Saturday, May 11, 2013

Stop Losing Elections!

31 comments:

guy faulkes said...

Morris, as an establishment Republican, is incapable of seeing why the Republican's cannot win an election. The base does not and will not support the liberal candidates the establishment has been successful in nominating. The Republican party is dead on the national level until the point at which the base is successful in the primaries.

Yes you deport illegal (criminal) aliens. You use law enforcement, ICE, and the Border Patrol to do it. (It is interesting that Morris terms these people as being Gestapo) You fund it by fines from those that employee illegals.

If Morris is tired of losing elections, he needs to realize he is the problem, not the solution.

I realize this will generate La La La La La from all of us as we have had this discussion many times, but posting the La La la La La of Morris is the cause. One cannot let the lie go unanswered.

Sarkazein said...

Actually morris is right on. Groups of people voted for Obama because of who they are. Groups of people didn't vote for Mitt because of who they are.
And then there were those of us who put aside our political egos and voted for the best possible chance to rid the USA of the Obama scourge. As proven by the results, the third runner up was in the single digits.

Blogger said...

Guy, you and I are so far apart on this one issue, that it leaves me speechless. But you are wrong.

guy faulkes said...

Maybe I am wrong, but I was not with Dole, McCain, and Romney. I said Romney was not electable long before he got the nomination. Remember the three million fewer votes he was able to pull than McCain. The base is another group that votes or should we say does not vote because of who they are.

As far as that goes, a large portion of the votes Romney got came from party first Republicans that support the nominee regardless of his views. Still annotate group that votes because of who they are,

These added to the swing voter who (if they voted for Romney) could just have easily voted for the Democrats because the difference in substance on issues (immigration, abortion, gun control, health care) was not that great, will never be enough to win an election.

Once again, the Republicans cannot win without their conservative base and the base will not support Democrat lite. This is true no matter how hard you wish otherwise.

See, more La La La La La from all of us.

Sarkazein said...

We missed the chance of having perhaps the greatest executive President in our history. A problem solver is what we needed at the time. Mitt was that man... and the opportunity was blown. The Obama voters/non-Romney voters deserve what they get/got/didn't get/won't get.

Blogger said...

Guy, Looking from your point of view, of course you were not wrong. So I take that back. Now I will start over. From my point of view, Morris is right. Obama did not win because they were voting for him. He won because each of them was voting for himself or herself. Also, from my point of view, many who voted for Romney were trying to rescue their country. But again from my point of view, I do not have a clue what the ideologues who sat on their hands thought they were accomplishing. The data shows that if that group had gone out and voted, the race would have been much closer and Obama could not now claim a mandate to continue dismantling the country. I still see that group who sat home as suicide bombers.

guy fauleks said...

Blogger, they may be suicide bombers to you. To me they are patriots and men of principle.

Sarkazein said...

Too many definitions changing these days.

Johnny Rico said...

We must all look back to what Guy Faulks said time and again - Mitt Romney would not win because he would be unable to garner support from conservatives. His track record on gun control, coupled with his attempted hijacking of the Republican nomination process at the state level, doomed him. We don't want managers or moderate Republicans, we want conservatives. Faulks spelled it out in stark terms - the Republican Party is doomed unless it returns to its conservative base.

Right now we have RINO Rubio and RINO McCain calling for capitulation on the immigration issue. McCain was ready to capitulate on the gun issue a few weeks back. This shows Faulks was dead on with his assessment of RINO, middle of the road, liberal Republicans.

I am registered as an Indpedant now - the shenanigans of the Republican Party turned me off. I vote on issues not the lesser of two evils. Dick Morris is an idiot like Carl Rove if he can't understand why RINO Republicans lose. We need some more Freshman Tea Party Republicans in 2014.

Your ole pal

Sarah McGlauflin

Anonymous said...

or it could be that the majority of the population doesn't buy your "Only a Christian when it benefits me" bull$#@*.

The problem is that your party inserts religion into it's argument for gay rights, contraceptives, and a host of other issues but when it comes to helping the poor or taking care of your fellow citizens you stop caring.

The Republican Party will be over with your generation save for a few selfish wealthy folks.

Let's see what your County Commissioners do to on Tuesday when non-profits petition them for help for our elderly, poor, and disadvantaged. They'll spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on land in the middle of nowhere but won't give a dime to those in need.

