A Voice

Roanoke, VA

#41 Jul 16, 2012
Constitutionalist wrote:
I will gladly offer some suggestions:
(1) Energy- We need to use our natural resources and not be so dependent on foreign sources. We have more oil reserves that haven't even been touched. We have oil off the coast of Virginia that could totally transform our economy, if the federal government had not issued regulations that hinder anything. Look what is happening in North Dakota with the new oil industry there. One of the reasons our economy is not worse off is because of what is going on in North Dakota, not because of anything the federal government is doing. Fortunately, the oil reserves there are on private not public land. Add in the new clean coal technology and our state could be leading the nation in energy. Again, all being hindered.
(2) Tax policy- Keynesian economics are a failure. If you want to know where Obama's policies will lead, look at Europe today. They have been doing for 2-3 decades what Obama wants us to do now. Europe is turning away from these ideas (check out the new Swedish financial secretary) at a time that we are beginning them. If we continue to monetize our debt, we will end up with the same situation that the Weimar Republic in Germany had in the 1920s. We need government spending to get under control, and have less federal intrusion in our lives. You cannot spend your way to prosperity, that has always taken hard work. We need to become productive again, and that won't happen without changing our approach.
(3)- Foreign Policy- We cannot continue to betray our friends (Israel, Great Britain, etc.) and placate our enemies (the Arab Spring has turned to winter with the Muslim Brotherhood taking over Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and soon Syria). Obama has been a disaster with our dealings with other countries. He is encouraging the wrong people. We have got to deal with our own problems first, and not try to police the rest of the world. Allowing Iran to acquire nuclear weaponry will have long-term impacts for years down the road.
There are just a few ideas. It is hard to address complex issues in only a few words. But, one thing is for sure. Obama's answers are not in the best interest of this nation. For that matter, neither are Romney's. But until you Obama lovers stop your slavish attachment to him, we will not overcome the problems. We need a new political party becaue the issues are no longer Democrat vs. Republican. They are between those who look to larger government vs. those who believe in the freedom outlined in the Constitution and our Declaration. We have lost our way as a nation because we no longer have any true foundation.
"Slavish",,,,,,,,is that a Freudian slip?
Bahaha

Duffield, VA

#42 Jul 16, 2012
A Voice wrote:
<quoted text>Not trying to be the devil's advocate here, but couldn't the same be said of any presidential election? I remember the very same retoric in 2004 when Bush and Cheney bought, I mean won, reelection.
Remember the good old days under Bush when he tried to get sneak and peak searches without a warrant and wanted libraries to tell the goverment what books we were checking out and our postmen to tell the federal goverment if we got packages without obvious recognizable return addresses on them. Fun times, fun times!!!!
Constitutionalis t

Duffield, VA

#43 Jul 16, 2012
No Freudian slip at all. Nothing to do with race, everything to do with undeserved adoration.

I find it interesting if that one word out of the entire text is what got your attention. It is no wonder we can't address the real problems of our nation. Everyone (that is Republican and Democrat)seems to be satisfied to just play games of "gotcha" with words. The media has raised that to an art form. Unless we get beyond that, it won't matter.

Bahaha in Gate City- If you find the Patriot Act offensive, then you should be going apolectic over the Healthcare Law. You haven't even begun to see an invasion of privacy by the government yet.
Blank

Wise, VA

#44 Jul 16, 2012
Constitutionalist wrote:
Well it appears that A Voice from Blacksburg has decided to go with the old COMMUNIST line of the rich vs. the poor. I have watched your 99%(Occupy Wall Street) and all they have is the same old class warfare routine. Obama continues to try to divide us along social, racial, cultural, and religious lines and you are falling prey to it. I will agree that we should not put trust in politicians, but you seem willing to give liberal politicians (Boucher) a free pass. I say right is right and wrong is wrong, and unless the citizens of this nation wake up to what is happening, we are headed down a destructive path that government is not going to solve. In fact, they only make things worse.
LOL!!! Good post, "Hannity!" HA!!
Constitutionalis t

