Joe Tegerdine 2010

[hendrixfreak70]

Hello all, I am not necessarily new to this site nor am I new to the Ron Paul/Liberty movement. However, I forgot my account information and hence the lack of posts. At any rate, I wanted you all to be aware of a real liberty Republican (especially foreign policy/fiscal issues) in the form of the Joe Tegerdine campaign. Joe is running for the 4th District in the state of Mississippi, a seat in which Gene Taylor holds. Gene has long since been a part of the problem and not the solution; he's a career politician and he voted for Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank to be in their Chair positions. Joe is diametrically opposed to nearly every thing (D) Gene Taylor to include the government's takeover of GM, healthcare, the G.I.V.E. Act, and much more. You can visit Joe's website at www.joetegerdine.com. He can be another ally in the liberty movement and if you're from the 4th District in Mississippi, Joe's our guy!


A.J. Thornton

[hendrixfreak70]

I also apologize if I made a mistake in the placement of this. It's been a while since I've been here and as with anything, rules evolve.

[tajitj]

I like him, calling for noninterventionist foreign policy. Nice find, putting him on my list.

[hendrixfreak70]

Good to hear Taj! He's not Ron Paul, obviously, but he's a dang good start and will follow the Constitution closer than anyone else running for the 4th District!

[lethaloption]

Here's a video of sound bites from Joe's recent 15 County Sprint in South Mississippi. It gives a good idea as to what he believes.

YouTube - Joe Tegerdine: Hope for Mississippi (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVjZL1VVZgM)

[Epic]

interviews on his website reveal that he would actually support gen. mccrystal's plan of afghan troop increase.

[lethaloption]

Joe's position has been to commit to win, win quickly and bring our troops home. Or don't send them at all. (That's really a cop-out and is the same foreign policy answer, riding the fence, that we've gotten from nearly every other politician in Washington). Seems to me we've had 8 years to 'win' and we haven't 'won' yet apparently. Still, some seem to think that just a few more troops, just a few more months, and certainly we'll have the game whipped.

I disagree with Joe's position on the Generals proposal to send 40,000 more troops. To me, the discussion should be: what, if any, is our our purpose in Afghanistan? What is the objective? Is it realistic?

[klamath]

I can see he is trying to frame his viewpoints to work a republican electorate. By the time he gets elected there will be 40 thousand more troops in afganistan sent there by Obama. I caould very well see him voting to remove the troops.

Our interests, as Americans, must be paramount and guide our government when conducting business with foreign nations. The best way to protect our interests at home and abroad is to keep our military might and wealth within our borders. I believe THE TIME IS NOW to heed the counsel of George Washington when he stated, “The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.” People, “Here let us stop.” We must bring our military establishment home within the borders of the United States and its territories, secure our borders, be energy independent, and promote trade policy that will decrease and eventually eliminate the massive trade deficit. It is impossible for us to maintain our liberty, our American interests, with our military and economic wealth spread around the world. I do not subscribe to an isolationist or protectionist philosophy, but one of nonintervention and free trade.

[lethaloption]

I agree. I think thats exactly what he is doing.

[Epic]

"be energy independent"

should we be food independent or computer independent too? It's a protectionist idea... a revolt against the natural division of labor...

[lethaloption]

a revolt against the natural division of labor...

absurd, I'm not even interested in how you conjured up that phrase.

It doesn't take a genius to see that much of the reason we are involved in the Middle East is because of the amount of oil we receive from that region. Ron Paul recommends a reading by Andrew Bacevich, and thats exactly what Bacevich says.... Can anyone deny that the reason we are so bogged down in the Middle East is because of oil?

We are at the mercy of our dependency, as individuals, and as a nation. I'm not suggesting that we become 100% inner-dependent, but I think it's a wise choice to remove dependency from areas of the world that cause us great pain, as in the case of Middle Eastern oil.

It was a series of foreign policy decisions that has led us to our 16% or so dependency on ME oil. It was a series of foriegn policy decisions that was backed up by sending our military equipment and soldiers into that region to secure petroleum resources, for whatever reason.

Is it a bad idea to suggest that we should look inward, and possibly remove our need for oil from the Middle East?

Again, a series of political decisions (environmental), concerning drilling in the U.S., has a lot to do with why less of our petroleum comes from the U.S.

The discussion of being energy independent is a discussion that needs to be had. Because, in the current case of energy, we receive too much of it from a very volitile place on the planet. And of course the U.S., being the superpower we are, has taken control of that region to prevent 'other powers' from taking control of it.

Energy supplies is what makes the world go round (all aspects of our way of life are dependent on it), and being able to ween yourself from dependency on such a precious commodity would be a good thing. Anyway just some thoughts...

[james1906]

should we be food independent or computer independent too? It's a protectionist idea... a revolt against the natural division of labor...

We should at least be energy and food independent. You don't have much in the way of sovereignty if you don't have those two.