It's why you'll lose the commission in 2014.

Sarkazein said...

Anonymouse 12:17AM- Not to worry, your IRS is going after Christian (ones they think are too Christiany) and pro-Israeli groups. You should be happy.

Sarkazein said...

Anonymouse 12:17 AM- Are you NEVER right "selfish Republicans"?

Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives.

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

Sarkazein said...

Anonymouse 12:17 AM- In your abject ignorance, you confuse voluntary charity with your government taking money from some and giving it to others at your behest (vote).

Anonymous said...

If the Republicans lose the county commission in 2014, it will be because of people like Blust and Yates who run as conservative but then vote to use tax money to make their charitable contributions!

I would like to see how much of their own money these 2 and also the 2 Democrats donated to the charities that they are supporting with my tax dollars.

It's easy to be generous with other peoples money!

NewGuy said...

anon...I am not in complete agreement with the funding of most non profits with taxpayer dollars. But, I am at the same time appreciative of the fact that the Republican controlled county commission has made significant steps in reducing these 'contributions' over the past few budget years. Considering the reductions made in the prior two years, and the fact that even more reductions are being made this year - and that both Yates and Blust voted for reductions in almost every case, I will continue to support them.

I am sure that all of the non profits under discussion are worthy causes - but county commissioners should not be deciding which non profits are more worthy than others. Also, please keep in mind that, in some cases, these non profits are already receiving the vast majority of their funding from other levels of government and, for the most part, have become mostly dependent on tax dollars.



NewGuy said...

https://www.facebook.com/groups/154501164730464/

Some interesting links here...check out the finances of the Hospitality House for one example.

Be aware also that Hospitality House serves several counties - none other than Watauga have ever made contributions and, as far as I know, Hospitality House has never asked the other counties for money.

Johnny Rico said...

I'll do my best to see to it that Republicans lose elections. I will do my best to see that conservatives win elections. Republicans like Carl Rove, John McCain, RINO Romney, etc. are liberals and could very well have Democrat in front of their name. It took a while to realize that many Republicans are as liberal as they come, but I'll do my best to see to it they don't ever win again.

Anonymous said...

That public hearing was a circus. Yates looked like an uneducated fool. Republicans need to get their act together locally I'm embarrassed of what happened tonight.

Anonymous said...

Perry Yates has turned out to be the weakest commissioner. The strange thing is he ran as the most conservative. I think he likes to ride the fence. He doesn't want to make anyone mad but you have to take a stand after you get elected.I disagree with the person above saying Yates is a fool but voting with the democrats on so many spending issues is no good. Nathan Miller is doing a bangup job. My advice to Yates would be to vote with Miller not Billy Kennedy and John Welch.

Anonymous said...

So far the only person to vote against more waste and spending for a stupid idea (business park) is a Dem. maybe he should follow Welch's lead!? I'm speechless.

Anonymous said...

You mean John Welch, the County Commissioner who puts Boone's liberal agenda infront of what's best for the County (support for Boone killing the sale of he old high school.) No thanks John Welch. I'll stick with Nathan Miller.

Anonymous said...

Welch talks moderate but votes liberal. I can't find where he has ever voted to cut funding to any non profit. He, like Kennedy, is just a wholly owned subsidiary of the leftist Boone Democrat party.

Anonymous said...

So you conservatives agree with the 194 business park and the future money it ties up? If you hang your hat on "conservatives" that save a whopping $18,000 on nonprofits but drop AT LEAST $2 mill on land for a bad idea then you have some low standards!

guy faulkes said...

Anonymous, why do you think the proposed park (or water reservoir or school site) is a bad idea? Provide some specifics, please, to back up your opinion.

Is there anything worthwhile that we would need to build on this property? Do we need it at all, even if it is a good deal?

Again, I am interested in a reasoned reply as I am of mixed feelings about this site.

Ranting is not going to convince me of anything but leaning the other way.

Anonymous said...

Guy is split because he is blinded by party loyalty. If this was a Dem controlled commission how would you feel about this issue on 194? I'm sure we all know the answer to that.

guy faulkes said...

Anonymous, which party do you think I am loyal to? I am neither a Republican or a Democrat.

Would you please answer the questions instead of running from them?

