The Briefing Room

General Category => Politics => Topic started by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 10:59:27 AM

Title: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 10:59:27 AM
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/periodic-table-new-american-right-david-marcus

Though I can't say I agree with Marcus on all points...he makes a powerful case and on the whole is correct in his description of how conservatives got to where we are today as a movement. Also, here's some great quotes from the article itself to give you the tone of its argument:

"Put simply, conservative voters will not go back to a GOP that offers only -- being a little better than Democrats -- as its claim to power."

"The time for conservative deciding has passed. The decision has been made and the American conservative movement is now a populist, nationalist, Reform Party minded body. It matters very little if our corporate liberal media chooses to accept this. It is true."

"The political figures that truly listen to rather than lecture conservative voters are the ones who will reap electoral rewards from today’s American conservatives."

"As was shown above, Trump’s political philosophy, which the New Right embraces did not emerge with him. It grew out of decades of struggle within the conservative movement, the Republican Party, and yes, the Reform Party. Trump grabbed the reins of the horse, but he didn’t open the barn door, the people did that as they always do."


And finally: "...that having been said there are political figures today ready to assume Trump’s mantle, and they are surely endowed with a brighter future than those longing for the country club and the Chamber of Commerce. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas; Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, even Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., all offer some vision of the New Right and stand poised to be the leaders of this movement in the halls of power."
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 06, 2021, 12:41:22 PM
Being a Trump denier makes it all seem questionable !  Time WILL tell!  An end run tactic?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 06, 2021, 01:59:12 PM
Nothing but Horse Manure from Marcus and his fellow travelers.
What's the very first topic they yap about???
Why politics, of course, their eternal fantasy, yet why???
Because it's intimate w/their subconscious yearnings; ATTENTION & POWER!!!
The giants of the past, whose massive height permits us to see as far as we do, understood Creation embedded Mankind w/a Psyche/Soul which is directed by Natural Law derivative of Human Nature.
The very essence of Conservatism involves eternal core Principles having absolutely nothing to do w/political malarkey, the relenthless obsession of those desperate for attention.

 
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 06, 2021, 02:06:25 PM
Utter nonsense.

Conservatives were never 'Chamber of Commerce'. nor 'country club'.

And Conservatism by its nature cannot be 'populist', and is only incidentally 'nationalist'

Tumpism is no more conservative than any other hyphenated 'conservatism' that came before.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 06, 2021, 02:54:09 PM
Utter nonsense.
Conservatives were never 'Chamber of Commerce'. nor 'country club'.
And Conservatism by its nature cannot be 'populist', and is only incidentally 'nationalist'
Trumpism is no more conservative than any other hyphenated 'conservatism' that came before.
-------------------
Roamer, indeed.
Sadly we are where we are because so many are stuck on stupid!
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 06, 2021, 05:04:56 PM
-------------------
Roamer, indeed.
Sadly we are where we are because so many are stuck on stupid!

YUP
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 06:44:56 PM
-------------------
Roamer, indeed.
Sadly we are where we are because so many are stuck on stupid!

Our resident "stuck in the old Bush country club paradigm" duo...some will never reconcile themselves to the more blue collar, populist conservatism. That's great for easy times but we're essentially in a cultural war...we don't need George Will's and other bowtied conservative intellectuals...we need leaders who will draw a line in the sand and fight for conservative values, originalist judges, and America First. Guys like Desantis...Rand Paul...Hawley and Cotton...I think most of us are done with the old school "compromisers". You guys hate Trump...I get it...but all Trump really is in policy terms...is Reagan with a dose of overblown ego. Not my favorite quality in a man either, but in our current crisis...an overzealous ego in the face of merciless personal smear and assault is no vice.

I await your "bah-humbugs".
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 06, 2021, 07:03:06 PM
Our resident "stuck in the old Bush country club paradigm" duo...

Yeah, you keep trying to rub RINOs off on me. I ain't never backed the RINOs, and I consider the Moderate Wing of the Republican party - You know, the 'Bush country club' to be every bit the enemy that the democrats are.

Quote
[...]some will never reconcile themselves to the more blue collar, populist conservatism.

Ain't nobody here more blue collar than me. So that hyphenation doesn't work a lick. And populism is not conservatism, and never can be. In fact, populism is every bit as daft and unprincipled as the liberalism you claim to detest.

Quote
That's great for easy times but we're essentially in a cultural war...we don't need George Will's and other bowtied conservative intellectuals...we need leaders who will draw a line in the sand and fight for conservative values, originalist judges, and America First. Guys like Desantis...Rand Paul...Hawley and Cotton...I think most of us are done with the old school "compromisers". You guys hate Trump...I get it...but all Trump really is in policy terms...is Reagan with a dose of overblown ego. Not my favorite quality in a man either, but in our current crisis...an overzealous ego in the face of merciless personal smear and assault is no vice.

I await your "bah-humbugs".

Right. ALWAYS a reason to put aside the very principles you claim to stand upon.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Killer Clouds on June 06, 2021, 07:17:19 PM
Yeah, you keep trying to rub RINOs off on me. I ain't never backed the RINOs, and I consider the Moderate Wing of the Republican party - You know, the 'Bush country club' to be every bit the enemy that the democrats are.

Ain't nobody here more blue collar than me. So that hyphenation doesn't work a lick. And populism is not conservatism, and never can be. In fact, populism is every bit as daft and unprincipled as the liberalism you claim to detest.

Right. ALWAYS a reason to put aside the very principles you claim to stand upon.
The only thing worse than lying to others is lying to yourself. You're a very good liar.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 06, 2021, 07:19:07 PM
The only thing worse than lying to others is lying to yourself. You're a very good liar.

GFY
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Killer Clouds on June 06, 2021, 07:23:18 PM
GFY
You do everytime you post. The truth will set you free, liar.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 06, 2021, 07:28:42 PM
You do everytime you post. The truth will set you free, liar.

Ain't lied at all. Why don't you try to defend your prince instead of throwing meaningless epithets.
I know why. Because you can't

At least @Mesaclone tries... You just throw sh*t.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 08:28:44 PM
Ain't lied at all. Why don't you try to defend your prince instead of throwing meaningless epithets.
I know why. Because you can't

At least @Mesaclone tries... You just throw sh*t.

I can't deny that you are an honest man. Hyperbolic...but honest. Curmudgeony. Grouchy. Scroogy. But honest =)

Read the article if you haven't...it makes clear that Trump is not the source of the MAGA movement, he is a byproduct. An important one, but like many others (Desantis, Noem, Paul, Cotton, Hawley, etcetera) he is riding the wave of populist conservatism....a term that simply means conservatism reaching out to motivate the middle class to engage in the political process. Not sure why you'd think that counter to conservatism...populism is a method that builds enthusiasm for a cause by speaking truth (with a bit of charisma if possible) to folks. It is not itself a philosophy. In this case, it is a method used to build support and enthusiasm for conservatism. There's just no way that should be seen as a bad thing. You seem to be applying anachronistic view of populism as a "befuddle the dumb masses with snake oil" sort of magic trick....that is not what we are seeing here with the MAGA movement.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 06, 2021, 08:29:57 PM
Our resident "stuck in the old Bush country club paradigm" duo...some will never reconcile themselves to the more blue collar, populist conservatism. That's great for easy times but we're essentially in a cultural war...we don't need George Will's and other bowtied conservative intellectuals...we need leaders who will draw a line in the sand and fight for conservative values, originalist judges, and America First. Guys like Desantis...Rand Paul...Hawley and Cotton...I think most of us are done with the old school "compromisers". You guys hate Trump...I get it...but all Trump really is in policy terms...is Reagan with a dose of overblown ego. Not my favorite quality in a man either, but in our current crisis...an overzealous ego in the face of merciless personal smear and assault is no vice.
I await your "bah-humbugs".
------------------------------
Mesaclone, since you're a smart lad, why are you auditioning for a clown award?
Conservatism was articulated by the Ancients, among them Plato, as  a body of enduring principles dealing w/human nature, involving attitudes, behaviors, impulses and sentiments across Mankind.
It had absolutely nothing to do w/either politics or religion, as it was birthed by the Natural Law;
the latter being Man's guide for thousands of years as the Scholastics, Locke, Hume, Burke
as well as Babbitt and Kirk, in our time asserted, to name but a handful.
The ideas and thoughts of these wise Men gave Conservatism integrity down thru history;
yet in our time it's morphed into an errand boy for politicians/politics, which in my judgment,
is its death sentence!!!

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Victoria33 on June 06, 2021, 08:39:22 PM
@Killer Clouds
@roamer_1

Killer, watch your language, especially with roamer; he is the buddy of most here, you are not.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 08:39:33 PM
------------------------------
Mesaclone, since you're a smart lad, why are you auditioning for a clown award?
Conservatism was articulated by the Ancients, among them Plato, as  a body of enduring principles dealing w/human nature, involving attitudes, behaviors, impulses and sentiments across Mankind.
It had absolutely nothing to do w/either politics or religion, as it was birthed by the Natural Law;
the latter being Man's guide for thousands of years as the Scholastics, Locke, Hume, Burke
as well as Babbitt and Kirk, in our time asserted, to name but a handful.
The ideas and thoughts of these wise Men gave Conservatism integrity down thru history;
yet in our time it's morphed into an errand boy for politicians/politics, which in my judgment,
is its death sentence!!!

Ah...reminds of the great painting by Raphael...you know...Aristotle and Plato walking side by side surrounded by the other greats. Natural law is of course the source of all as per Plato...but it is not disconnected from the religious and the political as you seem to suggest. If you are arguing that the philosophy of Plato is not intimately linked to all Western religious and moral thought...well...you need to go back and read the great works like Timaeus. Aristotle and his focus on facts and "what is" rather than what should be...you could maybe argue his philosophy is free of politics and belief...but even that's a reach. But you ARE right that Plato is the foundation of conservative thought...but arguing that it has "absolutely nothing to do with politics or religion" is ludicrous. Plato DEFINES the very meaning of politics and religion...Natural law is the source of philosophy but Plato did not deny its direct application to politics/religion. Rather, it was the pillar upon which his views on both was built.

Of course...not sure what you're trying to convey about THIS discussion...but its an interesting side discussion if nothing else.

BTW...a good reading suggestion for you...which I'm in the middle of as we speak. The Cave and the Light: Plato vs Aristotle and the Struggle for the Soul of Western Civilization..... by Arthur Herman. Knock your socks off quality read.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: libertybele on June 06, 2021, 08:42:37 PM
@Killer Clouds
@roamer_1

Killer, watch your language, especially with roamer; he is the buddy of most here, you are not.

 Exactly what I was thinking @Victoria33     The good doctor has spoken!    888high58888
           
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Victoria33 on June 06, 2021, 08:48:58 PM
Exactly what I was thinking @Victoria33     The good doctor has spoken!    888high58888

Let's see what happens to killer.
Love you libertybele, 44444heart
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: mystery-ak on June 06, 2021, 08:52:37 PM
@Killer Clouds

FYI

I know you are new here...One of the few rules we have here is we don't insult other members.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: libertybele on June 06, 2021, 08:53:39 PM
Let's see what happens to killer.
Love you libertybele, 44444heart

Love you my friend,   6666kiss

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 06, 2021, 08:56:59 PM
I can't deny that you are an honest man. Hyperbolic...but honest. Curmudgeony. Grouchy. Scroogy. But honest =)

LOL! Fine.... All but the 'hyperbolic' thing. Would prefer 'emphatic', perhaps...

Quote
Read the article if you haven't...it makes clear that Trump is not the source of the MAGA movement, he is a byproduct. An important one, but like many others (Desantis, Noem, Paul, Cotton, Hawley, etcetera) he is riding the wave of populist conservatism....a term that simply means conservatism reaching out to motivate the middle class to engage in the political process. Not sure why you'd think that counter to conservatism...populism is a method that builds enthusiasm for a cause by speaking truth (with a bit of charisma if possible) to folks. It is not itself a philosophy. In this case, it is a method used to build support and enthusiasm for conservatism. There's just no way that should be seen as a bad thing. You seem to be applying anachronistic view of populism as a "befuddle the dumb masses with snake oil" sort of magic trick....that is not what we are seeing here with the MAGA movement.

Now, lets not go and hyphenate 'populist' while we're at it - You're confused enough.

Paul, Cotton, and Hawley, all three would have my vote. But not Tumpy. WHY? And there is nothing 'new' about their Conservatism. Their Conservatism is long studied and with every intent. And they've a record to prove it.

Populism necessarily emphasizes the prince, and not the principle. I don't care a whit for Cruz one way or the other, and I never did. I cared about what he stood upon... Which is what I am standing upon. Why has Cruz nearly lost me? Because he is no longer standing as he was. And Tumpy has never been there.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Victoria33 on June 06, 2021, 09:07:20 PM
@Mesaclone

You said, "BTW...a good reading suggestion for you...which I'm in the middle of as we speak. The Cave and the Light: Plato vs Aristotle and the Struggle for the Soul of Western Civilization....."
___________________
Am very familiar with Plato's Cave.  I left the cave when I began to read at three years old, never went back to the cave.  What cave?  The cave we are in before we leave or stay.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 09:10:02 PM
LOL! Fine.... All but the 'hyperbolic' thing. Would prefer 'emphatic', perhaps...

Now, lets not go and hyphenate 'populist' while we're at it - You're confused enough.

Paul, Cotton, and Hawley, all three would have my vote. But not Tumpy. WHY? And there is nothing 'new' about their Conservatism. Their Conservatism is long studied and with every intent. And they've a record to prove it.

Populism necessarily emphasizes the prince, and not the principle. I don't care a whit for Cruz one way or the other, and I never did. I cared about what he stood upon... Which is what I am standing upon. Why has Cruz nearly lost me? Because he is no longer standing as he was. And Tumpy has never been there.

Your statement on populism would be true IF the enthusiasm was about the "man". Its not...the enthusiasm is about the MAGA movement and breaking away from the country club do-nothings. At long last. And honestly, Roamer, if Hawley suddenly air dropped into the Presidency, his policies and actions would be almost identical to those Trump has taken (and promises to take again). You are letting personal dislike for the man dictate your vote...reason would argue that Trump's agenda IS the same as the agenda of Desantis, Hawley, Cotton and such. There's just not an inch of daylight in there...the only real difference being that Trump generates one helluva lot more enthusiasm and activism from the Conservative base.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 09:14:59 PM
@Mesaclone

You said, "BTW...a good reading suggestion for you...which I'm in the middle of as we speak. The Cave and the Light: Plato vs Aristotle and the Struggle for the Soul of Western Civilization....."
___________________
Am very familiar with Plato's Cave.  I left the cave when I began to read at three years old, never went back to the cave.  What cave?  The cave we are in before we leave or stay.

Yes...but can you convince those still within to come into the light?  That's essentially the very difficult task of every conservative  leader. As in the allegory, the cave dwellers can become quite dangerous.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 06, 2021, 09:27:36 PM
Your statement on populism would be true IF the enthusiasm was about the "man". Its not...the enthusiasm is about the MAGA movement and breaking away from the country club do-nothings. At long last. And honestly, Roamer, if Hawley suddenly air dropped into the Presidency, his policies and actions would be almost identical to those Trump has taken (and promises to take again). You are letting personal dislike for the man dictate your vote...reason would argue that Trump's agenda IS the same as the agenda of Desantis, Hawley, Cotton and such. There's just not an inch of daylight in there...the only real difference being that Trump generates one helluva lot more enthusiasm and activism from the Conservative base.

@Mesaclone

No, it really has little to do with my personal dislike of Tumpy. It has to do, almost exclusively with performance, past and present. I told you before, I vote record, not popularity, not promises from the stump. Not baby kissing and handshaking. None of that crap matters to me at all.

Record. Will he uphold the principles of the Conservative Coalition... That's it. Entirely.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Victoria33 on June 06, 2021, 09:34:02 PM
Yes...but can you convince those still within to come into the light?  That's essentially the very difficult task of every conservative  leader. As in the allegory, the cave dwellers can become quite dangerous.
@Mesaclone

Yes, I can, and have done it in politics, turned a county, with my husband, from Democrat to Republican, and my other areas of human life - been a problem solver all my life and that is longer than you have been alive.   :patriot:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 09:54:51 PM
@Mesaclone

No, it really has little to do with my personal dislike of Tumpy. It has to do, almost exclusively with performance, past and present. I told you before, I vote record, not popularity, not promises from the stump. Not baby kissing and handshaking. None of that crap matters to me at all.

Record. Will he uphold the principles of the Conservative Coalition... That's it. Entirely.

So you ARE voting Trump then...obviously.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 09:56:11 PM
@Mesaclone

Yes, I can, and have done it in politics, turned a county, with my husband, from Democrat to Republican, and my other areas of human life - been a problem solver all my life and that is longer than you have been alive.   :patriot:

Much respect.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 06, 2021, 10:26:26 PM
Ah...reminds of the great painting by Raphael...you know...Aristotle and Plato walking side by side surrounded by the other greats. Natural law is of course the source of all as per Plato...but it is not disconnected from the religious and the political as you seem to suggest. If you are arguing that the philosophy of Plato is not intimately linked to all Western religious and moral thought...well...you need to go back and read the great works like Timaeus. Aristotle and his focus on facts and "what is" rather than what should be...you could maybe argue his philosophy is free of politics and belief...but even that's a reach. But you ARE right that Plato is the foundation of conservative thought...but arguing that it has "absolutely nothing to do with politics or religion" is ludicrous. Plato DEFINES the very meaning of politics and religion...Natural law is the source of philosophy but Plato did not deny its direct application to politics/religion. Rather, it was the pillar upon which his views on both was built.
Of course...not sure what you're trying to convey about THIS discussion...but its an interesting side discussion if nothing else.
--------------------------------
Let me try the reality of a timeline from history.
Wise Greeks, such as Plato, reflected/wrote some 400 years before Christ and Roman Catholicism.
Further Old Testament Judaism was restricted to the insular Jewish people of Judea, during
Classical Ancient Greece.
As such, the ideas & philosophy of Plato, Aristotle and their colleagues, was not influenced by
either religion, as one did not exist and the other was confined to a small city/state near Galilee.
Repeating, the essence of the ideas, among them principled conservatism; of these wise Greeks
was derived from the Natural Law, the benchmark for Mankind's attitudes, behaviors, impulses
and sentiments which defined Human Nature.
Given your sanctimonious pretentions, suggest you desist in calling anyone else ludicrous.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 06, 2021, 11:34:04 PM
So you ARE voting Trump then...obviously.

There must be some failure to communicate :

Obviously NOT.
Performance = NONE. Or nearly none.
Failure in fiscal Conservatism.
Failure in libertarianism.

I am LESS likely to vote for him now than when he started.
And I was utterly incapable of voting for him then.
On the record.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 06, 2021, 11:49:00 PM
--------------------------------
Let me try the reality of a timeline from history.
Wise Greeks, such as Plato, reflected/wrote some 400 years before Christ and Roman Catholicism.
Further Old Testament Judaism was restricted to the insular Jewish people of Judea, during
Classical Ancient Greece.
As such, the ideas & philosophy of Plato, Aristotle and their colleagues, was not influenced by
either religion, as one did not exist and the other was confined to a small city/state near Galilee.
Repeating, the essence of the ideas, among them principled conservatism; of these wise Greeks
was derived from the Natural Law, the benchmark for Mankind's attitudes, behaviors, impulses
and sentiments which defined Human Nature.
Given your sanctimonious pretentions, suggest you desist in calling anyone else ludicrous.

You’ve got your wires crossed. I’m saying modern western religious belief and doctrine is deeply effected by Platonic thought. Not vice versa. Christian apologetics are rife with Platonic assumptions and thought. But my original reference was to Plato’s connection to religious perception generally...not to Christianity nor Judaism...ancient Athens was the epicenter of religious thought at the time...and Plato’s concepts assume the existence of a prime mover of the universe.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Killer Clouds on June 07, 2021, 12:15:29 AM
@Killer Clouds

FYI

I know you are new here...One of the few rules we have here is we don't insult other members.
It wasn't an insult. It was a statement of facts.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Killer Clouds on June 07, 2021, 12:17:19 AM
@Killer Clouds
@roamer_1

Killer, watch your language, especially with roamer; he is the buddy of most here, you are not.
Facts are facts and the truth isn't always pretty.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 07, 2021, 01:43:44 AM
I can't deny that you are an honest man. Hyperbolic...but honest. Curmudgeony. Grouchy. Scroogy. But honest =)

Read the article if you haven't...it makes clear that Trump is not the source of the MAGA movement, he is a byproduct. An important one, but like many others (Desantis, Noem, Paul, Cotton, Hawley, etcetera) he is riding the wave of populist conservatism....a term that simply means conservatism reaching out to motivate the middle class to engage in the political process. Not sure why you'd think that counter to conservatism...populism is a method that builds enthusiasm for a cause by speaking truth (with a bit of charisma if possible) to folks. It is not itself a philosophy. In this case, it is a method used to build support and enthusiasm for conservatism. There's just no way that should be seen as a bad thing. You seem to be applying anachronistic view of populism as a "befuddle the dumb masses with snake oil" sort of magic trick....that is not what we are seeing here with the MAGA movement.

@Mesaclone

VERY well stated!

Thank you!
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 07, 2021, 02:00:29 AM
As scripture says; you cannot serve two masters.  The President is the master of the nation for four years.  Those that say they hate Trump, and defer to Biden helped give Biden the Presidency, and yet swear they did no such thing.  Truth?  A long ways from those that deny their own handiwork, and words.
This is a time for deceivers that are quite persuasive, don't forget that, many have!  I used to go round and round with such on the Coulter site, no longer exists though.  Do not walk with such, else you fall in the ditch with them.
 :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: DB on June 07, 2021, 02:23:47 AM
Facts are facts and the truth isn't always pretty.

The truth? Really? You called someone a liar that isn't. That makes you what?

Populism is just a different fickle mob that chases its own priorities. Populism has no foundation to build anything that actually stands for any meaningful amount of time. It is constantly shifting sand. Our constitution was based on fundamental unchanging principles - populism is an anathema to it.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 02:28:39 AM
As scripture says; you cannot serve two masters.  The President is the master of the nation for four years.  Those that say they hate Trump, and defer to Biden helped give Biden the Presidency, and yet swear they did no such thing.  Truth?  A long ways from those that deny their own handiwork, and words.
This is a time for deceivers that are quite persuasive, don't forget that, many have!  I used to go round and round with such on the Coulter site, no longer exists though.  Do not walk with such, else you fall in the ditch with them.
 :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:

Yeah, bullcrap. The same old sh*t sandwich vs, turd burger argument. Old and tired. And false. When that is the choice, I will always wander down the street for a nice deli and leave y'all to pick each other's teeth.

No one has 'deferred' to Biteme just because they refuse to endorse your prince. Such thinking is exactly what keeps the Rinos in power.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 02:31:49 AM
Facts are facts and the truth isn't always pretty.

You are not speaking truth. You are throwing sh*t. Though I don't find it surprising that you don't know the difference.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 07, 2021, 03:57:48 AM
The truth? Really? You called someone a liar that isn't. That makes you what?

Populism is just a different fickle mob that chases its own priorities. Populism has no foundation to build anything that actually stands for any meaningful amount of time. It is constantly shifting sand. Our constitution was based on fundamental unchanging principles - populism is an anathema to it.

@DB

Truer words were never written. The problem is the population has been dumbed down and taught to think "Bleep YOU,ME first!" in all things,and the Constitution is based on  the concept that people care about something other than themselves and united to stand for right against wrong in a manner that serves the interests of the nation as well as self.

Being a nation of people dedicated to justice and fair play as well as self-sacrifice in order to protect and support the rights of others as the rights of self is and has been out of fashion for a while now. Selfish self-interest rules the day these days with too many.

We can all take note of this and decrying it is easy. Coming up with an answer to these problems is what is hard.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Victoria33 on June 07, 2021, 09:24:17 AM
@DB
Truer words were never written. The problem is the population has been dumbed down and taught to think "Bleep YOU,ME first!" in all things,and the Constitution is based on  the concept that people care about something other than themselves and united to stand for right against wrong in a manner that serves the interests of the nation as well as self.

Being a nation of people dedicated to justice and fair play as well as self-sacrifice in order to protect and support the rights of others as the rights of self is and has been out of fashion for a while now. Selfish self-interest rules the day these days with too many.
We can all take note of this and decrying it is easy. Coming up with an answer to these problems is what is hard.
@sneakypete

Good post, thank you sneaky.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 07, 2021, 09:24:26 AM
@DB

Truer words were never written. The problem is the population has been dumbed down and taught to think "Bleep YOU,ME first!" in all things,and the Constitution is based on  the concept that people care about something other than themselves and united to stand for right against wrong in a manner that serves the interests of the nation as well as self.

Being a nation of people dedicated to justice and fair play as well as self-sacrifice in order to protect and support the rights of others as the rights of self is and has been out of fashion for a while now. Selfish self-interest rules the day these days with too many.

We can all take note of this and decrying it is easy. Coming up with an answer to these problems is what is hard.

Actually, it was the populism of men like Sam Adams that led us into and through the Revolution. Populism...like intellectualism...is not inherently good or bad, it is simply the mounting of enthusiasm to advance a cause. If that enthusiasm is directed to elevate a wise and considered course of policy. I would argue that Reagan was a populist, he inspired tremendous enthusiasm in the GOP base and directed it towards the achievement of wise policy. Populism, motivating the populace to fight for "the constitution's fundamental undying principles", is no vice. The Founding Father's...and Reagan....used populism in this way, as has Trump.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 07, 2021, 09:35:46 AM
@DB

Truer words were never written. The problem is the population has been dumbed down and taught to think "Bleep YOU,ME first!" in all things,and the Constitution is based on  the concept that people care about something other than themselves and united to stand for right against wrong in a manner that serves the interests of the nation as well as self.

Being a nation of people dedicated to justice and fair play as well as self-sacrifice in order to protect and support the rights of others as the rights of self is and has been out of fashion for a while now. Selfish self-interest rules the day these days with too many.

We can all take note of this and decrying it is easy. Coming up with an answer to these problems is what is hard.
:thumbsup:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 07, 2021, 09:40:58 AM
Actually, it was the populism of men like Sam Adams that led us into and through the Revolution. Populism...like intellectualism...is not inherently good or bad, it is simply the mounting of enthusiasm to advance a cause.
Indeed. In fact learning about what happened in the early stages of the independence movement in New England is a little disconcerting to those like myself who's early understanding was limited to Johnny Tremain. Its populism was not pretty but necessary to move the process of seeking independence along.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 09:41:14 AM
Actually, it was the populism of men like Sam Adams that led us into and through the Revolution. Populism...like intellectualism...is not inherently good or bad, it is simply the mounting of enthusiasm to advance a cause. If that enthusiasm is directed to elevate a wise and considered course of policy. I would argue that Reagan was a populist, he inspired tremendous enthusiasm in the GOP base and directed it towards the achievement of wise policy. Populism, motivating the populace to fight for "the constitution's fundamental undying principles", is no vice. The Founding Father's...and Reagan....used populism in this way, as has Trump.

The tail wagging the dog. 'Mounting enthusiasm to advance a cause' is exactly bass ackwards... And leads to situations like we have now... A popularity for an empty cause driven entirely by the flatulence of populism itself. It has no success and requires none. There are no goals but those found upon bumper-stickers and meaningless catch phrases. Be careful what you wish for, because such a thing will turn and bite its master just as easy as anything else.

And Reagan's popular appeal was incidental. He was fully vetted and proven as governor of California. And he performed accordingly.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 09:47:25 AM
@DB

Truer words were never written. The problem is the population has been dumbed down and taught to think "Bleep YOU,ME first!" in all things,and the Constitution is based on  the concept that people care about something other than themselves and united to stand for right against wrong in a manner that serves the interests of the nation as well as self.

Being a nation of people dedicated to justice and fair play as well as self-sacrifice in order to protect and support the rights of others as the rights of self is and has been out of fashion for a while now. Selfish self-interest rules the day these days with too many.

We can all take note of this and decrying it is easy. Coming up with an answer to these problems is what is hard.

Excellent in all points except the last. The answer to these problems is Conservatism in full measure. Return us to those expectations and the necessary repentance will surely follow.

Showing the way will never be found in those who compromise and provide for half measures... Because there is no clarion call in that. no distinction to be made. No line drawn where the borders of reality exist. No bright light to show the way.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 07, 2021, 10:40:05 AM
It wasn't an insult. It was a statement of facts.

Enjoy your 3-day vacay, bro.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 07, 2021, 11:09:34 AM
Clarity, it was NeverTrumpers that helped get Biden elected,pretending no Republican will be good enough,gives the election to Democrats.  As we have already see happen.  Supposedly Trump was the devil incarnate, but the democrats get a pass, means just how the last election turned out, democrats are guaranteed to win.  So now we have Biden ruling like a corrupt monarch, and as NeverTrumpers insisted and demanded, that is better than Trump in office.  Recognize when you buy into that, YOU also own it as taking part in it, and what you see now YOU own too!  The iniquity god owns you.
 :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 11:23:40 AM
Clarity, it was NeverTrumpers that helped get Biden elected,pretending no Republican will be good enough,gives the election to Democrats.  As we have already see happen.  Supposedly Trump was the devil incarnate, but the democrats get a pass, means just how the last election turned out, democrats are guaranteed to win.  So now we have Biden ruling like a corrupt monarch, and as NeverTrumpers insisted and demanded, that is better than Trump in office.  Recognize when you buy into that, YOU also own it as taking part in it, and what you see now YOU own too!  The iniquity god owns you.
 :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:

Your arguments toward Republican status quo are noted.
The same tired arguments that brought the Republicans a RINO dominance.

