55
   

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

 
 
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 05:36 pm
@ican711nm,
The post from Okie before Ican's was: "Is criticizing a Democrat now illegal?"

ican711nm wrote:

I want to deprive you and your fellow thieving c0veters of your deprivations of other people's rights and your violations of the rule of law. I expect it will ultimately require a vigilante committee to achieve that.


That comment was directed (personally?) to Parados.
Where is the photo of the little girl smirking with the burning house with the Obama sign in the yard in the background? On another thread, I guess. Is that the kind of vigilante committee yall expect will be required?

okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 08:18 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

The post from Okie before Ican's was: "Is criticizing a Democrat now illegal?"

Yes, a simple question, in response to Representative Grayson wanting to send someone that criticized him to jail for 5 years. And of course Parados immediately took up the cause.

I still remember thousands of liars accusing Bush of everything, yet nobody ever suggested any such thing. Bush was accused of bringing down the towers. Nobody cared. But do not dare criticize the nut, Grayson. The man is a nut, rjb. That of course is my opinion. Do you also think I committed a crime?

Politics is getting weird. We now have a president that is a virtual Marxist, but nobody cares. I never dreamed this would happen in my lifetime, rjb. It is supposed moderates like you that need to wake up and see the error of your vote for Obama, get over your emotional investment in the man, and face the truth, that he is no moderate, that we have a very serious problem in this country.

rjb, any president that advocates having a national security force every bit is powerful, as big, and well funded as the military, he is a dangerous man, wake up, we are not playing with something trivial here, we have a serious problem on our hands with this guy in charge. We need to vote these people out the very next opportunity we have.

Its as if a large body of the population wants to turn a blind eye to Obama's past, his politics, his mentors, his philosophy, as if it never existed. I am not going to do it, I am going to continue to state the truth, as stark as it is, I don't care if there are many that don't want to hear it.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 08:20 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:


Where is the photo of the little girl smirking with the burning house with the Obama sign in the yard in the background?



Good eye, I hadn't noticed the Obama sign in the front yard of the white house fully engulfed in flames.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  0  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 08:45 pm
@JTT,
Naaahh! The vigilantes don't need any stinkin' airplanes or rifles or bombs. All they need is numbers, say a million to surround the capital and the supreme court, and another million to surround the whitehouse. Then say about 100 thousand from each group is needed to enter the three buildings and physically, permanently remove by hand the thieving coveter nutcases from each building. That shouldn't be too difficult since many of the thieving coveter nutcases will have rapidly, permanently removed themselves when surrounded by such crowds.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 09:38 pm
@ican711nm,
Okie, h20man, Ican't, three ******* nut cases in a row. Get back on your medication right now, guys!
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 22 Dec, 2009 09:42 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

... three ******* nut cases ...


Pictured here enjoying three different medications together.

http://renovomedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/obama-pelosi-reid.jpg
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Dec, 2009 12:57 pm
@ican711nm,
Harry Reid has slipped unconstitutional language into his healthcare bill that would bar future lawmakers from making changes to the legislation.

In other words, the Senate is starting to work on ways to pass unconstitutional mandates on the American people, and then change the law so that we cannot get ourselves out from under them.

This means the thieving coveter nutcases are determined to make us slaves to the government. These thieving coveter nutcases appear to believe there is nothing we can do about it. But of course there is a great deal we can do about it.

In the event we don't rid our government of these thieving coveter nutcases in 2010 and 2012, all the vigilantes require to stop this corruption of the rule of law by these thieving coveter nutcases, is numbers, say a million to surround the capital and the supreme court, and another million to surround the whitehouse. Then say about 100 thousand from each group is required to enter the three buildings and physically, permanently remove by hand these thieving coveter nutcases from each building. That shouldn't be too difficult since many of these thieving coveter nutcases will have rapidly, permanently removed themselves when surrounded by such crowds.
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 23 Dec, 2009 01:12 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
The year was 1776, the winter was cold, dreary and wet. General George Washington had recently escaped annihilation at the hands of the British and had retreated from the Battle of Long Island. He had moved what was left of his tattered and discouraged army to Valley Forge Pennsylvania to hunker down for the winter. He was short of gunpowder, bullets and food. 30% of what was left of his army was without boots or uniforms. In fact they had wrapped their feet in burlap and were leaving bloody footprints in the cold snow. Of his original army of 30,000 only 2,400 diehard loyal stalwarts remained. The rest had deserted, believing the war was lost....Supplies were not getting through due to the terrible conditions of the roads and the failure of his Quartermaster Corps. France's support was wavering and to top it off, there was a movement in Congress to replace General George Washington as Commander in Chief......In fact, General Washington had written to relatives that he feared his army would dissolve to nothing and the war would be LOST.....So in this the darkest hour of the Revolution, when failure seemed imminent, when all hope had evaporated what does General Washington do???

