AMA Fuzzy Bear (approaching age 65 version)

[Fuzzy Bear]

How did you view the various major third parties and independent candidates that came and went? How have those views changed now? Specifically I’m talking about the Reform, Green, and Libertarian parties and such candidates as Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, and Gary Johnson.

I think more of their.candidates than I do of the parties.  I have more to say on this, but I would need to get to my house computer to type those thoughts out.

I also would like to know how you thought of Jill Stein

Sincere, compared to Hillary.  Hillary Clinton really doesn't get the idea that it's not all about her and other people should just get out of her way.

I might have voted for Jill Stein against a Paul Ryan or a Mitt Romney.  She's obviously for lots of things I'm not for, but America has been ruined by the Bushes, Clinton, and Biden.  Aside from Trump, I don't see how any of the losers would have been way better.

[PSOL]

How did you view the various major third parties and independent candidates that came and went? How have those views changed now? Specifically I’m talking about the Reform, Green, and Libertarian parties and such candidates as Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, and Gary Johnson.

I think more of their.candidates than I do of the parties.  I have more to say on this, but I would need to get to my house computer to type those thoughts out.

I also would like to know how you thought of Jill Stein

Sincere, compared to Hillary.  Hillary Clinton really doesn't get the idea that it's not all about her and other people should just get out of her way.

I might have voted for Jill Stein against a Paul Ryan or a Mitt Romney.  She's obviously for lots of things I'm not for, but America has been ruined by the Bushes, Clinton, and Biden.  Aside from Trump, I don't see how any of the losers would have been way better.

And the other candidates and parties?

[Fuzzy Bear]

How did you view the various major third parties and independent candidates that came and went? How have those views changed now? Specifically I’m talking about the Reform, Green, and Libertarian parties and such candidates as Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, and Gary Johnson.

I think more of their.candidates than I do of the parties.  I have more to say on this, but I would need to get to my house computer to type those thoughts out.

I also would like to know how you thought of Jill Stein

Sincere, compared to Hillary.  Hillary Clinton really doesn't get the idea that it's not all about her and other people should just get out of her way.

I might have voted for Jill Stein against a Paul Ryan or a Mitt Romney.  She's obviously for lots of things I'm not for, but America has been ruined by the Bushes, Clinton, and Biden.  Aside from Trump, I don't see how any of the losers would have been way better.

And the other candidates and parties?

I'm on my phone, and I hate posting from my phone. I have extended thoughts on those folks.

[Joe Republic]

Where do you get your news?  Specific TV channels, websites, etc.

[Fuzzy Bear]

How did you view the various major third parties and independent candidates that came and went? How have those views changed now? Specifically I’m talking about the Reform, Green, and Libertarian parties and such candidates as Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, and Gary Johnson.

I think more of their.candidates than I do of the parties.  I have more to say on this, but I would need to get to my house computer to type those thoughts out.

I also would like to know how you thought of Jill Stein

Sincere, compared to Hillary.  Hillary Clinton really doesn't get the idea that it's not all about her and other people should just get out of her way.

I might have voted for Jill Stein against a Paul Ryan or a Mitt Romney.  She's obviously for lots of things I'm not for, but America has been ruined by the Bushes, Clinton, and Biden.  Aside from Trump, I don't see how any of the losers would have been way better.

And the other candidates and parties?

I have generally thought more of the candidates than I have of the parties. 

Ralph Nader has become a villain to many liberals.  This is tragic and wrong; Nader has actually done more to advance the kind of liberal issues that make the lives of people better, and he's done it almost single-handedly.  Nader drew attention to auto-safety issues; concerns that now go into the planning and design of cars, weren't even thought of until Nader came along.  Nader MADE consumer protection a permanent cause and a force to be reckoned with; he provided accountability for Corporate America in a way that never happened before him.  Nader has always been a loner with a prickly personality, but he'd have been a President who was on the side of ordinary citizens against corporate behemoths. 

The idea that Nader cost Al Gore the Presidency is nonsense.  Gore lost the Presidency because (A) he couldn't carry West Virginia as Michael Dukakis did and (B) because of the advantages Bush had in Florida through his brother, the Governor.  (To say nothing of his failure to carry Tennessee, his home state.)  Nader has his faults, but liberals owe an apology to Ralph Nader for trashing him and treating him as a Benedict Arnold.  He's not a natural "Green", and I think the Greens are kind of left-loony, but Ralph Nader has not deserved the trashing from liberals he's received.

[Fuzzy Bear]

How did you view the various major third parties and independent candidates that came and went? How have those views changed now? Specifically I’m talking about the Reform, Green, and Libertarian parties and such candidates as Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, and Gary Johnson.

