It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => Politics/Legislation/Elections => Topic started by: trapeze on August 04, 2013, 11:42:58 PM
-
This guy (http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2013/08/a-schizophrenic-elephant.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FromNyToIsraelSultanRevealsTheStoriesBehindTheNews+%28from+NY+to+Israel+Sultan+Reveals+The+Stories+Behind+the+News%29) says (very well, I might add) what I have come to believe over the last year.
The thing is, though, that even if you explained this to the party faithful, even if you laid it all out like this guy does, most of them are gonna ignore it...pretend that it isn't reality because for them the truth is just not acceptable. They will continue to live in their little dream world repeating to themselves over and over, "Next time we are going to win...next time." They can have it.
Personally, I'm sort of done. I'll vote for the best candidate in any given election but I'm not fooling myself anymore as to the reality of the GOP. Screw them. Not another dime of my money and not another minute of my time.
The Republican Party became lost in the political currents and found itself stuck with a populist base that opposed most of its values. The contradictions were paved over with rhetoric. The GOP would pretend to represent the values of its base on social and economic issues, even as [it] worked against them. And no matter how often this baffling betrayal takes place, it's always a shock to a base that imagines that the Republican Party must stand for the same values as its voters. It doesn't. It never did.
The GOP is still basically the same party that it was after the Civil War. It believes that big government can make the country work, that centralizing everything will make the country more modern and that anything that contributes to growth must be good. And it's stuck with a base of Jacksonian Democrats who are highly suspicious of centralized power, value their independence and don't think that anyone should tell them what to do. Meanwhile the Republican Party's donors come from a more traditional Republican brand of politics.
Every now and then, a Republican Party leader must feel tempted to stand up and say. "Folks, you've got us wrong. We don't really stand for any of the things that you think we do. We like small business, in theory. But we like big business more. That's about all we have in common. Also we're still against Communism, not that it matters anymore. But we're fine with having a lot of government agencies. We created most of them. And we like abortion and gay rights. We're also on board with Global Warming, illegal immigration and some international law."
So the choice is now very clear to me. It's between "bad" and "worse" and I don't care for either. So my choice is going to be something else. I don't know what it is but that's what I'm going for as soon as I know what it is.
EDIT: As an aside, you can mark the "definitive" moment when our country gave up on greatness. It was when we gave up on space exploration. We turned inward and stopped doing truly great things. Now we can't even build a frickin' fence. Pathetic.
-
So, basically "greatness" ended under Clinton, right? I mean that was the age of robotocized space exploration and the start of hitching rides on Rooskie rockets to the ISS. Oh, and Newt the Great began backslidding on promises and exposed himself as a Big Government guy. For me the decline in greatness really began to take root when GWH Bush exposed himself to be a fraud.
The GOP is the Chicago Cubs of politics...they always look to next year...but after so much losing their fan base is in even worse shape, more Miami Marlin like.
GOP can't die fast enough to save the nation...surviving the collapse and aftermath and then rebuilding, that is where our energies are most needed.
-
So, basically "greatness" ended under Clinton, right?
I was leaning more in the direction of manned space exploration. We sort of stopped doing that at the end of the Apollo program. I should have said and emphasized "manned." I remember when I was younger thinking that by the time I retired we would have a permanent outpost on the moon, etc. We gave up on that kind of stuff under Ford/Carter and no one has had any real "vision" for great things since. As I did say, though, we can't even build a fence so why should we expect to do anything "great?" The funny thing is that all of the greatness in the space program took place under Democrats. The drive to the moon was initiated by JFK. Today we have O'BongoCare as a measure of presidential greatness. We have turned inward. We have been in decline for decades. It just took a socialist buffoon to drive a stake into the heart of the country to finish the job. A buffoon aided and abetted by the fecklessness of the establishment GOP.
-
So, basically "greatness" ended under Clinton, right?
I was leaning more in the direction of manned space exploration. We sort of stopped doing that at the end of the Apollo program. I should have said and emphasized "manned." I remember when I was younger thinking that by the time I retired we would have a permanent outpost on the moon, etc. We gave up on that kind of stuff under Ford/Carter and no one has had any real "vision" for great things since. As I did say, though, we can't even build a fence so why should we expect to do anything "great?" The funny thing is that all of the greatness in the space program took place under Democrats. The drive to the moon was initiated by JFK. Today we have O'BongoCare as a measure of presidential greatness. We have turned inward. We have been in decline for decades. It just took a socialist buffoon to drive a stake into the heart of the country to finish the job. A buffoon aided and abetted by the fecklessness of the establishment GOP.
Oh I agree, and I knew you meant "manned" spaceflight...my only point on that score being that we did have the Space Shuttle (the "bus"), it was manned, no comparison to Apollo though...under Clinton we took the bold leap of exploring solely by remote control...about as official an admission as we will get that great things are over, dreams of manned missions to Mars or anywhere else gone forever...social welfare program entitlements and the debt (progressive big government clowns in both parties) killed any hope to real greatness.
