"TOM McSELFISH = Gov. BustaMENCHA"

9/14/2003 | ALOHA RONNIE Guyer

[ALOHA RONNIE]

NEVER FORGET

.."TOM McSELFISH =

...Gov. BustaMENCHA"

........was THE Sign to behold at this weekend's California Republican Convention held in Playa Del Rey next to the Los Angeles International Airport. So I did.

...No Convention Endorsement came for California Governor, but a posted Convention Straw Poll showed ARNOLD with nearly ..80%.. of the votes verses a little over ..18%.. for TOM McCLINTOCK.

...No one backed down this weekend, though it was hoped one Candidate for California Governor would, with Recall Election Financier Congressman ISSA watching it all unfold right before his very eyes.

Signed:.."ALOHA RONNIE" Guyer / Republican Convention Witness

NEVER FORGET

[ohioWfan]

An article you might be interested in posted above......

[68 grunt]

They are guilty! The die-hards, brigaders, neo-puritans, whack-jobs all! Their guilt is already mighty. And still they spew their drivel, and still alienate the middle, and still the wedge the right and threaten and poot and have their pathetic collective temper tantrums. They need to find a mountaintop to be the head of their pin. If they are not disruptors they are zealots, and we know the fate of the zealots. Let us not be taken down with them!

VOTE FOR CALIFORNIA CHANGE - VOTE SCHWARZENEGGER

[68 grunt]

Thou protest too much! You are guilty - deal with it!

[ohioWfan]

It was Buchanan/Perot's fault that xlinton was elected, and the 'purists' who supported them. Only 43% voted for xlinton. He would NEVER have won without the Buchanan/Perot zealots.

Being an adult means taking responsibility for your own choices. Did you hide under 'moral principle' when you voted AGAINST GHW Bush, and as a result FOR xlinton?

What 'moral principle' made you do that.......that Bush was a 'reprobate,' or pro-gay, or pro-abortion (which, for the record, he, of course, was none of)? Or was it sheer political animosity?

I hear the same cry now as was given in 92, that voting for a guaranteed loser (who is a good man, from all I have heard) is somehow a matter of 'moral principle.'

My guess is, that it is far more political than it is moral, just like it was in 92 when the same group of uber rightists threw our country down the toilet by helping defeat GHW Bush because of their 'principles'......

[Sabertooth]

It was Buchanan/Perot's fault that xlinton was elected, and the 'purists' who supported them. Only 43% voted for xlinton. He would NEVER have won without the Buchanan/Perot zealots.

Being an adult means taking responsibility for your own choices. Did you hide under 'moral principle' when you voted AGAINST GHW Bush, and as a result FOR xlinton?

This wasn't addressed to me, but I'd like to answer anyway.

I disagree with you about Buchanan and Perot, and I voted for President Bush against Clinton. Even though I supported him, I also blame him for blowing that election and running a lousy campaign.

Politicians are selling a product: their candidacy, with all of the positions and baggage that entails. The currency paid for that product is votes.

A politician with a bad product, or who markets badly, isn't going to sell his candidacy to enough voters to win elections. When President Bush 41 grew complacent about his constituency, and took their votes for granted, many took their votes and bought stock in Perot.

Yes, Clinton was a disaster. But it does no good to blame voters for behaving the way they have always behaved. To do so is to ignore human nature. Disaffected voters will cast their ballots elsewhere. This is the nature of democracies.

So, what's the solution? Place the responsibility for successful or failed campaings where it belongs: on the politicians and their strategists. Make them earn our votes, over and over. If we don't, we risk nurturing further complacency, and losing more elections.

[exmarine]

It was Buchanan/Perot's fault that xlinton was elected, and the 'purists' who supported them. Only 43% voted for xlinton. He would NEVER have won without the Buchanan/Perot zealots.

ONLY 43%? Only 43%? That clearly means that half the country is immoral or amoral!! So, tell me again, whose fault is it? The American people, that's who. It's also the fault of many Christians who did NOT vote at all (they succumbed to rapturitis) and many other Christians who did not vote moral principle. If all Christians voted moral principle instead of trying to out-guess God and manipulate the future, McClintock would win (deny that!). But becuase many Christians are touting a reprobate, there will be consequences to pay!

Being an adult means taking responsibility for your own choices. Did you hide under 'moral principle' when you voted AGAINST GHW Bush, and as a result FOR xlinton?

I was not a Christian before 1995, I was a blind, deaf and dumb, just like most of America today.

I hear the same cry now as was given in 92, that voting for a guaranteed loser (who is a good man, from all I have heard) is somehow a matter of 'moral principle.'

what are you - a fortune teller? Trying to out-guess God again? This faithless attitude (that's right!) gives God no room to operate. You KNOW BETTER than God, eh? I will say it again, if all Christians voted moral principle (as they clearly should!), then godly men would be elected. But they don't - many are like you - they listen to talking heads who give them ungodly and unbiblical advice. I will say again, the RIGHT THING to do is vote moral principle, not policy. It is a moral COMPROMISE to do otherwise. Period.

My guess is, that it is far more political than it is moral, just like it was in 92 when the same group of uber rightists threw our country down the toilet by helping defeat GHW Bush because of their 'principles'......

Rightist? If voting moral principle according to the bible is "rightist," then I am guilty and proud of it! Our founder, John Jay (know who he is?) said we should prefer Christians in our voting. But what does he know, he only wrote the Federalist papers, was the 1st Chief Justice of SCOTUS, and attended the Constitutional convention.