If there is no demand for excellence, for adherence to orthodoxy, for adherence to absolute lines drawn hard upon the ground, there will be no reform. Just another hyphenated 'conservatism' that does nothing.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: corbe on June 07, 2021, 11:24:02 AM
   With all due respect @christian The Election was rigged when 6 States shut down counting in the middle of the night to figure out how many votes they needed to manufacture. I find it highly improbable that 6M+ Conservatives sat home on their azz and didn't vote for Trump, the results would have been the same no matter what these 'Nevers' would have done.  IMHO 

   The boogeyman called, I told him I wasn't at home.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 07, 2021, 11:32:15 AM
The tail wagging the dog. 'Mounting enthusiasm to advance a cause' is exactly bass ackwards... And leads to situations like we have now... A popularity for an empty cause driven entirely by the flatulence of populism itself. It has no success and requires none. There are no goals but those found upon bumper-stickers and meaningless catch phrases. Be careful what you wish for, because such a thing will turn and bite its master just as easy as anything else.

And Reagan's popular appeal was incidental. He was fully vetted and proven as governor of California. And he performed accordingly.

Make America Great Again is not an "empty" cause, which renders your point a bit moot. And now who's splitting hairs...Reagan's popular appeal was "incidentaL". Perhaps...and yet was instrumental to his achieving conservative goals. One could and should argue that Trump's popular appeal is likewise "incidental" and that its the "achieving of conservative goals...aka MAGA" that is at point. Securing the border...which was as secure as its ever been by 2020...is not a bumper sticker. Putting the interests of American businesses...corporate tax rate cuts and massive deregulation...is not a bumper sticker. Attaining energy independence...which we did...was not a bumper sticker. Looking forward...putting an end to atrocities like Critical Race Theory...is not a bumper sticker. Ensuring freedom of speech and an end to online partisan censorship...as Desantis is attempting in Florida and which Trump is the leading advocate...is not a bumper sticker.

I respect your opinion a great deal, roamer...which is why I continually try to argue the President's case and persuade you to at least a tolerance of president Trump. I realize its an uphill...perhaps hopeless struggle...but the conservative movement can't succeed if we are fragmented and at war with each other. And here's a truth you may find uncomfortable...in terms of policy...there's not an inch of space between Desantis, Hawley, Cotton...and President Trump. Despite that, this silly NT movement continues to ensure the Right remains fragmented and at war with itself. That makes...not just you...but all of us...useful idiots of the Left.

So my efforts to persuade you will continue against all odds...because you are needed in this fight. I believe in the same principles that you do...in fact I admire your tight hold on principle...but we cannot so narrowly define conservatism as to ensure we lose every political struggle. We cannot support only the "perfect" candidates, or we will have a handful of the perfect vs a mob of Leftists as our end result. Populism is about appeal...it reaches out and offers a vision of conservatism to those who otherwise would remain "in the cave, fearing the light"...populism is not in any way a counter to conservative thought, it is simply the promotion of that thought to a wider audience of voters.

Do you understand what conservative policies we can put in place when we lose elections?

And to be clear. No one...sure as hell not myself...is advocating we surrender ANY of our conservative principles. Period. What I'm advocating is quite the opposite...that populism is the means by which we educate the middle class as to what those principles are and why they matter.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 07, 2021, 11:44:59 AM
Excellent @Mesaclone. I’m gonna consider your post the final word in this debate, which has gone on far far too long.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 07, 2021, 12:09:25 PM
Make America Great Again is not an "empty" cause, which renders your point a bit moot. And now who's splitting hairs...Reagan's popular appeal was "incidentaL". Perhaps...and yet was instrumental to his achieving conservative goals. One could and should argue that Trump's popular appeal is likewise "incidental" and that its the "achieving of conservative goals...aka MAGA" that is at point. Securing the border...which was as secure as its ever been by 2020...is not a bumper sticker. Putting the interests of American businesses...corporate tax rate cuts and massive deregulation...is not a bumper sticker. Attaining energy independence...which we did...was not a bumper sticker. Looking forward...putting an end to atrocities like Critical Race Theory...is not a bumper sticker. Ensuring freedom of speech and an end to online partisan censorship...as Desantis is attempting in Florida and which Trump is the leading advocate...is not a bumper sticker.

I respect your opinion a great deal, roamer...which is why I continually try to argue the President's case and persuade you to at least a tolerance of president Trump. I realize its an uphill...perhaps hopeless struggle...but the conservative movement can't succeed if we are fragmented and at war with each other. And here's a truth you may find uncomfortable...in terms of policy...there's not an inch of space between Desantis, Hawley, Cotton...and President Trump. Despite that, this silly NT movement continues to ensure the Right remains fragmented and at war with itself. That makes...not just you...but all of us...useful idiots of the Left.

So my efforts to persuade you will continue against all odds...because you are needed in this fight. I believe in the same principles that you do...in fact I admire your tight hold on principle...but we cannot so narrowly define conservatism as to ensure we lose every political struggle. We cannot support only the "perfect" candidates, or we will have a handful of the perfect vs a mob of Leftists as our end result. Populism is about appeal...it reaches out and offers a vision of conservatism to those who otherwise would remain "in the cave, fearing the light"...populism is not in any way a counter to conservative thought, it is simply the promotion of that thought to a wider audience of voters.

Do you understand what conservative policies we can put in place when we lose elections?

And to be clear. No one...sure as hell not myself...is advocating we surrender ANY of our conservative principles. Period. What I'm advocating is quite the opposite...that populism is the means by which we educate the middle class as to what those principles are and why they matter.

If perfect existed .... it would be this post    pointing-up

Excellent @Mesaclone   Simply excellent.   Thank you for posting it.   :beer:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 07, 2021, 12:13:15 PM
Excellent @Mesaclone. I’m gonna consider your post the final word in this debate, which has gone on far far too long.

 :thumbsup:  Me, too @skeeter
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: DB on June 07, 2021, 12:48:58 PM
Wow. "Make America Great Again" has very little actual meaning. It is not call to liberty or aiming at any specific goal. It means something different to each person that tries to apply it.

Who's definition of "great"? The left's definition of great is some imagined Utopia where everyone thinks like them. When? The 1850's, 1950's, 1960's, 1970's... It is wide open to anything you think fondly of...

There is no call to organize towards any specific action or goal in that slogan. How does one even evaluate if the goal has been achieved or not? Just feel good rhetoric empty of anything specific. Populism in a nutshell...



Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: corbe on June 07, 2021, 01:01:12 PM
 :thumbsup:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 07, 2021, 01:03:28 PM
 corbe:
With all due respect @christian The Election was rigged when 6 States shut down counting in the middle of the night to figure out how many votes they needed to manufacture. I find it highly improbable that 6M+ Conservatives sat home on their azz and didn't vote for Trump, the results would have been the same no matter what these 'Nevers' would have done.  IMHO

   The boogeyman called, I told him I wasn't at home.

christian:
You missed the point corbe.  It wasn't was it election fraud or NeverTrumpers.

Annihilate America believes truth is a crap sandwich,and not lock-stepping is very tiring, regardless of how tireless he is.  What an interesting posture, conflicted, but an interesting posture.
 :tongue2: :beer: :tongue2:
 It was election fraud and NeverTrumpers working in lockstep to force upon us what they did. 
Don't sell the NeverTrumpers short, they accomplished a lot, and they are hardcore lockstepping to this very day.  i'm not one to be easily deceived, i've seen so much of it over many decades.  The democrats haven't quit in their intolerance to Trump, neither have the NeverTrumpers, co-incidence?  i think not.  Birds of a feather.....
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 07, 2021, 01:25:54 PM
If perfect existed .... it would be this post    pointing-up

Excellent @Mesaclone   Simply excellent.   Thank you for posting it.   :beer:

You and Skeeter are too kind.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 01:37:24 PM
Make America Great Again is not an "empty" cause, which renders your point a bit moot.

Well, it wasn't the first time around... You know... Back in '80...

Quote
And now who's splitting hairs...Reagan's popular appeal was "incidentaL". Perhaps...and yet was instrumental to his achieving conservative goals. One could and should argue that Trump's popular appeal is likewise "incidental" and that its the "achieving of conservative goals...aka MAGA" that is at point.

You misunderstand me. Reagan's popularity in politics was centered in his governance of California. He had the chops, and he earned it.  His wider popularity as a movie star is what I am saying is incidental... Exactly as is Tumpy's.

Quote
Securing the border...which was as secure as its ever been by 2020...is not a bumper sticker. Putting the interests of American businesses...corporate tax rate cuts and massive deregulation...is not a bumper sticker. Attaining energy independence...which we did...was not a bumper sticker. Looking forward...putting an end to atrocities like Critical Race Theory...is not a bumper sticker. Ensuring freedom of speech and an end to online partisan censorship...as Desantis is attempting in Florida and which Trump is the leading advocate...is not a bumper sticker.

All hot air. All gone. Dubya did the same dang thing. That's why governing by EO means nothing and does not count. I know y'all can't stand it, but it is damnwell true. And not long ago that was what every Conservative knew. So quit ticking on your fingers the things he made temporary gains in... That's the candy from the clown at the front of the parade. Soon enough, you'll get a belly ache from that. Tell me the things we get to keep. That is what would make him different from the Moderate Wing presidents we have had since Reagan. And that is the performance I demand.

Quote
I respect your opinion a great deal, roamer...

Despite our contention, I offer the same respect. You are pretty singularly the only inner-circle die-hard Tumpist that offers argument and some sort of half-assed defense. Well, that didn't come out to mean you are half-assed... That is not what I mean. You DO strive mightily and with fervor, and with intelligent, well meaning arguments. But they are the very same arguments as always. The very same attempts to color me the RINO, the very same attempts to justify an altered, hyphenated conservatism - Just the very same as the fanbois for Boosh, McCain't, and Romulus. It is the same old pragmatist/populist song. THAT is what is half-assed, and hard to defend.

I can and will tear that down, every time. But I respect your position, all the same. And you are always pretty easy to talk to, and I believe your intentions are good.

Quote
which is why I continually try to argue the President's case and persuade you to at least a tolerance of president Trump. I realize its an uphill...perhaps hopeless struggle...

Absolutely hopeless. I have been seared by the nuclear blast of twenty trillion dollars going up in smoke. And a gazillion small businesses shuttered - Including mine. There ain't a single chance in hell you can put a red bow on that.

Quote
but the conservative movement can't succeed if we are fragmented and at war with each other.

Yours is not a Conservative movement. See fiscal conservatism. See libertarianism. Then look at who is represented in the Conservative Coalition. ALL of them must be represented to call it a Conservative movement. First do no harm... Oops! Too late for that.

Quote
And here's a truth you may find uncomfortable...in terms of policy...there's not an inch of space between Desantis, Hawley, Cotton...and President Trump. Despite that, this silly NT movement continues to ensure the Right remains fragmented and at war with itself. That makes...not just you...but all of us...useful idiots of the Left.

Doesn't make me uncomfortable in the least. Every RINO out there says the same thing in the silly season. That's why hawking policy is bullcrap. Show me the money.

Quote
So my efforts to persuade you will continue against all odds...because you are needed in this fight. I believe in the same principles that you do...in fact I admire your tight hold on principle...but we cannot so narrowly define
conservatism as to ensure we lose every political struggle.

Quite the other way around. The minute you give in and compromise any principle thing, you have already lost, and there is no way I can support that. Any good that comes of it is offset by what was lost in the compromise - and chip by chip, those losses continue to erode away the foundations - To include your movement. In the grand total, liberalism won during the Tump administration. The ball went LEFT.

Quote

We cannot support only the "perfect" candidates, or we will have a handful of the perfect vs a mob of Leftists as our end result. Populism is about appeal...it reaches out and offers a vision of conservatism to those who otherwise would remain "in the cave, fearing the light"...populism is not in any way a counter to conservative thought, it is simply the promotion of that thought to a wider audience of voters.

Pragmatism yet again. If only I would compromise...  *****rollingeyes*****
It is compromise that has brought us here. It is compromise that has filled the Republican ranks with RINOs. The stench of it makes me wretch.

Quote
Do you understand what conservative policies we can put in place when we lose elections?

Not at the expense of other Conservatives and their policies. Carving off fiscal conservatism and libertarianism is exactly the same approach as is ALWAYS the argument toward compromise. Without those two, you are just another advocate of Big.gov... And I will not lend my endorsement to that. All or nothing pal... Because if you won't support all, you deserve nothing. Y'all are fond of this 'hang together or hang separately' bullcrap until I point out that y'all are the ones dividing off the Ficons and Civcons. It's y'all that are causing us to hang separately, not me.

Quote
And to be clear. No one...sure as hell not myself...is advocating we surrender ANY of our conservative principles. Period. What I'm advocating is quite the opposite...that populism is the means by which we educate the middle class as to what those principles are and why they matter.

Don't you see? You already have.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: GrouchoTex on June 07, 2021, 01:48:28 PM
I really like what @sneakypete and @Mesaclone had to say here.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 02:00:14 PM
Utter nonsense.

Conservatives were never 'Chamber of Commerce'. nor 'country club'.

And Conservatism by its nature cannot be 'populist', and is only incidentally 'nationalist'

Tumpism is no more conservative than any other hyphenated 'conservatism' that came before.


Conservatism can't be populist?

What is "populism"?

Quote
populism
[ pop-yuh-liz-uhm ]SHOW IPA

noun
1 any of various, often antiestablishment or anti-intellectual political movements or philosophies that offer unorthodox solutions or policies and appeal to the common person rather than according with traditional party or partisan ideologies.
2 grass-roots democracy; working-class activism; egalitarianism.
3 representation or extolling of the common person, the working class, the underdog, etc.:
populism in the arts.

(initial capital letter) the political philosophy of the People's party.


Clearly conservatism doesn't fit the first definition, but it certainly is the second, which is more of a methods definition, and absolutely matches the third definition.

Of course, no Never Trumper Principled Conservative (TM) whiner is a conservative, and those people had the working man, anyway.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 02:10:01 PM
Yeah, you keep trying to rub RINOs off on me. I ain't never backed the RINOs, and I consider the Moderate Wing of the Republican party - You know, the 'Bush country club' to be every bit the enemy that the democrats are.

ALL Never Trumpers are RINOs.

Quote
Ain't nobody here more blue collar than me. So that hyphenation doesn't work a lick. And populism is not conservatism, and never can be. In fact, populism is every bit as daft and unprincipled as the liberalism you claim to detest.

That may be, I haven't inspected your closet.   But conservatism is a working man populist movement, and has been since Reagan wrested the nomination from Bush Daddy.

Quote

Right. ALWAYS a reason to put aside the very principles you claim to stand upon.

What's important is winning the war.   Not dying in a hill that can be taken later in the battle.

Why didn't the allies bomb the socialist extermination camps to break the industrial slaughterhouses?   

Seems like stopping mass murder would be the "principled" thing to do. 

They decided winning the war was more important ...and the killings stopped because the war was won.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 02:17:17 PM
I can't deny that you are an honest man. Hyperbolic...but honest. Curmudgeony. Grouchy. Scroogy. But honest =)

Read the article if you haven't...it makes clear that Trump is not the source of the MAGA movement, he is a byproduct. An important one, but like many others (Desantis, Noem, Paul, Cotton, Hawley, etcetera) he is riding the wave of populist conservatism....a term that simply means conservatism reaching out to motivate the middle class to engage in the political process. Not sure why you'd think that counter to conservatism...populism is a method that builds enthusiasm for a cause by speaking truth (with a bit of charisma if possible) to folks. It is not itself a philosophy. In this case, it is a method used to build support and enthusiasm for conservatism. There's just no way that should be seen as a bad thing. You seem to be applying anachronistic view of populism as a "befuddle the dumb masses with snake oil" sort of magic trick....that is not what we are seeing here with the MAGA movement.

Many aspects of conservatism also appeal to the more rational of the lower percentiles, too.   Many of them want jobs, not handouts.   Many of them are America-Firsters.   Many of them abhor the slaughter of babies.   They need to be reached and taught, then they're in.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 02:19:27 PM
------------------------------
Mesaclone, since you're a smart lad, why are you auditioning for a clown award?
Conservatism was articulated by the Ancients, among them Plato, as  a body of enduring principles dealing w/human nature, involving attitudes, behaviors, impulses and sentiments across Mankind.
It had absolutely nothing to do w/either politics or religion, as it was birthed by the Natural Law;
the latter being Man's guide for thousands of years as the Scholastics, Locke, Hume, Burke
as well as Babbitt and Kirk, in our time asserted, to name but a handful.
The ideas and thoughts of these wise Men gave Conservatism integrity down thru history;
yet in our time it's morphed into an errand boy for politicians/politics, which in my judgment,
is its death sentence!!!

Plato's Republic was a totalitarian's paradise.

Plato did not have the economic understanding the people of today have, if they're not socialists.

Plato's importance in Western Culture was his teaching of method, not of specific ideas.   Just like his mentor, Ben's friend, Socrates.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 02:28:37 PM
I can't deny that you are an honest man. Hyperbolic...but honest. Curmudgeony. Grouchy. Scroogy. But honest =)



No.

The established fact is that the election of 2020 was stolen from the Americans that voted for Trump.

Roamer denies this happened and requests evidence.

When presented with the evidence, Roamer says that it isn't evidence because it hasn't been presented in court.

He argues in circles on this matter and that is the mark of the thoroughly dishonest man.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 02:31:19 PM
The truth? Really? You called someone a liar that isn't. That makes you what?

Populism is just a different fickle mob that chases its own priorities. Populism has no foundation to build anything that actually stands for any meaningful amount of time. It is constantly shifting sand. Our constitution was based on fundamental unchanging principles - populism is an anathema to it.

What about populism based on Constitutional principles?

Or are you claiming the Constitution does not appeal to the majority of the people?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 07, 2021, 02:32:02 PM
You’ve got your wires crossed. I’m saying modern western religious belief and doctrine is deeply effected by Platonic thought. Not vice versa. Christian apologetics are rife with Platonic assumptions and thought. But my original reference was to Plato’s connection to religious perception generally...not to Christianity nor Judaism...ancient Athens was  the epicenter of religious thought at the time...and Plato’s concepts assume the existence of a prime mover of the universe.
-------------------------
Fair retort and well articulated; yet my perspective differs.
Indeed, Rulers such as Hammurabi, Cyrus and Sargon, while hardly Christians, did
foster a religious impulse within their cultures/societies in the Cradle of Civilization.
Yet I assert that the Ancient Greeks were motivated differently because of their perspectives.
For them, ideas were catalysts for their creativity/innovation and the latter were birthed by their
spirit of inquiry, which was uncovered thru Reason and its rules of Deductive and Inductive Logic.
In my judgement, this level of intellectual discipline uniquely distinguishes the Ancient Greeks
from each and every culture, society and civilization, for all eternity.
We certainly are not the greatest and the sooner we abandon out infatuation
w/politics and politicians, the sooner our nation/state will emerge from its long nightmare.



Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 02:34:25 PM
The tail wagging the dog. 'Mounting enthusiasm to advance a cause' is exactly bass ackwards... And leads to situations like we have now... A popularity for an empty cause driven entirely by the flatulence of populism itself. It has no success and requires none. There are no goals but those found upon bumper-stickers and meaningless catch phrases. Be careful what you wish for, because such a thing will turn and bite its master just as easy as anything else.

And Reagan's popular appeal was incidental. He was fully vetted and proven as governor of California. And he performed accordingly.

Demanding honest elections is now an "empty cause" - this is why Principled Conservatism (TM) is neither.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 02:38:57 PM
-------------------------
Fair retort and well articulated; yet my perspective differs.
Indeed, Rulers such as Hammurabi, Cyrus and Sargon, while hardly Christians, did
foster a religious impulse within their cultures/societies in the Cradle of Civilization.
Yet I assert that the Ancient Greeks were motivated differently because of their perspectives.
For them, ideas were catalysts for their creativity/innovation and the latter were birthed by their
spirit of inquiry, which was uncovered thru Reason and its rules of Deductive and Inductive Logic.
In my judgement, this level of intellectual discipline uniquely distinguishes the Ancient Greeks
from each and every culture, society and civilization, for all eternity.
We certainly are not the greatest and the sooner we abandon out infatuation
w/politics and politicians, the sooner our nation/state will emerge from its long nightmare.

Abandon politics?

Politics is humaty's greatest invention.   Not fire.   But like fire, politics can destroy as well as build.   The Rodents and the RINOs use politics to feed their greed, and hence to them it's a destructive tool.

The Americans need to use politics to build the necessary anti-Rodent coalition to heal the nation and eradicate the vermin infestation.

What happens when people don't have politics?   The human hand was evolved to build tools.   The human hand was also ideally evolved to be a fist.  People without the tools to build use their hands to fight.   It's our killer ape heritage.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: libertybele on June 07, 2021, 03:08:47 PM
Abandon politics?

Politics is humaty's greatest invention.   Not fire.   But like fire, politics can destroy as well as build.   The Rodents and the RINOs use politics to feed their greed, and hence to them it's a destructive tool.

The Americans need to use politics to build the necessary anti-Rodent coalition to heal the nation and eradicate the vermin infestation.

What happens when people don't have politics?   The human hand was evolved to build tools.   The human hand was also ideally evolved to be a fist.  People without the tools to build use their hands to fight.   It's our killer ape heritage.

What happens when political parties don't adhere to the Constitution?  We're living it.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: DefiantMassRINO on June 07, 2021, 03:15:58 PM
America First and foremost - I am an American.  I was born in America.  I was raised in America.  I live and work in America.  My family has served America in the Armed Forces.  I pay taxes to the American Government. I vote in American elections.  I have an American passort. 

American government is supposed to work for and advance the interests of its citizens - not the Globalists, not the Chamber of Commerce, not the World Trade Organization, not the World Bank, not the International Monetary Fund, not the United Nations, and not the Chinese Communist Party.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 04:45:20 PM
What happens when political parties don't adhere to the Constitution?  We're living it.

Yeah, and what's that got to do with the necessity of politics in human affairs?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 07, 2021, 05:37:24 PM
Plato's Republic was a totalitarian's paradise.
Plato did not have the economic understanding the people of today have, if they're not socialists.
Plato's importance in Western Culture was his teaching of method, not of specific ideas.   Just like his mentor, Ben's friend, Socrates.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Er.................are you auditioning for some sorta comedy stunt ????
Plato was:
* arguably the wisest Man ever created by the Almighty,
* the definer of the Psyche (Soul) of Man, some 400 years before Roman Catholicism was born,
* the identifier of Natural Law as the guidepost for Human Nature.
The Greek Assembly in Athens, was the model for the Roman Senate and all the
representative bodies formed by Man, up to the present, in particular, Parliaments.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 05:42:04 PM

-----------------------------------------------------------
Er.................are you auditioning for some sorta comedy stunt ????
Plato was:
* arguably the wisest Man ever created by the Almighty,
* the definer of the Psyche (Soul) of Man, some 400 years before Roman Catholicism was born,
* the identifier of Natural Law as the guidepost for Human Nature.
The Greek Assembly in Athens, was the model for the Roman Senate and all the
representative bodies formed by Man, up to the present, in particular, Parliaments.

And since his opinions were often not founded on empirical reality, his conclusions from 25 centuries ago are of limited value to the modern world.

His Republic would have been a freakin' totalitarian nightmare.   The Republic founded by James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, et al, was much more realistic and much more fascinating.

As a training for presenting rationale, fine.    Since his arguments lacked founding, one has to recognize him for what he was, an outstanding man of his time...but his time is past.   

Hint:  His culture refused to accept the related concepts of zero and infinity.  That severely limited the distances they could go conceptually.

And, yes, we all know that Athens is the recognized "birthplace" of democracy.   It's implementation had flaws.  Serious flaws.   Flaws that really haven't been fixed, like what do with their Brutuses and Pelosies.

And, of course, Plato had NOTHING to do with the development of Athenian democracy.   That Golden Age blossomed and faded before Plato was born.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 07, 2021, 05:46:24 PM
Abandon politics?
Politics is humaty's greatest invention.   Not fire.   But like fire, politics can destroy as well as build.   The Rodents and the RINOs use politics to feed their greed, and hence to them it's a destructive tool.
The Americans need to use politics to build the necessary anti-Rodent coalition to heal the nation and eradicate the vermin infestation.
What happens when people don't have politics?   The human hand was evolved to build tools.   The human hand was also ideally evolved to be a fist.  People without the tools to build use their hands to fight.   It's our killer ape heritage.
------------------------------
Politics is the neurosis of those desperate for constant attention,
who consciously choose to be shallow and unenlightened.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 05:53:42 PM
------------------------------
Politics is the neurosis of those desperate for constant attention,
who consciously choose to be shallow and unenlightened.
are frauds and hustlers

You don't need to make the effort to understand what others write.   After all, what did I say, really, except that without politics there is no other recourse than war.

But, hey, that would require independent thought and a comprehension of human nature that Plato may or may not have held.

After all, Madison was a fraud and a liar to, right?

Look, human nature isn't all light and goodness, something Plato refused to recognize in his elitist's view of the perfect society.   Heck, Madison figured that the losing Presidential candidate would set aside his rivalry with the winner and be happy to be the Vice President.   No friction going to happen there, right?

The reality is that the unrestrained human is a vicious and violent beast.   What enables humans to live together in groups of more than one each is the ability to discuss matters and see that a peaceful resolution to a mutual problem is better than beating the tar out of the other guy.   This is almost certainly because men have to live with women, who are most annoying. 

So, politics was invented as a part of the natural evolution of the human species.

But you clearly believe politics is nothing but pure evil and we should abandon it and instead go straight to shooting each other when we want to, because...law...laws are the product of politics, and that includes the laws we have against shooting each other randomly.

But, hey, politics is all bad, right?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: libertybele on June 07, 2021, 05:56:54 PM
Yeah, and what's that got to do with the necessity of politics in human affairs?

@Sled Dog obviously not a dang thing.   :pop41:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 06:08:50 PM
@Sled Dog obviously not a dang thing.   :pop41:

I was just trying to figure out where you were going, is all.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 08:05:32 PM

Conservatism can't be populist?

What is "populism"?

Clearly conservatism doesn't fit the first definition, but it certainly is the second, which is more of a methods definition, and absolutely matches the third definition.

Of course, no Never Trumper Principled Conservative (TM) whiner is a conservative, and those people had the working man, anyway.

No, it does not. Conservatism, as it touches American politics, is a coalition of factions formed lately in the right wing of the Republican party. That coalition of factions have prerequisite principles that are unmovable, and are part and parcel, the formative parts of the agreement between factions. Conservatism by definition is charged with preserving and fighting for those principles, and is nothing else.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 08:13:36 PM
ALL Never Trumpers are RINOs.

RINO is 'Republican in Name Only' by the definition of the acronym - I am not a Republican (SPIT), ergo, it is impossible for me to be a RINO. And therefore, your statement is in error on its face.

Quote
That may be, I haven't inspected your closet.   But conservatism is a working man populist movement, and has been since Reagan wrested the nomination from Bush Daddy.

No it is not. Many a 'working man' is a union wonk, and a five star Democrat.

Quote
What's important is winning the war.   Not dying in a hill that can be taken later in the battle.

When you forget what you are fighting for, you have already lost.

Quote
Why didn't the allies bomb the socialist extermination camps to break the industrial slaughterhouses?   
Seems like stopping mass murder would be the "principled" thing to do. 
They decided winning the war was more important ...and the killings stopped because the war was won.

They were wrong in that. and the two were never mutually exclusive. Not that scurrilous decisions are not commonplace - It is war, after all.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 08:25:33 PM
No.

The established fact is that the election of 2020 was stolen from the Americans that voted for Trump.

No, that is not an established fact

Quote
Roamer denies this happened and requests evidence.


No, I do not deny that it happened. In fact, I am on the record saying it probably DID happen.Though proving it DOES require evidence.

Quote
When presented with the evidence, Roamer says that it isn't evidence because it hasn't been presented in court.

It isn't evidence in that it is of little use without being vetted and proven in court. Much of what was counted as evidence has been defamed. Dominion particularly. None of the rest of it holds any more verity than the Dominion shtick did.

Quote
He argues in circles on this matter and that is the mark of the thoroughly dishonest man.

It is not circular, and it is not dishonest. It is a matter of fact. Established fact is what gets you the win. Until it is established fact - Proven by court or by audit, or some other such authority, it means nothing. It does nothing.

Till then, tub-thumping is all you've got. I am not interested in tub-thumping. Nor joining in with tub-thumping. It is wasted time and energy.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 08:31:35 PM
No, it does not. Conservatism, as it touches American politics, is a coalition of factions formed lately in the right wing of the Republican party. That coalition of factions have prerequisite principles that are unmovable, and are part and parcel, the formative parts of the agreement between factions. Conservatism by definition is charged with preserving and fighting for those principles, and is nothing else.

Uh....

...no.

Conservative by definition has no definition.   Or haven't you noticed you can't define it, claim to be one and still deny the election of 2020 was stolen?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 08:34:09 PM
No, that is not an established fact

Yes, it is.

Quote
No, I do not deny that it happened. In fact, I am on the record saying it probably DID happen.Though proving it DOES require evidence.

Yes, you do.

When presented with the evidence you demand, you declare that it isn't evidence that no evidence has been presented.

Quote
It isn't evidence in that it is of little use without being vetted and proven in court. Much of what was counted as evidence has been defamed. Dominion particularly. None of the rest of it holds any more verity than the Dominion shtick did.

See what I mean?

Don't worry, everyone else does.

Quote
It is not circular, and it is not dishonest. It is a matter of fact. Established fact is what gets you the win. Until it is established fact - Proven by court or by audit, or some other such authority, it means nothing. It does nothing.

It is both.