Duffield, VA

#45 Jul 16, 2012
Good job there Blank in Norton. Once again, just call names and don't address the issues. This is why we are where we are today. Just to make the point for you, Karl Marx divided the world into 2 groups. The Bourgeoisie (the capitalist owners) and the Proletariat (the workers). He called for an overthrow by the Proletariat of the rich. They would then share the wealth and they would live in a socialist utopia. Of course, every time that this was done in countries, it only led to a dictatorship of the socialists over all the others. They were all equal, they were equally miserable. Doesn't this sound very familiar with what the Occupy Wall Street movement is saying? Only the terms they are using are the 1% and the 99%. The ideology is exactly the same. If you would study history and watch less cable TV shows, you would be better prepared for understanding what is currently happening.
A Voice

Roanoke, VA

#46 Jul 16, 2012
Constitutionalist wrote:
Good job there Blank in Norton. Once again, just call names and don't address the issues. This is why we are where we are today. Just to make the point for you, Karl Marx divided the world into 2 groups. The Bourgeoisie (the capitalist owners) and the Proletariat (the workers). He called for an overthrow by the Proletariat of the rich. They would then share the wealth and they would live in a socialist utopia. Of course, every time that this was done in countries, it only led to a dictatorship of the socialists over all the others. They were all equal, they were equally miserable. Doesn't this sound very familiar with what the Occupy Wall Street movement is saying? Only the terms they are using are the 1% and the 99%. The ideology is exactly the same. If you would study history and watch less cable TV shows, you would be better prepared for understanding what is currently happening.
Oh I have a lot of words,,,,,,actually more than 4000 characters in reply to your earlier narrative. I know that because I couldn't send it out. The reply will come in 2 or 3 sections. Immediately though, don't think you will have the last word here. You've said way too much to not be answered, but also you've said nothing. The only thing I can determine from your history lessons is that this Nation has taken a terrible turn since 2008. Now, for the record, I was around prior to 2008 and I don't think all this has happened under our current President. In all your history lessons, doesn't it say somewhere that we're to respect our leaders and recognize that the majority spoke in 2008? Also, don't trash our beloved Constitution by using it to spread your propoganda. Whatever it is!
Constitutionalis t

Duffield, VA

#47 Jul 16, 2012
No, I don't think our problems started in 2008. That is way too simplistic. I would go back to at least the Great Depression and the New Deal and really back to the late 1800s and the Progressive Movement. I believe that under Obama the situation has increased exponentially. But, by no means do I think that George W. Bush is not a part of this also. And by the way, respecting our leaders does not mean that we don't have the right to disagree. And if the only thing you got from my "history lessons" is since 2008, you need to go back and reread them. I am not trashing the Constitution, I am trying to defend it. How has anything I have said been trashing the Constitution?
A Voice

Roanoke, VA

#48 Jul 16, 2012
Constitutionalist wrote:
No, I don't think our problems started in 2008. That is way too simplistic. I would go back to at least the Great Depression and the New Deal and really back to the late 1800s and the Progressive Movement. I believe that under Obama the situation has increased exponentially. But, by no means do I think that George W. Bush is not a part of this also. And by the way, respecting our leaders does not mean that we don't have the right to disagree. And if the only thing you got from my "history lessons" is since 2008, you need to go back and reread them. I am not trashing the Constitution, I am trying to defend it. How has anything I have said been trashing the Constitution?
It sounds very scary when you start talking critically about the 2 party system that we have. To me, that's the very foundation of our Constitution. Two parties, three branches. Checks and balances. As full of faults as it is, it's still the best system of government in the world. I admire your knowledge of history, but one man's definition of socialism is another's definition of humanatarianism.
Constitutionalis t

Duffield, VA

#49 Jul 16, 2012
First of all, get your facts straight. Nowhere in the Constitution does it call for a 2 party system. George Washington even said in his Farewell Address to not form political parties. I am shocked at your lack of understanding of this basic concept. That being said, the 2 party system has worked well and is better than the parliamentry systems of Europe. But we don't have a true 2 party system today. We have a political class in Washington D. C. that continues the same policies no matter who is in the Presidency. You need to expand your knowledge beyond the rhetoric.

