# Respect



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

It has been said that one respects the rank or office and not the man... unless and until that personal respect is earned by that individual. To this I agree. But I have a problem with respecting the rank or office when the following condition exists.

The rank or office has been polluted by someone of such vile character and lack of integrity and honor that said rank or office is nothing more than a shell. And so it is with the current office of the president. I have absolutely no respect for not only the current occupier but the office as well. What this means to me is that the next person to hold that office must be of such a high caliber of character, honor, and integrity that not only will they command the respect of the American people but that this respect then carries over to the office in the form of a house cleaning to once again hold honor in the eyes hearts of the People.

So whom might that be? Who has such a persona that they can wipe the stain and stench that has festered in the white house for the past seven years and return it once again to that which the People can entrust their confidence and the future of this nation?


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

SouthernBoy said:


> ...The rank or office [of President of the US] has been polluted by someone of such vile character and lack of integrity and honor that said rank or office is nothing more than a shell...I have absolutely no respect for not only the current occupier but the office as well...


Yeah, OK, so what?
The condition to which you refer has been building ever since "dealmaker-in-chief" LBJ was our President, and reached one particularly pernicious peak during the so-called "administration" of Richard M. Nixon. It is now anchored in tradition, as well as in the abject laziness and cowardice of our entire Congress (including the entirety of both sides of the aisle).

The needed reform far outweighs the mere office of the President. We have to repair Congress too...and maybe we need to do that first.

So, what do you suggest? How would you help Congress collectively grow a spine and "a pair"? And who would you elect to the Presidency, who would abide by the Constitution, instead of ignoring it as almost 50% of his/her predecessors have?

Please...don't write that you believe that The Donald is perfect for the job. That would be like electing Hitler or Stalin, and expecting improved constitutional behavior from either one.

I apologize for my seeming abrasiveness in this post, but I am upset and dismayed by the great mass of people who state the same position as you have expressed here, while, at the same time, finding all sorts of excuses for avoiding actually having to choose a better President, Senator, and Representative. Instead, most of them seem to prefer doing nothing at all.

Please don't take my frustration, and the resulting anger I'm expressing, personally. That's not how it's meant.


----------



## rustygun (Apr 8, 2013)

Might want to practice saying madam president and see how that works for ya. If things stay the way are I believe that's what we are in for.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Yeah, OK, so what?
> The condition to which you refer has been building ever since "dealmaker-in-chief" LBJ was our President, and reached one particularly pernicious peak during the so-called "administration" of Richard M. Nixon. It is now anchored in tradition, as well as in the abject laziness and cowardice of our entire Congress (including the entirety of both sides of the aisle).
> 
> The needed reform far outweighs the mere office of the President. We have to repair Congress too...and maybe we need to do that first.
> ...


It began before LBJ however he was certainly one of the worse in my lifetime.

I have my ideas about some things that could be done to improve the picture of all three branches but I am not going to go into them here. Too lengthy and probably would case a bit of a distasteful discourse. As for voting, I always vote though there have been a number of times when I did so while holding my nose. I hate to feel as though I am voting for the lesser of two evils but I feel that staying away from the polls merely helps to throw the election into the wrong hands. Again, two evils with one perhaps a bit less of such than the other.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

SouthernBoy said:


> ...I hate to feel as though I am voting for the lesser of two evils...


Please remember that the lesser of two weevils still destroys a lot of cotton.

What we gotta do is throw the whole bunch of 'em out, the good with the bad, just to establish in their successors minds that the people are back in charge.

Or assassination. There's always that. Does anyone here have any friends among the Mafia or ISIS?


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Please remember that the lesser of two weevils still destroys a lot of cotton.
> 
> What we gotta do is throw the whole bunch of 'em out, the good with the bad, just to establish in their successors minds that the people are back in charge.
> 
> *Or assassination. There's always that.* Does anyone here have any friends among the Mafia or ISIS?