I once flirted with becoming a Libertarian.  My favorite Libertarian was Andre Marrou, the party's 1992 candidate who was actually elected to office as a Libertarian.  I watched him on C-Span on a debate with Lenora Fulani of the New Alliance Party (a leftist socialist party) and I was impressed as to the degree to which candidates who are sure to lose talk of issues quite naturally.  We would have a far more productive and responsive government if our major party candidates could speak of issues as naturally as Fulani and Marrou did.

I would have voted for Ron Paul in 1988 if he had been on the ballot.  Paul was an articulate spokeperson against the War on Drugs.  He described a situation in Washington State where police serving a warrant on a man accused of selling drugs.  Paul was, in deadpan, talking about how the cops entered the house and the man whirled around in his swivel chair. And, said Paul, "AFTER THEY KILLED HIM" (emphasis added; Paul said it in kind of a deadpan as well), they (the police) not only didn't find any drugs, they found that the grey metallic device in the dead man's hand was the TV remote control.  I'm certainly not pro-drugs.  I've spent years of my life working to help other people get off alcohol and drugs.  But I've long believed that the collateral damage of the War on Drugs is almost as harmful as the drugs themselves. 

The Libertarians, on the other hand, are amazingly unserious.  The part of their spiel I don't get is that the they are against GOVERNMENT jerks, but they're OK with privatized jerks doing the same thing to impinge on freedom.  There are many ordinary people who would agree with Libertarian principles on many issues, but what do they have in common with the Koch Brothers, who used libertarian principles to push Citizens United, where rich folks have the power to drown out common people out of being able to run for even the lowest level of public office.  That's not really my idea of Liberty.

[Fuzzy Bear]

How did you view the various major third parties and independent candidates that came and went? How have those views changed now? Specifically I’m talking about the Reform, Green, and Libertarian parties and such candidates as Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, and Gary Johnson.

The Reform Party was not a cult of personality, but it could not survive without Ross Perot, who was its personality and its bank account.  It effectively collapsed in 2000 when it essentially had two (2) separate nominees.  Pat Buchanan was one nominee, but many Reform Party members supported Natural Law Party candidate Dr. John Hagelin.  They elected a Governor of Minnesota, but that, too, was done on personality.  (Jesse "The Body" Ventura was a household name who actually had a track record in government in Minnesota which helped.)  Perot ended up betraying his own causes when he endorsed George W. Bush in the waning days of the 2000 campaign, a move that I believe was decisive in Bush carrying Ohio and Missouri.

What would have happened, however, if Bush had been reelected in 1992 and Perot had run for the REPUBLICAN nomination in 1996?  Perot was, really, the first Trump, and the Perot voters have a decent amount of overlap with the sort of folks that propelled Trump to the GOP nomination in 2016.  Perot's issues were Trump's issues, although Perot was more focused with Mexico taking American jobs while Trump was focused on China.  (Even back then, Trump was focused on China and what China was doing.)  Perot was not the personality Trump was, but he had a devoted following.  Had he run as a Republican he could have expanded his base and expanded the GOP.  The difference is that the GOP was not ready to become a populist party in 1996 because they were part of Big Business.  That's changed now; the Democrats have become the party of Big Business almost without announcing it.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Why do you use your religion and your faith, to spread hate?
Over most of my time here, I have seen nothing but bad faith arguments from you, in your attempt to degrade people of color (mainly immigrants from southern nations) and people who view themselves to be part of the LBGT+ community.

First off, I do not use my faith to spread hate.  You know this, but you are perpetually dishonest about that.  Your attacks on me regarding this rise to the level of trolling, and I will push back about that.  I will report every time you troll me.  You are, very much, a person who cannot play by rules when it comes to interacting with people you don't agree with.

This is, however, an AMA thread, so you can troll here (I suppose).

My Faith is in God, and his Son, Jesus Christ.  God's Word is in Scripture.  That's what I believe; that's what I've put my faith in.

In that regard, what I believe ought to conform to God's Word.  And Scripture, more than once, makes it clear that the only sexual activity God sanctions is that between one (1) male husband and his only female wife.  That's what Scripture says.  It's one thing to say, "I don't believe in the Bible!" and I'm fine with that, but it's not an honest argument to then quote Scripture when you challenge me on an issue.  (It's actually Straight Outta Alinsky, to be honest.)  I will allow people to live and let live and I respect the life choices others make, but I don't condone or endorse everyone else's lifestyle choices.  More importantly, I don't expect others to endorse my life choices, either.  I have great relationships in my personal life with all sorts of people, including people who are of other ethnicities and people who loathe Donald Trump who know that I voted for him twice and don't apologize for it.  I also have good relationships with LGBT coworkers who know full well what I believe.  (I don't preach at them, but I don't hide who I am, either.)

