In the recent primary elections, many voters changed their political party affiliation at the time they voted. This has been a traditional practice by both Republicans and Democrats. Should this practice be made illegal? What are your thoughts on this subject?

"Should this practice [changing party affiliation] be made illegal?"

What alternative do you suggest?

1. Lifetime party affiliation — having once declared a party affiliation, that declaration may never be changed?

2. Disallowing any change in party affiliation within a certain number of days before an election? (In most states, one must register, usually 30 days before a given election, however seven states, Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Wisconsin and Wyoming, allow for Election Day Registration.)

3. In several states primary elections are "open" or "nonpartisan" and voters may vote in any one of the party primaries, independent of their party affiliation. In these nonpartisan primary elections, a voter requests a particular party's ballot when checking in at the polling place. Should that practice be disallowed?

4. Should all such determinations with regard to primary elections (nominating primaries) — which are just one means by which a political party nominates its candidates for the following general election — be left to each individual political party? It could be argued that each party is or should be entitled to choose the method to be used in nominating its candidates in each jurisdiction.

In the US, primary elections are conducted by government on behalf of the parties. Elsewhere in the world, the nomination of candidates is usually the responsibility of the political party organizations themselves and does not involve the general public.

Why should anyone outside the party be allowed to influence the choice of that party's candidates? (Unless the party chooses to use the "open" or so called "non-partisan" election method?

Why should the government be involved in the administration of such party affairs at all?

FRNash: I find that your comments are appropriate and agreeable, and I especially like your last question, "Why should anyone outside the party be allowed to influence the choice of that party's candidates?". Maybe after the Democratic Party has settled on a candidate for president there will be some national action taken to prevent party affiliation changes just before voting.

It is called Operation Chaos.To vote in the other parties primary, so to elect the worst person, that would be easy to beat and allow the two Democrats to beat up on each other some. But it can not be done in N.C. because the Governor race is to important there.It is working fine,and phase three is about to start.

Yep, guys, why not put another freedom robbing law into effect? Surprisingly, there are some people who are not politically party blind and actually vote for the candidate they feel will do the best job. OK, this year the system failed!!!!

From David's comments I perceive that he is a Limbaugh fan. Perhaps the word should be "Kaos" in "Operation Chaos"?

FYI, for the Michigan primary this year, there was a prominent Detroit Democrat out there, on national television, actively recruiting people to vote in the Michigan Republican primary, to vote for a certain person, to try to cripple the Republicans. People in both parties of actively crossed party lines for years, simply because they thought they would have a bigger impact for their final choices, by voting in the other party's primary. Also, independents would have to "cross a party line" because they were unaffiliated, if they had a preference for one reason or another.

That being said, I have really disliked Rush Limbaugh for years, in part because he seems to actively dislike women, and think their place is in the home, baking cookies, or some such nonsense. I disagree with much of what he apparently stands for. But, we do have the First Amendment, people, that allows you to say pretty much whatever you want to, unless it would cause a mass stampede, or something. Our soldiers have fought for over 200 years to protect our First Amendment rights here at home, whether we happen to like the wars, or not.

You're right, Marianne. This has been going on for many years. Nothing new. I believe Limbaugh is taking credit where it's not due. Gotta remember, his show is entertainment, not news. Anything that stirs emotions brings in high ratings (and $'s). Oldest trick in the book. Muhammad Ali utilized it to perfection to build the gate. I think the circus going on right now within the Dem party is self-inflicted, and rightly so. Two lightweights trying to compete for the heavyweight crown, playing the race and gender cards and lying through their teeth. Ain't gonna work. I have never seen a weaker slate. The GOP isn't doing so hot, either, and hasn't for some time. I've had second thoughts on John McCain, though. Perhaps he's not the sharpest pencil in the box but may be doing the right thing by refusing to toe the party line. We don't need 'yes' people in government. As the old saw goes, if two business partners always agree, they don't need each other.....unless they're political hacks.