-
No, I meant manned space exploration. The shuttle was a bus, not a vehicle for true exploration. We really stopped developing space exploration vehicles while we had the shuttle. And the shuttle turned out to be incredibly dangerous as designed...lose a tile and you can't re-enter the atmosphere and survive. It was an amazing technological innovation when it was designed and created...in the 1970's. A comparison would be Boeing creating the 747 and then just stopping at that point.
-
No, I meant manned space exploration. The shuttle was a bus, not a vehicle for true exploration. We really stopped developing space exploration vehicles while we had the shuttle. And the shuttle turned out to be incredibly dangerous as designed...lose a tile and you can't re-enter the atmosphere and survive. It was an amazing technological innovation when it was designed and created...in the 1970's. A comparison would be Boeing creating the 747 and then just stopping at that point.
Oh, manned "exploration", yeah, that ended December 19, 1972 when Apollo 17 (Challenger LEM) left the moon...here we are 41 years later...
-
Capitalism is the key. In our early times, even before the institution of our republic, the kings and emperor's of the time, gave deeds to those who would own the land, who would pursue its wealth. What if Congress, and the President would acknowledge the right of whoever would set foot upon it? Would this unlock our pioneer spirit again? What you could claim there would be YOURS as assuredly as it was to the early settlers. We could do a 400 square mile, to be arbitrary, limitation, with all mineral rights included. Would that be sufficient to entice exploration again? If an asteroid was smaller, the corporation who claimed it would have FULL rights to ALL of it. If they managed to reach Jupiter, or Mars, or Venus, they could have all they could control. Each man of the corporation could make claim. What might it open up? The spirit is not dead, the law is. We must recognize that spirit and once again reward it.
-
This is it in a nutshell:
It's the wasted energy and votes of its base who might have been able to make a difference that it has siphoned off in multiple elections. The voters who might have been able to save America instead wasted their votes and energies on the likes of Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan
This guy is singing my song. It just so happens that it's also the GOP's swan song. They corral the conservative vote, then systematically deny it any power and influence in government.
If there is an historical retrospective on where "we" went wrong, it was in listening to the dire warnings about going 3rd party for all those years. In retrospect, wouldn't it have been nice to chuck the GOP back when the electoral consequences weren't as severe? Sure, it would have benefit the Democrats in the immediate term, but within a few election cycles the GOP's heir apparent would have become the new heavyweight and the GOP gone mercifully the way of the Whigs.
The deplorable state we are in now as a civilization is, I think, due more to Republican ineptitude than to Democrat aptitude. They are the authors of this crumbling house of cards.
-
Oh, manned "exploration", yeah, that ended December 19, 1972 when Apollo 17 (Challenger LEM) left the moon...here we are 41 years later...
Yeah, that's what I was driving at. What are we known for in the world today? We are known for making movies. We are also known for developing state of the art military hardware and for having the world's best special forces. We used to be known as having the world's best medical system. But we don't do big impressive stuff anymore. Apparently that was a one off.
But getting back to the real topic of this thread (since that was an aside)...
It is becoming more and more clear as time goes on that the Reagan years were an aberration and that Nixon, Ford, GHWB and GWB (not to mention Dole and Romney) have been the real faces of the GOP.
I'm old enough now and I've seen enough that I know these things to be true. And I have decided to stop playing that game. Will the country go into the toilet because I'm not going to fight anymore? It's going into the toilet if our guys win so what's the point? It just goes into the toilet faster if the Democrats win. After watching our side virtually surrender on immigration and healthcare there is just no denying it. So I'm gonna go sort of a modified Galt. I'm not physically going somewhere to hide out but I am beginning to live my life as if the country is going to fail in a way similar to Detroit. I'm allocating my resources accordingly.
The guy who wrote that article is right. It's been this way for many, many decades and it isn't going to change. There will have to be a collapse. There will be darkness and it will be bad. I say "bad" because you just can't have a major world power collapse and not have far reaching consequences. Plus, something will fill the vacuum that our collapse represents and it will not be better or the same. It will be worse. That's just human behavior and human history.
The United States was a terrific experiment but it has failed and it failed because there were not enough good people willing to stand and fight. I don't blame the Democrats anymore than I blame a tiger for being a tiger. There was never any doubt about who they were and where they wanted to take the country...not since FDR, anyway. I do blame the GOP for pretending to be that which it is not and for lulling its followers into a false sense of security, for giving them hope, for taking their donations and using them against them. I blame the Bob Doles and the John McCains of the party for where we are and for where we are now ultimately and inevitably heading. They lied to us and they sold us out. They remind me of (the largely fictional account of) the Scottish clan chiefs who sold out William Wallace in "Braveheart." We could have won but we didn't even try to fight and now it is largely too late to do anything.
Best case scenario: The country comes to its senses and throws all Democrats out of office and replaces them with actual conservatives who immediately restore all individual freedoms and something approaching fiscal sanity. We still lose because the debt is now so enormous that we are crushed under its weight. The country still dies but it dies slower and with a good conscience.
