I agree wholeheartedly with your post #16. I don’t hear any of the candidates in this election cycle talking about this, except for the tangent discussions about eminent domain. Time for the free market conservatives to talk this up, so we can distinguish them from the uniparty spies.
Complete tangent Rant begins:
No offense, but you point out exactly WHY I *loathe* the term ‘conservative’.
You bring up ‘free market conservatives’. Just how many camps does ‘conservative’ fall into? Doesn’t ‘conservative’ encompass ‘free market’s already?
If so, why the clarification?
If not, what DOES it encompass?
Can we NOT sound like the MSM, parsing every phrase and innuendo, looking for holes and ‘gotchas’? Compartmentalizing every person into tiny boxes that shift from speech to vote to ....
Just leave it as ‘Constitutionalist’ and be DONE! Adhere and follow, make it the basis of EVERY discussion/debate and use to return govt to its rightful size and purpose.
There is no wiggle room, no adjectives required. If it’s not being followed, one is not a “strict” Constitutionalist to begin.
Whom to vote would be a MUCH simpler endeavor, IMO.
/rant
***
Thanks. I’d rather start seeing REAL questions answered by the candidates. My #1:
How much of *ME* is owned to another? What %? How do you juxtapose that % is NOT ‘slavery’ (Def: Working for the benefit of another)?