I am an Independent voter.
I thought it was unfair or the Democrat Party to deny the people of Michigan a voice in the primary, not that I am interested in the Candidates they have.
I think the Two Party system that we have leaves little choice, and would like to see a level playing field.
As it is we have the choice between CFR "R" or CFR "D". With either choice you get the same plan and programs that have been working towards a New World Order under the "Building a North American Community" road map.
We still will have the Federal Reserve printing money out of thin air, and devaluing the Dollar.
We will ignoring Our Constitution, Violating the Rights of Citizens, and fighting wars under UN management.
The "choices" are not choices at all, just the illusion of choice.

I must be missing out on something; I'm not aware that my rights as a citizen of the U.S. have been violated to the degree that it matters.

It has been my impression that the U.S. and/or concealed world powers have been managing the U.N. most of the time since its inception.

By Matt Karhu (Matt_k)

"I must be missing out on something; I'm not aware that my rights as a citizen of the U.S. have been violated to the degree that it matters.

It has been my impression that the U.S. and/or concealed world powers have been managing the U.N. most of the time since its inception."

You might not mind, and might even welcome it.
I DO NOT.
I do not care to have Private Bankers controlling our money.
I do not care for the Gun Control Laws that infringe on my rights to self defense.
I do not care for laws that limit or prohibit me from using my private property.
I do not care to be involved in wars around the world. But I am expected to pay for them anyway.
I don't like to be spied on.
I don't want to be searched when I travel.

The Individual Liberty, and Freedom that this Country was founded on is being lost, and replaced with Collectivism.
This has been incremental over the years, but especially since about 1913 in the Wilson era.
At that time we got the Federal Reserve, The Counsel on Foreign relations, and started on the path to Socialism.
A few Quotes from those involved.

“Soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will effect our security as a chargeback for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer being unable to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions”.

“Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud which we will call `Social Insurance.’ Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.”

Colonal Mandell House, the founder of the CFR, from a meeting he had with Woodrow Wilson in 1910."

“The sovereignty fetish is still so strong in the public mind, that there would appear to be little chance of winning popular assent to American membership in anything approaching a super-state organization. Much will depend on the kind of approach which is used in further popular education.”

1944 Council on Foreign Relations Report

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But now the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

David Rockefeller

Well, Peter, your comments might be well-founded from your perspective but they sound a little paranoid to me.

I have yet to find a better banking system where I live in the Midwest no matter who controls the money.

No one has yet taken away my rights to own and use a gun in self-defense.

So far, sensible zoning laws have protected my use of and the value of my property.
I am not aware that I have been spied on (I assume you meant by a U.S government agency). If I have been, I had nothing to hide. If I will be, I will have nothing to hide.

I don't like the U.S. to be involved in wars around the world, especially when using military and economic colonization to gain control of the world's wealth and energy resources.

I don't mind being searched if I am in or passing through an area when and where national security requires it for my well-being and the well-being of other law-abiding citizens.

Most of the people in the rural, farming country where I live in the Midwest are usuallly content although not always pleased with the U.S. federal government. When a better system of federal government comes a long, I'm sure we will recognize it and act accordingly.

Matt Karhu (Matt_k)
I don't find it "paranoid" at all. I call it aware.

I just ran across a good Editorial on this subject.
This is just part,
http://neithercorp.us/npress/

“Conspiracy Theory” is an intellectually bankrupt put-down phrase, used by people who are unwilling to look at the evidence for themselves, because they are afraid that they will be forced to arrive at a very unpleasant conclusion. Americans who refuse to accept, for example, that the Council on Foreign Relations controls both political parties, are simply trying to protect their fragile psyches from the awful truth. People don’t like being told they’ve been conditioned or programmed, and they would rather believe that they live in a free society and their government would never hurt them, so they edit out the unpleasant parts of their reality.

Conspiracies by men in power have occurred time and again throughout recorded history, in just about every nation on the planet. The notion that 21st century America is immune to such tactics, or that conspiracies don’t happen anymore, is simply foolish.

If the facts about the control exerted over nations by the central banking families are indeed a hoax, then that hoax would have to be part of another conspiracy altogether - a conspiracy to travel through history planting evidence to frame the central banking families! Which is more plausible?