Of course, that will never happen. We will still be stuck with the best minds the Democrat party has to offer and there will be enough GOPers willing to cooperate with them that the country is finished. So basically a choice of driving at 100 mph directly over the cliff to certain death or braking a bit and turning the wheel slightly and plunging over the edge at only 95 mph again, to certain death.
Depressing? Yes. Yes, it is. But I'm accepting it, now. I am sorry for my children and grandchildren (yet to come) for I have failed them in that I didn't see the fraud. I was fooled for years and now it's too late.
-
Capitalism is the key. In our early times, even before the institution of our republic, the kings and emperor's of the time, gave deeds to those who would own the land, who would pursue its wealth. What if Congress, and the President would acknowledge the right of whoever would set foot upon it? Would this unlock our pioneer spirit again? What you could claim there would be YOURS as assuredly as it was to the early settlers. We could do a 400 square mile, to be arbitrary, limitation, with all mineral rights included. Would that be sufficient to entice exploration again? If an asteroid was smaller, the corporation who claimed it would have FULL rights to ALL of it. If they managed to reach Jupiter, or Mars, or Venus, they could have all they could control. Each man of the corporation could make claim. What might it open up? The spirit is not dead, the law is. We must recognize that spirit and once again reward it.
I don't see how any Earth-based government could have any legal say over any extraterrestrial property. But, that said, I agree that space exploration should now be left to private concerns. The problem is, as it always has been, that space exploration is scary expensive mainly because it is so difficult to leave Earth's gravity well and so dangerous coming back. It's physics and that's that. But there are now signs that private enterprise is moving in that direction. Unfortunately they are also liberals.
-
There are few individuals who can save the GOP. Very, very few. Immigration is weeding out the smiling back-stabbers. There is one politician who has more electability that Rand Paul, although they are on the same very small constitutionalists team.
Guess whom I'm supporting?
-
There are few individuals who can save the GOP. Very, very few. Immigration is weeding out the smiling back-stabbers. There is one politician who has more electability that Rand Paul, although they are on the same very small constitutionalists team.
Guess whom I'm supporting?
Ted Cruz?
-
Capitalism is the key. In our early times, even before the institution of our republic, the kings and emperor's of the time, gave deeds to those who would own the land, who would pursue its wealth. What if Congress, and the President would acknowledge the right of whoever would set foot upon it? Would this unlock our pioneer spirit again? What you could claim there would be YOURS as assuredly as it was to the early settlers. We could do a 400 square mile, to be arbitrary, limitation, with all mineral rights included. Would that be sufficient to entice exploration again? If an asteroid was smaller, the corporation who claimed it would have FULL rights to ALL of it. If they managed to reach Jupiter, or Mars, or Venus, they could have all they could control. Each man of the corporation could make claim. What might it open up? The spirit is not dead, the law is. We must recognize that spirit and once again reward it.
I don't see how any Earth-based government could have any legal say over any extraterrestrial property. But, that said, I agree that space exploration should now be left to private concerns. The problem is, as it always has been, that space exploration is scary expensive mainly because it is so difficult to leave Earth's gravity well and so dangerous coming back. It's physics and that's that. But there are now signs that private enterprise is moving in that direction. Unfortunately they are also liberals.
Not just liberals, wealthy liberals.
I relate the story of Orville and Wilbur Wright to people that say "Why can't private industry start exploring space?". In the late 1800's and early 1900's there was a large number of people that were experimenting with flight. It was easy and inexpensive (relatively). All an industrious person needed was time and a little cash and they could attempt to build their own aeroplane. There was no incredibly harsh environment you needed to survive in, and the costs/knowledge associated with building an aeroplane were relatively low. To go to space, now that is a different story. You need to be able to survive in a no atmosphere/no pressure/no gravity environment which requires pressure/environment suits, you need to travel outside the Earth's gravity well or at least to the edge of it which requires speed (lots and lots of speed), you need to be able to control your vehicle which requires an attitude control system (rocket motors are not cheap), you need to be able to return home which requires a re-entry and landing system (thermal survival for the re-entry and some sort of attenuation system to keep the landing loads low on the occupants). All of this requires lots and lots of money. Even Elon Musk can't afford to do all of this on his own dime (he has a few Space Act Agreements (SAA's) with NASA) so the government provides him some funds. All these things put Space Exploration out of the hands of entrepreneurs (with the exception of the extremely rich with gov subsidies), you can not build a rocket in your backyard capable of space exploration.
-
I thought we had a permanent base on the moon because in short if not where are all these moonbats coming from? ::hysterical::
-
I heard Rubio on Levin today. Levin made it clear up front that they were not going to discuss immigration and the only explanation for that is that it was a pre-condition for the interview. So they talked about embassies being closed and other mostly BS. I was a bit disappointed in Levin for doing the interview with Rubio, pre-condition or not. I wouldn't give Rubio a second of my time. He deserves to be shunned by conservatives.
He is not worthy of us.
A sellout.
A liar.
