TEN Conservative Candidates

Socialists make up 70% of the American people? Pity, I'd think a Colonel that had served during the Cold War would FIGHT socialism, not embrace it. I don't believe your numbers, because you have a propensity for pulling statistics out of your rectum.

It's too bad you couldn't give an intelligent analysis of the debate rather than a lecture on the very idea. You're about as much a moderate Republican as Mao was!

If these10 men were attempting to become the head of the Republican National Committee I believe they would represent some very creditable candidates for RNC Chairmen. The problem is they are attempting to secure the nomination to run for President of the United States. To select any one of these men as the next president would be to select a person that has ideas and policy objectives that IGNORE about 70% of the American People.

That would be up to the American voting public to decide, now would it not? Just because they don't hold to "your" ideas doesn't mean the "majority" of Americans feel the same way. To "assume" that premise would be rather ignorant. But then we've come to expect that type of behavior from you.

Gideon

Democrats, Moderates and Independents are NOT Socialists. That is a FLAT LIE. It is true that these three groups have different views of what the government should do
then conservatives but that does make them anything like Socialists. Since this country is a democracy, my point is that the GOP candidates hold policy objectives very different from what these three groups want and the conservatives DO NOT represent anything close to a majority. My analysis is right on since the policy outlook of these ten candidates all comes from the same slant which is NOT in accord with where the majority want our government to take this country. I am not saying all the conservative ideas should be ignored. What I am saying is we do not need another president that ONLY leads in one direction that represents what a MIONARITY of the population wants!

drmiler

"That would be up to the American voting public to decide, now would it not? Just because they don't hold to "your" ideas doesn't mean the "majority" of Americans feel the same way. To "assume" that premise would be rather ignorant. But then we've come to expect that type of behavior from you."

YOU ignore the point. It is not just my view it is the view of the majority. If you believe the majority support the conservative agenda, you live in a dream world.

It's amusing to watch Gene not realize how out of touch he is.  Few people (VERY few people) have the same opinion as Gene. Maybe 10% tops.

The number of hard core socialists in the United States is a very low %.

Gene's a born and bred politician. He thinks he and he alone knows what the American people wants.

Which is interesting, because if that were true, his books would have flown off the shelves (still waiting for my complimentary review copies)

Posted: Friday, May 04, 2007
“It's amusing to watch Gene not realize how out of touch he is. Few people (VERY few people) have the same opinion as Gene. Maybe 10% tops.”

I have NOT said what percent I think agree with everything I believe. What I Said is the MAJORITY do not agree with the conservative agenda and that policy that the ten candidates exported last night! You try and twist the issue to me. The issue is the fact that the policies those ten candidates support ARE NOT what the majority in this country want!

Gideon

“Which is interesting, because if that were true, his books would have flown off the shelves (still waiting for my complimentary review copies)” You can afford to buy a copy. You might learn something. This is what Midwest Book Review had to say after reading my book:

Book Reviews, Book Lover Resources, Advice for Writers and Publishers
Home / Reviewer's Bookwatch
Reviewer's Bookwatch
Volume 6, Number 10 October 2006

Burroughs' Bookshelf
George W. Bush Robin Hood For The Rich
Gene P. Abel
AuthorHouse
1663 Liberty Drive Suite 200, Bloomington, IN 47403
1425929427 $13.99 www.authorhouse.com 1-800-839-8640

George W. Bush Robin Hood For The Rich by Gene P. Abel, Colonel, USAR Ret. (over 30 years of service as a commissioned officer, and two-time recipient of the Meritorious Service Medal) severely questions the immediate and long-term effects to America that the Bush administration is responsible for. Sharply critical, George W. Bush Robin Hood For The Rich decries the administration's narrow-minded attempts to partially privatize Social Security without providing any transition fund for the interim monies that would be lost; the administration's alienation of its foreign allies in the years after the September 11 attacks due its blind press for war in Iraq; and the administration's utter failure to balance the budget or prevent an explosion of the national deficit. At the same time, George W. Bush Robin Hood For The Rich is not universally negative; it notes the wise actions that President Bush has taken, but laments that the harmful actions may well outweigh the good in the president's legacy for the 21st century. Drawing information from more than 40 renowned sources, and including humorous Blogs to convey points with a twist, George W. Bush Robin Hood For The Rich not only identifies potential current and future problems stemming from the Bush administration but also offers recommendations for alternatives to cope with their personal impact on individual lives. Highly recommended.