Quote
Till then, tub-thumping is all you've got. I am not interested in tub-thumping. Nor joining in with tub-thumping. It is wasted time and energy.

Yes, your circularity is so tiresome I'm not going to challenge it, I'm just going to point it out.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 07, 2021, 08:35:04 PM
You don't need to make the effort to understand what others write.   After all, what did I say, really, except that without politics there is no other recourse than war.
But, hey, that would require independent thought and a comprehension of human nature that Plato may or may not have held.
After all, Madison was a fraud and a liar to, right?
Look, human nature isn't all light and goodness, something Plato refused to recognize in his elitist's view of the perfect society.   Heck, Madison figured that the losing Presidential candidate would set aside his rivalry with the winner and be happy to be the Vice President.   No friction going to happen there, right?
The reality is that the unrestrained human is a vicious and violent beast.   What enables humans to live together in groups of more than one each is the ability to discuss matters and see that a peaceful resolution to a mutual problem is better than beating the tar out of the other guy.   This is almost certainly because men have to live with women, who are most annoying. 
So, politics was invented as a part of the natural evolution of the human species.
But you clearly believe politics is nothing but pure evil and we should abandon it and instead go straight to shooting each other when we want to, because...law...laws are the product of politics, and that includes the laws we have against shooting each other randomly.
But, hey, politics is all bad, right?
-------------------------------
Sled, it's an opinion forum, so you're certainly entitled.
However making politics the contra of war is more than a stretch,
as it elevates and glorifies the vast majority of those far below noble.
As for Madison, along w/Jefferson and Monroe, they were three of our first five.
Now let's classify the last five, into our Curley, Larry and Moe; so you choose
from Bush, Clinton, Obama, Trump, Biden and box them, then compare them
to Madison and his colleagues.
Sled, at founding we were where we were, because of the likes of Madison.
Now we are where we are because of Curley, Larry and Moe.
Best of intentions aside; Politics/Politicians surely ain't the answer to our morass.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 08:41:38 PM
Abandon politics?

Politics is humaty's greatest invention.   Not fire.   But like fire, politics can destroy as well as build.   The Rodents and the RINOs use politics to feed their greed, and hence to them it's a destructive tool.

The Americans need to use politics to build the necessary anti-Rodent coalition to heal the nation and eradicate the vermin infestation.

What happens when people don't have politics?   The human hand was evolved to build tools.   The human hand was also ideally evolved to be a fist.  People without the tools to build use their hands to fight.   It's our killer ape heritage.

Wrong - Politics is the main mover and shaker in war. Even wars thought to be religious in nature were really nothing more than politics. Perhaps it is a fine line to you, but America needs no more politics. It needs, desperately, statesmanship.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 08:42:20 PM
RINO is 'Republican in Name Only' by the definition of the acronym - I am not a Republican (SPIT), ergo, it is impossible for me to be a RINO. And therefore, your statement is in error on its face.

Fair enough.   When I use the term Never Trumper, I am referring to that non-Rodent wing of the American left who hate America.   All Never Trumpers fit THAT definition, since Rodents are by definition in their own class of Never America and not per se Never Trumpers.    That some of the Never Trumpers aren't official members of the GOP doesn't make them anything special.   They still hate America, as evidenced by their lack of support for the most conservative president since Reagan.

They want Allah, or some other weird God, to occupy the White House before they are satisfied, apparently.   

Quote
No it is not. Many a 'working man' is a union wonk, and a five star Democrat.

Those are just the stupid ones.  Just because they're stupid doesn't mean they shouldn't be conservatives, since only the conservative ideology serves their best interests.

EVERYONE that votes Rodent is a moron, even the dead ones.

Quote
When you forget what you are fighting for, you have already lost.

Then you've lost.

I know what I'm fighting for.

Quote
They were wrong in that. and the two were never mutually exclusive. Not that scurrilous decisions are not commonplace - It is war, after all.

What was scurrilous about it? 

What was wrong in using war materiel to prosecute the war to it's completion, since the purpose of any side in fighting a war is supposed to be to minimize their own casualties.   Every bomb dropped on a non-military target was a bomb not used to protect the lives of Allied troops on the battlefield.

I never said I disagreed with the decision to not destroy the death camps, I just pointed it out as an example.   The jews of Germany allowed themselves to be victimized, the jews of the other countries, were victimized by the National Socialists and often their own governments, like Poland and France.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 08:43:50 PM
Wrong - Politics is the main mover and shaker in war. Even wars thought to be religious in nature were really nothing more than politics. Perhaps it is a fine line to you, but America needs no more politics. It needs, desperately, statesmanship.

Yes, I understand that Never Trumpers have no clue about real human nature.   

But getting people to volunteer confirmation is always a good thing to get.

Wars are the failure of politics.

Diplomacy is, after all, the politics between nations.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 07, 2021, 08:44:37 PM
Never mind me, I'm just eating  :2popcorn:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: libertybele on June 07, 2021, 08:46:18 PM
Never mind me, I'm just eating  :2popcorn:

 :beer:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 08:47:36 PM
Uh....

...no.

Conservative by definition has no definition.   

False.

Quote
Or haven't you noticed you can't define it,

I just DID define it. It is what it is.

Quote
claim to be one and still deny the election of 2020 was stolen?

I made no such claim. In fact I am on the record right here in this thread claiming otherwise.
What I deny is that you have any useful and effective proof thereof.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 08:58:22 PM
Yes, it is.
No, in fact, it is not, if for no other reason than that the information you are going on has not been vetted.

Quote
Yes, you do.

No I do not. All the way back to the day after the election I stood on the ground that it had probably been stolen, but that proving it would be the hard part. That has been my position all the way along. And it remains the truth.

Quote
When presented with the evidence you demand, you declare that it isn't evidence that no evidence has been presented.

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE PRESENTED. There is no finding of fact. Wait till an audit proves it. THEN you have something. Prove it in court, THEN you have something. THEN you have something you can do.

All you have right now is theory ginned up by the right facing press... And utterly worthless for anything.

Quote
Yes, your circularity is so tiresome I'm not going to challenge it, I'm just going to point it out.

It is not circular. It is the bare fact of it. You can whine, and cry, and throw dirt in the air all you want, but that's all you've got until an audit, or court finding, or other such authority establishes a proven, vetted fact.

Till then, it is useless hot air.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 09:04:39 PM
Wars are the failure of politics.

Diplomacy is, after all, the politics between nations.

No, war is the failure of statesmanship. Diplomacy is also statesmanship. We need entirely less politicians, replaced by actual statesmen. Men who function according to principle and not according to the tattletale in the wind. Men who guard liberty with truth, and not men driven by greed, fame, and populism.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 09:04:59 PM
-------------------------------
Sled, it's an opinion forum, so certainty you're entitled.
However making politics the contra of war is more than a stretch,
as it elevates and glorifies the vast majority of those far below noble.
As for Madison, along w/Jefferson and Monroe, they were three of our first five.
Now let's classify the last five, our Curley, Larry and Moe; so you choose from
Bush, Clinton, Obama, Trump, Bidenxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxhold

Well, this is what happens when people own dictionaries.

They get to learn what words mean.  Politics is the art of talking to get people to do what you want without resorting to violence.   The threat of violence is a traditional tool in politics.   The execution of the threat is what happens when the poltiicking breaks down and mutual intransigence occurs.

I can't help it you have emotions that cloud your understanding of basic vocabulary.

What can I do to help you?

politic - 1 wise; prudent and sagacious in devising and pursuing measures; shrewd; diplomatic; 2 prudently or artfully contrived; well-devised;adapted to it's end; expedient, as a plan, action, remark, etc. 3 crafty, unscrupulous, cunning, artful, "I have been politic with my friend, smooth with my enemies" = Shakespeare.
The Webster's New Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language, ca. 1973.

I know it's a good dictionary because it's got 3000 pages, and not on any of those pages can be found the word "transsexual".  Plus, it's old and smells good.

Does that help?   It's a much better resource than that skimpy site dictionary.com, and it only cost me $1.75.   

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 09:09:47 PM
No, war is the failure of statesmanship. Diplomacy is also statesmanship. We need entirely less politicians, replaced by actual statesmen. Men who function according to principle and not according to the tattletale in the wind. Men who guard liberty with truth, and not men driven by greed, fame, and populism.

Statesmen are experts at....this is a really tricky concept, so you'll have to work at it...politics.

You do know that, don't you?

You also know that swapping synonyms out in a definition only alter the meaning slightly in most cases.   Calling a pool of blood incarnadine instead of simply red adds to the poetry, not the essential meaning.

As for guarding liberty with the truth, the only people I see doing that are those honest people actually admitting the election of 2020 was stolen.  Thank you for making your stance on the defense of liberty clear.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 09:22:28 PM
No, in fact, it is not, if for no other reason than that the information you are going on has not been vetted.

Yes, in fact, it is.

Quote
No I do not. All the way back to the day after the election I stood on the ground that it had probably been stolen, but that proving it would be the hard part. That has been my position all the way along. And it remains the truth.

Wasn't hard to prove, as it was proven.

The Constitution is not a difficult document to find on-line.   The relevant clause can be found therein.  There were insufficient Biden electors chosen according to the requirements of the Constitution.

Quote
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE PRESENTED. There is no finding of fact. Wait till an audit proves it. THEN you have something. Prove it in court, THEN you have something. THEN you have something you can do.

Yes, we presented evidence to you, starting with the Constitution.   The Constitution is not a difficult document to find on-line.  The relevant clause can be found there in.  There were insufficient Biden electors chosen according to the requirements of the Constitution.

Quote
All you have right now is theory ginned up by the right facing press... And utterly worthless for anything.

What I have is the facts of the election and the Constitution.  The Constitution is not a difficult document to find on-line.  The relevant clause can be found there in.  There were insufficient Biden electors chosen according to the requirements of the Constitution.

Quote
It is not circular. It is the bare fact of it. You can whine, and cry, and throw dirt in the air all you want, but that's all you've got until an audit, or court finding, or other such authority establishes a proven, vetted fact.

Again, you've been presented with facts, you reject the facts and insist no facts were presented.   Thus repeating the Reince Preibus Cycle.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 07, 2021, 09:24:41 PM
False.

He says my claim that he has no definition of the word "conservative" is false.

He provides no definition of the word "conservative" to validate his refutation.

Quote
I just DID define it. It is what it is.

Conservatism is God?  When asked who He was, He said "I yam what I yam".   Oh.  Wait, that was Pop-Eye.

Quote
I made no such claim. In fact I am on the record right here in this thread claiming otherwise.
What I deny is that you have any useful and effective proof thereof.

The Constitution is not a difficult document to find on-line.  The relevant clause can be found there in.  There were insufficient Biden electors chosen according to the requirements of the Constitution.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sighlass on June 07, 2021, 10:20:26 PM
The only thing worse than lying to others is lying to yourself. You're a very good liar.

Just wow.... you either don't know Roamer very well or have something stuck up your behind so far you can't see straight. Roamer and I don't mesh 100% of the time, but only because I tend to bend a little more the morality angle and he towards economics. We always seem to end up at the same juncture eventually. But his waiver on conservatism, is not something most here would dare claim unless trying to play the court jester.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sighlass on June 07, 2021, 10:27:51 PM
As scripture says; you cannot serve two masters.  The President is the master of the nation for four years. Those that say they hate Trump, and defer to Biden helped give Biden the Presidency, and yet swear they did no such thing.  Truth?  A long ways from those that deny their own handiwork, and words.

Another "just wow" moment.... I am not to serve two masters, true... but anyone that goes by the name " @christian " should know whom that Master is... and it ain't a person on Earth. I don't care if the late Billy Graham ran for President and won, I wouldn't dare call him Master, cause he is fallible. 
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sighlass on June 07, 2021, 10:40:25 PM
ALL Never Trumpers are RINOs.

The wows just keep a coming....

Nope, not all never-trumpers are RINOs .... The press (MSM) sure focuses on a lot of them now days, but those usually are not principled politicians... They actually tend to be actual Rino's for the most part... but not all, some are just butt hurt because Trump treated them like dirt when they didn't kiss his ring. Why, because Trump has the grace of a bull in a china shop, his demure is "grab em by the ***** and his morals are about as steady as his marriages were.. (same as his NY values he crowed about).  What was Trump, a freaking populace that changed views about as often as most of us change our undergarments. To some Trump's character endeared them to him, perhaps because they weren't perfect either and they tired of politics being played by the books. Heck, I am far from perfect, but I can't see voting for someone just because it might make me look more perfect. I want someone that knows they ain't God in the flesh, because only such a person knows the right direction to look for answers worth following.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 10:43:16 PM
Yes, we presented evidence to you, starting with the Constitution.   The Constitution is not a difficult document to find on-line.  The relevant clause can be found there in.  There were insufficient Biden electors chosen according to the requirements of the Constitution.


NO... According to YOU, not according to the Constitution.

On point is the Constitution assigning the sole authority to state legislatures wrt the appointment of electors.
State legislatures are the sole authority.
So what the state legislatures write is how it works.

Well, no one has presented to me the whole of the body of law as written by those various states wrt not only elections, but also contingencies both to elections and generally, where those states may have assigned their authority however they did.... What happens when there are contingencies? What happens in emergencies?

Nobody knows. All we have right now is you bellowing around, and five separate state legislatures, each of which certified their elections as having been conducted according to their laws and their say-so.  Get this now: The SOLE AUTHORITY APPROVED and CERTIFIED that they are alright with how their elections were conducted.

Now, silly me, but I though the Constitution made those state legislatures the sole authority and arbiter of how they conduct elections.... And with no evidence to the contrary, and with their (ALL FIVE SEPARATELY) certifications made, you are telling me that somewhere in the Constitution YOU are the sole authority and arbiter of all of those elections.

You've got nothing. You have an unproven theory provoked by general election laws with no real idea beyond that as to how those legislatures may have otherwise empowered various agents by law or by precedent. It is nowhere near as cut-and-dried as you ordain at the top of your voice.

That's a big complicated monkey-knot, relying on the whole body of law in five states... Your knee-jerk reckoning notwithstanding. That is why I will wait for the establishment of fact.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sighlass on June 07, 2021, 10:47:44 PM
Actually, it was the populism of men like Sam Adams that led us into and through the Revolution. Populism...like intellectualism...is not inherently good or bad, it is simply the mounting of enthusiasm to advance a cause. If that enthusiasm is directed to elevate a wise and considered course of policy. I would argue that Reagan was a populist, he inspired tremendous enthusiasm in the GOP base and directed it towards the achievement of wise policy. Populism, motivating the populace to fight for "the constitution's fundamental undying principles", is no vice. The Founding Father's...and Reagan....used populism in this way, as has Trump.

In the first primary, we saw an issue that pitted populism vs solid conservatism.... One person went full hog to support ethanol while one didn't because best thing for the country. One was a solid conservative view, one was pandering for votes because the state had a lot of corn growers.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 07, 2021, 11:20:26 PM
He says my claim that he has no definition of the word "conservative" is false.

He provides no definition of the word "conservative" to validate his refutation.

Conservatism is God?  When asked who He was, He said "I yam what I yam".   Oh.  Wait, that was Pop-Eye.


Sure I did, even as I said.

Quote
No, it does not. Conservatism, as it touches American politics, is a coalition of factions formed lately in the right wing of the Republican party. That coalition of factions have prerequisite principles that are unmovable, and are part and parcel, the formative parts of the agreement between factions. Conservatism by definition is charged with preserving and fighting for those principles, and is nothing else.

https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,439177.msg2442532.html#msg2442532


 pointing-up
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 08, 2021, 12:26:59 AM
NeverTrumpers, election fraud didn't happen until its proven it did happen in court, and democrats lean heavily on all facets of government.  as we have already seen.

The video evidence many of us witnessed in real time, like the capital building didn't happen yet.  Just like democrats views.

Facts are not facts, my opinion is fact!  Really?

So we have here that democrats are Conservatives and Republicans are not,or not good enough. I have never known a Conservative to speak annihilate America, nor trash truth. Notice how many times these ultra-'conservative' locksteps with the democrat agendas?  Hitlery committed ghastly felony crimes, her response was often; Prove it.  The Bart Simpson defense, and we see it again.  Fighting against Conservatives and giving democrats a pass?  but denying a bias? Bias all over the place.  We saw how that ended up last election.  We are now enduring the results.  Attacking Republicans and Trump, just like democrats do, but not a democrat.  If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck.....Denial of election fraud is how much of it has been justified,as democrats have warped and perverted our system.  Ask the tainted Courts and FBI,CIA, Justice Department for justice?  He full well knows that's a LAUGH, BUT uses it for denial, the same denial the democrats are using.  How can they march the same lock-step and yet have nothing to relate them, as their denial game plays out.  It's an I.Q. test.  Many refuse to be embarrassed at how badly they are failing.
 :smokin: :chairbang: :smokin:   :whistle:

We are seeing a determined divide and conquer movement of the left.  Sad to see its effect, pretend ultra-Conservative movement.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 01:52:20 AM
NeverTrumpers, election fraud didn't happen until its proven it did happen in court, and democrats lean heavily on all facets of government.  as we have already seen.

The video evidence many of us witnessed in real time, like the capital building didn't happen yet.  Just like democrats views.

Facts are not facts, my opinion is fact!  Really?

So we have here that democrats are Conservatives and Republicans are not,or not good enough. I have never known a Conservative to speak annihilate America, nor trash truth. Notice how many times these ultra-'conservative' locksteps with the democrat agendas?  Hitlery committed ghastly felony crimes, her response was often; Prove it.  The Bart Simpson defense, and we see it again.  Fighting against Conservatives and giving democrats a pass?  but denying a bias? Bias all over the place.  We saw how that ended up last election.  We are now enduring the results.  Attacking Republicans and Trump, just like democrats do, but not a democrat.  If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck.....Denial of election fraud is how much of it has been justified,as democrats have warped and perverted our system.  Ask the tainted Courts and FBI,CIA, Justice Department for justice?  He full well knows that's a LAUGH, BUT uses it for denial, the same denial the democrats are using.  How can they march the same lock-step and yet have nothing to relate them, as their denial game plays out.  It's an I.Q. test.  Many refuse to be embarrassed at how badly they are failing.
 :smokin: :chairbang: :smokin:   :whistle:

We are seeing a determined divide and conquer movement of the left.  Sad to see its effect, pretend ultra-Conservative movement.

Petulant and shallow thinking. So what if your every suspicion were true? What do you DO with it?
Harrumph and grumble. That's it.

Without PROVING IT, It may as well not be true for all its effect. You can do NOTHING without a court or an audit, or some form of actual authoritative result. So it seems your just mad that I refuse to listen to waggin tongues and won't join your tub-thumping and harrumphing chorus.

Which is utterly a waste of time.

Best to keep your powder dry and wait for something actionable than going off half-cocked for every rumor that comes over the hill. It;s all you'll do anyway, except looking the fool for subscribing to gossip. Happened to me too - I fell for the Dominion shtick... For a while... Because it was the only avenue to an interstate case and turning the SCOTUS loose. But it all turned out to be bullcrap, like all the rest so far.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 08, 2021, 02:59:57 AM
roamer1:
Without PROVING IT, It may as well not be true for all its effect. You can do NOTHING without a court or an audit, or some form of actual authoritative result. So it seems your just mad that I refuse to listen to waggin tongues and won't join your tub-thumping and harrumphing chorus.

christian:
Sounds like Hitlery, i got away with it and owning the Justice Department, the FBI, CIA, and many and the Courts and a great deal of the rest of the government, you can't prove a thing.  So proud i kin burst my buttons, you lost, i won! Thats a lot of pride !   That magic brand of old west elixir of yours sure goes with a lot of pride!  Must be tough keeping an adequate supply of buttons on hand.  So how many you figger you've made fools of so fer ?  Bart Simpson and Hitlery Clinton rolled into one with A DASH OF P.T. BARNUM.  Yah got Buffalo Bill wid yah ?  Is Hitlery gonna head up yer ultra-Conservative movement ?

So we all talk alike,you sure ?  I notice i'm looking more and more like black/white/yellow/Red Conservatives ever day! Yah noticed too !
I have noticed your talking points closely align with the democrat party and D.U., your second homes ?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 04:28:56 AM
christian:
Sounds like Hitlery, i got away with it and owning the Justice Department, the FBI, CIA, and many and the Courts and a great deal of the rest of the government, you can't prove a thing. 

You forget that for all his 'lock her up' bullcrap, Tumpy backed off on Hitlery. Tumpy said she had enough. And not another thing was aimed at Hitlery thereafter.

Quote
So proud i kin burst my buttons, you lost, i won! Thats a lot of pride !   That magic brand of old west elixir of yours sure goes with a lot of pride! 

What the hell are you even talking about? I didn't win nothing. I had no dog in this hunt, or the last one. Or the one before that and etc. There ain't no pride in that. My wins were Reagan, the 94 Congress, and the Tea Party... There is not another Conservative thing to point to. In fact, matters not, Democrat or Republican, we're all losing bigtime. And y'all play partisan games, when BOTH sides are selling us out and Venezuela is just around the corner.

Quote
Must be tough keeping an adequate supply of buttons on hand.  So how many you figger you've made fools of so fer ?  Bart Simpson and Hitlery Clinton rolled into one with A DASH OF P.T. BARNUM.  Yah got Buffalo Bill wid yah ?  Is Hitlery gonna head up yer ultra-Conservative movement ?

So we all talk alike,you sure ?  I notice i'm looking more and more like black/white/yellow/Red Conservatives ever day! Yah noticed too !
I have noticed your talking points closely align with the democrat party and D.U., your second homes ?

Got nothing for all that... Yer spitting gibberish.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 09:02:52 AM
NO... According to YOU, not according to the Constitution.

On point is the Constitution assigning the sole authority to state legislatures wrt the appointment of electors.
State legislatures are the sole authority.
So what the state legislatures write is how it works.

Yeah, all the rest of us know this.

We also know that was not the process used in enough states to steal the election.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 09:06:19 AM
Petulant and shallow thinking. So what if your every suspicion were true? What do you DO with it?
Harrumph and grumble. That's it.

Without PROVING IT, It may as well not be true for all its effect. You can do NOTHING without a court or an audit, or some form of actual authoritative result. So it seems your just mad that I refuse to listen to waggin tongues and won't join your tub-thumping and harrumphing chorus.

Which is utterly a waste of time.

Best to keep your powder dry and wait for something actionable than going off half-cocked for every rumor that comes over the hill. It;s all you'll do anyway, except looking the fool for subscribing to gossip. Happened to me too - I fell for the Dominion shtick... For a while... Because it was the only avenue to an interstate case and turning the SCOTUS loose. But it all turned out to be bullcrap, like all the rest so far.

It's BEEN proven.

It doesn't have to be in a COURT to be proven to the public.

The court ruled that OJ didn't murder Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.

The public knows better.

The Rodents didn't win the election.   The public knows this.

However, I do recognize the need of weak people with weak arguments who can't admit the truth to hide behind arguments from authority.   

"The courts haven't ruled that way, so it's not true" is a standard loser ploy.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 09:20:02 AM
Yeah, all the rest of us know this.

We also know that was not the process used in enough states to steal the election.

No, as I said, you ASSUME that. You do not know how the legislature may have assigned their agents otherwise in the course of contingencies and emergencies... If the state certified, they were happy with the legalities... And there really is no more to say. Overturning state cert just does not happen. Sole authority and all.

I don't think it without fault. I think it a quixotic attempt, made for public consumption. The lawyers would have known that upfront.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 08, 2021, 09:27:52 AM
roamer1:

What the hell are you even talking about? I didn't win nothing. I had no dog in this hunt, or the last one.

christian:
So such bragging, with so much modest denial, its like talking to two faces.  Don't blame me for what i did, REALLY?  JUST WHAT WOULD BE EXPECTED AT D.U.!  Attack, attack,attack, but i ain't got no dog in this hunt! I.Q. check, AND LAUGHING IN YER FACES!  GOOD THING HE HAS SERIOUS BACKERS, EH?
 :silly: :tongue2: :silly:   :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 09:28:13 AM
It's BEEN proven.

It doesn't have to be in a COURT to be proven to the public.

Picking nits. There is nothing to DO with your proposed proof without establishment of fact - a legal instrument of a court or audit of an election committee, or the like... Till then there will be no criminal indictment, no veritable proof the media can't avoid, no movement of legislatures to tighten up their methods... All there will be is you and a few more jumping up and down ineffectively.

meh.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 09:31:18 AM
roamer1:

What the hell are you even talking about? I didn't win nothing. I had no dog in this hunt, or the last one.

christian:
So such bragging, with so much modest denial, its like talking to two faces.  Don't blame me for what i did, REALLY?  JUST WHAT WOULD BE EXPECTED AT D.U.!  Attack, attack,attack, but i ain't got no dog in this hunt! I.Q. check, AND LAUGHING IN YER FACES!  GOOD THING HE HAS SERIOUS BACKERS, EH?
 :silly: :tongue2: :silly:   :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:

Of course I attack Big.gov calling itself Conservative.
And after Cruz was gone there was no Conservative choice, and has not been since, so no, like I said, I did not and do not have a dog in  this hunt.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 08, 2021, 10:42:39 AM
roamer2:
like I said, I did not and do not have a dog in  this hunt.

christian:
That joke is old and stale, as you walk hand in hand lockstepping with the democrats, still advancing the cause of the last election being stolen.  Persuasive?  NOT!  DENYING EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING, clever?  by half.  First Czarist cowboy i ever met!  I'll pass on your magic elixirs medicine show!  Too much toxic Putin like elixir for me to drink.  How is it for skin?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 11:13:05 AM
roamer2:
like I said, I did not and do not have a dog in  this hunt.

christian:
That joke is old and stale, as you walk hand in hand lockstepping with the democrats, still advancing the cause of the last election being stolen.  Persuasive?  NOT!  DENYING EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING, clever?  by half.  First Czarist cowboy i ever met!  I'll pass on your magic elixirs medicine show!  Too much toxic Putin like elixir for me to drink.  How is it for skin?

Yeah, bullcrap. Just because I deny your idiot prince does not mean I am hand in hand with democrats - I deny their idiot prince too, and everything they do, even more than Republicans. A pox on both your houses!

I am not doing anything except defending Conservatism by the numbers. And there is no denying that I am doing exactly that.

So your petty accusations fall far short of anything other than making a fool of yourself.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 08, 2021, 11:24:42 AM
"You may not be interested in government, but government is interested in you." 

Like it or not, we're all in it together.  :shrug:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 11:31:17 AM
"You may not be interested in government, but government is interested in you." 

Like it or not, we're all in it together.  :shrug:

I will not help it along with that. Not either side of it. Big.gov can go hang, be it from the Democrats or the Republicans. My liberty will not be made a compromise.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 08, 2021, 11:42:27 AM
I will not help it along with that. Not either side of it. Big.gov can go hang, be it from the Democrats or the Republicans. My liberty will not be made a compromise.

If you keep that up, then your liberties will be erased anyway, by morons.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 11:58:46 AM
If you keep that up, then your liberties will be erased anyway, by morons.

That's what is happening right now, by morons on the right and the left. Why do you think I am heading up the holler? It is soon to be too late, if it ain't already. I seen it coming five years back and knew Republicans were never going to defend Conservatism. They are every bit Big.gov as the democrats are.

So I will walk off and leave y'all to it. Because I can. If neither side is conservative, if BOTH sides are liberal and interested only in expanding the federal behemoth, there ain't a damn thing I can do to stop it.

So much for the idea of lending one's endorsement to the lesser evil.

And by the end of the summer I should be up in the holler, way past the pavement, way past the gravel, out on the very end of a barely discernible two-track... Surrounded by hillbillies, with a clear shot up and down the divide from the Northern Territories all the way down to Colorado.

Just try to dig me out of there. So no, we are not in this together. While partisans rearrange the deck chairs, and the band plays on, I will be doing fine in the heart of the Rockies.

Have at it. If the cause is to choose which Big.gov I want to live under, I will choose neither.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 08, 2021, 12:06:41 PM
Good luck when the revanooers show up.  Keep your powder dry.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 12:10:55 PM
Good luck when the revanooers show up.  Keep your powder dry.

The sheriff stops at the mouth of the holler and honks his horn if he has business up in there. Revenuers go up in there, they ain't never coming back down. And they know it. I figger they have easier fish to fry. Ever since Randy Weaver, they don't come up off the road.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 12:12:28 PM
No, as I said, you ASSUME that. You do not know how the legislature may have assigned their agents otherwise in the course of contingencies and emergencies... If the state certified, they were happy with the legalities... And there really is no more to say. Overturning state cert just does not happen. Sole authority and all.

I don't think it without fault. I think it a quixotic attempt, made for public consumption. The lawyers would have known that upfront.

No.

It's an established fact that the states of PA, AZ, GA, WI and MI, at a minimum, did not select their electors by the laws set by the legislatures of those states.

To say that we don't know how the legislatures assigned their "agents" (secret agents, perhaps?) is irrelevant.  Because what we do know is that in those states the judicial and executive branches set aside the laws passed by the legislature and substituted their own rules.

Go back and read the Constitution.    You can find a copy on line without too much effort.

You've been regulated many times on this, your failure to accept...admit the truth is a sign of serious TDS.  Conservatives don't suffer TDS.

It's also a sign of dishonesty.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 12:14:16 PM
Picking nits. There is nothing to DO with your proposed proof without establishment of fact - a legal instrument of a court or audit of an election committee, or the like... Till then there will be no criminal indictment, no veritable proof the media can't avoid, no movement of legislatures to tighten up their methods... All there will be is you and a few more jumping up and down ineffectively.

meh.

Standard Rodent Tactic #1 - Blame the Americans for what you yourself are doing.