Funny thing, I'd bet most Americans don't even know that we do have the right to alter or to abolish our government by force of arms should the need ever arise. Thomas Jefferson saw fit to codify this into our founding document.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> It has been said that one respects the rank or office and not the man... unless and until that personal respect is earned by that individual. To this I agree. But I have a problem with respecting the rank or office when the following condition exists.
> 
> The rank or office has been polluted by someone of such vile character and lack of integrity and honor that said rank or office is nothing more than a shell. And so it is with the current office of the president. I have absolutely no respect for not only the current occupier but the office as well. What this means to me is that the next person to hold that office must be of such a high caliber of character, honor, and integrity that not only will they command the respect of the American people but that this respect then carries over to the office in the form of a house cleaning to once again hold honor in the eyes hearts of the People.
> 
> So whom might that be? Who has such a persona that they can wipe the stain and stench that has festered in the white house for the past seven years and return it once again to that which the People can entrust their confidence and the future of this nation?


The problem as I see it is that one must be a corrupt, greedy, power hungry scoundrel in order to become a politician. It's a prerequisite for the job. They will lie, cheat, steal and prostitute themselves for some crummy little political office. It really is the nature of the business. Unfortunately we the people put up with it and keep electing these loathsome swines. The Democratic Party being the worst offenders. They do not believe that we are a "Constitutional Republic". They view the Constitution and Bill of Rights as worthless pieces of paper written for times that have passed. They often call it a "living breathing Constitution" to be changed from the bench or legislatively according to their beliefs. The only purpose for abolishing the Constitution and Bill of Rights is to enslave us to their authoritarian socialist welfare state. Indeed they are statists to the core.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Please remember that the lesser of two weevils still destroys a lot of cotton.
> 
> *What we gotta do is throw the whole bunch of 'em out, the good with the bad, just to establish in their successors minds that the people are back in charge.
> *
> Or assassination. There's always that. Does anyone here have any friends among the Mafia or ISIS?


That's probably the only practical way to do it. Or set up some type of system to remove them from office if they violate their oaths to "preserve and protect the Constitution" so help them God. It's our fault for not holding any of them accountable. We the people put them there, so we the people should be able to throw them out by demanding that they be held accountable. Part of the problem is that they protect their own. By appointing "justasses" who would preside over criminal procedures and charges that are brought against them. Those "justasses" must be held accountable too. They have a very cozy relationship with these politicians that appointed them which must be broken up. The other problem is that most politicians happen to be a bunch of fuckin' lawyers commonly known as "liars for hire". They know how to manipulate the system and are masters at deception and fraud. Lawyers are indeed professional con men/women.

People have had it with professional career politicians and now we are seeing the rise of Trump because of it. Can't blame them for that. It's a shame that so many are falling for his line of bullshit without looking into his past. Will the real Donald Trump please stand up? I for one have no idea of what this man stands for or what his motivations are? Because so many people have become disenfranchised with our political system he could very well become president. Although I seriously doubt it. However it is possible.

But nothing scares me more than that pathological lying bitch from Arkansas and her scumbag husband occupying the "out house" one more time. Worse yet having them appointing "justasses" to the Supreme and federal courts. Indeed it might again be choosing between the lessor of two weasels. Right now I'm hoping for a Cruz/Carson ticket. Cruz because he's loathed by his colleagues in the senate for standing up for his principles and holding them accountable for their promises which got them elected. He's embarrassed them and they resent him for it. Carson because he's not a professional politician or lawyer, highly intelligent and his rational demeanor.


----------



## miketx (Jul 20, 2015)

I'm saying Trump. Trump is not Stalin or Hitler.


----------



## Cuthahotha (Dec 14, 2015)

desertman said:


> But nothing scares me more than that pathological lying bitch from Arkansas...


One thing scares me more. The electorate who, despite knowing her nature still, will vote her into office.

The Donald is a egomaniacal narcissist who has not come up with a single answer to all the problems he's been able to point out. Problems by the way, any thinking American, already knows exists; he's just the first to put a public face on it. All that aside, if he was elected he would not know how to govern. He has been trained since birth to order people to do what he wants. We need a leader, not a dictator.

I agree on the ticket. Cruz/Carson is the decent option. And for once in a long time, I think it's actually a good option, as opposed to least worst.

We'll see how it plays out, but if we don't get someone who starts addressing the issues, at their core, we're hosed.


----------



## Cuthahotha (Dec 14, 2015)

Sorry computer fritzed out and double posted on me. Admin's can someone delete this please?


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

miketx said:


> I'm saying Trump. Trump is not Stalin or Hitler.