In addition, no one who has lived under socialism or any of its variations would consider it to be humanitarian. You might want to check out the 70 years of the Soviet Empire and how well those people lived before making such a statement. Also, as I stated in an earlier post, socialist countries in Europe such as Sweden have begun to turn from this approach. The French have decided to go for it even stronger. Is that what you want, for us to be like the French? I hope not.
A Voice

Roanoke, VA

#50 Jul 17, 2012
Constitutionalist wrote:
First of all, get your facts straight. Nowhere in the Constitution does it call for a 2 party system. George Washington even said in his Farewell Address to not form political parties. I am shocked at your lack of understanding of this basic concept. That being said, the 2 party system has worked well and is better than the parliamentry systems of Europe. But we don't have a true 2 party system today. We have a political class in Washington D. C. that continues the same policies no matter who is in the Presidency. You need to expand your knowledge beyond the rhetoric.
In addition, no one who has lived under socialism or any of its variations would consider it to be humanitarian. You might want to check out the 70 years of the Soviet Empire and how well those people lived before making such a statement. Also, as I stated in an earlier post, socialist countries in Europe such as Sweden have begun to turn from this approach. The French have decided to go for it even stronger. Is that what you want, for us to be like the French? I hope not.
I kinda like their kiss. Oh, and please don't be shocked at my lack of understanding, I know me better than anyone and I shock myself sometimes. It seems I am debating with a concept or an idea. I have laid my support of our President and our political system on the line. Exactly what are you advocating? Who are you advocating? It seems that from your viewpoint the whole thing is hopeless. I really don't know what to address. Do you consider Social Security and the New Deal Socialism? And, No, I never considered the USSR a pleasant place to live. So, let's live like the Danes,,,,,,,,the happiest people in the world!
Constitutionalis t

Duffield, VA

#51 Jul 17, 2012
After all that has been written on this site, you don't understand what I am advocating? One more time then. I disagree with the direction that Obama is taking the country. What he is promoting in his policies have always worked to the detriment of a free people. I have given many examples of this from the last century.

Freedom is something very precious. And although we as Americans often take it for granted and condsider it a birthright, it is not. Every generation has to be vigilant in keeping the liberty that we have. From fighting the Nazis in WW2, to Communism during the Cold War, to the new fight against Islamic fascism today, there are always those who attempt to replace our liberty with something else. If you cannot or will not see the danger to our freedom from the approach taken by Obama, then I really don't see the use in trying to explain things to you. From one of your earlier posts, I have to ask. Have you ever actually read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? I would suggest that you do and then compare that with the policies our federal government have implemented over the years. This is not just Democrat vs. Republican. I think that may be your hang-up.

What I am advocating is for freedom-loving Americans to wake up to what is being done to our economy, our government, and our way of life, and begin to stand for the truth. Our country is headed for a financial disaster that few are even aware is coming. On a personal level, we all know that you cannot spend more than you have and it not catch up with you at some point. This is what is happening on a national level. Those like you who are blindly supporting politicians (of either stripe) are letting these things occur. Whenever anyone tries to point out the dire situation, they are quickly shouted down by supporters like you. So, the truth never gets a hearing. That is why Obama is able to continue with his policies and never has to defend them.

I don't know where you gained an admiration for socialism, but you need to look beyond the slogans and empty promises. Look where "Hope and Change" has gotten us in just a few years. If Obama is re-elected, in four more years our country will not be recognizable.
A Voice

Roanoke, VA

#52 Jul 17, 2012
Constitutionalist wrote:
After all that has been written on this site, you don't understand what I am advocating? One more time then. I disagree with the direction that Obama is taking the country. What he is promoting in his policies have always worked to the detriment of a free people. I have given many examples of this from the last century.
Freedom is something very precious. And although we as Americans often take it for granted and condsider it a birthright, it is not. Every generation has to be vigilant in keeping the liberty that we have. From fighting the Nazis in WW2, to Communism during the Cold War, to the new fight against Islamic fascism today, there are always those who attempt to replace our liberty with something else. If you cannot or will not see the danger to our freedom from the approach taken by Obama, then I really don't see the use in trying to explain things to you. From one of your earlier posts, I have to ask. Have you ever actually read the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? I would suggest that you do and then compare that with the policies our federal government have implemented over the years. This is not just Democrat vs. Republican. I think that may be your hang-up.
What I am advocating is for freedom-loving Americans to wake up to what is being done to our economy, our government, and our way of life, and begin to stand for the truth. Our country is headed for a financial disaster that few are even aware is coming. On a personal level, we all know that you cannot spend more than you have and it not catch up with you at some point. This is what is happening on a national level. Those like you who are blindly supporting politicians (of either stripe) are letting these things occur. Whenever anyone tries to point out the dire situation, they are quickly shouted down by supporters like you. So, the truth never gets a hearing. That is why Obama is able to continue with his policies and never has to defend them.
I don't know where you gained an admiration for socialism, but you need to look beyond the slogans and empty promises. Look where "Hope and Change" has gotten us in just a few years. If Obama is re-elected, in four more years our country will not be recognizable.
I get it, you wanna be king. I'm sorry but I still don't see or read any solution except for a call to stand up. Stand up and do what exactly? Are you advocating an overthrow? If so, count me out.
Constitutionalis t

