Where have all the Conservatives Gone?

[Cuyo]

Libruls are so mean spirited; I don't understand their negativity all the time. Here they have the Congress and the Presidency and they are unhappy and complaining about conservatives who are currently powerless to stop their evil ways.

Go ahead and enact all your wacko spending programs and tax hikes. Where are the conservatives? We're sitting on our front porch and we can see November from there.

Libs are bitter and frustrated clutching their lattes and reading from "Audacity of Hope" and Mao's "Little Red Book"

Basically they're ******* miserable people with no joy in their lives. This comes from embracing a loser philosophy, a philosophy where you must pull everyone else to bring yourself up. It's sad and pathetic.

Why are you such an idiot? Nature, or nurture?

 

[ConHog]

Libruls are so mean spirited; I don't understand their negativity all the time. Here they have the Congress and the Presidency and they are unhappy and complaining about conservatives who are currently powerless to stop their evil ways.

Go ahead and enact all your wacko spending programs and tax hikes. Where are the conservatives? We're sitting on our front porch and we can see November from there.

Libs are bitter and frustrated clutching their lattes and reading from "Audacity of Hope" and Mao's "Little Red Book"

Basically they're ******* miserable people with no joy in their lives. This comes from embracing a loser philosophy, a philosophy where you must pull everyone else to bring yourself up. It's sad and pathetic.

Why are you such an idiot? Nature, or nurture?

I'd like to see that dude and Sangha in a think off. It would be horrendous.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Libruls are so mean spirited;

LOL wut?

Tough seeing the truth isn't it?
I think the bitterness and the constant state of annoyance displayed by many liberals is do in part to left over feelings from the 1960's and the fact that the majority of Americans still refuse to accept many liberal philosophies despite trillions of dollars being spent indoctrinating the children of 3 generations.

Anyone who goes against the liberal philosophy is branded a neo-con, a religious zealot, a redneck, trailer trash, toothless, banjo strummimg hick, and then called every homosexual slur in the book. Not too accepting is it Modbert? Plus when your basic philosophy is "divide the electorate and conquer voting blocks as you see fit" most Americans are turned off by this unless they are picking the lesser of 2 evils...which is what happened with Obama along with liberal white guilt. Given where the country is today I don't think Obama would even win against McCain if an election were held today. Now what kind of legacy is that after nearly 2 years in office?....and what does that say about current liberal philosophies?

 

[kurtsprincess]

Whatever the event, the right formulates an it's-the-left's-fault equation.

Well, then who do you think is at fault?

 

[Foxfyre]

Whatever the event, the right formulates an it's-the-left's-fault equation.

Well, then who do you think is at fault?

I have visions of President Chelsea Clinton somewhere down the line or one of Obama's daughters as representative from Illinois or one of Biden's boys as Senator from Maryland or something. And they'll still be gazing blankly into the camera and saying profoundly: "We inherited this mess and it's all George Bush's fault!"

 

[elvis]

Whatever the event, the right formulates an it's-the-left's-fault equation.

Well, then who do you think is at fault?

I have visions of President Chelsea Clinton somewhere down the line or one of Obama's daughters as representative from Illinois or one of Biden's boys as Senator from Maryland or something. And they'll still be gazing blankly into the camera and saying profoundly: "We inherited this mess and it's all George Bush's fault!"

what of the twins?

 

[EriktheRed]

Where have the Moderate Democrats gone? You remember them, they would never go along with Pelosi in trying to defund the troops in the middle of a live shooting war, they would never go along with ObamaCare.

Oh where oh where are the non-National Socialists Democrats? Was Vince Foster the last one to try to stand against his Party?

Hey there, dipshit!

Just wanna remind you that healthcare reform has long been a platform of the Democratic Party. I'm sure any attempt by them under any other Dem President would get the same treatment from you so you can shove what you just wrote above.


oh, and have wonderful day, you stupid wingnut

 

[EriktheRed]

[
You ******* idiot.

"Neo-con" refers to liberals who embrace some right wing values...such as military power.

Morons like yourself have taken the definition and instead of just applying it where it is appropriate, out of laziness and ignorance, have started using it to define something completely different.

Oh no, stupid.

Guys like Ward Churchill are ours, but the neo-cons are yours.


That's just the way it goes.

 

[EriktheRed]

[
Neo-conservatives and modern liberals have different ends, but their means are the same, which is what makes them similar. Bush was like a modern liberal to the extent that he and his administration wanted to use government to implement policy goals.

Uh, isn't implementing policy goals something any government is supposed to do?

