Jump to content


Kinky Friedman


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Longshanks

Longshanks

    what the duece is this?

  • Members
  • 2,650 posts
  • Location:Arlington-Dallas,Texas
  • Interests:History, Politics

Posted 26 February 2006 - 12:09 PM

As a Texan I can already say I am voting for this guy out of spite and disgust with the GOP, I ran a chapter of "The Young Conservatives of Texas" for awhile at my campus but I grew apart from the organization and I simply sucked at generating interest, there was a growing number of people in that group who were unstatisfied with the GOP who were supporting Kinky as well.Friedman has no chance though, there is very little buzz and the guy is regarded as a joke here, just an alternative to the GOP machine that has engulfed Texas over the past 20 yearsIf you thought the Democratic Party was a joke around the country you should see it operate in Texas, it is pathetic, Howard Dean might actually HELP democrats in Texas because he couldent hurt itsome pissed off conservatives like myself will vote for friedman just hoping he can sause a stir that will shake the GOP here, hes getting my vote but he probably wont hold a candle to the democratic sacrificial lamb and the GOP will reign on

#2 ChunkyLuver69

ChunkyLuver69

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 677 posts
  • Location:Portland, Maine
  • Interests:I just realized I have no interests =(
  • Favorite Poker Game:Pot Limit Omaha

Posted 26 February 2006 - 12:50 PM

Im with you on thisBTW I heard Kinky wants to work on legilizing gambling in Texas and Harrahs was going to put 7 casinos in Texas the profits goes towards education have you heard anything on this
burnin' jane in tha turnin' lane

#3 Longshanks

Longshanks

    what the duece is this?

  • Members
  • 2,650 posts
  • Location:Arlington-Dallas,Texas
  • Interests:History, Politics

Posted 26 February 2006 - 01:29 PM

View PostChunkyLuver69, on Sunday, February 26th, 2006, 2:50 PM, said:

Im with you on thisBTW I heard Kinky wants to work on legilizing gambling in Texas and Harrahs was going to put 7 casinos in Texas the profits goes towards education have you heard anything on this
that profits towards education thing is bullcrap, the lottery was supposed to do that, and education doesent need more moneythere is talk about Reunion Arena in dallas being a casino

#4 chrozzo

chrozzo

    hi™

  • Members
  • 23,051 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Geico

Posted 26 February 2006 - 04:58 PM

i dont know...sounds a little kinky to me
FCP CBO: Chief Beer Officer

I'm kind of a big deal.




#5 Mike Matusow

Mike Matusow

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 86 posts
  • Location:Las Vegas, Nevada
  • Interests:Poker

Posted 27 February 2006 - 12:48 AM

They ain't makin' jews like jesus anymore,They ain't makin' carpenters who know what nails are for.Well, the whole damn place was singin' as I strolled right out the doorlord, they ain't makin' jews like jesus anymore! -Kinky Friedman and the Texas Jewboys'nuff said. . .MM
Sometimes I gotta think to myself "Mike you've been everywhere, you've done everything. . . way to go kid!"

#6 wilheldp

wilheldp

    Poker Forum Nut

  • Members
  • 450 posts

Posted 27 February 2006 - 07:19 AM

I voted for Micheal Badnarik in the last presidential election because both the GOP and the Democratic parties have lost their damned minds. Neither party is fiscally conservative any more, the only thing that differs between them is what they overspend on (the Dems on useless "programs" to help the "needy", and the Reps on wars and oil buddies). The Reps are way too "morally" conservative, and the Dems overreact by being too morally liberal. Out of all of the candidates running for president (and here's a shocker, THERE WERE MORE THAN TWO!) I agreed most with Badnarik and the Libertarian party. They are truly fiscally conservative, in favor of much smaller government, and believe that the government has absolutely no place in "moral" issues.

#7 Trail Boss Mitch

Trail Boss Mitch

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 49 posts
  • Location:Deep in the Heart of Texas

Posted 27 February 2006 - 11:46 AM

As a Texan, I like most things Kinky. He would be a nice change to prettyboy Rick P. Although I'm a conversative and Republican, I'm tired of the same old politics and politicians...give me something kinky. Texas has a history of being a little rebellious. Why not shake things up with a weirdo governor? He and George could spend time together in Crawford smoking cigars and eating quail, assuming VP Cheney can shoot one without also bagging an attorney. (You can't eat attorneys...they stick in your teeth.)
Visit Trail Boss Mitch at:
Texas Poker Trails.com
A Texas writer discovers poker.

