PDA

View Full Version : GOP: Sarah Steelman (possibly running 4 senate) NOT a RP Repub.




trey4sports
05-12-2009, 09:13 PM
just wanted to update you guys on a potential candidate many thought was a Ron Paul Republican.

Sarah Steelman

Mrs. Steelman ran for Missouri Governor last election cycle and lost a narrow primary battle to Kenny Hulsof

The Ron Paul Meetup Group got behind her 100% during the primary and i assumed she was a libertarian leaning conservative....

I have had her for a whole semester (she was teaching a class at Mo State) and i must say she is a very principled conservative who believes in low taxes, HOWEVER, she is NOT A RON PAUL REPUBLICAN!

i did my final over ending the war on drugs and at the end of the presentation I asked her how she felt about the issue, she said she wasnt sure about legalizing marijuna, i then asked her about legalizing all drugs and she said she would have to look into the demand versus supply curve and she essentially said "shed look into it"
i took that as a nice way of saying no.

she never commited to abolishing the fed

doesnt believe in ending the drug war

and seems to have a liking for the military-industrial complex


this is in no way trying to be callous towards her, im merely suggesting shes NOT one of us and is not worthy of our fundraising.


That is all

Knightskye
05-12-2009, 09:49 PM
she never commited to abolishing the fed

Ask her if she supports auditing it?

doesnt believe in ending the drug war


and seems to have a liking for the military-industrial complex

Citation needed.

Athan
05-12-2009, 09:52 PM
The reason a lot of Meetups got behind republican candidates was because that was the best alternative. Steelman was probably one of them. There are very few actual Ron Paul Republicans running to begin with.

trey4sports
05-12-2009, 09:58 PM
Ask her if she supports auditing it?

doesnt believe in ending the drug war



Citation needed.


there is no citation.
i had her as a class teacher and im speaking of her lectures, i wanted very badly to whole-heartidly support her.

she was talking about torture, and she was for enhanced terrogation techniques saying that no torture applys to american citizens. she didnt speak on the war in iraq very much but when she did she seemed to take the side of military intervention.

speciallyblend
05-12-2009, 10:00 PM
The reason a lot of Meetups got behind republican candidates was because that was the best alternative. Steelman was probably one of them. There are very few actual Ron Paul Republicans running to begin with.

that disgusts me:( they wasted their votes on useless suck up republicans. they didnt have to vote republican or democrat. they basically enabled the gop by supporting her. so they do not like the dem so what. so they endorsed the lesser of two evils and then they want to know why the gop screws ron paul supporters. they were stupid enough to support someone they do not agree with. they deserve nothing. they did not stand for principle by helping the neo-con agenda and endorsing it by voting for it!! sigh

i am glad i didn't fall for that crap! the gop deserves obama. they forced republicans like me to not vote republican and i sure didn't vote for obama.

i am glad she lost!! thank god! dam gop suck ups

Young Paleocon
05-12-2009, 10:09 PM
I know the drug war is a very substantial issue, however I am much more interested in positions on military intervention, economic philosophy, and constitutionalism. Honesty is kind of a big one also. Though I realize the drug war is an infringement on civil liberties, is contradictory, and is massively wasteful, I don't think whether or not the Senator from Missouri is in favor of legalizing all drugs or pot should be a top 5 issue determinant. I also think you should have framed your question differently and gone the old libertarian low road of constitutionalism and jurisdiction. Use the tenth amendment argument on here, see how she interprets the commerce clause and see if you can corner her into saying the feds don't have jurisdiction over drugs within states. Just my two cents anyway.

Young Paleocon
05-12-2009, 10:12 PM
FYI I'll be interested to see if Blunt has a position on monetary policy during his run since he cosponsored 1207, and see what his policies are. What I'll probably wind up doing is voting for the least destructive one in the Rep primaries and vote for the libertarian or Constitution candidate in the general. Like last year :).

eduardo89
05-12-2009, 10:14 PM
that disgusts me:( they wasted their votes on useless suck up republicans. they didnt have to vote republican or democrat. they basically enabled the gop by supporting her. so they do not like the dem so what. so they endorsed the lesser of two evils and then they want to know why the gop screws ron paul supporters. they were stupid enough to support someone they do not agree with. they deserve nothing. they did not stand for principle by helping the neo-con agenda and endorsing it by voting for it!! sigh

i am glad i didn't fall for that crap! the gop deserves obama. they forced republicans like me to not vote republican and i sure didn't vote for obama.

i am glad she lost!! thank god! dam gop suck ups

i'd rather vote republican than democrat anytime...yes it does count as a good decision to vote for the lesser evil, instead of voting third party and ending up electing a socialist democrat into congress!

Young Paleocon
05-12-2009, 10:25 PM
i'd rather vote republican than democrat anytime...yes it does count as a good decision to vote for the lesser evil, instead of voting third party and ending up electing a socialist democrat into congress!

It's easy to say that when you apply socialist only to democrat. Johnny Mac wanted to by all the bad mortgages and I had my rep and senator both vote for Bush's stimulus in 08, Iraq, No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, DHS authorization, and both are Republicans.....You begin to wonder who are the socialists.

Imperial
05-13-2009, 12:24 AM
At least she is open to talk on the drug war, and isn't social conservative by default. She shows willingness to think critically and did attend some Ron Paul events in MO. Not perfect, but I would rather have a thoughtful dissenter than a mindless supporter.

speciallyblend
05-13-2009, 04:33 AM
i'd rather vote republican than democrat anytime...yes it does count as a good decision to vote for the lesser evil, instead of voting third party and ending up electing a socialist democrat into congress!

well then we can't blame the gop, when you endorse their failed policies by voting for them then demanding change with in the gop,not going to happen . when they see your vote endorsing the war and endorsing the patriot act and bigger intrusive government. then the only one to blame for the deafness from the gop toward ron paul supporters is not us but yourself for voting for republicans who endorsed bush/mccain policies and the same ole crap coming from the gop. either way you look at it. you still voted for lesser crap that still stinks,but since you voted for them . they think they smell like roses. either way you still have stinky crap that you endorsed!! good luck

you can bitch about all you want within the gop,but you basically endorsed their failed platform. i am at least glad the gop got their asses handed to them and from what i see. they took your vote to be more of the same within the gop!!and they are gonna run with it. enjoy romney,palin and the rest of the corrupt gop leadership!! you asked for it!!

same could be said about the democrats! and here lies the problem, jumping from shit to shit oops i meant ship(dnc) to ship(gop)= ship oops i meant sh__!!!

the best thing a republican running for office could do is actually try not to mention he is running as a republican.

the republican brandname is pretty much worthless to the average voter we need. let alone republicans like myself!! let the gop blame me for their worthless brandname. like i have always said from the beginning of this election. the republican brandname itself is the new scarlet letter,R