‘After TWENTY years of defending these guys, I’M DONE!!’ – Dana Perino

[Lando Lincoln]

Maybe there aren't enough people left who more value that freedom than fear it.
But having listened to the grumblings of yet another generation, I doubt that.
I'd be willing to try, nonetheless.


@Norm Lenhart @dfwgator @Victoria33 @Freya @txradioguy @AbaraXas @CatherineofAragon @EC

Not much for me to disagree with there Joe.  Also, not much for me to feel good about either.  Dang.

[Bigun]

One more thing.  One day, I'll be down your way and I'd be proud to buy you and the missus a big chunk of Texas beef.

Come on down!  I know just the place!  And YOU will love it!

[aligncare]

Megan has dead cold shark eyes. I can't stand to look at her.

Tell you what Megyn, men will stop objectifying women as soon as women stop objectifying themselves, or until the biologic procreative imperative has been extinguished from life on earth.

[sinkspur]

Tell you what Megyn, men will stop objectifying women as soon as women stop objectifying themselves, or until the biologic procreative imperative has been extinguished from life on earth.

I'm sure women would be happy if some men would stop thinking they have license to "grab 'em by the bleep."

[bigheadfred]

If hillary wins we see The Great Divide shepherded by obama grow into where "domestic terrorism" becomes the norm. If Trump wins I have to move to Mexico.  For me either is a no win scenario.

[jpsb]

Trying to be somewhat of an optimist (which is against my nature),   I don't think the GOP is any worse off than it was after 1964 and the Goldwater debacle.   

I think Hillary's presidency will be an epic failure, and all of this will quickly be forgotten.  At least I hope so.

Hillary will put American conservatism in the ash heap of history. She will grant amnesty to millions of illegals (Mraxists) and never again will an R win a national election. She will pack the Supreme Court with activist Marxist judges that will totally rewrite our constitution. We will lose freedom of speech to hate laws. We will lose freedom of religion to discrimination laws. We will lose the 2cd to gun control laws.  We will lose the ability to earn a living to trade laws. And that's only if she does not first get us into a nuclear war with Russia over Syria. When we will lose our lives. Voting anything but Trump is insanity.

[Sanguine]

Tell you what Megyn, men will stop objectifying women as soon as women stop objectifying themselves, or until the biologic procreative imperative has been extinguished from life on earth.

Yeah, but that's not the issue here.

[aligncare]

I post here what? Maybe 2-4 times a week. Yet, every time I do, right behind me, here comes sinkspur, who likes to call Trump supporters Trumpoids (well, that's better than bleep I suppose, which management told him not to use).

So, here's sinkspur putting up flak. I guess I must be over the target.

[Smokin Joe]

Hillary will put American conservatism in the ash heap of history. She will grant amnesty to millions of illegals (Mraxists) and never again will an R win a national election. She will pack the Supreme Court with activist Marxist judges that will totally rewrite our constitution. We will lose freedom of speech to hate laws. We will lose freedom of religion to discrimination laws. We will lose the 2cd to gun control laws.  We will lose the ability to earn a living to trade laws. And that's only if she does not first get us into a nuclear war with Russia over Syria. When we will lose our lives. Voting anything but Trump is insanity.

She won't do that without the acquiescence of the GOP Congress, which Trump is fighting against.
She's a threat to the ship, assuredly, but before we worry about that boarding party, we have a fire in the forward magazine we'd better deal with, and Trump is it.

[jpsb]

'64?  I think you could make a good case for tracking many of our current ills can be traced to that turning point in history.  Pre-64, America was one thing, after-64 something quite different.

You can thank LBJ immigration policies for that. "Demographics is history" lose on immigration (we did) and you are a foot note in history.

[Smokin Joe]

You can thank LBJ immigration policies for that. "Demographics is history" lose on immigration (we did) and you are a foot note in history.

The 'Great Society' was more destructive.

[skeeter]

Hillary's fanbois have similar delusions about their candidate as well.

I'm not surprised Perino's had enough after what happened to Yeb.

He's a goofy profane philanderer. She will lead this country to ruin.

So I will do nothing that enhances this hateful maoist's chances.

What hash this whole thing has become.

[jpsb]

She won't do that without the acquiescence of the GOP Congress, which Trump is fighting against.
She's a threat to the ship, assuredly, but before we worry about that boarding party, we have a fire in the forward magazine we'd better deal with, and Trump is it.

The GOP congress wanted to do it (amnesty) last year, only Cantors' defeat by an unknown running against amnesty scared them into not passing amnesty. Hillary if elected will get her amnesty and then you can kiss American conservatism, along with the bill of rights, good-bye forever. Conservationism as a political force in the USA will not survive Hillary. She will make the USA politically look like California. Even Texas will go blue.

[bigheadfred]

The 'Great Society' was more destructive.

Was or still is?

[aligncare]

I'm not surprised Perino's had enough after what happened to Yeb.

He's a goofy profane philanderer. She will lead this country to ruin.

So I will do nothing that enhances this hateful maoist's chances.

What hash this whole thing has become.

I spent the last year and a half looking up, researching and studying objective information about Donald Trump – that is, pre-election information – about Donald Trump's history and about his true character – not the caricature portrayed by media, Democrat and NeverTrump haters. All of that information is post primary and therefore subject to being partisan, politically motivated lies.

You, on the other hand, spent the same time reading TBR's NeverTrump biased disinformation (it makes a difference, you know).

Stop being led around by the nose. Do your own independent research. Trump may end up being one of America's great presidents because of his work ethic and love of country.

[Sanguine]

You can thank LBJ immigration policies for that. "Demographics is history" lose on immigration (we did) and you are a foot note in history.

Yep.  We will not be able to ride out the next four years and then work to return to where we should be.  You can't get there from there.

[Smokin Joe]

The GOP congress wanted to do it (amnesty) last year, only Cantors' defeat by an unknown running against amnesty scared them into not passing amnesty. Hillary if elected will get her amnesty and then you can kiss American conservatism, along with the bill of rights, good-bye forever. Conservationism as a political force in the USA will not survive Hillary. She will make the USA politically look like California. Even Texas will go blue.

If conservatism cannot take a stand in the Congress with a GOP majority, I would suggest that it is already, in essence, doomed to the sidelines until it cleans house (Conservatism, the GOP is a write-off). Conservatism has become fraught with charlatans who do not espouse the beliefs they express, nor act to protect those values they do claim. As such, in the halls of power there is scant representation, and even less support.

Considering Trump can't hold his ground on an idea from the Primaries to the General, what credibility is left for the transition from candidate to POTUS? The only thing Trump has been consistent about is attacking Republicans, whether Conservatives or not.

If this fight is to be won, it will have to be won by stopping the juggernaut at every turn, subjecting it to the death of a thousand cuts. No one person will stop it, at least not the one who has a long history of supporting Liberal causes and standard bearers.

If you are looking to Trump to be the knight in shining armor, the messiah bringing salvation for all things Conservative, you have chosen poorly.

[Smokin Joe]

Was or still is?

Was then, still is, and likely will have a lingering effect long beyond LBJ's 'hundred years'.

[Smokin Joe]

I spent the last year and a half looking up, researching and studying objective information about Donald Trump – that is, pre-election information – about Donald Trump's history and about his true character – not the caricature portrayed by media, Democrat and NeverTrump haters. All of that information is post primary and therefore subject to being partisan, politically motivated lies.

You, on the other hand, spent the same time reading TBR's NeverTrump biased disinformation (it makes a difference, you know).

Stop being led around by the nose. Do your own independent research. Trump may end up being one of America's great presidents because of his work ethic and love of country.

Quick question.

I see you used the term "NeverTrump haters". Is that people who hate NeverTrumps?

I have to laugh at the silliness of "That happened 20, 30 years ago and isn't relevant" on the one hand, while others assert only older, pre-election dirt on Trump is good.
I had done my research on Trump, and while I was enjoying the Donny Show, his actions during the primaries demonstrated character traits which I found (and still find) repugnant, even beyond those which already had come to light long ago. To decry the results of digging into a past that was only tabloid fodder, because while rich, Trump wasn't a serious (i.e. politically powerful) public figure in the past is silly. While the others had a political life on display, the actions of Trump that weren't soap opera material for supermarket endcaps had not been so thoroughly examined. That only happened when Trump decided to run for public office, so much of his dealings had not come to light, nor been considered relevant. Now, that conduct is.

[roamer_1]

If they couldn't handle Trump, how could they have handled Hillary's machine with the willing media?

Wrongheaded:

Why they 'couldn't handle Trump' was because Trump was off the rails. The rest of the field was trying to keep spats to a minimum because in the end, party unity must be achievable. Meanwhile, Trump was up there barfing crap everywhere he turned. The party divisions are DEEP, Deep, deep - and caused precisely by Trump's combative style. It is FOOLISH to follow Trumps way. The reason he cannot win is because of the bad blood he caused in the primary.

To then say 'well, if they couldn't stand up to Trump, how could they stand up to Hillary's machine' is a ridiculous position. ANY ONE OF THEM (Bush and Grahamnesty withstanding) would have withstood the Democrats and retained more party solidarity better than Trump.

[skeeter]

I spent the last year and a half looking up, researching and studying objective information about Donald Trump – that is, pre-election information – about Donald Trump's history and about his true character – not the caricature portrayed by media, Democrat and NeverTrump haters. All of that information is post primary and therefore subject to being partisan, politically motivated lies.

You, on the other hand, spent the same time reading TBR's NeverTrump biased disinformation (it makes a difference, you know).

Stop being led around by the nose. Do your own independent research. Trump may end up being one of America's great presidents because of his work ethic and love of country.

What I know about Trump came from his own mouth over the past thirty years. You can try but you can't put lipstick on that.

Hillary will administer the 'coup de grace' to the country. On this I will base my vote.

[LadyLiberty]

Can someone explain to me why Megyn Kelly is still at that sewer?

To get under Hannity's skin?

[AllThatJazzZ]

Because they got nowhere with the Milquetoasts.   I don't blame them for wanting to try something different for once,  it didn't work out this time.  Lessons learned.

You say "lessons learned." That remains to be seen. I have rarely seen such a stiff-necked, entrenched and intolerant group as the Trumpsters. To wit, the purging of TOS of anyone who uttered a discouraging word about their political messiah. You do realize that this is unhealthy behavior, don't you? I'm not overly optimistic that these types will learn from their mistakes.

But let's get to your first point. Assuming that all the other candidates were milquetoasts, were there any of them that would have been better than Hildebeast (who is likely be our next president)? Or was it just more important to make that burn-the-house-down statement that we're angry as hell and not going to take it anymore by nominating a candidate who has been historically liberal and who behaves in a manner that we'd never allow our kids to behave? The truth is, so many Republicans approached this race from the very beginning with the mindset of #NeverBushRubioWalkerPaulChristieGrahamCruzEtc. So these people were part of the problem from the beginning. No candidate was going to be pure enough for them. They created a vacuum and Trump moved in to fill it. As he did, he poisoned the race with the vilest of rhetoric. When the people kept cheering him, there were lots of us who were incredulous. So much so that we almost thought we were being punked. Except that it was really happening.

We were treated so horribly by "fellow conservatives" and called all kinds of names. Why, there couldn't be any other explanation to them except that we were GOPe or whatever new words they made up for those of us with an unwavering commitment to Constitutional conservatism. I don't know if they always had that kind of meanness in them or were just aping the behavior of their new political messiah, but it was jarring to watch it all unfold.

Pardon me if I'm tired of the hackneyed "milquetoast" excuse, especially when there were more than a dozen other candidates to chose from. There was no legitimately good reason to support a non-conservative, rude, tell-them-what-they-want-to-hear bully like Trump to represent a party whose base claims to want conservatism upheld. And yet here we are with him as our nominee.

Sometimes missed opportunities are unfortunate. Sometimes they're devastating. I give you the presidential election of 2016 as an example of the latter.

[HonestJohn]

Note, it is October 14th and were already performing the election autopsy...

I think the real question is what will become of the GOP. Is this its Whig's moment? Will it assume it didn't go far enough left, as it always seems to do? Or will it finally listen to what was its conservative base? Will Trump be gone or did he get a taste of something he can't let go of? And then there's the alt-right...

At this point I don't expect much. At a minimum I have to hunker down and try to survive the coming Hillary storm and I didn't survive the Obama storm very well... I'm running pretty low on optimism these days.

We had an autopsy of the 2012 election, with recommendations on what to do in order to win.  In 2016, Trump and his supporters have done the opposite.

And we are facing another loss; likely to be a large loss, too.

Those points made from the 2012 autopsy are still what needs to be done in order to win again.  However, the bad taste and stink left from this election will make those recommendations nearly impossible.

[EC]

There are, but the brand has been thoroughly trashed.
People from all over the political spectrum have been calling themselves "conservative".
It has regional differences as well. (What those of us in the hinterlands understood when reference was made to 'New York Values'.).
As they often do, liberals have made the term meaningless by calling the candidate who is running against the uberliberal "conservative" when they only are in a relative sense.

We need a new name for what we stand for.

There is bloody little in the political landscape worth conserving as it stands and is practiced.

Getting back to the Constitution is the only hope of restoring the Republic. Getting the Federal Government hammered back into its limited powers, restoring States' Rights and the Rights of the individual, and returning the Federal Government to fulfilling its prescribed duties and only those is the ticket to having a successful nation again.
America made incredible progress when we were closer to that form of government, and ever stagnates under the increasing burden of an increasingly centralized and totalitarian government.

We do great injustice to those who founded this country, who had often studied the very things which destroy nations and even empires, and did their utmost to avoid them by acknowledging the Rights of the Individual, creating a balance of power in the hands of individuals and the government they created to constrain that Government and yet permit it to function, not as some tightly controlled entity, but with enough leeway to survive and adapt to changing times, without sacrificing individual Rights to do so.
 
It has been a series of false dichotomies which have led us down this fallacious path.
Either you pay to feed all the hungry or you want them to starve.
Either you let the people with Social work degrees run your life or you hate children.
Either you do this or you're not that, or you are all for the evil du jour.
Either you give up your guns or you are for blood in the streets (another popular fallacy).
We still see that mentality daily, and somehow it is still effective, that either you are for more government or you hate puppies and kittens and laughing children...

Enough.
Just enough.
Time to quit.

We became a great nation because of our ability to say "None of the above, I have a better solution." We innovated, we invented, we conceived, designed, and built wonders only dreamed of. We prevailed in warfare, in technical prowess, in exploration, and in economic strength, not because the Government ran things, but because of the tremendous freedom to think, conceive, innovate, and construct those wonders. Now, even the activities at play that children of my youth freely participated in are constrained or forbidden, those playtime fantasies being the stuff that dreams are made of, those dreams the inspiration for true advancement.

Worse yet, so many of our countrymen (and women--and the Heinz 57 other gender identities out there) have become comfortable with their chains, a mantle of over reaching regulation and at best fight hair splitting battles over this word or that phrase, without even considering the question of the legitimacy of such authority over the individual, his family, his property, or his actions.

Maybe there aren't enough people left who more value that freedom than fear it.
But having listened to the grumblings of yet another generation, I doubt that.
I'd be willing to try, nonetheless.


@Norm Lenhart @dfwgator @Victoria33 @Freya @txradioguy @AbaraXas @CatherineofAragon @EC

Quoting in full for truth (and to put it on the new page).

A while back on here, before the primaries even, we had a go at defining conservative. There's about as many definitions as there are members, it turns out. 

Yes, there are common threads in peoples definitions. The placing of each thread varies wildly.