Just you wait.
His positions on difficult problems are all pretty shallow. If he gets elected, he will run out of ideas pretty quickly. Then he will descend into executive-fiat dictatorship, just as equally-shallow Obama is now trying to do.

No, Trump isn't Stalin or Hitler, but his methodology is exactly the same as theirs was.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Cuthahotha said:


> *One thing scares me more. The electorate who, despite knowing her nature still, will vote her into office.*
> 
> The Donald is a egomaniacal narcissist who has not come up with a single answer to all the problems he's been able to point out. Problems by the way, any thinking American, already knows exists; he's just the first to put a public face on it. All that aside, if he was elected he would not know how to govern. He has been trained since birth to order people to do what he wants. We need a leader, not a dictator.
> 
> ...


A black militant with known ties to anti American radicals was elected not once but twice. So anything is possible. Both he and that bitch from Arkansas are students of Alinsky. The question will be whether America has had enough of that way of thinking.

What you're saying about Trump is absolutely correct. It's one thing to be able to order people around when you're the CEO of your own company. Quite another as president of the United States, The United States of America is not his company. It's amazing that people do not realize this and he has such a steadfast following. Talk is cheap and Trump is a conceited sanctimonious blowhard. I often wonder how successful he would be if he didn't inherit his father's business? He once was a Democrat and supported both their ideology and politicians. Which to me should at least raise some suspicions amongst Republicans who are considering making him their standard bearer and nominee. Polls show him at around 30% or so. That means that 70% do not support him. We'll have to see how that plays out when the race comes down to the final three.

Ted Cruz is the real deal, that's what makes him so good. He doesn't have to fake his positions to please anyone. It's part of his heart and soul and the fabric of his being. He along with Jeff Sessions are probably the two best senators we have. Both have unwavering commitment to Conservative principles, causes and most important "Constitutional Law". Regardless of the effect it has on their political careers. Which is rare amongst politicians who put politics before principle. Carson? Carson, I believe is a sincere and very intelligent individual and certainly capable of being president. Whether he has any foreign policy or legislative experience to me is irrelevant. I'm confident he would pick the best and brightest advisors, listen to them, and make decisions that would be both rational and in the best interests of the United States. After all how much foreign policy experience did the "Black Militant" have before occupying the "out house"? Or legislative experience for that matter?

Regardless of who the Republican's nominate even if it's Trump. I will vote for and support that nominee. The alternative will be an absolute disaster.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Just you wait.
> *His positions on difficult problems are all pretty shallow*. If he gets elected, he will run out of ideas pretty quickly. Then he will descend into executive-fiat dictatorship, just as equally-shallow Obama is now trying to do.
> 
> No, Trump isn't Stalin or Hitler, but his methodology is exactly the same as theirs was.


Shallow indeed! His answer to just about anything is how great he is, how "phenomenal" his businesses and golf courses are, and he's going to build a wall on our southern border and make Mexico pay for it. He looks dumbfounded and flustered in a debate. What will happen when the Mexican government says: Fuck you Trump? What's he going to do wipe Mexico off the face of the earth? Cut off all economic ties to Mexico? Which would worsen their economic situation sending even millions more across our border. If he does become president, and I don't think he will, he is going to be in for one rude awakening. He has touched a raw nerve amongst the Republican electorate, I'll give him credit for that. I'm sure that the establishment Republicans are shitting in their pants as they won't be giving us another one of their hand picked nominees and another loss of the "out house" for the third time in a row.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

desertman said:


> Shallow indeed! His answer to just about anything is how great he is, how "phenomenal" his businesses and golf courses are, and he's going to build a wall on our southern border and make Mexico pay for it. He looks dumbfounded and flustered in a debate. What will happen when the Mexican government says: Fuck you Trump? What's he going to do wipe Mexico off the face of the earth? Cut off all economic ties to Mexico? Which would worsen their economic situation sending even millions more across our border. If he does become president, and I don't think he will, he is going to be in for one rude awakening. He has touched a raw nerve amongst the Republican electorate, I'll give him credit for that. *I'm sure that the establishment Republicans are shitting in their pants as they won't be giving us another one of their hand picked nominees and another loss of the "out house" for the third time in a row.*


They aren't called the Stupid Party for nothing. They'll continue to make the same mistakes and continue to tuck tail and run whenever the dems raise the flag of racism or sexism or any of the other "isms" they are so fond of throwing out. And the Stupid Party will just do what they have always done.