Duffield, VA

#53 Jul 17, 2012
Sorry, no I am not promoting a monarchy. And certainly not with me as king. And no, I am not calling for an overthrow. You know we have reached a sad state of affairs in this country when someone points out corruption in government and they are assumed to be a dangerous radical. Apparently, in your mind, the only acceptable mind set is to support Obama. What I advocate is a return to constitutional government that is limited in scope, that places more power at the state and local level rather than concentrated power at the federal level. A return to fiscal policy that doesn't spend more than it has in revenues. A monetary policy that ends the practice of routine inflation by the Federal Reserve. A foreign policy that is based on reality and not delusions of promises made by our enemies (for a recent example, look at Sec. of State Clinton's recent meeting with the new leader of Egypt Morsi). An energy policy based on using our natural resources and not depending on others such as the Saudis. Do you really consider this radical? I believe in the principles our country was founded upon and not in the new foundations that Obama wants when he promised to quote "fundamentally transform the country" in a speech just prior to his election.

I think you are someone who has a basic belief in fairness for all and a country that treats all equally. That is fine. But, what I am trying to show you with all these examples is that Obama is not that person.

I don't expect you to agree with me. But, just remember the things I have pointed out and in the coming months and years see if what I am saying turns out to be correct. Especially, the results that will come from Obama's handling of the economy. When the crash occurs, just remember that crazy guy who told you about it ahead of time. And then maybe you will want to go back and take a closer look at what we should have been doing in the first place. Socialism is not the answer, it never has been. We have the best system in the world, but it is slowly being dismantled. And unfortunately, your dogged support of Obama hinders you from seeing these things happening before your eyes.
A Voice

Roanoke, VA

#54 Jul 17, 2012
Constitutionalist wrote:
Sorry, no I am not promoting a monarchy. And certainly not with me as king. And no, I am not calling for an overthrow. You know we have reached a sad state of affairs in this country when someone points out corruption in government and they are assumed to be a dangerous radical. Apparently, in your mind, the only acceptable mind set is to support Obama. What I advocate is a return to constitutional government that is limited in scope, that places more power at the state and local level rather than concentrated power at the federal level. A return to fiscal policy that doesn't spend more than it has in revenues. A monetary policy that ends the practice of routine inflation by the Federal Reserve. A foreign policy that is based on reality and not delusions of promises made by our enemies (for a recent example, look at Sec. of State Clinton's recent meeting with the new leader of Egypt Morsi). An energy policy based on using our natural resources and not depending on others such as the Saudis. Do you really consider this radical? I believe in the principles our country was founded upon and not in the new foundations that Obama wants when he promised to quote "fundamentally transform the country" in a speech just prior to his election.
I think you are someone who has a basic belief in fairness for all and a country that treats all equally. That is fine. But, what I am trying to show you with all these examples is that Obama is not that person.
I don't expect you to agree with me. But, just remember the things I have pointed out and in the coming months and years see if what I am saying turns out to be correct. Especially, the results that will come from Obama's handling of the economy. When the crash occurs, just remember that crazy guy who told you about it ahead of time. And then maybe you will want to go back and take a closer look at what we should have been doing in the first place. Socialism is not the answer, it never has been. We have the best system in the world, but it is slowly being dismantled. And unfortunately, your dogged support of Obama hinders you from seeing these things happening before your eyes.
My dogged support of President Obama comes from deep within myself due to my upbringing. It is the way I was taught. We elect our candidate and we stick by them. I don't think Pres. Obama is perfect,,,really he is far from it. I don't think he is the perfect candidate. I do believe that as long as he is President, barring a public display of some weird new theology or idealogy, he merits my support. I'm no socialist. I do, however, believe that there will always be people who we have to support because they are either disabled, empaired or even just lazy. I get fired up,,,,,,calm down,,,,,read my posts,,,,,,and sometimes feel bad because of my words. Anyway, peace and God Bless You. And may God bless the USA.
Constitutionalis t