Conspiracy is not even the best word for some of the ideas that are dismissed as “conspiracy theory,” because a conspiracy implies a small group working in secret. The globalist agenda is no secret. The CFR is more than happy to tell you exactly what they are doing, because they are arrogant. They know they control public thought so well that it won’t matter what they say. They hide the truth in plain sight, because they know the average person will never see it because of their unwillingness to believe in something so pervasive.

The ever-expanding control-grid referred to by some as the “New World Order” is not some secret conspiracy, it’s just the way things are.

Peter, I agree with your statement, "it's just the way things are". Those of us who know how to live with and take advantage of "the way things are" do well financially and otherwise, but not to the extent that others suffer losses and deprivation from our efforts. We are aware that economic justice can cause great suffering and losses among the extremely greedy and power-hungry (as has being revealed in recent weeks), hence, we find positions in between the extremes and use their knowledge and leverage to our advantage as much as possible.

I felt really saddened that my comments on the pasty What's UP page were deleted. I do not think I broke the acceptable use policy.

My comments were in NO WAY a personal attack against our former prez.

What I basically said was a thank you to Jarmo from Finland for his congrats on our new prez. I said many of us respect him for his intelligence, lack of arrogance, and adherence to core values.

Since many comments are posted on issues of the day, Veteran's Day, Christmas, etc. I did not see this as inappropriate on Inauguration Day.

Further, if this is seen as an 'attack' on our former prez, I find that HIGHLY offensive to me! Unlike other people, I never thought he was unintelligent. He didn't impress me as arrogant (look at Kwame Kilpatrick or Rod Blagojavich for arrogance) and core values is obviously one of his strong points.

Excuse me, but what, please, was offensive about my comment!?

Maija, unfortunately, you don't have to go very far in a Google search for "George W. Bush" to run into huge attacks on our now former President's intelligence. Many others attacked him for his arrogance. Every night, we heard David Letterman, and sometimes Jay Leno, attack him for his intelligence. So, when you praised Obama for his intelligence and lack of arrogance, et al, it could easily be interpreted as a slam on our former President. I interpreted it that way, as well, but I did not complain to the management.

President and Mrs Bush are honorable people, and they do not deserve all of the garbage that has been slung their way. It is one thing to congratulate President Obama on his election and his orderly ascension to power, and that the US is one of the few countries in the world where that would have been possible. But, to praise him for the very qualities that the former President has been slammed on for so long, and has told the population that the former President is sorely lacking, is another thing entirely. That is my perception, for what it is worth. I think it was right to remove your posts, I'm sorry. As worded, they did belong on the political page. Some of us do congratulate and accept the new President as our President, the President of all of the US, but that does not mean that we have to celebrate the man.

Further, when Obama won the Democratic nomination, I never thought of him as an African-American. He is an American. I, for one, never saw that as a factor, for or against him. I have no problems at all with an African-American as President, had it been someone else, like General Colin Powell, who had very real experience. No one really knows what Obama stands for. Change was never defined, other than as anti-Bush. The media made sure that Obama's real thoughts and positions were never made public. Just being a good orator has nothing to do with being a great man or a great President. I hope you understand my thoughts, because if you do, they should not offend at all.

Well said, Marianne! Your words show that you are a lady of culture, and I applaud you for that.

Ditto to Shirley, Marianne. You should run for office! If Colin Powell would have run for the presidency, he would have garnered far more than 52% of the vote and that would have represented many, many white votes for him, far more than Prez Obama received. Another perspective: Prez Obama's election is symbolic of better race relations in our country. The groundwork was laid by many folks (including the much-despised GWB) to elevate competent people of color to high level positions in order for their race to gain public acceptance.....and it worked. Colin Powell and Condi Rice are excellent examples. I didn't vote for BHO because of his political views. I also didn't vote for McCain in the primary for the same reason. Again, forced to select the lesser of two 'evils' during the general election. But, BHO is now our president and we should support him when we agree with his actions, and let him know when we disagree. Maybe some on the fringe won't agree with that, but I think BHO would. 'Nuf said. I'm really tired of discussing politics after such a long campaign season!