The one picking the baby lice eggs is the one babbling incoherently about the courts because they can't defend their position using the Constitution.

Which means "not me".

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 12:16:21 PM
I will not help it along with that. Not either side of it. Big.gov can go hang, be it from the Democrats or the Republicans. My liberty will not be made a compromise.

Sayeth the Principled Conservative (TM) who can't admit the election was stolen right in front of his face.

Someone willing to accept a stolen election isn't a person who values liberty, not in the least little bit.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 12:35:26 PM
No.

It's an established fact that the states of PA, AZ, GA, WI and MI, at a minimum, did not select their electors by the laws set by the legislatures of those states.

To say that we don't know how the legislatures assigned their "agents" (secret agents, perhaps?) is irrelevant.  Because what we do know is that in those states the judicial and executive branches set aside the laws passed by the legislature and substituted their own rules.


As they do all the time. One time up in here, the election took place in the midst of a flood. The court stepped in and gave the job of moving things to higher ground to the Sheriff and the Montana Guard. Many election locations were just shut down. Others moved out of their precinct. It was by no means normal, but we got it done. Sheriff guarded the chain of evidence, and it was a giant cluster. Guess what. All of it was legit. We did the best we could with what we had... and the county and the state signed off on the result.

We often have to have wiggle room around snow too.

Because things can't go as planned, there are contingencies in place, either by law or by precedent that are approved by the legislature, at least by passive acquiescence. That the Democrats used the phony covid plandemic to take advantage of such things is likely... but also legit. It happens all the time.

So don't tell me it is set in stone. I don't know what contingencies are allowed for, or how each state allows it, but legislatures overlook such things as a matter of course. Until you have examined those things. you are not on solid ground. It would take a whole herd of lawyers to try and figure it out.

Not that it matters. the end game is that the legislature appoints the electors themselves if things get too messed up. They did not feel the need to do that. and they certified. Pretty much tough sh*t, there it is.

You may not like it, but it don't look like you can beat it. As I said from the beginning, proving it is the hard part.

Quote
Go back and read the Constitution.    You can find a copy on line without too much effort.

You've been regulated many times on this, your failure to accept...admit the truth is a sign of serious TDS.  Conservatives don't suffer TDS.

It's also a sign of dishonesty.

Bullcrap. You offer only the Constitutional mandate. That does not take into account the many ways that the legislature could have written or acquiesced to differences during contingencies. How those are handled will be the caveat. and you ignore it at the peril of your argument.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 12:38:54 PM
Standard Rodent Tactic #1 - Blame the Americans for what you yourself are doing.

The one picking the baby lice eggs is the one babbling incoherently about the courts because they can't defend their position using the Constitution.

Which means "not me".

Your argument already lost, so...
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 12:46:30 PM
As they do all the time. One time up in here, the election took place in the midst of a flood. The court stepped in and gave the job of moving things to higher ground to the Sheriff and the Montana Guard. Many election locations were just shut down. Others moved out of their precinct. It was by no means normal, but we got it done. Sheriff guarded the chain of evidence, and it was a giant cluster. Guess what. All of it was legit. We did the best we could with what we had... and the county and the state signed off on the result.

We often have to have wiggle room around snow too.

Because things can't go as planned, there are contingencies in place, either by law or by precedent that are approved by the legislature, at least by passive acquiescence. That the Democrats used the phony covid plandemic to take advantage of such things is likely... but also legit. It happens all the time.

So don't tell me it is set in stone. I don't know what contingencies are allowed for, or how each state allows it, but legislatures overlook such things as a matter of course. Until you have examined those things. you are not on solid ground. It would take a whole herd of lawyers to try and figure it out.

Not that it matters. the end game is that the legislature appoints the electors themselves if things get too messed up. They did not feel the need to do that. and they certified. Pretty much tough sh*t, there it is.

You may not like it, but it don't look like you can beat it. As I said from the beginning, proving it is the hard part.

Was there a flood on Election Day?

No.

Would it have mattered?  Does the Constitution grant a weather-exception to the requirement that the LEGISLATURE determine the method of elector selection?

No.

Therefore, those electors selected during the Great Flood of Whenever?   Those were false electors, too.  Not relevant to the issue of THIS election, which was stolen by false electors without your objection.

I sense a stench of desperation in your posts, now.

Please cite the Weather Exception clause in the Constitution.

===
Explain to this Syracuse boy why ANYONE would have to have a problem with the wee-bit of snow Texas may get in any particular week?  Are Texans frightened by white things?  Just askin', for a friend, ya know.  Maybe Texas doesn't have trucks?  Maybe they just don't know how to drive in a little snow?   Too funny.

===

If the "continencies" aren't established in advance by the legislature, they're not allowed to alter how the presidential electors are selected.

You gonna tell us next that "infringed" only applies to gun owners who don't own scary looking guns, as defined by the people who stole the election of 2020?

Quote
Bullcrap. You offer only the Constitutional mandate. That does not take into account the many ways that the legislature could have written or acquiesced to differences during contingencies. How those are handled will be the caveat. and you ignore it at the peril of your argument.

Yeah.  It's funny how I insist that the CONSTITUTION, the guarantor of our (well, my) freedom is the go-to document for determining whether an election is lawful or not.

Since I offer "only" the Constitutional mandate, please cite the law in the United States that overrides the Constitution, provide a link, and then we can discuss who ratified this law, why the Americans weren't informed about it, and how that law you cite is better at protecting our liberties than the Constitution you s(p)it on.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 12:52:47 PM
Sayeth the Principled Conservative (TM) who can't admit the election was stolen right in front of his face.

Someone willing to accept a stolen election isn't a person who values liberty, not in the least little bit.

I still have mine, and I will retain it or die, so...

And you continue to attack me with bullsh*t. I will say it again: I believed from the start that the election was suspicious. And that can be proven in the record, all the way along.

Where we part ways is that I am waiting for actual proof. You have not provided that. You have lost on that count, and as I said, the only way it goes forward is AZ's audit and the like... which IS the proof I have demanded all the way along.

What happens when those audits fizzle? I will just shrug and go on my way. You will be apoplectic. Because I have not invested myself in the gossip.

What happens if those audits prove out? I will stand and cheer  because FINALLY there is something that provides traction.

But one way or the other, I doubt very much that you will get your audits in all five states. Maybe two.
And I doubt very much that you will get to prove interstate collusion, which is the only way you are going to get at the big Dems. So even if an audit or two does prove out, it is liable to be anticlimactic. You'll get the heads of a few precinct captains at best.

That's the reality of it, and at this late date, you are probably beating a dead horse.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 08, 2021, 01:01:54 PM
Your argument already lost, so...
------------------------
Roamer, as I read and reflect on the words of the 'usual suspects' (borrowing Paine);
" These are the paragraphs that Try Men's Souls".
According to them, Plato was a zero and Politics is the answer to all our prayers;
even though that phone line has been disconnected for about 1,000 years.
Your patience is a gift!!!
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 01:20:02 PM
Was there a flood on Election Day?

No.

Right, but there WAS a plandemic. The same contingencies kick in, and are allowed by the precedent of the flood (or whatever)

Quote
Would it have mattered?  Does the Constitution grant a weather-exception to the requirement that the LEGISLATURE determine the method of elector selection?

No.


No, the legislature does. If there is precedent of the court acting as the agent of the legislature, that IS the legislature. If there is precedent of a wide berth given to State election committees by the legislature, then they are acting as agents of the legislature, making decisions the legislature had not predicted, then that IS the legislature.

You lose. A lawyer would wear you right out, because the precedent or written contingency was there before the fact of this election.

Quote
Therefore, those electors selected during the Great Flood of Whenever?   Those were false electors, too.  Not relevant to the issue of THIS election, which was stolen by false electors without your objection.


No they were not, by virtue of the state legislature signing cert. That is not a false elector.

Quote
I sense a stench of desperation in your posts, now.

Please cite the Weather Exception clause in the Constitution.

The legislature writes what it wants, according to the Constitution. To include exceptions to the rule. The argument is in the state, not the Constitution.

Quote
===
Explain to this Syracuse boy why ANYONE would have to have a problem with the wee-bit of snow Texas may get in any particular week?  Are Texans frightened by white things?  Just askin', for a friend, ya know.  Maybe Texas doesn't have trucks?  Maybe they just don't know how to drive in a little snow?   Too funny.

===


I am in NW Montana 60 miles from Canada in the heart of the Rockies... with the griz and the wolf, and real actual sled dogs. Most every one of my wolf-malamutes have been trained to the sled. So yeah. Snow. More than you.

Quote
If the "continencies" aren't established in advance by the legislature, they're not allowed to alter how the presidential electors are selected.

That's the point. They are.

Quote
You gonna tell us next that "infringed" only applies to gun owners who don't own scary looking guns, as defined by the people who stole the election of 2020?


Naw. I got all the guns I need. and they ain't locked up, and they're all loaded. and there ain't nothing worth shooting up in these mountains that I ain't shot and ate.

Quote
Yeah.  It's funny how I insist that the CONSTITUTION, the guarantor of our (well, my) freedom is the go-to document for determining whether an election is lawful or not.


The legislature writes what it wants. Since the constitution assigns elections solely to the state legislatures your argument is with the legislatures.

Quote
Since I offer "only" the Constitutional mandate, please cite the law in the United States that overrides the Constitution, provide a link, and then we can discuss who ratified this law, why the Americans weren't informed about it, and how that law you cite is better at protecting our liberties than the Constitution you s(p)it on.

The Constitution assigns the thing solely to the legislatures. They can do whatever they want. With the Constitution's blessing.

That is the bare fact. And whatever the legislature has written over the years to allow for contingencies is all an act of the legislature, just as much as the normal electoral law. And every time precedent was set by the court and the legislature did not act to correct it, is also the legislature by way of passive acquiescence, because as the sole authority and therefore arbiter, that which they don't correct remains in precedence.

That is not spitting on the Constitution.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 01:32:40 PM
------------------------
Roamer, as I read and reflect on the words of the 'usual suspects' (borrowing Paine);
" These are the paragraphs that Try Men's Souls".
According to them, Plato was a zero and Politics is the answer to all our prayers;
even though that phone line has been disconnected for about 1,000 years.
Your patience is a gift!!!

No friend, it is a bother.  happy77 :beer:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 01:36:49 PM
I still have mine, and I will retain it or die, so...

Everyone is entitled to their religious beliefs, per the Constitution, so you can believe what you want.

Until actions descending from those believes infringe on the rights of others to have free and honest elections.

Quote
And you continue to attack me with bullsh*t. I will say it again: I believed from the start that the election was suspicious. And that can be proven in the record, all the way along.

Well, no.  Citing the article of the Constitution that declare the state legislatures shall have sole authority on how the electors are selected and then pointing out that too many states defrauded the electors is not bullshit.

What is bullshit is your refusal to accept that fact for what it it, a fact.

And that the electors were selected by means not established by the state legislatures is an established fact and proven in the record.    All the way along.

It's just that some of us don't have TDS, don't object to Syracuse alumni, and actually like Cheetos, so we normal people are willing to be honest and state openly that the election was stolen.

Because the election was stolen.

Quote
Where we part ways is that I am waiting for actual proof. You have not provided that. You have lost on that count, and as I said, the only way it goes forward is AZ's audit and the like... which IS the proof I have demanded all the way along.

Where we part ways is the Constitution.

You don't like that the Constitution says Orangeman Won The Election.

Because Orangeman tweets mean things.

Or something.  I don't really care why you deny the election was stolen, the simple fact that you deny reality is sufficient.

That's where we part ways.   What's next, you reject the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle?

Quote
What happens when those audits fizzle? I will just shrug and go on my way. You will be apoplectic. Because I have not invested myself in the gossip.

And now we come up with the hypotheticals and the construction crews wearing Mini-True shirts moving the goal posts.

The electors were fraudulent because they were selected by unconstitutional means.

We already know the elections themselves were fraudulent, and we know it for the most obvious of reasons:  The Rodents don't want the audit to happen.  If the election were as honest as they say, they'd happily insist the audit happen.

Oh.

I forgot.

You TRUST the Rodents, at least so long as they kept the Evil Orange One from returning to his rightful place at the White House.    So long as the stolen election gave you the outcome you desired, an event perfectly in alignment with what Mitt Romney wanted, you're as happy as can be.   Now you're free to complain about all aspects of the Rodents except their habit of stealing elections and staging coups.

Quote
What happens if those audits prove out? I will stand and cheer  because FINALLY there is something that provides traction.

Nonsense.

We already have the evidence that the electors were false.    Read the Constitution.  It's not difficult to find on-line.

Here, if you're having difficulty finding a copy of the Constitution, and you're clearly confused about what it says, try constitutionus.com

Quote
But one way or the other, I doubt very much that you will get your audits in all five states. Maybe two.
And I doubt very much that you will get to prove interstate collusion, which is the only way you are going to get at the big Dems. So even if an audit or two does prove out, it is liable to be anticlimactic. You'll get the heads of a few precinct captains at best.

I don't recall asking for audits.

And the audits will only show what I and every other real American, the conservatives with real principles, already knows what happened.  That the Rodents cheat.    It's not like this is the first election they've stolen, you known.

Americans notice things like that.

Princpled Conservatives (TM) do not.   Unless Mittens loses an election.  Then I'm sure they get excited.

Quote
That's the reality of it, and at this late date, you are probably beating a dead horse.

No.  It's necessary to point out, everyday and forever, that the Rodents stole the election of 2020. 

Unlike Hester Prynne, the Rodents cannot make anything positive come from being compelled to wear the scarlet letter of "C".   

Cheaters aren't admired by Americans.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 08, 2021, 01:38:38 PM
------------------------
Roamer, as I read and reflect on the words of the 'usual suspects' (borrowing Paine);
" These are the paragraphs that Try Men's Souls".
According to them, Plato was a zero and Politics is the answer to all our prayers;
even though that phone line has been disconnected for about 1,000 years.
Your patience is a gift!!!

According to “Them”?

I believe Plato to be the foundation on which all of Western thought has been built...and to a lesser extent men like Aristotle, Heraclitus and Pythagoras. We ARE the children of Plato, the greatest thinker in the history of mankind. So be careful with that word “them” when applying it broadly to those disagreeing with you here. I do disagree with much that you say, but the foundational importance of Plato is something on which there can be no serious dispute. Quite frankly, Plato’s understanding of God makes the Bible look like a children’s cartoon book.

Frankly, this once promising thread has turned personal and non-productive. I’m done with it.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 02:02:51 PM
Right, but there WAS a plandemic. The same contingencies kick in, and are allowed by the precedent of the flood (or whatever)

What "same contingencies" are those, the same ones as the imaginary Weather Contingency you refused to provide citation for?

Quote
No, the legislature does. If there is precedent of the court acting as the agent of the legislature, that IS the legislature.

Only if the legislature...this is tricky...LEGISLATES the judicial review as part of the specific election law.

But I can see you're squirming something fierce, here.  You can't just admit that the Secretary of State is tasked SOLELY with enforcing the election laws established by the legislature, and cannot modify a single part of it, and that the courts cannot alter those laws either, even when it makes it easier for the Rodents to steal the election from the Evil Orange One.

Quote
If there is precedent of a wide berth given to State election committees by the legislature, then they are acting as agents of the legislature, making decisions the legislature had not predicted, then that IS the legislature.

No.

That means they have demonstrated a habit of violating the Constitution.

The Constitution is not real estate.  Nobody can sneak an easement in.

Quote
You lose. A lawyer would wear you right out, because the precedent or written contingency was there before the fact of this election.

I'm an engineer.    The lawyer will think he won and discover someone's put square wheels on his car.

The reality is that you have lost, because you're broken the strings on this particular harp.   You are admitting, over and over and over again, that the electors were chosen by means not authorized by the legislature, and thus not chosen by the requirements of the Constitution.

Thanks for the confession.  No need to sign it.

Quote
No they were not, by virtue of the state legislature signing cert. That is not a false elector.

It's a fraudulent elector.   What LAW did the legislature pass authorizing the unlawful revisions enacted by the courts and the executive branches?   You are aware that LAWS require a governor's signature on them, don't you?

There's no honest person who will argue that the "certification" is an ex-post facto authorization condoning prior unconstitutional acts.  Naturally Principled Conservatives (TM) argue this incessantly, when driven to the corner of their inherent dishonesty.

Quote
The legislature writes what it wants, according to the Constitution. To include exceptions to the rule. The argument is in the state, not the Constitution.

Oh.

According to the Constitution, each state shall have a republican form of government, which requires that the laws of the state be enacted by the governor's signature.

There are no exceptions to the rule that the state legislatures have sole authority on how the electors shall be selected.   Those rules were violated.   Hence the electors so chosen are false electors.

What you're arguing is that when two baseball teams go out to play, they have an agreed set of rules, and then during the play, one team decides to change the rules so that they score one and a half runs for each of their players who makes it to Home, but the other team still only gets one.   Then the final score is 7.5 to 6.   YEA!  The Rodent Team won!!!

Then after the game the MLB certifies the score and the rules change becomes permanent.  Hooray!!!  The Rodents never lose again, not ever!   

Hey, you Americans, stop your whining, you lost according to the rules.  What?  Who cares that the rules were changed in the middle of the game?   That doesn't matter.  What matters is that we won, you did not.  Orangeman Bad.   

That's your argument.

See any holes in it?  I bet the Americans see plenty.

Quote
I am in NW Montana 60 miles from Canada in the heart of the Rockies... with the griz and the wolf, and real actual sled dogs. Most every one of my wolf-malamutes have been trained to the sled. So yeah. Snow. More than you.

Oh.  Thought you were a Texas puke.  Montana might get a little snow once in a while.  No, not more than what I grew up with.   But nice try.   Have you managed to find the Weather Exception to the requirement that only state legislatures can determine how presidential electors are chosen?

I didn't think so.

Quote
That's the point. They are.

Naw. I got all the guns I need. and they ain't locked up, and they're all loaded. and there ain't nothing worth shooting up in these mountains that I ain't shot and ate.

The legislature writes what it wants. Since the constitution assigns elections solely to the state legislatures your argument is with the legislatures.

I have no argument with the legislatures, unless they mailed out a bazillion easily defraudable ballots as they did in the Rodent states.    So I can now assume you like stolen elections based on mail fraud felonies?

My argument is with the courts, who have no authority interfering federal elections, and the governors, whose chance to affect the rules ends with their signatures on the election law.  And, of course, with the Never Trumping Principled Conservative (TM) Orange Man Bad fools that like the results of this particular stolen election so they can brag about how they value their liberty and other equally harmful and stupid things to say.

Quote
The Constitution assigns the thing solely to the legislatures. They can do whatever they want. With the Constitution's blessing.

That is the bare fact. And whatever the legislature has written over the years to allow for contingencies is all an act of the legislature, just as much as the normal electoral law. And every time precedent was set by the court and the legislature did not act to correct it, is also the legislature by way of passive acquiescence, because as the sole authority and therefore arbiter, that which they don't correct remains in precedence.

Yeah, that's not what happened here, and you know this.  What happend was that Trump was going to win the election, so...MONTHS before the election, the Secretaries of State and the state courts decided to hand down rulings doing all sorts of things that violated state election law.   

But you know all this.

Quote
That is not spitting on the Constitution.

That's why I used  (p) in that particular word.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 02:04:59 PM
According to “Them”?

I believe Plato to be the foundation on which all of Western thought has been built...and to a lesser extent men like Aristotle, Heraclitus and Pythagoras. We ARE the children of Plato, the greatest thinker in the history of mankind. So be careful with that word “them” when applying it broadly to those disagreeing with you here. I do disagree with much that you say, but the foundational importance of Plato is something on which there can be no serious dispute. Quite frankly, Plato’s understanding of God makes the Bible look like a children’s cartoon book.

Frankly, this once promising thread has turned personal and non-productive. I’m done with it.

I never said Plato wasn't a leading founder of Western Civilization.   I said he was wrong in many things.   Our civilization moved away from the nightmare that is Plato's Republic, for example.   

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 02:45:37 PM
Well, no.  Citing the article of the Constitution that declare the state legislatures shall have sole authority on how the electors are selected and then pointing out that too many states defrauded the electors is not bullshit.

And if that legislature, who has sole authority according to the Constitution, ALLOWS the state administration by way of the elections board, a broadly defined ability to act in their stead, WHAT THEN? That is the legislatures prerogative. They have sole authority, and can do what they want. At that point, the elections board, granted the authority to make decisions wherein the legislature could not predict, then the Administration iis acting at that point as the agent of the legislature - Entirely legal, because the legislature says so.

Quote
What is bullshit is your refusal to accept that fact for what it it, a fact.

No it is not. If that were true, ONLY the legislature could man the voting precincts. In ALL cases, they have granted oversight of the election to the administration. That right there is not ONLY the legislature. So EVERY state is outside of their Constitutional mandate.

But no... That's just the bullsh*t you want me to believe. The Legislature has already lent their authority to the administration in the bare form of oversight - True on its face. Now what we are arguing is the increment of authority granted therein, whether it is broadly or narrowly written.

Quote
And that the electors were selected by means not established by the state legislatures is an established fact and proven in the record.    All the way along.

No, it has not been proven. Is there precedent? I don't know. and neither do you. If the state board is operating using a preexisting exception or precedent in state law is not determined and damn important.

Quote
and actually like Cheetos

Puffs, slightly stale.

Quote
so we normal people are willing to be honest and state openly that the election was stolen.

So then I am normal people. I think it was stolen. I just don't think you can prove it.

Quote
Where we part ways is the Constitution.

You don't like that the Constitution says Orangeman Won The Election.

Because Orangeman tweets mean things.

Or something.  I don't really care why you deny the election was stolen, the simple fact that you deny reality is sufficient.

Mindreading, and damn poor at it. I was behind ol Tumpy in this... except that none of it means anything without actionable proof.

Quote
The electors were fraudulent because they were selected by unconstitutional means.

We already know the elections themselves were fraudulent, and we know it for the most obvious of reasons:  The Rodents don't want the audit to happen.  If the election were as honest as they say, they'd happily insist the audit happen.

Nah. Means nothing. If I  am being sued I get damned obstructionist just on general principles... That is how the game is played. I would never expect them to roll over.

Quote
You TRUST the Rodents, at least so long as they kept the Evil Orange One from returning to his rightful place at the White House.    So long as the stolen election gave you the outcome you desired, an event perfectly in alignment with what Mitt Romney wanted, you're as happy as can be.   Now you're free to complain about all aspects of the Rodents except their habit of stealing elections and staging coups.

More senseless mind reading. I don't TRUST any of em, right or left. And I didn't vote for Romulus... You did. Remember?

And I care not a whit about your complaining about the Democrats. Knock yourself out. Don't care.
What is nonsensical is all your tub-thumping with absolutely no actionable proof.

Quote
We already have the evidence that the electors were false.    Read the Constitution.  It's not difficult to find on-line.

Here, if you're having difficulty finding a copy of the Constitution, and you're clearly confused about what it says, try constitutionus.com

Don't need to. I have one right here in my pocket.

Quote
I don't recall asking for audits.

And the audits will only show what I and every other real American, the conservatives with real principles, already knows what happened.  That the Rodents cheat.    It's not like this is the first election they've stolen, you known.

Americans notice things like that.

...and do nothing but bitch and moan because they have no actionable proof. What do you do about it without actionable proof? You can't even justify your rabble rousing since without actionable proof, in the shade of the next time, it don't matter how many people you get to vote, because if you are right in this, they will steal it again regardless.

Quote
Princpled Conservatives (TM) do not.   Unless Mittens loses an election.  Then I'm sure they get excited.

Again, YOU voted for Romulus. Remember? I did not.

Quote
No.  It's necessary to point out, everyday and forever, that the Rodents stole the election of 2020. 

Unlike Hester Prynne, the Rodents cannot make anything positive come from being compelled to wear the scarlet letter of "C".   

Cheaters aren't admired by Americans.

All to no avail. A waste of time and energy without being able to DO something about it.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 08, 2021, 02:59:17 PM
Frankly, this once promising thread has turned personal and non-productive. I’m done with it.

That's right. I am done with it too.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 08, 2021, 03:02:39 PM
ONLY the legislature could man the voting precincts. In ALL cases, they have granted oversight of the election to the administration. That right there is not ONLY the legislature. So EVERY state is outside of their Constitutional mandate.

What the hell are you talking about?  What oversight was the administration granted?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 03:08:51 PM
And if that legislature, who has sole authority according to the Constitution, ALLOWS the state administration by way of the elections board, a broadly defined ability to act in their stead, WHAT THEN? That is the legislatures prerogative. They have sole authority, and can do what they want. At that point, the elections board, granted the authority to make decisions wherein the legislature could not predict, then the Administration iis acting at that point as the agent of the legislature - Entirely legal, because the legislature says so.

If the state legislature "allows" an exception to the rules, the Rodents don't have to go judge-shopping to find a judge to buy off on the steal.  Do describe the Special Chinese Bioterrorism Pandemic the state legislatures included in their constitutionally valid laws.   If the exceptions were part of the law, then the courts wouldn't have gotten involved.

Do you know how the laws work in the US?

Just askin'.   

Quote
No it is not. If that were true, ONLY the legislature could man the voting precincts. In ALL cases, they have granted oversight of the election to the administration. That right there is not ONLY the legislature. So EVERY state is outside of their Constitutional mandate.

?

Seriously?  You're presenting this as a rebuttal?

Quote
But no... That's just the bullsh*t you want me to believe. The Legislature has already lent their authority to the administration in the bare form of oversight - True on its face. Now what we are arguing is the increment of authority granted therein, whether it is broadly or narrowly written.

No, they haven't.

Quote
No, it has not been proven. Is there precedent? I don't know. and neither do you. If the state board is operating using a preexisting exception or precedent in state law is not determined and damn important.

We're back to this. 

Good.

Yes, it's been proven.


Quote
So then I am normal people. I think it was stolen. I just don't think you can prove it.

You don't think it was stolen.   If you thought it was stolen, your emotions and energy would be directed towards defeating the Theft.   Clearly your energies are being used to prevent the public acceptance of this fact.

It's already been proven.   It's in the Constitution.   You can find it on-line.

Quote
Mindreading, and damn poor at it. I was behind ol Tumpy in this... except that none of it means anything without actionable proof.

Except there is proof.

It's in the Constitution.  You can find it on-line.

Quote
Nah. Means nothing. If I  am being sued I get damned obstructionist just on general principles... That is how the game is played. I would never expect them to roll over.

You mean rolling over as in "i believe the election was stolen but I'm going to object vociferously to every effort to make that fact part of the common knowledge" kind of rolling over?

Anyone in American honestly believe the Rodents are objecting to the audits because the elections results are pure and untainted?

Anyone here who remembers how the Rodents desperately tried to steal Floriduh in 2000 want to state the Rodents aren't Election Bandits of the worst caliber?

Quote
More senseless mind reading. I don't TRUST any of em, right or left. And I didn't vote for Romulus... You did. Remember?

You're still trying to straddle a fence that long ago replaced it's splintery wood with high quality 440C steel razor blades, edge up.

Quote
And I care not a whit about your complaining about the Democrats. Knock yourself out. Don't care.
What is nonsensical is all your tub-thumping with absolutely no actionable proof.

Additional proof not required.

Once a theorem has been established, additional proof are curiosities, not necessities.   There are dozens of proofs of the Pythagorean Theorem.   Only one was required.   You can prove trigonometric identities with more trig, or, if you're a masochist, you can dig out the McClauren series and have fun with that.

Quote
Don't need to. I have one right here in my pocket.

...and do nothing but bitch and moan because they have no actionable proof. What do you do about it without actionable proof? You can't even justify your rabble rousing since without actionable proof, in the shade of the next time, it don't matter how many people you get to vote, because if you are right in this, they will steal it again regardless.

Again, YOU voted for Romulus. Remember? I did not.

No.  I didn't know Star Trek was on the ballot.

Sure are a lot of Klingons around the seventh planet, though.   

Quote
All to no avail. A waste of time and energy without being able to DO something about it.

John 8:32
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 08, 2021, 03:14:12 PM

My argument is with the courts, who have no authority interfering federal elections,

You're (still) wrong.  If states violate the 14th Amendment Equal Protections Clause and/or Article 2, Section I, Clause 2 of the US Constitution, Federal court is precisely where ths issue(s) belong.  And since it's a State v State issue the US Supreme Court is the Court of original jurisdiction.  This is not "interfering", this is a Constitutionally mandaded judicial obligation.

No matter how many years and how strongly you state otherwise, you are and will remain dead wrong.



Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 08, 2021, 03:16:06 PM
That's right. I am done with it too.

Thank you, Jesus.   :0001:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: libertybele on June 08, 2021, 03:33:55 PM
According to “Them”?

I believe Plato to be the foundation on which all of Western thought has been built...and to a lesser extent men like Aristotle, Heraclitus and Pythagoras. We ARE the children of Plato, the greatest thinker in the history of mankind. So be careful with that word “them” when applying it broadly to those disagreeing with you here. I do disagree with much that you say, but the foundational importance of Plato is something on which there can be no serious dispute. Quite frankly, Plato’s understanding of God makes the Bible look like a children’s cartoon book.

Frankly, this once promising thread has turned personal and non-productive. I’m done with it.

 :amen:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 03:38:45 PM
You're (still) wrong.  If states violate the 14th Amendment Equal Protections Clause and/or Article 2, Section I, Clause 2 of the US Constitution, Federal court is precisely where ths issue(s) belong.  And since it's a State v State issue the US Supreme Court is the Court of original jurisdiction.  This is not "interfering", this is a Constitutionally mandaded judicial obligation.

No matter how many years and how strongly you state otherwise, you are and will remain dead wrong.

No, I'm not wrong about that because I didn't bother to list all the caveats and emptors and other legal thingies in a polite conversation.

I'm also fully aware of how the Supreme Court used lies about the Fourth Amendment to justify violating the Fifth Amendment and thus fifty million babies have been slaughtered for profit in the last five decades.

If some state said that (b)lacks weren't allowed to vote, then yes, the Equal Protection Clause applies.

If some judge, elected or otherwise, violates state election law by ordering the polls to remain open because some (b)lacks in the inner cities like voting so much they like to do it often and thus the lines are too long, that's not a valid application of the Equal Protection Clause.

The courts were ordering that mail-in ballots be counted, even though they were received after the legislated deadline, ordered ballots accepted without valid signature, rejected signature validation, etc. 

Valid exceptions on the strength of later Amendments to the Constitution are not what was used to violate the election.

We all know this.

But Orangeman Bad, bring in ALL the arguments, no matter how flawed, to shut down the discussion on how the election was stolen.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Absalom on June 08, 2021, 05:29:51 PM
According to “Them”?
I believe Plato to be the foundation on which all of Western thought has been built...and to a lesser extent men like Aristotle, Heraclitus and Pythagoras. We ARE the children of Plato, the greatest thinker in the history of mankind. So be careful with that word “them” when applying it broadly to those disagreeing with you here. I do disagree with much that you say, but the foundational importance of Plato is something on which there can be no serious dispute. Quite frankly, Plato’s understanding of God makes the Bible look like a children’s cartoon book.
Frankly, this once promising thread has turned personal and non-productive. I’m done with it.
--------------------------------
Mesaclone,
My core issue w/many posts/posters is their fundamental lack of seriousness when
discussing individuals/matters involving Plato, Natural Law, Human Nature, Creation,
Logic & Reason, enduring Principles and the like.
Some are lost while others are just clowning around to get attention but you were
never the object of any such criticism or scorn from me.
More importantly, whether we agree or disagree, this is an opinion forum and you are
certainly entitled to yours.

 
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 08, 2021, 05:41:37 PM
The rational is that only a court can decide guilt or innocence, therefore you can murder all the people you want, if the murders never come before a court, you are then innocent.  This is the thinking of the reprobate, no guilt conscience.  Odd how Conservatives are based on morality, this character denied morality out side of a court room.  Ted Bundy believed in whatever he could get away with too.  Laughing at America's doom is another big clue being ignored.  Has like minded people found this a haven ?  It would explain a lot.  The New Conservative, Putin or Xi ?  Don't be so sure it ain't.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 08, 2021, 05:53:07 PM
roamer1:
I will not help it along with that. Not either side of it. Big.gov can go hang, be it from the Democrats or the Republicans. My liberty will not be made a compromise.

christian:
NeverTrumpers working with RINOs and democrats to overthrow an election has nothing to do with them ?
 :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:
Cowboy comedian ! with denials thrown in too!
You march their march, talk their talk, join them to defeat Trump, but you have no part in it?  Drivers in getaway cars used to deny their were part of it,to their surprise they were part of it and went to prison with the rest.  Your con-job is wearing thin, and is wearing out.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: corbe on June 08, 2021, 05:54:39 PM
    Wait yall, I haven't even started yet.  Don't leave.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 08, 2021, 06:20:39 PM
No, I'm not wrong about that because I didn't bother to list all the caveats and emptors and other legal thingies in a polite conversation.

Your assertion that the federal court has no role in a federal election is wrong.  Sorry, it's just wrong.

If some judge, elected or otherwise, violates state election law by ordering the polls to remain open because some (b)lacks in the inner cities like voting so much they like to do it often and thus the lines are too long, that's not a valid application of the Equal Protection Clause.

It is a potential violation of both the Electors Clause giving the state legislature sole control of the election for presidential electors,  as well as the Equal Protection Amendment for citizens in all states guaranteeing uniform application of the Electors' Clause.  Just because no state legislature has ever challenged this doesn't mean they could not have.

The courts were ordering that mail-in ballots be counted, even though they were received after the legislated deadline, ordered ballots accepted without valid signature, rejected signature validation, etc. 

And these actions were part of the suit brought by the State of Texas (and 18 cosigner states) against four defendant states.  The suit requested a ruling from the court of original jurisdiction on a potential violation of the Electors' Clause and the 14th Amendment of the United States. 

Valid exceptions on the strength of later Amendments to the Constitution are not what was used to violate the election.

Not necessarily true.  If the defendant states did violate the Electors' Clause rendering their electors invalid, then the right of every US citizen to an accurate application of the Electors' Clause guaranteed through the 14th Amendment was trampled.  A reasonable remedy for both violations would have been to invalidate the certified electors of the four defendant states and return the selection to the state legislatures for a review, debate and new vote.
.
We all know this.

We should.





Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 08, 2021, 06:46:36 PM
Your assertion that the federal court has no role in a federal election is wrong.  Sorry, it's just wrong.

Your ability to say I said what I didn't say is just astounding.  Sorry, it's just astounding.

You guys really can't hold up your end of the argument on reason and facts, can you?  Resorting to strawmen, resorting to arguments from authority.   Wow.

Quote
It is a potential violation of both the Electors Clause giving the state legislature sole control of the election for presidential electors,  as well as the Equal Protection Amendment for citizens in all states guaranteeing uniform application of the Electors' Clause.  Just because no state legislature has ever challenged this doesn't mean they could not have.

And as the judge said about "election fraud", "we all know it when we see it".   Except he didn't use the word "election fraud", but I did.

We all know when a judge is raping the Constitution.  Some do it to murder babies, others do it to steal elections.  But it's always obvious when it's being done for a political purpose rather than for a liberty-enhancing Constitutional protection.

The judges that ordered the fraudulent ballots to be counted, that ordered the polls to remain open, they weren't doing it for election integrity, they were doing it for a purpose you approved of, to steal the election from the American people.  ANYTHING to keep the Ebil Orange Man out of the White House.

How terrifying it must be for people to be so afraid of an Orangeman they instead vote in a senile plagiarist who came from Syracuse University, himself an Orangeman.

I'm surprised the Rodents still allow orange pumpkins to be sold in Octobers.    I guess the alternative, the albino pumpkins from Trader Joe's, was much to privileged to be considered.

Quote
And these actions were part of the suit brought by the State of Texas (and 18 cosigner states) against four defendant states.  The suit requested a ruling from the court of original jurisdiction on a potential violation of the Electors' Clause and the 14th Amendment of the United States. 

Oh, I'm not even talking about those actions.   Clearly since the states of WI, PA, AZ, GA, MI were busy defrauding the entire United States, Texas and every other state who wasn't engaged in the most massive vote fraud operation in history had standing to sue.   But the people who pretend to accept the violation of the Constitution by the judicial interference in the states' selection of electors are equally and strangely just as happy that the courts whose job it is to adjudicate inter-state disputes refused to even look at the evidence, simply falsely claiming those states had no standing.

Then they sit around and wonder how the Court has gotten away with the murder of fifty million Americans over the last half-century.   Because the Court isn't using the Constitution as it's anchor.

What ever happened to the idea that words mean things?

Quote
Not necessarily true.  If the defendant states did violate the Electors' Clause rendering their electors invalid, then the right of every US citizen to an accurate application of the Electors' Clause guaranteed through the 14th Amendment was trampled.  A reasonable remedy for both violations would have been to invalidate the certified electors of the four defendant states and return the selection to the state legislatures for a review, debate and new vote.

Yes, it was trampled.

The REASONABLE remedy for false electors is to dismiss the false electors, if the Constitution itself is deemed the source of "reasonableness" in the functioning of the federal government.  And if enough false electors are dismissed to prevent any candidate from achieving the required majority of electors, then the electoral process is shifted to a state-by-state vote in the House.

It's not "reasonable" to demand a new vote between election day and the day the Electors submit their ballots to the Congress.

As everyone else has been saying, the election was stolen.  Even Joe Biden, Senile, admitted the Rodents were running the most massive vote fraud operation in history.

Quote
We should.

I do.

The Americans do.

Never Trumper Principled Consertive (TM) Orange-o-phobiacs do not.  Or rather, refuse to .
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 08, 2021, 08:46:34 PM
roamer2:
like I said, I did not and do not have a dog in  this hunt.

christian:
That joke is old and stale, as you walk hand in hand lockstepping with the democrats, still advancing the cause of the last election being stolen.  Persuasive?  NOT!  DENYING EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING, clever?  by half.  First Czarist cowboy i ever met!  I'll pass on your magic elixirs medicine show!  Too much toxic Putin like elixir for me to drink.  How is it for skin?
@christian

@roamer-1

You are wasting your time. His mind is made up and reason and logic are not going to change it. He is emotional,not rational.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 08, 2021, 08:48:38 PM
roamer2:
like I said, I did not and do not have a dog in  this hunt.

christian:
That joke is old and stale, as you walk hand in hand lockstepping with the democrats, still advancing the cause of the last election being stolen.  Persuasive?  NOT!  DENYING EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING, clever?  by half.  First Czarist cowboy i ever met!  I'll pass on your magic elixirs medicine show!  Too much toxic Putin like elixir for me to drink.  How is it for skin?

@christian

BTW,it won't make any real difference,but you should address him as roamer-1.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: DB on June 08, 2021, 10:30:22 PM
@christian

@roamer-1

You are wasting your time. His mind is made up and reason and logic are not going to change it. He is emotional,not rational.

Actually it is very rational. You vote for the lesser evil and then wonder why you got evil. It isn't that hard. Until enough people have the courage to not vote for the lesser evil giving in to their fear nothing will change. That lesser evil doesn't have to perform any better because they already own your vote. That should be obvious by just by reviewing the last 30 years of voting for the lesser evil and what you got in return.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 08, 2021, 10:37:10 PM
Actually it is very rational. 

@DB

Maybe to us it is,but not to him. There comes a time when you just have to stop beating your head against the door and accept the FACT that some people will just never change their minds about anything.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 08, 2021, 10:47:06 PM
Actually it is very rational. You vote for the lesser evil and then wonder why you got evil. It isn't that hard. Until enough people have the courage to not vote for the lesser evil giving in to their fear nothing will change. That lesser evil doesn't have to perform any better because they already own your vote. That should be obvious by just by reviewing the last 30 years of voting for the lesser evil and what you got in return.
I was 95% happy with the policies promoted by the last president but you didn’t like him either.

Obviously we want different things
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 08, 2021, 10:50:21 PM
I was 95% happy with the policies promoted by the last president but you didn’t like him either.

Obviously we want different things

@skeeter

That HAD to have posted to DB,because I consider Trump to have been the best US President in my lifetime. Even better than Reagan.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 08, 2021, 11:05:18 PM
@skeeter

That HAD to have posted to DB,because I consider Trump to have been the best US President in my lifetime. Even better than Reagan.
It was. All matters of style aside, Trump did almost everything I would want a president to do, given the limitations of his office.

I don’t know what all this ‘lesser of evils’ talk is about. I voted FOR DJT every bit as much as I voted against the Big Guy Mr 10%.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 08, 2021, 11:17:43 PM
It was. All matters of style aside, Trump did almost everything I would want a president to do, given the limitations of his office.

@skeeter

I agree. Personally,I wouldn't let him in my house if he knocked on the door and asked for a drink of water. I'd make him wait on the porch and give him one and tell him to leave.

Then again,I don't vote for politicians because I am looking for a new best friend. I want elected officials who are dedicated to once again making America a free country based on Constitutional laws,not a paradise for parasites who hate freedom.

Quote
I don’t know what all this ‘lesser of evils’ talk is about. I voted FOR DJT every bit as much as I voted against the Big Guy Mr 10%.


Same here,and we are not alone. I see people every day that are STILL flying "Trump!" flags,and just saw a SUV today that had "TRUMP!" painted in big red letters across the rear window.

I don't remember EVER seeing such things after any other politician loses (allegedly) an election,do you?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 08, 2021, 11:26:46 PM

Same here,and we are not alone. I see people every day that are STILL flying "Trump!" flags,and just saw a SUV today that had "TRUMP!" painted in big red letters across the rear window.

I don't remember EVER seeing such things after any other politician loses (allegedly) an election,do you?
Never. Last week I saw a guy flying a big trump flag from his truck here in Capitola CA. Almost ground zero for batshit leftism.

Of course the bah humbug types will scoff at that, but if turning things around is what they want the then rather than insult that kind of loyalty they really should try to figger out how a guy like Trump has earned it.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: DB on June 08, 2021, 11:53:37 PM
Never. Last week I saw a guy flying a big trump flag from his truck here in Capitola CA. Almost ground zero for batshit leftism.

Of course the bah humbug types will scoff at that, but if turning things around is what they want the then rather than insult that kind of loyalty they really should try to figger out how a guy like Trump has earned it.

Hey, just for the record, I love it when people fly the Trump flag in places like CA. Driving leftist crazy is good sport.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 02:13:47 AM
@christian

@roamer-1

You are wasting your time. His mind is made up and reason and logic are not going to change it. He is emotional,not rational.

Quite the other way around @sneakypete
I am merit based, and judge by performance. Emotion has little to do with it.

Open your hand and look what's in it from Tumpy's administration. Nothing. Nothing but a fist full of unicorn dreams. It's all gone like a fart in a windstorm. And it only cost you twenty trillion bucks.

But you feeel good about it, so you'll vote for him again.
That would be emotional.

Should I entertain a vote for a guy that got nothing done and cost double Obama's first term?

Oh hell no. And that is as reasonable and rational as it gets.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 09, 2021, 02:19:11 AM
Quite the other way around @sneakypete
I am merit based, and judge by performance. Emotion has little to do with it.

Open your hand and look what's in it from Tumpy's administration. Nothing. Nothing but a fist full of unicorn dreams. It's all gone like a fart in a windstorm. And it only cost you twenty trillion bucks.

But you feeel good about it, so you'll vote for him again.
That would be emotional.

Quote
Should I entertain a vote for a guy that got nothing done and cost double Obama's first term?

Oh hell no. And that is as reasonable and rational as it gets.
[/b]


@roamer_1

What an odd way to define delusional.

Here I was thinking Trump had been a president,not a dictator.

Foolish me,huh?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 03:11:33 AM
What an odd way to define delusional.

Here I was thinking Trump had been a president,not a dictator.

Foolish me,huh?

@sneakypete
Yeah... Foolish you.  :laugh:
Every other president there has ever been is judged by what he got done in his administration - Tumpy is no different.

That's what governing by Executive Order (ahem, dictator) is such a bad thing. It is almost always extremely temporary. Soon enough it is all gone.

If anything is going to actually get fixed, it necessarily gets fixed by law. Unfortunately all the law passed in Tumpy's term is largely liberal. Now, after the smoke is cleared, what we get to keep from Tumpy turns out to be all that liberal law. He moved the ball LEFT...

Being satisfied with nothing in your hand (at the cost of $20T) seems to be unprofitable.
Again, a merit based judgement would think that a very bad result.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 09, 2021, 03:55:58 AM
@sneakypete
Yeah... Foolish you.  :laugh:
Every other president there has ever been is judged by what he got done in his administration - Tumpy is no different.

It
Quote
That's what governing by Executive Order (ahem, dictator) is such a bad thing.

@roamer_1

Ahhhh,I see your problem with him now. You are pissed he didn't allow the DNC to be his co-President!
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 08:45:24 AM

Ahhhh,I see your problem with him now. You are pissed he didn't allow the DNC to be his co-President!

@sneakypete
It's been a primary problem with him all the way along. Predictably, every executive order was short lived - Candy thrown by the clown at the front of the parade - As for the DNC, they got all they wanted, written in law, and all that is still here.

Keep being satisfied with horrendously expensive administrations that do little or nothing in real terms. I realize it is the traditional sort of Republican administration, but if you mean to stop the Liberals, you'll have to set your standards a helluva lot higher.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 09, 2021, 09:11:42 AM
@sneakypete
It's been a primary problem with him all the way along. Predictably, every executive order was short lived - Candy thrown by the clown at the front of the parade - As for the DNC, they got all they wanted, written in law, and all that is still here.

Keep being satisfied with horrendously expensive administrations that do little or nothing in real terms. I realize it is the traditional sort of Republican administration, but if you mean to stop the Liberals, you'll have to set your standards a helluva lot higher.

@roamer_1

Who fits your "lofty" standards?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 09, 2021, 09:31:41 AM
Hey, just for the record, I love it when people fly the Trump flag in places like CA. Driving leftist crazy is good sport.

Yes. It was worth following him for a few blocks to catch the expressions.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 09, 2021, 10:45:06 AM
@sneakypete
It's been a primary problem with him all the way along. Predictably, every executive order was short lived - Candy thrown by the clown at the front of the parade - As for the DNC, they got all they wanted, written in law, and all that is still here.

Keep being satisfied with horrendously expensive administrations that do little or nothing in real terms. I realize it is the traditional sort of Republican administration, but if you mean to stop the Liberals, you'll have to set your standards a helluva lot higher.

@roamer_1

Alright...one last post in the thread and THEN I'm out.

Your premise is wrong. Had it been President Desantis or President Cruz...or President Hawley or President Cotton. They, like Trump, would have had only one viable political avenue for change open to them...Executive Order. In the past....say the 80's and 90's...maybe it WAS possible to push conservative legislation through with some Dem support. In TODAY's political environment, this was not an option for President Trump...nor would it have been for anyone else in his shoes. President Trump pushed...beyond...the limits of what was politically achievable. WAY beyond...I honestly can't think of any other conservative who could have achieved as much for conservatism in the White House. And yes, much of it was via EO and can be reversed...but an EO was the ONLY POSSIBLE OPTION in nearly every case in which he used it. It wasn't EO or legislation...it was EO or nothing. No wall construction etcetera unless the EO was used and that principle applies to a host of other issues from 2017-2021. Period.

Ironically, he could have gotten more legislation passed had he been more willing to go full compromise with Dem Left and give them much of what they wanted...but then you'd have called him a traitor to conservatism and a Big city liberal (which you do anyway so I guess no loss for him on your account).  And you know what, I'd have agreed with you. But that's not what happened. So, given that President Trump had no power to get MORE conservative legislation...and that you absolutely would have opposed him doing a great "compromise" with the Left to get legislation...what the hell other course was open to him as President other than EO's.

Our next GOP President, be it Trump or Desantis or Hawley or Cotton...will face the same dilemma. Folks like you, roamer, will be breathing down his neck to move the conservative agenda forward NOW....and yet President's have no power to do so in THIS political climate without a 60 vote majority in the Senate. So this next President will have a choice of; Use EO's to achieve what can be achieved knowing that's an impermanent solution, Compromise with Left to get legislation that will be anything but genuinely conservative, or go full dictator.  That's it. The days of "Reagan charming and bullying his way to get conservative legislation" passed are gone...that is not achievable in this environment.

My point is this. You've set a standard for President Trump that no other Republican could ever meet...no one short of Jesus Christ could get done what you want done. I'm all for getting conservative issues addressed and legislated....but damn...President's are not magicians. They can only do what CAN be done. What you seem to want is the old Roman trick of electing a dictator for one year who simply reforms and shapes all legislation to conservative perfection (see Cincinnatus)...and then peacefully steps down. That's not a reasonable or even rational standard in today's political environment.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 09, 2021, 11:13:24 AM
@Mesaclone

A good summation of the lose-lose scenario.  With the Rats in perfect lockstep today, there is no way to pass conservative legislation without watering it down so any laws passed will be worthless.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 09, 2021, 11:14:58 AM
Excellent response @Mesaclone. I’m sure you know the stock response to your very rational reply will be along the lines of ‘well if trump had been a statesman he could’ve overcome those obstacles with leadership skills’. In spite of the obvious fact leadership skills, even of the executive, count for nothing where members of both parties as well as the entire bureaucracy itself are busy grabbing with both hands. As if the corrupt can be swayed by patriotic appeals.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 09, 2021, 11:45:19 AM
Excellent response @Mesaclone. I’m sure you know the stock response to your very rational reply will be along the lines of ‘well if trump had been a statesman he could’ve overcome those obstacles with leadership skills’. In spite of the obvious fact leadership skills, even of the executive, count for nothing where members of both parties as well as the entire bureaucracy itself are busy grabbing with both hands. As if the corrupt can be swayed by patriotic appeals.

Seasoned with repeated mocking of Trump's name.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 09, 2021, 11:53:53 AM
Seasoned with repeated mocking of Trump's name.
which is always a persuasive gimmick.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Mesaclone on June 09, 2021, 12:05:18 PM
@Mesaclone

A good summation of the lose-lose scenario.  With the Rats in perfect lockstep today, there is no way to pass conservative legislation without watering it down so any laws passed will be worthless.

Which makes EO's the only viable option for a conservative leader if they hope to in any way advance conservatism. It is a dysfunctional way to govern, and apt to use by liberals in similar fashion....but there is no practical alternative. We have to realize that this fight is becoming about more than just filibusters and legislation...we've entered a cultural battle that is a true historical Turning Point. We will either go Left or Right...this middle course cannot endure. There are a LOT of parallels to the late Roman Republic that I won't get into...but any good conservative should read their Cicero and Plutarch. We are heading for an explosive political endpoint and as conservatives we'd better be ready or we'll be waltzing into a  Russia 1917 scenario.

For the record. I see roamer_1 as our very own Cato. Moral. Obstinate. Correct. But impractical and prone to tilting at windmills. God bless has obstinacy and vision but we are in a bitter fight that requires more than rigidity...we must tactically sound and capable of longer term strategic choices. Not compromise...wisdom.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 09, 2021, 12:15:41 PM
https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/1401368652650319872

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 09, 2021, 12:17:49 PM
Add RSBN's Youtube, Rumble and Facebook audiences and more than 2.5 million watched President Trump's keynote speech at the NC GOP Convention on Sat, Jun 5   ---   No wonder the socialists are throwing Obama back in front of the cameras.   888blackhat

https://twitter.com/newsmax/status/1402606466222026763


https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1401331545575669766

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 09, 2021, 12:34:10 PM
roamer1:
Yeah, bullcrap. Just because I deny your idiot prince does not mean I am hand in hand with democrats - I deny their idiot prince too, and everything they do, even more than Republicans. A pox on both your houses!

christian:
Wow, for all the endless times of NeverTrumping, to his great detriment, it's just amazing how many times you have NEVERBIDEN-ED.  AS YOU POSTURE EQUAL TREATMENT, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU DEMONIZED AND NEVERBIDEN-ED HERE ? DON'T BE SHY AND BASHFUL NOW, YOU HAVEN'T BEEN SHY AND BASHFUL BASHING TRUMP, YAH, KNOW.
eH?  ROAMER ?
nUMBER PLEASE ?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 09, 2021, 12:40:45 PM
Self-labeled "conservatives" always spend much more time training their weapons on Republicans than they do the much worse Democrats.  It's how the world works.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 09, 2021, 01:02:02 PM
Add RSBN's Youtube, Rumble and Facebook audiences and more than 2.5 million watched President Trump's keynote speech at the NC GOP Convention on Sat, Jun 5   ---   No wonder the socialists are throwing Obama back in front of the cameras.   888blackhat

https://twitter.com/newsmax/status/1402606466222026763


https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1401331545575669766
Not too shabby considering no one else, not even Fox, carried the speech.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 03:21:51 PM
@roamer_1

Who fits your "lofty" standards?

@sneakypete
Well I was ready to vote for Cruz a while back... Last election I had no choice.
As for who else, I don't know who is running yet. And until someone is running, I do not do vetting beyond an occasional ACU rating, or some such...

Not that it matters  - It is not only the president where standards are required - It is the whole damn show. Anyone you put in the presidency is going to be ineffective so long as there are more RINOs than Conservatives in congress.

So a mindset toward Conservative orthodoxy needs to be applied across the board.

No prince will do what you think Tumpy can do. No single man ever will.
And you don't go to war with the army you have, unless you have built an army capable of going to war.

It is a whole-house problem; and requires a whole-house solution.

And that solution is a return to Conservative orthodoxy. Conservatism as it touches politics is an agreement between factions to support each other, providing that each of the faction's immovable principles are being defended. If you want to win elections AND win effectively at passing laws that steer this country right-ward, that agreement needs to be attended.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 04:11:58 PM
Actually it is very rational. You vote for the lesser evil and then wonder why you got evil. It isn't that hard. Until enough people have the courage to not vote for the lesser evil giving in to their fear nothing will change. That lesser evil doesn't have to perform any better because they already own your vote. That should be obvious by just by reviewing the last 30 years of voting for the lesser evil and what you got in return.

So you'd rather not vote at all so you can be surprised that the most evil of the candidates is now controlling the food ration card you didn't know existed before you didn't vote.

That's how it works in the real world, without the pithy but empty aphorisms.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 04:16:10 PM


@roamer_1

Ahhhh,I see your problem with him now. You are pissed he didn't allow the DNC to be his co-President!

Did you ever notice that he's NOT pissed that the RINOs in House and Senate did everything they could to help the Rodents impede The Best President Ever and hurt the US?

He's from a state that elected Trump but put a Rodent in the US Senate the next election.   Makes one wonder...
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 04:23:17 PM
@Mesaclone

A good summation of the lose-lose scenario.  With the Rats in perfect lockstep today, there is no way to pass conservative legislation without watering it down so any laws passed will be worthless.

But it's "Trump's Fault" when nothing gets done.

And all the normals have noticed that "bipartisanship" is only a good thing when it gives Rodent Presidents and Usurpers more control over Americans and makes America less safe.   No calls for "bipartisanship" came from the media during the Trump Administration except to encourage s(p)its like Romney to vote for fake impeachments.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 04:24:24 PM
Excellent response @Mesaclone. I’m sure you know the stock response to your very rational reply will be along the lines of ‘well if trump had been a statesman he could’ve overcome those obstacles with leadership skills’. In spite of the obvious fact leadership skills, even of the executive, count for nothing where members of both parties as well as the entire bureaucracy itself are busy grabbing with both hands. As if the corrupt can be swayed by patriotic appeals.

I have on good authority, found in this very thread, that Statesmen don't do mere politics.  Politics is EBIL!
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 04:25:42 PM
Which makes EO's the only viable option for a conservative leader if they hope to in any way advance conservatism. It is a dysfunctional way to govern, and apt to use by liberals in similar fashion....but there is no practical alternative. We have to realize that this fight is becoming about more than just filibusters and legislation...we've entered a cultural battle that is a true historical Turning Point. We will either go Left or Right...this middle course cannot endure. There are a LOT of parallels to the late Roman Republic that I won't get into...but any good conservative should read their Cicero and Plutarch. We are heading for an explosive political endpoint and as conservatives we'd better be ready or we'll be waltzing into a  Russia 1917 scenario.

For the record. I see roamer_1 as our very own Cato. Moral. Obstinate. Correct. But impractical and prone to tilting at windmills. God bless has obstinacy and vision but we are in a bitter fight that requires more than rigidity...we must tactically sound and capable of longer term strategic choices. Not compromise...wisdom.

Cato wasn't afraid to call a stolen election a stolen election.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 04:26:42 PM
@roamer_1

Alright...one last post in the thread and THEN I'm out.

As it turns out, my last reply to @sneakypete applies directly to your comments here too @Mesaclone
Pragmatism (populism) has wrought this. When you gather around princes rather than principles, this condition is what you get.

Quote
Your premise is wrong. Had it been President Desantis or President Cruz...or President Hawley or President Cotton. They, like Trump, would have had only one viable political avenue for change open to them...Executive Order. In the past....say the 80's and 90's...maybe it WAS possible to push conservative legislation through with some Dem support. In TODAY's political environment, this was not an option for President Trump...nor would it have been for anyone else in his shoes. President Trump pushed...beyond...the limits of what was politically achievable. WAY beyond...I honestly can't think of any other conservative who could have achieved as much for conservatism in the White House. And yes, much of it was via EO and can be reversed...but an EO was the ONLY POSSIBLE OPTION in nearly every case in which he used it. It wasn't EO or legislation...it was EO or nothing. No wall construction etcetera unless the EO was used and that principle applies to a host of other issues from 2017-2021. Period.

No, my premise is damn well right.
To begin, the buck stops at the top. The fault of the last four years inevitably must be laid at Tump's door. He donned the mantle. It is his responsibility to lead - And inherent in leading is being able to build coalitions and getting people to follow. Any businessman will tell you that 'my way or the highway' is a nuclear option. That is not how it is done day to day. To lead, people must be convinced to follow. One way or another, Tumpy did not get that done.

BUT, and this is a big hairy but, all y'all didn't give him a single chance in hell of getting that done, because all y'all have been pulling for the 'Big Rhinestone R', and in essence, any old 'R' will do, so long as it's not a Democrat. You have filled the state houses and Congress with RINOs that have an agenda opposed to Conservatism. In that, I recognize your primary argument that 'poor little Tumpy can't help it' - In effect, that is true. And that is your fault in the greater context, but he gets to take the blame for not being able to work with the damn little you gave him, as he said he could... All of the above already predicted by me, and other hard core Conservatives many, many times, in reams of the record here.

Can you hear me now?

Dammit, the answer is Conservative orthodoxy, not chasing after princes. Not populism. Congress matters more than the presidency, and state houses matter more than congress. You need bottom-up country wide, every conservative organization, outlet, and device, preaching Conservatism. Not partisanship, and certainly not princes.

It does not matter a single whit what the Democrats are doing if you cannot stop them. And it matters not a single whit how much you love your prince if he cannot govern. All of the above requires NOT the 'army you have', but rather, the army you build, one that is every bit in lockstep as the Democrats are. Ad the only answer to liberalism uncontained, is pure, raw, unwatered Conservatism, straight out of the ground, and in strength at every level of government. That is what the TEA party was doing. and that is what needs to be done.