The perfect establishment GOP politician.
EDIT: Also this evening, HotAir featured this link (http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/08/05/rubios-new-mission-win-back-the-republican-partys-base/comment-page-1/) in their headlines area about whether or not Rubio can win back the GOP base. I didn't see it before it was almost off the main page so I didn't bother commenting. But others did. There were almost two full pages of comments and that's pretty good for an item that didn't get a writeup from one of their inhouse writers. The comments are about what you might expect...most everyone hates Rubio now. The overall consensus is that the low intelligence voters in the GOP might support him but the true conservatives will give him the finger.
This business about Rubio "winning back" the base is a new one when you think about it. Wasn't that long ago that the conventional wisdom was that only Rubio could lead on immigration in the GOP (sort of like only Nixon could go to China, I suppose). Only Rubio could win over the base with his new thinking on immigration or amnesty or something. Now he's trolling for support in any place he can find it. If he was "man overboard" though, most of us would gladly toss him an anvil.
-
Many anvil-worthy types abound, Rubio is but one of them.
And when is J-Mac gonna stop jerking everyone off and officially leave the GOP? It might not save the GOP but it would be more honest...and others could follow that asshat. But whatever, the GOP is in deadspin, whatever I would like to see has no practical effect and is merely for amusement.
-
I heard Rubio on Levin today. Levin made it clear up front that they were not going to discuss immigration and the only explanation for that is that it was a pre-condition for the interview. So they talked about embassies being closed and other mostly BS. I was a bit disappointed in Levin for doing the interview with Rubio, pre-condition or not. I wouldn't give Rubio a second of my time. He deserves to be shunned by conservatives.
He is not worthy of us.
A sellout.
A liar.
The perfect establishment GOP politician.
EDIT: Also this evening, HotAir featured this link (http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/08/05/rubios-new-mission-win-back-the-republican-partys-base/comment-page-1/) in their headlines area about whether or not Rubio can win back the GOP base. I didn't see it before it was almost off the main page so I didn't bother commenting. But others did. There were almost two full pages of comments and that's pretty good for an item that didn't get a writeup from one of their inhouse writers. The comments are about what you might expect...most everyone hates Rubio now. The overall consensus is that the low intelligence voters in the GOP might support him but the true conservatives will give him the finger.
This business about Rubio "winning back" the base is a new one when you think about it. Wasn't that long ago that the conventional wisdom was that only Rubio could lead on immigration in the GOP (sort of like only Nixon could go to China, I suppose). Only Rubio could win over the base with his new thinking on immigration or amnesty or something. Now he's trolling for support in any place he can find it. If he was "man overboard" though, most of us would gladly toss him an anvil.
It's hard to win back that he really didn't own.
-
I was behind him until the immigration betrayal. And that is most certainly what it was. He campaigned on an "enforcement first...seal the border...no amnesty" platform and raised lots of money and won his senate seat. A lot of people supported him over Crist when it looked like he was going to lose. A lot of people gave him a lot of money.
And this is how he returns the favor. I think he did have the base. I know that he has lost it. I don't think there is any going back.
-
I was behind him until the immigration betrayal. And that is most certainly what it was. He campaigned on an "enforcement first...seal the border...no amnesty" platform and raised lots of money and won his senate seat. A lot of people supported him over Crist when it looked like he was going to lose. A lot of people gave him a lot of money.
And this is how he returns the favor. I think he did have the base. I know that he has lost it. I don't think there is any going back.
He was either a betrayer from the start, or he came to believe the eGOP hype that he was the GOP's Great Hispanic Hope. It seems that he thought that his heritage gave him some unique ability to broker amnesty that both sides would accept.
He was too stupid to realize that the GOP isn't that smart... See what I did there?
-
I was behind him until the immigration betrayal. And that is most certainly what it was. He campaigned on an "enforcement first...seal the border...no amnesty" platform and raised lots of money and won his senate seat. A lot of people supported him over Crist when it looked like he was going to lose. A lot of people gave him a lot of money.
And this is how he returns the favor. I think he did have the base. I know that he has lost it. I don't think there is any going back.
He was either a betrayer from the start, or he came to believe the eGOP hype that he was the GOP's Great Hispanic Hope. It seems that he thought that his heritage gave him some unique ability to broker amnesty that both sides would accept.
He was too stupid to realize that the GOP isn't that smart... See what I did there?
Floridians told us from the start that when he was in the FL legislature, he was pro-illegals; it's a matter of record.
-
Floridians told us from the start that when he was in the FL legislature, he was pro-illegals; it's a matter of record.
Somehow I missed that. Don't know how but I did. And then there was all of that "no way I'm gonna let amnesty happen," stuff and it seemed authentic and all...
...so to me, it's a betrayal. And no, I don't care if Floridians warned me about it, it is a betrayal and I won't forgive that.
-
Floridians told us from the start that when he was in the FL legislature, he was pro-illegals; it's a matter of record.
Somehow I missed that. Don't know how but I did. And then there was all of that "no way I'm gonna let amnesty happen," stuff and it seemed authentic and all...
