Posts: 34
Libertarian. Not happy with any of the last game show hosts in the White house.
Sand Jello is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-06-2013, 03:41 PM   #90
Jeeper
 
Walkingstick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sand Jello
Libertarian. Not happy with any of the last game show hosts in the White house.
No kidding. Last talking heads have really POed me. And transparency my ass!

__________________
Make Sure Everyone is Dead within hearing and sight range. Only then, you can say any area is cleared.
Walkingstick is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




Download our Mobile App

» Network Links
»Jeep Parts
» Featured Product

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:30 PM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC