Whatever Is John Ramsey Thinking?

Barbara

New Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
741
Reaction score
23
Website
Visit site
Thanks to Watching You on FFJ for bringing up such a good point that I thought I'd expound upon it here as well:

John Ramsey wants to run for political office on the Republican ticket here in the United States of America. This is a man who has repeatedly refused to take an FBI administered polygraph because he didn't trust the FBI


This is a man who has criticized LE endlessly and has made horrible remarks about the possible planting of evidence, corruption in trying to frame him and his family, etc.

This is a man who is currently still considered one of the only two suspects in the murder of his own 6 year old child, while he was too stoned, along with the mother of this poor little girl to cooperate in a police investigation.

This is a man who is an adulterer who lied about it as well during this investigation.

This is a man who co-authored a book with his wife, promising to set up a foundation for children everywhere. This will be particularly scrutinized by the public

This is a man who calls internet posters "beer can collectors" and other adjectives, not likely to sit well with the general intelligent public who utilize the internet for personal interest in murder cases, etc.

This is a man who has hired Lin Wood, protector of Gary Condit to represent the Ramsey family and who also has unkind words for the public who take an interest in this case.

This is a man who cannot distance himself from *******, a self proclaimed representative for the Ramsey family..well, you know the rest.

All of the above will NOT go unnoticed!

I predict he will NEVER run; the Republican party will not allow it! After all, if running for office, it is not just us beer collectors who will be scrutinizing his life, it will be other politicians (with more means to uncover truths), and the general public who may not even know about the details of this case nor the lies, lies and more lies the Ramseys have spoken.

I for one, hope that he runs, so that so many more might uncover the corruption in this case. If in the headlines, more attention may be given to the blatant intentional cronyism covering up a murder.

Be careful what you wish for John.....I hope you get it!
 
Face it, John Ramsey has successfully pulled the wool over the public's eyes for the past 7-years--and made MILLIONS doing it!. After that, in John Ramsey's eyes, there is nothing he can't do.

Since the murder, the Ramsey's life has been one big charade after another. It's at the point where they can no longer can distinguish reality from their own imagination and web of deception.

IMO
 
>This is a man who has repeatedly refused to take an FBI administered polygraph because he didn't trust the FBI.
...Sensible guy! The voters will probably want a politician with good sense like that!

>This is a man who has criticized LE endlessly
They sure deserved it. Meanwhile he has actively campaigned for better police agencies to take over the case.
>corruption in trying to frame him and his family, etc.
Frame and railroad certainly seem to be appropriate terms for him to use, though I do not know if he has in fact used them.

>This is a man who is currently still considered one of the only two suspects in the murder of his own 6 year old child,
...considered by you perhaps.

>This is a man who is an adulterer
along with about umpteen zillion other men.

>promising to set up a foundation
....which he did.

>This is a man who cannot distance himself from *******, a self proclaimed representative for the Ramsey family
.......Not at all. Representative for truth, justice, courtesy, common-sense, etc., but not the Ramsey family.
 
Toth said:
>This is a man who has repeatedly refused to take an FBI administered polygraph because he didn't trust the FBI.
...Sensible guy! The voters will probably want a politician with good sense like that!

>This is a man who has criticized LE endlessly
They sure deserved it. Meanwhile he has actively campaigned for better police agencies to take over the case.
>corruption in trying to frame him and his family, etc.
Frame and railroad certainly seem to be appropriate terms for him to use, though I do not know if he has in fact used them.

>This is a man who is currently still considered one of the only two suspects in the murder of his own 6 year old child,
...considered by you perhaps.

>This is a man who is an adulterer
along with about umpteen zillion other men.

>promising to set up a foundation
....which he did.

>This is a man who cannot distance himself from *******, a self proclaimed representative for the Ramsey family
.......Not at all. Representative for truth, justice, courtesy, common-sense, etc., but not the Ramsey family.

Well, I don't live in Michigan so doing without my vote won't hurt him, but let John tell all the above to the voters.

Let him tell the voters there that he is only one of umpteen zillion adulterers. :eek:

Let him tell them he is smart not to trust the FBI. :eek:

Let him tell them what happened to his foundation. :eek:

Just what has he done anyway to "actively campaign" for better LE? :liar:

Perhaps they chose to go public with Patsy's relapse so he has a convenient "out" when the Republicans refuse to let him run. Nobody here is fooled by the timing of these various "announcements".
 
And, John Ramsey has apparently forgotten that no one has been charged with the murder of his daughter. Wouldn't you think this would be his number one priority in life?
 
Trino said:
And, John Ramsey has apparently forgotten that no one has been charged with the murder of his daughter. Wouldn't you think this would be his number one priority in life?

I would guess that is the priority of all parents of murdered children. However it doesn't mean that they stay holed up in their houses and do nothing but wait. Denise Naslund's mother did essentially that and it didn't help solve her daughter's murder any faster.
 
Jayelles said:
He mocked Santa for being gay. Not very pc.
I don't think pc is a burden the Ramseys carry. Otherwise Patsy wouldn't have been sporting those fur coats.
 
tipper said:
I would guess that is the priority of all parents of murdered children. However it doesn't mean that they stay holed up in their houses and do nothing but wait.
Tipper, realize that you are talking about people that have never even seen the inside of the Boulder police station. The Ramseys are about as interested in finding the "intruder" as O.J. is in finding the killer of Ron Goldman.
 
When Sally Field won the oscar she said "They love me! They really love me!"

When LBJ was elected he danced with Lady Bird at the inaugural ball and said "Look dear, they really love me."

John just needs some love, some basic love from the masses, even if they have to vote it in. :crazy: :loser: :bang:
 
tipper said:
I don't think pc is a burden the Ramseys carry. Otherwise Patsy wouldn't have been sporting those fur coats.

It is in the interests of all politicians to be pc.
 
Jayelles said:
It is in the interests of all politicians to be pc.

No, it is in the interests of all politicians to stand by their true CONVICTIONS.
We have enough sleaze balls who have none - and stick their (middle) finger up to the wind to see which way it's blowing. Then they move on and contradict what they've said before. Begging the question: What exactly DO they believe and stand for? And they wonder why they are not trusted!
It's a slimy tactic of "politicians" to say what voters want to hear - only to get elected. Then watch their voting record. Therein lies the truth.

I will vote for a public servant - not a 'politician.'

"If you don't stand for something - you will fall for anything."
 
K777angel said:
No, it is in the interests of all politicians to stand by their true CONVICTIONS.
We have enough sleaze balls who have none - and stick their (middle) finger up to the wind to see which way it's blowing. Then they move on and contradict what they've said before. Begging the question: What exactly DO they believe and stand for? And they wonder why they are not trusted!
It's a slimy tactic of "politicians" to say what voters want to hear - only to get elected. Then watch their voting record. Therein lies the truth.

I will vote for a public servant - not a 'politician.'

"If you don't stand for something - you will fall for anything."
Well, then, I'm sure you will find an honest and upright person such as John Ramsey to be a refreshing change.
 
Please remember that John Ramsey or any other candidate, if elected, will represent a specific geographical area with its own demographics. As with all elected officials, he should represent the interests of that geographical area, not the interests of himself or others not living in that area. Therefore, finding out which way the wind is blowing among the people an elected person represents and changing one's position accordingly is a good thing.

JMO
 
K777angel said:
No, it is in the interests of all politicians to stand by their true CONVICTIONS.
We have enough sleaze balls who have none - and stick their (middle) finger up to the wind to see which way it's blowing. Then they move on and contradict what they've said before. Begging the question: What exactly DO they believe and stand for? And they wonder why they are not trusted!
It's a slimy tactic of "politicians" to say what voters want to hear - only to get elected. Then watch their voting record. Therein lies the truth.

I will vote for a public servant - not a 'politician.'

"If you don't stand for something - you will fall for anything."

In the UK, politicians represent the people - not themselves. Regardless of what one's feelings about people of a different race or sexual orientation, one cannot simply go around being offensive in the name of "following one's convictions". In the UK, a Minister who made an anti-gay or racial comment would be forced to resign. We are governed by European Law on these matters and there is zero tolerance.
 
John has yet more competition if he decides to pull the trigger and run. This new candidate would seem to have more on the ball in representing his local constituency than carpetbagging John:

http://www.gaylordheraldtimes.com/articles/2004/04/12/news/top_stories/top_stories04.txt

Another Republican has announced his candidacy for the 105th District state representative seat, bringing the total to three official candidates, plus two who have not yet officially declared their candidacy.

Attorney Kevin Elsenheimer of Bellaire will file to run for state representative next week.

...

As a partner in Young, Graham & Elsenheimer, civil law firm for Otsego County planners, Elsenheimer has worked on many of the land-use issues facing northern Michigan.

"I support regional planning concepts, but I'm concerned about ceding local government authority to regional entities," Elsenheimer said.

An avid hunter and angler, Elsenheimer sees the need to protect the rivers, streams and woods of northern Michigan.

He also respects the rights of property owners.

"Lansing can never forget the value that our Constitution places on the ownership of private property," he said.

He also intimates an understanding of the challenges of a small-business owner in northern Michigan.

"I want to make sure the legislature holds tight on the elimination of the small-business tax," he said.

A lifelong resident of northern Michigan, Elsenheimer has served as chair of the Antrim County Republican Party for more than five years and is chair of Bellaire's Cub Scout Pack 15. He and his wife, Ann, have three children.
 
BlueCrab said:
Please remember that John Ramsey or any other candidate, if elected, will represent a specific geographical area with its own demographics. As with all elected officials, he should represent the interests of that geographical area, not the interests of himself or others not living in that area. Therefore, finding out which way the wind is blowing among the people an elected person represents and changing one's position accordingly is a good thing.

JMO

You miss my point. When a candidate is running for office he or she MUST truthfully represent themselves and their positions on issues. Only then can the electorate confidentally vote for that candidate - or choose not to. The candidate either does - or does not - REPRESENT the voter's own positions on issues. No one can represent every voter on every issue. You cannot for instance, vote pro-life as a representative and appease the pro-abortion segment. But if you ran for office making it clear that you are and will vote pro-life, and were subsequently elected into office, then that IS how you will represent your constituency.
Therefore, the platform and postions on issues a candidate runs on BEFORE the election - will determine how he/she will vote when in office.
The people have spoken by electing him/her in the first place.
It is up to the electorate to FIND OUT where the candidate stands during the campaign.
There are of course issues that can arise after the election - but taking a good look at some very core and basic positions of a candidate are going to give you a darn good idea of what path he/she will take in the future.
Unless they have NO foundation to begin with and their stands and positions on issues are a mish-mash that contradict each other. In other words - there is no foundational basis with which the rep. uses as a springboard in making decisions. They just ride the wind of what they percieve as being politically advantageous to themselves. It is shallow and empty. As is that person who functions in that manner.

It is what I see personally as the root problem in one of our major political parties and why I never see a candidate in that party that I can vote for anymore.

And it is VERY important to know how a man or woman who desires to represent me in Congress (state or national) - conducts themselves in their personal life. Are they honest? Trustworthy? etc....
For if a man or woman cannot even be faithful to the ones (spouse/children)
he loves on a personal level - what in the world makes you think he/she is going to be faithful to YOU - a stranger he/she has never met????
His foundational principles and morals have enormous cracks in them.
And those will follow you in every aspect of your life. Because it is WHO YOU ARE.
It is why every company now days not only investigates personal references on a potential employee - but a background check to see how that person has conducted themselves in the past.
We, as citizens should take heed and do no less with someone who will be making such powerful decisions affecting our everyday lives.
What a no-brainer.
 
Knowing Uncle Johnny he would recruit more members for the Michigan militia, bomb LE offices around the country, avoid paying taxes, hire Robert B Palachy to eliminate people who accuse him of murdering his daughter. :boohoo:
 
Thanks to Sabreena for the link to this article

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20040305-1230-danielle.html

Every time I see things like this, I can't help but think of Patsy and John talking about things like this, but of course actually DOING nothing. They did set up a charity fund, but it was their own charity as it turns out. They used the proceeds from DOI to pay their lawyers instead of the JonBenet Foundation. Oh Well, not surprising.

BUT now that JR wants to run for public office, the JBR foundation and all those promises he made about helping children are bound to be brought up by many and it will be interesting to listen to what he has to say about it. Not even once, in his discussion of running for office did he mention that being in public office will help him do more for the children who are abused, murdered, kidnapped, etc.

Ordinary citizens like Brenda Van Dam, John Walsh, Mark Klaas, etc. have already spoken in public, but alas, the Ramseys never did.

Election Day is right around the corner, and I for one will be curious to listen to what JR has to say during campaign speeches.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
128
Guests online
1,071
Total visitors
1,199

Forum statistics

Threads
589,928
Messages
17,927,789
Members
228,003
Latest member
Knovah
Back
Top