[klamath]

should we be food independent or computer independent too? It's a protectionist idea... a revolt against the natural division of labor...
No. It means don't hamstring our own energy industry with heavy regulation but be willing to ship troops overseas to keep middle east oil cheap.
That was a pretty wild jump. Did you find anywhere in his issues where he said to put tariffs?????

[lethaloption]

http://mikegarofalo.greenoptions.com/2007/10/31/power-to-the-people-pride-goeth-before-ron-paul-%E2%80%A6/

From Paul's interview in New Hampshire by a 'green' supporter.

According to Paul, energy independence does not mean that the US has to produce every single ounce of energy used. Paul believes that independence means having no government-mandated policy. If you need oil or energy, you can simply buy it.

Paul has voted in favor of offshore drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf. He has also voted for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Paul would end all subsidies of any kind to all energy companies, including oil companies.

Paul would suspend the federal gasoline tax when retail gasoline prices hit $3 a gallon.

Paul co-sponsored legislation that would fast track the federal approval process for oil refinery construction or expansion.

Paul voted in 2001 against raising CAFÉ standards to 27.5 mpg for 2005 and 2006 cars and trucks.

Paul supports expanding the use of domestic coal as a fuel source. "Technology is improving all the time and by using coal this might be something that can help the US become more energy independent."

[Romantarchist]

I will be informing my relatives who live in Mississippi’s 4th Congressional District of Tegerdine's candidacy. However, I was slightly bothered by his self-imposed term limits. That’s what a lot of “Republican Revolution” candidates did when they were elected in 1994, and after they left Congress someone corrupt usually takes their place. Also even though his website talks about limiting government interference in our private lives, I have a feeling he’s a bit too socially conservative for my liking. But he mentioned the Federal Reserve’s monetary insanity, is a total fiscal conservative, refers to the U.S. as a Republic and seems like a non-interventionist so I feel like I can trust him.

[lethaloption]

Here's the incumbent Joe is trying to unseat, this 11 second video says a lot.

YouTube - Gene Taylor Career Politician - Living Constitution or Ignorance? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eT1yRFhnLs)

[Nathan Hale]

Tegerdine has an interesting race. Gene Taylor (the incumbent), won by an average of 71% for the last decade (he's held the seat since 1989). But here's the weird thing - it's one of the most Republican districts in the nation when it comes to voter registration. The right candidate could really exploit this, but Taylor is no joke as he's managed to hold the seat very long is what appears so hostile a district. I don't think Tegerdine is the right guy for the race, but if he's insistent, plays his strategic cards right, and doesn't get challenged in the primary by a more credible opponent, he stands a small chance of winning.

[hendrixfreak70]

I am Joe's Campaign Volunteer coordinator and when elected, I will sit on Joe's policy board in regards to national defense and military issues. I must say I am surprised by Joe's wanting to send more troops. As a policy member, I must ask Joe not to vote for any troop increases; let's just bring them home. The next war that gets waged will have to be a declared one as outlined by the Constitution. I will see to it that Joe sees the worthlessness of the Patriot Act, Department of Homeland Security, and things like the Military Commissions Act of 2006, all of which increase the Executive's role and thusly usurps the Legislative's.

[lethaloption]

YouTube - GulfCoast 912 Project hosts Joe Tegerdine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0WgD_6JAsg)

[lethaloption]

I've spoken with Joe about foreign policy recently. I don't think he is at all interested in extending our overseas obligations in any form or in any location.

[hendrixfreak70]

If anyone has the ability, would you kindly donate to the campaign? We have a challenger now, no doubt an establishment guy. Funds are low and now we have to contend with an establishment candidate. Joe's been at it for nine months with no help from the party and the new guy already has their endorsement. That alone speaks volumes.

[Bruehound]

He wrote a blog piece about having sympathy for some navy Seals who roughed up "insurgents" throughout the piece he kept referring to a War(and there has been no declaration).

He is trying to be cagey with regard to foreign policy issues and so far he has refused to resond to my inquiry as to whether he opposes fighting undeclared wars. Maybe he will end up being a trojan horse in our favor on these issues but I woul prefer a candidate who is more forthright. I'm still going to vote for Joe.

[hendrixfreak70]

He wrote a blog piece about having sympathy for some navy Seals who roughed up "insurgents" throughout the piece he kept referring to a War(and there has been no declaration).

He is trying to be cagey with regard to foreign policy issues and so far he has refused to resond to my inquiry as to whether he opposes fighting undeclared wars. Maybe he will end up being a trojan horse in our favor on these issues but I woul prefer a candidate who is more forthright. I'm still going to vote for Joe.

Since you're from the Coast, you have more insight than I about Palazzo (I would believe). I spoke with him on the phone the day he decided to run against Joe. He was sort of evasive with the questions I asked. I was also the first to call Joe and he was not happy. What is the sentiment like down there on the Coast about Gene Taylor, is it the same as always or are people tired of it yet? I've spoke with a few people from there and they all seemed to be ready to get rid of Gene. Now, I don't know if they have always felt that way or if they're changing their minds.