Triple Ditto Marianne.... I agree most heartily

Is it usual to delete member's posts around here? I just signed up and just browsing around.

Is this a place where you ASSUME what a post means and if you don't like what YOU assume you delete it? SDoesn't sound very fair to say the least. I friend told me to check this place out but dang I'm just shocked.

I find everyone's views very informitive and at times it helps me determine my own views. I would never want to be president, too much pressure and anyone brave enough to run and then to be elcted deserves a chance. I voted for Bush, I'll say it, I then became very unhappy with my choice BUT I prayed before voting and made the best choice I could concidering who was running. I prayed that Bush does what was best for US as Americans. I never bashed him as president, I was in the military and I will always support the President while his in office. But he's NOT in office now and I will say I'm not completely happy with how he handled things but it doesn't just take one man, it take ALL of them in office and they all messed up. But EVERYONE messes up!! I pray that our president and everyone in the office now does what's best for US as Americans.

I mean no harm by this, I'm a easygoing gal that just flows with what life brings me but it just turned my stomach knowing that if the boss doesn't agree with what id post it will get deleted. Heck I and this post will most likely get deleted. I'm not here to stir things up but I guess my question would be......... Is this normal for this site? I'm just looking for a site that welcomes eveyone and their views.

Peace to everyone!
Steppy

Please Steppy I hope you are not discouraged as we welcome you with open arms. Sometimes posts are 'moved' to the correct page so to keep with the policies of this site. It appears they are deleted from the original posting area, but in keeping with the ***please use appropriate forum***, they are moved and reappear later. Review the users policies and you will understand the methods to our madness :)We generally are a pretty easy going group, with plenty of thoughts and ideas to share.

Pax Exit, translation from Latin
Peace out!
Theresa in Tampa

Quote from Maija:
I felt really saddened that my comments on the pasty What's UP page were deleted. I do not think I broke the acceptable use policy.

My comments were in NO WAY a personal attack against our former prez.


Quote from Marianne:
I think it was right to remove your posts, I'm sorry.


This tells me it was deleted NOT moved. Over assuming what Maija it meant. Easy going group? Talk show hosts, comedians all make a living off from making people look bad. If they didn't they don't get paid, doesn't mean a member here meant anything by that comment. Shoot, there's even adware on your site that asks are you smarter than Obama and I've seen on for Bush too.

I'll do some more looking around and see how this site's method of madness works.
BTW I'm from Florida too but on the EAST coast.

Yes, Steppy, welcome to this site. It is fun and informative the majority of the time, and we thank Charlie and Mary for putting up with us. :) Theresa, I like your Latin phrase. Wanted to say, while the discussion was going on yesterday and Tues., my thoughts went to Pres. (Republican, by the way) Abraham Lincoln's statement that I, myself, often try to practice. Quote: "It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt." :)

Steppy: yes my posts (two actually) were deleted and not moved. Posts from others on the same day (Inauguration Day) were also deleted and not moved. Also, another of mine which was meant to be conciliatory was deleted, so the people I meant to apologize to and clarify what I had meant never could have seen it. It also was not moved.

I appreciate Marianne's comments. I too have not been comfortable with some of the negativity surrounding our previous president. But I still am extremely saddened that on this site we were not allowed to present our congrats to our new prez ON INAUGURATION DAY.

sorry, maija, it sounds like you're in the
doghouse. thanks for trying to repost your
message but all i see is your apology. so
i have no idea what happened. but i agree
with your apology and wish good luck to the new
administration and all of us -- we seem to
need it.

a m hill: the explanation to my deleted posts is on the page called 'politics' at the top of all these pages that can be chosen.

Yup, I'm in the doghouse with many people here. Still trying to comprehend why! I can only figure that it's because I had the gross temerity to state on the "Sarah 'Cuda Palin" page that I am a liberal and that I'm against name calling and labeling, which one poster said "we right-wing conservatives enjoy." This whole conversation resulted because I took difference with liberals being called 'lame-brained'.

I also took offense with one comment about Barack Obama's relatives living in grass huts, but I made no comment there. I won't stoop THAT low!

Thanks Marianne!