I want you to tell me how it is wrong (biblically and morally) to vote for moral principle. You can't do it! You can't do it becuase it's right! You are wrong and you are grasping at the same lame excuses that all Christians use when they want to justify their non-trust of God.

[exmarine]

Respond to this and justify it if you can:

But Ahh-nold is also pro-gay rights and the governor most certainly does and has signed pro-gay legislation into LAW. Just look at the bills signed by Gay Davis. So, there's no way around it. A vote for Ahh-nold is a vote for the continued demolition of God's family. Not to mention the gun laws he might pass that are in violation of the 2nd Amendment.

[68 grunt]

You are protesting too much because you are guilty, guilty, guilty. Go find a mountaintop. Gather your bretheren and wait, the time is near.

[sruleoflaw]

You are right on.

Arnold and Cruz are kissing cousins -- sharing the same positions on homosexual domestic partnerships, Proposition 54, the Family Leave Act, Prop. 187, vouchers, abortion and many more.

ARNOLD = CRUZ LITE

[68 grunt]

Might, maybe, could be ... Your denial of basic rights to people with different lifestyles than you is ugly.

VOTE UNITY - VOTE SCHWARZENEGGER

[68 grunt]

Alright! Two of you - it must be a concensus! LOL

[exmarine]

Arnold and Cruz are kissing cousins -- sharing the same positions on homosexual domestic partnerships, Proposition 54, the Family Leave Act, Prop. 187, vouchers, abortion and many more.

Exactly right friend. A vote for Arnold is tantamount to selling moral principle down the river in exchange for POSSIBLE future benefits (manipulation of the future, out-guessing and ignoring God). It's a form of PROSTITUTION for a Christian to do this. I refuse to be a WHORE for Arnold Schwarzenegger. How's taht for blunt?

[ohioWfan]

Bush DID run a lousy campaign who didn't get the truth out that the economy was improving (to tell you the truth, I think he might have been a bit naive about how ruthless the Clintons were), Perot was a straw dog who fooled a lot of conservatives who were angry at GHW, and the Clinton campaign was the most masterful set of lies and deceit ever foisted upon the American people.

The American people can be easily deceived, the press was pushing hard, and shamelessly campaigning for their 'darling,' and there wasn't nearly the access to alternative information (i.e. TRUTH) that there is now.

(All 43% who voted for him did not know that Clinton was a reprobate, exmarine). BUT, the conservatives who voted for Perot DID know Clinton was a reprobate, and voted for a guaranteed LOSER anyway, and ushered in the most evil man to ever occupy the Oval Office.

When all is said and done, bad campaigning, media complicity in the lies of the Clintons, the ignorance of the American people, the REAL fault lies with those who knew Perot couldn't win, who knew Clinton was debauched, and voted in anger AGAINST GHW Bush to make their political point.

And America lost BIG time because of their choice.

[Sabertooth]

When all is said and done, bad campaigning, media complicity in the lies of the Clintons, the ignorance of the American people, the REAL fault lies with those who knew Perot couldn't win, who knew Clinton was debauched, and voted in anger AGAINST GHW Bush to make their political point.

How else will voters make their points?

Angry voters will vote elsewhere. This isn't going to change.

Voters get angry when they feel politicians are disloyal to their own promises, or to shared values. Appeals to loyalty won't move them when they believe that their trust has already been broken by a politician.

This is fundamental, real-world politics. You don't have to like it, but to ignore it is to ignore gravity.

[exmarine]

I will ask you for the third time to respond to this:

But Ahh-nold is also pro-gay rights and the governor most certainly does and has signed pro-gay legislation into LAW. Just look at the bills signed by Gay Davis. So, there's no way around it. A vote for Ahh-nold is a vote for the continued demolition of God's family. Not to mention the gun laws he might pass that are in violation of the 2nd Amendment.

Now, tell me how you can justify voting for Arnold or anyone else who believes as he does. Inquiring minds want to know.

[exmarine]

The American people can be easily deceived, the press was pushing hard, and shamelessly campaigning for their 'darling,' and there wasn't nearly the access to alternative information (i.e. TRUTH) that there is now.

People with no moral compass are easily deceived, but this is no excuse for Christians. IF people voted moral principle, they could not be deceived as they stand on the ROCK of God's truth.

[BunnySlippers]

Anyone know when the debate is tonight?

[exmarine]

By the way, GHW Bush was not a great President. He lied to Americans (read his lips) and he sacrificed American sovereignty on the altar of the "new world order." I didn't trust him then and I don't trust him now. He's better than Clinton, but not the best candidate. I don't vote for liars or for people who ignore the U.S. Constitution - it's a waste of a vote. If I had been A Christian in 92, I would have voted Constitution Party, as I always vote moral principle and leave the results up to God. That is the essence of faith. You do what God asks you to do and leave the results up to Him.

[Redleg Duke]

Didn't anyone ever tell you that sooner or later, you need to stop telling yourself you are in a cave, stop digging, and climb out of the hole?

And if you think that I would vote for Clinton if he ran as a Republican, then don't even presume to call me "my friend".

[SONbrad]

A little historic insight for you.

John Jay did not write the Federallist Papers. He was ONE of the writers of the Federalist Papers.

Just thought you should know since you seem to have a "holier than God" attitude about you.