Duffield, VA

#55 Jul 17, 2012
Well, I think more is accomplished in those calmed down moments. Let me make a point based on what you said. There are those who for whatever reason are less fortunate. How were those people cared for before we had the New Deal and welfare? It was done through private charities, the churches, and the local communities. I think these are better equipped to help people rather than some bureaucrat sitting in an office in Washington or Richmond for that matter. If we the people were able to keep more of the money we earn, then there would be money available to help those in need, rather than wasted in Washington in order to get political favors. I am not disagreeing with what we have the responsibility to do, I just see another way of doing it. A way that is truly humanitarian. We have actually robbed ourselves of great blessings by putting the most important things in the hands of a government that was never intended by the Founding Fathers to take care of these things. The federal government should be small and only do those things that they can do. Things such as defending the country, operating a judicial system so that rights are protected, and a few other things. They should have never got in the business of running our lives. Something to remember, a government that is big enough and powerful enough to give you everything you want, is also big and powerful enough to take those things away whenever it meets their needs. Like when citizens protest unconstitutional acts of the government. The 1st Amendment protects the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Let's not lose that because some want to have a blind allegiance to a leader. That's what leads to dictatorships. And no, I am not saying that you are guilty of doing that. But, please don't be so committed to a leader to be unwilling to change your mind when presented with the facts.
A Voice

Roanoke, VA

#56 Jul 17, 2012
Ok, I promise, this is my last post on this subject because it makes me sweat and get irritable. Are you suggesting that I, a life-long democrat, support a man who describes his party as "not the rich but people who want to be rich"? Sorry, that's just not me. Obama, warts and all, is still the superior candidate in 2012. I'm not doubting some of the facts you state because obviously you are an extremely intelligent person but I will not be so naive as to think this is the fault of my party. Now, whenever our system comes up with something better, or a credible Libertarian emerges I might stray away from my beliefs. Until then,,,,forewarning by you aside, I will support Mr. O. Best wishes and I just hope that I'm around for a few more years to see how this plays out. As for me, I'm looking for the Big Man upstairs to call 'GAME OVER",,,,,,,and all our cares will vanish. At that point all you Repubs can deal with it. SORRY, JUST KIDDING,,,,the devil made me say it.
Constitutionalis t

Duffield, VA

#57 Jul 17, 2012
I will also end up on this, but I have never mentioned that you should support Romney. I am not planning on voting for Romney. Unless something different changes my view, I plan to vote for the Constitution Party candidate, who happens to be a former congressman from Virginia. I have also voted Libertarian in the past. The only thing I have tried to encourage out of you is to not be so trusting of Obama. But, differences aside, you have a wonderful day and yes, the most important thing to know of all is that God is in control and everything is going to work out according to his plan.
booger

Charlotte, NC

#58 Oct 12, 2012
griffin still lives out of the 9th district!!!!~
I miss Rick

Duffield, VA

#59 Oct 12, 2012
booger wrote:
griffin still lives out of the 9th district!!!!~
He is a pathetic excuse for a Congressman. He hasn't been in Scott County but once since he was elected. He has no clue to our needs, our problems with transportation (roads), education, economic development, etc. He has no ability to secure funding for projects, an no ideas to advance the region. Just a pitiful , slow thinking man , who has no idea where to go next. Like the dog that caught the car..... Now what? Thank you Rick Boucher for 28 years of outstanding representation.
Emma

Duffield, VA

#61 Oct 14, 2012
I would love to see Terry Kilgore run for Congressman. Thats what we all need in Scott County.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gate City Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
bos bs Tue Another Boondoggle 7
Lee County gets screwed by Republicans and Demo... Tue Thank You 9
Y'all got laptops? (Oct '13) Tue wolfie 21
Thought on Pizza Plus in GC Mon raphl 2
Anybody know Kay H Dec 22 Phoney Machine 3
Blue devil basketball??? What is going on????? Dec 22 jk to the moon 1
English Bull Dog Breeder Dec 20 Local Vet 2
Gate City Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Gate City People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Gate City News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Gate City

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 3:05 am PST