Re: POLITICS - Who you should vote for

[Guest guest]

On 1/6/08, haecklers <haecklers@...> wrote:

> This is an interactive site where you answer questions on the 15

> issues - whether you support or oppose and how important they are to

> you; it then tells you which candidates are closest to your interests

> and where they disagree with you. My top one is Kucinich, which I

> knew. #2 choice is Gravel! LOL!

>

> http://www.dehp.net/candidate/

I got a +44 for Ron ; Gravel and Kucinich basically tied for

second place at +28 for Gravel and +26 for Kucinich. All the

Democrats followed on the positive side, and all the Repubicans except

Ron had negative scores.

Interesting, though hardly comprehensive. Also, I'm not sure how

accurate it is. They have Ron as opposing state's right to use

the death penalty. As far as I know, his position is personally

against the death penalty and he'd eliminate it on the federal level

as president; it's possible he'd support a constitutional amendment

taking the states' right to issue it away (I have no idea, but maybe),

but I doubt without one that he'd try to ban them from using it. But

maybe I'm wrong.

Chris

[Guest guest]

--- " haecklers " <haecklers@...> wrote:

> This is an interactive site where you answer questions on the 15

> issues - whether you support or oppose and how important they are to

> you; it then tells you which candidates are closest to your interests

> and where they disagree with you. My top one is Kucinich, which I

> knew. #2 choice is Gravel! LOL!

> http://www.dehp.net/candidate/

Interesting - thanks for posting. My top scores were 26 for Biden, 25

for Kucinich, 22 for , although Biden had 4 unknowns and

had 2 unknowns that could change the score. Even Clinton at

19 and Obama at 20 outscored at 14. I was very surprised that

does not support net neutrality. I listed that as a key issue.

raised a good point - that the list of issues is not very

comprehensive. It doesn't include any sustainability/food/supplement

related issues that most of us have.

[Guest guest]

--- Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@...> wrote:

>

--- <oz4caster@...> wrote:

> > I was very surprised that does not support net neutrality.

> > I listed that as a key issue.

>

> If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

it appears that we still have internet neutrality.

Wikipedia has a good discussion about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality

As long as it stays this way, I would see no need for legislation.

But if content providers are no longer treated equally in servicing

the passage of information through the net, then I believe we should

have legislation to restore that condition.

[Guest guest]

Amusing.... 91 Kucinich

77 Gravel

0

[Guest guest]

--- Idol <Idol@...> wrote:

> What in the name of the flying spaghetti monster made you think Ron

> would support net neutrality? He's against government

> regulation, including regulations preventing abuses such as traffic

> shaping. Maybe he'd say that as a matter of personal taste, he

> objects to companies leveraging their power over the last mile, but

> net neutrality regulation would be foursquare against his

> fundamental philosophy.

Yeah , what was I thinking?

> Of course the irony is that without it, his candidacy could never

> have gotten off the ground in the first place, as he's the ultimate

> YouTube candidate -- and if it goes away in the future, as it's

> already starting to do, there might eventually be no more net-based

> political insurgencies.

I guess that's why I thought he would be in favor. It is ironic.

> This one gave me 76 points for Kucinich

Wow! You must have had a lot of " key " issues that matched, about like

with Ron .

> None of them cover certain issues central to this list, but that's

> because those issues just haven't hit the mainstream or even

> anything close as of yet.

It's a real shame that issues like sustainability, food quality, GMO,

NAIS, vaccines, and supplement regulation aren't higher on the

mainstream priority list. I'd rate them as " key " issues.

It's also ironic that if people recognized that the key to good health

is diet and not drugs, vaccines, and surgery, " health care " might not

be much of an issue and billions of dollars could be saved to pay for

better quality sustainable food. I'm afraid most people are severely

brainwashed in this regard. And as a consequence, our national

priorities are severely messed up. Our government is funding and

favoring more and more drug/surgery/factory farm solutions for our

health and food. Unfortunately this is likely to continue unless the

masses can be re-educated in this regard. That's where a neutral

internet is our biggest asset.

[Guest guest]

Are you actually a Kucinich supporter? Or was this a surprise?

>

> Amusing.... 91 Kucinich

> 77 Gravel

> 0

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

> Not really a surprise...

>

> I did find out to my chagrin that Kucinich said in Iowa, that he supported

> Obama if he himself didn¹t reach the threshold. I find Clinton and Obama

> quite loathsome...it would seem like if he wanted to throw his support behind

> a mainstream candidate, would be the one.

>

>> >

>> >

>> > Are you actually a Kucinich supporter? Or was this a surprise?

>> >

>> >

>>> >>

>>> >> Amusing.... 91 Kucinich

>>> >> 77 Gravel

>>> >> 0

>>> >>

>>> >>

>>> >>

[Guest guest]

On 1/6/08, Ancient Eyeball Recipe <implode7@...> wrote:

> > I did find out to my chagrin that Kucinich said in Iowa, that he supported

> > Obama if he himself didn¹t reach the threshold. I find Clinton and Obama

> > quite loathsome...it would seem like if he wanted to throw his support

> behind

> > a mainstream candidate, would be the one.