He plans an attack. Yes, he plans an attack on an armed garrison of seasoned Hessian Mercenaries in Trenton New Jersey some 20 miles away. To reach the planned battle zone it would be necessary for what was left of his army to cross the ice choked Delaware River, march 19 miles in a freezing cold blizzard, deploy unseen, and attack the Hessians from three quarters. On the evening of December 26, 1776 General George Washington did just that. He attacked. When it was over, he had captured 1,800 Hessians along with all their supplies and war materials. His troops now had all the food and warm clothes and tents and guns and powder and uniforms that they could want.....and he did this with a minimum of casualties. The next day, when the news got out, 15,000 more volunteers showed up. When the news finally reached the French Court, the French King threw France solidly behind the Revolutionists.

So on the darkest day of our struggle, General Washington turned the tables on the British and snatched Victory from the Jaws of Defeat. His password that night was "VICTORY OR DEATH". The General went on to soundly defeat the British several years later at York......The moral of the story "It ain't over until the fat lady sings" and she has not sung yet......

So my fellow patriots, take heart, learn from our history....you are only defeated when you agree to be defeated, and we have not yet begun to fight.....

If they beat us in the Senate, we will fight them in conference. If they beat us in conference, we will fight them in the House. If they beat us in the House over Healthcare, we will fight them over Cap and Trade. We will fight them over Immigration and Amnesty. We will fight them over the gigantic deficit. We will fight them over the staggering debt. And we will fight them in 2010, and in 2012. We will fight them in the House. We will fight them for Senate seats in Connecticut, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New York, and Arkansas. We will fight them in Colorado and North Dakota and California and Washington State. We will fight them in Illinois and in New Jersey. We will never, never, never, never give up!

Our America is at stake! We are the front line of defense, and our future and the future of our children depends on our resolution, our resolve, our determination to see this war through until we can claim VICTORY and FREEDOM FROM THE TYRANNY OF 'THE THIEVING COVETING NUTCASES->alias Democrats->alias Liberals->alias progressives. Until these THIEVING COVETING NUTCASES are vanquished and we who want our Constitutional Republic restored--alias Conservatives--are once again in charge of America!

GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 23 Dec, 2009 01:22 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
Barack Obama is demonstrating just how [evil he is and/or how] little he understands basic economics. He [appears to believe] growing the government at a rapid rate is what causes prosperity, declaring America must “spend our way out of this recession.” He also in recent weeks scolded “fat cat bankers,” telling them they need to loan more money out in order to get our economy going again. Obama’s [evil and/or] economic illiteracy is plunging our country into economic ruin.

From bailouts, to company takeovers, healthcare reform and stimulus bills: if it involves greater taxpayer involvement Obama supports it.

When Obama reported that the Treasury had received back $200 billion in TARP funds, he declared that he planned to spend that money on a second stimulus while paying down the debt. This is patently untrue. America will not be paying down any debt. The Senate is moving to raise the debt ceiling by over $1.8 Trillion. Actually, we will be borrowing a record sum, as Obama mortgages our future to “spend us out of this recession.”

The problem with his policy is that it doesn’t work [for the good of America]. Government spending has never created prosperity. Every dollar the government spends must be taken from someone else. Government engages in wealth transfer not wealth creation. Borrowing money and running sizable deficits is transferring wealth from the future generation, which faces paying off Obama’s credit card. The bill must be paid someday. Obama is robbing future generations in order to support his binge spending.

Obama’s first Stimulus was nothing more than a slush fund of money, used by Democrats to support their liberal pet projects. $6 Million worth of stimulus money lined the pockets of Democratic pollster Mark Penn who used it to create three jobs. $18 Million from the stimulus went to fund Obama’s recovery website, which reported on jobs saved and stimulus money spent in Congressional districts that do not exist. With that kind of success rate it should surprise no one that Obama’s approval rating has plummeted to 45%. American voters understand government spending is not the recipe for recovery.

Recently, Obama met with leading bankers, individuals he referred to as “fat cats.” In his meeting Obama pushed these banks to lend more and loosen up their capital requirements on loans. Nobody is arguing that these banks need or deserve the outrageous bonuses they have been pocketing after Obama bailed them out with the taxpayers’ dime, but the idea that they need to lend more is nearly ludicrous.