Very well said and exactly the point. I also didn't complain to management, nor engage in the 'food fight' as Charlie so aptly put it, but your post is right on the mark.

If you read my previous post to Steppy I said 'SOMETIMES posts are moved'. Let me add now "and Sometimes they are deleted", so to keep with the policies of this site.

I think the reef, mustang, and others I'm a member of are a lot more kind to their members so I think I will stick with them. I didn't find one area I could sit back and make friends and enjoy some informative information. The negativity here is just too much, I'm surprised there's even members here when there's so many other forums out there when the people are like family. Sure even familys argue and disagree but to treat them like babies is crazy. I agree limits need to be set but *gasp* is there any air to breath and enjoy yourself.
You guys have your photos which are beautiful but I can get beautiful pictures of reefs, corals, life, friends without the fear of being deleted or "MOVED"
Life offers so much and people with nothing better to do but stress over simple misunderstandings really need to take a good look at themselves.
Times are tough and this is the time when we all need to become UNITED, but unity is not what I see here.
I hope maija and others that have been in the "doghouse" find another place to call home on the www.worldwide because there's more out there than this.

Oh another thing......... I can't understand why this forum has to be so confusing to find a post or topics. It might be more enjoyable if it was organized a bit better.

No disrespect.......just suggestions too bad I couldn't find anywhere here to relax and be myself.

Many thanks goes out to those of you that welcomed me, means a lot that you too time out to make me feel welcome. Makes me apprieciate the forums I'm a member of already 100 times more.

If anyone interested in becoming friends outside of here I'm on yahoo, username sinalie4u. A place I can make friends without the fear of being deleted. Not sure if I'm allowed to invite people to chat with me, but I did it. It shouldn't affend anyone, that's not my intent, just looking for friends.

God Bless, Peace out, and many best wishes to everyone here.

Stephanie Rose (Steppy):

Please don't be in such a hurry to leave!
It was just a small misunderstanding, I'm sure, although this is largely true:

---

Quote:

I can't understand why this forum has to be so confusing to find a post or topics. It might be more enjoyable if it was organized a bit better.

---

Could Steppy be the infamous Joanne????????

Steppy is not Joanie.

Why exactly was Joanie 'infamous'? I miss her humorous and intelligent posts.

No I am not "Joanie". I live in Mississippi, I have a daughter that is 8 a dog named Honey, a cat named Corona, some saltwater aquariums.
Born in Michigan, raised in Florida, living and working in Mississippi.

There seems to be some paranoia about all new members being Joanie. I thought she was fun. Maybe you all are just a little to uptight.

I just took time to read the recently posted comments. Wow! How many of you have the power to delete comments and direct the subject of comments on this site? Is this site supposed to be self-disciplined? Are some of you practicing for call-in talk-shows, newspaper and news magazine letters and editorial commentaries, and such stuff? Maybe more of you ought to attend local school board meetings, city and village council meetings, service club and lodge meetings, and church meetings. Lots of important stuff goes on at those meetings.

Matt, it really breaks my heart to see so many negative responsives to my posts. It is my opinion that forumers that do not like what I have to say, should just look the other way. I feel that the only one that should intervene should be the moderator of this forum. Like I have always said, "Chew the meat and spit out the bone".

I'm with Cindy on this one.

Back to one topic of this site, "political party affiliation":

I received my Republican Party membership renewal notice a few weeks ago. I was not going to renew my membership until a new chairman of the party was elected to replace the failed leadership of Mike Duncan. Michael Steele now is the chairman of the Republican Party. His background indicates that he is a moderate conservative who will represent "grass roots" Republicans (as we moderate conservative Republicans are called in letters from the RNC).

In a recent interview regarding the Republican Party, Steele said, "I will not let anyone decide the issues for us". Even though he appeared as a guest on the Hannity TV talk-show, he is not a radical right-wing conservative like Hannity, Limbaugh, Cunningham, etc. They will be mistaken if they think they can influence him with their radical right-wing opinions; they will have little or no effect on the issues decided upon by the Republican Party under Steele's leadership.

Anyone have comments to share regarding political party affiliation?