...so to me, it's a betrayal. And no, I don't care if Floridians warned me about it, it is a betrayal and I won't forgive that.
Still better than RINO Crist on any day but agreed, betrayal of campaign. I hate lawyers and this is the main reason why, they're trained liars.
-
Floridians told us from the start that when he was in the FL legislature, he was pro-illegals; it's a matter of record.
Somehow I missed that. Don't know how but I did. And then there was all of that "no way I'm gonna let amnesty happen," stuff and it seemed authentic and all...
...so to me, it's a betrayal. And no, I don't care if Floridians warned me about it, it is a betrayal and I won't forgive that.
Still better than RINO Crist on any day but agreed, betrayal of campaign. I hate lawyers and this is the main reason why, they're trained liars.
Another old dead guy (Shakespeare) vindicated.
-
Floridians told us from the start that when he was in the FL legislature, he was pro-illegals; it's a matter of record.
no one listens
many of these people have histories that are eye brow raising and it's gets swept under the rug because he says he's one of us
I've seen it locally. The candidate says he's pro-life then gets in office and then he's not voting pro-life. Welllll, those pro-life votes before turn out not to be so pro-life when they get looked at. But too late he's elected to a higher office.
-
This is why I believe every election year should have a new system wherein 10% of the sitting Congress is forced to perform in a Running Man competition. Winners get to keep their seat. Losers get to provide economic stimulus to the mortuary business.
The formula for choosing the 10% will assign a score to each member, and the heaviest weighted component will be number of years in office.
-
This is why I believe every election year should have a new system wherein 10% of the sitting Congress is forced to perform in a Running Man competition. Winners get to keep their seat. Losers get to provide economic stimulus to the mortuary business.
The formula for choosing the 10% will assign a score to each member, and the heaviest weighted component will be number of years in office.
That's one hell of a good idea, Glock. ::thumbsup::
-
Rubio got elected because the other choice was Charlie Crist.I have come to the point in my life where I might vote for the democrat to dump a useless rino and settle it in the next election. That my friends is how we get rid of the establishment Repubs.
If somebody out there could call the plays all we have to do is vote so as not to lose control of the house but we can still dump the most worthless ones ASAP.Once that gets out in DC we will have our government back cause the rest will pay attention as to how it's done.
-
So you're still holding out hope this problem can be resolved through the electorate?
-
So you're still holding out hope this problem can be resolved through the electorate?
I have to hang on to some damned thing.
-
So you're still holding out hope this problem can be resolved through the electorate?
I have to hang on to some damned thing.
I thought you had a new Beretta? ::saywhat::
-
So you're still holding out hope this problem can be resolved through the electorate?
I have to hang on to some damned thing.
I thought you had a new Beretta? ::saywhat::
I keep telling you that I sold it and the 2K rounds of ammo and all the shotguns a while back.
-
So you're still holding out hope this problem can be resolved through the electorate?
I have to hang on to some damned thing.
I thought you had a new Beretta? ::saywhat::
I keep telling you that I sold it and the 2K rounds of ammo and all the shotguns a while back.
Oh, yeah. Up here we got lots of boating accidents.
-
I did not know that Ace has, like me, given up on the GOP. That was made very plain today with this post... (http://minx.cc/?post=342345)
...there are only so many times one can say "I'm quitting this party and will henceforth only support third party candidates."
Well, I have said it. Many of us have. We mean it. And it's over.
Go ahead and do what you like, GOP. The divorce is final.
Done.
Chuck Shumer says he doesn't mind the Republicans' piecemeal strategy (passing small separate bills on immigration), because he intends just to collect them all up into a single bill which will be "conferenced" with the Senate, and then he'll deliver amnesty just as the Gang of Eight has long plotted.
I guess this is why I'm not terribly political anymore, or it seems as if I don't care as much. I don't. I knew this was coming, I knew there was nothing to stop it.
There will be a third party and there will be a 20 year period of Democratic dominance.
It is unavoidable.
So I have retreated into a sort of philosophical take on it all. Politics isn't fun when you always lose and worse yet your team plays to lose, because secretly they have a great deal of affection for and allegiance to the other side.
There's no point plotting this move and that move; all moves are failures and result in the same dismal outcome. I don't know if it is an effective strategy to just retreat into the completely impractical/philosophical, but I do know I have no interest in playing a ludicrous game in which there is only one set of permissible moves and only one permitted outcome.
I don't want to play this pretend-game. There is no point to this pretend-game, except to snooker people into thinking they have some input into the system, which they do not.
For those of us who are done: You may have our acquiesensce but you will no longer have our votes.
It's like I say about gerbils. Gerbils will always get out of their cages because all they do is plot 14 hours per day how to get out of the cage. They have no other thoughts. They have no other goals.
You cannot control something that is plotting every waking hour to escape the cage.
The Republican Gerbils want this, they will never stop wanting it, they will never stop, period.
I'm tired of fighting with them. At some point, you just accept that the Gerbil wants to be free to be eaten by the cat. And you let him go.
Because you have better things to do with your time than minding a Gerbil all day long.
You know, all these months that Mickey Kaus has been saying "Hey, don't go to sleep, we have to fight amensty," I've been thinking one thing: What's the point? It's kabuki. It's nothing but a never-ending string of "breakthroughs" and "dramatic compromises" and "billions of new dollars for border security" all with the exact same goal, to con us into acquiescence.
It's always the same deal, they just try to think of somewhat different ways to say it. Like a very bad tv show. Which it all actually is, in a very real way.
But I don't want to watch this crap. And I've said so continuously.
So I'm done.
I don't know if he already announced that he was finished with the GOP and I missed it or if this is the official announcement...it can be interpreted both ways. But, yeah, this is me now. I'm finished* if I hadn't made it clear already.
As some of you know, I was involved in local Republican party stuff. I was a precinct committee rep for my county. I quit that post and turned in my Republican registration (I briefly reinstated it to vote against Romney in the primary) and I quit giving donations to the party. When did I do this? During the push for amnesty during the GWB years. Now I'm not going to vote R anymore, either. Except maybe in the general election. If I really, really like the candidate like, say, Ted Cruz. Otherwise, no. I'm done with them. I don't think my one vote will matter one way or the other anyway. If no one else takes a principled stand like I am doing then it won't matter...we will continue on with the charade and my vote won't be missed. If a lot of the base does what I'm doing then it wouldn't have mattered if I had stayed to "fight the good fight" against the coming Democrat horde.
So, yeah...get ready for a few decades wandering in the wilderness. The Democrats are going to take over completely and the country will really, really race over the cliff at light speed complete with unsustainable debt, assaults on free speech and other liberties, ultra high mega taxes (plus regulations) that will kill most small businesses, socialist/Marxist appointments to the SCOTUS, and so on and so on. The country WILL get the government that they deserve and everyone will complain about it and it will only get worse until, like the alcoholic or drug addict, they finally "bottom out" and begin to look for a different way. And it could take decades. I may never live to see it. And it may never happen because, you know...sometimes the alcoholic and drug addict just die.
Perhaps Texas really will secede (they can, you know...unlike the other states which were merely territories, Texas was an actual country before joining the union) and if it does I will probably sell out here in CO and head to my property down there. But otherwise I am now resigned to living in a socialist/utopian hell hole of a country because that's where we are pointed and there is no foot on the brake and no one is fighting over the wheel.
But no more Republican party for me. I'm not fooled anymore that there is a reason to fight. There isn't. Screw them all. I do hope that someday they are all richly rewarded for their betrayal.
*Let me qualify that: Amnesty is my red line. Once crossed, I am absolutely, positively done. But I'm kinda assuming that it's going to happen so I'm sort of pre-emptively saying that I'm done.
-
Trap, your thoughts on this pretty much sum up my feelings.
I think not voting can be a principled use of the right to vote. I plan to use it very carefully and if no one deserves it then I'm not giving it away. If no one cares, so what, I do.
-
The only thing I disagree with Ace on is the idea that we're only looking at 20 years of Democratic domination. No, this is end game. It's not a period of banishment to the political wilderness followed by a resurgence, it's the USA being finished. I think it's finished regardless, so I don't dispute the attitude of checking out politically.
I am not prepared to spend the rest of my life living under their domination. If I'm going to be stuck in a country governed by democratic socialists, there's lots of better choices than here. I'd rather go somewhere like New Zealand rather than just accept the tidal wave of Mexican transformation.
I don't like thinking like a collectivist, but if I'm going to be stuck in a collective then I choose ethnic tribalism. There is not a single aspect of America's decline that doesn't ultimately lead back to the Less and Less White People, More and More Brown People dynamic.
We're approaching a point where even Russia will look more desirable than this place.
-
Chuck Shumer says he doesn't mind the Republicans' piecemeal strategy (passing small separate bills on immigration), because he intends just to collect them all up into a single bill which will be "conferenced" with the Senate, and then he'll deliver amnesty just as the Gang of Eight has long plotted.
And THIS is EXACTLY where "compromise" leaves us. No more pharcking compromising. machinegun
-
The only thing I disagree with Ace on is the idea that we're only looking at 20 years of Democratic domination. No, this is end game. It's not a period of banishment to the political wilderness followed by a resurgence, it's the USA being finished. I think it's finished regardless, so I don't dispute the attitude of checking out politically.
Yeah, I think that might be a bit optimistic, too. But, of course, it could be that it doesn't mean what you think it means. It could mean, as you suspect, that he believes that in 20 years there will be an opportunity to reverse course (politically...our fiscal fate at that point being more or less sealed). Or, it could mean that he thinks that after 20 years of Democrat dominance the country will self destruct and that there will be some kind of a revolution and we will get a shot at putting things right at that point. I seem to remember reading somewhere, though, that democracies collapse into dictatorships so that will be bad.
But, you know...it's been a fun experiment, this country, and I'm glad that I got to see it when it was what it was supposed to be for a good chunk of my life. We were a light unto the world until we became decadent and corrupt. Now that that light is being forcibly extinguished the world will once again be plunged back into darkness and it will probably stay dark for a very, very long time.
-
I'm too fed up and foul-tempered to let a bunch of clowns drive me out...If I go out I go out on my terms and with my boots on!
-
I just heard Limbaugh say that, based on phone conversations he has had with his contacts in DC, the Democrats have the votes to pass immigration reform in the House...that amnesty is now a fait accompli.
I decided, what the heck, I will write and call my congressman just so I can know that I have pretty much done all that I can do. I wrote this:
Sir,
Just to let you know: Whether you vote for or against immigration reform, IF it passes I will leave the Republican Party permanently. Immigration reform is my personal red line. I will never, ever vote for another Republican as long as I live. Period. Why? Because there just won't be any point to it after immigration reform. Immigration reform is a death sentence for the party. The party will be dead and there will be a permanent Democrat majority after that. I will vote for and support a third party in a post-immigration reform world.
This is not an easy decision for me. I have voted straight line Republican for over thirty five years. I have been involved in party activities including being a precinct committeeman. I have been a delegate to the Colorado State convention. But if immigration reform passes that will be, sadly, behind me.
Again, I don't know what your position is on amnesty/immigration reform. I hope you are against it. I hope you vote against it. But whether you do or you don't, if it passes, I am through with the party. Feel free to pass that on to your fellow congressmen. I seriously doubt that they will care, though, since it is pretty obvious at this point that most of the Republicans in Congress care more about what their political consultants and the media say and think that about what their constituents think and want. In that way, I really won't be leaving the party...they have purposefully left me.
I am very skeptical that you will actually read this message but I feel that I at least owe you the few minutes of my time necessary to state my view and declare my intentions.
Sincerely,
***** *****,
*****, CO
I then called the DC office of my congressman and learned, much to my dismay, that he has no position on this issue. This guy is supposed to be a conservative. His office gerbil said that they were just taking people's opinions on the matter and passing them on to the congressman. I wasn't sure that I had heard him properly so I asked again what his position was and was told, again, that he did not have one. I reiterated everything that is in the above letter and said that that was my opinion and that was what I would do. The apathy on the other end of the line was palpable.
In a way this makes my decision to quit voting for and supporting Republicans that much easier.
So that's it, then.
-
In a way this makes my decision to quit voting for and supporting Republicans that much easier.
So that's it, then.
Welcome to my world.
-
"...has no positon on the issue..."
Pure unadulterated bullsh*t!
Don't know this clown, but he is obviously a gutless wretch.
No position!
::gaah::
Pull up a chair Trap, crack a cold Shiner, lite up a fine puro...and flip these clownboxers off!
"Feed My Head" - Dio
Hiding in a corner
Waiting for the storm
Maybe they'll forget about me
Avoid connection
Still they say you always surrender
All the smiling faces
Promising the sun
Another way of breaking you down
All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head
Hope is gone
The spell's been said
Fill my mind
Feed my head
Ah
Waiting for my number
To climb upon the cross
Maybe they'll forget about me
Must avoid detection
But they say you'll still go down
Safe in dreams
Away from where they are
Let me be nowhere
Just another star
Safe in night
The shadows cloak their eyes
Take me to nowhere
Where everybody flies
Oh!
All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head
Hope is gone
The spell's been said
Fill my mind
Feed my head
All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head
Hope is gone
The spell's been said
Fill my mind
Feed my head
All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head
Hope is gone
The spell's been said
Fill my mind
Feed my head
All is lost
Hope is dead
Feed my mind
Fill my head
-
I sometimes still have trouble trying to figure out what their motives are. Unleashing the tidal wave of Mexican colonization means the Democrats will never again be challenged for supremacy at the federal level. So why would Republicans go along with their own undoing?
Is it so they can be seen as significant? As transformative? So they can be feted by the DC and media establishment for the remainder of their own political lives, and who cares about anything after that? Or are they really so stupid as to believe they will reap political rewards from the Shake & Bake overnight citizens? That the only real consequence of amnesty will be more Sanchez and less Smith in the phone books?
-
from Ed Meese 2006:
President Reagan set out to correct the loss of control at our borders. Border security and enforcement of immigration laws would be greatly strengthened—in particular, through sanctions against employers who hired illegal immigrants. If jobs were the attraction for illegal immigrants, then cutting off that option was crucial.
He also agreed with the legislation in adjusting the status of immigrants—even if they had entered illegally—who were law-abiding long-term residents, many of whom had children in the United States. Illegal immigrants who could establish that they had resided in America continuously for five years would be granted temporary resident status, which could be upgraded to permanent residency after 18 months and, after another five years, to citizenship. It wasn’t automatic. They had to pay application fees, learn to speak English, understand American civics, pass a medical exam and register for military selective service. Those with convictions for a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible.