The reason the housing market collapsed in the first place was because Congress pushed Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac to loan nearly half of their assets to families with incomes below the national median. Coupled with the Community Reinvestment Act, which forced banks to make imprudent loans, overzealous lending created an artificial housing bubble that collapsed. After the CRA was expanded in 1995, bank loans going to low- and moderate-income families increased by 80%. These were the same banks that were later attacked for being predatory for taking undue risks. They were making poor loans, but it was at the behest of a federal government that was trying to artificially increase home ownership amongst people not equipped for the responsibilities of home ownership.

Fast forward back to today, Obama is now encouraging banks to make more loans, asking banks to take more risk. This is the same Obama who has criticized banks for making risky loans in the past. By creating business climate uncertainty Obama is not helping our country to stabilize. Obama’s conflicting messages are confusing. Which “Obama” are banks suppose to listen to; the one who demonizes risky behavior, or the one who demonizes banks for sitting on their assets?

Obama’s meeting with bank leaders was simply political theatre as was his recent “jobs” summit. Jobs aren’t created by bureaucrats sitting around talking. They are created when people are free to innovate and create without undue fear of erratic government behavior. If the government would cut back on its’ wild spending, cut taxes and promote a stable regulatory environment, the private sector would start creating new jobs.

0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Dec, 2009 04:12 pm
The terrible and nasty things Obama and his Democrat party have done, are doing
and have planned will only instill a great hope within the Conservative movement.

The Obamanation will not last long and it will be up to the American Conservative
to pick up the pieces, repair the damage and move forward. Real change is coming.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Dec, 2009 04:36 pm
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:

Harry Reid has slipped unconstitutional language into his healthcare bill that would bar future lawmakers from making changes to the legislation.

I heard about that. These people are crooks, and will destroy the country if they are allowed to stay in power.

It will also take Democrats that still love this country to stand up and be counted, and vote these scoundrels out.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Wed 23 Dec, 2009 05:40 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

The terrible and nasty things Obama and his Democrat party have done, are doing
and have planned will only instill a great hope within the Conservative movement.

The Obamanation will not last long and it will be up to the American Conservative
to pick up the pieces, repair the damage and move forward. Real change is coming.


Amusingly (for me, a liberal), I gave H2O's post a thumbs up, bringing it up from -1. I disagree with some of his rhetoric, but November, 2010, will be pivotal for the Republican party. All 435 House seats and some 34 Senate seats will be voted on. Many of those seats have traditionally been considered "safe" for either the Dems or Repubs.
November, 2010? Nay, the battle will begin just after the 1st of the year, when Repubs will battle each other (from the moderate or conservative side) to challenge an incumbent Dem. Or maybe a Republican moderate incumbent will run up against a conservative intent on "real change."
Can you identify, H20, any places where a conservative Repub will be attempting to unseat a moderate Repub?
What races do you see as being the defining battlegrounds between moderate and conservative Repubs?
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Dec, 2009 07:19 pm
@parados,
And what federal law was broken?
The website is specifically aimed at Grayson, nobody else.
So, when did criticizing him become illegal?

Now, since everyone on here that knows me will admit that I do not advocate violating ANY laws, please either admit you lied, or show PROOF that your claim about me is true.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Dec, 2009 01:12 pm
@realjohnboy,
THERE ARE NO REPUBLICANS WHO ARE MODERATE ABOUT THE NECESSITY FOR THE OBAMA THIEVING COVETERS TO BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE, IN ORDER FOR AMERICA'S CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC TO BE RESCUED FROM EXTINCTION.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Thu 24 Dec, 2009 05:49 pm
No need to scream, Ican. My question is this: are there any races in the House where you expect to see a primary pitting an incumbent moderate Repub against a conservative Repub? Isn't that a big part of the test of the American Conservatism movement as it relates to the Republican party?
You seem to believe that the Conservatives will sweep aside the moderate wing of your party, the moderate wing of the Democrat party and the Independents in order to defeat the Liberal Democrat "coveters" in 2010.
Realistically, don't the Conservatives have to take control of the Republican party apparatus first?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Dec, 2009 06:17 pm
@realjohnboy,
Looks like a case of cart before the horse...
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Dec, 2009 06:59 pm
@realjohnboy,
ican's comments
realjohnboy wrote:
No need to scream, Ican.
I thought EMPHASIS was necessary to get your attention.

My question is this: are there any races in the House where you expect to see a primary pitting an incumbent moderate Repub against a conservative Repub? Yes!

Isn't that a big part of the test of the American Conservatism movement as it relates to the Republican party?
Yes!

You seem to believe that the Conservatives will sweep aside the moderate wing of your party, the moderate wing of the Democrat party and the Independents in order to defeat the Liberal Democrat "coveters" in 2010.
Yes, I think that!