 

[EriktheRed]

Libruls are so mean spirited; I don't understand their negativity all the time. Here they have the Congress and the Presidency and they are unhappy and complaining about conservatives who are currently powerless to stop their evil ways.

Go ahead and enact all your wacko spending programs and tax hikes. Where are the conservatives? We're sitting on our front porch and we can see November from there.

Libs are bitter and frustrated clutching their lattes and reading from "Audacity of Hope" and Mao's "Little Red Book"

Basically they're ******* miserable people with no joy in their lives. This comes from embracing a loser philosophy, a philosophy where you must pull everyone else to bring yourself up. It's sad and pathetic.

Neither of you idiots actually have an answer to the OP, do you....

 

[EriktheRed]

Libruls are so mean spirited;

LOL wut?

Tough seeing the truth isn't it?
I think the bitterness and the constant state of annoyance displayed by many liberals is do in part to left over feelings from the 1960's and the fact that the majority of Americans still refuse to accept many liberal philosophies despite trillions of dollars being spent indoctrinating the children of 3 generations.

Anyone who goes against the liberal philosophy is branded a neo-con, a religious zealot, a redneck, trailer trash, toothless, banjo strummimg hick, and then called every homosexual slur in the book. Not too accepting is it Modbert? Plus when your basic philosophy is "divide the electorate and conquer voting blocks as you see fit" most Americans are turned off by this unless they are picking the lesser of 2 evils...which is what happened with Obama along with liberal white guilt. Given where the country is today I don't think Obama would even win against McCain if an election were held today. Now what kind of legacy is that after nearly 2 years in office?....and what does that say about current liberal philosophies?

 

[NYcarbineer]

[
You ******* idiot.

"Neo-con" refers to liberals who embrace some right wing values...such as military power.

Morons like yourself have taken the definition and instead of just applying it where it is appropriate, out of laziness and ignorance, have started using it to define something completely different.

Oh no, stupid.

Guys like Ward Churchill are ours, but the neo-cons are yours.


That's just the way it goes.

I got rid of my 'We're all Paulbots now!' sigline too soon. It's amazing, but not that surprising, that the post neo-conservatives/ex neo-conservatives are marching their past heroes,

like Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al,

to the guillotine.

It makes one really lament the fact that all forums don't preserve all their archives forever.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[
Either government is limited, or it is unlimited.

'

All government is limited. The statement is idiocy in a clever costume.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Where have the Moderate Democrats gone? You remember them, they would never go along with Pelosi in trying to defund the troops in the middle of a live shooting war, they would never go along with ObamaCare.

Oh where oh where are the non-National Socialists Democrats? Was Vince Foster the last one to try to stand against his Party?

There are no moderate Democrats?

In round numbers the Democrats control 60% of the Congress, not to mention a majority of governorships and state legislatures.

If those are all liberals, all ELECTED liberals, that kind of blows a big fat hole in that rightwing nonsense about the U.S. being a center/right country, doesn't it?

We're a center/right country that wants to be represented in government by liberals, yeah, that makes sense, lol.


You should have thought that one through...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Then you don't support the Constitution.

The concept of "living rules" means in fact that there are NO rules....Anarchy.

Of course you are correct.

Our friend Wry, while well meaning, supports a paradoxical concept he little understands.
His statement is akin to 'Vegetarians for Meat.'

“Proponents of a “21st century constitution” or “living constitution” aim to transform our nation’s supreme law beyond recognition—and with a minimum of public attention and debate. Indeed, if there is an overarching theme to what they wish to achieve, it is the diminishment of the democratic and representative processes of American government. It is the replacement of a system of republican government, in which the constitution is largely focused upon the architecture of government in order to minimize the likelihood of abuse of power, with a system of judicial government, in which substantive policy outcomes are increasingly determined by federal judges. Rather than merely defining broad rules of the game for the legislative and executive branches of government, the new constitution would compel specific outcomes.”
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/impri...=2010&month=04

Either government is limited, or it is unlimited.

Progressives saw the Constitution as a roadblock to their vision of perfect government and perfect people: utopia. Progressives of the late 19th and early 20th centuries saw this older, limited understanding of government stood in the way of the policy aims they believed the state ought to pursue in a world that had undergone significant evolution since the time of the Founding.

They believed that the role of government, contrary to the perceived historical notion of Founding-era liberalism, ought to adjust continually to meet the new demands of new ages without accessing the amendment process.

As Woodrow Wilson wrote in 'The State', "Government does now whatever experience permits or the times demand."

Thus, a 'living Constitution.'