What I won't do is endorse any position that would put me at odds with Scripture.  I'm not going to take a position that puts me in a position where I am at odds with God, Himself, and what He has said.  I can live and let live, but I can't openly affirm things such as SSM or anything that affirms lifestyles and choices that God has explicitly said is sin.  I'm willing to not discuss it.  What I'm not going to do is to be coerced into taking a position that puts me at odds with God, Himself.  And I don't believe that Christian institutions should be forced to hire people who don't share these views that are Black Letter Scripture.  (Indeed, even Red Letter Scripture; consider what Jesus said about adultery.)

I would like someone to tell me how I could say I am "in the faith" when I stand firm on a position God, Himself, has taken the opposite position in Scripture.  Joe Biden is now as pro-abortion as Gloria Steinem.  Is he in the Catholic Faith, given the role of abortion doctrine in the Catholic Church?  This is God we're talking about, not my boss or your boss, but THE CREATOR of all that was ever made.  When I willfully posture against His Word, it really does beg the question of do I believe He is who He says He is.

[PSOL]

And Jill Stein?

[Fuzzy Bear]

And Jill Stein?

I don't think much about Jill Stein, except for the fact that Hillary couldn't hold back calling her a Russian Asset or something like that.  (Anything to avoid responsibility for blowing a race she was poised to win.)  I did think that if Hillary Clinton could stoop to attacking her that viciously, she must have some redeeming virtue. 

I found Gary Johnson to be an incredible bust.  Weld, though certainly NOT an actual libertarian (small "l") was actually far more articulate.  Johnson seemed stoned during part of the campaign, and maybe he was.   

All in all, I like Stein more than Johnson because there are more degrees of separation from the corporatist globalism and her then there is with Gary Johnson.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Why do you use your religion and your faith, to spread hate?
Over most of my time here, I have seen nothing but bad faith arguments from you, in your attempt to degrade people of color (mainly immigrants from southern nations) and people who view themselves to be part of the LBGT+ community.

I don't "degrade people of color".  But we live in an age of rampant Identity Politics and Tribalism which, to me, is what threatens to undermine the Rule of Law and Civil peace that separate us from Failed States.

I certainly believe that there are many legitimate steps we can take to increase fairness in criminal justice, and I've discussed some of them.  But I'm not for defunding police.  I'm not going to pretend that certain individuals who have been shot by police were clearly resisting lawful arrests.  And I'm not going to support Critical Race Theory in any of our institutions.  It is not "sensitivity training"; it is political indoctrination that teaches (in part) that people, by virtue of being white, bear more sin for the oppression of others by virtue of their "whiteness" and everything they have is due to "privilege".  Is that the whole of it?  No, but why should people be forced to "go there" against their will at school or work, any more than they should be forced to binge-watch Tucker Carlson?  CRT is discriminatory and it institutionalizes hatred of White persons, and, to be honest, most of its advocates share that hatred and are fine with expressing it.

Immigration is not a right; it is a privilege, and it's something that people are not entitled to, period.  It's something Americans don't have to hand out equally; if certain groups hold beliefs that are counter to liberal democracy, we, as a nation, are well advised to not allow them to even visit here, no matter what race, color, or creed they are.  And we simply can't absorb unlimited immigration from our Southern Border as we are experiencing presently.  Is that denigrating "people of color"?  Is it denigrating them if it is suggested that 18% of these new arrivals are COVID-19 positive, maskless, and not social distancing?  Is it denigrating them if this is true?

The fact is that what is going on at the Southern Border is allowed to happen in an attempt to change the demography of our Country in such a way as to give the Democratic Party advantages in future elections.  It's no longer a secret; Democrats are saying this out loud now.  For myself, I don't care as to the race or ethnicity of immigrants.  I care about religious beliefs to the extent that someone's religion precludes support for liberal democracy, but not beyond that.  I care as to whether or not immigrants will be self-supporting, and that principle is written into our law.  I will note, however, that every Democrat who said they were for enforcing existing laws on immigration was lying, and that includes people on this forum who opposed the Wall and said that Biden would enforce existing laws.  That's not what happening now, and it's lying to deny that what is going on now is anything but Open Borders, enacted without the authority of law.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Why do you use your religion and your faith, to spread hate?
Over most of my time here, I have seen nothing but bad faith arguments from you, in your attempt to degrade people of color (mainly immigrants from southern nations) and people who view themselves to be part of the LBGT+ community.