Realistically, don't the Conservatives have to take control of the Republican party apparatus first?
Yes! And, the Tea Party and its allies are currently in the process of doing that (e.g., Nevada). I expect many in those moderate wings will switch to conserving our constitutional republic (COCR). Many Independents have already switched to COCR. I expect a great many more will do so.

The trend among a majority of probable voters according to the polls is total rejection of Obama thieving coveters.

realjohnboy
 
  3  
Reply Thu 24 Dec, 2009 07:10 pm
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:


My question is this: are there any races in the House where you expect to see a primary pitting an incumbent moderate Repub against a conservative Repub? Yes!

Which Republican House members do you think should be ousted by more conservative candidates? I am looking for specific names.
0 Replies
 
JamesMorrison
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Dec, 2009 08:32 pm
@ican711nm,
Why Has Parker Griffin changed to the Republican Party? His party is currently in the Majority in Congress along with a radical leftist Democrat in the White House. Perhaps those who consider themselves Democrats/Progressives/Liberals would indulge us with an answer.

But the important question for MACs is whether Griffin should be trusted at all. I say no. CWDP (Conservatives With Deep Principles) must remember that Griffin voted with Pelosi et al 80% of the time. Better to find a proven native conservative candidate if possible and sink resources into his/ her campaign. Forget anybody, whether an R or D designate, that has not demonstrated consistent conservative (fiscally responsible) economic principles in their total voting record. The Republican Party has let us Americans down, first under Tom Delay, then George Bush, and now their (Mitch McConnell et al) failure to stall this socialistic assault on individual rights and liberties on all Americans which is now proceeding under the guise of "Health Care Reform".


Sen. McConnell's strategy of proposing "messaging amendments" has been an unmitigated failure and has only allowed the statist Reid to ignore those 'messages' by buying off one unprincipled Democratic Senator after the other and put the lie to the belief that the term 'Unprincipled Democrat' some how implies a real world dichotomy in the democratic party regarding those who are principled and those who are not.

The MMM and Democratic operatives have pointed to the 'revolution' in the Republican Party. However, the real battle is between MACs (true fiscal conservatives and political Objectivists--see Ayn Rand @ http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=arc_ayn_rand_the_nature_of_government and http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=arc_ayn_rand_man_rights ) and their fellow American Statists (essentially Marxists), whether Democratic or Republican (many mainstream Repubs think moderates only will win elections and therefore move left). Who wins will determine the destiny of the United States of America. Honestly, if conservatives-- real conservatives,--do not win a majority in the coming 2010 elections I feel the U.S will become, ultimately, Europe. This does not initially seem so bad to the uninformed, but all those who still are fans of independent thinking should ask and answer these questions:

Who pulled Europe’s and USSR's chestnuts out of the WWII fire?
Who was wealthy enough to execute Marshall-type plans in both theaters of WWII when peace ensued?
Who pulled Europe's chestnuts out from under the Cold War steamroller known as the U.S.S.R?

And how was this possible? From whence came such wealth?

A further observation should be the EU’s degrading socialism, anti-business policies and resultant inability to field a security force, even to defend itself.

I contend that, without our American forefather’s research into past governing systems and their careful crafting of our now increasingly ignored constitution along with their economic laissez-fairest policies, the above questions would have been impossible to even conceive of, let alone answer with current history.

Given the real world, America is the global resident's first and, probably, last chance at a political system that promotes individual rights and, consequently, personal freedom. This does not mean that there can’t be some compromise with those that think strict Conservatism and Laissez-Faireism is too cold or inhumane but such compromises must always lean rightward towards individual rights and away from their violation. Given the Left's (See Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals") actions in history I would consul against even this.


JM
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Dec, 2009 01:34 pm
@JamesMorrison,
Quote:
Why Has Parker Griffin changed to the Republican Party? His party is currently in the Majority in Congress along with a radical leftist Democrat in the White House. Perhaps those who consider themselves Democrats/Progressives/Liberals would indulge us with an answer.


Laughing How hard is this to understand? He is from a very conservative district, and had commissioned a poll which showed that he would lose if he ran as a Democrat. Do not confuse self-preservation with some sort of indication of a shift in our country's politics.

Your inability to understand that there are many different, and valid, forms of Conservatism will be the downfall of your party. It's as if you don't realize that your 'Conservatives With Deep Principles' - what is it with you guys and acronyms, anyway? - represent a small segment of the country, no more than 20% or so. If you cannot find ways to make meaningful alliances with those who are not exactly ideologically like yourselves, you will be doomed to failure every time.

Cycloptichorn
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.25 seconds on 11/18/2024 at 10:50:28