Why would I buy a copy, Col? You don't believe in personal wealth, you believe in redistributing wealth, remember? I would hate to put you in a moral and ethical dilemna by giving you money.

Honestly, insulting the intelligence of your opposition is a pretty telling sign of a weak argument, Col. I will gladly review your books. I will not buy them. Or, send me one and if I like it I'll buy it AND the other.

Gideon

This Blog does not insult the intelligence of anyone including the conservatives. It clearly points out that to elect one of these ten candidates would be to appeal to about 30% of our people and ignore the other 70%. If you can not understand that is not what our country is about and that will just perpetuate the political polarization, then you are of limited intellect!

Gideon

“Why would I buy a copy, Col? You don't believe in personal wealth, you believe in redistributing wealth, remember? I would hate to put you in a moral and ethical dilemma by giving you money.”

Another example of the ridiculous nature of your arguments. The real dilemma for you is your refusal to look at other people and how they are being impacted by the policies you hold important. You also do not look at the long term impact of the policies you hold important. Your not reading my book will harm you far more then me. The issues I tackle are real. The research was substantial. The path we are on is NOT solving many of the major issues facing our country. I have always found it is important to examine both the validity of the goals and the methods to achieve the goals. Both often require changes and in some cases admission that the approach, the assumptions etc that were being used were incorrect. One of the most basic failures of GWB is his inability and unwillingness to take an honest look at BOTH his policies and his tactics. He is a stubborn, arrogant and ill informed man who has not achieved much by his own efforts and was handed just about every thing in life because of the success of his father.

Historians will have a field day with the life and presidency of GWB. The citizens of the United States will suffer for decades because of this man!

Gideon

"You don't believe in personal wealth,"

That is not correct. I was successful in achieving enough money to live comfortably with two homes and the ability to help our children. I do understand that many people work every day and do not earn enough to provide the basis needs for their family. Some are disabled and can not provide for what they need. Some lost what they had by virtue of things like Katrina. The difference between you and I is that I believe we collectively via the government has an obligation to help those that need help so long as they do their part. I do not favor handing my tax dollars to someone that CAN and choose NOT to work. I do not object to providing my tax dollars to those that are working but still need help or to those that can not provide what they need. That will require some added burden on those that have enormous resources and the extent that I would ask them to help will not materially alter their life style.

Every person who has achieved great wealth did so in part because of the abilities they were given by their creator. They may have added hard work and education, but if any member of the top 10% were born into a family without great wealth and an IQ of 60, they too would be in need of help. The people I believe can and should contribute a little more are those that are at the extreme end of the wealth spectrum. People well into six and seven figure annual incomes. People with millions and in some cases billions of treasure stacked up. I know MOST people with extreme wealth got that wealth from many little people buying what ever they provided. In many cases these goods have costs that are higher then need be and there is no clearer example of this then the oil companies.

What the wealthy do not want to understand is that the refusal to balance our budget and pay down the debt will adversely impact them and their children down the road. We hear that the wealthy pay most of the taxes. Guess what-- then the wealthy will be paying the added trillions in interest we are obligating the future Americans to pay by the debt. When we must do something to pay Medicare and Social Security the choices will be either CUT benefits or increase taxes. Some have said only 10% of people agree with me. I doubt that. If you believe given the choice of not paying Social Security and Medicare or increasing taxes on the wealthy the majority will not choose increasing taxes you have lost all sense of reality. I bet 90% would opt to increase taxes and they will not support major tax increases on the low and middle income workers. It is time for the wealthy to WAKE UP and look at the ultimate consequences of the fiscal policy we have been following! The wealthy will bear the greatest burden for making up what will be needed by the vast majority especially for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid!