I will give you a starting point as it seems explaining why you made a statement is to hard for you.

I think that a business park, a water reservoir, and a school site are all reasonable and valid concerns that need to be addressed. I just do not know if the present economic conditions make it the time to try to do so.

If the property tax reevaluation turns out as I suspect, the lower values will result in either a tax rate increase to stay at the same net income revenue or cutting items even more than has been proposed instead of adding new projects.

This concern is not influenced by any party.

You are just making your original post meaningless and irrelevant by not explaining your statement.

NewGuy said...

Can anyone join this argument?

I don't know what the proposed purchase of land for a business park has to do with the donating of taxpayer money to various charities? To begin with, one is a capital investment, the other is an expense. I don't agree that government should decide which charities deserve my money!

Secondly, there has been no purchase of any land - simply a contract to purchase if a feasibility study suggests that to be the appropriate decision.

Commissioner John "it's not my money" Welch voted for this contract - basically an option to buy the property depending on the results of the study - Then, he votes to not fund the study! This is the same John Welch who hired the school superintendent whose contract had to be bought out as soon as Welch left the school board.

I can't say that I am in favor of the county's purchase of land for a business park. In general, I am opposed to government involving itself in business investment. On the other hand, the property seems to be a screaming bargain! If we are bound and determined to invest taxpayer dollars in a venture like this - then this could be the one to invest in. At any rate, I certainly don't oppose the current plan to 'lock in' the purchase at this bargain price while a feasibility study is conducted.

Laughing Out Loud said...

It's actually pretty funny watching all you so-called "conservatives" try to find a way to support this absurd land purchase now that it's "us" in office. I didn't support the Democrats land purchases and I don't support the Republicans when they do the exact same thing. That makes me at least a "consistent conservative", it makes the rest of you hypocrites.

guy faulkes said...

How so, Laughing out Loud / Anonymous? Where has anyone said anything that supports either party. Both New Guy and I have stated we have reservations about the land purchase and stated why. Can you not do the same?

Why is the land purchase absurd? Please give your reasons. Also, why did you use two different identities to post an unexplained comment?

Happily Married said...

I am interested in the duality of the argument form the perspective of the current commissioners. Yes, the land is a steal, but hasn't the county learned its lesson in investing in land? The devaluation of the high school property (although some can be blamed on the town - certainly not most of it) has the county finances in a lurch. As this is farm land in the middle of nowhere - it is an investment risk. The county already has industrial area that is vacant that could be redeveloped for much cheaper. The George Wilson Road area is already better served with transportation infrastructure and could easily have existing water infrastructure extended (if not already there). It also makes so much more sense given the long term plans of the NCDOT. Who says that in 20 years manufacturing will be on the same scale as today. Given increasing transportation costs and advances such as 3d printing manufacturing might be much more localized (hence, smaller). If the county wants to provide economic development why not save the money for direct incentives like other places do - especially if it is tied to redevelopment of existing. Why use of perfectly good farm land (which MIGHT be more valuable as localized farm land given increasing transportation costs) when companies can be incentivized to redevelop existing removing the blight and provide jobs? I don't beleive the meat camp farm land will be a case of "build it and they will come" - I believe it will be the county boondoggle. I have to say the $52k was the biggest bone head waste of money ever. Now I wonder how i will be attacked for this post?

guy faulkes said...

First of all, HM, I seriously doubt you will be attacked unless you get into your La La La La La repetition mode and then is is not an attack, but a defense of the blog.

You make several good points but then miss the main point.

First the property is a very good deal, as you said.

You also make a good point about redeveloping other sites. However, most of these sites would be within the Town of Boone's jurisdiction. The town's oppressive regulations and anti development attitude would keep this from ever happening.

Manufacturing has an excellent potential for coming back. For instance many gun companies ae leaving anti gun states and are relocating. North Carolina has a new ammunition manufacturer. This park might not be large enough for something like this, but then again, it might. You do not know until you do a study of what the property could support.

This brings us to what you call the biggest bone head waste of money ever and you missing the main point. The commissioners would be derelict in their duty not to do a study before they bought the property. You have to know what your options are before you can make an informed decision.

Personally, my idea of the biggest bone head waste of money ever is a tie between an overpriced new high school and the failure of the previous commission to sell the old high school property when they had an excellent offer and before Boone killed the value of the property.