Moyers said the same thing in the interview Wanita posted, though I

didn't really understand his response, which wasn't very specific.

Chris

[Guest guest]

Did you read the interview from Moyers? It sounded like it was part

of some strategy - he said he wasn't endorsing Obama, just that it

would help if in Iowa they gave their votes to him.

> >>> >>

> >>> >> Amusing.... 91 Kucinich

> >>> >> 77 Gravel

> >>> >> 0

> >>> >>

> >>> >>

> >>> >>

[Guest guest]

Yeah, that whole vegan thing would count against him on this group.

--- In , ee Meade <scottee1@...>

wrote:

>

> My top score was for Kucinich. My biggest problem with him is that I

> understand him to be a vegan and very pro-Animal Rights.

>

> ee in Virginia

>

[Guest guest]

Oh ick! me too.

Connie

> My top score was for Kucinich. My biggest problem with him is that I

> understand him to be a vegan and very pro-Animal Rights.

>

> ee in Virginia

[Guest guest]

> Did you read the interview from Moyers?

I watched the RP and DK interviews; they were great. This is even

better -- one hour with Ron in a town meeting format in New

Hampshire:

Part 1.

youtube.com/watch?v=WxldrCsVByA

Part 2.

youtube.com/watch?v=8VQcpmfT0f4

> Yeah, that whole vegan thing would count against him on this group.

I wouldn't have a problem with it if he weren't an advocate of Big

Government. But the combination is dangerous -- he wants, for

example, to ban nutritional supplements containing nervous tissue, and

thinks the FDA doesn't do enough to combat mad cow, which suggests he

might support NAIS.

If he were an advocate of smaller government, I'd be happy he was

vegan, because it's an alterantive health viewpoint. If he wants more

freedom for alternative health viewpoints, he'd give me freedom for

mine too.

Either way, in the completely impossible situation that it were

Kucinich against any of the Repubilcans aside from , I'd go

Kucinich all the way, just to get someone in there who will cut down

the size of the warfare state and stand up to these corporations that

run the government. That might bode well in the longer term for the

health movement, but in the short term there would be some negative

effects.

Chris

[Guest guest]

> I¹m just so sick and tired of these cliches...²big government², ³freedom²,

> ³change², etc....

>

> Say something substantive, or don¹t say it.

>

>> >

>> >

>>> >> Did you read the interview from Moyers?

>> >

>> > I watched the RP and DK interviews; they were great. This is even

>> > better -- one hour with Ron in a town meeting format in New

>> > Hampshire:

>> >

>> > Part 1.

>> > youtube.com/watch?v=WxldrCsVByA

>> > Part 2.

>> > youtube.com/watch?v=8VQcpmfT0f4

>> >

>>> >> Yeah, that whole vegan thing would count against him on this group.

>> >

>> > I wouldn't have a problem with it if he weren't an advocate of Big

>> > Government. But the combination is dangerous -- he wants, for

>> > example, to ban nutritional supplements containing nervous tissue, and

>> > thinks the FDA doesn't do enough to combat mad cow, which suggests he

>> > might support NAIS.

>> >

>> > If he were an advocate of smaller government, I'd be happy he was

>> > vegan, because it's an alterantive health viewpoint. If he wants more

>> > freedom for alternative health viewpoints, he'd give me freedom for

>> > mine too.

>> >

>> > Either way, in the completely impossible situation that it were

>> > Kucinich against any of the Repubilcans aside from , I'd go

>> > Kucinich all the way, just to get someone in there who will cut down

>> > the size of the warfare state and stand up to these corporations that

>> > run the government. That might bode well in the longer term for the

>> > health movement, but in the short term there would be some negative

>> > effects.

>> >

>> > Chris

>> >

[Guest guest]

" Idol " Idol@... wrote:

This one gave me 76 points for Kucinich, 65 points for Gravel (hah!),

52 for Obama, and so on down the line. The only Republican who got a

positive score at all was Ron , but he brought up the rear at 18.

Kucinich was the highest score for me with Gravel slightly trailing. I had 0

disagreement to Gravel and 2 to Kucinich. Go figure? Questionnaire I've taken

previously was Gravel first.

Wanita

________________________________________________________________________________\

____

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

[Guest guest]

On 1/6/08, Ancient Eyeball Recipe <implode7@...> wrote:

> > I¹m just so sick and tired of these cliches...²big government², ³freedom²,

> > ³change², etc....

> > Say something substantive, or don¹t say it.

I did. I said he supports banning supplements with nervous tissue and

probably supports NAIS. I called his campaign to ask his position on

NAIS and couldn't get an answer; they said they'd call me back with

one and they didn't.

On a general principal, if he supports greater government regulation

of dietary supplements and farming conditions, and he's vegan, that

bodes pretty poor prospects for people who sell dietary supplements or

farm from a meat-is-good-for-you philosophy.