Gideon This Blog does not insult the intelligence of anyone including the conservatives. It clearly points out that to elect one of these ten candidates would be to appeal to about 30% of our people and ignore the other 70%. If you can not understand that is not what our country is about and that will just perpetuate the political polarization, then you are of limited intellect!

You're STILL not getting it are you? Fool that you are, "IF" one of them gets elected far more than 30% will have supported them. If only 30% supported, that would make any of them an also-ran.

Marxists throughout history have thought much as you do.

Your posts have consistently struck me as very out of touch with the mainstream. I get the striking opinion that you don't spend a lot of time with a lot of people in your day to day life.

Moreover, the foundation of your belief is based on ignorance.  The vast VAST majority of people who are poor and receive welfare aren't retarded or disabled. They are simply people who made incredibly stupid choices and continue to do so.

I have met many people who are poor and as I've gotten to know them realized that even if you handed them everything, they'd ruin it and end up wretched any way. 

But I don't base my beliefs even mostly on personal experiences but based on statistical fact.  We know who the poor in this country are. There is a wealth of demographic information out there.  They don't need public assistance they need to get off their asses and work.

But since people like you don't care about facts -- after all, you don't advocate that you pay extra in taxes, you advocate for other people to pay more in taxes -- you have no incentive to get educated.

Why is the burden on "the wealthy" to take care of the deficit? Shouldn't the 40% or so of Americans who pay nothing in federal taxes be worried about it too?

And why should I care if the federal government ends up bankrupt any more than the next person? Heck, quite the opposite. It's the person who pays nothing in but gets something out that should be worried.

You'd lose that bet. Most people don't support higher taxes. 

You aren't qualified to say what the consequences are by having a 2% GDP deficit. 

You are quite mistaken, however, that the rich will bear the greatest burden.  No, quite mistaken. 

People like you are powerless because you are, ultimately parasites. The only reason you even have the ability it spout out your crap is because of the generosity of successful people who can, at a whim, take it away (whether that be here or elsewhere). 

I have no problem bearing a disproportionate of the burden.  I already do.  I paid more in taxes last year than you've probably earned in your lifetime, Gene.  It's about thresholds.  I'm at my threshold now.  It's time for "the people" to start being more responsible for themselves.

 

OK, Col Gene. I'll bite.Just for a second, I will assume that you really are the smartest man on the planet and should be elected dictator for life based on your omniscience. Assuming that, I put forth this challenge:

SHOW ME THE BODIES! Show me the Americans starving in the street, emaciated, left without food to die by their heartless countrymen. You show me that and I'll march with you all the way to Washington.

UNTIL you do that, you are nothing but an opportunistic liar who's just trying to sell a book. A person ironically trying to make bank off of the bashing of capitalism.

Your barrage of personal insults on all who oppose the omniscient Col. Gene is telling.

“You're STILL not getting it are you? Fool that you are, "IF" one of them gets elected far more than 30% will have supported them.”

No Fool. What has taken place is the conservatives have taken control of the GOP. In this country we have only two viable parties. In the 2000 election the majority selected Gore. In the 2004 election Bush won by 2%. That does not alter the fact that the policies we have been following and the policies presented by the ten GOP candidates do NOT conform to what the majority want for this country.

“Moreover, the foundation of your belief is based on ignorance. The vast majority of people who are poor and receive welfare aren't retarded or disabled. They are simply people who made incredibly stupid choices and continue to do so.”

No- many people that have service jobs that we all need do not pay a living wage. If we were able to grant every worker a B.S. degree we would have waiters, grass cutters, garbage people with a college degree. These jobs exist because we need the services and society does not value them enough to pay a living wage. Low income families are a combination of people that have service jobs, limited ability workers and disabled. In any event, so long as they do what they can I believe those that have abundance should help them with the resources needed to live!

