Free Republic

To follow up on this, no, gay men will not go to jail, because the only federal crimes are counterfeiting, espionage, and treason. And if the Constitution were really followed, the Senate would not be corrupt, so we would not have to worry about that.
I must admit, although I have been active in the CP for quite some time, I have never seen that part about the 17th amendment. I'll have to look back to it.

I happen to be a member of the party. And if you want to make fun of me for it, you're just another liberal.

I met Michael Peroutka! I was an usher and ticket-taker at "America's Call to Honor God," where he campaigned. He's a great man, and if he did take office, America would be back to the way it was founded, like that! We'd roll back nearly a CENTURY of government largesse. The Constitution Party is, indeed, nearly identical to the freerepublic.com platform. I think Bush and Kerry are nearly two peas in a pod, so I'm voting for Michael.

Ridiculous. Where is this country headed? And Orrin Hatch is a good guy too. What's the deal?

Somehow I don't think that's really Al Franken. I don't think even he has enough time on his hands to come and put us all down. But whoever it is, why don't they just leave us alone? We never go to commiedreams (commondreams.org) and throw all the facts at them (sounds like a good idea, but I won't give them the satisfaction).

A democrat promising to stop spiraling costs of health care. Ha! That's the equivalent to a tobacco company promising to make everyone's lungs healthier! The spiraling costs are the direct result of excessive government intervention in the health care industry! People were already upset about Bush's medicare expansion, and now this guy wants to do something that costs twice as much. This is the kind of mess we run into when we disobey the constitution.

Thom Hartmann is a nut case. He's not worth our time. I read one of his articles, and my childhood blanket has a better understanding of economics than him.

I know America will come to their senses eventually. Kerry is a weird extremist.

Yes, those are good, but he also hiked government spending while doing it. As much as I like Bush, he is settling for moderation, and we need something else, that will stick to our country's principles.

Yes, those are good, but he also hiked government spending while doing it. He is settling for moderation, and we need something else.

I agree with that. The republican party is becoming liberal, and I plan to join the Constitution Party.

I've always wondered the same thing. Watching the guy on TV, I don't know how one could feel hate towards him. My mom is a liberal, and she says it's because of his "fiscal irresponsiblity" and how he "brings the bible into everything." But you know, Clinton was just as fiscally irresponsible. The only way he avoided the deficit was by robbing the citizens, which, as we know, led to a recession. Others hate him because of the Iraq War, but that argument goes down the tubes when they love Clinton, who led us into Kosovo. And liberals have no clue what our founding fathers had in mind conserning religion. They think they actually would have objected to any public display of Christianity.
I think the main reason is that he came in after their Clinton bubble was burst, and they don't agree with him, so they make up every excuse possible to find something to blame him for. If nothing else had gone wrong, they would be blaming him for their food tasting bad, and their girlfriend/boyfriend dumping them.

That was very well done. That proves he is doing what's best for small businesses, or at least taking a step in that direction. Of course, he never brought up his liberalism (eg. his socialized medicare bill). But anyway, I had never seen that assertiveness and articulation in him before. He had some very good points.

Their social issues are horrible (eg. abortion, gay marriage, drug legalization, prostitution legalization, no death penalty). But their economics are great. I don't usually agree with them on trade, but Harry has some good points here. Over-regulation is definitely costing us.
The 2000 election was more interesting, with three really good guys running: Pat Buchanan, Howard Phillips, and Harry Browne. I'm glad Browne's still somehow involved.

You know, most of the people attacking this bill are the true conservatives. I think this is the administration's attempt at being "compassionate conservative." From what I see, the bill is working great for the seniors, but it's just another form of democratic socialism. Just where the GOP is headed.

I just came by this. This is very true, and relieving. It slightly offends me that my politics are considered a form of rebellion, but that's what the hippie generation wants to think. I think a factor in the change of politics is that youth is surprisingly smart enough to see the mess their predecessors have created in the country and recognize that it's their job to clean it up. I hope our work doesn't get rolled back by another generation in a couple decades.

Wow, I hate Billy Chrystal. He needs to read that article and graph and see if he still considers our economy to be "tanking." He should be one of the people out on the streets, thrown to the compassion of those around him.

Now he's talking in a different language like an idiot. What a megalomaniac. He's almost as bad as Michael Moore (but not quite).

Haha, now when we are asked why we like Bush more than Clinton, we can answer: "It's the economy stupid!"

Hmmm, Pat and Jesse Jackson on the same show. That must have been interesting. :)

John Edwards does seem to be focusing on his concern for the "average guy." Pat's against free trade too, so he and Edwards would agree on that. If Edwards gets elected, I know the economy will continue getting better, and the democrats will have another excuse to believe that they're "better for the economy." I think Pat's got a great combination of economic policies.

It looks like the liberals' claims that deficits and interest rates are so closely related is another one of their lies.

What really pissed me off is that my uncle, who is investing for a business, knows that interest rates are low. But he said, "I hope they stay that way with 'old what's his face' in the whitehouse." How the hell can he try to blame Bush for high interest rates? I understand George isn't perfect, and is spending too much, but he did work to lower the interest rates, and all people like my uncle can do is attack him for it being "probably temporary." Probably because he doesn't want to admit to taking a personal risk by investing his own money.