So let me ask you:  What do YOU think about what is going on at our Southern Border?  Is it not a case of everyone who wants to can come right in?  Is this enforcing existing laws?  Please tell me if it is or not.

[Fuzzy Bear]

2. Are you familiar with any anime (ie Japanese animation), either directly or through your son? If so, do you have any movies or series you particularly enjoyed?

Before I could log on here tonight I played Demonslayer with my 16 year old son.

We've also played Beyblades for a while and I've watched the cartoon at times with him.

When I was a kid I watched 8th Man.  He was a Japanese Superhero who was banned from TV when people objected to the cigarette energizers he used when he was depleted of his strength.

[Xing]

What are some of your favorite places in each region of Florida?

[OSR stands with Israel]

1. How come you dislike Richard Nixon given you like Trump given many of their similarities(I’d argue Nixon was an intelligent version of Trump) and the fact that many Trump fans also seem to like Nixon as well

2. Who is the best president we never had(from the people who ran in the primaries in either the Republican or Democratic primaries)

3. Are you an NBA fan

[Thank you for being a friend...]

This thread is a necessary step to cement my status as a Forum Institution in that it's a way to get to 20k posts by my 65th birthday.  So go ahead.

I just want to say Happy Birthday.  I thought you were a millennial like me (i'm in 30s).

[DaleCooper]

Do you believe in the Rapture as it's typically depicted in Evangelical circles? I'm not a believer myself, but even when I was that was a concept that I felt was unbiblical.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Why do you have the most popular AMA thread on Atlas forums?

[Calthrina950]

Why do you have the most popular AMA thread on Atlas forums?

I can't recall who said it, but Fuzzy Bear has the tendency of exposing holes in the arguments of those who are opposed to him. And he is a controversial poster, who's aroused the emotions of many people on here.

[Joe Republic]

I can't recall who said it, but Fuzzy Bear has the tendency of exposing holes in the arguments of those who are opposed to him.

... while leaving gaping ones in his own, which he often refuses to attempt to fill.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

You said you voted straight ticket Democratic in 2018 with 1 exception. What office was it for that you did not vote Democratic?

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

More questions, Fuzzy!

1.  What is one POSITIVE thing about my generation? (Millennials)

2.  What is one NEGATIVE thing about my generation?

3.  What is your honest view of Hinduism?

[Meclazine for Israel]

I can't recall who said it, but Fuzzy Bear has the tendency of exposing holes in the arguments of those who are opposed to him.

... while leaving gaping ones in his own, which he often refuses to attempt to fill.

[TML]

Do you consider people like Rudy Giuliani, Mike Lindell, Sidney Powell, and Lin Wood heroes for their actions in the aftermath of the 2020 election?

[Fuzzy Bear]

More questions, Fuzzy!

1.  What is one POSITIVE thing about my generation? (Millennials)

2.  What is one NEGATIVE thing about my generation?

3.  What is your honest view of Hinduism?

As to Question 1:  They have a willingness to think outside the box, which is admirable.  The boxes haven't always served people well.

As to Question 2:  They have limited loyalty and seem to not take a long view of things.  Now I don't fault them for that, in that many of them grew up in situations where parents divorced for relatively trivial reasons, or were not real committed to each other in the first place, and parents did not have the kind of relationships with their employers that my parents had with relatively paternalistic employers.  (My criticisms of younger generations are always tempered by the fact that my generation accelerated the trends that weakened the Family as an institution; it was the worst thing we did as a generation.)

As to Question 3:  I'm a Christian, and I believe in a specific path to Eternal Life which is exclusive to all other paths.  Not to all other people; anyone can come to believe in Christ as Savior and Lord, confess their status as sinners, and receive Christ as Savior and Lord and the Free Gift of Eternal Life that goes with it.  

Obviously I cannot agree with Hindu doctrines.  I certainly do not like the sound of the Hindu caste system, but I confess I don't know much about it beyond what 9th grade Social Studies in America presented.

I should say this:  When I say a religion is a False Religion, I say that in the sense it's doctrines conflict with the Doctrine of Salvation.  I believe there is a ONE (and only one) way to Salvation.  Now other religions believe that as well, and those folks believe my religion to be a False Religion.  That's fine, too.  This doesn't mean I cannot live peaceably with these people, nor does it mean that I cannot cooperate with these people on a secular plane.  The issue of concern for the Nuclear Family as an institution is a good example.  There are many faiths that do not subscribe to the exclusivity of Christ as the means to Salvation with whom I can find agreement on issues of Family, abortion, and other secular issues.  I am most definitely not a theocrat.  I do not believe that theocracy is the model for Christian citizenship in the secular world today.