They don't pay a living wage? WHERE ARE THE BODIES, COL?

"They don't need public assistance they need to get off their asses and work."

Every wealthy person should have to work a few years doing service jobs for minimum wage. I see a lot of low income workers breaking their back and have very little to show for their work. All workers can not own their own business and pay themselves $200,000 per year!

"You'd lose that bet. Most people don't support higher taxes. "

If the choice is not receiving Social Security or Medicare or increasing the taxes on the top 10%, MOST people will opt for the wealthy paying higher taxes! That is what the choice will come to and VERY SOON!

I have known minimum wage workers my whole life, Col. Know what I see?

I do not personally know a single minimum wage worker who does not have a color TV. MOST have bigger, fancier ones than we have (we have a 13 inch), and not a few have 52" big screens. They also all have cable or dish, DVD players, and stereos. This is not "subsistence" living. True they have little to show for their work because at the end of the day all of these things belong to (name your local rental place). But because they insisted on purchasing from these places, IF they pay off their contract, they will have paid 3-5 times the value of the item.

A good example is computers. Know how many (functional) computers I have (not counting parts)? THREE. Know how much I paid for each? $65 for my main machine, which has a 1.8 Ghz P4 Proc, $125 for my Linux machine, which I bought three years ago and which functioned as my main machine for over two years, and $100 for my newest acquisition, with a 1.0 ghz proc. Know how much the average poor person pays for theirs? Over $1000, usually more to the tune of $2000-3000 before all is said and done. They borrow money at payday loan places at 500-1000% APR because they can't afford their cigarettes, beer, and lottery tickets (oh yes, ask any convenience store owner where they sell the most lottery tickets...the POOR side of town. And liquor stores aren't located in the ghettoes without a reason).

You can blame Bush and blame anyone you want for the plight of the poor, Col, but the VAST MAJORITY of America's poor are poor because of LIFE CHOICES, NOT because of "the man"

SHOW ME THE BODIES! Show me the Americans starving in the street, emaciated, left without food to die by their heartless countrymen. You show me that and I'll march with you all the way to Washington.

You need go no further then the Gulf Coast and the eastern coast of Texas. Many of these people had almost nothing before Katrina and now they have NOTHING. Anyone below the poverty line is POOR. I saw hundreds in the affluent community I live in Florida when I was president of a non profit corporation that helped low income families with housing. We had a waiting list for low income housing that was 5 times the total number of units we had available. Every year we received less and less money from FL as they were cutting the taxes on the wealthiest residents under Jeb Bush. There were laid off workers in Ohio on 20/20 that had to wait in line over 5 hours in line to receive surplus food.

Gideon

WHY don't you try and live on $10,000 per year. That is what $5.15 per hour at 40 hrs per week amount to! Hell try $15,000 which is what a person would receive at the proposed increase in the minimum wage!

I've done it, Col. The thing is, I've worked my way UP the chain so I don't HAVE to. I know more about living off of a fixed income than you ever will. You've lived your entire life on the taxpayer's dime, Col, so you have a decided conflict of interest.

And no, people are not starving to death on the Gulf Coast. That is an outright, bold faced lie, something you're very, very good at presenting, Col.

Gidion

Again you show your ignorance. GE, Ford, Merchants National Bank University of Pennsylvania and Hahnemann University were not the Government. In addition I formed two small corporations. I spent 5.5 Years on active duty in the Army and my reserve pay (week end drills) came from tax dollars and part of my salary as Dean of a Community College came from tax dollars. The VAST majority of my income DID NOT, as you put it, come from the taxpayers. Not all people who are poor starve to death but they have nothing but the bare essentials and then only because of some of the help you and others on this Blog site would end. The outlook you display is despicable and I do not have to justify myself to the likes of people who would turn their back on those the need help in this country so they can add more zero's to their Net Worth. Again we need leaders that understand the LONG TERM needs of ALL Americans not just the privileged FEW! I say again NONE of the ten GOP candidates have that outlook!