This is why I am not a republican; I'm a Constitutionalist who happens to vote republican because the alternative is so distasteful to me. The lesser of two evils thing. Mention has been made about Cruz being perhaps the best of the candidates running for the ticket. I think that is true. But I also think that he could alienate some fence sitters and Reagan democrats who might otherwise jump ship and go republican this time around. He is viewed by these types as a bit inflexible, somewhat caustic and abrasive, and perhaps too far to the right. This is the albatross on the backs of republicans and forces them to move too close to the center in order to pick up fence sitter votes. Cruz does tend to stay the course and call a spade a spade... at least in the senate.

Should be pretty interesting next year.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> They aren't called the Stupid Party for nothing. They'll continue to make the same mistakes and continue to tuck tail and run whenever the dems raise the flag of racism or sexism or any of the other "isms" they are so fond of throwing out. And the Stupid Party will just do what they have always done.
> 
> This is why I am not a republican; I'm a Constitutionalist who happens to vote republican because the alternative is so distasteful to me. The lesser of two evils thing. Mention has been made about Cruz being perhaps the best of the candidates running for the ticket. I think that is true. But I also think that he could alienate some fence sitters and Reagan democrats who might otherwise jump ship and go republican this time around. He is viewed by these types as a bit inflexible, somewhat caustic and abrasive, and perhaps too far to the right. This is the albatross on the backs of republicans and forces them to move too close to the center in order to pick up fence sitter votes. Cruz does tend to stay the course and call a spade a spade... at least in the senate.
> 
> Should be pretty interesting next year.


I'm not a Republican either, I'm a "Constitutional Conservative". Who has never and never will vote for a Democrat or go third party. I'd rather spend my time getting more like thinking individuals into office on the Republican ticket. I'd rather work to change the Republican Party rather than abandon it. To their credit the Republicans have not allowed any anti gun legislation that was sponsored by the Democrats to come to the floor.

What you're saying about Ted Cruz is indeed true. However the last two candidates McCain and Romney did not appeal to the base and neither one of them had core Conservative values. They were establishment candidates and were selected because of their willingness to compromise and reach across the aisle in the hopes that they would appeal to Reagan Democrats. We all know how that turned out. The Republicans will never win if there is a lack of enthusiasm among their base. Many will just stay home on election day as they are fed up with the leadership of the Republican Party. I believe this time that the country is desperate for a real change after 8 years of the Black Militant in the "out house". He is as far to the left as one can get and an anti American radical who has disdain and contempt for this country. Yet he was able to get elected, twice. There's no reason why we can't have someone who is the complete opposite and far to the right and win.

Every time the Republicans "compromise" we lose more of our freedoms. I do not want a leader who will be flexible with our real enemy which is the Democratic Party. Say the Republicans have a cake and the Democrats come along and say: I want the whole cake. To which the Republicans reply: No you can't have it. So they negotiate, reach a deal and the Democrats end up getting half the cake. Then they come back for the other half and the cake is split again. This continues until all we are left with is crumbs. This is what is happening to our 2nd Amendment and Constitutional Law.

That pathological lying bitch from Arkansas is a haggard old bag with a shrill voice. She is one of the most detestable/contemptible people to ever hold public office. She is a weak candidate who represents a sordid past. This time around the Republicans should have no trouble defeating her. Especially with a candidate such as Cruz who will cream her in any presidential debates. Trump? I'm not so sure about. People are indeed pissed off at the direction this country is headed in. Which lead to the rise of Trump and all of his bombastic bullshit. There is more excitement this time around for a Republican ticket. Not so the Democrats. More than likely if Trump does not secure the nomination, and I believe he won't. His supporters will go to Cruz who represents real change and has the credentials to prove it.

Indeed it will be a very interesting year! Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you!


----------



## Cuthahotha (Dec 14, 2015)

+1 for DesertMan!