You don't need a Tump orthodoxy (which is where you are going now), you need a Conservative orthodoxy. You don't need compromise to get democrat votes. You need orthodoxy to build Conservative votes.

This dyed in the wool die hard Conservative was in the TEA up to my neck. Why won't I give y'all the time of day? Because what you are doing will fail. By the numbers. You can't wag the dog. It already HAS FAILED.

Quote
Ironically, he could have gotten more legislation passed had he been more willing to go full compromise with Dem Left and give them much of what they wanted...but then you'd have called him a traitor to conservatism and a Big city liberal (which you do anyway so I guess no loss for him on your account). 

He already did that anyway. Every one of those megaporkulus bills were chock full of greasy liberal left wing treats. Go read em. Written as LAW, not EOs. They stay, and the EOs are mostly gone. That is exactly what your (y'all) strategy has wrought. And that is why, alongside his EO candy, his administration was aligned with big city liberals in LAW. What we get to keep went LEFT, man. And there is no way you can deny it.

So governing by EO, as predicted, is utterly useless - Worthless but for populist appeal. A fantasy full of unicorn reams... The reality is the stuff we get to keep. And that changed leftward, not to the right.

Quote
And you know what, I'd have agreed with you. But that's not what happened. So, given that President Trump had no power to get MORE conservative legislation...and that you absolutely would have opposed him doing a great "compromise" with the Left to get legislation...what the hell other course was open to him as President other than EO's.

That's the point. He could not do what he said he could. It was impossible from the get-go as Conservative stalwarts here saw plainly. That's the problem with putting all your chips on a prince. and that's where y'all need a change in direction... What you are doing is exactly what is wrong.

Quote
Our next GOP President, be it Trump or Desantis or Hawley or Cotton...will face the same dilemma. Folks like you, roamer, will be breathing down his neck to move the conservative agenda forward NOW....and yet President's have no power to do so in THIS political climate without a 60 vote majority in the Senate. So this next President will have a choice of; Use EO's to achieve what can be achieved knowing that's an impermanent solution, Compromise with Left to get legislation that will be anything but genuinely conservative, or go full dictator.  That's it. The days of "Reagan charming and bullying his way to get conservative legislation" passed are gone...that is not achievable in this environment.

Precisely so. WHY? Because them damn dirty Conservatives won't compromise their filthy principles(tm) so we can get things done, right?

When actually, it is the other way around. Y'all have to STOP compromising. Stop chasing after princes and trying to make Conservatism fit your cause. That ain't how it works. Raise the Conservative standard, not the Tumpian one. Make the Liberty Caucus a power to be reckoned with at the very least, and you need WAY more than what, maybe five real Conservative senators. Howabout twenty if you can't get fifty? That's the direction you need to be going in,

You don't get there kissing the ring. You get there raising the standard (in both meanings of the word)

Quote
My point is this. You've set a standard for President Trump that no other Republican could ever meet...no one short of Jesus Christ could get done what you want done. I'm all for getting conservative issues addressed and legislated....but damn...President's are not magicians. They can only do what CAN be done. What you seem to want is the old Roman trick of electing a dictator for one year who simply reforms and shapes all legislation to conservative perfection (see Cincinnatus)...and then peacefully steps down. That's not a reasonable or even rational standard in today's political environment.

No... Sadly, in effect, Cincinnatus is what you are doing. Or expecting, in assuming the only thing you can do is relying on your prince to exercise dictatorial powers by EO for his short season... While the band plays on. Pardon friend, but you are projecting.

I have not put such a standard on the president. That IS the standard of the Presidency. And you'll note the very same demand for excellence throughout, not just on the president. We need statesmen, not politicians. True believers, not compromises.

What army can beat a liberal orthodox army moving in lockstep? Only one thing: A Conservative orthodox army moving in lockstep...
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 04:31:28 PM
@sneakypete
Well I was ready to vote for Cruz a while back... Last election I had no choice.

You had the choice of voting for President Trump or for some hair-sniffing senile old Rodent pervert who was locked up in his basement.

You made your choice.   Pretending you didn't make a choice simply because you didn't have it in you to support the most pro-American candidate since Reagan doesn't mean you didn't have a choice.  It means you're ashamed that you didn't make a better choice than what you did.

But Biden's effort to steal the election was successful even without your vote.

One doesn't "return to conservatism" by doing nothing to stop the enemy.    Kinda like how the Jews were morally opposed to the National Socialists but couldn't bring themselves to getting guns until it was too late for that. 

Thanks for your help, pal.

Remember what happened to Quisling.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 04:34:37 PM
As it turns out, my last reply to @sneakypete applies directly to your comments here too @Mesaclone
Pragmatism (populism) has wrought this. When you gather around princes rather than principles, this condition is what you get.

No, my premise is damn well right.
To begin, the buck stops at the top. The fault of the last four years inevitably must be laid at Tump's door. He donned the mantle. It is his responsibility to lead - And inherent in leading is being able to build coalitions and getting people to follow. Any businessman will tell you that 'my way or the highway' is a nuclear option. That is not how it is done day to day. To lead, people must be convinced to follow. One way or another, Tumpy did not get that done.

Only if you accept the Rodent Truman's false characterization of how a major government functions.

A president can't sign bills that don't get to his desk.

And a president can't get the bills he wants on his desk if his own party is full of pretend Principled Conservatives (TM) who are most interested in stopping the President from accomplishing anything that could be termed a success for the next election cycle.

We know how you feel about mean tweets.  That's a really important index of success.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 04:43:39 PM
These people act as if a football team only had a quarterback or a baseball team only a pitcher, and the other members of the team share no blame when they lose the game.

How childish.

What a shallow understanding of the world.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 05:45:24 PM
You had the choice of voting for President Trump or for some hair-sniffing senile old Rodent pervert who was locked up in his basement.

You made your choice.   

YEAH, NEITHER ONE.
Your Big.gov is no different than his Big.gov and if you don't believe me, go look at the pporkulous signed into law the last four years.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 05:54:30 PM
YEAH, NEITHER ONE.
Your Big.gov is no different than his Big.gov and if you don't believe me, go look at the pporkulous signed into law the last four years.

Yes.

You made a choice to put your future ENTIRELY in the hands of the Rodents.

That's what happens when you choose to not make a choice.  You've still made a choice.

Isn't that a rush?

Just because you want to sit one out doesn't mean the Rodents will let you.

Now you have to first coup in history on your hands and you still want to play Pilate.   He decided to not make a choice, too.  Left his reputation in the hands of the mob.   Worked out well for him, they named an exercise system after him, or something.  Maybe just a wash basin.

You could have been 75,000,001, you know.   Would have made all the difference in public opinion now if we could have said "MORE THAN 75,000,000 Americans voted for Trump, more than any other candidate in history", but nooooo....somebody choose to not choose, and so we're stuck with only saying a mere 75,000,000 people.

Thanks, pal.

As for claiming the Third Obama term "big government" is no different than what Trump's second term would be...

...look at the effing border.

...look at how Germany is falling all over itself to give Putin head.

...look at how arrogant the Chinese and Iranians are.

The timing of the Hamas attack wasn't coincidental that there's a Usurper and a stolen presidential election. 

The Weimar Republic was taking Germany to hell in a express train.   Hitler swapped in cattle cars and lifetime vacations at Auschwitz.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 09, 2021, 05:57:32 PM
YEAH, NEITHER ONE.
Your Big.gov is no different than his Big.gov and if you don't believe me, go look at the pporkulous signed into law the last four years.

For the record, paraphrasing the honorable @HoustonSam above, You are our Cato.  Inflexible, yes, but that makes you the right compass.  Please never change, and never leave!
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 06:01:02 PM
Yes.

You made a choice to put your future ENTIRELY in the hands of the Rodents.

That's what happens when you choose to not make a choice.  You've still made a choice.

Isn't that a rush?

Just because you want to sit one out doesn't mean the Rodents will let you.

Now you have to first coup in history on your hands and you still want to play Pilate.   He decided to not make a choice, too.  Left his reputation in the hands of the mob.   Worked out well for him, they named an exercise system after him, or something.  Maybe just a wash basin.

You could have been 75,000,001, you know.   Would have made all the difference in public opinion now if we could have said "MORE THAN 75,000,000 Americans voted for Trump, more than any other candidate in history", but nooooo....somebody choose to not choose, and so we're stuck with only saying a mere 75,000,000 people.

Thanks, pal.

What utter pap.

There is no way in hell I am going to reward Tumpy and the Republican Party for spending 20 friggin trillion dollars. There is no way I will reward the destruction of millions of small businesses, including mine, with an endorsement. And if you don't like that, I really don't give a single sh*t.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 06:05:52 PM
For the record, paraphrasing the honorable @HoustonSam above, You are our Cato.  Inflexible, yes, but that makes you the right compass.  Please never change, and never leave!

The thing with compasses is, they only work if you follow them. Just carrying one around in your pocket doesn't help you at all. And I am more the mirror used to determine azimuth and that lets to see that the red is in the shed.

The compass itself is Conservatism.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 06:09:40 PM
For the record, paraphrasing the honorable @HoustonSam[/member] above, You are our Cato.  Inflexible, yes, but that makes you the right compass.  Please never change, and never leave!

And by the way, I believe that was @Mesaclone , believe it or not ... And a fine compliment from a most worthy opponent.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 06:16:29 PM
The thing with compasses is, they only work if you follow them. Just carrying one around in your pocket doesn't help you at all. And I am more the mirror used to determine azimuth and that lets to see that the red is in the shed.

The compass itself is Conservatism.

No.

Compasses work whether you follow them or not.    The choice to stay lost in the woods when one has a compass is a personal choice.

Just like how people choose to let Biden steal the election with the most massive vote fraud operation in history.  You'd a thunk that all real Americans would hear that call to go vote, and all real Americans did.   They had a clear compass and FOLLOWED IT.

Others had an equally clear compass and kept their ballot in their pocket.

Refusing to make a choice is not heroic, nor is it respectable.   

It's cowardly.

And in the end, they still made a choice.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 09, 2021, 06:19:10 PM
What utter pap.

There is no way in hell I am going to reward Tumpy and the Republican Party for spending 20 friggin trillion dollars. There is no way I will reward the destruction of millions of small businesses, including mine, with an endorsement. And if you don't like that, I really don't give a single sh*t.

Uh-huh.

So you wanted to have a billion Mexicans flooding our border.

Good for you.

You showed the Ebil Orange Man, didncha?   Now we have a genuine Orangeman in the White House, because of an election that was stolen.

America is proud of you, sir.   

At least the real Cato recognized his Republic's REAL enemies.   

I guess modern Cato's need better glasses than were available in the Second Century BC? 
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: HoustonSam on June 09, 2021, 06:54:15 PM
And by the way, I believe that was @Mesaclone , believe it or not ... And a fine compliment from a most worthy opponent.

Well I'll reiterate @Cyber Liberty 's expression of the the sentiment anyway.  When we need a North Star for Conservatism in all its dimensions, not only the political, we need look no father than @roamer_1 .
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 07:55:00 PM
Well I'll reiterate @Cyber Liberty 's expression of the the sentiment anyway.  When we need a North Star for Conservatism in all its dimensions, not only the political, we need look no father than @roamer_1 .

In your case @HoustonSam , you need look no further than your nearest mirror. There ain't much of nothing I could tell you that you don't all ready know

And I thank you for your kindness.  :beer:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 09, 2021, 09:15:34 PM


For the record. I see roamer_1 as our very own Cato. Moral. Obstinate. Correct. But impractical and prone to tilting at windmills. 

@Mesaclone
 
I think you nailed it with that post!
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 09, 2021, 09:40:41 PM
@Mesaclone
 
I think you nailed it with that post!

Except that I am not the one tilting at windmills.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 09, 2021, 10:18:19 PM
Except that I am not the one tilting at windmills.

@roamer_1

Un,huh. If you say so.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 09, 2021, 11:03:05 PM
roamer1:
There is no way in hell I am going to reward Tumpy and the Republican Party for spending 20 friggin trillion dollars. There is no way I will reward the destruction of millions of small businesses, including mine, with an endorsement. And if you don't like that, I really don't give a single sh*t.

christian:
Of course no reward to Trump or Republicans, its the democrats that have done what Republicans have done and worse that get a pass.  The steady demonizing and trashing of Republ9icans and Trump, and the void of the same for Democrats make it clear what a wolf in sheeps clothing is really going on.  Heavy criticism of Trump, daily,  very small passive slights towards democrats as they direct this nation towards destruction.  This is a deep stater psy-op,and I.Q. test that people either fail miserably, or are actually in bed with. Its just too easy to see whats really going on here.

AGAIN!
christian:
Wow, for all the endless times of NeverTrumping, to his great detriment, it's just amazing how many times you have NEVERBIDEN-ED.  AS YOU POSTURE EQUAL TREATMENT, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU DEMONIZED AND NEVERBIDEN-ED HERE ? DON'T BE SHY AND BASHFUL NOW, YOU HAVEN'T BEEN SHY AND BASHFUL BASHING TRUMP, YAH, KNOW.
eH?  ROAMER ?
NUMBER OF TIMES PLEASE ? Please, please, please !
Why do the equally treated democrats feel so pleased at this 'equal' treatment !
Biden slaughters small businesses in America shutting down the pipeline and suspending Constitutional rights using Chinese cod-vid imported here to further devastate our economy, but blame Trump,not democrats?  It's looking more and more like Derangement syndrome and political a whoring with denial thrown in for good measure, eh ?  Does the Chinese pay you or the DNC?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 12:59:24 AM
christian:
Of course no reward to Trump or Republicans, its the democrats that have done what Republicans have done and worse that get a pass. 

No, they don't get a pass, and I don't vote for them either.

Quote
The steady demonizing and trashing of Republ9icans and Trump, and the void of the same for Democrats make it clear what a wolf in sheeps clothing is really going on.  Heavy criticism of Trump, daily,  very small passive slights towards democrats as they direct this nation towards destruction.  This is a deep stater psy-op,and I.Q. test that people either fail miserably, or are actually in bed with. Its just too easy to see whats really going on here.

AGAIN!
christian:
Wow, for all the endless times of NeverTrumping, to his great detriment, it's just amazing how many times you have NEVERBIDEN-ED.  AS YOU POSTURE EQUAL TREATMENT, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU DEMONIZED AND NEVERBIDEN-ED HERE ? DON'T BE SHY AND BASHFUL NOW, YOU HAVEN'T BEEN SHY AND BASHFUL BASHING TRUMP, YAH, KNOW.
eH?  ROAMER ?
nUMBER OF TIMES PLEASE ?

I don't give a sh*t about Democrats. I give a sh*t about STOPPING democrats... For REAL... Not like y'all, who can't point to a single damn win. SOSDD. The very same as always. Hyphenated-Conservatism and partisan idiocy. Tub thumping and throwing poo. It's what you do.

Liberalism is winning because it has no opposition. That opposition is supposed to be you guys. And they ran you over the very same as Dubya. Temporary 'conservatism', gone in four years, with no wins, an liberalism written into LAW in the same four years... Moving the ball LEFT. Sommore.

And you are voting for more.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 10, 2021, 01:09:37 AM
So you're going to keep on dodging the questions, spin and obfuscate and ignore/deny?  Bill and hill must be so proud of you! You're the only 'Conservative' i've seen that is so dedicated to using democrat tactics and ways.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 01:47:15 AM
So you're going to keep on dodging the questions, spin and obfuscate and ignore/deny?  Bill and hill must be so proud of you! You're the only 'Conservative' i've seen that is so dedicated to using democrat tactics and ways.

I dodged nothing. You asked, I answered.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:50:54 AM


Liberalism is winning because it has no opposition. That opposition is supposed to be you guys.


We normals DO oppose the Rodents.

It's the Never Trumpers who are busy helping them.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 10, 2021, 02:24:07 PM
roamer1:
Liberalism is winning because it has no opposition. That opposition is supposed to be you guys. And they ran you over the very same as Dubya. Temporary 'conservatism', gone in four years, with no wins, an liberalism written into LAW in the same four years... Moving the ball LEFT. Sommore.

christian:
Libealism is winning because you heavily criticize Trump and Republicans, while laughable on few occasions throw out a democrats too.  Pretending such one sided treatment is equal and fair, and many how noticed and criticized your openly biased prejudices, while pretending equal TREATMENT.  Fools can be convinced of nearly anything, we are not easily manipulated fools that you take us for.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 02:34:40 PM
The Rodents are ascendant because one of the things they absolutely demand is that No Rodent Ever Talk Ill Of Another Rodent, and more, All Rodents Shall Lie To Cover Other Rodents.

The Americans are more individualistic than that and the Rodents have infiltrated the Americans and their political parties, encouraging fools to worship pointless perfection more than winning battles.

The Americans lost almost all the early major battles in the Civil War.    But they didn't give up and finally found their Trump, who was rude and crude and willing to bring war to the Rodents.   Naturally, the crypto-Rodents decided that they didn't like the Orange Grant and made snide remarks about being a drunkard.   The most important American President in history said "Oh.  So what kind of whisky does he like?  Send him a case.  He fights."

Trump FIGHTS.

The people the Principled Conservatives (TM) prefer are losers who ask "can't we all jus' get along?"

I'll take a fighter every time.

Nuts.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 02:53:51 PM
We normals DO oppose the Rodents.

It's the Never Trumpers who are busy helping them.


Yeah right... With a hand full of nothing, the ball moved LEFT, and all for the low low cost of twenty trillion bucks...
No win again. SOSDD. You are opposing nothing.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 10, 2021, 03:04:51 PM
The Rodents are ascendant because one of the things they absolutely demand is that No Rodent Ever Talk Ill Of Another Rodent, and more, All Rodents Shall Lie To Cover Other Rodents.

The Americans are more individualistic than that and the Rodents have infiltrated the Americans and their political parties, encouraging fools to worship pointless perfection more than winning battles.

The Americans lost almost all the early major battles in the Civil War.    But they didn't give up and finally found their Trump, who was rude and crude and willing to bring war to the Rodents.   Naturally, the crypto-Rodents decided that they didn't like the Orange Grant and made snide remarks about being a drunkard.   The most important American President in history said "Oh.  So what kind of whisky does he like?  Send him a case.  He fights."

Trump FIGHTS.

The people the Principled Conservatives (TM) prefer are losers who ask "can't we all jus' get along?"

I'll take a fighter every time.

Nuts.
you gotta admit though, even though he refused to get it dirty General McClellan sure looked smart in that snappy uniform. Statesmanlike.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 03:08:07 PM

Yeah right... With a hand full of nothing, the ball moved LEFT, and all for the low low cost of twenty trillion bucks...
No win again. SOSDD. You are opposing nothing.


Keep dreaming that you're accomplishing anything more than helping the Rodents.

You probably don't understand that just because you throw a boat's motor into reverse, that doesn't mean the boat won't continue to go forward until it's stopped.

But because the boat won't immediately go backwards when the motor is put in reverse, you want to shoot the pilot and keep sitting in the back seat whining about how close the Horseshoe Falls is getting.  "Oh, dear, why can't we get the boat to go back upstream", you ask.  "We keep shooting all the pilots who want to go that way but not one of them has been able to do it instantly like I, the two year old, demand. wa wa wa wa!!!"
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 10, 2021, 03:10:09 PM
I'm still here...please carry on....

 :2popcorn:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 03:12:22 PM
you gotta admit though, even though he refused to get it dirty General McClellan sure looked smart in that snappy uniform. Statesmanlike.

He even got an air force base named after him.   Pretty good for a Civil War general.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 03:45:56 PM
Libealism is winning because you heavily criticize Trump and Republicans, while laughable on few occasions throw out a democrats too.  Pretending such one sided treatment is equal and fair, and many how noticed and criticized your openly biased prejudices, while pretending equal TREATMENT.  Fools can be convinced of nearly anything, we are not easily manipulated fools that you take us for.


I am under no obligation to be fair. There is no requirement to evenly spread my ire, tit for tat. What kind of liberal crybaby thinking is that? If I want to hammer Tumpy and ignore the crats, that is my prerogative. That ain't what I do, but as I mainly pay the crats no mind, knowing what they are, and not surprised by what they do...

And frankly, I can't take the hypocrisy on those threads. All y'all in your harrumphing circle criticizing crats for big.gov and spending money, when just months ago, you were defending big.gov and spending even MORE money, so long as your boy was doing it. How the f* shallow is that thinking???? Hell, you defend it even yet. Y'all criticize Fauci like your boy wasn't standing right up there with him, not a year ago. That kind of two-faced whipsaw disgusts me, and partisan poo throwing does nothing to advance the ball. Especially when it is done swimming in hypocrisy.

 That ain't defending crats. That's calling all y'all out. That's making you look at ideas instead of mindless partisanship, where those ideas are currency that depends on who is doing it. Just like democrats in that - Defending your prince regardless of what is actually true... In spite of egregious offense to actual Conservatism.

The crats ain't calling themselves conservatives though... The crats ain't claiming conservative ground while operating just the same as big.gov crats. If you want to see me rise in anger, that's the best way to do it of all. Claiming Conservatism while spending twice as much as Obummer in a term.... And shutting the f'ing country OFF... Justifying it because it is your boy doing it, and paying no mind to the damage you are doing to Conservative principle.

I have ZERO control or input over what the Democrats do. I don't vote for them, I don't raise money for them, I abhor every facet of their philosophy. What the left does is beyond my reach.

But I DO function on the Right. From '80 to '07 - That's just damn near thirty years, and I will call it thirty easily, as I continued to support select Republicans after 07 - All that time I was a good Republican drone, pulling for that big Rhinestone R. I used my business sources to raise big money. I went door to door. I attended think tanks and events. The whole 9 yards.

For nothing. Absolutely nothing. Not a single friggin win in all that time. They took my money and my labor to do the very same thing as the democrats. Absolute betrayal of the principles they claimed to defend - Kinda like y'all.

So fine, call me jaded. Bitter. That is probably right - spending all that time and money and faith to help raise up another monster, just the same as Democrats, just as interested in globalism, just as happy if not more happy than the democrats to crush the very people and principles they had promised to defend -That betrayal is one of the deepest betrayals I have ever experienced.

As for monsters, the one I fight is the one I am responsible for creating. Y'all like that monster, and figure you need it to fight the crats, but nothing could be further from the truth. The monster that will wind up eating you is the one you are feeding. I know, I seen me do it. And you should mark them words and ponder em.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 04:02:29 PM
Trump FIGHTS.

The people the Principled Conservatives (TM) prefer are losers who ask "can't we all jus' get along?"

I'll take a fighter every time.

Nuts.

He doesn't fight. He flails. And he has done terrible damage to Conservatives doing it.
I don't want to get along. I was on the front lines for thirty years.

But what I was fighting for all that time, was the principles I stand upon. Principles you would defame for fleeting succor.

I was not fighting 'against the democrats'. I was fighting *FOR* the principles.
And in lowering yourselves to the level of Democrats you will find those principles turning against you too... As those principles are always true (or they would not be principle things).

When you betray the very things you are supposed to be fighting for, the writing is on the wall... Your doom is sealed. And in that, you are bound to fail.  And I will not help you do it.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 04:05:33 PM

Keep dreaming that you're accomplishing anything more than helping the Rodents.

You probably don't understand that just because you throw a boat's motor into reverse, that doesn't mean the boat won't continue to go forward until it's stopped.

But because the boat won't immediately go backwards when the motor is put in reverse, you want to shoot the pilot and keep sitting in the back seat whining about how close the Horseshoe Falls is getting.  "Oh, dear, why can't we get the boat to go back upstream", you ask.  "We keep shooting all the pilots who want to go that way but not one of them has been able to do it instantly like I, the two year old, demand. wa wa wa wa!!!"

Yeah... Poor little Tumpy... He can't help it... It's everybody's, anybody's fault but his!  *****rollingeyes*****
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 10, 2021, 04:07:22 PM
He doesn't fight. He flails. And he has done terrible damage to Conservatives doing it.
I don't want to get along. I was on the front lines for thirty years.

But what I was fighting for all that time, was the principles I stand upon. Principles you would defame for fleeting succor.

I was not fighting 'against the democrats'. I was fighting *FOR* the principles.
And in lowering yourselves to the level of Democrats you will find those principles turning against you too... As those principles are always true (or they would not be principle things).

When you betray the very things you are supposed to be fighting for, the writing is on the wall... Your doom is sealed. And in that, you are bound to fail.  And I will not help you do it.
I betrayed nothing.

I liked Trump. I approved of nearly everything he did. And if it weren't for a cowardly GOP and utterly corrupt rat party and DC bureaucracy I'm sure I would've approved of the rest.

My mind is completely at ease.



Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 04:16:44 PM
I betrayed nothing.

I liked Trump. I approved of nearly everything he did. And if it weren't for a cowardly GOP and utterly corrupt rat party and DC bureaucracy I'm sure I would've approved of the rest.

My mind is completely at ease.

You can approve of it all you want. It came to nothing. Again. Sommore.

And if you approve of 20T dollars and shutting the country OFF, that surprises the crap out of me.

And oddly enough, my mind is completely at ease too. As much as some folks try to ladle guilt on me, it's like water off a duck's back.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 10, 2021, 04:40:36 PM
Ahhhh....I miss the good old days of the Pat Buchanan supporters when he was running for President.  They were so easy to work with.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 04:43:05 PM
I am under no obligation to be fair.

Yeah, we've noticed you're not feeling obligated towards honesty, either.

You're busy whining because....no matter WHO was in the White House, NOBODY was going to stop the Great Ship of State on a dime and reverse course.   

The inverted iceberg of socialism (we can see 95% of it) the USS USSA is on a collision course with cannot be avoided by answering full astern and stopping the ship in the water.   

That was not possible for the Titanic, it's not possible for the world's only superpower.

So, bitch, whine, cry, have hissy fits, share your chrysophobia with everyone, but know this:

You are merely a passenger on that great ship.   You're not part of the crew.   While the Americans are in the black gang trying to shovel the coal into the boilers, you're on the lidodeck playing shuffleboard with attitude, looking for your life vest (which can't be orange) and demanding a place on the life boats, all the while complaining that others aren't shoveling that coal in a way that suits you.

Is it any wonder most of the "males" on the Titanic died of hypothermia that night?   We Americans are certainly willing to leave those who are standing in the way and not helping out in the cold.

Quote
That ain't defending crats.

Yes, it is.

Quote
That's calling all y'all out.

No, it's not.

Quote
That's making you look at ideas instead of mindless partisanship, where those ideas are currency that depends on who is doing it. Just like democrats in that - Defending your prince regardless of what is actually true... In spite of egregious offense to actual Conservatism.

Ideas?

You mean you're forcing me to look at the idea that people who don't fight don't really have any respect and certainly don't deserve to have their kibitzing taken seriously.

How's that for an idea whose time has never expired?

How much credence did the Loyalists who refused to take arms to birth the United States get from the Patriots?

Not very damned much.

People who sit on the sidelines don't get to quarterback.

Want more metaphors?

Those are ideas, too.

Quote
The crats ain't calling themselves conservatives though... The crats ain't claiming conservative ground while operating just the same as big.gov crats. If you want to see me rise in anger, that's the best way to do it of all. Claiming Conservatism while spending twice as much as Obummer in a term.... And shutting the f'ing country OFF... Justifying it because it is your boy doing it, and paying no mind to the damage you are doing to Conservative principle.

The Rodents don't call themselves Rodents, either, but that's what they are.   

Rand called them Looters.

Americans call them traitors.

People with chrysophobia call them friend, but maybe not in public.

Quote
I have ZERO control or input over what the Democrats do. I don't vote for them, I don't raise money for them, I abhor every facet of their philosophy. What the left does is beyond my reach.

Since you refused to fight the Rodents, you really don't have any say in what the Americans do, either.

You should re-read "Man Without A Country".

Maybe that tale should be re-written as "The Man Who Wouldn't Fight"...but it's no "Red Badge of Courage" those people sport, sport.  It's more like something someone would get who fell asleep in the middle of the road right before they painted those no-passing lines, if you know what I mean.

Quote
But I DO function on the Right. From '80 to '07 - That's just damn near thirty years, and I will call it thirty easily, as I continued to support select Republicans after 07 - All that time I was a good Republican drone, pulling for that big Rhinestone R. I used my business sources to raise big money. I went door to door. I attended think tanks and events. The whole 9 yards.

Then you saw the job was done and decided that Obama was just too good to fight against.

There's a word for people who quit before the race is done.

We call them quitters.

Quote
For nothing. Absolutely nothing. Not a single friggin win in all that time. They took my money and my labor to do the very same thing as the democrats. Absolute betrayal of the principles they claimed to defend - Kinda like y'all.

My principle is fight to the finish or there was no reason to fight at all.   Kinda no anything like what you've done, at all.

Quote
So fine, call me jaded. Bitter. That is probably right - spending all that time and money and faith to help raise up another monster, just the same as Democrats, just as interested in globalism, just as happy if not more happy than the democrats to crush the very people and principles they had promised to defend -That betrayal is one of the deepest betrayals I have ever experienced.

 8888crybaby 8888crybaby 8888crybaby

Quote
As for monsters, the one I fight is the one I am responsible for creating. Y'all like that monster, and figure you need it to fight the crats, but nothing could be further from the truth. The monster that will wind up eating you is the one you are feeding. I know, I seen me do it. And you should mark them words and ponder em.

I haven't created any monsters.   Call me George.   Without the jungle.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 04:44:24 PM
I betrayed nothing.

I liked Trump. I approved of nearly everything he did. And if it weren't for a cowardly GOP and utterly corrupt rat party and DC bureaucracy I'm sure I would've approved of the rest.

My mind is completely at ease.

 :yowsa:

The captain does not steer the ship.

The captain tells the crew where to steer the ship.

The GOP is full of mutineers. 

We have to fight to clean the GOP before we can convince the Rodents to jump overboard...preferably off the plank with a Cutlass charging them at full throttle.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 05:02:49 PM
He doesn't fight. He flails. And he has done terrible damage to Conservatives doing it.

Yeah, if only we can get another candidate to get 75,000,000 votes.   The conservatives need to get damaged like that as often as possible.

Quote
I don't want to get along. I was on the front lines for thirty years.

Yeah.  You're the only one.   It must be rough, living in Montana and having a state government that might occasionally enact a conservative law.   My heart bleeds for you, as I recall spending the last thirty years in California, with never having any level of government occupied by a candidate of my choice not ever, but once, and that RINO I voted against in the next election.   You have life sooooo ruff! How do you stand it?  I can understand why you quit.   Only weak people would live in Maxine Waters' district and STILL keep trying to affect positive change in the governments of the United States...it takes a really strong man to just give up and quit like you did, to spend your years in political retirement kibitzing the chess games of others and whining when you don't play and thus are guaranteed to never win.

Yeah, that's what real men do,  they give up and feel good about themselves.  They feel liberated to feel superior to others who were so weak they just won't quit.

There's a reason there's a law in the UCMJ against advising others to desert.

Quote
But what I was fighting for all that time, was the principles I stand upon. Principles you would defame for fleeting succor.

Then you stopped fighting for them and decided you had Principles, instead.   
Real fighters can't afford Principles. 
Real fighters want to win.
Real fighters don't quit.

Call me John Carter.

Quote
I was not fighting 'against the democrats'. I was fighting *FOR* the principles.
And in lowering yourselves to the level of Democrats you will find those principles turning against you too... As those principles are always true (or they would not be principle things).

And you're using the past tense because you surrendered those principles and discovered Principles (TM) instead.

You never figured out who sold you Principles (TM) and why they sought to sell them to you.

Quote
When you betray the very things you are supposed to be fighting for, the writing is on the wall... Your doom is sealed. And in that, you are bound to fail.  And I will not help you do it.

Well, yeah.

The first act of betrayal is ceasing to fight.

It's not an overt act, most people won't notice until you know it's Pride Month and let everyone know you were no longer fighting.

But cowardice in the face of the enemy is still an act of betrayal.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 05:05:21 PM
Yeah, we've noticed you're not feeling obligated towards honesty, either.

You're busy whining because....no matter WHO was in the White House, NOBODY was going to stop the Great Ship of State on a dime and reverse course.   

The inverted iceberg (we can see 95% of it) the USS USSA is on a collision course with cannot be avoided by answering full astern and stopping the ship in the water.   

That was not possible for the Titanic, it's not possible for the world's only superpower.


Excuses, excuses. Outspending democrats (by DOUBLE) has no excuse.
Shutting the country OFF, killing thousands of small businesses has no excuse.

Quote
So, bitch, whine, cry, have hissy fits, share your chrysophobia with everyone, but know this:

You are merely a passenger on that great ship.   You're not part of the crew.   While the Americans are in the black gang trying to shovel the coal into the boilers, you're on the lidodeck playing shuffleboard with attitude, looking for your life vest (which can't be orange) and demanding a place on the life boats, all the while complaining that others aren't shoveling that coal in a way that suits you.

Is it any wonder most of the "males" on the Titanic died of hypothermia that night?   We Americans are certainly willing to leave those who are standing in the way and not helping out in the cold.

Yes, it is.

No, it's not.

Yeah, bullcrap. Just because I am standing against you does not mean I am not fighting, the same as always. In fact, standing against you is just as profitable to Conservatism as standing against the Democrats, if not more so... Because pointing out your fetid, feckless, phony opposition to democrats might make you think. I doubt it, but it might.

And that aside, bullcrap sommore. Since I cannot support the national 'Right' in their so-called 'battle' in politics, I have concentrated on other aspects of Conservatism with great success. Like teaching folks independence and survival skills, which I am eminently qualified to do - Preparing folks for your inevitable failure, seeing as how y'all refuse to apply the principles you purport to defend. They will need that knowledge soon.

And in social Conservatism... The Religious Right... I retain a full engagement on that front.

No, I am not a passenger. And even without political power to favor (which is not exactly true, as I favor helping the CP rise), I make myself useful in other aspects of Conservatism.

Quote
Ideas?

You mean you're forcing me to look at the idea that people who don't fight don't really have any respect and certainly don't deserve to have their kibitzing taken seriously.

How's that for an idea whose time has never expired?

How much credence did the Loyalists who refused to take arms to birth the United States get from the Patriots?

Not very damned much.

People who sit on the sidelines don't get to quarterback.

Want more metaphors?

Those are ideas, too.

The Rodents don't call themselves Rodents, either, but that's what they are.   

Rand called them Looters.

Americans call them traitors.

People with chrysophobia call them friend, but maybe not in public.

Since you refused to fight the Rodents, you really don't have any say in what the Americans do, either.

You should re-read "Man Without A Country".

Maybe that tale should be re-written as "The Man Who Wouldn't Fight"...but it's no "Red Badge of Courage" those people sport, sport.  It's more like something someone would get who fell asleep in the middle of the road right before they painted those no-passing lines, if you know what I mean.

Then you saw the job was done and decided that Obama was just too good to fight against.

There's a word for people who quit before the race is done.

We call them quitters.

My principle is fight to the finish or there was no reason to fight at all.   Kinda no anything like what you've done, at all.

 8888crybaby 8888crybaby 8888crybaby

I haven't created any monsters.   Call me George.   Without the jungle.

Meh. Petty. Vindictive. And shallow.
I still fight liberalism, every bit as much as I ever have. It's just now I have to fight it on the left and the right. I can oppose you and the democrats at the same time. After all, y'all are the same thing.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 10, 2021, 05:10:58 PM

One doesn't "return to conservatism" by doing nothing to stop the enemy.    Kinda like how the Jews were morally opposed to the National Socialists but couldn't bring themselves to getting guns until it was too late for that. 

Thanks for your help, pal.

Most of us understand we are in the political fight of our lives; a fight that is fierce against an enemy with no respect for life or law  --- an enemy that has infiltrated every part of American society and must be weeded out and destroyed if we are to prevail @Sled Dog 

@roamer_1 fights for a myopic obsession on par with a religious crusade.  His insistence that we stand down until perfection appears is political quicksand and should be avoided as if our political lives and America's future depend on it --- because both do.

In time of war there is no virtue in doing nothing.  It is surrender.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 05:18:28 PM
Yeah, if only we can get another candidate to get 75,000,000 votes.   The conservatives need to get damaged like that as often as possible.

Yeah.  You're the only one.   It must be rough, living in Montana and having a state government that might occasionally enact a conservative law.   My heart bleeds for you, as I recall spending the last thirty years in California, with never having any level of government occupied by a candidate of my choice not ever, but once, and that RINO I voted against in the next election.   You have life sooooo ruff! How do you stand it?  I can understand why you quit.   Only weak people would live in Maxine Waters' district and STILL keep trying to affect positive change in the governments of the United States...it takes a really strong man to just give up and quit like you did, to spend your years in political retirement kibitzing the chess games of others and whining when you don't play and thus are guaranteed to never win.

Yeah, that's what real men do,  they give up and feel good about themselves.  They feel liberated to feel superior to others who were so weak they just won't quit.

There's a reason there's a law in the UCMJ against advising others to desert.

Then you stopped fighting for them and decided you had Principles, instead.   
Real fighters can't afford Principles. 
Real fighters want to win.
Real fighters don't quit.

Call me John Carter.

And you're using the past tense because you surrendered those principles and discovered Principles (TM) instead.

You never figured out who sold you Principles (TM) and why they sought to sell them to you.

Well, yeah.

The first act of betrayal is ceasing to fight.

It's not an overt act, most people won't notice until you know it's Pride Month and let everyone know you were no longer fighting.

But cowardice in the face of the enemy is still an act of betrayal.

All bullcrap. I have not quit, and I have not sold out. In fact I stand exactly where I always have, as many here have attested. And I am no coward. It is not cowardice to fight the liberals invading the right, which I consider the greater threat, because in their invasion, they nullify the only opposition to liberalism there is, which is, btw, Principled Conservatism... That thing you hate on every day.

And as for my reach here in Montana, that was regional in my day. Stretching deeply to the west, all the way to the coast. So I have engaged IRL, all the way to Portland and Seattle. Same old argument I hear all the time. False as hell. And it ain't like there ain't no Californication going on right here.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 05:28:47 PM
@roamer_1 fights for a myopic obsession on par with a religious crusade.  His insistence that we stand down until perfection appears is political quicksand and should be avoided as if our political lives and America's future depend on it --- because both do.

In time of war there is no virtue in doing nothing.  It is surrender.

Yeah, Same old bullcrap again... I am not, nor have I ever preached standing down. Nor have I preached perfection.

I have preached the same old Conservatism that has always been, coming right out of Goldwater and Reagan.

I have preached Conservative Coalition, and that is all.
If you wreck that coalition you will get no help from me. And in fact I will stand against you.

It is not waiting for perfection to insist folks that call themselves conservatives adhere to the defense of the principles that define it. That is what we are here for.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 05:47:10 PM
Yeah, Same old bullcrap again... I am not, nor have I ever preached standing down. Nor have I preached perfection.

I have preached the same old Conservatism that has always been, coming right out of Goldwater and Reagan.

I have preached Conservative Coalition, and that is all.
If you wreck that coalition you will get no help from me. And in fact I will stand against you.

It is not waiting for perfection to insist folks that call themselves conservatives adhere to the defense of the principles that define it. That is what we are here for.

I saw the one and only college football game in my life in the Carrier Dome when SU was undeated.   If my impression of football was limited to that one game, I'd always expect that the winning team won be by catching the ball on the kickoff and running it down the full length of the field for a touchdown in the first ten seconds of the game.  Penn State didn't have a chance that year.  As I recall the final score was 28 to 0.   

Most football games are won by slogging it on the field, five yards, ten yards, two yards at a time, and losing ground in-between.

Conservatives NEVER win by a brilliant running game.   Not once have we won that way.   To expect that the conservatives are going to field the perfect team and never give up ground once the team is on the field is too much to expect of any human endeavor.

The Rodents didn't get where they are by a single effort.  No.  They got to the Big Steal by LIFETIMES of incessant efforts to undermine society and rot it out from within.

Conservatives aren't going to fix it in a day, in a year, in a single presidential term or in six presidential terms.

And they're certainly not going to fix it in one presidential term if the president gets no support and no conservative advice from his team in Congress. 

Did Trump get any Conservative advice (in the form of bills and proposals to fight for) from the leadership of either house?   Not once.   

To blame Trump is a fool's game.   If Trump had been given a truly conservative agenda to fight for by conservatives in House and Senate, Trump would have been far more successful than his already impressive presidency was.   

Trump had no help.

Those damn Chrysophobics (I love that word, I gots me a label for those Never Trumping rectums!) do no one but the Rodents any favors when they do the Devil's task of blaming Trump for the RINO's treasons.   And that is what they are doing, they are helping the Enemy by allowing the Enemy to hide behind them, even if we assume the Chrysophobics are acting indepently of their RINO fellow travellers.

So, no.   It's pretty clear that the blame for the failures of the 45th President's first term rest squarely on the shoulders of the RINOS and the Never Trumping Pretend Republicans and the jerks seeking Jesus as their candidate before they ever vote again.   Those were the Mutineers, seeking all the bounty they can steal.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 05:50:37 PM
I was point-of-the-spear for the TEA party, from the very beginning, when it was still in Ron Paul's camp... All the way through.

Yet I won't lift a finger for y'all. You should really try to do that math.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 10, 2021, 06:08:13 PM
Yeah, Same old bullcrap again... I am not, nor have I ever preached standing down. Nor have I preached perfection.

I have preached the same old Conservatism that has always been, coming right out of Goldwater and Reagan.

I have preached Conservative Coalition, and that is all.
If you wreck that coalition you will get no help from me. And in fact I will stand against you.

It is not waiting for perfection to insist folks that call themselves conservatives adhere to the defense of the principles that define it. That is what we are here for.

The "conservative coalition" is MAGA.  You standing against me is standing against Saving America.

You preach in "defense of principles"; we'll rise in defense of country.  You sit and fiddle in your reading room; we'll stand and fight with every weapon we can put our hands on. 

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTJ2r06Ph9JDbi7SpOCYMfEhMv6XexlSAAGfYCbDHNjz_j2TuZ3hj1rW_8FEEyvIfzYvog&usqp=CAU)


Your obsession is useless.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 06:12:35 PM
I was point-of-the-spear for the TEA party, from the very beginning, when it was still in Ron Paul's camp... All the way through.

Yet I won't lift a finger for y'all. You should really try to do that math.

Well, there it is.

Ron Paul was never a real conservative.   He was a fake libertarian who never got anything done.

He said a few interesting things, but accomplishment wasn't his forte.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 08:24:00 PM
Most football games are won by slogging it on the field, five yards, ten yards, two yards at a time, and losing ground in-between.

Republicans have lost ground all the way along. No wins.  NONE. That is a statistical impossibility.

Quote
Conservatives NEVER win by a brilliant running game.   Not once have we won that way.   To expect that the conservatives are going to field the perfect team and never give up ground once the team is on the field is too much to expect of any human endeavor.

Perhaps. But one could start from the position of 'Do no harm'... But not even that - Y'all support Big.gov... Not only is there not a reversal, even a small one, when Republicans get into power, there is expansion of the federal beast. And Tumpy is no different. The first to go under the bus are the ficons and the civcons - And again, Tumpy is no different.

Quote

The Rodents didn't get where they are by a single effort.  No.  They got to the Big Steal by LIFETIMES of incessant efforts to undermine society and rot it out from within.

Nah, they got there because they had no opposition. All y'all feign opposition, but you tell a tree by its fruit, and your tree is big.gov, and there is no denying it.

Quote
Conservatives aren't going to fix it in a day, in a year, in a single presidential term or in six presidential terms.

And they're certainly not going to fix it in one presidential term if the president gets no support and no conservative advice from his team in Congress. 

Did Trump get any Conservative advice (in the form of bills and proposals to fight for) from the leadership of either house?   Not once.   

Conservatives are not going to fix anything, because folks like y'all supplanted them. More Conservatives are outside the Republican party than in it. Which is why I favor putting my efforts into the CP. No sense in putting anymore effort into Republicans. That dog don't hunt, and worse then that, he bites me every chance he gets.

Quote
To blame Trump is a fool's game.   If Trump had been given a truly conservative agenda to fight for by conservatives in House and Senate, Trump would have been far more successful than his already impressive presidency was.   

Trump had no help.


Poor little Tumpy. He can't help it... Everbody's pickin on him...
But he fights

 :silly: And y'all claim I chase windmills  :silly:

Yes I can blame Tumpy. Not that I blame him exclusively, but he was at the top and the buck always stops at the top. If you are a businessman, you will admit that. And while I very much admit he had no help from Republicans, and that they are at fault, Part of his promise, part of his JOB is to lead his party. That ain't the 'kiss the ring' thing y'all demand... It is forming coalitions and cutting deals, and bringing folks together to move forward. That is what leading is, and if he could not get that done, as he vowed he could do - Well that is on him... Just as much as anyone, if not more.

And y'all get the blame too in that - Filling the Republican party with RINOs because of 'lesser evil' thinking is your (y'all) fault... Had the Congress been in control of Conservatives instead of moderates... Had the RINOs been but a handful and the Conservatives the majority, perhaps he'd have had more to work with... But then, if Conservatives were in power, he would not have been necessary either.

Quote
Those damn Chrysophobics

That's really funny. A whole lot of my gear is orange and black... My watch has orange in the bezel... as a hunter, I love camo, but hunter orange is on a lot of my gear... And my favorite color on pickups is Hugger Orange. The one in my yard was meant to go that color - I even have the paint for it on the shelf in the kitchen...

So no, I am fine with orange. I ain't fine with liberal big.gov. Especially on the right.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 10, 2021, 08:25:32 PM
Well, there it is.

Ron Paul was never a real conservative.   He was a fake libertarian who never got anything done.

He said a few interesting things, but accomplishment wasn't his forte.

@Sled Dog

Ron Paul was never ANY type of conservative,and AFAIK,never even CLAIMED to be a conservative. He was and is a Libertarian.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 08:33:37 PM
The "conservative coalition" is MAGA.  You standing against me is standing against Saving America.


That's just it. You ain't saving nothing. Twenty TRILLION dollars. Do you have ANY conception of the damage it causes printing money like that?

Y'all shut the country OFF. Thousands of small businesses just like me CRATERED for no reason but piss poor leadership...

And you DEFEND it.

Quote
You preach in "defense of principles"; we'll rise in defense of country.  You sit and fiddle in your reading room; we'll stand and fight with every weapon we can put our hands on. 

If you are not standing in those principles, those TRUE THINGS, you are doing more damage than you are helping. I know you are well meaning, but ignorantly throwing the truth under the bus, justifying your position because of desperation is nothing but fear and poor decisions.

As for Rome burning, You don't know it, but you are holding the matches.

Quote
Your obsession is useless.

No, it is truth.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 08:37:47 PM
Republican Party had no wins, huh?

Know what the Rodents NEVER wanted to happen?  Know what the Rodents never expected would happen?

The Republicans destroyed the Soviet Union, Marxist Mecca, without firing a shot.

Know what else the Rodents NEVER wanted to happen?   

The Republicans reversed Carter's intentional "malaise" in less than one term, in an economic resurgence so strong it took until the Rodents and RINOs destroyed the economy in 2008 to put Obama into office.

What else has the GOP won recently?   over 1100 state and local elective offices since the Rodents installed that Kenyan marxist muslim.    They haven't gotten most of those back yet, even though they've been stealing elections like crazy.

What else have we won?

Trump's tax law limits the amount of state and local taxes a taxpayer can deduct from his federal income taxes, and that REALLY hurts the wealthy Rodents.   Didn't do me any favors, but I'm a patriot so I don't mind paying a price to win the Good War.  Not a crybaby.

And, most importantly of all, what we have right now is 75 million really pissed off Americans who aren't whining, who are simply furious at how the Rodents and the Principled Conservatives (TM), persons such as yourself, have conspired to steal elections and return to Screw'em As Usual methods.   

The 75 Mega-MAGA don't whine.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 08:46:18 PM
@Sled Dog

Ron Paul was never ANY type of conservative,and AFAIK,never even CLAIMED to be a conservative. He was and is a Libertarian.

To digress:

I never said Paul said he was.   The TEA Party was a CONSERVATIVE response to the Illegal Alien in the White House and the corrupt RINOs in bed with him.   

Paul was held up as some kind of Conservative Idol that we were supposed to pay attention to, but held up by the Libertarian crowd who really don't know what foundational principles real conservatives hold.   

I went to the LP for a while after the RINOs in the Senate voted to absolve the Rapist for his crimes by not holding the trial the public deserved to see of the first President impeached for committing real felonies.   Later that year the Senate finished the Farce Hearing and held their vote.  As I recall, fewer than five senators actually went to the room where the documentary evidence was stored and reviewed any of it.   Those were documents the PUBLIC should have seen, but were and are denied access to.

So I skipped to the LP after that.   And got to watch how the LP eventually became the Rodent's "female dog in heat" (rhymes with what Hillary is) and was used solely as a GOP busting Turd Party to get garbage-eating Rodent candidates elected in VA and elsewhere.   I stayed there for a while...why not, it was free...until Trump came along and revitalized a real GOP.

The LP has no clue what freedom is about.   Subject for another thread, that.

Someone equating the TEA Party with Ron Paul tells us a lot about that person.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 08:46:54 PM
Well, there it is.

Ron Paul was never a real conservative.   He was a fake libertarian who never got anything done.

He said a few interesting things, but accomplishment wasn't his forte.

Ron Paul comes right out of Goldwater. And hell yeah he did way more than Tumpy ever thought of.

Now, that being said, I am not in Ron Paul's camp, and never was... I was just among the hard core Reaganites that saw the value in what he was trying to do and joined in on the effort. It was the Reaganite Right that brought it out of the libertarians and into the focus of Conservatism.  And rightly so. There is little distance between a Reaganite and Goldwater Conservative.

In fact, it is the Moderates that drive wedges between libertarians and the rest of Conservatism. Can't have folks around that call em right when it comes to foundational libertarian and Constitutional issues.

I never supported Ron Paul in his runs for president, as he was adamant about not getting in foreign entanglements 0 He was right in that too, but I had to stand differently, in that once our boys are committed to an action, I have to be four square behind that action with the throttle to the nines. Paul would pull them, regardless. I would have them win. I know how important that is.

But I would vote for Rand, without question. One of a very few. And I supported much that his old man stood on. And no surprise. Fiscal Conservatism and Libertarianism are the root of Goldwater, and thereby the root of all modern political Conservatism. And the West, especially the Rockies, is where libertarianism is best preserved.

What a surprise that as a Conservative I would hang pretty well with libertarians.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: HoustonSam on June 10, 2021, 08:53:39 PM
I never supported Ron Paul in his runs for president, as he was adamant about not getting in foreign entanglements 0 He was right in that too, but I had to stand differently, in that once our boys are committed to an action, I have to be four square behind that action with the throttle to the nines. Paul would pull them, regardless. I would have them win. I know how important that is.

But I would vote for Rand, without question. One of a very few. And I supported much that his old man stood on. And no surprise. Fiscal Conservatism and Libertarianism are the root of Goldwater, and thereby the root of all modern political Conservatism. And the West, especially the Rockies, is where libertarianism is best preserved.

What a surprise that as a Conservative I would hang pretty well with libertarians.

Well stated @roamer_1 .  I don't agree with everything Rand says, but right now I'm scratching my head to remember what that disagreement was.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 08:58:47 PM
Republican Party had no wins, huh?

Know what the Rodents NEVER wanted to happen?  Know what the Rodents never expected would happen?

The Republicans destroyed the Soviet Union, Marxist Mecca, without firing a shot.


Reagan. Before the fact.

Quote
Know what else the Rodents NEVER wanted to happen?   

The Republicans reversed Carter's intentional "malaise" in less than one term, in an economic resurgence so strong it took until the Rodents and RINOs destroyed the economy in 2008 to put Obama into office.

Reagan. Before the fact.

Quote
What else has the GOP won recently?   over 1100 state and local elective offices since the Rodents installed that Kenyan marxist muslim.    They haven't gotten most of those back yet, even though they've been stealing elections like crazy.

TEA. And the 94 Congress, which you omitted.

Both of which were advances that were crushed, largely by Moderate Republicans taking the air away from them.
All of it overturned. Or close enough to claim it.

Quote
What else have we won?

Trump's tax law limits the amount of state and local taxes a taxpayer can deduct from his federal income taxes, and that REALLY hurts the wealthy Rodents.   Didn't do me any favors, but I'm a patriot so I don't mind paying a price to win the Good War.  Not a crybaby.


offset by twenty friggn trillion in spending. In fact, the money printed under Tump has probably more than offset the tax break in inflation.

Quote
And, most importantly of all, what we have right now is 75 million really pissed off Americans who aren't whining, who are simply furious at how the Rodents and the Principled Conservatives (TM), persons such as yourself, have conspired to steal elections and return to Screw'em As Usual methods.   

The 75 Mega-MAGA don't whine.

Who have empty hands. No wins. EOs like farts in a windstorm. Throwing fiscal and civil conservatism right under the bus just like every other Republican venture.

Meh. This is not winning.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 09:05:27 PM
To digress:

I never said Paul said he was.   The TEA Party was a CONSERVATIVE response to the Illegal Alien in the White House and the corrupt RINOs in bed with him.   

That's right. And it started in Paul's camp... One of my good friends over on TOS was libertarian and invited me to look at what they were doing. Because of that, I was in on the ground floor, and particpated locally helping to drive it in this region.

Conservatives did it, and Paul was a big part of that.

Quote
Paul was held up as some kind of Conservative Idol that we were supposed to pay attention to, but held up by the Libertarian crowd who really don't know what foundational principles real conservatives hold.   

That would not be me - Though I respect him and give credit where it is due.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 09:08:15 PM
Well stated @roamer_1 .  I don't agree with everything Rand says, but right now I'm scratching my head to remember what that disagreement was.

@HoustonSam
 :laugh:

Same. But there is no denying he's the real deal.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:11:33 PM
Reagan. Before the fact.

Reagan. Before the fact.

Those sports stadium beavers sure work fast.    Goal posts just ZOOM farther way when some people are around.

Quote
TEA. And the 84 Congress, which you omitted.

Lots of things I omitted.

I'm not writing dissertations here.

Quote
Both of which were advances that were crushed, largely by Moderate Republicans taking the air away from them.

You mean the future Never Trumpers.

Who have "Principles".

Quote
All of it overturned. Or close enough to claim it.

Thanks because....

....all those lazy RINO republicans who can't be bothered to vote except in the Big elections, like Archie Bunker.

Maybe if those people with their Principles would stop sitting on their asses when elections came around, the Rodents would have more of a contest.   

I was mowing a lawn...my father's lawn...and he came out of the house and said, "come on, time to vote in the local school election".

"but I'm busy".

And then I got The Look.

And all those Never Trumping Principled Conservative (TM) WINOs (Whiny Republicans in Name Only) are getting The Look from all those Americans that, the 75 Million, because voting is the most important task, a moral and patriotic DUTY, to the defense of the Republic.

We Americans don't like shirkers and goldbrickers.

Quote
offset by twenty friggn trillion in spending. In fact, the money printed under Tump has probably more than offset the tax break in inflation.

Actually, inflation was fairly low under The Last President.    Three dollar gasoline in Los Angeles.   Less than two dollars in America.

Quote
Who have empty hands. No wins. EOs like farts in a windstorm. Throwing fiscal and civil conservatism right under the bus just like every other Republican venture.

Meh. This is not winning.

You're right.  We're not seeing winning here.  We're seeing whining.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:17:10 PM
Well stated @roamer_1 .  I don't agree with everything Rand says, but right now I'm scratching my head to remember what that disagreement was.

I'll tell you what that (bleep) said.

When he was on the debate stage for one of his many failed attempts to get a couple of delegates for the RNC national convention, the question of the USS Cole came up.

Mr. Libertarian blamed the United States and the crew of the USS Cole for the terrorist attack on the Cole that murdered 17 sailors and injured another 39, putting a United States warship out of commission for almost a year.   The USS Cole was refueling in a friendly port.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 10, 2021, 09:19:47 PM
I'll tell you what that (bleep) said.

When he was on the debate stage for one of his many failed attempts to get a couple of delegates for the RNC national convention, the question of the USS Cole came up.

Mr. Libertarian blamed the United States and the crew of the USS Cole for the terrorist attack on the Cole that murdered 17 sailors and injured another 39, putting a United States warship out of commission for almost a year.   The USS Cole was refueling in a friendly port.

Sounds more like Ron Paul, not Rand.  :shrug:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:21:48 PM
Sounds more like Ron Paul, not Rand.  :shrug:

The original post in this sub-thread was:

@Sled Dog

Ron Paul was never ANY type of conservative,and AFAIK,never even CLAIMED to be a conservative. He was and is a Libertarian.


Ooops...that's not right.

THIS is where Ron Paul entered the discussion.   Sorry, everyone.

I was point-of-the-spear for the TEA party, from the very beginning, when it was still in Ron Paul's camp... All the way through.

Yet I won't lift a finger for y'all. You should really try to do that math.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 09:23:24 PM
Those sports stadium beavers sure work fast.    Goal posts just ZOOM farther way when some people are around.

No, the time in question has always been after Reagan. There has not been a political gain on anything since Reagan.

Thirty years of backsliding on Life.
Thirty years of backsliding on 2nd amendment except Cruz and the SCOTUS decision
Thirty years of backsliding on fiscal responsibility.
Thirty years backsliding on civil liberty,

Not a single win on principle, not a single thing steering rightward,

Quote
Maybe if those people with their Principles would stop sitting on their asses when elections came around, the Rodents would have more of a contest.   

I vote for every Conservative I can... I go right out of my way to do it. I even throw money at em. I would do more but i am currently physically incapable. But I would if I could... with gusto.
Maybe if you want more votes you should try Conservatism. That is what it is for.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:26:58 PM
No, the time in question has always been after Reagan.

No, it hasn't been.

The time in question has always been the existence of the Democrat Party.

Like I said, smooth move.   Almost nobody noticed it.

My historical perspective is a historical perspective, not a short slice of my own life, selectively edited to win acclaim in the internet.

What you just tried to do is no different and, in fact, morally equivalent to the actions of the pathetic Global Warming conmen who want to claim the period of "warming" happened in 1800, not 1650 with the end of the Little Ice Age, or 10,000 BC, with the commencement of the Instadial Thaw or 1940, to avoid the hottest years in US history.

What you just tried to play is a standard act of deceitful marketing.   

And you want to miss the single most important achievement of the Trump Era.

Hillary was never Presidentess.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: DCPatriot on June 10, 2021, 09:28:12 PM
Those sports stadium beavers sure work fast.    Goal posts just ZOOM farther way when some people are around.

Lots of things I omitted.

I'm not writing dissertations here.

You mean the future Never Trumpers.

Who have "Principles".

Thanks because....

....all those lazy RINO republicans who can't be bothered to vote except in the Big elections, like Archie Bunker.

Maybe if those people with their Principles would stop sitting on their asses when elections came around, the Rodents would have more of a contest.   

I was mowing a lawn...my father's lawn...and he came out of the house and said, "come on, time to vote in the local school election".

"but I'm busy".

And then I got The Look.

And all those Never Trumping Principled Conservative (TM) WINOs (Whiny Republicans in Name Only) are getting The Look from all those Americans that, the 75 Million, because voting is the most important task, a moral and patriotic DUTY, to the defense of the Republic.