And, geez, for folks who do not want the rich and corporations

controlling our society -- we have to realize how critical it is that

we keep 1) our food and 2) our money out of their hands. If they

control our food and our money, they control the root of our entire

society. Because even the littlest gal needs to eat, and to run the

smallest business she needs to buy and sell in money.

Our money is printed by a private and highly secretive consortium of

international bankers (and you-know-who is the only candidate who will

abolish this scenario) and our food is more and more going into the

hands of a handful of corporations, and the only foothold we have left

is our dwindling small farming sector. There is a movement in

association with WAPF and eatwild, etc, to expand this sector, and

there is a movement by the federal government to shut it down. As far

as I know, you-know-who, and not Kucinich, is the only reliable

candidate that can stop this from happening.

So, yeah, I think this is all pretty substantive. I don't think we

should give up our money to a private and highly secretive consortium

of international bankers and I don't think we should give up our food

to Monsanto and a few factory farming corporations, just for the sake

protecting some regulations and federal aid programs and so on that

really do nothing at the crux of the power issue, but simply try to

curb the excesses of the massive corporations that are taken for

granted to run the government and our society for their own profit.

Chris

[Guest guest]

" Ancient Eyeball Recipe " implode7@... wrote:

Amusing.... 91 Kucinich

77 Gravel

0

I took the three other tests posted as well.

http://www.gotoquiz.com/candidates/2008-results.html is the only one I feel most

accurate. Tops were Gravel and Kucinich tied at 83% with at 82%. RP was

first of Republicans behind all Dems in every result.

Wanita

________________________________________________________________________________\

____

Be a better friend, newshound, and

know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[Guest guest]

" Ancient Eyeball Recipe " implode7@... wrote:

> Not really a surprise...

>

> I did find out to my chagrin that Kucinich said in Iowa, that he

supported

> Obama if he himself didn¹t reach the threshold. I find Clinton and

Obama

> quite loathsome...it would seem like if he wanted to throw his

support behind

> a mainstream candidate, would be the one.

Kucinich would then be supporting who of the top two with him in Washington he

finds least loathsome. Its a in Washington, party allegiance. loathes

the corruption of Washington politics, especially lobbyist influence from being

there.

Wanita

________________________________________________________________________________\

____

Never miss a thing. Make your home page.

http://www./r/hs

[Guest guest]

I must be acting stupid today or something. Because the candidate it

listed as my highest score seemed to disagree with my views on every

issue. So either I'm not understanding how to do it or how to read it.

On the bright side, this does have a way to scroll over their answers

and see what they believe.

--- In , " haecklers " <haecklers@...>

wrote:

>

> This is an interactive site where you answer questions on the 15

> issues - whether you support or oppose and how important they are to

> you; it then tells you which candidates are closest to your interests

> and where they disagree with you. My top one is Kucinich, which I

> knew. #2 choice is Gravel! LOL!

>

> http://www.dehp.net/candidate/

>

[Guest guest]

" Masterjohn " chrismasterjohn@... wrote:

>A lot of folks are hurting because of the gas prices now, which are

>three times higher than they were a few years ago.

> I have people in my family who, because of

>their commute, are currently making less money than they are paying

>out in bills.

>Ron is the ONLY person who has identified the cause: paper money.

>According to a January 4 Wall Street Journal article, since the year

>2000, oil has gone up 350% in dollars, 200% in euros, and stayed

>completely flat in gold.

>This means if we were on the gold standard, the price of oil would

>have stayed the same.

Few months ago a Congressman from CT said on NPR that a new corporate type

entity (forget name) was setting oil prices outside of Wall Street standards.

LLCs (limited liability corporations) and private equity firms are two newer

ways of doing business. They both have contributed and led up to the sub prime

crisis.

>I encourage anyone interested in this issue to read this article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119941453085566759.html

>It requires registration. You have to give a credit card, but if you

>cancel within two weeks, you don't get charged. It's an important

>article to understanding this issue, but you can't get it across in

>sound bytes. So when Ron cited this article on the January 5

>debate, he just got laughed at and that was that, but it's the truth,

>and he's the only one saying it.

Do they want a gold card?

Seriously, I highly recommend this documentary In Debt We Trust that looks to be

entire in 9 parts.Its a look at the bigger financially than Iraq elephant that

is coming out of the closet. That iceberg.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuVfm5UDuNU

Wanita

________________________________________________________________________________\

____

Never miss a thing. Make your home page.

http://www./r/hs

[Guest guest]

--- <oz4caster@...> wrote:

> > It's a real shame that issues like sustainability, food quality,

> > GMO, NAIS, vaccines, and supplement regulation aren't higher on

> > the mainstream priority list. I'd rate them as " key " issues.

>

--- Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@...> wrote:

> Ron at Farm Food Voices:

>

> Ron on raw milk:

> http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul422.html

> Ron on NAIS:

> http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul326.html

> Ron on vaccines:

> http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul66.html

> http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul203.html

> Ron on supplement regulations:

> http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul261.html

thanks for the info. These appear to be big pluses. Counting

them as " key " issues would add 25 points to the 14 points I got for

Ron on that candidate assessment web site.