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

desertman said:


> I'm not a Republican either, I'm a "Constitutional Conservative". Who has never and never will vote for a Democrat or go third party. I'd rather spend my time getting more like thinking individuals into office on the Republican ticket. I'd rather work to change the Republican Party rather than abandon it. To their credit the Republicans have not allowed any anti gun legislation that was sponsored by the Democrats to come to the floor.
> 
> What you're saying about Ted Cruz is indeed true. *However the last two candidates McCain and Romney did not appeal to the base and neither one of them had core Conservative values. They were establishment candidates* and were selected because of their willingness to compromise and reach across the aisle in the hopes that they would appeal to Reagan Democrats. We all know how that turned out. The Republicans will never win if there is a lack of enthusiasm among their base. Many will just stay home on election day as they are fed up with the leadership of the Republican Party. I believe this time that the country is desperate for a real change after 8 years of the Black Militant in the "out house". He is as far to the left as one can get and an anti American radical who has disdain and contempt for this country. Yet he was able to get elected, twice. There's no reason why we can't have someone who is the complete opposite and far to the right and win.
> 
> ...


Boy if that isn't true.

Good job and well stated. It's embarrassing to me that there are a large number of people in this country who have no problem with getting people on the public dole in order to garnish perennial votes from them. To hell with the Constitution and what the Founders designed (they don't like this anyway). Get as many people as possible dependent upon government and you've created a guaranteed voting block. This has been going on in earnest with democrats since 1965.*

* Check what LBJ said when signing the Voting Rights Act into law that year.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

SouthernBoy said:


> Boy if that isn't true.
> 
> Good job and well stated. It's embarrassing to me that there are a large number of people in this country who have no problem with getting people on the public dole in order to garnish perennial votes from them. To hell with the Constitution and what the Founders designed (they don't like this anyway). *Get as many people as possible dependent upon government and you've created a guaranteed voting block.* This has been going on in earnest with democrats since 1965.*
> 
> * Check what LBJ said when signing the Voting Rights Act into law that year.


Hence the need to import tens of millions of the world's indigent population into our country. The United States of America can not become the world's dumping ground for political expediency which can only benefit the Democratic Party. It's a shame that Rubio and his "gang of eight" do not comprehend that. But then again politicians in general could care less about the affects it will have on the general population. All they care about is their sorry little asses and shitty little political office. They live in a sheltered little world at our expense and their disastrous decisions will never effect their personal lives. When they leave office they leave fat and wealthy. There are only a few who are in politics for the good of the country. I believe Cruz is one of them along with Jeff Sessions and Trey Gowdy. So far I've also been pleased with Paul Gosar my home town congressman. Of course there are others but they are few and far between.

Unfortunately being a politician is not an honorable profession. I no longer respect the office of president. More often than not it is occupied by a petty little man in a big suit. Hopefully not a pathological lying petty little woman in a pantsuit. There are no real statesmen anymore. Just power hungry greedy little bastards who seek the office as if it were some sort of prize such as winning the lottery. Only fortune and fame is the prize. They will lower themselves to the least common denominator in order to achieve their goal. It brings out the worst of human behavior. They claw their way to the top and step on anyone who gets in their way. Just like rats on a sinking ship. I blame an apathetic population for this. People in general do not want to take the time to research the candidates for whom they are voting for and a disinterest in politics altogether. Who they are voting for will have a profound affect on their lives and the future of our country. I just don't understand their apathy.


----------



## Cuthahotha (Dec 14, 2015)

desertman said:


> Just power hungry greedy little bastards who seek the office as if it were some sort of prize such as winning the lottery.


"He who craves it the most, deserves it the least."


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

Cuthahotha said:


> "He who craves it the most, deserves it the least."


If that ain't the God's honest truth. They all crave it to some degree. I've followed Cruz's political career. Because of his Cuban ancestry he knows and understands what oppression is all about. I honestly believe (at least I hope so) that he is in it not for himself but for the good of the country. I doubt he wants this country to be anything like Cuba which is the direction we are headed. His unwavering stance on Conservative principles and being loathed by his colleagues in the Senate and the Republican Party leadership because of that, reinforce my belief that he won't back down or cave in due to political expediency or correctness. He's about the only person that I have been enthusiastic about in any presidential election that includes Reagan. My parents were big Goldwater supporters way back when. I was way too young to vote then.


----------