We Americans don't like shirkers and goldbrickers.

You're right.  We're not seeing winning here.  We're seeing whining.

Hang in there, @Sled Dog

When I was a much younger man on the forums, I could go 'Howlin' on somebody with the best of them. (Ask @mystery-ak )

Don't have the patience or the inclination to care much anymore.   The thought that a debate is even happening makes me want to throw up.

But lately, I find myself asking "What would Howlin say?"    :laugh:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:33:03 PM
Hang in there, @Sled Dog

When I was a much younger man on the forums, I could go 'Howlin' on somebody with the best of them. (Ask @mystery-ak )

Don't have the patience or the inclination to care much anymore.   The thought that a debate is even happening makes me want to throw up.

But lately, I find myself asking "What would Howlin say?"    :laugh:



Thanks.

I find the vigorous exercise keeps my memory sharper and my mind more alert.

I mean, it took me a few minutes to remember why Ron Paul so disgusts me, and now I remember.  It was his assinine comments about the USS Cole.   
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 09:35:10 PM
No, it hasn't been.

The time in question has always been the existence of the Democrat Party.

Like I said, smooth move.   Almost nobody noticed it.

My historical perspective is a historical perspective, not a short slice of my own life, selectively edited to win acclaim in the internet.

No it has not. My contention has always been post Reagan. And rightly so. The last grand alignment toward Conservatism was Reagan. Your perspective has nothing to do with it. My declaration has always been 'the last thirty years' , roughly placed... From Reagan forward.

So it would be you moving goalposts.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:36:53 PM
No it has not.

Yes it has.

I think I know what time periods I'm talking about when I'm talking about time periods.

Why do you presume to know what time periods I'm talking about, just because they don't match the periods you want to hide from public view?

You tryin' to Hide the Decline?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:42:56 PM
I know how to stop the advancing Marxification of America.

Everyone stop voting!

That'll do it.

Won't it?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 09:43:33 PM
Yes it has.

I think I know what time periods I'm talking about when I'm talking about time periods.

Why do you presume to know what time periods I'm talking about, just because they don't match the periods you want to hide from public view?

You tryin' to Hide the Decline?

No. It was my declaration. I SAID IT. and I said nothing other than my offense at the Republican party since Reagan, and my disenchantment from Reagan to 07 when I left the Republican party.

I have ALWAYS said there has been no wins since Reagan. Thirty years. 90's, 00s, 10s... Don't be trying to tell me what I said. There are pages of it here, and I said the same thing all the way along.

And if I have said the whole thing all the way along, how the hell did I move the goalposts?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 09:49:07 PM
I know how to stop the advancing Marxification of America.

Everyone stop voting!

That'll do it.

Won't it?

Who stopped voting? Not me. With the exception of the last election where I was disenfranchised, I don't think I missed a one. Might have during my convalescence.

I just don't vote for Liberal Republicans and big.gov Republicans just because they have an 'R' and call themselves 'conservative'... I actually vote for Conservatives. Only.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:51:19 PM
No. It was my declaration. I SAID IT. and I said nothing other than my offense at the Republican party since Reagan, and my disenchantment from Reagan to 07 when I left the Republican party.

I have ALWAYS said there has been no wins since Reagan. Thirty years. 90's, 00s, 10s... Don't be trying to tell me what I said. There are pages of it here, and I said the same thing all the way along.

And if I have said the whole thing all the way along, how the hell did I move the goalposts?

I left the GOP in 1997 or so.

But I STILL fight, have always fought, to destroy the Rodents.

I have NEVER surrendered, never given up, never WHINED.

So forgive my TOTAL LACK of any sympathy for players who want to sit out the game for the rest of their lives because the game isn't fun because they're not winning like they want to.

It's not a game.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 10, 2021, 09:52:48 PM
Who stopped voting? Not me. With the exception of the last election where I was disenfranchised, I don't think I missed a one. Might have during my convalescence.

I just don't vote for Liberal Republicans and big.gov Republicans just because they have an 'R' and call themselves 'conservative'... I actually vote for Conservatives. Only.

Oh, well, at least you're finally admitting the election was stolen.

75,000,000 real Americans were disenfranchised when the Rodents and RINOs conspired to steal the election from us.

What changed your mind and got you to agree the election was stolen?

Oh.

You don't understand what the word "disenfranchised" means.

What it does not mean is "there's no candidate I want on the ballot".    Boo hoo hoo.



Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Right_in_Virginia on June 10, 2021, 09:54:50 PM
That's just it. You ain't saving nothing. Twenty TRILLION dollars. Do you have ANY conception of the damage it causes printing money like that?

I do.

Y'all shut the country OFF. Thousands of small businesses just like me CRATERED for no reason but piss poor leadership...

This will happen for sure and quickly if we surrender to the Marxists @roamer_1   It's a pity your principles don't include priorities.

And you DEFEND it.

I do not.  My worldview includes priorities, yours does not.  Your worldview includes surrender, mine does not.

If you are not standing in those principles, those TRUE THINGS, you are doing more damage than you are helping.

You're standing on true things,  I am fighting for their survival.

I know you are well meaning,

Need I tell you where you can put your condescension?

but ignorantly throwing the truth under the bus ....

You read about truth from your porcelain throne. I carry with me into battle.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 09:57:42 PM
I left the GOP in 1997 or so.

But I STILL fight, have always fought, to destroy the Rodents.

I have NEVER surrendered, never given up, never WHINED.

So forgive my TOTAL LACK of any sympathy for players who want to sit out the game for the rest of their lives because the game isn't fun because they're not winning like they want to.

It's not a game.

Me neither. I reject your partisan air. I don't care about 'Democrat'. I care about 'Liberal'. and I care even more about them being on the right side of the fence. So I will clean them out of the castle before I worry what is beyond the gate. Because I want REAL opposition to liberalism, and that will come from the right.

But only if there IS a Right.
And the Right is DEFINED by principled Conservatism.
It is there to defend those principles - THAT is what I will happily fight for.

Not for the lollygaggin you prefer, where anything goes, up to and including anything the Democrats would do.

You want my help, Defend those principle things. That is what the Right does.
Otherwise I walk, because that is the only thing I signed up for.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 10:09:06 PM
Oh.

You don't understand what the word "disenfranchised" means.

What it does not mean is "there's no candidate I want on the ballot".    Boo hoo hoo.

I do not have a mailbox here at the cabin.
My mail goes down to the ranch, and I pick it up when I do.
We could only vote by mail this election because of the covid,

And even though I have had a standing request for mailed ballot (since when I was in a wheelchair nearly a decade ago), and they have mailed that ballot to the ranch in spite of my residence elsewhere for several elections, this year they checked to make sure the residence and the mailing address match, and if not, the ballot was discarded.

So I never got a ballot, and by the time I found out why, and in that my registration was wrongfully terminated, It was too late for me to fix it.

That is disenfranchisment.

Not that it matters much to you, because I would not have voted for your guy anyway. Twenty friggin trillion bucks in funny money forbids me. As does shutting the country down. No way in hell I would endorse that.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Bigun on June 10, 2021, 10:15:25 PM
Forty + years and still in the exact same rut! Everyone claims to want the same result (constitutional government) but ONLY if THEY get to choose the car we ride in to get there!

I'm SO sick of that shit!
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: DCPatriot on June 10, 2021, 10:21:29 PM
Forty + years and still in the exact same rut! Everyone claims to want the same result (constitutional government) but ONLY if THEY get to choose the car we ride in to get there!

I'm SO sick of that shit!

Thank you, sir!!    :patriot:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 10, 2021, 10:21:43 PM
I do.

This will happen for sure and quickly if we surrender to the Marxists @roamer_1   It's a pity your principles don't include priorities.


It ALREADY happened @Right_in_Virginia , and YOUR GUY did it. My priorities are just fine... One of them being I flatly will not BOHICA. Y'all destroyed me and expect me to take another one for the team. Well no. Bullsh*t on that. Tin Patch time.  And it is a big part of why I see no difference between y'all and the Marxists.

You don't like it when they do it, but you sure as hell don't mind doing it yourselves.

Quote
I do not.  My worldview includes priorities, yours does not.  Your worldview includes surrender, mine does not.

I have surrendered nothing. I am fighting for Conservatism... And it don;t look a damn bit like what y'all are doing.

Quote
You're standing on true things,  I am fighting for their survival.

By destroying them? How the hell does that work?

Quote
You read about truth from your porcelain throne. I carry with me into battle.

There is no Truth in 20 trillion dollars of funny money.
There is no truth in shutting off commerce.
Hell there is no truth in governing by EO.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: skeeter on June 10, 2021, 10:47:45 PM
Forty + years and still in the exact same rut! Everyone claims to want the same result (constitutional government) but ONLY if THEY get to choose the car we ride in to get there!

I'm SO sick of that shit!
i surely don’t give a crap who advances, or attempts to advance, the ball down the field, @Bigun. Even if they fail as long as they try they’ll have my support.

Such a leader is just too damn hard to come by.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 10, 2021, 11:52:09 PM
roamer1:
Me neither. I reject your partisan air. I don't care about 'Democrat'. I care about 'Liberal'.

christian:
The democrats the home party of extremist liberals who advance the liberals worst agendas, have nothing to do with the liberalism they are home to!  How educational!    Just like your trashing  Republicans about ten to one favoring Democrats, but in your delusional world/mind, that's equal or 'fair'.  We have along overdue need for a therapist here !

christian:
Note again,cry about Trumps spending while repairing the nation, silence on biden's spending.  It's just that clear!

roamer1:
And oddly enough, my mind is completely at ease too. As much as some folks try to ladle guilt on me, it's like water off a duck's back.

christian:
Indeed you can't make a reprobate feel guilty, as they are immune to such.  I've argued with the worst of the liberals over the years, they own this trait.

roamer1:
So fine, call me jaded. Bitter. That is probably right - spending all that time and money and faith to help raise up another monster, just the same as Democrats, just as interested in globalism, just as happy if not more happy than the democrats to crush the very people and principles they had promised to defend -That betrayal is one of the deepest betrayals I have ever experienced.

christian:
Again, the same false accusations that Republicans are no different than democrats.  This is true of the RINOs, yet roamer doesn't talk about them, hardly at all.  The democrats are the most guilty of betrayal, yet roamer gives them a pass!  (yet lies and says he doesn't)

roamer1:
I am under no obligation to be fair.

christian:
and as roamer favors one side, and viciously attsacks the other, he really means it about fair.  What kind of false posturing as he is doing could possibly be fair ?
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: LegalAmerican on June 11, 2021, 12:17:04 AM
roamer1:
Me neither. I reject your partisan air. I don't care about 'Democrat'. I care about 'Liberal'.

christian:
The democrats the home party of extremist liberals who advance the liberals worst agendas, have nothing to do with the liberalism they are home to!  How educational!    Just like your trashing  Republicans about ten to one favoring Democrats, but in your delusional world/mind, that's equal.  We have along overdue need for a therapist here !

 :hands:
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 11, 2021, 01:03:38 AM
roamer1:
Me neither. I reject your partisan air. I don't care about 'Democrat'. I care about 'Liberal'.

christian:
The democrats the home party of extremist liberals who advance the liberals worst agendas, have nothing to do with the liberalism they are home to!  How educational!    Just like your trashing  Republicans about ten to one favoring Democrats, but in your delusional world/mind, that's equal or 'fair'.  We have along overdue need for a therapist here !


Yes it is the home of liberals, but not really. Republican moderates who are in control of the party and have been since Reagan left are mad globalists, just like the liberal Democrats. They just want it governed in the board room while Democrats want it governed in the UN. And the Republican left wing has always been the old school back east money for the party and you don't need to look to far to find them... Romulus is a perfect example. Go look at what his daddy stood on and know that apple didn't fall far from the horse. And most of you VOTED FOR him.

Quote
christian:
Note again,cry about Trumps spending while repairing the nation, silence on biden's spending.  It's just that clear!

He repaired NOTHING. That money went to military some, but mostly to liberal crap. If you don;t believe me, sit down and read the porkulus bills that Tumpy signed. MORE leftist crap signed into law, and all the conservative crap by EO so it would disappear in four years. No question, the ball moved LEFT under Tumpy.

Quote
roamer1:
And oddly enough, my mind is completely at ease too. As much as some folks try to ladle guilt on me, it's like water off a duck's back.

christian:
Indeed you can't make a reprobate feel guilty, as they are immune to such.  I've argued with the worst of the liberals over the years, they own this trait.


Nothing at all reprobate in refusing to reward massive spending of funny money and tearing down small business by shutting the country off. That ANYONE would vote for more of that should be an embarrassment.

Quote
roamer1:
So fine, call me jaded. Bitter. That is probably right - spending all that time and money and faith to help raise up another monster, just the same as Democrats, just as interested in globalism, just as happy if not more happy than the democrats to crush the very people and principles they had promised to defend -That betrayal is one of the deepest betrayals I have ever experienced.

christian:
Again, the same false accusations that Republicans are no different than democrats.  This is true of the RINOs, yet roamer doesn't talk about them, hardly at all.  The democrats are the most guilty of betrayal, yet roamer gives them a pass!  (yet lies and says he doesn't)


I give them no pass! I want a Right that will actually fight them FOR REAL That will move the ball to the RIGHT for a change and KEEP moving it to the right... And that ain't y'all. Your argument is that you're better than Democrats, and my reply is not by much. Y'all are JUST as focused on big.gov. You just thing you can do it better than the crats.

Well I will not help with that. Just on the spending I would never support Tump. Oh HELL no.

Quote
roamer1:
I am under no obligation to be fair.

christian:
and as roamer favors one side, and viciously attsacks the other, he really means it about fair.  What kind of false posturing as he is doing could possibly be fair ?

I am not favoring EITHER side. I sure as hell don't want liberals anywhere. But more than anything I do not want them on the RIGHT. That y'all practice big.gov on the right makes y'all a non-starter for Conservatives. True Conservatism embraces fiscal Conservatism. True Conservatism embraces civil Conservatism. That ain't y'all. Not by a long shot.

Liberals are winning because they have no opposition.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 11, 2021, 01:51:55 AM
Me neither. I reject your partisan air. I don't care about 'Democrat'. I care about 'Liberal'.

In the Venn Diagram of political sets, the set of Democrat is 100% included in the set of "Liberal".

The set of Liberal also includes the set of people with Principles (TM) who are perfectly willing to see the nation destroyed by the Liberals, and their lovely little Principles, so long as they themselves don't have to get their hands dirty defending those Principles.    These people area  special subset of the set of Liberals identified most easily as the set of Suckers.

But maybe we could leave mathematics out of the equation, since NO ONE believes 80,000,000 individual people each cast one and only one vote for that senile meat puppet.   That math doesn't work at all.

Quote
and I care even more about them being on the right side of the fence. So I will clean them out of the castle before I worry what is beyond the gate. Because I want REAL opposition to liberalism, and that will come from the right.

Uh, yah, whatever.

The "Castle" is the ENTIRE country and it's overrun with Rodents, but, hey, if you feel only the most perfect of Saints can get their hands dirty sweeping the Rodents out.   Regular real people who want to try the best they can, well, they're just not good enough, because of reasons and things.    Much better to let the crap pile up until death do us part than to expend imperfect effort trying to merely get things started.

Right?

Quote
But only if there IS a Right.
And the Right is DEFINED by principled Conservatism.
It is there to defend those principles - THAT is what I will happily fight for.

You mean by "a Right" the POLITICAL "Right", as in the outmoded linear spectrum of political ideology that usually falsely places National Socialism on the Right and regular Marxism on the Left?   

Hmmm?

That?

Do the police defend the innocent and the weak by sitting on their butts at the donut shop?

No...they defend the public by being proactive, by being visible and letting the criminal element know fear.

You want to defund the conservative movement with silly demands for pointless purity.

That's not going to get you what you claim you want.   It will get the Rodents what they don't claim to want, absolute power.

Hence that thankfully tiny set in the Venn Diagram of Liberal.

Quote
Not for the lollygaggin you prefer, where anything goes, up to and including anything the Democrats would do.

You want my help, Defend those principle things. That is what the Right does.
Otherwise I walk, because that is the only thing I signed up for.

No.

Actually, the Americans really don't want your help.   Not now.   The first rule of bridge building is that you never re-use a buckled member, you throw it away.   The broken part cannot be repaired, it's too dangerous to trust. It is guaranteed to fail at a lower load the next time, and it is guaranteed to fail.

So, don't bother thinking we consider you a Prodigal Son and are eagerly awaiting your Road to Damascus Moment.     Not a chance. 

We discuss these matters with you because you're wrong, this is the internet and it's good training to practice for the time when someone who can be reached needs solid and strong arguments to show someone capable of learning the error of their ways.

Some people are not capable of seeing their error, let alone being big enough to admit their error.

You don't even have to apologize.  There's no point.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 11, 2021, 02:09:40 AM
He repaired NOTHING. That money went to military some, but mostly to liberal crap. If you don;t believe me, sit down and read the porkulus bills that Tumpy signed. MORE leftist crap signed into law, and all the conservative crap by EO so it would disappear in four years. No question, the ball moved LEFT under Tumpy.

Well, there you have it.   STARTING to rebuild the military the Obama Terrorist Regime depleted, that's a "nothing".

Real conservatives sorta kinda consider making the US military strong enough to defend the country somewhat maybe just a little bit REALLY important.


Quote
I am not favoring EITHER side.

That's the problem, ain't it?

You're not Sweden and the time for neutrality never really existed.   

How'd that neutrality thing work for Belgium.   Pick whichever World War you want in your answer.

Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 11, 2021, 02:13:33 AM
In the Venn Diagram of political sets, the set of Democrat is 100% included in the set of "Liberal".

The set of Liberal also includes the set of people with Principles (TM) who are perfectly willing to see the nation destroyed by the Liberals, and their lovely little Principles, so long as they themselves don't have to get their hands dirty defending those Principles.    These people area  special subset of the set of Liberals identified most easily as the set of Suckers.

Riiiight. So that whole Goldwater/Reagan thing is just so much bullsh*t, right

Because that is what I am standing upon.

Quote
But maybe we could leave mathematics out of the equation, since NO ONE believes 80,000,000 individual people each cast one and only one vote for that senile meat puppet.   That math doesn't work at all.

I find it stunning that anyone would vote for either one.

Quote
Uh, yah, whatever.

The "Castle" is the ENTIRE country and it's overrun with Rodents, but, hey, if you feel only the most perfect of Saints can get their hands dirty sweeping the Rodents out.   Regular real people who want to try the best they can, well, they're just not good enough, because of reasons and things.    Much better to let the crap pile up until death do us part than to expend imperfect effort trying to merely get things started.


I reject that wholly. Printing HUGH piles of funny money ain't doing the best you can.
Shutting the damn country OFF ain't doing the best you can.

And voting for more of it after the fact sure as hell ain't doing the best you can.

And I am not looking for perfect. It is as false a charge as it was upthread the last 34 times.
Hell if he only didn't spend quite as much as Obummer, that would be a tiny lean in the right direction at least. But by rights, he should have easily cut spending by 25% over Obummer (who spent twice as much as Boosh) and balanced the budget... Hell if he even HAD a budget...

And it is sheer idiocy to say that is too much to ask for.


Quote

Right?

You mean by "a Right" the POLITICAL "Right", as in the outmoded linear spectrum of political ideology that usually falsely places National Socialism on the Right and regular Marxism on the Left?   

Hmmm?

That?

Yeah I mean the Right. You know. Conservatives. We exist. I know you;d like to say that's all gone now so you can be comfortable spending us into oblivion right alongside the liberals... And so you can justify shutting the nation OFF with your draconian over-state. But too bad for you, folks exist that would like the government to operate just like they do when they are sitting at the kitchen table trying to figure out how the hell they are gonna get the buffalo to kiss the injun's ass this time...

Some of us know that any government big enough to help you is big enough to enslave you, and it WILL. Doesn't matter if it is Tumpy or Buydem at the helm.

Quote
Do the police defend the innocent and the weak by sitting on their butts at the donut shop?

No...they defend the public by being proactive, by being visible and letting the criminal element know fear.

You want to defund the conservative movement with silly demands for pointless purity.

That's not going to get you what you claim you want.   It will get the Rodents what they don't claim to want, absolute power.

Howabout you worry about defunding the government before we're friggin Venezuela?


Quote
Actually, the Americans really don't want your help.   Not now.   The first rule of bridge building is that you never re-use a buckled member, you throw it away.   The broken part cannot be repaired, it's too dangerous to trust. It is guaranteed to fail at a lower load the next time, and it is guaranteed to fail.

Suits me fine. I always have something better to do than support big.gov liberal Republicans.

Have fun. See you in Venezuela... Or, no I won't... Because I will be so far back in the sticks with all my family that we will ride it out fine.

It's a Republic, if you can keep it. Here's a hint: You won't.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: roamer_1 on June 11, 2021, 02:22:37 AM
Well, there you have it.   STARTING to rebuild the military the Obama Terrorist Regime depleted, that's a "nothing".

Real conservatives sorta kinda consider making the US military strong enough to defend the country somewhat maybe just a little bit REALLY important.


Go look at what in them porkulus bills he signed. Really. I double dog dare you. And then come back and try to defend it. as military spending.

Quote
That's the problem, ain't it?

You're not Sweden and the time for neutrality never really existed.   

How'd that neutrality thing work for Belgium.   Pick whichever World War you want in your answer.

I ain't neutral. I am against BOTH your houses. Neither side can be trusted. And the only way to fix it is to cut the federal government off at the knees. or better yet, the ankles. Because BOTH sides are taking your liberty.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Sled Dog on June 11, 2021, 03:06:35 AM
Riiiight. So that whole Goldwater/Reagan thing is just so much bullsh*t, right

Because that is what I am standing upon.

Goldwater didn't want Reagan to reach out to the Christian religious core of the country and felt that the GOP was making a mistake opposing abortion.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-08-07-mn-4874-story.html

So..."eff" Goldwater.

Got it?

That you standing on, the corpses of fifty or sixty million babies murdered before ever taking a single breath?

So much for "Principles (TM), hey?

Quote
I find it stunning that anyone would vote for either one.

Not making a choice is making a bad choice.

I made a good choice.   Trump adores the military and doesn't want babies murdered.   And he thinks America is worth fighting for.

Which of those three violates Principles (TM), besides the lust to kill babies?

Quote
I reject that wholly. Printing HUGH piles of funny money ain't doing the best you can.

Maybe someday you'll learn how sausage is made, too?

Reality does intrude on the most Principled (TM) of those adhering to the Principles.   

Quote
Shutting the damn country OFF ain't doing the best you can.

When someone hires an expert to give expert advice, and all the experts queried provide the same advice, does the patient ignore the advice and let the tumor grow?

Case in point:
After I got my degree, took a while to find an aerospace job.   My old boss had started up his own contracting business so I swung a hammer for him for nearly a year.   One of the jobs we did involved putting new stairs to the basement.   The stairs, if I remember correctly, had thirteen risers plus a 1.0 inch clearance for the floor at the top.   They were puzzling over it...our one real carpenter was a cabinet maker...so I did the algebra and told them they needed risers of...7 and 13/16 inches.   They said "That's stupid.  We'll make it 7 and 3/4."  I told them it will be short.  And sure enough, they bitched up a storm when the stairs were 13/16 too short.

They didn't take the advise of their mathematician, the expert.

Trump is not an epidemiologist.   He HAD to take the advice of the experts or people, many people, could have died.

You're faulting Trump for doing something you flatly refused to do.  He made a decision.   

You're still demanding perfection from human beings.   

Good luck with that.

Quote
And voting for more of it after the fact sure as hell ain't doing the best you can.

I voted for less of it.

Now YOU have Captain Filled Underpants in the White House, and he didn't even win the election to get there.

Quote
And I am not looking for perfect.

Agreed.

You're not looking for it because you know you can't find it.

But you are DEMANDING it.

You are demanding something you know can't be found.   

What does that say, hmmmm?

Quote
Hell if he only didn't spend quite as much as Obummer, that would be a tiny lean in the right direction at least. But by rights, he should have easily cut spending by 25% over Obummer (who spent twice as much as Boosh) and balanced the budget... Hell if he even HAD a budget...

Explain carefully why Congress has not passed a REAL budget in the last 13 years or more...I don't know when the last budget was passed.

Like I said, you need to UNDERSTAND the realities of government, and stop pretending the rest of us don't know how the government works and who is to blame for the lack of a proper budget.   In the Era of Trump, you need to discuss this matter with Principled Conservative (TM) RINO Ryan and Naughty Pelosi.

Quote
And it is sheer idiocy to say that is too much to ask for.

No point in asking when what you're supposed to be doing it fighting for it.

Oh.

I forgot.

Never mind.

Quote
Yeah I mean the Right. You know. Conservatives. We exist. I know you;d like to say that's all gone now so you can be comfortable spending us into oblivion right alongside the liberals... And so you can justify shutting the nation OFF with your draconian over-state. But too bad for you, folks exist that would like the government to operate just like they do when they are sitting at the kitchen table trying to figure out how the hell they are gonna get the buffalo to kiss the injun's ass this time...

Yeah, I know.   Like I said, your picture of the political spectrum is false.    Refer to the Venn Diagram discussion above.

If the Principled Conservatives (TM) are one thing, the one thing they are not is conservative.   They sit out and refuse to do their duty as voting citizens.  Conservatives don't shirk their duties.

Quote
Some of us know that any government big enough to help you is big enough to enslave you, and it WILL. Doesn't matter if it is Tumpy or Buydem at the helm.

And those of us who don't have Principles (TM) know that deciding to do nothing to object to the growth of government get more government.   

Thomas Jefferson et al were willing to put their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor on the line to throw over the yoke of imperial enslavement.   Other people think isolating themselves in a cabin in the woods and not participating is equally effective.

Quote
Howabout you worry about defunding the government before we're friggin Venezuela?

What do you think the purpose of voting is?

Why do you think ...er...FEEL the reason the real Americans are furious at the Stolen Election and seriously not happy with those pretending to have Principles (TM) who still don't have the honesty to admit the election was stolen?

How is the government made less dangerous when people hiding behind false Principles (TM) eagerly oppose the Americans with real principles who want honest elections?

Answer:  It can't be.

Quote
Suits me fine. I always have something better to do than support big.gov liberal Republicans.

You mean those with Principles (TM)

Quote
Have fun. See you in Venezuela... Or, no I won't... Because I will be so far back in the sticks with all my family that we will ride it out fine.

Actually, that's not how any of that works.   

Marxists WILL NOT let you escape.   

Hide in the woods during a nuclear war?  The fallout is guaranteed to get you.

Hide in the woods during a bolshevik revolution?   They WILL come for you.   The one thing, the absolute one thing, the Marxist will not tolerate is dissent.   And if they have to kill you to end the dissent, they'll be very very happy.  They like to kill.

And if you think you're secure in your little hideaway, you'll one day have a conversation with David Koresh and Randy Weaver.

Quote
It's a Republic, if you can keep it. Here's a hint: You won't.

Here's another hint:

The United States hasn't been a republic since the ratification of the 17th Amendment.

The conservatives lacking Principles (TM) have been fighting to recover the Republic since it was destroyed.  Our chances of success are the same as those of Emperor Claudius.

 But at least we're fighting, in the hopes that something can be rescued.   If I wanted to, I could buy a sailboat and escape to Australia, but I'm a real American and that's not the moral thing to do.  But running away won't work.  It will only accelerate the destruction.   And once America has died the (D), the world collapses.

(Besides which there are only two ways to decently cross the ocean.   Fly over it or sail under it.)
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: sneakypete on June 11, 2021, 09:48:01 AM
Well, there you have it.   STARTING to rebuild the military the Obama Terrorist Regime depleted, that's a "nothing".

Real conservatives sorta kinda consider making the US military strong enough to defend the country somewhat maybe just a little bit REALLY important.


That's the problem, ain't it?

You're not Sweden and the time for neutrality never really existed.   

How'd that neutrality thing work for Belgium.   Pick whichever World War you want in your answer.

@Sled Dog

Ladies and gentlemens,we have a winna!
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: christian on June 11, 2021, 02:05:39 PM
Notice the false repetitive of equality and the one sided bashing, while pretending such is equal and 'fair', and clearly not so.

roamer1:
Well I will not help with that. Just on the spending I would never support Tump. Oh HELL no.

roamer1:
I am not favoring EITHER side.

That's quite impressive, you show in your first quote of spending, Trump hell no, where did you mentioned the democrats equally!  Such overwhelming repetitive actions, clearly one sided.  While still posturing not favoring a side.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: HoustonSam on June 11, 2021, 02:40:06 PM
Notice the false repetitive of equality and the one sided bashing, while pretending such is equal and 'fair', and clearly not so.

roamer1:
Well I will not help with that. Just on the spending I would never support Tump. Oh HELL no.

roamer1:
I am not favoring EITHER side.

That's quite impressive, you show in your first quote of spending, Trump hell no, where did you mentioned the democrats equally!  Such overwhelming repetitive actions, clearly one sided.  While still posturing not favoring a side.

This observation is pointless.  Opposition to the Ds is assumed here, it's why you can draw the wrath of a Mod for calling someone a D or accusing them openly of supporting the Ds.  @roamer_1 is not obligated to prove his bona fides by ritually denouncing the Ds every time he advocates his position.
Title: Re: David Marcus defines the New Right conservative movement
Post by: Cyber Liberty on June 11, 2021, 02:43:59 PM
Since we're approaching 300 posts on this Topic, and not much new ground being covered in the last several pages, I think it's time to put this one to bed.  It's beyond "I Like Pie" stage.

This Topic is locked.  Please find something else to do?