#8 Foulky

Foulky

    Poker Forum Regular

  • Members
  • 235 posts
  • Location:Pennsylvania

Posted 03 March 2006 - 12:24 PM

View Postwilheldp, on Monday, February 27th, 2006, 7:19 AM, said:

I voted for Micheal Badnarik in the last presidential election because both the GOP and the Democratic parties have lost their damned minds. Neither party is fiscally conservative any more, the only thing that differs between them is what they overspend on (the Dems on useless "programs" to help the "needy", and the Reps on wars and oil buddies). The Reps are way too "morally" conservative, and the Dems overreact by being too morally liberal. Out of all of the candidates running for president (and here's a shocker, THERE WERE MORE THAN TWO!) I agreed most with Badnarik and the Libertarian party. They are truly fiscally conservative, in favor of much smaller government, and believe that the government has absolutely no place in "moral" issues.
I read a piece written by John Hospers not too long ago I think it was called the Libertarian Manifesto or something like that, and I couldn't help but agree with 90% of what he said. Libertarian's might be a little drastic and a little cold-hearted but if I had to choose between too much government and too little government I would choose the latter any day of the week.
"It's like Papa Wolenda said, 'Life is on the wire. The rest is just waiting.'"

#9 Farnan

Farnan

    Poker Forum Nut

  • Members
  • 285 posts
  • Interests:Golf, Poker, Music

Posted 03 March 2006 - 12:49 PM

View PostFoulky, on Friday, March 3rd, 2006, 12:24 PM, said:

Libertarian's might be a little drastic and a little cold-hearted but if I had to choose between too much government and too little government I would choose the latter any day of the week.
Yeah, Libertarian thought seems great at first until you think about what woudl happen if we implemented their ideas. First off, no federal agencies. Who's going to dole out the licenses for use of airwaves (radio, tv, cell phones)--just wait and see how fast all of those signals interfere with one another. Anyone up for some perscription drugs? Holy shit would that be a vicious game of russian roulette w/o the FDA (i know it isn't perfect, but it is MUCH better than nothing). What about the FTC? What about the NLRB? FAA? Shit, i wouldn't want to fly anywhere without solid airline safety regulations.I love the idea of smaller government and fiscal responsibility--but they combine a warped sense of social darwinism with an unbelievably misguided trust in completely free markets. To that end, i think libertarians deserve a seat at the table--just not the head of the table.Kinky's a crazy dude---i've heard him talk a few times on the radio and i like his straight-forward views. You know he's not trying to blow smoke up your ass (well, not as much as the rest of them). Oh, and gambling/lottery won't ADD money to education. Do ya know why? Every year states make a budget and allocate a certain amount to education. They put all the lottery $$ in and what ever is needed on top of that, tax dollars are added. In other words, there isn't a specific amount of $ the government adds to education and the lottery funds are on top of that, it is the other way around. So in effect, it is like the $$ is going to the general treasury.

#10 chrozzo

chrozzo

    hi™

  • Members
  • 23,051 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Geico

Posted 03 March 2006 - 01:07 PM

im not convinced, still sounds a little kinky to me
FCP CBO: Chief Beer Officer

I'm kind of a big deal.




#11 Birddog

Birddog

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • Location:Texas
  • Interests:Poker

Posted 03 March 2006 - 08:19 PM

Kinky would be great for the state. Good lordy we have an Aggie Cheerleader running things now, and he is PATHETIC!!!He may be unorthodox, but he has a hell of a lot of horse sense.

#12 Aces, Full, Mike

Aces, Full, Mike

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 51 posts
  • Location:In my club, I will splash the pot whenever I please.

Posted 03 March 2006 - 10:30 PM

I was supportive of Kinky, but lately he has really been turning me off his campaign and I think I will now be voting for Rick Perry.Kinky's naive attempt to make gay marriage a focal point of his campaign annoys me. Not because I care one way or the other, but because this issue was already dealt with last year by public vote, also there are so many other more important issues that he is marginalizing at it's expense.Also his support of Max Soffar and general dislike for the death penalty leave a bad taste in my mouth as well.All in all, I would have to say Kinky had a chance, but his political inexperience is showing. He caught my attention because he was the only candidate discussing doing something about our immigration problem, but the more I hear him speak the more I am starting to think that his "Mexican generals" plan is nothing more than lip service, something unique that he can throw out when he is appearing in the media. It doesn't sound like he has a real feasible plan for resolving our immigration woes.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users