Please explain to the audience where in the Constitution is the authority of the Supreme Court to decide the Constitionality of a law.
Or, do you believe the actions of the SC in deciding the constitionality of a law is an example of big government overrreaching?

Article III, section 2.

I wonder if you'd care to comment on the Progressive President Woodrow Wilson'ws statement above?

or

Woodrow Wilson, in his essay “Socialism and Democracy” said ‘Limitations of public authority must be put aside; the state may cross that boundary at will.’ The collective is not limited by individual rights.

or

Teddy Roosevelt, in his “New Nationalism” speech” rightly maintains that every man holds his property subject to the general right of the community to regulate its use to whatever degree the public welfare may require it.” http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=501

 

[Foxfyre]

Where have the Moderate Democrats gone? You remember them, they would never go along with Pelosi in trying to defund the troops in the middle of a live shooting war, they would never go along with ObamaCare.

Oh where oh where are the non-National Socialists Democrats? Was Vince Foster the last one to try to stand against his Party?

There are no moderate Democrats?

In round numbers the Democrats control 60% of the Congress, not to mention a majority of governorships and state legislatures.

If those are all liberals, all ELECTED liberals, that kind of blows a big fat hole in that rightwing nonsense about the U.S. being a center/right country, doesn't it?

We're a center/right country that wants to be represented in government by liberals, yeah, that makes sense, lol.


You should have thought that one through...

All the evidence and ALL the credible polls show that more Americans are ideologically right of center than left.

The Democratic Party used to be more ideologically right of center than left.

The large number of Democrats in Congress right now reflects:

1. The GOP was governing more left of center than right which disgusted much of their base who would not reward them with re-election.

2. Obama campaigned well right of center giving hope that he was an honorable man who believed what he was saying. That proved not to be the case of course, but once elected, it's too late.

3. The Democrats who backed him were further rewarded by holding onto his coattails, and the GOP gave no indication that it had learned anything by being voted out of power. Unfortunately, like Obama, that added more leftwing extremists to the system.

This year we can hope that people won't believe the campaign rhetoric and will look at the track record of those running for office.

Perhaps then we can restore some sanity to the process regardless of whether the people have a D or R beside their names.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Where have the Moderate Democrats gone? You remember them, they would never go along with Pelosi in trying to defund the troops in the middle of a live shooting war, they would never go along with ObamaCare.

Oh where oh where are the non-National Socialists Democrats? Was Vince Foster the last one to try to stand against his Party?

There are no moderate Democrats?

In round numbers the Democrats control 60% of the Congress, not to mention a majority of governorships and state legislatures.

If those are all liberals, all ELECTED liberals, that kind of blows a big fat hole in that rightwing nonsense about the U.S. being a center/right country, doesn't it?

We're a center/right country that wants to be represented in government by liberals, yeah, that makes sense, lol.


You should have thought that one through...

All the evidence and ALL the credible polls show that more Americans are ideologically right of center than left.

The Democratic Party used to be more ideologically right of center than left.

The large number of Democrats in Congress right now reflects:

1. The GOP was governing more left of center than right which disgusted much of their base who would not reward them with re-election.

2. Obama campaigned well right of center giving hope that he was an honorable man who believed what he was saying. That proved not to be the case of course, but once elected, it's too late.

3. The Democrats who backed him were further rewarded by holding onto his coattails, and the GOP gave no indication that it had learned anything by being voted out of power. Unfortunately, like Obama, that added more leftwing extremists to the system.

This year we can hope that people won't believe the campaign rhetoric and will look at the track record of those running for office.

Perhaps then we can restore some sanity to the process regardless of whether the people have a D or R beside their names.

Very nicely put.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[
Either government is limited, or it is unlimited.

'

All government is limited. The statement is idiocy in a clever costume.

Your statement appears somewhat flaccid when judged against those that I quote in post #135. Two former Presidents claimed unlimited government.
Care to recalculate, or retract?

Possibly it represents, on your part, an attempt at relevancy in an area in which you have less than adequate understanding.


And, if I may indulge in a bit of psychobabble, the need to inject the term 'idiocy ' seems to represent a fear that it may be used against you...and therefore a desire to insulate yourself by using if first. Could be?

Well, be advised, I never use the term.
I allow an opponent to self-identify based on their post.

So, how do you think you did?

 

[saveliberty]

My guess is ignore or deflect will be the preferred route.

 

[PoliticalChic]

My guess is ignore or deflect will be the preferred route.

Oh, are you suggesting that the left has neither ability nor courage?


We shall see.