If this sounds familiar, it’s because these are pretty much the same provisions included in the Comprehensive Reform Act of 2006, which its supporters claim is not amnesty. In the end, slight differences in process do not change the overriding fact that the 1986 law and the recent Senate legislation both include an amnesty. The difference is that President Reagan called it for what it was.
Lesson of 1986
The lesson from the 1986 experience is that such an amnesty did not solve the problem. There was extensive document fraud, and the number of people applying for amnesty far exceeded projections. And there was a failure of political will to enforce new laws against employers. After a brief slowdown, illegal immigration returned to high levels and continued unabated, forming the nucleus of today’s large population of illegal aliens.
So here we are, 20 years later, having much the same debate and being offered much the same deal.
What would President Reagan do? For one thing, he would not repeat the mistakes of the past
link (http://www.humanevents.com/2006/12/13/reagan-would-not-repeat-amnesty-mistake/)
Rubio in 2009:
But in 2009, Rubio wasn’t a fan of amnesty, criticizing the 1986 Simpson-Mazoli Act that President Ronald Reagan signed into law.
In an article in the Nov. 17, 2009 edition of The Palm Beach Post, George Bennett wrote about a Rubio appearance at a Martin County (Fla.) Republican Women, Federated meeting in Stuart, Fla. in which Rubio criticized Reagan’s 1986 effort.
“In 1986 Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to 3 million people,” Rubio said. “You know what happened, in addition to becoming 11 million a decade later? There were people trying to enter the country legally, who had done the paperwork, who were here legally, who were going through the process, who claimed, all of a sudden, ‘No, no, no, no, I’m illegal.’ Because it was easier to do the amnesty program than it was to do the legal process.”
Rubio told the group that amnesty would send the wrong message to those wanting to enter the United States.
“If you grant amnesty, the message that you’re sending is that if you come in this country and stay here long enough, we will let you stay,” he said. “And no one will ever come through the legal process if you do that.”
At the time, Rubio insisted that sealing the border was a prerequisite in dealing with the illegal immigrants in the country, a position he held during his 2010 bid for U.S. Senate, but has since evolved on.
“Only after you deal with illegal immigration in a serious way — seal the border and the visa problem — can you then create a legal immigration system that works. That still leaves you with 11 million people that are here illegally,” Rubio said.
“I think he did it for the right reasons, but I think it ended up working the wrong way,” he added, according to the Post report.
link (http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/28/flashback-2009-rubio-says-reagan-made-a-mistake-with-1986-amnesty/)
I remember Reagan's amnesty act. Knew it was bad then and would make things worse. I hate I was right.
-
Yes, I remember it too, and the Dem's are a lot more devious and disingenuous now than they were then and they were very devious and disingenuous then...they knew then that the sanctuary movement and Latino community organizers would ensure more illegals would be brought in, that the pol's they supported and funded and sent to DC would ensure any immigration legislation had more loopholes and unenforceable provisions in it to render even the most stringent anti-illegal bill would be impotent and that the MFM would work to demonize any such attempts as racist, sexists, anti-family and unfair.
They always win on this issue, everybody else always lose. I really don't care if it is their rank ignorance in believing they can peel off a few supporters from the influx or if they are openly progressive in their intent...the fact is the GOP is flat-out useless as an opposition party and in no way at all represents a conservative party interested in restoring Founding Principles.
It's been over for a while folks...this insanity is merely the final confirmation for those still foolishly clinging to hope.
-
Speaking of those who foolishly cling to hope, Ann Coulter (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/coulter-bashes-sleazy-dems-declares-voters-should-throw-out-gopers-who-back-amnesty-on-hannity/) says that any Republican who votes for amnesty should be voted out of office. Let's just say that I am totally unimpressed with Coulter's opinion on at least two levels. First, she has been the big time supporter of Christie who favors both DumbassCare and amnesty (not to mention gun control) so if she has suddenly got religion on these two issues her credibility is pretty thin. Second, she must still be under the impression that the Republican party can be salvaged. It can't. Sometimes you just have to face facts and walk away...cut your losses. This is one of those times. The party is dead and any attempts to revive and/or reanimate the corpse are a total waste of time and resources.
-
The big problem is, conservatives should have been more strident decades ago. A big middle finger to the Republican Party 40 years ago might have been early enough to allow the short term benefit to the Democrats come and go while there was still something salvageable left. Doing it now isn't so much punishing a hapless GOP, it's the painful resignation that the country is finally lost. And it is.
We might have been able to restore Founding principles, but for decades the nominal opposition party had nothing to say but variations of "come on now, this isn't the hill to die on, there's bigger fish to fry" ad nauseam. Even recently, we were told that about certain issues because the debt ceiling coming up in a few months time, that was the real battle. That is to say, that was the real battle for them to also immediately surrender on.
Bunch of decrepit old fossils, with their atomic white dentures, artificial tans. Scum. All of them. I want to hear their death rattle at the end of a rope, all of them.
-
Yeah, that bus left the station decades ago Ann...this is the only one left to the GOP - ::bus::