Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Has there ever been an Presidential election where ALL the lead candidates were anti-gun?

Maslow's Hierarchy has gotten a lot of exposure over the years, but it doesn't have much real scientific validity. It's one of those theories that sounds plausible, but without much substance, sort of like the psychoanalytic theory where Maslow started. High brow psychobabel, IMO. I've been to so many development seminars that started with Maslow's Hierarchy that it got so I thought I'd puke if I heard it one more time.

Paul

well, he bought some support in NH....up to 7%. He's getting close to the point where somebody may run an ad against him.

I'm not advocating it, but the Constitution doesn't preclude the ownership of a Trident sub either. Nor does the Constitution necessarily hand over the decision to the Congress.

Casey

You're coming around...........


Casey

Not incorrect opinions, it's the New Age reading of the Constitution.........in other words, whatever fits government's New Age policy........and the Courts rubberstamp it.


Casey

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So What.... There's also nothing in the Constitution which prohibits you from keeping a basement full of dynamite and hand grenades either.

Last I remember, and please correct me if i'm wrong, the Constitution vested powers in governing bodies to make laws.

Well, no actually the federal courts routinely bitchslap both the executive and legislative branches.

Maslow's theory is easy to understand for most of us. Here is an example from his own writings.

"One of the many interesting things Maslow noticed while he worked with monkeys early in his career, was that some needs take precedence over others. For example, if you are hungry and thirsty, you will tend to try to take care of the thirst first. After all, you can do without food for weeks, but you can only do without water for a couple of days! Thirst is a �stronger� need than hunger. Likewise, if you are very very thirsty, but someone has put a choke hold on you and you can�t breath, which is more important? The need to breathe, of course. On the other hand, sex is less powerful than any of these. Let�s face it, you won�t die if you don�t get it!"

"Let�s face it, you won�t die if you don�t get it!"

but you might want to.

Ease of understanding and intuitive appeal don't make a theory valid. Part of the problem is extrapolating from basic needs as in Maslow's monkey research, to his hierarchy theory as an explanation for more complex human behavior, such as that of politicians, or motivation in the workplace.

FWIW, I believe that power is the single most significant motivating factor. Money and sex are just subcategories that are possible to obtain through power, or are perhaps symbols of it, trappings of power as it were. Think about it. JMO.

Paul

Yo Steve,
If politicians don't go into politics to make money, 'splain to me how a couple of rubes from Arkansas with a combined income of maybe $150,000 became multimillionaires at the end of their 8 years in office, and brag about their newfound wealth at every opportunity. How do a large portion of Senators and Representatives go to DC with nothing but regular middle class salaries and end up being millionaires? The idea that politicians don't go into politics to make money is, shall we say, a little naive. Maybe some don't, but I would have to say after 35 years of observing the breed, most do.

Savage99
Whether Ron Paul keeps his or not, I don't know; but judging from past actions, I'd bet not. If you wonder, why not write him an e-mail and ask. As to Romney, I don't trust people whose past actions and statements bely their current statements. The looks fair and feels foul thing, or all that glitters is not gold analogy. The point to all of this is that we have an opportunity to cast our votes for an individual who stands four square behind the Constitution, who is running in one of the two major parties, and I have yet to have anyone here tell me why he's not electable, except those that have a vested interest in keeping status quo ante, or believe that more socialism is needed to save the country.

Lets try to separate our voting. Think of primaries as the time and place to promote your candidate and the final election as the place to vote on whats best in general. What I am saying is that its just fine and in fact good and productive to promote your ideas and your favorite candidate right now. But in the final election not to throw away your vote on a splinter candidate who will not matter a whit ten years from now except for the damage that he did.

I have to thank Ralph Nader for helping Gore lose and Bush win. We would be even worse off with Gore. I want to admonish those who voted for Ross Perot and put Bill Clinton in the Whitehouse.

As you can see splinter candidates can matter a lot in the result. Don't throw away your vote. We need every vote.

"Yo Steve,
If politicians don't go into politics to make money, 'splain to me how a couple of rubes from Arkansas with a combined income of maybe $150,000 became multimillionaires at the end of their 8 years in office, and brag about their newfound wealth at every opportunity. How do a large portion of Senators and Representatives go to DC with nothing but regular middle class salaries and end up being millionaires? The idea that politicians don't go into politics to make money is, shall we say, a little naive. Maybe some don't, but I would have to say after 35 years of observing the breed, most do."

Well, no. Most don't. The Clintons are famously corrupt. And spent half their time defending investigations because of it. Bill is disbarred. They are sort of the exception that proves the rule.

Any body who gets rich in politics now is just an FBI target. This isn't LBJ's congress. There are tens of thousands of elected officials in this country. A handful go to jail every year. They are no more crooked than cops, insurance salesmen, or short order cooks. But they have their own FBI/Justice Department cops trying to bust them. Makes nice cynical chit chat at Ron Paul meet ups, but it isn't true.

Every federal judge I know took more than a 50% pay cut to serve.

Not entirely. The courts tend to be quite friendly to business. But when it comes to the business of keeping the Great Unwashed Masses in line, the courts are often quite friendly to the legislature(s).

Casey

That's my point, Tridents or TNT.....same diff.





Within the framework and intent of the Constitution, of course--and that's my point, the intent of the Constitution has been subverted (for lack of a better word) in the ever present effort of government to control the Great Unwashed Masses.

If an individual wants to build a billion dollar Trident sub--so what? It's not lack of money that prevents the individual from stocking it with Trident missles--it's that somebody else has the missles and know-how and it ain't for sale.

If I want a full auto weapon, reasonable Americans should have one to defend themselves from......terrorists......and government----and THAT'S why government doesn't want us to have them.

You guys are hiding behind the word reasonable. It's only reasonable if one is a member of the exclusive few that benefits from government largess, or government run programs.

Casey

Off subject, but there is an ego thing going on there too. And don't think upon retirement that judges and politicians alike don't take full advantage of their former "position".....

And, I find it interesting that just recently in northern Colorado judicial district a District Magistrate's position was advertised at $120,000 a year. That's a junior judge. Put that in perspective, Supreme Court Justices "only" make $200,000 annually. And of course that doesn't include the incredible benefits a government employee recieves. Are you working on veterans day Steve? State and fed judges aren't.

Casey

"hiding behind reasonableness" That's a new one!!


Some of you guys are scary at times. Kinda makes me grateful for all those laws shutting done the so called "great unwashed masses"

You and Bristoe knock yourselves out buying your "Yellow Trident Submarine"!! Let me know how it works out for you.

If one party loses because they did a poor job of their issues connecting with members of their party or other semi-like minded candidates, then losing is just the thing to make them sit up, take notice, and change their wayward ways.

The current neo-con Republican party comes to mind......

Don't worry, if Hillary Clinton wins the presidency, it's almost certain the Democrats will lose one or both houses of Congress two years later. The Democrats are just as capable of screwing things up as the neo-cons have been........


Casey

Courts decide cases. Each one is peculiar in its own facts. The "friendly to business" and "hostile to women" or "anti-civil rights" labels that get hung on judges are largely BS.

And the salaries magistrates, district judges, and SC justices make are a fraction of what someone with those qualifications would make in the private sector. There is the ego gratification of wearing a black robe and having your butt kissed by lawyers all day, but I'd rather have the money.

You're one of the Few,......the Proud,.......the Greedy